Zinātniski raksti par pieejamajām iekārtām
Sejas uzvedības un emociju atpazīšanas programmatūra - FaceReader
Skiendziel, T., Rösch, A. G., & Schultheiss, O. C. (2019). Assessing the convergent validity between the automated emotion recognition software Noldus FaceReader 7 and Facial Action Coding System Scoring. PLOS ONE, 14(10), e0223905. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0223905
D’Arcey, J. T. (2013). Assessing the Validity of FaceReader using Facial EMG. Chico: California State University.
Hirt, F., Werlen, E., Moser, I., & Bergamin, P. (2019). Measuring emotions during learning: lack of coherence between automated facial emotion recognition and emotional experience. Open Computer Science, 9(1), 308–317. https://doi.org/10.1515/comp-2019-0020
Suhr, Y. T. (2017). FaceReader, a Promising Instrument for Measuring Facial Emotion Expression? A Comparison to Facial Electromyography and Self-Reports. Ph.D. thesis, Utrecht University, Utrecht.
Terzis, V., Moridis, C. N., and Economides, A. A. (2010). “Measuring instant emotions during a self-assessment test: the use of FaceReader,” in Proceedings of the 7th International Conference on Methods and Techniques in Behavioral Research, Eindhoven.
Fanti, K. A., Kyranides, M. N., & Panayiotou, G. (2015). Facial reactions to violent and comedy films: Association with callous–unemotional traits and impulsive aggression. Cognition and Emotion, 31(2), 209–224. https://doi.org/10.1080/02699931.2015.1090958
Kognitīvie testi un planšetdators - CANTAB
Syväoja, H., Tammelin, T., Ahonen, T., Räsänen, P., Tolvanen, A., Kankaanpää, A., & Kantomaa, M. (2015). Internal Consistency and Stability of the CANTAB Neuropsychological Test Battery in Children. Psychological Assessment, 27 (2), 698- 709. doi:10.1037/a0038485
Levaux, M.-N., Potvin, S., Sepehry, A. A., Sablier, J., Mendrek, A., & Stip, E. (2007). Computerized assessment of cognition in schizophrenia: Promises and pitfalls of CANTAB. European Psychiatry, 22(2), 104–115. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eurpsy.2006.11.004
Fried, R., Hirshfeld-Becker, D., Petty, C., Batchelder, H., & Biederman, J. (2012). How informative is the CANTAB to assess executive functioning in children with ADHD? A controlled study. Journal of Attention Disorders. doi: 10.1177/1087054712457038
Gau, S. S., & Shang, C. (2010). Executive functions as endophenotypes in ADHD: Evidence from the cambridge neuropsychological test battery (CANTAB). Journal of Child Psychology and Psychiatry, 51(7), 838–849. doi: 10.1111/j.1469-7610.2010.02215.x
Al Backer, N., Ateeq Alharbi, K., Alfahadi, A., Shahid Habib, S., & Bashir, S. (2018). Assessment of the Cambridge Neuropsychological Test Automated Battery test in Saudi children with learning disabilities: A case-control study. F1000Research, 7, 323. https://doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.13695.1
Matos Gonçalves, M., Pinho, M. S., & Simões, M. R. (2017). Construct and concurrent validity of the Cambridge neuropsychological automated tests in Portuguese older adults without neuropsychiatric diagnoses and with Alzheimer’s disease dementia. Aging, Neuropsychology, and Cognition, 25(2), 290–317. https://doi.org/10.1080/13825585.2017.1294651
Kim, H. S., An, Y. M., Kwon, J. S., & Shin, M.-S. (2014). A Preliminary Validity Study of the Cambridge Neuropsychological Test Automated Battery for the Assessment of Executive Function in Schizophrenia and Bipolar Disorder. Psychiatry Investigation, 11(4), 394. https://doi.org/10.4306/pi.2014.11.4.394
Torgersen, J., Flaatten, H., Engelsen, B. A., & Gramstad, A. (2012). Clinical Validation of Cambridge Neuropsychological Test Automated Battery in a Norwegian Epilepsy Population. Journal of Behavioral and Brain Science, 02(01), 108–116. https://doi.org/10.4236/jbbs.2012.21013
Smith, P. J., Need, A. C., Cirulli, E. T., Chiba-Falek, O., & Attix, D. K. (2013). A comparison of the Cambridge Automated Neuropsychological Test Battery (CANTAB) with “traditional” neuropsychological testing instruments. Journal of Clinical and Experimental Neuropsychology, 35(3), 319–328. https://doi.org/10.1080/13803395.2013.771618
Mindware fizioloģisko datu mērītājs
Schmidt, S., & Walach, H. (2000). Electrodermal activity (EDA): State-of-the-art measurement and techniques for parapsychological purposes. Journal of Parapsychology, 64(2), 139–163.
Publication recommendations for electrodermal measurements. (2012). Psychophysiology, 49(8), 1017–1034. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1469-8986.2012.01384.x
Posada-Quintero, H. F., & Chon, K. H. (2020). Innovations in Electrodermal Activity Data Collection and Signal Processing: A Systematic Review. Sensors, 20(2), 479. https://doi.org/10.3390/s20020479
Citation: Geršak G, Drnovšek J (2020) Electrodermal activity patient simulator. PLoS ONE 15(2): e0228949. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0228949
Boucsein, W (2012) Electrodermal activity (2nd Ed). New York: Springer
Critchley, H.D. (2010). Electrodermal Responses: What Happens in the Brain. The Neuroscientist, 8, 132-144.
Dawson, ME, et al (2001) The Electrodermal System. In J. T. Cacioppo, L. G. Tassinary, and G.B. Bernston, (Eds) Handbook of Psychophysiology (2nd Ed), 200–223. Cambridge Press, Cambridge.
Nagai, Y., Critchley, H.D., Featherstone, E., Trimble, M.R., & Dolan, R.J., (2004). Activity in ventromedial prefrontal cortex covaries with sympathetic skin conductance level: a physiological account of a ‘‘default mode’’ of brain function, NeuroImage, 22, 243-25