{"success":true,"database":"eegdash","data":{"_id":"69a33a3b897a7725c66f3ee2","dataset_id":"ds007052","associated_paper_doi":null,"authors":["Couperus, J.W.","Bukach, C.M.","Reed, C.L."],"bids_version":"1.8.0","contact_info":["Jane Couperus"],"contributing_labs":null,"data_processed":false,"dataset_doi":"doi:10.18112/openneuro.ds007052.v1.1.2","datatypes":["eeg"],"demographics":{"subjects_count":288,"ages":[22,19,19,20,18,19,18,20,18,19,19,19,19,19,18,18,18,19,21,18,18,19,19,19,20,18,18,19,18,21,19,22,19,20,18,20,18,20,20,19,19,19,18,21,20,19,19,18,19,19,18,20,21,22,18,18,23,19,19,18,18,21,18,20,18,18,18,18,18,18,20,19,18,18,18,19,18,18,18,19,19,19,20,19,22,18,21,18,18,19,18,19,19,30,18,21,20,18,19,18,20,22,20,18,18,18,18,19,18,18,18,19,22,21,19,20,19,21,18,21,19,19,24,21,18,20,20,20,19,20,20,21,22,19,22,22,19,22,18,18,19,20,19,21,20,19,20,19,19,21,19,26,19,22,33,20,20,21,19,19,18,19,20,19,18,18,21,19,21,21,18,22,19,24,21,21,19,18,18,19,20,20,19,22,19,22,21,21,21,21,20,19,23,20,21,20,23,21,19,19,20,21,21,19,19,21,19,18,20,21,19,18,19,19,19,18,20,20,19,18,19,22,19,19,20,19,21,21,19,20,18,18,19,19,18,21,21,21,18,18,21,18,18,19,21,21,18,20,19,20,19,19,20,21,18,20,19,20,20,19,20,20,18,21,21,20,19,19,21,19,21,21,18,21,20,23,19,23,21,21,19,19,19,18,18,22,20],"age_min":18,"age_max":33,"age_mean":19.62369337979094,"species":null,"sex_distribution":{"o":287},"handedness_distribution":null},"experimental_modalities":null,"external_links":{"source_url":"https://openneuro.org/datasets/ds007052","osf_url":null,"github_url":null,"paper_url":null},"funding":[],"ingestion_fingerprint":"addc8a1886a2205a571bc794c12e9cce929e83baaf100b2d7cc6fb3d6152c263","license":"CC0","n_contributing_labs":null,"name":"PURSUE N400 Word Processing","readme":"# README\nWord Processing Task from the PURSUE project (pursureerp.com). Data collected from participants at 3 different primarily undergraduate academic institutions (Southern California, Massachusetts, and Virginia) in 2017 and 2018. The task design can be found in the publication by Kappenman et al.(2021). ERP CORE: An open resource for human event-related potential research. NeuroImage, 225, 117465. Details of task are found in the supplementary materials.\nRace Key:\n    \"Levels\": {\n      \"x1\": \"White\",\n      \"x2\": \"Black/African American\",\n      \"x3\": \"Native American\",\n      \"x4\": \"Asian\",\n      \"x5\": \"Pacific Islander\",\n      \"x6\": \"Hispanic/Latino\",\n      \"x7\": \"Other\",\n      \"x8\": \"Prefer not to respond\",\n      \"x9\": \"Chose more than one response\",\n      \"\" :  \"empty\"\n      }","recording_modality":["eeg"],"senior_author":"Reed, C.L.","sessions":[],"size_bytes":9636979355,"source":"openneuro","storage":{"backend":"s3","base":"s3://openneuro.org/ds007052","raw_key":"dataset_description.json","dep_keys":["CHANGES","README","datacite.yml","participants.json","participants.tsv","task-WordPR_events.json"]},"study_design":null,"study_domain":null,"tasks":["WordPR"],"timestamps":{"digested_at":"2026-04-22T12:29:57.664976+00:00","dataset_created_at":"2025-12-09T19:45:31.456Z","dataset_modified_at":"2025-12-11T14:54:34.000Z"},"total_files":288,"computed_title":"PURSUE N400 Word Processing","nchans_counts":[{"val":32,"count":288}],"sfreq_counts":[{"val":500.0,"count":288}],"stats_computed_at":"2026-04-22T23:16:00.312490+00:00","total_duration_s":144034.888,"tagger_meta":{"config_hash":"3557b68bca409f28","metadata_hash":"1b2a5993cba1ec25","model":"openai/gpt-5.2","tagged_at":"2026-04-07T09:32:40.872789+00:00"},"tags":{"pathology":["Healthy"],"modality":["Visual"],"type":["Memory"],"confidence":{"pathology":0.8,"modality":0.6,"type":0.6},"reasoning":{"few_shot_analysis":"No few-shot example is exactly an N400 word-processing paradigm, but conventions are clear in several similar healthy cognitive ERP datasets. For instance, the healthy digit-span example maps an explicit cognitive construct (working memory load) to Type=Memory, and uses the stimulus channel (auditory digits) for Modality. The meta-rdk example shows that visual screen-based cognitive tasks are labeled Modality=Visual and Type based on the construct (e.g., Perception/Decision-related). Applying these conventions here: word/N400 paradigms are typically visually presented linguistic stimuli and primarily probe semantic/lexical processing (closest available Type: Memory or Other).","metadata_analysis":"Key metadata facts:\n1) Population/source: \"Data collected from participants at 3 different primarily undergraduate academic institutions ...\" (suggests typical undergraduate/non-clinical recruitment).\n2) Task identity: \"Word Processing Task from the PURSUE project\" and dataset title \"PURSUE N400 Word Processing\" (explicitly an N400 ERP word-processing paradigm).\n3) Age range: \"Age range: 18-33\" and \"Subjects: 288\" (large young adult sample; no clinical groups/diagnoses mentioned).","paper_abstract_analysis":"No useful paper information (only a pointer to Kappenman et al., 2021 / ERP CORE, without an abstract included in the provided metadata).","evidence_alignment_check":"Pathology:\n- Metadata says: \"primarily undergraduate academic institutions\" and only an \"Age range: 18-33\" with no diagnoses/groups listed.\n- Few-shot pattern suggests: similar non-clinical undergraduate datasets are labeled Healthy.\n- Alignment: ALIGN.\n\nModality:\n- Metadata says: \"Word Processing Task\" / \"N400 Word Processing\" but does not explicitly state whether words are presented visually or auditorily.\n- Few-shot pattern suggests: stimulus modality should follow presented stimuli; word-processing/N400 in ERP CORE is commonly visual word presentation.\n- Alignment: PARTIAL (metadata underspecified; modality inferred from paradigm convention).\n\nType:\n- Metadata says: \"N400\" and \"Word Processing\" (semantic/lexical processing), but does not explicitly name a construct label from the allowed list.\n- Few-shot pattern suggests: map the primary construct (e.g., working memory -> Memory; perceptual discrimination -> Perception). N400 semantic processing fits best under Memory (semantic memory/lexical access) vs Other.\n- Alignment: PARTIAL (construct inferred; not explicitly stated).","decision_summary":"Top-2 comparative selection:\n\n1) Pathology\n- Candidate A: Healthy\n  Evidence: \"participants at ... primarily undergraduate academic institutions\"; \"Age range: 18-33\"; no mention of any diagnosis/patient group.\n- Candidate B: Unknown\n  Evidence: no explicit statement like \"healthy controls\".\n- Head-to-head: Healthy wins because recruitment context and absence of clinical descriptors strongly indicate a normative cohort.\n- Alignment status: Aligns with few-shot conventions for non-clinical samples.\n\n2) Modality\n- Candidate A: Visual\n  Evidence: task is \"N400 Word Processing\" (typical ERP CORE N400 paradigm uses visually presented words/sentences); word processing commonly screen-based in ERP datasets.\n- Candidate B: Auditory\n  Evidence: N400 can be elicited by spoken words, but no metadata indicates audio presentation.\n- Head-to-head: Visual slightly stronger given common implementation and lack of any auditory keywords.\n- Alignment status: Partial; inferred due to missing explicit stimulus description.\n\n3) Type\n- Candidate A: Memory\n  Evidence: N400 indexes semantic/lexical processing tied to semantic memory; task described as \"Word Processing\" rather than pure sensory discrimination.\n- Candidate B: Other\n  Evidence: the allowed Type list lacks an explicit \"Language\" category; metadata does not explicitly state memory/semantic memory.\n- Head-to-head: Memory is a better fit than Other because N400 word processing primarily targets semantic memory/lexical access.\n- Alignment status: Partial; construct inferred from N400 paradigm name.\n\nConfidence justification:\n- Pathology=0.8: supported by 2+ explicit metadata quotes (undergraduate institutions; age range/large sample) plus clear few-shot convention for non-clinical cohorts.\n- Modality=0.6: no direct quote specifying visual vs auditory presentation; inference from standard N400 paradigm.\n- Type=0.6: N400/word-processing implies semantic memory but not explicitly labeled in metadata; Memory vs Other remains plausible."}},"canonical_name":null,"name_confidence":0.86,"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":"Couperus2025_N400"}}