Excerpts

Particular attention must be paid to the main effect path: In the baseline model excluding mediators, the total effect of T1 Policy Attitude on T3 Consumption Intention was highly significant ( β = 0.340, p < 0.001).

When participants did not receive a warning that selective repetitions came from speakers with vested interests, the repetition-contrast score was positive and highly significant, M = +28.34, SD = 25.82 [20.76; 35.92], t (46) = 7.60, d = 2.22, p < 0.001.

The association between this variable and motivation levels was highly significant [ χ 2 (16) = 105.58, p < 0.001, Cramér’s V = 0.14], supporting the hypothesis that ‘higher usage frequency leads to stronger learning motivation’, which aligns with the theoretical connotations of the “Relevance” and “Satisfaction” dimensions in the ARCS model.

Due to skewness of positive mutuality, we subsequently used the Kruskal–Wallis non-parametric test, which revealed that these were highly significant differences (sensitive responding: χ 2 (2) = 23.23, p < 0.001; positive mutuality: χ 2 (2) = 102.44, p < 0.001).

This association is positive and highly significant on the within-level (β = 0.54, SE = 0.06, p < 0.001).

Identity Priming Effects For response latency, as expected, the effect of Prime type was highly significant ( t = 9.58, p < 0.001).

For model 3 predicting the behavioral factor II as a response, which was mainly comprised of the proportion of time tail wagging, licking the trainer’s hand or face, and the frequency of lips licking, we found a clearly significant full-null model comparison (c2 = 27.44, df = 6, 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.

However, a highly significant effect of Valence was found for Bias [ F (1,35) = 29.11, p < 0.001, η p 2 = 0.45], with significantly higher bias for negative words, and also a main effect of Genotype [ F (1,35) = 6.56, p = 0.02, η p 2 = 0.16], with significantly lower bias in Met carriers than Val homozygotes (see Figure 1 ).

This study also revealed a moderately significant positive relationship between function value and GPA ( β = 0.21, p < 0.001).

The results revealed a highly significant main effect of test duration [ F (5,65) = 226.765, p < 0.001, η p 2 = 0.946], showing the reproduction durations increasing as a function of the test durations.

For tapping rate, the triple interaction Congruency × Language × Phase was highly significant [ F (1, 61) = 16.15, p < 0.001].

A mixed-design ANOVA on the total efficacy score indicated a highly significant main effect of Time, F (1, 479) = 311.17, p < 0.001, η p 2 = 0.39.

The results showed that the main effect was highly significant, F (1,76) = 71.199, p < 0.001, η p 2 = 0.487.

There was also a highly significant interaction of Participant Sex by Congruency, F 2 (2,32) = 8.08, p = 0.001.

Specifically, it demonstrated the largest and most highly significant positive predictive effect on both Social Responsibility ( β = 0.344, p < 0.001 ) and Prosocial Behavior ( β = 0.271, p < 0.001 ).

There was significant main effect of perceptual load, F (1, 19) = 290.86, p < 0.001, η 2 p = 0.94, with faster RTs in the low load condition (631 ms) than in the high load condition (1207 ms); and, there was also a marginally significant main effect of singleton distractor presence, F (1, 19) = 17.72, p < 0.001, η 2 p = 0.48, with RTs in the neutral distractor condition (937 ms) being slower than RTs in the singleton distractor absent condition (901 ms).

Indeed, separate age group analyses confirmed that the phrasal planning effect was highly significant for both young (40 ms, 4.6% benefit, p < 0.001) and older (41 ms, 4.0% benefit, p < 0.001) adults.

With respect to the How Confident section, the seven-factor model demonstrated a statistically and practically significant improvement in model fit as compared to the five-factor model, Δχ 2 (11) = 2645.780, p < 0.001, ΔTLI = 0.041; first six-factor model (A), Δχ 2 (6) = 958.617, p < 0.001, ΔTLI = 0.013; and second six-factor model (B), Δχ 2 (6) = 1969.970, p < 0.001, ΔTLI = 0.031.

The primary effect of time was highly significant ( F = 509.072, p < 0.001, η 2 = 0.924), indicating a consistent reduction in depression severity across all groups over time.

Regarding the inter-context correlations, the relationship between positive contact in school and out-of-school contexts was large and highly significant ( r = 0.494, p < 0.001).

Second, SEW shows a strong and highly significant effect on family governance ( β = 0.62, p < 0.001).

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.

Phase synchronization The PLV of the theta frequency band between the ACC and right BA40 showed a highly significant Group effect, F (1, 27) = 14.85, p < 0.001.

Four data sets with a highly significant d-squared value ( p < 0.001) were excluded.