Next Article in Journal
Advancing ADAS Perception: A Sensor-Parameterized Implementation of the GM-PHD Filter
Next Article in Special Issue
Identification of the Biomechanical Response of the Muscles That Contract the Most during Disfluencies in Stuttered Speech
Previous Article in Journal
Developing and Testing High-Performance SHM Sensors Mounting Low-Noise MEMS Accelerometers
Previous Article in Special Issue
Impaired Lumbar Extensor Force Control Is Associated with Increased Lifting Knee Velocity in People with Chronic Low-Back Pain
 
 
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Review

Wearable Biosensor Technology in Education: A Systematic Review

by
María A. Hernández-Mustieles
1,
Yoshua E. Lima-Carmona
1,
Maxine A. Pacheco-Ramírez
1,
Axel A. Mendoza-Armenta
1,
José Esteban Romero-Gómez
2,
César F. Cruz-Gómez
1,
Diana C. Rodríguez-Alvarado
1,
Alejandro Arceo
1,
Jesús G. Cruz-Garza
3,
Mauricio A. Ramírez-Moreno
1 and
Jorge de J. Lozoya-Santos
1,*
1
Mechatronics Department, School of Engineering and Sciences, Monterrey Campus, Tecnologico de Monterrey, Monterrey 64700, Mexico
2
Mechatronics Department, School of Engineering and Sciences, Guadalajara Campus, Tecnologico de Monterrey, Guadalajara 45201, Mexico
3
Department of Neurosurgery, Houston Methodist Research Institute, Houston, TX 77030, USA
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Sensors 2024, 24(8), 2437; https://doi.org/10.3390/s24082437
Submission received: 7 March 2024 / Revised: 31 March 2024 / Accepted: 2 April 2024 / Published: 11 April 2024
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Human Health and Performance Monitoring Sensors)

Abstract

:
Wearable Biosensor Technology (WBT) has emerged as a transformative tool in the educational system over the past decade. This systematic review encompasses a comprehensive analysis of WBT utilization in educational settings over a 10-year span (2012–2022), highlighting the evolution of this field to address challenges in education by integrating technology to solve specific educational challenges, such as enhancing student engagement, monitoring stress and cognitive load, improving learning experiences, and providing real-time feedback for both students and educators. By exploring these aspects, this review sheds light on the potential implications of WBT on the future of learning. A rigorous and systematic search of major academic databases, including Google Scholar and Scopus, was conducted in accordance with the PRISMA guidelines. Relevant studies were selected based on predefined inclusion and exclusion criteria. The articles selected were assessed for methodological quality and bias using established tools. The process of data extraction and synthesis followed a structured framework. Key findings include the shift from theoretical exploration to practical implementation, with EEG being the predominant measurement, aiming to explore mental states, physiological constructs, and teaching effectiveness. Wearable biosensors are significantly impacting the educational field, serving as an important resource for educators and a tool for students. Their application has the potential to transform and optimize academic practices through sensors that capture biometric data, enabling the implementation of metrics and models to understand the development and performance of students and professors in an academic environment, as well as to gain insights into the learning process.

1. Introduction

There has been a significant surge and evolution in research on Wearable Biosensor Technology (WBT) in recent years [1], along with its integration into educational environments. WBT refers to a subset of wearable technology devices that are designed to be worn directly or loosely by an individual and that are equipped with an arrangement of built-in sensors that allow for the acquisition of physiological or biometric data [2]. The wide applicability of these technologies ranges from healthcare (for treatment, rehabilitation, or monitoring) [3] and safety (for fall detection and fall prevention, fatigue detection and environmental condition monitoring) [4] to activity recognition in sports [5] and education [6], among others.
Nowadays, WBT has been used in educational contexts to enhance the learning experience and study the effects of its incorporation [7,8]. WBTs have been used to guide the structure of learning programs, capture data to inform the process of learning, make knowledge visible, and help instructors learn about their students [9]. One of the first documented cases of the use of wearable devices in education incorporated the use of virtual reality (VR) technology for mathematics and geometry education with the help of a tutor in the virtual space [10]. In recent years, smartwatch devices have been the focus of interest due to their unique features, such as their comfortable portability and the ability to support learning and everyday activities [11,12,13]. Currently, smartwatches have been recognized as promising in educational contexts given their growing acceptance and adoption as a personal wearable device [14]. Other applications of WBT include identity management systems, class attendance, e-evaluation, security, student motivations, and learning analytics [15]. The biometric technology market is expected to reach a value of USD 94 billion by 2025 at a compound annual growth rate of 36% [15], when just 10 years prior, in 2015, it was valued at USD 9.916 million [16]. This increase in market value points to a growth in the development and acceptance of this type of technology.
The adoption of WBTs in education provides several advantages. One of the main benefits of adopting WBT is its ability to facilitate convenient access and interaction with biometric information and learning materials with little restrictions regarding time and place of access [17]. Students and teachers can benefit from this information by accessing learning materials at any time and any place while also guaranteeing valuable data collection in various educational settings for subsequent analysis [11]. This would reflect a non-restrictive, unobtrusive learning experience for students. A clear example of this can be found in [18,19], where WBTs are incorporated into tasks for physical activity recognition and biomechanical feedback applications, respectively, to improve students’ sports performance and health.
When combined with other tools such as the Internet of Things (IoT), smartwatches, and eye-tracking technology, wearables can be used to estimate student attention [20]. WBT can also be used to implement performance evaluation systems [21] or emotion recognition systems for students with different needs, for instance, those who present a mental disorder or mood disruption [22].
A second benefit of adopting WBT in education is the value of the implicit information offered by the collected physiological data. In [23], the term “neurophysiological measurement” is introduced, which refers to an exclusive type of physiological data that are related to the Central Nervous System (CNS) or the Autonomic Nervous System (ANS). On this note, neurophysiological measurements (NPMs) related to the ANS include measurements such as eye-related measurements (blink rate and pupil dilation), electrodermal activity (EDA) or galvanic skin response (GSR), blood pressure, and electrocardiography (ECG), while NPMs related to the CNS include electroencephalography (EEG) and electromyography (EMG) [23]. From this list, EEG is of particular interest in an educational context as it measures brain activity, which can be used to infer fluctuations in cognitive processes [24,25]. It is widely known that psychological constructs such as cognitive load, attention, and emotion play an important role in the learning process of a student [23]. NPMs such as EEG, heart rate variability (HRV), or EDA can provide valuable neurological data to monitor mental states and determine a student’s performance [26,27,28,29,30].
Figure 1 shows a summary of the physiological measurements considered for this review, along with some of the devices used to acquire them. The combination of such measurements with machine learning (ML) algorithms can aid in the detection of low academic performance and is useful for deciding preventive actions [31,32]. Additionally, integrating VR technology has allowed for the design and testing of different learning environments with more convenience and the study of how they affect cognitive processes in students [33,34,35].
A third benefit of the use of WBT in education is that the monitoring of NPMs can be exploited to solve educational challenges. They can be used to predict cognitive outcomes such as students’ academic performance by using peer-to-peer or student–teacher brain-to-brain (B2B) synchronization and interaction [36,37,38,39]. This allows for an increase in the effectiveness of teaching and learning processes [23].
The purpose of this review is to critically examine the existing literature to assess the impact of the application of WBT in education and the limits that it encompasses. We aim to investigate the evolution of WBT in education over the past 10 years, how it has been integrated to solve key educational challenges, the wide range of educational areas in which it can be applied, and the future perspectives, challenges, and trends for this technology. A detailed discussion over the evolution, trends, applications, and challenges of WBT in education is presented in order to provide a guide for future research in this field.
The rest of this article is divided as follows: Section 2 describes the methodology used to write this review; Section 3 presents the evolution of WBT in education, state-of-the-art implementations, and current applications in the field; Section 4 discusses the challenges and current trends in this technology and provides perspectives; and finally, Section 5 closes the article with the conclusions of this work.

2. Materials and Methods

2.1. Study Design and Search Strategy

A systematic search, following the (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) PRISMA methodology [40] was applied in this review. The literature review took place on 21 September 2022 within the Scopus database and Google Scholar; Scopus is widely acknowledged as one of the main bibliographic databases, distinguished by its extensive content coverage and robust impact indicators [41]. This selection affords access to valuable metrics crucial for data analysis and the construction of the content distribution presented, allowing us to complement it correctly with the literature consulted on Google Scholar, considering publications that were available within the January 2012 to August 2022 period. The following string represents the equation formulated by the relevant keywords related to all aspects of WBT in education:
(“Biometry” OR “Biometrics” OR “EEG” OR “Electroencephalography” OR “Electroencephalogram” OR “Biofeedback” OR “ECG” OR “Electrocardiogram” OR “BPM” OR “Beats per Minute” OR “Blood Volume Pulse” OR “HRV” OR “Heart Rate Variability” OR “Devices” OR “Sensors” OR “Smartwatch” OR “Wearable”) AND (“Education” OR “Remote Education” OR “Learning” OR “e-learning” OR “Student” OR “Teacher” OR “Professor” OR “Teaching” OR “Classroom” OR “School Activity” OR “Academic Task” OR “Exam” OR “Academic” OR “Learning Outcomes" OR “Reading Comprehension”) AND (“Mental Fatigue” OR “Stress” OR “Cognitive Workload” OR “Applications” OR “Perspectives” OR “Limitations” OR “Challenges” OR “Innovation” OR “Advantages” OR “Disadvantages” OR “Technology”) AND NOT (“Deep Learning”) AND NOT (“Machine Learning”) AND NOT (“Reinforcement Learning”).

2.2. Exclusion Criteria

Studies were excluded if they met one or more of the criteria in the following list:
  • The publication was not related to biometry or education (n = 96).
  • The publication was related to biometry but not to education (n = 57).
  • The publication was related to education, but not to biometry (n = 145).
  • The search was related to a summary of conference proceedings (n = 3).

3. Results

3.1. Summary of Studies Included

A total of 368 works were detected in Scopus using the equation presented in Section 2. Duplicates reported from the database and studies within the exclusion criteria were discarded. From the identified papers, 301 studies were eliminated due to falling within the exclusion criteria, and only 66 were considered. Additionally, 74 studies were also included from citation searching in Google Scholar. A summary of the results obtained from the search is shown in Figure 2.

3.2. General Characteristics of the Included Studies

The general characteristics of the 66 included studies from Scopus are summarized in Table 1. This table presents the following characteristics for each study:
  • Objective. Describes the main goal of the study being conducted.
  • Education Type. Classifies the study according to the type of education to which it is applied, such as academic, language, medical, Science Technology Engineering Mathematics (STEM), etc.
  • Education Level. Classifies the study according to the level of education to which it is applied, such as kindergarten, elementary school, high school, university, etc.
  • Institute. Provides the name of the institution in which the study is being conducted.
  • Country. Provides the name of the country in which the study was conducted.
  • Sample Size. Number of people who participated as test subjects during the study.
  • Analysis Tools. Provides information on the tools used to gather and analyze the study’s data. The information collected in each study includes mainly physiological characteristics, such as EEG, ECG, EMG, HR, GSR, and HRV, and some questionnaires such as the Medical Student Stressor Questionnaire (MSSQ), Perceived Stress Scale (PSS-10), Behavior Assessment System for Children (BASC-S2), Global Assessment of Recent Stress (GARS-K), Balance of Challenge and Skill (BCS), and Momentary Test Performance (MOM-tp). On the other hand, a diverse set of tools was used to analyze the information, including MATLAB, Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS), augmented reality (AR), VR, wearable commercial-off-the-shelf (COTS), and brain–computer interfaces (BCIs). Lastly, in order to provide reliable results, the studies employed various types of metrics or statistics, which included standard deviation of NN intervals (SDNN), root mean square of successive differences between normal heartbeats (RMSSD), proportion of NN50 (pNN50), low frequency (LF) and high frequency (HF) ratio, ANOVA, radial basis neural network (RBFNN), and improved extreme learning machine (IELM).
  • Contribution. Contains the main findings of the study.
It is important to note that all of the devices presented in this review only take recordings during experimental settings and for a limited period of time. Studies about continuous monitoring devices are not included.

3.3. Temporal Distribution of the Included Studies

Figure 3 shows the temporal distribution of the selected papers from Scopus and Google Scholar that were published from 2012 to 2022. During this period, an increasing trend in the implementation and exploration of WBTs in the field of education can be observed. This illustrates how researchers, scientists, and scholars have adapted to new challenges, harnessed emerging technologies, and forged pathways to address the complexities of the educational system during the last decade.
Furthermore, this increasing trend observed from 2012 to 2022 can be attributed to different factors, since, during the first years of research (2012 to 2017, mean: 4.83 studies, std: 3.92), the theoretical part and the practical basis of the field were established. Following this, starting in 2018 until 2022 (mean: 22.20 studies, std: 4.60), there was a growing recognition of the importance of these technologies in education as they became more sophisticated and more accessible.
In summary, the temporal graph of publications related to the implementation of WBT in education shows a four-fold increase in the number of published articles per year from 2018 to 2022 compared to the articles published between 2012 and 2017. This reflects an increased focus on the convergence of technology and education, which promises significant advances in improving the quality of teaching and learning over the next decade.

3.4. Geographical Distribution of the Included Studies

Figure 4 shows the geographical distribution of the included studies from 2012 to 2022. It reveals a diverse and widespread interest in WBT in education across the globe. Notably, China emerges as a pioneer in this field, with 20 studies contributing valuable insights. Following closely, the United States demonstrates significant engagement with 18 studies, underlining its prominent role in advancing research in this area. Mexico also surfaces as a noteworthy participant, with 10 studies, highlighting a growing interest in wearable biosensors within the educational context.
The collective picture is truly international, with a total of 45 countries actively contributing to the body of knowledge on WBTs in education during the specified time period. This extensive global involvement underscores the universal significance and appeal of WBT in shaping educational practices. As diverse nations collaborate and contribute, it fosters a rich and comprehensive understanding of the implications and applications of this technology in enhancing educational methodologies worldwide.

3.5. Literature Review

3.5.1. Evolution of WBT in Education

It has been observed over the years that, for educational institutions, it is difficult to extract information that helps understand the way students learn, as well as to guarantee enhancing learning experiences [86], taking into account the challenges represented by teaching people with different educational backgrounds and learning engagement styles [87]. Educational institutions have been incorporating and implementing new gadgets like wearable and mobile devices, making it easier to obtain data from students in order to improve how they learn by making data-based changes to their infrastructure or teaching methodologies [88,89].
In July 2012, a study was conducted in which EEG was used to estimate and predict mathematical problem-solving outcomes. This study aimed to evaluate whether estimates of the attention and cognitive workload of students obtained from recorded EEG data while they solved math problems could be useful in predicting success or failure. The signals were processed to obtain the mental states of students in the frequency domain. Based on the results obtained from a Support Vector Machine (SVM) model, the transitions between different state levels can predict problem-solving outcomes with an average accuracy of 62 percent for both easy and hard difficulties [90].
As another example of these types of implementations, in 2018, Hui Zheng and Vivian Genaro Motti [91] created “WELI” to investigate how smartwatches can support students with Intellectual and Developmental Disabilities (IDDs). The goal was to help students with IDDs in the performance of activities requiring high emotional and behavioral skills, as well as involvement, communication, collaboration, and planning. Furthermore, in 2017, a multibiometric system was developed, aimed at authenticating students on online learning platforms. This algorithm verifies the presence and interaction of students by calculating the score-level fusion of different biometric responses. This system serves as a tool to accredit the identity of the person undergoing the learning experience [92].
In 2019, a paper showed an implementation of adaptability and artificial intelligence (AI) methods within the Education 4.0 framework and also investigated the embedded biosensors used in smartphones and smartwatches [93]. In this context, Education 4.0 is the integration of emerging technologies such as analytics, AI, biometrics, and the IoT within the educational framework in preparation for the industry. They proposed a framework for education that uses embedded biosensor data (EMG, EDA, ECG, blood pressure, and EEG) and environmental data to estimate students’ well-being and health. Recent studies have continued to explore learning/Education 4.0 by exploring emotional and cognitive engagement classification through EEG [94]. This study classified states of low/high engagement with a 77% accuracy.
In another study, the authors developed a BCI for gathering data and detecting a learner’s mental state while watching MOOC (Massive Open Online Course) videos through EEG devices. Their proposal was based on John Sweller’s cognitive load theory to develop a model with preprocessed training data and test the classifiers to validate their ensemble classifiers’ performance [95]. Other studies have continued to explore the approach of assessing a learner’s engagement and attention during video lectures through inter-subject metrics [96].
During the recent COVID-19 pandemic, the University of Pamplona, in Colombia, conducted a research study where they measured EDA, ECG, and EMG in an academic context during stressful situations. This was a study for the detection and identification of the volatile organic compound profiles emitted by the skin. The aim was to measure the student’s stress state during the exam and during the relaxation state, after the exam period [55].
New developments have not only occurred in hardware, but new software and processing techniques have also emerged. In 2022 [48], a study found better classification results from EEG data as a predictor of student stress through the use of an improved extreme learning machine model. A useful approach for EEG processing uses traditional SVMs whose features were extracted through empirical mode decomposition to obtain a higher classification accuracy in predicting student interest [97]. Another metric that has already been used in real-world applications, but is still being developed, is the B2B synchrony measured through EEG [36,98]. Software advancements have also been implemented to enable adaptive learning to, for example, provide video feedback to increase engagement upon the detection of low attention via EEG [99].
As it is evidenced in Figure 5, a wide variety of biosensors have been used in education with diverse applications [100]. Another study [101] identified EEG, ECG, EMG, skin temperature (ST), photoplethysmography (PPG), GSR, and EDA as some of the main physiological signals obtained by sensors to monitor students’ engagement. In the early 2000s, a trend regarding the use of e-textiles in educational contexts appeared, but almost all data were related to posture, gestures, and respiratory patterns. Wearables for learning purposes reached peak development around 2014–2016, when technological advances, such as smart wristbands, watches, and glasses, arrived with the possibility of acquiring precise physiological data [9]. In recent years, there has been a notable surge in technological progress, marked by the emergence of solutions employing more advanced algorithms and machine learning techniques [34,35,101]. These innovations are designed to efficiently process vast amounts of data, addressing specific problems within defined scenarios.

3.5.2. Solving Educational Problems with WBTs

The educational system has been integrating new methods and techniques to improve how students learn. Educational demands change over time, and institutions have to adapt their teaching methods to ensure an optimal learning process. Technology development increases continuously and, as a result, new technologies have allowed for the monitoring of students while they learn that give feedback on the efficiency of teaching methodologies [102,103].
Figure 5. Significant progress timeline of WBT evolution in educational contexts from 2004 to 2022.
Figure 5. Significant progress timeline of WBT evolution in educational contexts from 2004 to 2022.
Sensors 24 02437 g005
WBT has been useful in the academic field in various aspects [15], considering that emotional states and cognitive status are considered good metrics to be aware of the student’s academic progress [104]. Having access to this kind of data allows teachers to identify motivations and optimize the learning process. In this respect, HRV monitoring shows a good performance regulating emotional state, as six breaths per minute are shown to reduce stressful emotions and contribute to improved learning experiences [43], but techniques to characterize cognitive statuses are still being studied. Additionally, WBTs can save institutional resources, optimizing systems like access points, transportation, and other control criteria, which not only has an impact on education but also on safety and security [105].
A high academic load often drives students to develop coping behaviors. EEG recordings during exam situations can serve as adequate indicators of adaptive responses as frontal cortex activation correlates with brain processes that support motivational systems. Stressful situations, such as coping behavior, may push students towards less effective ways of handling the situation [106]. In this context, neurofeedback represents a growing opportunity to monitor mental states. For this reason, various universities tested adaptive neuro-learning systems using a BCI for online education, showing an enhanced learning performance (average test scores of 83.83 out of 100 for the experimental group compared to 56.67 for the control group) [99]. Considering that changes in EEG alpha asymmetry have been observed in the prefrontal cortex depending on the approach or avoidance of motivational systems using positive or negative effects in students, this has demonstrated how positive traits lead to left hemispheric activation, influencing the adaptive response of brain processes and manifesting in an improved academic performance [106].
Specific studies have been developed to solve different problems in education regarding intellectual disabilities. The implementation of a monitoring system using EEG, ECG, and near-infrared spectroscopy (NIRS) offers a valuable tool for assessing cognitive states, in this case, to measure the educational effect on children with mental retardation over four years [107]. In 2022 [43], a study to reduce anxiety and social stress in primary students was released. It shows how having instant biofeedback of the heart rate variability allows for the teaching of an easier method of conscious breathing, leading in consequence to a positive impact on the emotional experience of the students who know how to perform slow and steady breathing.
Given that cognitive load is a fundamental factor in cognitive processing and has a significant impact on clinical reasoning, a study that recorded ECG signals from students at the Uniformed Services University of the Health Sciences was able to identify a correlation between cardiovascular measures and activities associated with high levels of cognitive load [29]. This leads to the conclusion that this type of feedback can aid in enhancing instructional materials and, in turn, improve the future performance of medical students while reducing cognitive load. Using similar physiological measurement techniques with ECG, a study was conducted on college students. In this case, the objective was to analyze how the environment affects students’ learning performance and their psychophysiological responses depending on thermal conditions. The results showed that ECG measurements served as objective indicators to control the task’s load [30].
Understanding the relevance of the fields of STEM in industry settings and assessing vocational interests in these areas can be a complex task, traditionally achieved through various psychometric tests. However, it is possible to evaluate these interests using EEG data [108]. A study was conducted to evaluate the performance of children in topics offered by machine care education (children’s education in STEM), such as programming, 3D design, and robotics. This study aimed to demonstrate how the development of a machine learning algorithm, capable of analyzing physiological signals (HRV, EDA, and EEG), can predict an individual’s affinity for engineering. Additionally, WBT can promote STEM education and involvement of students by exposing them to fun and engaging hands-on activities related to do-it-yourself electronics for wearable computing [6].
NPMs including brain activity, cardiac function, and skin conductance have been analyzed in various contexts, leading to the development of models capable of classifying mental fatigue. This demonstrates how the use of wearable devices that measure physiological signals can enhance the experiences of students and workers [109]. Depending on the tasks being undertaken, specific autonomic responses are generated by the human body, with adequate machine learning classification extracting ECG and EDA measurements in a non-invasive manner, and it is possible to identify the type of task being performed [110]. EEG and cardiac activity have also been used to address the issue of the effects of different learning and teaching methods on the learning process and cognitive state of students with the hopes of implementing personalized learning experiences in the future [111,112].
Overall, wearable biosensors have served as a guiding structure for learning. All kinds of physiological feedback and data interpretation provide the possibility to construct a framework for students and evaluate user performance, but they are also helpful in supporting current teaching methodologies and how tasks can be managed [9,101]. Biometric systems are still evolving and offer a wide range of applications not just in education, leading to meaningful strategies to enhance human performance [105].

3.5.3. Applications of WBTs in Education

With the ongoing evolution of WBTs, their integration has brought about a profound transformation in the pedagogical landscape, reshaping the methodologies of teaching and learning. WBTs have arisen as powerful tools, offering a wide range of applications that harness NPMs to deepen our understanding of the intricate processes involved in human learning, a trend that can be seen in Figure 6.
Figure 6 shows a graphical description of the contrast between the periods from 2012 to 2016 and from 2018 to 2022, since in more recent years, there has been an increasing trend in the application of wearables in education based on physiological signals. In the case of applications with EEG signals, it is shown that in the period from 2018 to 2022, there was an increase of 133% in studies compared to studies in the period from 2012 to 2018. Furthermore, the application that had the greatest increase, taking into account its relevance in both periods, was the heart monitoring application, which is mainly due to the fact that it benefited from the easy access of society to wearable devices such as smartwatches. Finally, applications related to physiological signals such as EMG or EDA also exhibited an important growth; nevertheless, compared to other physiological signals, they have not been of great interest to researchers.
It is necessary to consider that each of our physiological signals may shed light on distinct facets of the learning process [101]. Many of the applications provide multiple perspectives of how the process of knowledge acquisition occurs in individuals. Recent trends in research suggest that wearables are starting to be implemented within real-time frameworks to provide direct feedback for educators. Current wearables are being used in real time to monitor stress during exams [72,81], predict mental fatigue [102] and concentration levels [20], and identify flow states [26]. In bringing wearables to naturalistic settings, studies may leverage consumer-grade wearables, real-time data processing techniques, or web applications with dashboards for monitoring. This research is often conducted within the umbrella of IoT applications [62,71,93,102].
Below, a summary of the main applications of WBTs within the realm of education (with a specific focus on NPMs) is presented.
Electroencephalography. Since learning is a cognitive process that involves changes in brain activity [60], and considering that some methods to measure the levels of attention and engagement in students may be intrusive [96], EEG signals have been of great relevance to researchers in the development of tools, technologies, and methodologies for the benefit of education. One of the first studies to test students in a naturalistic high school setting analyzed attention, self-reported enjoyment, personality traits, and other social and engagement metrics derived from surveys and EEG to discover the relationship with a student’s brain synchrony. This study found statistically significant associations suggesting brain-to-brain synchrony as a useful marker for predicting classroom interactions and engagement [37]. With the use of portable and low-cost EEG devices, the authors were able to take measurements from students throughout many sessions of their semester in a non-laboratory setting. Follow-up publications expanded on this idea to understand how the student–teacher relationship and retention of class content are correlated with closeness and brain-to-brain synchrony [37].
EEG-based technologies can also be used as predictors of cognitive performance [28] by using the alpha/theta ratio and delta band power (which are indicators of mental fatigue and drowsiness). Alongside facial expressions, EEG can be predictive of states of engagement, attention [113], planning [114], shifting [115], and even student effort [116]. Regarding attention, considering that it is the most important factor in learning, protocols have been proposed to classify the levels of attention in educational environments [117]. Other studies have generated offline algorithms to evaluate primary and middle-school children’s STEM interests [118]. Wearable technologies can also make EEG research more approachable and accessible. A study created a research-based laboratory curriculum for undergraduate students to learn about the theoretical foundations of EEG and the different protocols used in research [119].
Another possible application enabled by detecting cognitive states can be biofeedback systems [102]. This study built a system where learners engaged in a task while their biometrics were displayed in a separate interface to the teacher. Afterward, the data were fed to a random forest classification algorithm that could accurately discern states of mental fatigue. Furthermore, NPMs are a useful tool to detect stress and anxiety in students. This could allow for more particular interventions in high-stress situations, such as college evaluations [60,120]. In [121], a review can be found where the effects of stress on education have been studied using EEG signals.
Electrocardiography, Photoplethysmography, and Heart Rate. HRV is a commonly used metric to detect stress. HRV is not a single metric, but usually an analysis performed in both the time and frequency domains during varying lengths of time over a heartbeat signal. A study conducted on medical students [53] related HRV to both stress and academic achievement, which showed a positive correlation between these variables. A study [29] attempted to measure how the heart rate and HRV, measured by ECG, related to cognitive load and performance in medical students watching videos of physician–patient interactions and filling out a post-encounter form. This study found positive correlations between cognitive load, HR, and HRV, while performance was negatively correlated with cognitive load measures. A larger study performed during university final evaluations [72] used HRV and HR to measure the changes in stress amongst students of different academic years throughout the exam. In this case, HRV was lowest when stress was released after the exam. It also showed a lack of adaptation techniques amongst undergraduates of different semesters, with only a measurable difference in heart rates present between first-year graduate and undergraduate students. This study required the use of a small ECG device (made by CardioDiagnostic) and electrodes to be placed on the participant’s chest and abdomen during the evaluation.
With a focus on biofeedback and interventions, another study used HRV in elementary-school students to reduce anxiety and social stress [43]. This study used HeartMath EmWave 2021 Pro. Version software and hardware, both of which are consumer-grade non-invasive devices for HRV measurements and stress management. The heart rate by itself has also been used as a physiological measure to improve engagement and motivation of university students by combining wearable data (Fitbit, Apple Watch, or JINS MEME) with data of academic performance [122].
Electromyography, Electrodermal Activity, and Others. Combined with HRV, EDA can be used to identify different cognitive tasks that a person is performing [110], which has the potential to improve coordination and performance in a classroom. GSR—a term used interchangeably with EDA that also measures skin conductance—has also been used in studies [34,55,73] to measure academic stress. EMG is highly accurate at detecting stress using measurements from the left and right trapezius muscles and the left and right erector spinae muscles, which all showed higher activity during stress-inducing tasks. This study also used ECG to derive HRV and improve the accuracy of the SVM classifier [123]. Considering that different biometric signals or data are implemented in the academic environment, some studies have opted to use a combination of these to make the learning environment intelligent; such data include heart rate, emotions, and sweat levels [86]. Another study [55] also used the EMG of the upper trapezius muscle, alongside ECG and GSR to differentiate students in a state of stress (during an exam) and relaxation (after the exam). With simple classification methods, such as SVMs and linear discriminant analysis (LDA), this study achieved a high accuracy with these variables, particularly GSR, in classifying stress and relaxation states.

3.5.4. Sensors Used by WBTs in Education

WBTs have evolved to include multiple sensors, which are based on the type of physiological signal to be focused on. Some of the most common sensors that can be found in WBTs are detailed in the following.
Electroencephalography. In the case of EEG signals, electrode variations, such as dry or wet electrodes, are mainly implemented.
Electrocardiography, Photoplethysmography, and Heart Rate. Infrared PPG ear sensors, noninvasive auditory sensors, heart rhythm scanner PE, AD8232 ECG chip, Ambu WhiteSensor WS, blood pressure sensors, ECG sensors, and oxygen sensors are mainly used.
Electromyography, Electrodermal Activity, and Others. IMU sensors, EMG sensors, GSR sensors, acceleration sensors, MOX gas sensors, movement trackers, eye tracking sensors, and light and temperature sensors are mainly used.
Table 2 includes many of these sensors that have been reported in the literature. This table also aims to provide a brief summary of the technologies used in multiple studies. It includes the technical details of the device, such as the communication protocol, type of storage, and whether it used a simulated or experimental signal. Moreover, Table 3 also provides general information about some of the different biometry devices used in education, such as the type of signal they measure, the sensors implemented, their type of data storage, and power supply.

4. Discussion

The search results from the present review show that EEG was the most popular NPM among the studies. It was found to be used as a stand-alone measurement or along with other biometrics such as EDA [68], eye tracking [74], ECG [85], or even EMG and blood pressure [84]. Two main objectives were identified regarding the use of EEG in classrooms: to analyze the mental state of a student through the estimation of physiological constructs or to evaluate teaching and learning effectiveness with the help of qualitative or biofeedback strategies [71,74,84,85].
First, physiological responses to stress have been used to evaluate the performance of students in an academic setting. Stress analysis was of particular interest for researchers, especially during exams or tests, to examine the change in studying and learning patterns of students [65]. Overall, it was found that investigation of stress levels improves the quality of academic classes [45,121]. Students’ stress levels increase before examinations and during timed exams [60,69,124], and high levels of stress are correlated with poorer evaluation performance and psychological health problems [75,81]. Other analyzed physiological constructs include motivation [85], flow state [26], concentration [66], and sustained attention [113], where an increase in all of them correlates to improved educational interventions and allows for the possibility of implementation of e-learning platforms through BCIs or AR systems [26,66]. Meanwhile, an increase in mental fatigue was discovered to increase on 8 h school days (or longer), and it was identified as a factor of high concern in high-school education [64]. Some studies also developed algorithms for emotion recognition in teachers [46] and to evaluate psychological stress in students [48,68].
Secondly, to evaluate teaching and learning effectiveness, researchers tested the acceptability of wearable and mobile devices by also implementing qualitative surveys [49,63], and biofeedback strategies were used to evaluate the effectiveness of lessons and judge cognitive errors in students [74,79,84].
HR is shown to be the second most preferred NPM in classrooms. HRV is estimated either through ECG or PPG. Contrary to EEG, which is sometimes used as a stand-alone physiological measurement, these measurements are usually always used in parallel with others, such as motion [52], blood pressure [5,77], eye tracking [20], EEG [85], GSR, EMG, temperature, and respiration [55,56,78,84]. Once more, stress is the main focus of the studies, with the proposal of stress detection and monitoring frameworks based on gender-centered HRV, GSR, and EMG [42,47,55,56,123] evaluations [53,76], and the proposal of stress-reduction techniques [77,78]. Some studies also researched the relationship between stress levels and sleep, where high stress levels proved to be associated with poor sleep behaviors in students [44,88]. It was once again proved that WBT offers pedagogical opportunities [5,72,80,82,84,85] and supports learning activities through the integration of AR, AI, and IoT devices [20,52,62]. Finally, other NPMs found in the studies are temperature [54], motion [58,59,67], EDA [70], GSR [73], electrooculography (EOG), EMG [57], and voice [61].
Figure 7 presents a summary of the results. China and the United States were the top two countries with the most papers published related to wearable technology in education. MATLAB (The Mathworks Inc., Natick, MA, USA) and Python (Python Software Foundation, Beaverton, OR, USA) proved to be the most popular software to perform signal processing, and EEG and ECG were the most popular measurements.

4.1. Perspectives

One of the main limitations identified in the studies is the variability of the WBT used. This technology field is characterized by its diversity, with various devices offering different features and capabilities, but this represents a drawback. Comparing results between studies may be challenging, given that researchers may not consistently evaluate the same types of devices. This also opens the possibility of variability in protocols for the usage of this technology, limiting the consistency of results across studies. For example, the NeuroSky MindWave Headset (NeuroSky, San Jose, CA, USA) is shown to be the most used device for EEG recording (Table 2). However, the data-processing techniques vary, as well as the software used for the task [26,63,66,71,74].
Additionally, few studies seem to consider the acceptance and user experience of WBT by students and teachers as an important research variable. Most studies did apply surveys to qualitatively measure stress or attention levels; however, only a few implemented surveys to determine the acceptability of WBT in classrooms [61,63] or others did not implement any type of qualitative measurement at all. From the application of technology readiness models (TRMs) to measure physical education teachers’ perspectives on WBT, it is possible to identify conditions in infrastructure that better accommodate the use of technological innovations that improve physical education and performance [125]. Another study shows that teachers report benefits in the incorporation of WBT in teaching by receiving real-time feedback on students’ cognitive states and representing tools for the implementation of more dynamic studying sessions; however, students stated that they experience several challenges related to the affordability, technical infrastructure, distractibility, security, ethics, and privacy of these technologies [126]. Providing insights into the perspectives of the main stakeholders of these technologies would allow for their seamless adoption and implementation and would offer better performance results.
It is suggested that future research should focus further on enriching WBT application and implementation scenarios, instead of being limited only to the theoretical analysis or evaluation of frameworks. This would increase the robustness of the analysis of the true impact of this technology in teaching, learning, or in any educational context [127]. Finally, collaboration would also play an important role in standardizing data and processing methodologies, facilitating the reproduction of studies and the comparison of their performance in the future. Research community efforts such as the EEG extension of the Brain Imaging Data Structure (BIDS) [128] and the Standard Roadmap for Neurotechnologies [129] provide a standard for the storage and organization of EEG data and the requirements for the standardization of neurotechnologies, respectively, and could be valuable tools in building future efforts to contribute to this technology’s standardization.

4.2. Challenges and Trends

WBT is emerging as a game-changing trend that is set to shape the future of learning methods. By harnessing these technologies in educational settings, it is possible to unlock endless possibilities for personalized and immersive learning experiences [28,34,35,102,130]. The exponential advances in this field have developed new ways to improve education, but with this growth comes several challenges that must be addressed to ensure improved learning outcomes [115].
One of the major challenges of this technology field is the extraction of useful and actionable health information from the large volumes of data generated by wearable biosensors [131,132]. Analyzing and interpreting these data require complex algorithms and machine learning techniques to gain meaningful insights [133].
Another obstacle is the consistency and accuracy of NPMs, which are highly dependent on the interface between the biosensing electrode and the human body [134]. Ensuring the accuracy and reliability of the data collected by WBTs is crucial for their effective implementation in educational settings [135].
Furthermore, integrating WBT into the existing educational infrastructure represents a multi-level challenge. It involves not only incorporating big data analysis methodologies and building environments that take advantage of WBT and adapt to the education type presented [136,137,138,139], but also addressing issues related to privacy and data security, as WBTs collect sensitive personal information [80,140,141]. Privacy and security issues are challenges that need to be considered; all biometric information must be obtained with the user’s consent and therefore must be included in the incorporation of privacy-protective solutions to assure the user that the information collected is secured [43].
The application of WBT in education requires training and support for educators to effectively use the data generated by these devices [17,142]. Also, the cost of WBT and the availability of technical support may limit their widespread deployment and scalability in educational settings [143]; however, wearables are typically less expensive than, for instance, neuroimaging equipment, and recent trends suggest they are becoming cheaper and more widely accessible [144].
Despite these challenges, there are several trends in wearable biosensing technology that have the potential to improve education. These biosensors can provide valuable information about students’ physiological responses during learning activities, allowing for adaptive and personalized educational interventions [36,114]. Additionally, the integration of physical sensors, machine learning, multifunctional AI, and VR with wearable biosensors is promising to improve the capabilities of these devices and solve some of the challenges [127].
The development of WBT capable of monitoring and analyzing emotional responses in real time has the potential to revolutionize the field of education [135]. By understanding students’ emotional states, educators can adjust their teaching strategies to optimize engagement and learning outcomes [121,145]. The use of wearable biosensors in collaborative learning environments can facilitate peer-to-peer collaboration and improve the quality of classroom engagement [146].
Finally, due to the COVID-19 pandemic, different alternatives to continue school programs had to emerge to ensure that students continue with their studies. This is where the new modality of virtual education entered the scene.
In recent years, a large number of learners around the world have enrolled in MOOCs offered by various online platforms. MOOCs stand out among the most popular e-learning methods. In 2017, there were more than 58 million learners, 800 universities, and 9400 MOOCs on MOOC platforms and the leading MOOC, Coursera, has thirty million learners and 2700 different courses [95]. This shows the relevance of virtual education in the last decade, and with the COVID-19 pandemic, this e-learning tendency reached its peak [141]. In the realm of virtual education, MOOCs provide significant flexibility for learning, but there is room for improvement in course structures. Students often face challenges related to their levels of consciousness while participating in online courses; physiological monitoring and WBT utilization can assist in recognizing students’ performance patterns, for instance, via high blood pressures in chronic stress conditions or confusion detection from acquired EEG signal data [147].
Virtual reality environments have found applications in educational contexts, suggesting that immersive technologies of this kind can effectively facilitate learning. In recent years, the integration of psychophysiological methods with VR technology has emerged as a tool for objectively evaluating their impact on learning. Among these methods, EEG has gained significant traction due to its association with cognitive processing data [35,148]. One noteworthy finding in this field is that virtual scenarios provide an opportunity to apply learned concepts and techniques instantaneously, emulating real conditions effectively [33]. However, when dealing with factual information and a high memory workload, the comparison of physical versus virtual environments should always be taken into account.
Additionally, WBT assists in making a reality out of personalized learning. Algorithms for stress [75,76,77,78,81] or mental fatigue evaluations [64], as well as biofeedback systems [43,74], can aid in creating timely and customizable resources and services that support students’ education—or even their lifestyle [73]—according to their individual needs.
As every trend shows, their implementation implies challenges that need to be solved in order to be executed successfully. This is where biometrics can help to improve the quality of virtual education to assure that students receive the knowledge they should. Some studies have proposed the use of sensors and software to study the biometric behavior of students to measure their attention level, the presence of stress, or their pulse rate to identify specific behaviors in students [68,123]. Wearables are intertwined with technology-enhanced learning, a concept that explores scalability and data aggregation, carrying implications across various domains. More significantly, they introduce innovative approaches, devices, and techniques to enhance education [143].

5. Conclusions

Wearables and biometric signals are linked today due to technological advances in both fields. New devices are constantly being researched, designed, and distributed with the capacity to obtain a wider variety of biometric data more efficiently and with greater precision. As time goes by, devices are progressively becoming more cost-effective [144]. As stated in previous studies, biometric data allow us to accurately determine the state and behavior of a person considering the subject’s profile and description [44]. This paves the way for further exploration into novel realms of research due to the growing field of wearables.
This review includes a total of 140 WBT studies that discuss their implementation in academic environments. In the studies analyzed, various focal points are discerned, such as the examination of emotional and academic stress of students in class or exams [70,75,76,78], the development of the student as a whole [82,83,84,85], academic achievement and improvement in students [58], and the impact of the use of different teaching resources and techniques [49], among others.
WBT is employed to examine teaching and learning effectiveness through data collection, analysis, biofeedback strategies, and qualitative surveys. This review presents EEG as the predominant NPM used in education studies. Some studies utilize EEG independently or in conjunction with other biometrics such as EDA, eye tracking, ECG, EMG, and blood pressure. The analysis and interpretation of these data in classrooms aim to explore mental states, assess physiological constructs, and evaluate teaching effectiveness from a cognitive perspective. Some of these studies focus on examining various facets of students, including stress, motivation, flow state, concentration, and cognition. They observe the impact of these factors on academic performance and psychological well-being, employing different algorithms for these assessments [20].
As stated previously, data captured via high-tech devices have shed light on students’ behavior and performance in academic environments. This information gives professors insights into students’ academic performance, learning outcomes, and achievements [5]. The recent technique of computing and analyzing brain synchrony between students and professors has been shown to have an impact on a student’s performance and achievement in their academic pathway, and this tool gives professors a broader understanding of their class engagement. Providing this feedback to professors allows them to further tailor and adapt their teaching according to the needs of the class [62].
Nowadays, some educational institutions are adopting and exploring the use of biometrics in education [15], in which some of its applications are to predict the performance of a student, to personalize the student experience, and to improve the efficiency of e-learning systems. Finally, it is crucial to keep in mind that the projects analyzed make use of sensitive biometric data collected by WBT. For this reason, and as mentioned in Section 4, it is important to prioritize and look after the privacy of the students by ensuring that the data are appropriately protected to keep this sensitive information safe [43].
The research in this field ought to gravitate towards some approaches to develop educational models tailored to the unique learning requirements of each student or to generate better predictive algorithms to accurately forecast academic performance and learning needs. Another recommendation for future studies is the impact of brain synchrony between students and educators on academic outcomes, which could lead to more effective teaching methods. By closely analyzing the data collected using this approach, it could be possible to provide constructive feedback to both students and educators, thereby enhancing teaching and learning processes.
When discussing biometrics and wearable technology applied in educational settings, several research approaches were detected. These include the development of educational models tailored to the unique learning requirements of each student and the improvement of predictive algorithms to accurately forecast academic performance and learning needs. Using these technologies can provide details of the teaching or learning quality in academic programs from a physiological perspective. This is of great importance in cases where the evaluation of students’ learning and/or skills is complicated. As WBTs provide a physiological-based assessment of mental and cognitive states, they are expected to be increasingly used in the future academic context to provide a more complete evaluation of educational objectives.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization, M.A.R.-M. and J.d.J.L.-S.; methodology, M.A.R.-M. and Y.E.L.-C.; software, Y.E.L.-C.; validation, M.A.R.-M. and J.G.C.-G.; formal analysis, Y.E.L.-C., and M.A.H.-M.; investigation, Y.E.L.-C. and M.A.H.-M.; resources, M.A.R.-M. and A.A.; data curation, Y.E.L.-C.; writing—original draft preparation, M.A.H.-M., Y.E.L.-C., M.A.P.-R., A.A.M.-A., J.E.R.-G., C.F.C.-G. and D.C.R.-A.; writing—review and editing, M.A.R.-M., M.A.H.-M., A.A., J.G.C.-G. and J.d.J.L.-S.; visualization, J.G.C.-G.; supervision, M.A.R.-M. and J.d.J.L.-S.; project administration, M.A.H.-M., M.A.R.-M. and J.d.J.L.-S.; funding acquisition, M.A.R.-M., J.d.J.L.-S. and J.G.C.-G. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

The APC of this work was funded by Tecnologico de Monterrey.

Institutional Review Board Statement

Not applicable.

Informed Consent Statement

Not applicable.

Data Availability Statement

Not applicable.

Acknowledgments

The authors would like to acknowledge the Conscious Technologies research group and the International IUCRC BRAIN Affiliate Site at Tecnologico de Monterrey for their support in the development of this work.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

Abbreviations

The following abbreviations are used in this manuscript:
WBTWearable Biosensor Technology
VRvirtual reality
IoTInternet of Things
CNSCentral Nervous System
NPMneurophysiological measurement
EDAelectrodermal activity
GSRgalvanic skin response
ECGelectrocardiography
EEGelectroencephalography
EMGelectromyography
HRVheart rate variability
MLmachine learning
B2Bbrain-to-brain
STEMScience Technology Engineering Mathematics
MSSQMedical Student Stressor Questionnaire
PSSPerceived Stress Scale
BASC-S2Behavior Assessment System for Children
GARS-KGlobal Assessment of Recent Stress
BCSBalance of Challenge and Skill
MOM-tpMomentary Test Performance
SPSSStatistical Package for the Social Sciences
ARaugmented reality
COTSWearable Commercial-off-the-shelf
BCIbrain–computer interface
SVMSupport Vector Machine
IDDsIntellectual and Developmental Disabilities
AIartificial intelligence
MOOCsMassive Open Online Courses
STskin temperature
PPGphotoplethysmography
NIRSnear-infrared spectroscopy
LDAlinear discriminant analysis
EOGelectrooculography
TRMtechnology readiness models
BIDSBrain Imaging Data Structure

References

  1. Niknejad, N.; Ismail, W.B.; Mardani, A.; Liao, H.; Ghani, I. A comprehensive overview of smart wearables: The state of the art literature, recent advances, and future challenges. Eng. Appl. Artif. Intell. 2020, 90, 103529. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  2. Blasco, J.; Chen, T.M.; Tapiador, J.; Peris-Lopez, P. A Survey of Wearable Biometric Recognition Systems. ACM Comput. Surv. 2016, 49. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  3. Wu, M.; Luo, J. Wearable technology applications in healthcare: A literature review. Online J. Nurs. Inf. 2019, 23. Available online: https://www.himss.org/resources/wearable-technology-applications-healthcare-literature-review (accessed on 6 March 2024).
  4. John Dian, F.; Vahidnia, R.; Rahmati, A. Wearables and the Internet of Things (IoT), Applications, Opportunities, and Challenges: A Survey. IEEE Access 2020, 8, 69200–69211. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  5. Fu, D.; Chen, L.; Cheng, Z. Integration of wearable smart devices and internet of things technology into public physical education. Mob. Inf. Syst. 2021, 2021, 6740987. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Markvicka, E.; Rich, S.; Liao, J.; Zaini, H.; Majidi, C. Low-cost wearable human–computer interface with conductive fabric for STEAM education. In Proceedings of the 2018 IEEE Integrated STEM Education Conference (ISEC), Princeton, NJ, USA, 10 March 2018; pp. 161–166. [Google Scholar]
  7. Khosravi, S.; Bailey, S.G.; Parvizi, H.; Ghannam, R. Wearable Sensors for Learning Enhancement in Higher Education. Sensors 2022, 22, 7633. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Ferrier, B.; Lee, J.; Mbuli, A.; James, D.A. Translational Applications of Wearable Sensors in Education: Implementation and Efficacy. Sensors 2022, 22, 1675. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  9. Chu, S.L.; Garcia, B.M.; Rani, N. Research on Wearable Technologies for Learning: A Systematic Review. arXiv 2022, arXiv:2201.11878. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Kaufmann, H. Construct3D: An augmented reality application for mathematics and geometry education. In Proceedings of the tenth ACM International Conference on Multimedia, Juan-les-Pins, France, 1–6 December 2002; pp. 656–657. [Google Scholar]
  11. Al-Emran, M.; Saeed, R.; Al-Sharafi, M.A. What impacts learning with wearables? An integrated theoretical model. Interact. Learn. Environ. 2020, 30, 1897–1917. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Garcia, B.; Chu, S.L.; Nam, B.; Banigan, C. Wearables for Learning: Examining the Smartwatch as a Tool for Situated Science Reflection. In Proceedings of the CHI ’18: 2018 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, New York, NY, USA, 21 April 2018; pp. 1–13. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. Zheng, H.; Genaro Motti, V. Assisting Students with Intellectual and Developmental Disabilities in Inclusive Education with Smartwatches. In Proceedings of the CHI ’18: 2018 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, New York, NY, USA, 21 April 2018; pp. 1–12. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. Shapovalov, Y.B.; Bilyk, Z.I.; Usenko, S.A.; Shapovalov, V.B.; Postova, K.H.; Zhadan, S.O.; Antonenko, P.D. Harnessing personal smart tools for enhanced STEM education: Exploring IoT integration. Educ. Technol. Q. 2023, 2023, 210–232. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. de Menendez, M.H.; Morales-Menendez, R.; Escobar, C.A.; Arinez, J. Biometric applications in education. Int. J. Interact. Des. Manuf. 2021, 15, 365–380. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Unar, J.; Seng, W.C.; Abbasi, A. A review of biometric technology along with trends and prospects. Pattern Recognit. 2014, 47, 2673–2688. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Bower, M.; Sturman, D. What are the educational affordances of wearable technologies? Comput. Educ. 2015, 88, 343–353. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Zhong, C.L.; le Li, Y. Internet of things sensors assisted physical activity recognition and health monitoring of college students. Measurement 2020, 159, 107774. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Zhang, X.; Shan, G.; Wang, Y.; Wan, B.; Li, H. Wearables, biomechanical feedback, and human motor-skills’ learning & optimization. Appl. Sci. 2019, 9, 226. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Francisti, J.; Balogh, Z.; Reichel, J.; Magdin, M.; Koprda, Š.; Molnár, G. Application Experiences Using IoT Devices in Education. Appl. Sci. 2020, 10, 7286. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Hernandez-Ortega, J.; Daza, R.; Morales, A.; Fierrez, J.; Ortega-Garcia, J. edBB: Biometrics and behavior for assessing remote education. arXiv 2019, arXiv:1912.04786. [Google Scholar]
  22. Mehmood, R.M.; Lee, H.J. Towards building a computer aided education system for special students using wearable sensor technologies. Sensors 2017, 17, 317. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  23. Darvishi, A.; Khosravi, H.; Sadiq, S.W.; Weber, B. Neurophysiological Measurements in Higher Education: A Systematic Literature Review. Int. J. Artif. Intell. Educ. 2021, 32, 413–453. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  24. Davidesco, I.; Matuk, C.; Bevilacqua, D.; Poeppel, D.; Dikker, S. Neuroscience research in the classroom: Portable brain technologies in education research. Educ. Res. 2021, 50, 649–656. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. Battro, A.M.; Calero, C.I.; Goldin, A.P.; Holper, L.; Pezzatti, L.; Shalóm, D.E.; Sigman, M. The cognitive neuroscience of the teacher–student interaction. Mind, Brain, Educ. 2013, 7, 177–181. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Wu, S.F.; Lu, Y.L.; Lien, C.J. Detecting Students’ Flow States and Their Construct Through Electroencephalogram: Reflective Flow Experiences, Balance of Challenge and Skill, and Sense of Control. J. Educ. Comput. Res. 2021, 58, 1515–1540. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Cohen, S.S.; Madsen, J.; Touchan, G.; Robles, D.; Lima, S.F.; Henin, S.; Parra, L.C. Neural engagement with online educational videos predicts learning performance for individual students. Neurobiol. Learn. Mem. 2018, 155, 60–64. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  28. Ramírez-Moreno, M.A.; Díaz-Padilla, M.; Valenzuela-Gómez, K.D.; Vargas-Martínez, A.; Tudón-Martínez, J.C.; Morales-Menendez, R.; Ramírez-Mendoza, R.A.; Pérez-Henríquez, B.L.; Lozoya-Santos, J.d.J. EEG-Based Tool for Prediction of University Students’ Cognitive Performance in the Classroom. Brain Sci. 2021, 11, 698. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  29. Solhjoo, S.; Haigney, M.C.; McBee, E.; van Merrienboer, J.J.; Schuwirth, L.; Artino, A.R., Jr.; Battista, A.; Ratcliffe, T.A.; Lee, H.D.; Durning, S.J. Heart rate and heart rate variability correlate with clinical reasoning performance and self-reported measures of cognitive load. Sci. Rep. 2019, 9, 14668. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  30. Kim, H.; Hong, T.; Kim, J.; Yeom, S. A psychophysiological effect of indoor thermal condition on college students’ learning performance through EEG measurement. Build. Environ. 2020, 184, 107223. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Villegas-Ch, W.; Román-Cañizares, M.; Palacios-Pacheco, X. Improvement of an online education model with the integration of machine learning and data analysis in an LMS. Appl. Sci. 2020, 10, 5371. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. Gedam, S.; Paul, S. A review on mental stress detection using wearable sensors and machine learning techniques. IEEE Access 2021, 9, 84045–84066. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Kalantari, S.; Rounds, J.D.; Kan, J.; Tripathi, V.; Cruz-Garza, J.G. Comparing physiological responses during cognitive tests in virtual environments vs. in identical real-world environments. Sci. Rep. 2021, 11, 10227. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  34. Kalantari, K.; Contreras-Vidal, J.L.; Smith, J.S.; Cruz-Garza, J.; Banner, P. Evaluating educational settings through biometric data and virtual response testing. ACADIA 2018, 118–125. [Google Scholar]
  35. Cruz-Garza, J.G.; Darfler, M.; Rounds, J.D.; Gao, E.; Kalantari, S. EEG-based investigation of the impact of room size and window placement on cognitive performance. J. Build. Eng. 2022, 53, 104540. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  36. Dikker, S.; Wan, L.; Davidesco, I.; Kaggen, L.; Oostrik, M.; McClintock, J.; Rowland, J.; Michalareas, G.; Van Bavel, J.J.; Ding, M.; et al. Brain-to-brain synchrony tracks real-world dynamic group interactions in the classroom. Curr. Biol. 2017, 27, 1375–1380. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  37. Bevilacqua, D.; Davidesco, I.; Wan, L.; Chaloner, K.; Rowland, J.; Ding, M.; Poeppel, D.; Dikker, S. Brain-to-brain synchrony and learning outcomes vary by student–teacher dynamics: Evidence from a real-world classroom electroencephalography study. J. Cogn. Neurosci. 2019, 31, 401–411. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  38. Chen, C.M.; Wang, J.Y.; Yu, C.M. Assessing the attention levels of students by using a novel attention aware system based on brainwave signals. Br. J. Educ. Technol. 2017, 48, 348–369. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. Holper, L.; Goldin, A.P.; Shalom, D.E.; Battro, A.M.; Wolf, M.; Sigman, M. The teaching and the learning brain: A cortical hemodynamic marker of teacher–student interactions in the Socratic dialog. Int. J. Educ. Res. 2013, 59, 1–10. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  40. Moher, D.; Liberati, A.; Tetzlaff, J.; Altman, D.G. Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: The PRISMA statement. Int. J. Surg. 2010, 8, 336–341. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  41. Pranckutė, R. Web of Science (WoS) and Scopus: The titans of bibliographic information in today’s academic world. Publications 2021, 9, 12. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  42. Tripska, K.; Draessler, J.; Pokladnikova, J. Heart rate variability, perceived stress and willingness to seek counselling in undergraduate students. J. Psychosom. Res. 2022, 160, 110972. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  43. Aranberri-Ruiz, A.; Aritzeta, A.; Olarza, A.; Soroa, G.; Mindeguia, R. Reducing Anxiety and Social Stress in Primary Education: A Breath-Focused Heart Rate Variability Biofeedback Intervention. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2022, 19. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  44. Suh, M. The association of salivary alpha-amylase, heart rate variability, and psychological stress on objectively measured sleep behaviors among college students. Front. Nurs. 2022, 9, 63–70. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  45. Siripongpan, A.; Namkunee, T.; Uthansakul, P.; Jumphoo, T.; Duangmanee, P. Stress among Medical Students Presented with an EEG at Suranaree University of Technology, Thailand. Health Psychol. Res. 2022, 10, 1–6. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  46. Dong, J. Analysis of Emotional Stress of Teachers in Japanese Teaching Process Based on EEG Signal Analysis. Occup. Ther. Int. 2022, 2022, 2593338. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  47. Lai, Y.H.; Su, K.; You, Y.Q.; Liang, Y.X.; Lan, L.; Lee, M.H.; Huang, F.; Chen, D.Q. Development of Arduino Based ECG Device for STEM Education and HRV Applications. In Proceedings of the 2022 8th International Conference on Control, Automation and Robotics (ICCAR), Xiamen, China, 8–10 April 2022; Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers Inc.: Xiamen, China, 2022; pp. 329–333. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  48. Liu, L.; Ji, Y.; Gao, Y.; Li, T.; Xu, W. A Novel Stress State Assessment Method for College Students Based on EEG. Comput. Intell. Neurosci. 2022, 2022, 4565968. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  49. Bi, Y. The Application of Wireless Sensor Technology of Internet of Things in Korean Language Teaching. Wirel. Commun. Mob. Comput. 2022, 2022, 7476225. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  50. Ma, X. Teaching Mode of Augmented Reality College English Listening and Speaking Supported by Wearable Technology. Wirel. Commun. Mob. Comput. 2022, 2022, 2181512. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  51. Brown, W.J.; Kinshuk, K. Improving simulation-based healthcare education through human actors, wearable, and web-based technology. In Proceedings of the 2022 International Conference on Advanced Learning Technologies (ICALT), Bucharest, Romania, 1–4 July 2022; pp. 411–413. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  52. Cao, Y. Exploration, Analysis, and Practice of Sensor English Teaching Based on Immersive Augmented Reality Technology. Mob. Inf. Syst. 2022, 2022, 4494448. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  53. Yoo, H.H.; Yune, S.J.; Im, S.J.; Kam, B.S.; Lee, S.Y. Heart Rate Variability-Measured Stress and Academic Achievement in Medical Students. Med Princ. Pract. 2021, 30, 193–200. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  54. Yin, S.; Zhang, D.; Zhang, D.; Li, H. Wireless sensors application in smart English classroom design based on artificial intelligent system. Microprocess. Microsyst. 2021, 81, 103798. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  55. Durán-Acevedo, C.M.; Carrillo-Gómez, J.K.; Albarracín-Rojas, C.A. Electronic devices for stress detection in academic contexts during confinement because of the COVID-19 pandemic. Electronics 2021, 10, 301. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  56. Wu, J.; Zhang, Y.; Zhao, X. Stress Detection Using Wearable Devices based on Transfer Learning. In Proceedings of the 2021 IEEE International Conference on Bioinformatics and Biomedicine (BIBM), Houston, TX, USA, 9–12 December 2021; pp. 3122–3128. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  57. Yufei, W.; Dandan, W.; Yanwei, Z. Research on the Advantages of Digital Sensor Equipment in Language Audio-Visual and Oral Teaching. J. Sens. 2021, 2021, 3006397. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  58. Jiang, S.; Wang, L.; Dong, Y. Application of Virtual Reality Human–Computer Interaction Technology Based on the Sensor in English Teaching. J. Sens. 2021, 2021, 2505119. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  59. Komaini, A.; Hidayat, H.; Ganefri; Alnedra.; Kiram, Y.; Gusril.; Mario, D.T. Motor Learning Measuring Tools: A Design And Implementation Using Sensor Technology For Preschool Education. Int. J. Interact. Mob. Technol. 2021, 15, 177–191. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  60. Rajendran, V.; Jayalalitha, S.; Adalarasu, K. EEG Based Evaluation of Examination Stress and Test Anxiety Among College Students. IRBM 2022, 43, 349–361. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  61. Labayen, M.; Vea, R.; Florez, J.; Aginako, N.; Sierra, B. Online Student Authentication and Proctoring System Based on Multimodal Biometrics Technology. IEEE Access 2021, 9, 72398–72411. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  62. Ciolacu, M.L.; Tehrani, A.F.; Svasta, P.; Tache, I.; Stoichescu, D. Education 4.0: An Adaptive Framework with Artificial Intelligence, Raspberry Pi and Wearables-Innovation for Creating Value. In Proceedings of the 2020 IEEE 26th International Symposium for Design and Technology in Electronic Packaging, SIITME 2020-Conference Proceedings, Pitesti, Romania, 21–24 October 2020; pp. 298–303. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  63. Kumari, P.; Deb, S. EEG Cross Validation of Effective Mobile Technology by Analyzing Attention Level in Classroom. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Electronics and Sustainable Communication Systems, ICESC, Coimbatore, India, 2–4 July 2020; pp. 961–965. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  64. Tyas, A.E.; Dharma Wibawa, A.; Purnomo, M.H. Theta, Alpha and Beta Activity in the Occipital Based on EEG Signals for Mental Fatigue in High School Students. In Proceedings of the ICoSTA 2020: 2020 International Conference on Smart Technology and Applications: Empowering Industrial IoT by Implementing Green Technology for Sustainable Development, Surabaya, Indonesia, 20 February 2020. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  65. Rustamova, T.V. Influence of examination stress on eeg amplitude in the cerebral sphere of the brain of students of the faculty of biology-chemistry with different individual typological features. Sib. J. Life Sci. Agric. 2020, 12, 97–112. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  66. Bos, A.S.; Herpich, F.; Kuhn, I.; Guarese, R.L.; Tarouco, L.M.; Zaro, M.A.; Pizzato, M.; Wives, L. Educational Technology and Its Contributions in Students’ Focus and Attention Regarding Augmented Reality Environments and the Use of Sensors. J. Educ. Comput. Res. 2019, 57, 1832–1848. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  67. Jiang, J.Y.; Chao, Z.; Bertozzi, A.L.; Wang, W.; Young, S.D.; Needell, D. Learning to predict human stress level with incomplete sensor data from wearable devices. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Information and Knowledge Management, Proceedings, Beijing, China, 3–7 November 2019; pp. 2773–2781. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  68. Hasanbasic, A.; Spahic, M.; Bosnjic, D.; Adzic, H.H.; Mesic, V.; Jahic, O. Recognition of stress levels among students with wearable sensors. In Proceedings of the 2019 18th International Symposium INFOTEH-JAHORINA, INFOTEH 2019-Proceedings, East Sarajevo, Bosnia and Herzegovina, 20–22 March 2019; pp. 20–22. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  69. Hafeez, M.A.; Shakil, S.; Jangsher, S. Stress Effects on Exam Performance using EEG. In Proceedings of the 2018 14th International Conference on Emerging Technologies (ICET), Islamabad, Pakistan, 21–22 November 2018. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  70. Kajasilta, H.; Apiola, M.V.; Lokkila, E.; Veerasamy, A.; Laakso, M.J. Measuring Students’ Stress with Mood Sensors: First Findings; Springer International Publishing: Cham, Switzerland, 2019; Volume 11841 LNCS, pp. 92–99. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  71. Gasah, M.; Baharum, A.; Zain, N. Measure learning effectiveness among children using EEG device and mobile application. Indones. J. Electr. Eng. Comput. Sci. 2019, 17, 191–196. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  72. Hammoud, S.; Karam, R.; Mourad, R.; Saad, I.; Kurdi, M. Stress and heart rate variability during university final examination among Lebanese students. Behav. Sci. 2019, 9, 3. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  73. Oweis, K.; Quteishat, H.; Zgoul, M.; Haddad, A. A Study on the Effect of Sports on Academic Stress Using Wearable Galvanic Skin Response. In Proceedings of the 2018 12th International Symposium on Medical Information and Communication Technology (ISMICT), Sydney, NSW, Australia, 26–28 March 2018; Volume 2018. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  74. Zhai, X.; Fang, Q.; Dong, Y.; Wei, Z.; Yuan, J.; Cacciolatti, L.; Yang, Y. The effects of biofeedback-based stimulated recall on self-regulated online learning: A gender and cognitive taxonomy perspective. J. Comput. Assist. Learn. 2018, 34, 775–786. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  75. Li, Z.L. Analysis of psychological health status of college students under examination stress based on EEG neuroscience. Kuram Ve Uygulamada Egit. Bilim. 2018, 18, 1547–1557. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  76. Hunasgi, S.; Koneru, A.; Rudraraju, A.; Manvikar, V.; Vanishree, M. Stress recognition in dental students using smartphone sensor and a software: A pilot study. J. Oral Maxillofac. Pathol. 2018, 22, 314–317. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  77. Horgan, K.; Howard, S.; Gardiner-Hyland, F. Pre-service Teachers and Stress During Microteaching: An Experimental Investigation of the Effectiveness of Relaxation Training with Biofeedback on Psychological and Physiological Indices of Stress. Appl. Psychophysiol. Biofeedback 2018, 43, 217–225. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  78. Pérez, F.d.A.; Santos-Gago, J.M.; Caeiro-Rodríguez, M.; Fernández Iglesias, M.J. Evaluation of commercial-off-the-shelf wrist wearables to estimate stress on students. J. Vis. Exp. 2018, 2018, e57590. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  79. Chen, X.J.; Niu, Y.F.; Ding, F.Q.; Xue, C.Q. Application of electroencephalogram physiological experiment in interface design teaching: A case study of visual cognitive errors. Kuram Uygulamada Egit. Bilim. 2018, 18, 2306–2324. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  80. Engen, B.K.; GiÆver, T.H.; Mifsud, L. Wearable technologies in the K-12 classroom–Cross-disciplinary possibilities and privacy pitfalls. J. Interact. Learn. Res. 2018, 29, 323–341. [Google Scholar]
  81. Polo, A.; Guillot, J.; Calle, M.; Sarmiento, J. Monitoreo del estrés estudiantil durante la realización de un examen académico: Caso de Estudio utilizando dispositivos wearables. In Proceedings of the LACCEI International Multi-Conference for Engineering, Education and Technology, Lima, Perú, 18–20 July 2018; pp. 19–21. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  82. Miao, R.; Dong, Q.; Weng, W.Y.; Yu, X.Y. The Application Model of Wearable Devices in Physical Education. In Blended Learning. Enhancing Learning Success; Lecture Notes in Computer Science (including subseries Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence and Lecture Notes in Bioinformatics); Springer: Cham, Switzerland, 2018; Volume 10949 LNCS, pp. 311–322. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  83. Kara, E.; Güleç, M.; Çağıltay, K. Teaching concepts with wearable technology: Learning internal body organs. In Universal Access in Human–Computer Interaction. Methods, Technologies, and Users; Lecture Notes in Computer Science (including subseries Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence and Lecture Notes in Bioinformatics); Springer: Cham, Switzerland, 2018; Volume 10907 LNCS, pp. 542–550. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  84. Bauer, M.; Bräuer, C.; Schuldt, J.; Krömker, H. Adaptive E-learning technologies for sustained learning motivation in engineering science acquisition of motivation through self-reports and wearable technology. In Proceedings of the 10th International Conference on Computer Supported Education, CSEDU, Madeira, Portugal, 15–17 March 2018; Volume 1, pp. 418–425. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  85. Pavlova, L.P.; Berlov, D.N.; Kurismaa, A. Dominant and opponent relations in cortical function: An EEG study of exam performance and stress. AIMS Neurosci. 2018, 5, 32–35. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  86. Dafoulas, G.A.; Maia, C.C.; Clarke, J.S.; Ali, A.; Augusto, J. Investigating the role of biometrics in education–The use of sensor data in collaborative learning. MCCSIS 2018–Multi Conference on Computer Science and Information Systems. In Proceedings of the International Conferences on e-Learning 2018, international association for development of the information society (IADIS), Madrid, Spain, 17–19 July 2018; pp. 115–123. [Google Scholar]
  87. Thomas, L. Student Retention in Higher Education: The Role of Institutional Habitus. J. Educ. Policy 2002, 17, 423–442. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  88. de Arriba Pérez, F.; Santos Gago, J.; Caeiro Rodríguez, M. Analytics of biometric data from wearable devices to support teaching and learning activities. J. Inf. Syst. Eng. Manag. 2016, 1, 41–54. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  89. Fesol, S.; Salam, S.; Bakar, N. Framework for enhancing learning experience with wearable technology in technical MOOC. J. Telecommun. Electron. Comput. Eng. 2018, 10, 83–91. [Google Scholar]
  90. Cirett Galán, F.; Beal, C.R. EEG estimates of engagement and cognitive workload predict math problem solving outcomes. In User Modeling, Adaptation, and Personalization; Lecture Notes in Computer Science (including subseries Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence and Lecture Notes in Bioinformatics); Springer: Cham, Switzerland, 2012; Volume 7379 LNCS, pp. 51–62. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  91. Zheng, H.; Motti, V.G. Assisting students with intellectual and developmental disabilities in inclusive education with Smartwatches. In Proceedings of the Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems–Proceeding, Montreal, QC, Canada, 21–26 April 2018. [Google Scholar]
  92. Fenu, G.; Marras, M.; Boratto, L. A multi-biometric system for continuous student authentication in e-learning platforms. Pattern Recognit. Lett. 2018, 113, 83–92. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  93. Ciolacu, M.I.; Binder, L.; Popp, H. Enabling IoT in Education 4.0 with BioSensors from Wearables and Artificial Intelligence. In Proceedings of the 2019 IEEE 25th International Symposium for Design and Technology in Electronic Packaging (SIITME), Cluj-Napoca, Romania, 23–26 October 2019; pp. 17–24. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  94. Apicella, A.; Arpaia, P.; Frosolone, M.; Improta, G.; Moccaldi, N.; Pollastro, A. EEG-based measurement system for monitoring student engagement in learning 4.0. Sci. Rep. 2022, 12, 5857. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  95. Balamurugan, B.; Mullai, M.; Soundararajan, S.; Selvakanmani, S.; Arun, D. Brain–computer interface for assessment of mental efforts in e-learning using the nonmarkovian queueing model. Comput. Appl. Eng. Educ. 2020, 29, 394–410. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  96. Poulsen, A.T.; Kamronn, S.; Dmochowski, J.; Parra, L.C.; Hansen, L.K. EEG in the classroom: Synchronised neural recordings during video presentation. Sci. Rep. 2017, 7, 43916. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  97. Babiker, A.; Faye, I.; Mumtaz, W.; Malik, A.S.; Sato, H. EEG in classroom: EMD features to detect situational interest of students during learning. Multimed. Tools Appl. 2018, 78, 16261–16281. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  98. Ramírez-Moreno, M.A.; Cruz-Garza, J.G.; Acharya, A.; Chatufale, G.; Witt, W.; Gelok, D.; Reza, G.; Contreras-Vidal, J.L. Brain-to-brain communication during musical improvisation: A performance case study. F1000Research 2022, 11, 989. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  99. Kim, H.; Chae, Y.; Kim, S.; Im, C.H. Development of a Computer-Aided Education System Inspired by Face-to-Face Learning by Incorporating EEG-Based Neurofeedback Into Online Video Lectures. IEEE Trans. Learn. Technol. 2022, 16, 78–91. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  100. Almusawi, H.A.; Durugbo, C.M.; Bugawa, A.M. Wearable Technology in Education: A Systematic Review. IEEE Trans. Learn. Technol. 2021, 14, 540–554. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  101. Bustos-López, M.; Cruz-Ramírez, N.; Guerra-Hernández, A.; Sánchez-Morales, L.N.; Cruz-Ramos, N.A.; Alor-Hernández, G. Wearables for Engagement Detection in Learning Environments: A Review. Biosensors 2022, 12, 509. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  102. Candela-Leal, M.; García-Briones, J.; Olivas, G.; Abrego-Ramos, R.; Álvarez Espinoza, G.; Botin, D.; Rodríguez-Hernández, K.; Pachego-Quintana, J.; Sampogna-Montemayor, S.; Morales-Menendez, R.; et al. Real-time Biofeedback System for Interactive Learning using Wearables and IoT. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Industrial Engineering and Operations Management Monterrey, Monterrey, Mexico, 3–5 November 2021. [Google Scholar]
  103. Miao, R.; Dong, Q.; Weng, W.Y.; Yu, X.Y. The Application Model of Wearable Devices in Physical Education. In Proceedings of the Blended Learning. Enhancing Learning Success, Osaka, Japan, 31 July–2 August 2018; Cheung, S.K., Kwok, L.f., Kubota, K., Lee, L.K., Tokito, J., Eds.; Springer: Cham, Switzerland, 2018; pp. 311–322. [Google Scholar]
  104. Dafoulas, G.; Cardoso Maia, C.; Samuels-Clarke, J.; Ali, A.; Augusto, J.C. Investigating the role of biometrics in education—the use of sensor data in collaborative learning. In Proceedings of the International Conference e-Learning, Madrid, Spain, 17–19 July 2018. [Google Scholar]
  105. de J Lozoya-Santos, J.; Ramírez-Moreno, M.A.; Diaz-Armas, G.G.; Acosta-Soto, L.F.; Leal, M.O.C.; Abrego-Ramos, R.; Ramirez-Mendoza, R.A. Current and Future Biometrics: Technology and Applications. In Biometry; CRC Press: Boca Raton, FL, USA, 2022; pp. 1–30. [Google Scholar]
  106. Papousek, I.; Wimmer, S.; Lackner, H.K.; Schulter, G.; Perchtold, C.M.; Paechter, M. Trait positive affect and students’ prefrontal EEG alpha asymmetry responses during a simulated exam situation. Biol. Psychol. 2019, 148, 107762. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  107. Zennifa, F.; Ide, J.; Noguchi, Y.; Iramina, K. Monitoring of cognitive state on mental retardation child using EEG, ECG and NIRS in four years study. In Proceedings of the 2015 37th Annual International Conference of the IEEE Engineering in Medicine and Biology Society (EMBC), Milan, Italy, 25–29 August 2015; pp. 6610–6613. [Google Scholar]
  108. Martínez, G.O.; Leal, M.O.C.; Alvarado, J.C.O.; Soto, L.F.A.; Sanabria, D.M.B.; Armas, G.G.D.; Herrera, A.J.A.; Jiménez, E.A.D.; Espinosa, M.A.; Moreno, M.A.R.; et al. Detection of Engineering Interest in Children Through an Intelligent System Using Biometric Signals. In Proceedings of the International Conference on Industrial Engineering and Operations Management, Monterrey, Mexico, 3–5 November 2021; pp. 3–5. [Google Scholar]
  109. Ramírez-Moreno, M.A.; Carrillo-Tijerina, P.; Candela-Leal, M.O.; Alanis-Espinosa, M.; Tudón-Martínez, J.C.; Roman-Flores, A.; Ramírez-Mendoza, R.A.; Lozoya-Santos, J.d.J. Evaluation of a fast test based on biometric signals to assess mental fatigue at the workplace—A pilot study. Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health 2021, 18, 11891. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  110. Posada-Quintero, H.F.; Bolkhovsky, J.B. Machine learning models for the identification of cognitive tasks using autonomic reactions from heart rate variability and electrodermal activity. Behav. Sci. 2019, 9, 45. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  111. Ramírez-Moreno, M.; Díaz-Padilla, M.; Valenzuela-Gómez, K.; Vargas-Martínez, A.; Roman-Flores, A.; Morales-Menendez, R.; Ramírez-Mendoza, R.; Lozoya-Santos, J. Advanced Learning Assistant System (ALAS) for Engineering Education. In Proceedings of the 2020 IEEE Global Engineering Education Conference (EDUCON), Porto, Portugal, 27–30 April 2020; pp. 1858–1861. [Google Scholar]
  112. Aguilar-Herrera, A.J.; Delgado-Jiménez, E.A.; Candela-Leal, M.O.; Olivas-Martinez, G.; Álvarez-Espinosa, G.J.; Ramírez-Moreno, M.A.; de Jesús Lozoya-Santos, J.; Ramírez-Mendoza, R.A. Advanced Learner Assistance System’s (ALAS) Recent Results. In Proceedings of the 2021 Machine Learning-Driven Digital Technologies for Educational Innovation Workshop, Monterrey, Mexico, 15–17 December 2021; pp. 1–7. [Google Scholar]
  113. Ko, L.W.; Komarov, O.; Hairston, W.D.; Jung, T.P.; Lin, C.T. Sustained attention in real classroom settings: An EEG study. Front. Hum. Neurosci. 2017, 11, 388. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  114. Cruz-Garza, J.G.; Sujatha Ravindran, A.; Kopteva, A.E.; Rivera Garza, C.; Contreras-Vidal, J.L. Characterization of the stages of creative writing with mobile eeg using generalized partial directed coherence. Front. Hum. Neurosci. 2020, 14, 577651. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  115. Kerdawy, M.E.; Halaby, M.E.; Hassan, A.; Maher, M.; Fayed, H.; Shawky, D.; Badawi, A. The Automatic Detection of Cognition Using EEG and Facial Expressions. Sensors 2020, 20, 3516. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  116. Moissa, B.; Bonnin, G.; Boyer, A. Exploiting Wearable Technologies to Measure and Predict Students’ Effort; Springer International Publishing: Cham, Switzerland, 2019; pp. 411–431. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  117. Alirezaei, M.; Hajipour Sardouie, S. Detection of Human Attention Using EEG Signals. In Proceedings of the 2017 24th National and 2nd International Iranian Conference on Biomedical Engineering (ICBME), Tehran, Iran, 30 November–1 December 2017; pp. 1–5. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  118. Olivas, G.; Candela, M.; Ocampo, J.; Acosta, L.; Aguilar, A.; Delgado, E.; Alanis, M.; Ramirez, M.; Lozoya, J.; Murrieta, J.; et al. Detecting Change in Engineering Interest in Children through Machine Learning using Biometric Signals. In Proceedings of the 2021 Machine Learning-Driven Digital Technologies for Educational Innovation Workshop, Monterrey, Mexico, 15–17 December 2021; pp. 1–7. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  119. de Wit, B.; Badcock, N.; Grootswagers, T.; Hardwick, K.; Teichmann, L.; Wehrman, J.; Williams, M.; Kaplan, D. Neurogaming Technology Meets Neuroscience Education: A Cost-Effective, Scalable, and Highly Portable Undergraduate Teaching Laboratory for Neuroscience. J. Undergrad. Neurosci. Educ. JUNE A Publ. FUN Fac. Undergrad. Neurosci. 2017, 15, A104–A109. [Google Scholar]
  120. Johnson, J.; Conderman, G.; Van Laarhoven, T.; Liberty, L. Wearable Technologies: A New Way to Address Student Anxiety. Kappa Delta Pi Rec. 2022, 58, 124–129. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  121. AlShorman, O.; Masadeh, M.; Alzyoud, A.; Bin Heyat, M.B.; Akhtar, F.; Rishipal. The Effects of Emotional Stress on Learning and Memory Cognitive Functions: An EEG Review Study in Education. In Proceedings of the 2020 Sixth International Conference on e-Learning (econf), Sakheer, Bahrain, 6–7 December 2020; pp. 177–182. [CrossRef]
  122. Ueda, T.; Ikeda, Y. Stimulation methods for students’ studies using wearables technology. In Proceedings of the 2016 IEEE Region 10 Conference (TENCON), Singapore, 22–25 November 2016; pp. 1043–1047. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  123. Pourmohammadi, S.; Maleki, A. Stress detection using ECG and EMG signals: A comprehensive study. Comput. Methods Programs Biomed. 2020, 193, 105482. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  124. Darfler, M.; Cruz-Garza, J.G.; Kalantari, S. An EEG-based investigation of the effect of perceived observation on visual memory in virtual environments. Brain Sci. 2022, 12, 269. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  125. Almusawi, H.A.; Durugbo, C.M.; Bugawa, A.M. Innovation in physical education: Teachers’ perspectives on readiness for wearable technology integration. Comput. Educ. 2021, 167, 104185. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  126. Motti, V.G. Wearable Technologies in Education: A Design Space. In Learning and Collaboration Technologies. Ubiquitous and Virtual Environments for Learning and Collaboration; Lecture Notes in Computer Science (including subseries Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence and Lecture Notes in Bioinformatics); Springer: Cham, Switzerland, 2019; Volume 11591 LNCS, pp. 55–67. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  127. Gao, W.; Wei, T.; Huang, H.; Chen, X.; Li, Q. Toward a Systematic Survey on Wearable Computing for Education Applications. IEEE Internet Things J. 2022, 9, 12901–12915. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  128. Pernet, C.R.; Appelhoff, S.; Gorgolewski, K.J.; Flandin, G.; Phillips, C.; Delorme, A.; Oostenveld, R. EEG-BIDS, an extension to the brain imaging data structure for electroencephalography. Sci. Data 2019, 6, 103. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  129. Sujatha Ravindran, A.; Aleksi, T.; Ramos-Murguialday, A.; Biasiucci, A.; Forsland, A.; Paek, A.; Karalikkadan, A.; Soria-Frisch, A.; Onaral, B.; Erlandson, B.-E.; et al. Standards Roadmap: Neurotechnologies for Brain–Machine Interfacing; Technical Report; IEEE: Piscataway, NJ, USA, 2020. [Google Scholar]
  130. Camarillo-Abad, H.M. Wearable technology as a mediator for communication and learning. In Proceedings of the MexIHC ’18: Proceedings of the 7th Mexican Conference on Human–Computer Interaction, Merida, Mexico, 29–31 October 2018. [CrossRef]
  131. Gelb, A.; Clark, J. Identification for Development: The Biometrics Revolution. Center for Global Development Working Paper. 2013. Available online: https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2226594 (accessed on 31 January 2024).
  132. Ye, S.; Feng, S.; Huang, L.; Bian, S. Recent Progress in Wearable Biosensors: From Healthcare Monitoring to Sports Analytics. Biosensors 2020, 10, 205. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  133. Ki, J.J.; Kelly, S.P.; Parra, L.C. Attention strongly modulates reliability of neural responses to naturalistic narrative stimuli. J. Neurosci. 2016, 36, 3092–3101. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  134. Muldner, K.; Burleson, W. Utilizing sensor data to model students’ creativity in a digital environment. Comput. Hum. Behav. 2015, 42, 127–137. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  135. Wang, M.; Yin, X.; Zhu, Y.; Hu, J. Representation Learning and Pattern Recognition in Cognitive Biometrics: A Survey. Sensors 2022, 22, 5111. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  136. Li, M.; Sun, M.; Wang, L. Application Analysis of Smart Wearable Devices in Students’ Physical Activity under the Background of Big Data. J. Phys. Conf. Ser. 2021, 1757, 012124. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  137. Sánchez, J.A.; Camarillo-Abad, H.M.; Magallanes, Y. Environments for learning motor skills using wearable technologies. In Proceedings of the CLIHC ’19: IX Latin American Conference on Human Computer Interaction, Panama City, Panama, 30 September–4 October 2019; ACM International Conference Proceeding Series. pp. 4–7. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  138. Shen, M.; He, Y.; Tang, J.; Liang, Z.; Xue, W.; Li, P. Research on the Application of Wearable Devices in Implicit stratified Soccer Teaching. In Proceedings of the 2021 International Conference on Information Technology and Contemporary Sports (TCS), Guangzhou, China, 15–17 January 2021; pp. 481–484. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  139. Crespo, R.G.; Burgos, D. Advanced sensors technology in education. Sensors 2019, 19, 4155. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  140. Ezenwoke, A.; Ezenwoke, O.; Adewumi, A.; Omoregbe, N. Wearable technology: Opportunities and challenges for teaching and learning in higher education in developing countries. In Proceedings of the 10th International Technology, Education and Development Conference, Valencia, Spain, 7–9 March 2016; Volume 1, pp. 1872–1879. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  141. Rathgeb, C.; Pöppelmann, K.; Gonzalez-Sosa, E. Biometric Technologies for eLearning: State-of-the-Art, Issues and Challenges. In Proceedings of the 2020 18th International Conference on Emerging eLearning Technologies and Applications (ICETA), Košice, Slovenia, 12–13 November 2020; pp. 558–563. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  142. Sapargaliyev, D. Wearables in education: Expectations and disappointments. In Technology in Education. Technology-Mediated Proactive Learning; Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2015; Volume 559, pp. 73–78. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  143. Buchem, I.; Klamma, R.; Wild, F. Introduction to wearable enhanced learning (WELL): Trends, opportunities, and challenges. In Perspectives on Wearable Enhanced Learning (WELL); Springer: Cham, Switzerland, 2019; pp. 3–32. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  144. Johnson, K.T.; Picard, R.W. Advancing Neuroscience through Wearable Devices. Neuron 2020, 108, 8–12. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  145. Babiker, A.; Faye, I.; Malik, A.S.; Sato, H. Studying the Effect of Lecture Content on Students’ EEG data in Classroom using SVD. In Proceedings of the 2018 IEEE-EMBS Conference on Biomedical Engineering and Sciences (IECBES), Sarawak, Malaysia, 3–6 December 2018; pp. 200–204. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  146. Nunes, M.B.; Isaias, P. Proceedings of the international conference E-learning 2018, Madrid, Spain, 17–19 July 2018; IADIS Press: Algarve, Portugal, 2018. [Google Scholar]
  147. Tahmassebi, A.; Gandomi, A.H.; Meyer-Baese, A. An Evolutionary Online Framework for MOOC Performance Using EEG Data. In Proceedings of the 2018 IEEE Congress on Evolutionary Computation (CEC), Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, 8–13 July 2018; pp. 1–8. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  148. Baceviciute, S.; Mottelson, A.; Terkildsen, T.; Makransky, G. Investigating Representation of Text and Audio in Educational VR using Learning Outcomes and EEG. In Proceedings of the CHI ’20: 2020 CHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, New York, NY, USA, 25–30 April 2020; pp. 1–13. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Figure 1. Graphical abstract for the present literature review. This figure provides a summary of the devices used to acquire each physiological measurement, and the use of each biometric in education is also explained.
Figure 1. Graphical abstract for the present literature review. This figure provides a summary of the devices used to acquire each physiological measurement, and the use of each biometric in education is also explained.
Sensors 24 02437 g001
Figure 2. PRISMA flow diagram. The diagram shows the total works included in this review. The review was limited to one database (n = 1) and no registers (n = 0). In addition, 74 studies were identified through citation searching within Google Scholar.
Figure 2. PRISMA flow diagram. The diagram shows the total works included in this review. The review was limited to one database (n = 1) and no registers (n = 0). In addition, 74 studies were identified through citation searching within Google Scholar.
Sensors 24 02437 g002
Figure 3. Temporal distribution of included studies from Scopus and Google Scholar.
Figure 3. Temporal distribution of included studies from Scopus and Google Scholar.
Sensors 24 02437 g003
Figure 4. Geographical distribution of included studies from Scopus and Google Scholar.
Figure 4. Geographical distribution of included studies from Scopus and Google Scholar.
Sensors 24 02437 g004
Figure 6. Temporal distribution of included studies divided according to their application.
Figure 6. Temporal distribution of included studies divided according to their application.
Sensors 24 02437 g006
Figure 7. A graphical depiction of the results found in this review. It shows the countries, signals, devices, and institutions, among other characteristics, that are most present in the papers found.
Figure 7. A graphical depiction of the results found in this review. It shows the countries, signals, devices, and institutions, among other characteristics, that are most present in the papers found.
Sensors 24 02437 g007
Table 1. General characteristics of the included studies from Scopus.
Table 1. General characteristics of the included studies from Scopus.
StudyObjectiveEducation TypeEducation LevelInstituteCountrySample SizeAnalysis ToolsContribution
[42]To determine stress levels in pharmacy studentsPharmacy educationUniversityFaculty of Pharmacy in Hradec KrávoléCzech Republic375 studentsHRV, PSS-10, StatisticsModerate stress levels while studying
[43]To reduce children’s anxiety and stressAcademic educationElementary schoolPublic school from the “Amara Berri” groupSpain585 studentsEmWave, BASC-S2, statisticsBiofeedback reduces students’ anxiety and stress
[44]To evaluate sleep behaviors among college studentsAcademic educationUniversityLocal university in South KoreaSouth Korea86 studentsSleep behavior, Saliva sampling, HRV, GARS-K, statisticsSleep behaviors are associated with stress
[45]To investigate daily stress levels and EEGAcademic educationUniversitySuranaree University of TechnologyThailand60 studentsMSSQ, EEG, statisticsStress among students alters brain functions
[46]To analyze emotional stress in teachersAcademic educationUniversityNot providedJapanNot providedEEG signalsEmotional stress recognition model for teachers
[47]To develop a cost-effective monitoring deviceSTEM educationUniversityNot providedChinaNot providedArduino, Smartphone app, ECG signalsCost-effective ECG signal testing device
[48]To evaluate psychological stress in studentsAcademic educationUniversityNot providedChina90 studentsClassification algorithm, RBFNN and IELMImportance of stress detection in education
[49]To test technology in Korean teachingLanguage educationUniversityKorean major in a universityChina50 studentsWireless sensing technology, testsImpact of sensing technology in education
[50]The use of wearables in the teaching and learning of EnglishLanguage educationUniversityUniversiti Utara MalaysiaChina263 studentsStatisticsWearables can make learning easier by improving teaching themes, providing graphic teaching scenarios, and creating an overall independent teaching environment
[51]To create scenarios for students to build confidenceMedical EducationUniversityGeorgian College of Applied Arts and TechnologyCanada6 personal support worker studentsArduino, Bluetooth, vibration motorSimulation enables students to reach learning outcomes
[52]To integrate sensors and AR in EFL teachingLanguage educationUniversityZhejiang Yuexiu UniversityChinaSimulation experimentSensorsAR is effective and can support English teaching
[53]To investigate academic stress–achievement relationshipsMedical educationUniversityPusan National University School of MedicineSouth Korea97 studentsHRV, statisticsStudents with higher academic achievements have higher stress
[54]To identify how sensors improve learning efficiencyLanguage educationUniversityXingtai University, Universiti Teknologi MalaysiaChina and MalaysiaNot providedMachine learning, statisticsA classroom learning environment affected by the students’ movements allowed learning free from constraints
[55]To detect students’ stress during the COVID-19 pandemicAcademic educationUniversityEngineering Department at the University of PamplonaColombia25 studentsPython 3.8, Tkinter library, ScikitLearn libraryGSR resulted in the best NPM to identify stress
[56]To propose a stress detection frameworkAcademic educationUniversityNot providedNot provided264 students and 32 police school studentsMachine learning classificationDevelopment of stress detection algorithms based on an adversarial transfer learning method and analysis of physiological signals
[57]To use sensors in audio–visual language teachingLanguage educationUniversitySpeech and hearing research center of Peking UniversityChina4 subjectsMATLAB, classificationLine-of-sight change estimation classifier
[58]To improve English language teaching by using sensors and VRLanguage educationAll education levelsNot providedChinaNot providedStatisticsAn online English teaching system via sensors/VR
[59]To implement motor learning tools for studentsMotor learningPreschoolNot providedIndonesia65 studentsNot providedMeasuring tool based on sensors to evaluate motor skills
[5]To analyze teaching methods in basketball studentsPhysical educationUniversityNot providedNot provided108 students (49 women)StatisticsIntegration of micro classes and smart bands in a basketball course
[60]To analyze stress in students during examinationAcademic educationUniversitySastra UniversityIndia14 studentsStatisticsIdentification of higher stress before testing
[61]To create a student authentication system for online learningOnline academic educationUniversityMoodle, Blackboard and OpenEdxLatin America, Europe and Asia350 studentsElectron JSAn automated, online student authentication system
[26]To create a real-time detection system of students’ flow state through EEGAcademic educationElementary schoolDepartment of Science Education, National Taipei University of EducationTaiwan30 studentsBCS, MOM-tp, StatisticsFuture e-learning development with a BCI system
[62]To motivate students with AI to improve their perfomanceAcademic educationUniversityNot providedNot provided4 studentsStatistic, HRV, Grovi Pi Sensors, Raspberry PiIntroduction of the Education 4.0 Framework
[20]To find links between physiological measurements, obtained with IoT devices, and students’ concentrationAcademic educationUniversityUniversity of Novi SadSerbia15 studentsApple Watch, eye tracker, canvas, statisticsA higher HR correlates to lower concentration levels.
[63]To find cognitive-wise growth in mobile device use in the classroomAcademic educationUniversityNational Institute of Technology AgartalaIndia58 studentsEEG Headset, survey, statisticsUse of mobile devices in classrooms to enhance the quality of education
[64]To analyze mental fatigue conditions in the occipital regionAcademic educationHigh schoolSenior High School 2 MalangIndonesia13 studentsEEG Headset, questionnaire, statisticsMental fatigue is a life-threatening factor in high-school students
[65]To study changes in stress patterns during testsAcademic educationUniversityGanja State UniversityAzerbaijan68 studentsEEG, Excel, SPSSReference physiological values are needed for studying stress patterns in education
[66]To demonstrate the influence of AR in concentrationTechnological educationUniversityFederal University of Rio Grande do SulBrasil5 studentsAR, EEG headset, platformsIncreased student attention during AR interaction
[67]To solve missing data problems and human stress level predictionAcademic educationUniversityNot providedNot provided75 studentsSmart-wristband data, MATLABMethod for solving missing data problems through data completion with diurnal regularizers and temporally hierarchical attention network methods
[68]To recognize students’ exam stress levelsAcademic educationUniversityUniversity of TuzlaBosnia and Herzegovina10 studentsBITalino, MATLAB, machine learningWearables can be used for building automated stress detection systems
[69]To test the effects of time limitation on exam performanceAcademic educationUniversityInstitute of Space Technology, IslamabadPakistan14 studentsEEG signalsPerformance deteriorates during timed tests
[70]To measure academic stress to provide better ways to cope with itAcademic educationUniversityUniversity of TurkuFinland17 studentsSmart device measures stress via physiological signalsRelation between study-related and non-study-related stress
[71]To use EEG to measure e-learning effectivenessAcademic educationKindergartenTadika Advent Goshen Kota Marudu, Pacos Trust Penampang, Pusat Minda Lestari UMS Kota KinabaluMalaysia98 students and 6 teachersEffective learner application for EEG, and a mobile learning appE-learning success is best judged in short sessions with suburban children
[72]To measure HRV changes in students during different stages of an examAcademic educationUniversityLebanese UniversityLebanon90 studentsHR, SDNN, RMSSD, pNN50, LF, HF, LF/HFGender differences during assessment of stress in real exams
[73]To find statistical differences between lifestyles and stress levelsAcademic educationUniversityAmerican University of MadabaJordan19 studentsGRS data, Microsoft Band 2, mobile app, online surveyCorrelations were found between GSR values and physical activity level
[74]To review the learning behavior with biofeedbackAcademic educationUniversityNot providedChina106 studentsEEG headset, eye tracker, statisticsImproving learning efficiency in autonomous learning settings is essential
[75]To evaluate the psychological state of college students under test stressAcademic educationJunior collegeNot providedNot provided15 studentsMATLAB, EEG, neural networks, test questionsStudents with higher test stress are more likely to face psychological health problems
[76]To compare students stress appearing for previva/postviva during examsMedical educationUniversityNavodaya Dental College and HospitalIndia70 studentsStatistics, mobile app, SmartphoneAcademic examinations produce situational stress in students and result in anxiety
[77]To study stress-reduction techniques during microteaching in preservice teachersAcademic educationUniversityNot providedNot provided100 teachersHR, blood pressure, statisticsBiofeedback was not effective to reduce stress in this sample of preservice teachers
[78]To evaluate solutions for stress in students using COTS wristbandsAcademic educationUniversityUniversity of VigoSpain12 studentsCOTS wristbands, machine learning, lecturesA protocol to evaluate student stress in classrooms based on HR, temperature, and GSR
[79]To understand interactions with a visual search interfaceAcademic educationAll education levelsNot providedNot provided20 studentsEEG signals, E-prime 2, EEGO, ASA, Minitab17, ANOVA, StatisticsEEG experiment can be used as a basis to judge cognitive errors
[80]To study how wearables support learning activities and ethical responsibilitiesAcademic educationAll education levelsOslo Metropolitan UniversityNorwayNot providedWearablesWearables in teaching and learning provide pedagogical opportunities
[81]To monitor stress levels during exams in studentsAcademic educationUniversityUniversidad del Magdalena, Universidad del NorteColombia20 studentsEEG Emotiv InsightA desktop app that monitors stress according to parameters obtained from EEG signals and the Emotiv Insight Software
[82]To help teachers with wearables to collect data and provide feedbackAcademic educationElementary schoolAn elementary school in Zhaoqing CityChinaNot providedWearable deviceA model to collect data and give feedback
[83]To help students with intellectual disabilities to learnAcademic educationAll education levelsMiddle East Technical UniversityTurkey4 studentsWearable clothingA way to help people with disabilities by creating an app and plushies with smart clothing that facilitate the learning of internal body organs
[84]To improve the quality of teaching micro technologyAcademic educationUniversityTechnische Universität IlmenauGermany30 studentsSmart watch, fitness tracker, EEG, EMGTechniques in the design process through formative evaluation
[85]To analyze human motivation and efficacy processesAcademic educationUniversitySt. Petersburg State University‘s Psychology FacultyRussian20 studentsBiofizpribor, ECGImproved educational and therapeutic interventions
Table 2. General technical characteristics of the included studies from Scopus.
Table 2. General technical characteristics of the included studies from Scopus.
StudySensorBiometry DeviceSim or ExpCommunication ProtocolType of StorageComputing EngineProcessingSoftwareQualitative IndexQuantitative IndexStudy Outcome
[42]Infrared PPG ear sensorEmWavePro (HeartMath Inc., Boulder Creek, CA, USA)ExperimentalNot providedNot providedNoStatisticsKubios HRV (Kubios, Kuopio, Finland)PSS-10, sociodemographic dataTotal power, VLF, LF, HF, LF/HF, SDNN, Coherence5No significant changes in PSS-1O and HRV
[43]Non-invasive auditory sensorNot providedExperimentalUSBNoNoStatisticsEmWave 2021 Pro. Version (HeartMath Inc, Boulder Creek, CA, USA)BASC II testHRVStudents learned to breathe consciously
[44]Heart rhythm scanner PEOctagonal motion logger Sleep Watch-L (Ambulatory Monitoring, Ardsley, NY, USA)ExperimentalNot providedNot providedNoStatisticsAction W-2, IBM SPSS Statistics version 25 (IBM, Armonk, NY, USA)GARS-KSaliva, HR, SD, SDNN, LF/HFsAA and HRV are significant in sleep disorders
[45]EEG electrodesNot providedExperimentalNot providedNot providedNoStatisticsIBM SPSS Statistics version 17MSSQ, sociodemographic dataEEG signalsStress analysis improves classes
[46]EEG electrodesNot providedExperimentalNot providedNot providedNoDFA, Linear Feature Selection, statisticsNot providedNot providedEEG signalsDeep learning for emotion recognition
[47]AD8232 ECG chipNot providedExperimentalBluetooth HC-05Not providedNoSignal filteringNot providedNot providedHRVSystem that facilitates HRV analysis
[48]EEG electrodesNot providedExperimentalNot providedNot providedNoAdaBoost, RBFNN, IELMNot providedSociodemographic data, self-evaluationEEG signalsAlgorithm with excellent accuracy
[49]EEG electrodesNot providedExperimentalWireless communicationInternet and satelliteNoStatisticsNot providedNot providedNot providedWireless sensors can improve student grades
[50]Not providedNot providedExperimentalNot providedNot providedNoStatisticsIBM SPSS Statistics version 13.0Not providedNot providedWearable use is associated with better test scores
[51]Arduino MKR1010, vibration motorNot providedExperimentalBluetooth and visual via websiteNot providedNoStatisticsArduino (Arduino, Lombardia, Italy)Not providedNot providedWearables provided insight into a medical scenario
[52]Track movement, heartbeat, trajectoryNot providedSimulationHigh-bandwidth optical fiber technologyNot providedNoSurvey summary and statisticsNot providedNot providedTemp, Disp, RS, MF, Stress, VibrationAR supports the practice of English teaching
[53]Not providedSA2000E HRV analytic equipmentExperimentalNot providedNot providedNot providedStatisticsIBM SPSS Statistics 24.0Socio-demographic dataBMI, HRV, SDNN, LF, HF, LF/HFWomen suffer more academic stress than men
[54]Light and temperature sensorsNot providedExperimentalWiFiNot providedNot providedMachine learningNot providedSatisfaction surveyLight and temperatureStudents approve of the system
[55]GSR sensor, MOX gas sensors, electrodesGSR, ECG, EMG, Electronic Nose SystemExperimentalI2C, WifiNot providedNoLDA, KNN, SVMPython 3.8, (Python Software Foundation, Beaverton, OR, USA), Raspbian environmentSISCO InventoryHRV of ECG, GSR, gas sensors’ response, EMGGSR data were best in relaxed and stressed states
[56]EDA, PPG, ST, ACC sensorsWrist-worn wearable deviceExperimentalBluetoothNot providedNoSVM, KNNPythonSelf-reported stress levelsMean, SD, HRV, BPM, IBI, LF, HF, AverageClassification of stressed and relaxed states
[57]Heog, NEMG, and IMU sensorsNeuroScan synamps 2 systemExperimentalNot providedNot providedNoWindow slicing, FCN, LSTM and SVMMATLAB (The Mathworks Inc., Natick, MA, USA)NoHeog Value, NEMG amplitude and RMSEstimation of change angle of line of sight
[58]Odometer, Polaroid 6500 sonar modulesMilodometer and Sonar systemsNoNot providedNot providedNoSIFA, KF, statisticsNot providedNoSkeleton position, movement, rotation angleVR for an online English teaching experience
[59]Movement sensorLimit switch sensorExperimentalNot providedNot providedNoNoNot providedScoring of motor abilityTime between movementsA motor skills test tool from the locomotor component
[5]Heart rate and blood pressure sensorsSmart Redmi bracelet (Xiaomi, Beijing, China)ExperimentalWireless sensor networkNot providedSemantic mobile computingStatisticsIBM SPSS Statistics 17.0NoScores of physical exercises, P valueBetter student performance in basketball classes
[60]Dry EEG electrodesEnobio system (Neuroelectrics, Barcelona, Spain)ExperimentalNot providedStored in the computerNot providedWPT, StatisticsPSYTASK (Bio-Medical Instruments Inc., Detroit, MI, USA), ENOBIO NIC 1.4 (Neuroelectrics, Barcelona, Spain)Arithmetic taskEEG relevant alpha and theta component energyStudents were highly stressed before examination
[61]Microphone, webcam, keyboardProctoring systemExperimentalVoIPDBCloudFaceBoxes, M3L, NNs, KaldiElectron JS (OpenJS Foundation, San Fransisco, CA, USA)User experience testImages, audio, keystroke dynamicsBetter biometric models are needed
[26]Mobile dry EEG sensorsNeuroSky MindWave Headset (NeuroSky, San Jose, CA, USA)ExperimentalNot providedNot providedNoAverage, EEG power, statisticsSPSS 20.0 (SPSS Inc., Chicago, IL, USA), Microsoft Excel (Microsoft, Redmond, WA, USA), WEKA 3.8 (University of Waikato, Hamilton, New Zealand)SR-FEEG signalsEEG-F detects flow experience
[62]PPG, Grove Pi sensorsSmartphone, Raspberry Pi (Raspberry Pi, Cambridge, UK), SmartwatchExperimentalI2C, Wifi, BluetoothNot providedGoogle Cloud TTSStatisticsPython, ECG for EverybodySoundHRV, Temp, Cal, Hum, StepsRelation between self-test and biosignals
[20]HR and eye tracking sensorApple Watch (Apple, Cupertino, CA, USA)ExperimentalNot providedHealth Mobile AppCloudStatisticsNot providedQuiz evaluationHeart rateInitial HR in the quiz affects concentration
[63]Mobile dry EEG sensorsNeuroSky MindWave HeadsetExperimentalNot providedNot providedNoThinkGear ASIC, statisticsJASP 0.10.2 (JASP Statistics, Amsterdam, The Netherlands)SurveyEEG signalsBayes factor supports that mobile devices have positive effects in class
[64]EEG electrodesEMOTIV EPOC+ (EMOTIV, San Francisco, CA, USA)ExperimentalBluetoothNot providedNoMAV and SDNot providedIFSEEG signals8 h school days can cause mental fatigue
[65]EEG electrodesNot providedExperimentalNot providedNot providedNoStatisticsIBM SPSS Statistics, Microsoft ExcelNot providedEEG signalsDifferences in brain signals between 1st and 5th year students
[66]Mobile dry EEG sensorsNeuroSky MindWave HeadsetBothBluetoothStudent’s inventoryNoStatisticsMoodle (Moodle, West Perth, WA, USA), Unity 3D (Unity Technologies, San Francisco, CA, USA), Vuforia (PTC, Boston, MA, USA)Self-reported attention levelsEEG signals, attention levelsHigh concentration with AR app
[67]Sleeping, walking, running, and cycling sensor dataSmart-wristbandExperimentalNot providedNot providedNoMachine learningMATLAB, Tensorflow (USENIX Association, Berkeley, CA, USA)Online surveyData from smart-wristbandData filling and stress level prediction
[68]EDA and ECG sensorsBITalinoExperimentalBluetoothNot providedNoStatistics, KNN, SVM, LDAMATLABNot providedECG and EDA signalsSVM was the most accurate with 91%
[69]EEG electrodesOpenBCI Cyton (OpenBCI, Brooklyn, NY, USA)ExperimentalWireless transmissionAt the device levelNoMean and SD of PSDMATLAB and EEGLAB (Swartz Center for Computational Neuroscience, San Diego, CA, USA)Math testEEG signalsStress increases in timed exams
[70]EDA sensorMoodmetric smart ringExperimentalNot providedNot providedNoStatisticsMicrosoft ExcelWritten diaryEDA signalCorrelation between non-study and studying
[71]EEG electrodesNeuroSky MindWave HeadsetExperimentalNot providedNot providedNoStatisticsMobile learning applicationQuestionnaireEEG signalsSuburban students tend to learn more with m-learning
[72]Ambu WhiteSensor WS electrodesCardio Diagnostics (Cardio Diagnostics Inc., Chicago, IL, USA)ExperimentalNot providedNot providedNoStatisticsKubios HRV 2.2QuestionnaireHRV parametersHRV in females is lower before/after examination
[73]GSR sensorMicrosoft Band 2 (Microsoft, Redmond, WA, USA)ExperimentalBluetoothMobile appNoStatisticsNot providedOnline surveyGSR dataGSR data are dependent on human behavior
[74]Mobile dry EEG sensors, eye trackerNeuroSky MindWave HeadsetExperimentalNot providedNot providedNoStatisticsMinxp, IMB SPSS Statistics 19Bloom’s taxonomy surveyEEG signalBiofeedback may act as a metacognitive method
[75]EEG electrodesNot providedExperimentalNot providedNot providedNoNeural networksMATLABTest questionsEEG signalsEEG signals are multi-fractal signals
[76]HR, oxygen and stress sensorsSmartphone Samsung S7 (Samsung, San Jose, CA, USA)ExperimentalNot providedMobile appNoStatisticsAndroid S-HEALTH (Android, Palo Alto, CA, USA)Not providedHR, oxygen saturation, stress levelsGender differences in stress aptitude
[77]HR, blood pressure sensorsHeartMath EmWave, GE Dinamap PRO 400 VitalsExperimentalNot providedNot providedNot providedNoStatisticsOnline surveyHR and blood pressure dataNo differences in stress levels after microteaching
[78]HR, ST, GSR, ACC sensorsWristbandExperimentalBluetoothServer’s databaseNoMachine learningNot providedQuiz and lecture sessionsInformation from wearableAverage classification accuracy of 97.62%
[79]EEG electrodesNot providedExperimentalNot providedNot providedNoANOVA, statisticsE-prime 2 (Psychology Software Tools, Pittsburgh, PA, USA), EEGO (ANT Neuro, Hengelo, The Netherlands), ASA, Minitab17 (Minitab LLC, State College, PA, USA)Not providedEEG signalsN200 is produced by visual attention
[80]GPS and HRFitbit Surge (Fitbit, San Francisco, CA, USA)ExperimentalWiFiComputer storageCloudStatisticsMicrosoft ExcelNot providedLocation and pulse dataWearables are not yet ready for use in teaching and learning
[81]EEG electrodesEMOTIV Insight (EMOTIV, San Francisco, CA, USA)ExperimentalBluetooth Smart 4.0Not providedNoNot providedMicrosoft Excel, SDK of EMOTIV Insight (EMOTIV, San Francisco, CA, USA)Test IDAREEEG signalsIncreased stress in both subjects
[82]HR sensorLove buckle health (CoCoQCB2)ExperimentalBluetoothSystem platformServerStatisticsNot providedRPE scaleHeart rateMeasured data should be more accurate
[83]Not providedNot providedExperimentalNot providedNot providedNoNot providedAppPosition of organsNot providedStudents learned organ locations
[84]EEG, ECG, EDA, EMG, HR, BP, BG, BO sensorsNot providedExperimentalNot providedNot providedNoNot providedNot providedSR-FEEG, ECG, EDA, EMG, HR, BP, BG, BOE-learning system prototype
[85]EEG and ECG electrodesNot providedExperimentalNot providedNot providedNoStatisticsNot providedFAM testEEG and ECG signalsStress was related to poor answers
Table 3. Biometry devices used in the included studies from Scopus.
Table 3. Biometry devices used in the included studies from Scopus.
Biometry DeviceSignalSensing DeviceCommunication ProtocolType of Data StoragePowerStudies
EmWaveProHRVPPG, ear sensorUSBSoftwareRechargeable lithium-ion battery[42,77]
Octagonal motion logger sleep Watch-LNot providedNot providedSerial communications (COM) port2 Mb of non-volatile memoryPower supply, changeable batteries[44]
SA2000E HRV analytic equipmentHRVNot providedNot providedNot providedNot provided[53]
NeuroScan synamps 2 systemEEGEEG ElectrodesUSB 2.0Neuroscan software120V AC[57]
Smart Redmi braceletHeart rate, blood pressure, oxygen saturation6-axis sensor: 3-axis accelerometer and 3-axis gyroscope, PPG heart rate sensor and light sensorBluetooth low energyApp200 mAh[5]
Enobio systemEEGWet, semi-dry and dry electrodesWiFi or USBMicroSD or SoftwareRechargeable system using Li-Ion battery[60]
NeuroSky MindWave HeadsetEEG and ECG signals12 bit raw brainwaves and power spectrum, eSense, sensor arm up and downBT/BLE dual mode moduleAppAAA battery[26,63,66,71,74]
Raspberry PiNot providedGPIO to connect sensorsSSH, UART, I2C, SPI, USB, LAN, WIFI, BluetoothDAS, NAS1.8 a 5.4 W[62]
Apple WatchHeart rate, blood pressure, oxygen saturation, movementPPG heart rate sensor, light sensor, 3-axis accelerometer, 3-axis gyroscopeBluetoothDAS, NAS, AppRechargeable lithium battery[20]
EMOTIV EPOC+EEG signals9 axis sensor: 3-axis accelerometer, 3-axis magnetometer. EGG sensors.Bluetooth low energySoftwareInternal 640mAh lithium-polymer battery (rechargeable)[64]
BITalinoECG, EMG, EDA, and EEG signalsMCU, Bluetooth, Power, EMG, EDA, ECG, Accelerometer, LED, and Light SensorBluetooth 2.0 + EDR or Bluetooth 4.1 BLE, Bluetooth (BT) or Bluetooth low energy (BLE)/BT dual modeOpenSignals SoftwareBattery: 700 mA 3.7 V LiPo (rechargeable)[68]
OpenBCI CytonEEG, EMG, ECGNot applicable—it serves as a connection between sensorsBLE, USB dongle via RFDuino radio modulePC, mobile device3–6 V DC[69]
Moodmetric smart ringEDANot providedBluetooth SmartMoodmetric app and Moodmetric cloudInternal, non-removable, rechargeable Li-Ion battery[70]
Cardio DiagnosticsECGTransmitter adhesive patchNot providedCloudRechargeable battery[72]
Microsoft Band 2ECG and temperatureOptical sensor, three-axis accelerometer, gyrometer, galvanic skin sensors and skin temperature sensor.Bluetooth 4.0Not providedCharge by a 200 mAh Li-polymer battery.[73]
Smartphone Samsung S7Heart rate and oxygen saturationSpO2 and heart rate sensorNot providedSamsung S-health softwareRechargeable Li-Ion battery[76]
GE Dinamap PRO 400 VitalsBlood pressure, temperature, oxygen saturationBlood pressure cuff, SpO2 sensor, oral temp sensorRemote operation with DINAMAP® Host Communications ProtocolNot providedDC input, battery power, host port power[77]
Fitbit SurgeECGAn MEMS 3-axis accelerometer and optical heart rate trackerBluetooth 4.0fitbit.com dashboardRechargeable lithium-polymer battery.[80]
EMOTIV InsightEEG signalsEEG semi-dry sensors, IMU, accelerometer, gyroscope, magnetometerBluetooth low energyNot provided480 mAh battery[81]
Love buckle health (CoCoQCB2)Heart rateNot provided433 MHz radio, BluetoothApp, serverNot provided[82]
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Hernández-Mustieles, M.A.; Lima-Carmona, Y.E.; Pacheco-Ramírez, M.A.; Mendoza-Armenta, A.A.; Romero-Gómez, J.E.; Cruz-Gómez, C.F.; Rodríguez-Alvarado, D.C.; Arceo, A.; Cruz-Garza, J.G.; Ramírez-Moreno, M.A.; et al. Wearable Biosensor Technology in Education: A Systematic Review. Sensors 2024, 24, 2437. https://doi.org/10.3390/s24082437

AMA Style

Hernández-Mustieles MA, Lima-Carmona YE, Pacheco-Ramírez MA, Mendoza-Armenta AA, Romero-Gómez JE, Cruz-Gómez CF, Rodríguez-Alvarado DC, Arceo A, Cruz-Garza JG, Ramírez-Moreno MA, et al. Wearable Biosensor Technology in Education: A Systematic Review. Sensors. 2024; 24(8):2437. https://doi.org/10.3390/s24082437

Chicago/Turabian Style

Hernández-Mustieles, María A., Yoshua E. Lima-Carmona, Maxine A. Pacheco-Ramírez, Axel A. Mendoza-Armenta, José Esteban Romero-Gómez, César F. Cruz-Gómez, Diana C. Rodríguez-Alvarado, Alejandro Arceo, Jesús G. Cruz-Garza, Mauricio A. Ramírez-Moreno, and et al. 2024. "Wearable Biosensor Technology in Education: A Systematic Review" Sensors 24, no. 8: 2437. https://doi.org/10.3390/s24082437

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop