↓ Skip to main content

Familiarity effects in EEG-based emotion recognition

Overview of attention for article published in Brain Informatics, April 2016
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
80 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
158 Mendeley
Title
Familiarity effects in EEG-based emotion recognition
Published in
Brain Informatics, April 2016
DOI 10.1007/s40708-016-0051-5
Pubmed ID
Authors

Nattapong Thammasan, Koichi Moriyama, Ken-ichi Fukui, Masayuki Numao

Abstract

Although emotion detection using electroencephalogram (EEG) data has become a highly active area of research over the last decades, little attention has been paid to stimulus familiarity, a crucial subjectivity issue. Using both our experimental data and a sophisticated database (DEAP dataset), we investigated the effects of familiarity on brain activity based on EEG signals. Focusing on familiarity studies, we allowed subjects to select the same number of familiar and unfamiliar songs; both resulting datasets demonstrated the importance of reporting self-emotion based on the assumption that the emotional state when experiencing music is subjective. We found evidence that music familiarity influences both the power spectra of brainwaves and the brain functional connectivity to a certain level. We conducted an additional experiment using music familiarity in an attempt to recognize emotional states; our empirical results suggested that the use of only songs with low familiarity levels can enhance the performance of EEG-based emotion classification systems that adopt fractal dimension or power spectral density features and support vector machine, multilayer perceptron or C4.5 classifier. This suggests that unfamiliar songs are most appropriate for the construction of an emotion recognition system.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 158 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 158 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 23 15%
Student > Master 16 10%
Student > Bachelor 16 10%
Researcher 14 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 9 6%
Other 26 16%
Unknown 54 34%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Computer Science 39 25%
Engineering 27 17%
Neuroscience 12 8%
Psychology 7 4%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 1%
Other 10 6%
Unknown 61 39%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 05 January 2017.
All research outputs
#20,648,832
of 25,363,868 outputs
Outputs from Brain Informatics
#95
of 119 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#232,745
of 312,662 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Brain Informatics
#9
of 10 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,363,868 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 119 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.1. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 312,662 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 13th percentile – i.e., 13% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 10 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one.