oh my fking god. I am TRYING to do research for my book right now but I am getting DISTRACTED by the fact that I followed a citation from a paper into another paper and learned that they're interpreting EEG and eyetracking as a way to sort people into "in the flow" or "not in the flow" I AM GOING TO EFFING LOSE IT
I love that this was published in the same overall goddamn umbrella organization that sent me reviewers that said my work had "too much psychology" cited in it I AM. GOING. TO. LOSE. IT.
eyeblinks as a measure of frustration? I'm going to throw my entire laptop into the ocean
this is UNCRITICALLY cited in a BIG paper with NO reference to it being a biometrics study AT ALL
I mean. Can we measure things with EEG and with eyetracking, yes we can. Can we detect different kinds of waves yes we can. Do blinks correlate with something, I don't know, probably. This is all just so effing strange.
how is engineering the most critical field with the LEAST critical research I've ever seen. Do you guys just think if something is published in Fuck All Journal, 2024, that makes it good?
ML CLASSIFIER ON SIX DATA POINTS WHAT IS HAPPENING
Movement dominates brain activity, and is ALSO a huge artifact in any skin conductance. So like THAT'S a confound in these conditions. Yet no details at all about how this is truly analyzed, because it's an off the shelf EEG "band" someone bought with some research cash I bet. This paper is "we thought this was cool and so we bought a lot of stuff and tried it."
What's the play guys. What's the thing. Are we going to believe developers are human beings if we count enough eyeblinks and say they're systematically different if you focus harder? Are we going to unlock the magical super Computer Brain region if we measure hard enough?
MY WIFE PUBLISHED A PAPER ABOUT HOW MOVEMENT DOMINATES BRAIN ACTIVITY AND NEEDS TO BE ACCOUNTED FOR IN MEASURES AND NONE OF THESE GUYS READ IT
@robryk yes that's one!