Bartlett’s test of sphericity was highly significant ( χ 2 = 3876.42, df = 153, p < 0.001), confirming that the correlation matrix was appropriate for factor analysis.
Excerpts
Chi-square analyses between group and suggestion within each social influence condition revealed a highly significant effect (χ 2 = 12.0, df = 1, p = 0.001), in the no social influence condition (thus replicating Wiseman and Greening, 2005 ) with 10 participants (33.3%) reporting that the key continued to bend if given the verbal suggestion compared to none in the no-suggestion condition.
The regression models testing Condition and Block revealed a highly significant main effect of Block ( b = 0.39, z = 4.67, p < 0.001).
There was a highly significant interaction between modality and lexical class, χ 1 2 = 43.97, p < 0.001.
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).
Results Validity Assumption I We performed a Principal Component Analysis (Varimax rotation) to extract the most important independent factors (KMO=0.751; the Bartlett Test was highly significant; p <0.001).
There was a difference between performance on the first 5 s of the SSB recordings and the last 5 s that was highly significant ( t = 8.186, p < 0.001).
As expected, paired t -tests for the valence ratings showed highly significant differences between negative and positive stimuli, for both faces and words (Faces: t (34) = −20.18, p < 0.001; Words: t (34) = −34.25, p < 0.001), thus validating the employed category grouping of the experimental stimuli.
The contribution of the 3 variables used is highly significant ( p < 0.001) in all models.
Behavioral EI had a highly significant relationship (β = 0.64, p < 0.001, n = 100) with perceived leadership effectiveness and no relationship with engagement ( Miller, 2014 ).
Results Is LG-OST Effective in Reducing BII-Fear? Repeated measures MANOVA yielded a highly significant effect, F (6,34) = 15.65, p < 0.001.
After the intervention, the experimental group showed a significant improvement in self-efficacy, with a highly significant difference between groups ( t = 12.76, p < 0.001), and an effect size of 0.65 (moderate effect), indicating that dance therapy has substantial clinical significance in improving self-efficacy.
This showed a highly significant, medium-sized correlation r(204) = 0.326, p < 0.001.
It is worth noting in this connection that the correlation between CPM and performance on the inflection task is relatively strong and highly significant ( r = 0.63, p < 0.001).
Total reading time The analysis revealed a highly significant main effect of semantic relation on the noun region, β = 99.68, SE = 6.74, t = 14.79, p < 0.001.
This study also revealed a moderately significant positive relationship between function value and GPA ( β = 0.21, p < 0.001).
Highly significant positive correlations were found between EE and both EOE ( r = 0.35, p = 0.001) and LST ( r = 0.30, p = 0.003).
The interaction between perceived responsiveness and utilitarian motivation was highly significant (b = 0.16, SE = 0.03, t = 5.00, p < 0.001, 95% CI [0.09, 0.22]).
The model showed no statistically significant effect of Group F (2, 40) = 0.209, p = 0.813, a highly significant effect of Condition F (4, 195) = 47.176, p < 0.001 and a significant Group * Condition interaction, F (8, 242) = 2.732, p = 0.007.
A Chi-squared test showed this difference was highly significant (χ 2 = 75.1307, p < .001).
Conversely, the correlation between each individual’s learning slope and mean threshold value on day 1 of learning was highly significant ( r = −0.91, p < 0.001), which indicates that those who showed a steep learning function (slower learners) started off with a high threshold, whereas those with a flatter learning curve (faster learners) were already close to ceiling performance on the first day of training, as may be seen in Figure 4 .
The result showed a highly significant logistic component, t 58 = 20.19, p > 0.001, that captures a sigmoid-shaped function consistent with a category boundary (Harnad, 1987 ; Figure 3 ).
Because the 95% confidence interval is relatively narrow for this effect and does not include 0, these findings can be interpreted as a medium summary effect that is positive, precise, and highly significant ( p < 0.001).
The difference between these two syllable types is highly significant (sign test p < 0.001), as 22 of the 23 speakers have more pulses in the case of the coda condition.
Combining samples A and B yielded a highly significant main effect [disgust: M = 2.63, SD = 0.45; neutral: ( M = 2.46, SD = 0.39), t (50) = 3.75, p < 0.001, d = 0.53 ( Figure 3A )].