In the proofreading block, every sentence was followed by a question asking, “Was there a spelling error?” After subjects finished proofreading each sentence they had to answer “yes” or “no” with the triggers. The experimental session lasted for approximately forty-five minutes to one hour. Data

were analyzed using inferential statistics based on generalized linear mixed-effects models (LMMs). In the LMMs, task (reading vs. proofreading), target type (predictability item vs. frequency item, where applicable), and independent variable value (high vs. low, where applicable, or filler (error-free in the reading block) vs. error (in the proofreading block), where applicable) were centered and entered as fixed effects, and subjects and items were entered as crossed random effects, including intercepts and slopes (see Baayen, Davidson, Selleckchem Alectinib BMS-777607 clinical trial & Bates, 2008), using the maximal random effects structure (Barr, Levy, Scheepers, & Tily, 2013). For models that did not converge before reaching the iteration limit, we removed random effects that accounted for the least variance and did not significantly improve the model’s fit to the data iteratively until the model did converge.3 In order to fit the LMMs, the lmer function from the lme4 package (Bates, Maechler, & Bolker, 2011) was used within the R Environment for Statistical Computing (R Development Core Team, 2009). For

fixation duration measures, we used linear mixed-effects regression, and report regression coefficients (b), which estimate the effect size (in milliseconds) of the reported comparison, and the t-value of the effect coefficient. For binary dependent variables (accuracy and fixation probability data), we use

logistic mixed-effects regression, and report regression coefficients (b), which represent effect size in log-odds space and the z value of the effect coefficient. Values of the t and z statistics greater than or equal Dapagliflozin to 1.96 indicate an effect that is significant at approximately the .05 level. Mean accuracy and error detection ability for proofreading are reported in Table 3. Overall, subjects performed very well both in the comprehension task (94% correct) and in the proofreading task (95% correct). Fixations shorter than 80 ms were combined with a previous or subsequent fixation if they were within one character of each other or were eliminated. Trials in which there was a blink or track loss during first pass reading on the target word or during an immediately adjacent fixation were removed (1% of the original number of trials). For each fixation duration measure, durations greater than 2.5 standard deviations from the subject’s mean (calculated separately across tasks) were also removed (less than 2% of the data from any measure were removed by this procedure). The remaining data were evenly distributed across conditions.