Excerpts

Random intercept for Participant was significant [β = 1.728, SE = 0.086, 95% CI = [1.56, 1.90], t (47.99) = 20.117, p < 0.001] and fixed-effects factor WordOrder was highly significant [β = −0.098, SE = 0.035, 95% CI = [−0.17, −0.03], t (808.19) = −2.78, p = 0.006].

At the Bonferroni-corrected alpha level of 0.004, energy and catastrophizing were the only variables showing significant pre-post changes, with pain acceptance and general health approaching significance ( p = 0.006 and p = 0.005, respectively).

Separate analyses of the stimulus category for the time windows revealed no effects for s1 and s2 ( p > 0.10), and highly significant effects for s3, F (2,84) = 5.76, p = 0.006, η 2 = 0.12, s4, F (2,84) = 9.05, p < 0.001, η 2 = 0.18, and s5, F (2,84) = 9.40, p < 0.001, η 2 = 0.18, after stimulus onset (see also Figure 3A ).

We note that one clinical variable approached significance, being frequency of OBEs over the past month (illness severity) in BEG participants ( r = 0.558, p = 0.007).

The ANOVA of theta responses revealed highly significant differences for Qigong technique, F (1, 19) = 9.20, p = 0.007, η p 2 = 0.33.

Health Qigong dynamic Qigong mental practice relaxation EEG The ANOVA of alpha-1 responses revealed highly significant differences for training, F (3,72) = 4.34, p = 0.007, η P 2 = 0.15.

These differences mean that having a relative or close friend infected or deceased from COVID-19 predicted almost significantly the emotional processing indexes in the respondents’ writings [IRef: R 2 = 0.112, F (1, 62) = 7.81, p = 0.007, t = −2.80, p = 0.007; IWRAD: R 2 = 0.054, F (1, 62) = 3.56, p = 0.064, t = 1.89, p = 0.064; IWRAD_IWRLL: R 2 = 0.057, F (1, 62) = 3.74, p = 0.058, t = 1.93, p = 0.058].

A main effect of Stereotype was found in the by-participants analysis, along with a marginally significant effect in the by-items analysis, F 1 (2,56) = 5.50, p = 0.007; F 2 (2,32) = 3.00, p = 0.064, with faster RTs to word pairs that contained a neutral role term ( M = 828 ms), than those that contained male-biased ( M = 850 ms) or female-biased terms ( M = 889 ms).

The link between approach and the use of emotive language in the threats was highly significant in the mixed motivations sample: 23 (60.5%): 20 (32.8%), χ 2 = 7.333, p = 0.007, φ = 0.272, OR 3.143 (1.354–7.295), and in the aggrieved sample 10 (76.9%): 6 (26.1%), χ 2 = 8.693, p = 0.003, φ = 0.491, OR 9.444 (1.924–12.645), but not in the relationship-seeking sample: 9 (45%): 4 (28.6%), χ 2 = 0.941, NS, 0.166.

However, the main effect of the labeling was slightly significant [ F (3,22) =5.85; p =0.008].

Most participants agreed that it is: for example, 72% of participants agreed or strongly agreed with the statement, “Learning is due to modifications in the brain”; and 90% agreed or strongly agreed that, “There is a lasting change in the brain when someone learns a new skill.” Using the Bonferroni-adjusted alpha level of 0.006, we found that the correlation between TOI scores and responses to these questions did not reach statistical significance ( R 2 = 0.036, p = 0.008).

However, a significant trend of change was found in students’ perceived D-A fit ( B = 0.001, t = 2.71, p = 0.008), students’ perceived client involvement ( B = 0.009, t = 2.39, p = 0.02), students’ general evaluation of the sessions ( B = 0.07, t = 5.28, p < 0.001), and students’ evaluation of their mood during the sessions ( B = 0.05, t = 4.07, p < 0.001).

With regard to unique predictors of change in outcomes, similarity of offender spirituality was the most consistent predictor showing significant, negative associations with growth in unforgiveness, emotional expressivity, and self-esteem (βs = −0.17 to −0.42, p s ≤ 0.005) and significant, positive associations with empathy (β = 0.40, p = 0.002), and positive affect (β = 0.46, p < 0.001) and a positive association that approached significance for emotional forgiveness (β = 0.32, p = 0.008).

For participants with ASD, it is noteworthy that there was a statistical trend for HPF eating to differ from the No Diagnosis group ( p = 0.008; ƞ 2 p < 0.01) despite only N = 13 in the Diagnosed group.

While none of the tests returned correlations above 0.3, we can see that (throw) came the closest with 0.220 (and also showed a highly significant correlation with p = 0.008) followed by (our), r = 0.203, p = 0.015).

However, when DPR thresholds in just the defective parts of the visual field (the hemifield or quadrant(s) containing the blind area) were compared, we found highly significant improvements (pre-training: 81.4 ms ± 2.4, post-training: 66.5 ms ± 3.7, Wilcoxon Z = 2.64, p = 0.008; Figure 3B ).

In the cathodal group, the coefficients for all three goods were significant at the 5% level ( p = 0.018, 0.017, and 0.009, respectively), and the coefficient for the average WTP was highly significant at the 1% level (coefficient = 0.555, p = 0.008).

In addition there was a strong trend supporting ‘developing basic skills in language,’ χ 2 (1, N = 104) = 7.06, p = 0.008 as an additional rationale endorsed by parents with greater technology experience.

Behavioral performance Regarding reading comprehension performance, a 2 × 3 mixed ANOVA showed a highly significant main effect of group [ F (1,40) = 7.58, p = 0.009] with a non-significant group by level interaction effect [ F (2,80) = 0.221, p = 0.802].

Post-hoc Wilcoxon signed-rank tests using a Bonferroni corrected alpha of 0.008 revealed a significant difference between children’s spontaneity in the object-centred helping and social-centred comforting tasks ( z = −2.74, p = 0.006) and a marginally significant difference between the social-centred helping and social-centred comforting tasks ( z = −2.60, p = 0.009).

Treating TOI as a categorical variable, we found a marginally significant effect of TOI category on whether participants believed practicing skills changes a person’s brain [ F (2,190) = 4.79, p = 0.009, η 2 = 0.038] Tukey contrasts revealed a significant difference only between the incremental and the entity theorists [ t (112) = 2.77, p = 0.02].

There was a highly significant correlation ( p < 0.01) between the processing speed estimate C and retirement status (Retired).

Finally, the General Fade-out capability (β = −0.01, CI [−0.05, 0.03]) was included as the only variable with a non-significant p -value ( p = 0.526), whereas all other effects had highly significant p -values ( p < 0.010).

However, these main effects should not be interpreted given the highly significant interaction effect of country and event valence ( Ψ ^ = −125.72, p < 0.01).

“w+s+”) failed to reach significance, and comparisons between separated prefixes and segmentally identical function words (“sb” vs. “wb”) were significant on a lower level ( W = 2386, p < 0.01) than the other comparisons ( W > 2200, p < 0.0001).