Excerpts

However, neuroticism is clearly a mixture of both anxiety and fear, demonstrating highly significant correlations with fear (RST-FFFS) as well as with anxiety (RST-BIS) in the present sample ( r = 0.438 and r = 0.479, respectively).

In this case, there is no expectation that a new solution will be conceived or discovered in a limited time frame, but if it were to be found, the value would be extremely significant.

Although this interaction was only marginally significant, this is likely due to the consideration of such a wide age range, with most age groups showing a clear lack of difference in response to instruction condition.

Focusing on the quality of the options, there was neither a significant difference in the quality of the first choice between the groups, F (3, 69) = 0.74, p = 0.53, f = 0.18, 1−β = 0.21, nor in the quality of the final choice between the groups, F (3, 69) = 2.25, p = 0.09, f = 0.31, 1−β = 0.57, although in this latter case, the effect size was of moderate strength and the alpha value was approaching significance.

No other effects approached significance (all p s > 0.20).

The interaction with the influence of the expectation condition only approached significance.

Neither the main Root Frequency effect nor the interactions with Grade approached significance.

E/M and S , on the other hand, have marginally significant responses, but are not significantly different from each other.

Instead, we actually found a positive indirect association of COVID-19 threat levels and ingroup as well as outgroup warmth/competence rating via BIS with the latter indirect association being only marginally significant.

Second, even though associations between stimuli and DO are by definition non-existing at SRep1, we observed a highly significant response slowing for DO trials relative to CO trials at SRep1.

Footnotes 1 When using SRep 1 as reference for online R-E learning progress (SRep1 – SRep2, Srep1 – SRep3, etc...), there was an overall trend for negative correlations with the RE compatibility effect but none of them reached significance (neither for RTs nor for errors). 2 This holds under the assumption that factor Y and factor X impact RT along different timelines – otherwise factor X impact on performance slope should have a similar

The IAT revealed a more positive attitude of two samples of university students toward younger than older workers although no such attitude difference was apparent in averaged semantic differential scores as an explicit measure.

Results showed that z 3 and z 2 were approaching significance; thus, z 3 was excluded from the model.

While participants responded most rapidly following exposure to neutral cue words and most slowly following negative cue words, no difference in latency approached significance (negative versus neutral cue words: t (19) = 1.36, p corrected = 0.57; negative versus positive cue words: t (19) = 0.60, p corrected = 0.91; positive versus neutral cue words: t (19) = 1.28, p corrected = 0.65).

The multivariate ANOVA (MANOVA) results showed a marginally significant effect for the interaction between closeness in drawing and drawing with a friend/non-friend – on IFS.

This experiment showed that the overestimation of contingency was stronger in the scrambled condition than it was in the organized condition, although the results were only marginally significant.

However, given that the statistical result was approaching significance, the non-significant decrease in self-reported enjoyment over repetition should be taken with caution.

No other coping subscales approached significance in predicting activity level.

Although the result of the Sobel test was only marginally significant (see Figure 3 ), the fact that zero fell outside the confidence interval (−12.89 to −1.30; see Table 4 ) indicated a significant mediation effect (Preacher and Hayes, 2008 ).

Therefore, marginally significant differences between groups might be due to a floor effect.

This difference was highly significant with a strong effect size.

The positive low group had the smallest CVE, an effect that was significant in the error data and just at the threshold of significance in the RT data.

None of these interactions were approaching significance.

However, the p -value of being female bordered on a statistically significant value in the Colombian sample.

When controlling for the other variables in the multiple regression models, these differences were statistically significant for the Chilean sample and bordered on significance in the Colombian sample.