A multilab investigation into the N2pc as an indicator of attentional selectivity: Direct replication of Eimer (1996)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The N2pc is widely employed as an electrophysiological marker of an attention allocation. This interpretation was largely driven by the observation of an N2pc elicited by an isolated relevant target object, which was reported as Experiment 2 in Eimer (1996). All subsequent refined interpretations of the N2pc had to take this crucial finding into account. Despite its central role for neurocognitive attention research, there have been no direct replications and only few conceptual replications of this seminal work. Within the context of #EEGManyLabs, an international community-driven effort to replicate the most influential EEG studies ever published, the present study was selected due to its strong impact on the study of selective attention. We revisit the idea of the N2pc being an indicator of attentional selectivity by delivering a high powered direct replication of Eimer's work through analysis of 779 datasets acquired from 22 labs across 14 countries. Our results robustly replicate the N2pc to form stimuli, but a direct replication of the N2pc to color stimuli technically failed. We believe that this pattern not only sheds further light on the functional significance of the N2pc as an electrophysiological marker of attentional selectivity, but also highlights a methodological problem with selecting analysis windows a priori. By contrast, the consistency of observed ERP patterns across labs and analysis pipelines is stunning, and this consistency is preserved even in datasets that were rejected for (ocular) artifacts, attesting to the robustness of the ERP technique and the feasibility of large-scale multilab EEG (replication) studies.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Direct model labels (unvalidated)
Per-model category and study-design labels from the labeling rounds. They are machine output, unvalidated, and the disagreement between models ships as data. No study design here is MEDLINE-validated yet.
| Model arm | Categories | Study design | Confidence |
|---|---|---|---|
| gemma | no category Domain: not available · Genre: Empirical About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no | Bench or experimental | low |
| gpt | Metaresearch Domain: Reproducibility · Genre: Empirical About the Canadian research system: no · About a Canadian topic: no | Other design | high |
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.018 | 0.061 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedLabeled directly by 2 models reading the full record.
The models disagree on parts of this classification; every voice is preserved in the section at the end of the page.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".