Table 8. LMM Analyses on the Target Word When Change Detection Task Was Included as a Variable.

	SP			FFD			GD			Go-past			TFD
Factor	b	SE	z	b	SE	t	b	SE	t	b	SE	t	b	SE	t
Note. Significant terms are marked in bold, and marginally significant items are underlined. b = regression coefficient.
(Intercept)	.04	.09	.46	5.53	.02	359	5.58	.02	317	5.76	.03	228	5.71	.02	234
Preview
Syntactically infelicitous alternative versus identical	−.15	.06	−2.68	.09	.02	4.86	.12	.02	5.76	.16	.03	6.18	.10	.02	4.20
Pseudocharacter versus syntactically infelicitous alternative	−.23	.06	−3.95	.01	.01	.90	.03	.02	1.78	.02	.02	.90	.03	.02	1.90
Frequency: High versus low	−.04	.05	−.78	.01	.01	1.08	.02	.01	1.61	.04	.01	2.69	.03	.02	2.17
Task	.01	.17	.03	.05	.03	1.83	.06	.03	1.79	.09	.05	1.81	.13	.05	2.75
Interactions
Syntactically Infelicitous Alternative Versus Identical × Frequency	.53	.11	4.68	−.09	.03	−3.12	−.10	.03	−2.86	−.14	.04	−3.88	−.03	.03	−.88
Pseudocharacter Versus Syntactically Infelicitous Alternative × Frequency	−.10	.11	−.86	.04	.03	1.26	.04	.03	1.14	.08	.04	2.15	.01	.03	.36
Syntactically Infelicitous Alternative Versus Identical × Task	−.05	.11	−.44	.04	.03	1.16	.05	.04	1.33	.03	.05	.61	.07	.05	1.50
Pseudocharacter Versus Syntactically Infelicitous Alternative × Task	.03	.11	.31	.03	.03	1.17	.02	.03	.51	.03	.04	.59	−.01	.03	−.29
Frequency × Task	.30	.09	3.27	−.00	.02	−.01	−.00	.02	−.07	−.02	.03	−.70	−.03	.03	−1.16
Syntactically Infelicitous Alternative Versus Identical × Frequency × Task	−.33	.23	−1.47	−.03	.06	−.47	−.03	.07	−.47	.01	.07	.11	−.04	.07	−.62
Pseudocharacter Versus Syntactically Infelicitous Alternative × Frequency × Task	−.04	.23	−.19	−.00	.06	−.01	−.01	.06	−.15	−.03	.07	−.35	−.06	.06	−.90