Perceptual evaluation system, perceptual evaluation device, perceptual evaluation program, and perceptual evaluation method

Abstract

This method measures cross-modal interactions in the human brain and quantifies them as perceptual evaluation values. [Solution] The perceptual evaluation system of the present invention is characterized by presenting questions to the test subject, simultaneously generating two or more types of test information consisting of answer information to the questions and non-answer information that differs from the questions, obtaining the test subject's answers to the questions, and calculating a perceptual evaluation value that represents the perceptual ability to perceive two or more pieces of information as a single event based on the obtained answers.

Description

Technical Field

[0001] The present invention is suitable for a perceptual evaluation system that evaluates the degree of sensory interaction in which, for example, the five human senses of vision, hearing, smell, taste, and touch interact with each other.

Background Art

[0002] The information obtained by humans when recognizing the surrounding environment is not necessarily limited to a single sensory modality. Information from multiple modalities such as vision, hearing, and touch is integrated and processed in the brain.

[0003] At this time, it is known that humans try to integrate sensory information from each modality as consistently as possible in order to reconstruct the most probable world in the brain. In this process, it is known that a function to complement ambiguous information with more reliable other senses works. (See, for example, Non-Patent Document 1)

[0004] This complementation is generally called cross-modal interaction (sensory interaction), but it has been confirmed not only between senses but also between information having different processing domains in the brain even within the same sense.

[0005] In addition, when visual information and auditory information are different, under certain conditions, an illusion phenomenon has been confirmed in which the information obtained from auditory information is recognized as different information that is neither the information obtained from auditory information.

[0006] It has been confirmed that this phenomenon is a cognitive phenomenon that does not occur in dementia patients but occurs in normal people. (See, for example, Non-Patent Document 2)

Prior Art Documents

Non-Patent Documents

[0007]

Non-Patent Document 1

[0008] [Non-Patent Document 2] X.Delbeuck et al. / Neuropsychologia 45 (2007) 3315-3323, "Is Alzheimer's disease a disconnection syndrome? Evidence from a crossmodal sudio-visual illusory experiment“. [Overview of the project] [Problems that the invention aims to solve]

[0009] If cross-modal interactions of this configuration can be quantified, it is expected that they can be widely used as indicators of brain state.

[0010] The present invention was made to solve these problems, and its objective is to provide a perceptual evaluation system, perceptual evaluation device, perceptual evaluation program, and perceptual evaluation method that can quantify cross-modal interaction. [Means for solving the problem]

[0011] To solve these problems, the perceptual evaluation system of the present invention provides: A question presentation section that shows questions to the person being tested, An inspection information generation unit that simultaneously generates two or more types of inspection information consisting of answer information to the aforementioned question and non-answer information that differs from the aforementioned question, A response acquisition unit that acquires the answers of the subjects of the test to the aforementioned questions, The system is characterized by having an evaluation calculation unit that calculates a perceptual evaluation value representing the perceptual ability to perceive two or more pieces of information as a single event, based on the aforementioned answer.

[0012] Furthermore, the perceptual evaluation device of the present invention includes a question presentation unit that shows questions to the person being tested, An inspection information generation unit that simultaneously generates two or more types of inspection information consisting of answer information to the aforementioned question and non-answer information that differs from the aforementioned question, A response acquisition unit that acquires the answers of the subjects of the test to the aforementioned questions, Based on the above response, an evaluation calculation unit calculates a perceptual evaluation value that represents the perceptual ability to perceive two or more pieces of information as a single event. It is characterized by having the following features.

[0013] In the perceptual evaluation program of the present invention, the computer is instructed to: A question presentation step that shows the questions to be asked of the person to be tested, A test information generation step that simultaneously generates two or more types of test information consisting of answer information to the aforementioned question and non-answer information that differs from the aforementioned question, A response acquisition step to obtain the responses of the subjects to the aforementioned questions, The system is characterized by performing an evaluation calculation step that calculates a perceptual evaluation value representing the perceptual ability to perceive two or more pieces of information as a single event, based on the aforementioned answer.

[0014] The perceptual evaluation method of the present invention includes a question presentation step in which questions are presented to the person being tested, A test information generation step that simultaneously generates two or more types of test information consisting of answer information to the aforementioned question and non-answer information that differs from the aforementioned question, A response acquisition step to obtain the responses of the subjects to the aforementioned questions, The system is characterized by having an evaluation calculation step that calculates a perceptual evaluation value representing the perceptual ability to perceive two or more pieces of information as a single event, based on the aforementioned answer. [Effects of the Invention]

[0015] The present invention can realize a perceptual evaluation system, perceptual evaluation device, perceptual evaluation program, and perceptual evaluation method that can quantify cross-modal interaction. [Brief explanation of the drawing]

[0016] [Figure 1] It is a schematic diagram showing the configuration of the perception evaluation system of the first embodiment. [Figure 2] It is a block diagram showing the electrical configuration of the server of the first embodiment. [Figure 3] It is a block diagram showing the electrical configuration of the user terminal of the first embodiment. [Figure 4] It is a schematic diagram showing the configuration of the questionnaire screen (1) of the first embodiment. [Figure 5] It is a schematic diagram showing the configuration of the questionnaire screen (2) of the first embodiment. [Figure 6] It is a flowchart for explaining the perception evaluation process of the first embodiment. [Figure 7] It is a schematic diagram showing the configuration of the perception evaluation system of the second embodiment. [Figure 8] It is a schematic diagram showing the configuration of the inspection object set of the second embodiment. [Figure 9] It is a flowchart for explaining the brain age evaluation process of the second embodiment. [Figure 10] It is a schematic diagram showing the configuration of the questionnaire screen (3) of the third embodiment.

Embodiments for Carrying Out the Invention

[0017] <The First Embodiment> The processing in the human brain is extremely complex, and many regions in the brain are processing while influencing each other. When a human senses (in addition to the five senses of vision, hearing, smell, taste, and touch, stimuli received by humans from the outside world such as somatic sensation and sense of balance), a process of perceiving (assigning meaning to the type of stimulus) is executed. At this time, a process of perceiving and recognizing stimuli input into different sensory modalities as one event is executed.

[0018] It is known that when multiple pieces of information are acquired, ambiguous information is supplemented by other senses. In this process, the human brain is thought to perform sensory integration by judging the likelihood of each piece of information and assigning weights accordingly. The proportion of each sensory piece of information that contributes to the cognitive outcome during sensory integration is determined by the reliability of each piece of information, with higher reliability being given greater weight.

[0019] Furthermore, there are cross-modal interactions that arise from expectations and attention stemming from the context and memories of an experience. The mechanisms of cross-modal interactions, and the boundaries between what is based on knowledge and experience and what is based on physiological and developmental foundations such as intersensory congruence, are often unclear.

[0020] For example, the relationship that warm colors evoke a warm impression and cool colors evoke a cold impression has been thought to be based on physiological and developmental foundations, but it has been suggested that this relationship is based on cultural norms (quoted from Non-Patent Literature 1).

[0021] In other words, when the human brain receives multiple stimuli from the outside, it processes these stimuli internally, taking into account knowledge, experience, physiological and developmental factors, and then perceives them as a single event.

[0022] The perceptual evaluation system 1 of the present invention generates multiple stimuli and calculates a perceptual evaluation value that represents the perceptual ability to perceive multiple stimuli as a single event, based on the user's response values ​​to the stimuli.

[0023] This perceptual evaluation score may be used on its own, or in conjunction with other evaluation systems. For example, it is envisioned to be used as part of intelligence tests at school entry or specific grade levels, or in combination with simple calculations, reading and writing, and quizzes to assess brain age, diagnose developmental disorders, diagnose dementia, and other tests that determine the state of the brain.

[0024] In the first embodiment, we will describe a case in which perceptual evaluation values ​​are determined on each user's terminal and used as part of an intelligence test.

[0025] Figure 1 shows a perceptual evaluation system as a whole. The perceptual evaluation process in the perceptual evaluation system 1 is performed by communication between the server 2 and the user terminal 3 via a telecommunications network (not shown) such as the Internet via wireless or wired connections.

[0026] As shown in Figure 2, Server 2 has a computer configuration, and a control unit 21 consisting of a CPU (Central Processing Unit), ROM (Read Only Memory), and RAM (Random Access Memory) comprehensively controls the entire Server 2 and executes perceptual evaluation processing according to a perceptual evaluation program stored in advance in the memory unit 25. Server 2 executes perceptual evaluation processing while communicating with the user terminal 3 via the external interface 23. Note that the display unit 24 and the operation input unit 26 are not essential.

[0027] As shown in Figure 3, the user terminal 3 has a computer configuration, and a control unit 31 consisting of a CPU, ROM, and RAM comprehensively controls the entire user terminal 3 and executes perceptual evaluation processing according to a perceptual evaluation program. The user terminal 3 executes perceptual evaluation processing while communicating with the server 2 via an external interface 33.

[0028] For example, the user selects an application software (hereinafter referred to as "app") by touching the touch panel-type operation input unit 36 ​​located on the display unit 34 of the user terminal 3. The control unit 31 of the user terminal 3 reads the selected app from the storage unit 35 and displays the startup page of the selected app on the display unit 34.

[0029] The control unit 31 of the user terminal 3 transmits an information request signal via the external interface 33 according to the application, in response to user operations via the operation input unit 36. As a result, information such as image data and audio data is supplied from the external device. The control unit 31 of the user terminal 3 displays the supplied image data on the display unit 34 and outputs the audio data from the audio input / output unit 37. As a result, the user can view the information acquired via the application.

[0030] The user terminal 3 may perform perceptual evaluation processing according to a perceptual evaluation program stored in the storage unit 35 in advance, or it may sequentially access the server 2 and output image data and audio data supplied from the server 2 from the display unit 34 and the audio input / output unit 37.

[0031] The user launches the browser application on user terminal 3 and accesses the website where the intelligence test is administered by entering a URL (Uniform Resource Locator) or site name and performing a search.

[0032] When the control unit 21 of server 2 receives an access request signal from user terminal 3, it sends image data of the top page to user terminal 3. As a result, the top page of the intelligence test is displayed on user terminal 3.

[0033] Although not shown in the diagram, the top page of the intelligence test displays an input page with blank fields for entering the user's name, identifier, age, gender, etc. If the user is already registered, information for user authentication will be displayed as input fields. When the user enters the information and presses the submit button, the input is sent to server 2, and the user is registered or authenticated.

[0034] Server 2 starts an intelligence test after registering a user in the user registration database. The intelligence test measures commonly used cognitive abilities such as the Verbal Comprehension Index (VCI), Perceptual Reasoning Index (PRI), Working Memory Index (WMI), and Processing Speed ​​Index (PSI), and simultaneously calculates a perceptual ability evaluation score that represents perceptual ability.

[0035] The method for measuring perceptual ability involves simultaneously outputting two or more events from the user terminal 3, displaying corresponding questions, and having the user respond. Voice input is preferably used to measure the time taken to respond, but keyboard input or text input via a touch panel may also be used.

[0036] For example, as shown in Figure 4, a figure PC1 with the word "orange" written inside a picture of an apple is displayed, and the question is "What is the shape?" Generally, language recognition ability is higher than shape recognition ability, so the word "orange" may lead to an incorrect answer of "orange," or it may be difficult to answer "apple," resulting in a delayed response.

[0037] In other words, when a shape representing the answer and text representing non-answer information are output simultaneously, perception can cause delays in responding to the answer information or lead to incorrect answers. In this question, text is included within a single shape, and the two pieces of test information are displayed overlappingly.

[0038] At this time, in order to measure the time required to answer, the message "Answer in a loud voice. Question: What is the shape?" is displayed first to allow the user to recognize the question, then the shape PC1 is displayed, and the time from the display to the input of the answer is measured.

[0039] Server 2 measures the time elapsed from the display of the figure PC1 to the start of answer input, and registers it along with the correctness of the answer, associating it with the user.

[0040] Figure 5 shows two circular shapes, PC2 and PC3, side by side, each with a different color. Generally, shapes appear smaller when colored with a low-luminosity color such as black, and larger when colored with a high-luminosity color such as white. In Figure 5, shape PC2 is slightly larger than shape PC3, but due to an optical illusion caused by color, shape PC2 may appear smaller or the same size.

[0041] In other words, when the size of the circle (answer information) and the color (non-answer information) are output simultaneously, the perceived size of the circle may appear different from its actual size. In this question, two figures are displayed side by side, each with a different color, resulting in overlapping test information, and the tester is asked to compare the two figures.

[0042] Although not shown in the diagram, it is also possible to output sound from user terminal 3 and ask questions that combine sound with shapes or text, or vibration with shapes or text.

[0043] User terminal 3 converts the entered response into text using speech recognition or other means, and sends the response to server 2. The response time, from the display of figures PC2 and PC3 to the start of response input, is measured by user terminal 3 and supplied to server 2 as the response time. Alternatively, server 2 may calculate the response time from the relationship between the display start time and the response input start time supplied by user terminal 3.

[0044] The memory unit 25 of server 2 stores a response score database in which scores (points) corresponding to the response results (in this case, correctness of the answer and response time) are registered. This response score database aggregates response results for each question and for each user's age, and scores are calculated based on the distribution of responses. In other words, if a user makes a mistake in answering the information or takes a long time to answer, they are judged to have high perceptual ability.

[0045] The control unit 21 of server 2 selects a score corresponding to the answer based on the response result and stores it in association with the user and the question.

[0046] Once the user has finished answering all the questions, the control unit 21 of server 2 compiles the scores for the questions regarding the user's perceptual ability and calculates a perceptual evaluation value. As a result, a perceptual evaluation value representing perceptual ability can be provided as one of the evaluation items of the intelligence test.

[0047] In addition to the above configuration, the perceptual evaluation system 1 of this embodiment is designed to compensate for individual differences in sensory and cognitive abilities (hereinafter referred to as processing ability).

[0048] As mentioned above, perceptual abilities are weighted more heavily towards processing abilities with higher reliability, and the degree of weighting changes depending on the processing ability. For example, users with perfect pitch tend to have a higher weighting for auditory perception, and users with high spatial recognition ability tend to have a higher weighting for spatial recognition.

[0049] For example, users with strong spatial reasoning abilities are less likely to be distracted by text in questions like Figure 4 and can answer correctly quickly.

[0050] Therefore, the perceptual evaluation system 1 measures the individual processing ability of each user and adjusts the score accordingly.

[0051] For example, processing speed and character recognition will utilize some of the results from intelligence tests. Furthermore, auditory and color recognition abilities will be assessed through separate tests on discrimination capabilities.

[0052] The greater the difference in recognition ability between the answered and unanswered information, the more susceptible the score will be to being skewed; therefore, the score will be adjusted to be lower. For users with fast processing speeds, the score will be selected by multiplying the response speed by a coefficient of 1 or more corresponding to the processing speed ability.

[0053] Furthermore, since a higher ability to recognize answer information makes individuals less susceptible to being influenced by non-answer information, making it unsuitable for measuring perceptual ability, it may be advisable to select and present only questions that demonstrate a high ability to recognize answer information. This would allow for the appropriate calculation of perceptual evaluation values ​​that represent perceptual ability.

[0054] Next, the perceptual evaluation process RT1, which is executed according to the perceptual evaluation program, will be explained using the flowchart in Figure 6. This perceptual evaluation program may be executed by server 2 or by user terminal 3. Alternatively, server 2 may execute part of it and user terminal 3 may execute the rest. In this case, server 2 and user terminal 3 communicate with each other to send and receive information while the perceptual evaluation process is executed.

[0055] In perceptual evaluation system 1, once the perceptual evaluation process begins, the system moves to step S1. In step S1, the user, who is the subject of the test, is presented with questions via audio output, display, or other means.

[0056] In step S2, two or more types of test information, including answer information and non-answer information, are generated simultaneously. In step S3, the user's answers to the questions are obtained.

[0057] In step S4, a perceptual evaluation score is calculated based on the user's responses. In step S5, the user's processing ability score is measured.

[0058] In step S6, the perceptual evaluation value is corrected based on the measured processing ability value.

[0059] In this way, after the perceptual evaluation score is calculated, a corrected perceptual evaluation score is calculated by adjusting the perceptual evaluation score according to the individual's processing ability.

[0060] <Second Embodiment> Next, a second embodiment will be described. The second embodiment, shown using Figures 5 and 6, differs from the first embodiment in that it is used for diagnosing dementia and that an actual object that exists in the event of occurrence is used as the test object 111. In the second embodiment, the same reference numerals are used in the same locations as in the first embodiment, and the number 100 is added to the corresponding reference numerals, and the explanation of the same locations will be omitted.

[0061] As shown in Figure 5, the perceptual evaluation system 101 uses a real-world object, the test object 111. This perceptual evaluation system 101 can be used, for example, as part of a brain age assessment in a health checkup.

[0062] In the perceptual evaluation system 101, there is an operator OP who operates the user terminal 103. The operator OP hands the test objects 111 to the test subject JG according to the instructions from the user terminal 103, and the brain age evaluation is performed. Multiple (10 in the diagram) test objects 111 are packed as one set of test objects 110.

[0063] Multiple sets of test objects 110 are prepared, and one set of test objects 110 is selected and used. This ensures the validity of the test by preventing the test-taker from memorizing answers by repeatedly performing the same test.

[0064] As shown in Figure 6, the inspection object set 110 has a set identifier 110A that identifies the inspection object set 110, which consists of a number and a two-dimensional code, attached to the package 110B.

[0065] For example, inspection object set 110 is a set of inspection objects 111 consisting of balls that differ in color, weight, size, texture, gloss, etc. Each inspection object 111 has an inspection object identifier 111A that is a set identifier representing the inspection object set 110 to which it belongs, and a number within the inspection object set 110.

[0066] The operator OP activates the perceptual evaluation program by operating the user terminal 103 via the operation input unit 36, and the examiner input screen (not shown) is displayed on the display unit 134 of the user terminal 103.

[0067] When the examiner identifier (numbers, barcodes, 2D codes, etc.) written on the examination sheet held by the examiner JG is entered, the display unit 134 prompts for input of the set of examination objects 110 to be used. When the operator OP enters the examination object identifier 111A written as a 2D code or numbers, the perceptual evaluation test begins.

[0068] The control unit 131 of the user terminal 103 displays the identification number of the inspected object identifier 111A on the display unit 134, and outputs a voice message from the voice input / output unit 137, for example, as a question: "I will now hand you two balls one at a time. Please tell me which ball is heavier, the one you received first or the one you received second." The control unit 131 also displays the instruction "Please hand over ball number 8" on the display unit 134. Below the instruction, an instruction completion button (not shown) is displayed with the message "Handed over."

[0069] At this time, the control unit 131 of the user terminal 103 prompts the user to select two balls such that the answer information is weight and the non-answer information is differences in appearance (color, texture, gloss, etc.). In this question, each of the test objects 111 has different colors, weights, and sizes, and two pieces of test information are attached to them. Here, the user places the test object 111 in their palm before and after, feels its weight, and compares it.

[0070] When operator OP hands over ball number 8 and presses the instruction completion button, the next instruction, such as "Please hand over ball number 2," and the instruction completion button are displayed. Then, upon recognizing that the instruction completion button has been pressed, user terminal 103 outputs a voice message from the voice input / output unit 137 saying, "Which ball was heavier, the previous one or the next one?"

[0071] When the control unit 131 recognizes that the subject JG has responded "Forward," it stores the response "Forward" in association with the question and the examiner identifier.

[0072] When the perceptual evaluation test is completed, the control unit 131 of the user terminal 103 supplies the results of the perceptual evaluation test to the server 102. The control unit 121 of the server 102 calculates the perceptual evaluation value from the results of the perceptual evaluation test.

[0073] In addition, a cognitive ability test is administered in conjunction with the perceptual evaluation system 101. This cognitive ability test consists of simple calculations, kanji characters, and short-term memory tests, and the Hasegawa Dementia Scale is preferably used. From among several cognitive ability tests, the appropriate cognitive ability test is selected for the test subject JG, taking into consideration the results of the previous test and their age.

[0074] For example, the results of cognitive ability measurements, such as those performed using a touch panel or on paper, are supplied to the server 102 in a state where they are associated with a measurement identifier and an examiner identifier that represent the type of cognitive ability measurement.

[0075] The control unit 121 of server 102 determines brain age, which represents the state of the brain, based on the results of the cognitive test and the perceptual evaluation value. For example, it calculates a brain age score by adding the results of the cognitive test and the perceptual evaluation value at a predetermined rate, and then determines the brain age of the test subject from the average value based on the brain age scores aggregated for each age.

[0076] Here, brain function varies greatly from person to person. Therefore, the perceptual evaluation system 101 of the present invention identifies the subject of the test using an examiner identifier and checks for changes over time.

[0077] For example, if a brain age assessment is conducted once a year, the results of each year's brain age assessment will be displayed in a graph. In addition, the average brain age assessment result for all test subjects will also be displayed in a graph. This allows for a visual representation of the changes in each test subject's brain age score, making it possible to visually confirm the degree of brain deterioration over time.

[0078] In children, it can be used to assess brain age development and diagnose the presence or absence of disabilities. In older adults, it makes it easier to see rapid changes in brain age scores and discrepancies with actual age, making it useful for the early detection and progression of dementia.

[0079] In this way, it is possible to measure perceptual ability using the actual object identifier 111A. Furthermore, it is possible to perform a brain age assessment using the perceptual evaluation value, calculate a score representing the state of the brain (brain age score), and check changes over time.

[0080] Next, the brain age evaluation process RT2, which is executed according to the brain age evaluation program, will be explained using the flowchart in Figure 9. In this brain age evaluation program, steps S1 to S4 are perceptual evaluation processes and are the same as in the first embodiment, so their explanation will be omitted. This brain age evaluation program may be executed by the server 102 or by the user terminal 103. Alternatively, the server 102 may execute part of it and the user terminal 103 may execute the rest. In this case, the server 102 and the user terminal 103 communicate with each other to send and receive information while the perceptual evaluation process is executed.

[0081] In steps S1 to S4, the perceptual evaluation calculation process is performed, and the perceptual evaluation value is calculated.

[0082] In step S15, cognitive ability is measured through a cognitive ability test. In step S16, a brain age score is determined based on the perceptual evaluation values ​​and the results of the cognitive ability test.

[0083] In step S17, the previous test results of subject JG are checked. In step S18, the brain age scores of subject JG in the past are displayed chronologically, along with their current brain age score. <Third Embodiment>

[0084] Next, a third embodiment will be described. In the third embodiment, which will be explained using Figure 10, the use in diagnosing dementia is the same as in the second embodiment, but the displayed figure is a mouth image PC4 when a word is spoken. In addition, although not shown in the figure, the user terminal 3 outputs a sound of a word, and the user is asked which word is being spoken.

[0085] For example, Non-Patent Literature 2 describes a scenario where an image of a mouth pronouncing " / ka / " is displayed on the screen while the sound " / pa / " is played from a speaker. If normal audiovisual integration is functioning, the subject will experience the illusion that the sound they just heard is a third sound (e.g., "ta") distinct from both the image and the sound. In dementia patients, however, it has been shown that they are not drawn into (or experience the illusion of) this screen information and instead perceive it as the sound " / pa / ".

[0086] User terminal 3 converts the entered response into text using speech recognition or other means, and sends the response to server 2. The response time, from the display of the graphic PC4 and the audio output to the start of response input, is measured by user terminal 3 and supplied to server 2 as the response time. Alternatively, server 2 may calculate the response time from the relationship between the display start time and the response input start time supplied by user terminal 3.

[0087] Next, the brain age assessment process RT2, which is executed according to the brain age assessment program, is the same as the flowchart in Figure 9.

[0088] <Action and Effects> The following describes the features of the group of inventions extracted from the embodiments described above, including, as necessary, problems and effects. For ease of understanding, the corresponding configurations in each embodiment will be indicated in parentheses as appropriate, but the invention is not limited to these specific configurations. Furthermore, the meanings and examples of terms described in each feature may also be applied to the meanings and examples of terms described in other features that use the same wording.

[0089] In this configuration, the perceptual evaluation system of the present invention (perceptual evaluation system 1) includes a question presentation unit (voice input / output unit 37) that presents questions to the person being tested, An inspection information generation unit (display unit 34) simultaneously generates two or more types of inspection information consisting of answer information to the aforementioned question and non-answer information that differs from the aforementioned question, The response acquisition unit (audio input / output unit 37, external interface 23) acquires the responses of the person being tested to the aforementioned questions, The system is characterized by having an evaluation calculation unit (control units 21, 31) that calculates a perceptual evaluation value representing the perceptual ability to perceive two or more pieces of information as a single event, based on the aforementioned answer.

[0090] In the perceptual evaluation system, the perceptual evaluation value is The aforementioned response is characterized by being calculated based on aggregated values ​​compiled by age.

[0091] This allows the perceptual assessment system to appropriately evaluate perceptual abilities that change with age.

[0092] In the perceptual evaluation system, the evaluation calculation unit is: A processing capacity measurement unit that measures the processing capacity value possessed by the person being tested, It is characterized by having a correction unit that corrects the perceptual evaluation value based on the processing capacity value.

[0093] This allows for correction of individual differences among test subjects, enabling a more accurate assessment of perceptual abilities.

[0094] In the perceptual evaluation system, the evaluation unit is: The method is characterized by diagnosing the presence and degree of dementia based on the aforementioned perceptual evaluation values.

[0095] This makes it possible to provide a new method for diagnosing dementia using perceptual evaluation values.

[0096] In the perceptual evaluation system, the evaluation unit is: The method is characterized by determining the intelligence level based on the aforementioned perceptual evaluation value.

[0097] This allows for the use of perceptual evaluation scores to increase the number of items in intelligence tests, making it easier to understand and assess individual personalities.

[0098] The aforementioned inspection information generation unit is: The method is characterized by generating two or more types of inspection information by having the user operate one or more inspection objects whose conditions can be changed.

[0099] This increases the flexibility in designing the test information used, allowing for an increase in the types of tests that can be performed.

[0100] In the perceptual evaluation system, the test object is assigned an identifier. Having an identification unit that identifies the aforementioned identifier, The evaluation unit described above, The method is characterized by calculating the perceptual evaluation value based on the inspection information generated by the inspection object corresponding to the identifier.

[0101] This allows for smooth testing using actual test objects.

[0102] <Other Embodiments> The second embodiment described above describes a case where the operator OP hands over the object to be inspected. The present invention is not limited to this, and for example, the object to be inspected may be sent to the person being inspected by mail, an identifier may be entered, and instructions may be output from the user terminal.

[0103] The embodiments described above included cases where perceptual evaluation values ​​were included as an item in an intelligence test or used in conjunction with other cognitive tests to assess brain age. The present invention is not limited to these, and may, for example, be measured independently to measure perceptual ability.

[0104] The second embodiment described above described a case in which the perceptual evaluation value is not corrected according to an individual's processing ability. The present invention is not limited to this, and the perceptual evaluation value may be corrected and then displayed over time. This makes it possible to clarify whether a change in the perceptual evaluation value is due to a decrease in processing ability itself or a change in perceptual ability.

[0105] The second embodiment described above describes a case where the user terminal is instructed to input that the instruction has been completed. The present invention is not limited to this, and for example, an acceleration sensor and communication means may be provided on the ball, so that the user terminal determines that the instruction has been completed based on the acceleration.

[0106] The second embodiment described above describes a case in which a perceptual evaluation test using an object is performed during a health checkup. The present invention is not limited to this, and for example, the object may be sent to the person being tested by mail, and the evaluation test may be performed using a user terminal, making it closer to the person being tested's own operation.

[0107] The above-described embodiment describes a case in which the perceptual evaluation system 1 of the present invention is configured by a display unit 34 as a question presentation unit, a display unit 34 as an inspection information generation unit, an audio input / output unit 37 as an answer acquisition unit, and a control unit 21 as an evaluation calculation unit. The present invention is not limited to this configuration, and the perceptual evaluation system of the present invention may also be configured by a question presentation unit, an inspection information generation unit, an answer acquisition unit, and an evaluation calculation unit in a different order. [Industrial applicability]

[0108] The present invention can provide a perceptual evaluation system capable of quantifying cross-modal interaction. [Explanation of symbols]

[0109] 1,101: Perceptual evaluation system, 2,102: Server, 3,103: User terminal, 23,33: External interface, 24: Display unit, 25,35: Memory unit, 26,36: Operation input unit, 21,31,121,131: Control unit, 34,134: Display unit, 37,137: Audio input / output unit, 110: Test object set, 110A: Set identifier, 110B: Package, 111: Test object, 111A: Test object identifier

Claims

1. A question presentation section that shows questions to the person being tested, An inspection information generation unit that simultaneously generates two or more types of inspection information consisting of answer information to the aforementioned question and non-answer information that differs from the aforementioned question, A response acquisition unit that acquires the answers of the subjects of the test to the aforementioned questions, Based on the above response, an evaluation calculation unit calculates a perceptual evaluation value that represents the perceptual ability to perceive two or more pieces of information as a single event. A perceptual evaluation system characterized by having the following features.

2. The aforementioned perceptual evaluation value is, The above response is calculated based on aggregated values ​​compiled by age. The perceptual evaluation system according to feature 1.

3. The aforementioned evaluation calculation unit, A processing capacity measurement unit that measures the processing capacity value possessed by the person being tested, A correction unit that corrects the perceived evaluation value based on the processing capacity value. The perceptual evaluation system according to claim 1, characterized by having the following features.

4. The evaluation unit described above, Based on the aforementioned perceptual evaluation values, the presence and degree of dementia are diagnosed. The perceptual evaluation system according to feature 1.

5. The evaluation unit described above, Based on the aforementioned perceptual evaluation values, the intelligence level is determined. The perceptual evaluation system according to feature 1.

6. The aforementioned inspection information generation unit is: By having the user operate one or more inspection objects, two or more types of the aforementioned inspection information are generated. The perceptual evaluation system according to feature 1.

7. The aforementioned inspection object is assigned an identifier, Having an identification unit that identifies the aforementioned identifier, The aforementioned evaluation calculation unit, The perceptual evaluation value is calculated based on the inspection information generated by the inspection object corresponding to the identifier. The perceptual evaluation system according to claim 6.

8. A question presentation section that shows questions to the person being tested, An inspection information generation unit that simultaneously generates two or more types of inspection information consisting of answer information to the aforementioned question and non-answer information that differs from the aforementioned question, A response acquisition unit that acquires the answers of the subjects of the test to the aforementioned questions, Based on the above response, an evaluation calculation unit calculates a perceptual evaluation value that represents the perceptual ability to perceive two or more pieces of information as a single event. A perceptual evaluation device characterized by having the following features.

9. For computers, A question presentation step that shows the questions to be asked of the person to be tested, A test information generation step that simultaneously generates two or more types of test information consisting of answer information to the aforementioned question and non-answer information that differs from the aforementioned question, A response acquisition step to obtain the responses of the subjects to the aforementioned questions, Based on the above response, the evaluation calculation step calculates a perceptual evaluation value that represents the perceptual ability to perceive two or more pieces of information as a single event. A perceptual evaluation program characterized by causing the program to execute.

10. A question presentation step that shows the questions to be asked of the person to be tested, A test information generation step that simultaneously generates two or more types of test information consisting of answer information to the aforementioned question and non-answer information that differs from the aforementioned question, A response acquisition step to obtain the responses of the subjects to the aforementioned questions, Based on the above response, the evaluation calculation step calculates a perceptual evaluation value that represents the perceptual ability to perceive two or more pieces of information as a single event. A method for evaluating perception, characterized by having the following features.

Images