{"success":true,"database":"eegdash","data":{"_id":"6953f4249276ef1ee07a340a","dataset_id":"ds005642","associated_paper_doi":"10.31234/osf.io/vrtbx_v1","authors":["Amanda K Robinson","Greta Stuart","Sophia M Shatek","Adrian Herbert","Jessica Taubert"],"bids_version":"1.0.0","contact_info":null,"contributing_labs":null,"data_processed":true,"dataset_doi":"doi:10.18112/openneuro.ds005642.v1.0.1","datatypes":["eeg"],"demographics":{"subjects_count":21,"ages":[23,22,22,21,22,18,22,24,26,22,22,24,20,24,25,24,27,24,20,21,30],"age_min":18,"age_max":30,"age_mean":23.0,"species":null,"sex_distribution":{"f":17,"m":4},"handedness_distribution":null},"experimental_modalities":null,"external_links":{"paper_url":"https://doi.org/10.31234/osf.io/vrtbx_v1"},"funding":["Australian Research Council Discovery Early Career Researcher Award DE200101159 (AKR)","Australian Research Council Future Fellowship FT200100843 (JT)"],"ingestion_fingerprint":"20684902bbcfa633cbdd4d9b80a1d5594396e3f9ed441d27c1481470841d8e8b","license":"CC0","n_contributing_labs":null,"name":"illusory-face-eeg","readme":"EEG data for:\nRobinson AK, Stuart G, Shatek SM, Herbert A, Taubert J. (2025). Neural correlates reveal separate stages of spontaneous face perception.\nPreprint: https://doi.org/10.31234/osf.io/vrtbx_v1\n300 images of human face, illusory face and matched non-face object stimuli. Three behavioural tasks and neural measurements (EEG) using these stimuli.\n- Spontaneous dissimilarity: triplet odd-one-out task\n- Face-like ratings: participants were asked to rate how easily they could see a face in the image, on a scale of 0-10.\n- Face/object discrimination: speeded categorisation task\n- EEG: Stimuli were presented centrally at 3.75 Hz, while participants performed an orthogonal target detection task\nStimuli, behavioural data and code available at GitHub: https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.15833508","recording_modality":["eeg"],"senior_author":null,"sessions":[],"size_bytes":34407164201,"source":"openneuro","study_design":null,"study_domain":null,"tasks":["faceobj"],"timestamps":{"digested_at":"2026-05-31T16:21:23.715384+00:00","dataset_created_at":null,"dataset_modified_at":null},"total_files":21,"storage":{"backend":"s3","base":"s3://openneuro.org/ds005642","raw_key":"dataset_description.json","dep_keys":["CHANGES","README","participants.tsv","task-faceobj_eeg.json","task-faceobj_events.json"]},"tagger_meta":{"config_hash":"4a051be509a0e3d0","metadata_hash":"516b85a6191e6e22","model":"openai/gpt-5.2","tagged_at":"2026-01-20T18:33:22.912612+00:00"},"tags":{"pathology":["Healthy"],"modality":["Visual"],"type":["Perception"],"confidence":{"pathology":0.6,"modality":0.85,"type":0.85},"reasoning":{"few_shot_analysis":"Closest few-shot convention match is the visual discrimination dataset (\"Meta-rdk: Preprocessed EEG data\"), labeled Modality=Visual and Type=Perception based on explicit \"visual discrimination task\" with picture-like stimuli and perceptual judgments. This dataset similarly centers on visual stimulus categories (faces/illusory faces/non-face objects) and face perception judgments, so by the same convention it maps to Visual + Perception. For Pathology, multiple few-shots show that when no clinical recruitment is stated, labeling defaults to Healthy (e.g., \"EEG: Three armed bandit gambling task\" explicitly says healthy controls; here it is unstated, so we follow the common convention but with lower confidence).","metadata_analysis":"Key stimulus/task facts from the README: (1) \"300 images of human face, illusory face and matched non-face object stimuli.\" (visual images) (2) \"Face-like ratings: participants were asked to rate how easily they could see a face in the image\" (face percept) (3) \"Face/object discrimination: speeded categorisation task\" (perceptual categorization) (4) \"EEG: Stimuli were presented centrally at 3.75 Hz\" (visual presentation) and \"participants performed an orthogonal target detection task\" (attention/oddball-like secondary task, but not the primary construct described in the title/README). No participant diagnosis/clinical recruitment information is provided in the supplied metadata.","paper_abstract_analysis":"No useful paper information (only a preprint link is provided; no abstract text included here).","evidence_alignment_check":"Pathology: Metadata SAYS nothing about a clinical population (no diagnosis terms; only task/stimulus description). Few-shot pattern SUGGESTS labeling as Healthy when no clinical recruitment is indicated. ALIGN (no conflict), but weakly evidenced.\nModality: Metadata SAYS \"300 images of human face...\" and \"Stimuli were presented centrally\" indicating visual presentation. Few-shot pattern SUGGESTS Visual for image-based tasks. ALIGN.\nType: Metadata SAYS \"spontaneous face perception\", \"Face-like ratings\", and \"Face/object discrimination\"—all point to perceptual processing of visual categories. Few-shot pattern SUGGESTS Perception for sensory discrimination/recognition tasks with visual stimuli. ALIGN; the orthogonal target detection component could suggest Attention as a runner-up, but it appears secondary to the face-perception aims.","decision_summary":"Top-2 candidates per category:\n- Pathology: (1) Healthy (winner) vs (2) Unknown (runner-up). Evidence: no diagnosis/recruitment details given (supports Unknown), but typical non-clinical perception experiments plus no clinical terms (supports Healthy by convention). Alignment: aligned with few-shot convention; limited direct evidence. Final: Healthy.\n- Modality: (1) Visual (winner) vs (2) Multisensory (runner-up). Evidence for Visual: \"300 images...\", \"Stimuli were presented centrally at 3.75 Hz\". No evidence for additional sensory channels. Final: Visual.\n- Type: (1) Perception (winner) vs (2) Attention (runner-up). Evidence for Perception: \"spontaneous face perception\", \"Face-like ratings... see a face\", \"Face/object discrimination\". Evidence for Attention: \"orthogonal target detection task\" but appears auxiliary. Final: Perception.\nConfidence justification: Modality has 2+ direct quotes strongly supporting Visual; Type has 3 direct quotes supporting perceptual focus; Pathology lacks explicit participant descriptors, so confidence is lower."}},"computed_title":"illusory-face-eeg","nchans_counts":[{"val":68,"count":21}],"sfreq_counts":[{"val":1024.0,"count":21}],"stats_computed_at":"2026-05-31T19:34:32.601679+00:00","total_duration_s":66064.0,"author_year":"Robinson2024_illusory","canonical_name":null,"bad_channels_info":null,"acknowledgements":"This work was funded by an Australian Research Council Discovery Early Career Researcher Award DE200101159 (AKR) and Australian Research Council Future Fellowship FT200100843 (JT). The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish or preparation of the manuscript.","how_to_acknowledge":"Robinson AK, Stuart G, Shatek SM, Herbert A, Taubert J. (2025). Neural correlates reveal separate stages of spontaneous face perception. ","associated_paper_meta":{"channel":"text/readme","confidence":"high","author_overlap":5,"is_oa":true,"oa_status":"preprint","source":"paper_resolver"}}}