Optical measurement techniques and recent advances in wearable technology have made heart rate (HR) sensing simpler and more affordable. The Polar OH1 is an arm worn optical heart rate monitor. The objectives of this study are two-fold; 1) to validate the OH1 optical HR sensor with the gold standard of HR measurement, electrocardiography (ECG), over a range of moderate to high intensity physical activities, 2) to validate wearing the OH1 at the temple as an alternative location to its recommended wearing location around the forearm and upper arm. Twenty-four individuals participated in a physical exercise protocol, by walking on a treadmill and riding a stationary spin bike at different speeds while the criterion measure, ECG and Polar OH1 HR were recorded simultaneously at three different body locations; forearm, upper arm and the temple. Time synchronised HR data points were compared using Bland-Altman analyses and intraclass correlation. The intraclass correlation between the ECG and Polar OH1, for the aggregated data, was 0.99 and the estimated mean bias ranged 0.27–0.33 bpm for the sensor locations. The three sensors exhibited a 95% limit of agreement (LoA: forearm 5.22, -4.68 bpm; upper arm 5.15, -4.49; temple 5.22, -4.66). The mean of the ECG HR for the aggregated data was 112.15 ± 24.52 bpm. The intraclass correlation of HR values below and above this mean were 0.98 and 0.99 respectively. The reported mean bias ranged 0.38–0.47 bpm (95% LoA: forearm 6.14, -5.38 bpm; upper arm 6.07, -5.13 bpm; temple 6.09, -5.31 bpm), and 0.15–0.16 bpm (95% LoA: forearm 3.99, -3.69 bpm; upper arm 3.90, -3.58 bpm; temple 4.06, -3.76 bpm) respectively. During different exercise intensities, the intraclass correlation ranged 0.95–0.99 for the three sensor locations. During the entire protocol, the estimated mean bias was in the range -0.15–0.55 bpm, 0.01–0.53 bpm and -0.37–0.48 bpm, for the forearm, upper arm and temple locations respectively. The corresponding upper limits of 95% LoA were 3.22–7.03 bpm, 3.25–6.82 bpm and 3.18–7.04 bpm while the lower limits of 95% LoA were -6.36–(-2.35) bpm, -6.46–(-2.30) bpm and -7.42–(-2.41) bpm. Polar OH1 demonstrates high level of agreement with the criterion measure ECG HR, thus can be used as a valid measure of HR in lab and field settings during moderate and high intensity physical activities.

Evaluation of team performance in naturalistic contexts has gained popularity during the last two decades. Among other human factors, physiological synchrony has been adopted to investigate team performance and emotional state when engaged in collaborative team tasks. A variety of methods have been reported to quantify physiological synchrony with a varying degree of correlation with the collaborative team task performance and emotional state, reflected in the inconclusive nature of findings. Little is known about the effect of the choice of synchrony calculation methods and the level of analysis on these findings. In this research work, we investigate the relationship between outcomes of different methods to quantify physiological synchrony, emotional state, and team performance of three-member teams performing a collaborative team task. The proposed research work employs dyadic-level linear (cross-correlation) and team-level non-linear (multidimensional recurrence quantification analysis) synchrony calculation measures to quantify task performance and the emotional state of the team. Our investigation indicates that the physiological synchrony estimated using multidimensional recurrence quantification analysis revealed a significant negative relationship between the subjectively reported frustration levels and overall task performance. However, no relationship was found between cross-correlation-based physiological synchrony and task performance. The proposed research highlights that the method of choice for physiological synchrony calculation has direct impact on the derived relationship of team task performance and emotional states.

Assessment of team performance has become increasingly important in recent years, prompting the exploration of innovative approaches to enhance our understanding of the underlying cognitive and neural processes involved. This review examines the application of neuroimaging techniques such as electroencephalography (EEG), functional near-infrared spectroscopy (fNIRS), and other brain imaging techniques in assessing team performance. It specifically emphasises the investigation of team aspects using neuroimaging techniques and their relationship to teamwork. By conducting a thorough analysis of the literature, the review highlights the unique capabilities, advantages, and limitations of brain imaging techniques. It also explores different research paradigms, including simulated tasks and real-world team interactions, to provide insights into the methodological landscape of studying team performance using neurophysiological measures. Moreover, the review underscores the significance of team aspects such as cooperation, workload, engagement, and decision-making, which have been investigated through neuroimaging techniques. By synthesising existing research, the review identifies associations between neurophysiological measures and specific indicators of team performance, shedding light on the underlying neural mechanisms that contribute to effective teamwork. Overall, this review highlights the value of neurophysiological measures in assessing team performance, emphasising the exploration of team aspects using neuroimaging techniques and identifying future research directions to advance our understanding of team dynamics and optimise performance in various domains.