{"success":true,"database":"eegdash","data":{"_id":"6953f4249276ef1ee07a335b","dataset_id":"ds004519","associated_paper_doi":null,"authors":["Edward Ester","Asal Nouri"],"bids_version":"1.8.0","contact_info":["Edward Ester"],"contributing_labs":null,"data_processed":false,"dataset_doi":"doi:10.18112/openneuro.ds004519.v1.0.1","datatypes":["eeg"],"demographics":{"subjects_count":40,"ages":[],"age_min":null,"age_max":null,"age_mean":null,"species":null,"sex_distribution":null,"handedness_distribution":null},"experimental_modalities":null,"external_links":{"source_url":"https://openneuro.org/datasets/ds004519","osf_url":null,"github_url":null,"paper_url":null},"funding":[],"ingestion_fingerprint":"5fdd3c62d9a46e5d4f5f7989a728d9e2bc1814a7f9faae905f02b7f9b4938e52","license":"CC0","n_contributing_labs":null,"name":"Internal selective attention is delayed by competition between endogenous and exogenous factors","readme":"Preprocessed data files from \"Internal selective attention is delayed by competition between endogenous and exogenous factors\". A preprint describing the work can be found at https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/2022.07.05.498906v4.abstract, and analysis scripts can be found at https://osf.io/wat6d/. This study was conceptualized and analyzed before our lab made the switch to BIDS archival. If you want to use the analysis scripts linked above to analyze the BIDS data, you'll have to modify them to load the BIDS .set files rather than the .mat files we analyzed in our lab (the .set and .mat files, however, are identical). You will also need to modify the analysis scripts to load in the _behavSummary.mat files for alignment with the EEG data. If you have questions or run into problems, please e-mail the corresponding author of the study (eester@unr.edu)\"","recording_modality":["eeg"],"senior_author":"Asal Nouri","sessions":[],"size_bytes":13486847571,"source":"openneuro","study_design":null,"study_domain":null,"tasks":["ProAntiCue"],"timestamps":{"digested_at":"2026-04-22T12:26:41.790448+00:00","dataset_created_at":"2023-03-03T23:49:01.001Z","dataset_modified_at":"2023-03-04T19:46:39.000Z"},"total_files":40,"storage":{"backend":"s3","base":"s3://openneuro.org/ds004519","raw_key":"dataset_description.json","dep_keys":["CHANGES","README","participants.json","participants.tsv","task-ProAntiCue_events.json"]},"nemar_citation_count":3,"computed_title":"Internal selective attention is delayed by competition between endogenous and exogenous factors","nchans_counts":[{"val":62,"count":40}],"sfreq_counts":[{"val":250.0,"count":40}],"stats_computed_at":"2026-04-22T23:16:00.307803+00:00","tags":{"pathology":["Healthy"],"modality":["Visual"],"type":["Attention"],"confidence":{"pathology":0.65,"modality":0.6,"type":0.75},"reasoning":{"few_shot_analysis":"Most similar few-shot by construct/paradigm is the DPX/Dot Probe continuous performance example (labeled Type=Attention, Modality=Visual), because it is an explicit attention/goal vs stimulus-driven control task rather than a pure sensory discrimination task. In contrast, the schizophrenia moving-dots example (Type=Perception) is framed as a visual discrimination decision task; our dataset is framed around selective attention and endogenous/exogenous competition, which aligns better with the Attention labeling convention.","metadata_analysis":"Key metadata indicating a non-clinical cognitive attention study:\n- Title: \"Internal selective attention is delayed by competition between endogenous and exogenous factors\" (explicitly names selective attention and endogenous/exogenous factors).\n- Dataset README: \"Preprocessed data files from \\\"Internal selective attention is delayed by competition between endogenous and exogenous factors\\\".\" (confirms it is the same cognitive study).\n- Tasks field: \"ProAntiCue\" (a cueing-style task name consistent with endogenous/exogenous attention manipulations).\n- Participants overview: \"Subjects: 40\" (no mention of diagnosis/patient recruitment, consistent with a normative cohort).","paper_abstract_analysis":"No useful paper information. (Only a biorxiv link is provided; no abstract text is included in the metadata.)","evidence_alignment_check":"Pathology:\n- Metadata says: \"Subjects: 40\" with no mention of patients/diagnoses, and the dataset is described as a cognitive study in the title/README.\n- Few-shot pattern suggests: basic cognitive task datasets with only subject counts and no clinical descriptors are labeled Healthy.\n- Alignment: ALIGN.\n\nModality:\n- Metadata says: task name is \"ProAntiCue\" and the title discusses \"endogenous and exogenous factors\" in selective attention (typical cueing paradigms).\n- Few-shot pattern suggests: cueing/oddball/discrimination paradigms are labeled by stimulus channel; attention cueing tasks are commonly Visual in EEG lab paradigms.\n- Alignment: PARTIAL (metadata does not explicitly say 'visual'/'auditory'; modality is inferred from task naming and standard paradigm usage).\n\nType:\n- Metadata says: \"Internal selective attention\" and endogenous/exogenous competition (attention construct is explicit in the title).\n- Few-shot pattern suggests: when the main construct is attention/selection/control (rather than sensory discrimination), label Type=Attention.\n- Alignment: ALIGN.","decision_summary":"Top-2 candidate selection:\n\n1) Pathology\n- Candidate A: Healthy\n  Evidence: no clinical recruitment mentioned (\"Subjects: 40\"); cognitive-attention framing in title (\"Internal selective attention...\").\n- Candidate B: Unknown\n  Evidence: participants are not explicitly called 'healthy controls'.\n  Head-to-head: Healthy wins because the dataset is clearly a non-clinical cognitive study and lacks any pathology terms.\n  Alignment status: aligned with few-shot conventions.\n\n2) Modality\n- Candidate A: Visual\n  Evidence: task name \"ProAntiCue\" suggests cue-based attention paradigm; title’s \"endogenous and exogenous\" competition is most commonly implemented with visual cues/targets in selective attention EEG work.\n- Candidate B: Unknown\n  Evidence: no explicit statement of stimulus channel (no 'visual', 'auditory', etc.) in provided metadata fields.\n  Head-to-head: Visual narrowly wins based on paradigm inference from the task name and attention framing.\n  Alignment status: partially aligned (inference required).\n\n3) Type\n- Candidate A: Attention\n  Evidence: title explicitly: \"Internal selective attention\"; endogenous vs exogenous factors are classic attention-control constructs.\n- Candidate B: Perception\n  Evidence: could involve perceptual target processing, but the stated focus is attentional competition rather than sensory discrimination.\n  Head-to-head: Attention wins because the construct is explicitly attention-focused in the title.\n  Alignment status: aligned with few-shot conventions.\n\nConfidence justification:\n- Pathology confidence is moderate (limited explicit wording like 'healthy'), supported by: \"Subjects: 40\" + absence of any diagnosis terms + non-clinical attention title.\n- Modality confidence is lower because it is inferred from \"ProAntiCue\" and standard cueing paradigms without explicit modality text.\n- Type confidence is higher because \"selective attention\" is explicitly stated in the title."}},"total_duration_s":240.0,"tagger_meta":{"config_hash":"3557b68bca409f28","metadata_hash":"4fd13c89c9c0d235","model":"openai/gpt-5.2","tagged_at":"2026-04-07T09:32:40.872789+00:00"},"canonical_name":null,"name_confidence":0.66,"name_meta":{"suggested_at":"2026-04-14T10:18:35.343Z","model":"openai/gpt-5.2 + openai/gpt-5.4-mini + deterministic_fallback"},"name_source":"author_year","author_year":"Ester2023_Internal"}}