Exploring Individual Biases in BCI Research and Users: Does Gender Matter?

Cornelia Herbert^*Viviana Ramos AcunaRaphael R. K. KneippNina I. Kapfer

• Applied Emotion and Motivation Psychology, University of Ulm, Ulm, Germany

Objective: Brain-Computer Interface (BCI) is an interdisciplinary research field characterized by rapid technological advances and collaborative efforts to develop user-friendly, adaptive devices that enable healthy and non-responsive users to communicate and interact with their environment through brain signals elicited by specific instructions or tasks. However, research often shows gender bias, especially in scientific disciplines with strong technological, medical, or social foundations. Gender biases have been found among scientists conducting and publishing research. They may also exist among examiners and study participants. Research Question and Methods: This study investigates whether gender biases are present in BCI research, particularly in the distribution of women and men across editorial boards and authorship of studies focusing on psychological human factors that influence BCI performance and usability. We systematically analyzed the gender distribution in neuroscientific journals that accept BCI research or have a strong focus on BCI, reviewed their editorial boards, analyzed BCI publications from the past five years— including those related to psychological human factors—and examined gender biases among study participants. Additionally, we reviewed EEG studies investigating sex-or gender-related differences in EEG signals relevant to BCI research. Results: We observed significant differences in the representation of women and men among editorial board members and BCI authors, including first- , co-, and last-authorship. Similarly, there were differences in the gender distribution of participants in BCI studies. Moreover, the literature review suggests potential differences in brain signals between women and men within the studied samples. The impact of these differences on performance in BCIs, such as motor-imagery SMR-BCIs, SSVEP-BCIs, and P300-BCIs, as well as training methods and BCI usability, still needs to be explored. Conclusion: Our findings emphasize the importance of increasing awareness of gender-, sex-, and user-related factors in BCI research. In line with recent perspectives that highlight the need to address gender biases and consider individual differences like language, motivation, or cultural background, future BCI research should focus on systematically examining gender and sex differences. This will help promote gender equality in BCI research and lead to a better understanding of users' needs, preferences, and individual characteristics.