ABSTRACT
The pupil diameter has been shown to provide insight to a person's experienced cognitive strain. Pupillary light responses, however, make this measure unreliable in uncontrolled settings. Two derived indicators-Index of Cognitive Activity (ICA) and Index of Pupillary Activity (IPA)-aim to 'eliminate' lighting influences, changing based only on the perceived cognitive strain. The IPA potentially offers a valuable alternative to the ICA through its fully transparent calculation, which lifts the restrictions to proprietary software and supported eye trackers. The measures are examined and compared based on two experimental studies; (i) as indicators of cognitive strain during mental arithmetic tasks and (ii) under different conditions of computer screen luminance. Results indicate that neither indicator differentiates between the increasing levels of cognitive strain. Differences in screen luminance are reflected in both indicators, although differently between the conditions. Both results contradict the claims of the indicators and further investigations are thus required.
