# Title of Dataset: Modulation of posterior default mode network activity during interoceptive attention and relation to mindfulness Brief summary of dataset contents, contextualized in experimental procedures and results. ## Description of the Data and file structure The xlsx file contains the study data as per its six reported results sections. The ten spreadsheets correspond to data presented in the eight figurers: (1) Demographics, (2) Fig 2A, (3) Fig 2BD, (4) Fig 2C, (5) Fig 3, (6) Fig 4, (7) Fig 5, (8) Fig 6, (9) Fig 7, (10), Fig 8 Spreadsheet (1) - Demographics SubjectIndex: Subject Study ID age bin: Subject age bin in years, bin 1 (age<18), 2 (age 18-29), 3 (age 30-39), 4 (age 40-49), 5 (age 50-59), 6 (age 60-69), 7 (age 70-79), 8 (age 80-89), 9 (age >90) gender: Subject Gender, 1: male, 2: female ethnicity: Subject ethnicity, 1: Caucasian; 2: Black/African American; 3: Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander; 4: Asian; 5: Native American; 6: More than one ethnicity; 7: Other sesscore: socio-economic score per the family affluence scale, range 0-9; 0-2 low, 3-5: middle, 6-9 high Median_BT: median breathing response time for monitoring every two breath cycles MAD_BT: median absolute deviation of response time for monitoring every two breath cycles Consistency: Consistency of response time for monitoring every two breath cycles Mindfulness: self-report on Mindful Attention Awareness Scale (MAAS) Depression: self-report on PHQ9 depression scale global_efficiency: efficiency averaged across the four exteroceptive cognitive tasks gw_efficiency_go: efficiency of the "Go Wait" inhibitory control task mf_efficiency: efficiency of the "Middle Fish" interference processing task ls_span_efficiency: span weighted efficiency of the "Lost Star" working memory task\ fo_efficiency: efficiency of the "Face Off" emotion bias task Nhigh: number of high consistency trials Nlow: number of low consistency trials Ntotal: total number of trials % high: % high consistency trials %low: % low consistency trials Spreadsheet (2) - Fig 2A Freq: frequency index Mean: mean scalp power SEM: standard error on the mean of scalp power Spreadsheet (3) - Fig 2BD high Cons: source localized alpha activity for 68 rois during high consistency trials low Cons: source localized alpha activity for 68 rois during low consistency trials diff: source localized alpha activity for low minus high consistency trials rest: source localized alpha activity for resting state data Spreadsheet (4) - Fig 2C lowrr_alpha: Correlation between low consistency trial alpha activity and Rest alpha activity in all ROIs highrr_alpha: Correlation between high consistency trial alpha activity and Rest alpha activity in all ROIs highlowr_alpha: Correlation between high consistency trial alpha activity and low consistency alpha activity in all ROIs Spreadsheet (5) - Fig 3 lowCons: Low Consistency Trial Network Activity shown for 5 brain networks: FPN, CON, aDMN, pDMN, mtDMN highCons: High Consistency Trial Network Activity shown for 5 brain networks: FPN, CON, aDMN, pDMN, mtDMN df: Low minus High Trial Network Activity shown for 5 brain networks: FPN, CON, aDMN, pDMN, mtDMN r: Resting State Network Activity shown for 5 brain networks: FPN, CON, aDMN, pDMN, mtDMN naming format is "Network"_"trial type" Spreadsheet(6) - Fig 4 Dunn Clark test FDR corrected P value for network correlation between FPN vs pDMN and CON vs pDMN for high consistency vs rest and low consistency vs rest pDMN_FPN lowCons connectivity - Network activity between pDMN and FPN during low consistency trials for each participant pDMN_CON lowCons connectivity - Network activity between pDMN and CON during low consistency trials for each participant Spreadsheet (7) - Fig 5 Low Cons: Left Precuneus Activity on low consistency trials High Cons: Left Precuneus Activity on high consistency trials Diff Cons: Left Precuneus Activity on low minus high consistency trials age: participant age group: Mindfulness group defined by median split dep: self-report on PHQ9 depression scale Spreadsheet (8) - Fig 6 Interoceptive Consistency L1: Consistency at L1 of adaptive interoceptive attention task Interoceptive Consistency L2+: Consistency at higher levels (L2+) of adaptive interoceptive attention task Response Time L1: Response Time at L1 of adaptive interoceptive attention task Interoceptive Consistency L2+: Response Time at higher levels (L2+) of adaptive interoceptive attention task L1 Alpha Activity on Low Consistency Trials: Alpha activity parsed in pDMN on L1 Low Consistency Trials L1 Alpha Activity on High Consistency Trials: Alpha activity parsed in pDMN on L1 High Consistency Trials L2+ Alpha Activity on Low Consistency Trials: Alpha activity parsed in pDMN on L2+ Low Consistency Trials L2+ Alpha Activity on High Consistency Trials: Alpha activity parsed in pDMN on L2+ High Consistency Trials Spreadsheet (9) - Fig 7 highCI: average inspiration breath time for high consistency trials highCE: average expiration breath time for high consistency trials highCCycle: average breath cycle for high consistency trials lowCI: average inspiration breath time for low consistency trials lowCE: average expiration breath time for low consistency trials lowCCycle: average breath cycle for low consistency trials consistency: Consistency of response time for monitoring every two breath cycles pDMN low: pDMN network activity during low consistency trials pDMN high: pDMN network activity during high consistency trials pDMN diff: pDMN network activity during low minus high consistency trials groups: groups defined by breath cycle during low consistency trials lowPhase: Average breath phase of button press during low consistency trials fastPhase: Average breath phase of button press during high consistency trials Spreadsheet (10) - Fig 8 Correlation values between source localized alpha activity using 22 channels vs 63 channels across all 68 rois ## Sharing/access Information Links to other publicly accessible locations of the data: N/A Was data derived from another source? No

Background: Interoceptive attention to internal sensory signals, such as the breath, is fundamental to mindfulness. However, interoceptive attention can be difficult to study and the vast majority of investigations of the neural correlates of mindfulness-based attention rely on subjective and retrospective measures. Response consistency is an established method for evaluating variability of attention on exteroceptive attention tasks but has rarely been applied to interoceptive attention task. Methods: In this study, we measured consistency of response times on a breath-monitoring task in individuals across the lifespan (15-91 years of age, n=324) with simultaneous electroencephalography (EEG). Results: We found that consistency on this breath monitoring task was positively correlated with attentive performance on an exteroceptive inhibitory control task. EEG source reconstruction showed that on-task alpha band (8-12 Hz) activity was greater than that measured at rest. Low consistency/longer breath responses were associated with elevated brain activity relative to high consistency responses particularly in posterior default mode network (pDMN) brain regions. pDMN activity was inversely linked with functional connectivity to the fronto-parietal network (FPN) and the cinguloopercular network (CON) on task but not at rest, suggesting a role for these frontal networks in on-task regulation of pDMN activity. pDMN activity was greater in subjects reporting low subjective mindfulness, and was adaptively modulated by task difficulty in an independent experiment. Conclusions: Elevated pDMN alpha activity serves as an objective neural marker for low consistency responding during interoceptive breath attention, scales with task difficulty and is associated with low subjective mindfulness.