Excerpts

This effect of orientation was highly significant ( p < 0.001), but interacted with the effect of category ( p < 0.02), suggesting that the behavioral cost of mirror recognition was greater for words (41 ms) than for objects (25 ms).

Furthermore, all the factor loadings are highly significant ( p < 0.001), and both the coefficient alpha values (0.832–0.901) and the composite reliabilities (0.837–0.904) of all the constructs exceed the 0.70 benchmark.

MANCOVA revealed a highly significant group difference ( F 4/61 = 34.03; p < 0.001, η 2 = 0.69).

Students in the experimental group reported substantially lower levels of anxiety (M = 2.71) than those in the control group (M = 5.84), with a highly significant difference ( t = −17.91, p < 0.001).

For depression (PHQ-9), a highly significant Group × Time interaction was found, F (1, 118) = 270.52, p < 0.001, η 2 p = 0.696, 95% CI [0.625, 1.000], indicating that the Piano group showed a substantially greater reduction in depressive symptoms than the White Noise group.

Differential associations of support system profiles with resilience One-way ANOVA results indicated highly significant differences in total resilience and all dimension scores across the support system profiles ( p < 0.001), with effect sizes (η 2 ) ranging from 0.100 to 0.107, indicating moderate to large effects (see Table 6 ).

While age and gender were not statistically associated with Romanticism, race, education, and employment were all highly significant ( p < 0.001).

We crucially found that this interaction was negative and highly significant (β = 3.37, SE = 0.54, z = 6.21, p < 0.001).

At midline leads (Cz/FCz), the 2 face type × 2 group × 2 attachment × 3 lead repeated measures ANOVA solely revealed a highly significant main effect for lead, F (1, 33) = 12.12, p = 0.001, η p 2 = 0.27, with Nc amplitude responses being more negative at FCz ( M = −6.84, SE = 0.65) than Cz ( M = −5.33, SE = 0.68).

A paired samples Wilcoxon test (since the responses did not follow a normal distribution) shows a highly significant difference ( W = 30, 433, p < 0.001) between the two types of stimuli. 4.1.

A paired Wilcoxon Rank test demonstrated that this difference is highly significant (W = 40.5, p < 0.001). 5.2.1.

Overall, the regression model was highly significant [ F (1, 48) = 55.39, p < 0.001, R 2 = 0.53] and yielded a significant coefficient for trial (β = 0.02, t = 7.44, p < 0.001), which indicates that the difference across the two conditions increased logarithmically over time.

Sampling adequacy was excellent, as indicated by a global KMO value of KMO = 0.912, and Bartlett's test of sphericity was highly significant (χ 2 = 5, 486.73, df = 231, p < 0.001), confirming strong inter-item correlations and suitability for factor analysis.

As expected, a model including Activity ratings ( Table 2 , alternative model) did not yield a close fit between sampled data and the estimated model as shown by a highly significant chi-square ( p < 0.001) and CFI < 0.96.

That study yielded highly significant reductions in self-reported anxiety and stress ( p < 0.001), indicating that tapping alone can produce robust outcomes and highlighting the importance of further research into the mechanisms involved. 3.2.3.

Because these analyses were based on Bayesian estimates, we could not directly assess model fit, but we noted that all of the individual factor loadings were highly significant ( p < 0.001), suggesting that the items in each composite contributed to a single latent factor.

The main effect of Administration time (pre ToT; after ToT; end-of-break, after-the-break) on the VAS fatigue was highly significant ( F (3, 66) = 23.82, p < 0.001, η p 2 = 0.52).

The ANOVA yielded a highly significant result, F (2, 114) = 50.66, p < 0.001, indicating that the magnitude of change in authenticity perceptions varied substantially by source.

The hypotheses postulating direct effects of Ethical Leadership (EL) showed highly significant t-values: EL → EMI ( t = 15.746, p < 0.001, β = 0.587), EL → EC ( t = 12.021, p < 0.001, β = 0.546), EL → AC ( t = 6.398, p < 0.001, β = 0.339), EL → WH ( t = 7.378, p < 0.001, β = 0.362), and EL → WREP ( t = 4.770, p < 0.001, β = 0.291), confirming that Ethical Leadership (EL) constitutes a fundamental social resource that drives both motivational states and objective dimensions.

The interaction term was highly significant (Δ R 2 = 0.05, p < 0.001).

Interactions between musical parameters—local correlations of loudness–Y Although there are main effects of “training,” “loudness” and “tempo,” as well as two-way interactions between “loudness” and “training,” “tempo” and “training,” “pitch” and “tempo,” and “loudness” and “tempo,” the main focus here is on a highly significant interaction between “pitch” and “loudness” [ F (1.46,90.60) = 481.88, p < 0.001, partial η 2 = 0.89].

In line with our research hypotheses H1a and H1b, the analyses identified a significant increase for SER heuristic-participants supportive attitude toward CCU [ F (1, 99) = 5.492, p < 0.01; η p 2 = 0.05; M SER-pre = 3.79, SD SER-pre = 0.98; M SER-post = 3.90, SD SER-post = 0.95], as well as a highly significant increase of their acceptance of CCU [ F (1, 87) = 14.505, p < 0.001; η p 2 = 0.14; M SER-pre = 2.60, SD SER-pre = 1.30; M SER-post = 3.00, SD SER-post = 1.34] from pre- to post-measurement (see Table 3 for an overview). 3.3.

The interaction between cynicism and self-efficacy was highly significant ( β = −0.171, p < 0.001).

There was no significant effect when the target was a no-onset item, F < 1, but a highly significant effect when the target was an onset, F (4, 84) = 16.18, p < 0.001: RTs increased on average by 103 ms from one onset to six onsets.

3.3 Repeated measures ANCOVA on depression score In the analysis of depression, we observed a highly significant main effect of time [ F (1.139) = 23.44, p < 0.001], confirming a substantial decrease in depressive symptoms post-treatment.