skip to main content
10.1145/3275116.3275141acmotherconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagesmindtrekConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article
Open Access

Towards ecosystem for research and development of electrodermal activity applications

Published:10 October 2018Publication History

ABSTRACT

Electrodermal activity is one of the most studied psychophysiological markers of the functioning of the autonomic nervous system and it has been applied in psychophysiological research for over 100 years. However, electrodermal activity measurement has not been largely applied in clinical research until now due to it being limited to laboratory environment before the entry of wearable devices. The aim of this study is to speed up research and development of electrodermal activity applications based on wearable device measurements. In order to reach that goal an ecosystem model is proposed that includes open data, open source, application programming interface and software development kit as central components. To illustrate the ecosystem model a case study of Moodmetric is presented.

References

  1. Argyle, N. 1991. Skin Conductance Levels in Panic Disorder and Depression. The Journal of Nervous and Mental Disease. 179, 9 (Sep. 1991), 563--566.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  2. Betella, A., Zucca, R., Cetnarski, R., Greco, A., LanatÃ, A., Mazzei, D., Tognetti, A., Arsiwalla, X.D., Omedas, P., De Rossi, D. and Verschure, P.F.M.J. 2014. Inference of human affective states from psychophysiological measurements extracted under ecologically valid conditions. Frontiers in Neuroscience. 8, (Sep. 2014), 286.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  3. Bianco, V.D., Myllarniemi, V., Komssi, M. and Raatikainen, M. 2014. The Role of Platform Boundary Resources in Software Ecosystems: A Case Study. 2014 IEEE/IFIP Conference on Software Architecture (Apr. 2014), 11--20. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  4. Biørn-Hansen, A., Majchrzak, T.A. and Grøndi, T.-M. 2018. Progressive Web Apps for the Unified Development of Mobile Applications. Springer, Cham. 64--86.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  5. Blechert, J., Michael, T., Grossman, P., Lajtman, M. and Wilhelm, F.H. 2007. Autonomic and Respiratory Characteristics of Posttraumatic Stress Disorder and Panic Disorder. Psychosomatic Medicine. 69, 9 (Nov. 2007), 935--943.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  6. Boucsein, W. 2012. Electrodermal Activity. Springer US.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  7. Braune, S., Albus, M., Fröhler, M., Höhn, T. and Scheibe, G. 1994. Psychophysiological and biochemical changes in patients with panic attacks in a defined situational arousal. European Archives of Psychiatry and Clinical Neuroscience. 244, 2 (Aug. 1994), 86--92.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  8. Cowley, B., Filetti, M., Lukander, K., Torniainen, J., Henelius, A., Ahonen, L., Barral, O., Kosunen, I., Valtonen, T., Huotilainen, M., Ravaja, N. and Jacucci, G. 2016. The Psychophysiology Primer: A Guide to Methods and a Broad Review with a Focus on Human--Computer Interaction. Foundations and Trends® in Human--Computer Interaction. 9, 3-4 (2016), 151--308. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  9. Critchley, H.D. 2002. Review: Electrodermal Responses: What Happens in the Brain. The Neuroscientist. 8, 2 (Apr. 2002), 132--142.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  10. De, B. 2017. API Management. API Management. Apress. 15--28.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  11. Dolu, N., Süer, C., Özesmi, Ç., Keleştimur, F. and Eşel, E. 1997. Electrodermal Activity in Nonmedicated Hyperthyroid Patients Having No Depressive Symptoms. Biological Psychiatry. 42, 11 (Dec. 1997), 1024--1029.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  12. Dolu, N., Süer, C., Özesmi, Ç., Keleştimur, F. and Özcan, Y. 1999. Electrodermal Activity in Hypothyroid Patients and Healthy Subjects. Thyroid. 9, 8 (Aug. 1999), 787--790.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  13. Dunderfelt, T. 2017. Valoisaksi. Viisas Elämä.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  14. Evans, P.C. and Basole, R.C. 2016. Revealing the API ecosystem and enterprise strategy via visual analytics. Communications of the ACM. 59, 2 (Jan. 2016), 26--28. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  15. Förger, K., Himberg, T., Laroche, J. and Bachrach, A. 2018. FSenSync - A software for enabling collaboration between art and science. Hybrid Labs Symposium 2018 (2018), 1.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  16. Garbarino, M., Lai, M., Bender, D., Picard, R., Tognetti, S. and 2014, undefined 2014. Empatica E3---A wearable wireless multi-sensor device for real-time computerized biofeedback and data acquisition. Wireless Mobile Communication and Healthcare (Mobihealth) (2014), 39--42.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  17. Grossman, P., Niemann, L., ... S.S.-J. of psychosomatic and 2004, U. 2004. Mindfulness-based stress reduction and health benefits: A meta-analysis. Journal of psychosomatic research. 57, 1 (2004), 35--34.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  18. Hartig, T., Mitchell, R., de Vries, S. and Frumkin, H. 2014. Nature and Health. Annual Review of Public Health. 35, 1 (Mar. 2014), 207--228.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  19. Hoehn, T., Braune, S., Scheibe, G. and Albus, M. 1997. Physiological, biochemical and subjective parameters in anxiety patients with panic disorder during stress exposure as compared with healthy controls. European Archives of Psychiatry and Clinical Neuroscience. 247, 5 (Oct. 1997), 264--274.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  20. Iansiti, M. and Levien, R. 2004. Strategy as ecology. Harvard business review. 82, 3 (Mar. 2004), 68--78, 126.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  21. Ilvonen, I., Jussila, J., Karkkainen, H. and Paivarinta, T. 2015. Knowledge Security Risk Management in Contemporary Companies -- Toward a Proactive Approach. 2015 48th Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences (Jan. 2015), 3941--3950. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  22. Kabat-Zinn, J. 2003. Mindfulness-based stress reduction. Constructivism in the Human Sciences. 8, 2 (2003), 73--107.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  23. Kappeler-Setz, C., Gravenhorst, F., Schumm, J., Arnrich, B. and Tröster, G. 2013. Towards long term monitoring of electrodermal activity in daily life. Personal and Ubiquitous Computing. 17, 2 (Feb. 2013), 261--271. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  24. Kenney, M. and Zysman, J. 2016. The rise of the platform economy. Issues in Science and Technology. 32, 3 (2016), 61--69.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  25. Lader, M.H. and Wing, L. 1964. Habituation of the psycho-galvanic reflex in patients with anxiety states and in normal subjects. Journal of neurology, neurosurgery, and psychiatry. 27, 3 (Jun. 1964), 210--8.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  26. Lee, Y., Yoon, S., Lee, C. and Lee MH 2006. Wearable EDA sensor gloves using conducting fabric and embedded system. EMBS'06. 28th Annual International Conference of the IEEE (2006), 6785--6788.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  27. Moilanen, J., Niinioja, M., Seppänen, M. and Honkanen, M. 2018. API-talous 101. Alma Talent Oy.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  28. Moore, J.F. 1993. Predators and prey: a new ecology of competition. Harvard business review. 71, 3 (1993), 75--86.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  29. Pantelopoulos, A. and Bourbakis, N.G. 2010. A Survey on Wearable Sensor-Based Systems for Health Monitoring and Prognosis. IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics, Part C (Applications and Reviews). 40, 1 (Jan. 2010), 1--12. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  30. Picard, R., Migliorini, M., Caborni, C., Onorati, F., Regalia, G., Friedman, D. and Devinsky, O. 2017. Wrist sensor reveals sympathetic hyperactivity and hypoventilation before probable SUDEP. Neurology. 89, 6 (2017), 633--635.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  31. Poh, M., Swenson, N. and Picard, R. 2010. A wearable sensor for unobtrusive, long-term assessment of electrodermal activity. IEEE transactions on Biomedical engineering. 57, 5 (2010), 1243--1252.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  32. Sandifer, P.A., Sutton-Grier, A.E. and Ward, B.P. 2015. Exploring connections among nature, biodiversity, ecosystem services, and human health and well-being: Opportunities to enhance health and biodiversity conservation. Ecosystem Services. 12, (Apr. 2015), 1--15.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  33. Sarén, H. and Uosukainen, L. 2016. Luonnon hyvinvointivaikutukset ja hyvinvointiteknologia matkailun nakokulmasta.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  34. Setz, C., Arnrich, B., Schumm, J., La Marca, R., Tröster, G. and Ehlert, U. 2010. Discriminating stress from cognitive load using a wearable EDA device. IEEE Transactions on information technology in biomedicine. 14, 2 (2010), 410--417. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  35. Suoja, K., Liukkonen, J., Jussila, J., Salonius, H., Venho, N., Sillanpää, V., Vuori, V. and Helander, N. 2018. Application for pre-processing and visualization of electrodermal activity wearable data. EMBEC & NBC 2017 (2018), 93--96.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  36. Suomalainen fitness-sovellus on paljastanut satojen sotilaiden liikkeitä | Long Play: 2018. https://www.longplay.fi/sivuäänet/suomalainen-fitness-sovellus-paljastanut-satojen-sotilaiden-liikkeita. Accessed: 2018-07-08.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  37. Suominen, A.H., Jussila, J., Lundell, T., Mikkola, M. and Aramo-Immonen, H. 2018. Educational Hackathon: Innovation Contest for Innovation Pedagogy. The ISPIM Innovation Conference -- Innovation, The Name of The Game, 17-20 June 2018. (Stockholm, 2018).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  38. Thomas, L. and Autio, E. 2012. Modeling the ecosystem: a meta-synthesis of ecosystem and related literatures. DRUID 2012 Conference (Copenhagen, 2012).Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  39. Torniainen, J., Cowley, B., Henelius, A., Lukander, K. and Pakarinen, S. 2015. Feasibility of an electrodermal activity ring prototype as a research tool. 2015 37th Annual International Conference of the IEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology Society (EMBC) (Aug. 2015), 6433--6436.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  40. Vardasca, R.Â.R. 2011. The effect of work related mechanical stress on the peripheral temperature of the hand. University of Glamorgan.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  41. Vukovic, M., Srivastava, B., Branch, J.W., Laredo, J., Muthusamy, V., Slominski, A., Vaculin, R., Tan, W., Naik, V., Silva-Lepe, I. and Kumar, A. 2016. Riding and thriving on the API hype cycle. Communications of the ACM. 59, 3 (Feb. 2016), 35--37. Google ScholarGoogle ScholarDigital LibraryDigital Library
  42. Ward, N.G., Doerr, H.O. and Storrie, M.C. 1983. Skin conductance: A potentially sensitive test for depression. Psychiatry Research. 10, 4 (Dec. 1983), 295--302.Google ScholarGoogle ScholarCross RefCross Ref
  43. Yin, R. 2003. Case study research and applications: Design and methods. SAGE.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar
  44. Yin, R.K. 2011. Applications of case study research. SAGE.Google ScholarGoogle Scholar

Index Terms

  1. Towards ecosystem for research and development of electrodermal activity applications

      Recommendations

      Comments

      Login options

      Check if you have access through your login credentials or your institution to get full access on this article.

      Sign in
      • Published in

        cover image ACM Other conferences
        Mindtrek '18: Proceedings of the 22nd International Academic Mindtrek Conference
        October 2018
        282 pages
        ISBN:9781450365895
        DOI:10.1145/3275116

        Copyright © 2018 Owner/Author

        This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution International 4.0 License.

        Publisher

        Association for Computing Machinery

        New York, NY, United States

        Publication History

        • Published: 10 October 2018

        Permissions

        Request permissions about this article.

        Request Permissions

        Check for updates

        Qualifiers

        • research-article
        • Research
        • Refereed limited

        Acceptance Rates

        Mindtrek '18 Paper Acceptance Rate34of68submissions,50%Overall Acceptance Rate110of207submissions,53%

      PDF Format

      View or Download as a PDF file.

      PDF

      eReader

      View online with eReader.

      eReader