{"success":true,"database":"eegdash","data":{"_id":"6953f4249276ef1ee07a347c","dataset_id":"ds007081","associated_paper_doi":null,"authors":["Yakup Yılmaz","Nursena Ataseven Özdemir","Wouter Kruijne","Elkan Akyürek","Eren Günseli"],"bids_version":"1.10.1","contact_info":["Yakup Yılmaz"],"contributing_labs":null,"data_processed":false,"dataset_doi":"doi:10.18112/openneuro.ds007081.v1.0.0","datatypes":["eeg"],"demographics":{"subjects_count":41,"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/ds007081","osf_url":null,"github_url":null,"paper_url":null},"funding":[],"ingestion_fingerprint":"dff177f9863c0eac4b767b59829951e30f238b887070c6c18e043b506ec237a5","license":"CC0","n_contributing_labs":null,"name":"Passive but accessible:  Studied information is not actively stored in working memory, yet attended regardless of anticipated load","readme":"Each trial began with a fixation dot presented for a jittered intertrial interval (ITI) between 600 and 1000 ms.\nThe first memory screen (1000 ms) showed two objects on one lateral side that participants were instructed to memorize (indicated by a wedge cue), and two objects on the opposite side to balance visual input.\nDepending on the block condition, the to-be-memorized objects on the first screen could be studied (learned in the learning phase) or novel/unstudied.\nAfter a 1400 ms interstimulus interval, a second memory screen (1000 ms) presented additional items vertically around fixation (one above and one below fixation); these items were always novel/unstudied and were placed near fixation to avoid influencing lateral EEG indices from the first screen.\nIn the extra-load expectation condition, additional second-screen items appeared on 80% of trials (and were omitted on 20% of trials), whereas in the low-load expectation condition this probability was reversed (20% appear, 80% omitted).\nAfter a 400 ms interstimulus interval, a probe from either the first or second memory screen was presented and participants reported the probed object's color by moving the mouse; the probe color updated continuously along an invisible color wheel whose orientation was randomly rotated on each trial.\nAfter the response, absolute angular error feedback was displayed for 400 ms; for studied objects, if the error exceeded 40°, the correct color was displayed for 1000 ms as corrective feedback.","recording_modality":["eeg"],"senior_author":"Eren Günseli","sessions":[],"size_bytes":12129532986,"source":"openneuro","study_design":null,"study_domain":null,"tasks":["PassiveAccessible"],"timestamps":{"digested_at":"2026-04-22T12:30:00.161874+00:00","dataset_created_at":"2025-12-14T15:48:28.314Z","dataset_modified_at":"2025-12-14T17:28:23.000Z"},"total_files":41,"storage":{"backend":"s3","base":"s3://openneuro.org/ds007081","raw_key":"dataset_description.json","dep_keys":["CHANGES","README","participants.tsv"]},"tagger_meta":{"config_hash":"4a051be509a0e3d0","metadata_hash":"bdf9bd752f1c31a7","model":"openai/gpt-5.2","tagged_at":"2026-01-20T19:17:09.497631+00:00"},"tags":{"pathology":["Healthy"],"modality":["Visual"],"type":["Memory"],"confidence":{"pathology":0.6,"modality":0.85,"type":0.8},"reasoning":{"few_shot_analysis":"Most similar few-shot example by cognitive aim is the digit span dataset (Healthy / Auditory / Memory). Labeling convention there: when the core manipulation is maintaining/recalling items across a short delay and responding to a probe, the Type is labeled \"Memory\" (even though there are also rest blocks and varying load). This dataset likewise uses sequential memory screens and a delayed probe response, so by convention it maps to Type=Memory. For Modality, several few-shot examples show that stimulus channel (not response) drives modality; here stimuli are visual objects and a fixation dot, so it matches the convention used in visual paradigms (e.g., motor imagery dataset is still labeled Visual due to on-screen targets). For Pathology, when no disorder-based recruitment is described, few-shot examples label as \"Healthy\" rather than \"Unknown\".","metadata_analysis":"Key task/paradigm facts from the provided README indicate a visual working-memory/probe task with learned vs novel items and load expectation manipulation. Quotes: (1) \"The first memory screen (1000 ms) showed two objects on one lateral side that participants were instructed to memorize\". (2) \"After a 1400 ms interstimulus interval, a second memory screen (1000 ms) presented additional items\". (3) \"a probe from either the first or second memory screen was presented and participants reported the probed object's color\". (4) Learning component is present but appears subordinate to the WM probe paradigm: \"Depending on the block condition, the to-be-memorized objects on the first screen could be studied (learned in the learning phase) or novel/unstudied.\" No participant clinical/demographic recruitment information is provided in the snippet (no diagnosis terms, no patient/control groups).","paper_abstract_analysis":"No useful paper information.","evidence_alignment_check":"Pathology: Metadata says nothing about a clinical population (no diagnosis/recruitment terms; only task description such as \"participants were instructed to memorize\"). Few-shot pattern suggests labeling such non-clinical cognitive task datasets as \"Healthy\" rather than \"Unknown\" when no disorder recruitment is indicated. ALIGN (no conflict).\nModality: Metadata explicitly describes visual stimuli: \"fixation dot\", \"two objects\", \"memory screen\". Few-shot pattern suggests Modality is based on stimulus channel; object/fixation screen paradigms are labeled \"Visual\". ALIGN.\nType: Metadata describes a delayed-probe memory paradigm: \"instructed to memorize\", later \"a probe ... participants reported\"; also mentions a learning phase (\"studied (learned in the learning phase)\") and expectation manipulation, but the core construct is maintaining and reporting item features. Few-shot pattern suggests probe-based short-term retention tasks map to \"Memory\" (e.g., digit span labeled Memory). ALIGN (learning is present but not dominant).","decision_summary":"Top-2 candidates — Pathology: (A) Healthy: supported by absence of any diagnosis/recruitment language and generic \"participants\" phrasing; consistent with few-shot convention that standard cognitive tasks without clinical recruitment are Healthy. (B) Unknown: possible because participant health status is not explicitly stated. Winner: Healthy. Confidence is moderate because there is no explicit \"healthy\" statement.\nTop-2 candidates — Modality: (A) Visual: supported by \"fixation dot\", \"memory screen ... showed two objects\", and probe display; clearly visual stimulus presentation. (B) Other: if stimuli were unspecified, but they are specified as visual. Winner: Visual.\nTop-2 candidates — Type: (A) Memory: supported by \"instructed to memorize\" and delayed probe report of object color; consistent with few-shot Memory labeling for retention/probe paradigms. (B) Learning: because of \"studied (learned in the learning phase)\" and corrective feedback for studied objects, but this appears as a manipulation within a WM task rather than the primary purpose. Winner: Memory."}},"computed_title":"Passive but accessible:  Studied information is not actively stored in working memory, yet attended regardless of anticipated load","nchans_counts":[{"val":32,"count":41}],"sfreq_counts":[{"val":1000.0,"count":41}],"stats_computed_at":"2026-04-22T23:16:00.312252+00:00","total_duration_s":94748.8,"author_year":"Ylmaz2025","canonical_name":null}}