Excerpts

It is worth noting that post-HABIT internalized shame score came very close to being statistically significant (post-HABIT Perceived Stigma Internalized Shame score is not a significant predictor of post-HABIT Perceived Stress, B = 0.1.072[−0.019, 2.163], t = 2.012, p = 0.054).

The difference was marginally significant with p = 0.054.

The results showed a marginally significant main effect of the pandemic context, F (1, 51) = 3.896, p = 0.054, partial η 2 = 0.071; that is, drawings of the pandemic group ( M = 9.63) were higher than those of the regular group ( M = 7.45).

Finally, concerning between-subjects effects, a tendency toward significance was found for the main effect Handedness: F (1, 24) = 4.1035, p = 0.054, indicating a significant difference between the left-handedness (M = −3.06, SE = 2.32) and right-handedness (M = −9.70, SE = 2.32). 3.2.5.

The fear of contagion by COVID-19 decreased as time passed since the start of the pandemic, and this difference was almost significant ( p = 0.054) when comparing the data between 2020 and 2021.

In the remaining two trials there was significant to a marginally significant difference of below chance looking [second: t(17) = −2.61, p = 0.054; third: t (16) = −2.82, p = 0.036].

An approaching significance reduction was found in RTs (first measurement: 667.0 ms [ SE 46.5], second measurement: 595.2 ms [ SE 18.8], F (1,17) = 4.3, p = 0.054, η p 2 = 0.20 ).

Bonferroni corrected pairwise comparisons indicated HR-ASD looked at the referent less than LR controls (marginally significant at p = 0.054) and HR-TYP ( p < 0.001).

However, the only allopregnanolone association that survived robust regression was the one with SERT binding in the prefrontal cortex (slope = -0.011, SD = 0.003, β = -0.196, p < 0.001), whereas the robust regressions between allopregnanolone and SERT binding in the pallidostriatum and hippocampus were in borderline significance (pallidostriatum; slope = -0.162, SD = 0.083, β = -0.236, p = 0.054, hippocampus; slope = -0.049, SD = 0.027, β = -0.187, p = 0.071).

Second-year 3D-MR and second-year BSL grades were also strongly correlated, but the effect was marginally insignificant ( r 2 = 0.39, t = 2.21, p = 0.054; Figure 5B ).

Local Cue When a red cup marked the goal location (Figure 2A ), the difference between groups just failed to reach significance [ F (2,64) = 3.046, P = 0.054, η p 2 = 0.087, power = 0.570], although individuals with DS ( M = 0.899, SE = 0.026) made fewer correct choices than TD adults ( M = 0.997, SE = 0.030; P = 0.017).

In the domain of knowledge transfer, the pedagogical agent showed a marginally significant main effect [ F (1, 108) = 3.809, p = 0.054, η 2 = 0.034], whereas the main effect of emotional feedback was not significant [ F (1, 108) = 1.519, p = 0.220, η 2 = 0.014].

The path from environmental sensitivity to pro-environmental behavior was marginally significant (β = 0.211, p = 0.054).

As can be expected following the results above, following the intervention in English significantly larger gains are observed in English ( M = 0.27) than in Hebrew ( M = 0.05) for target words that were taught in English, t (21) = 5.93, p < 0.001, and following the intervention in Hebrew larger gains are observed in Hebrew ( M = 0.11) than in English ( M = 0.02) for target words that were taught in Hebrew, and the difference was nearly significant, t (21) = 2.04, p = 0.054.

Results Behavioral Results The ANOVA results showed significant main effects of the stimulus congruency [ F (1,15) = 24.774, p = 0.000 < 0.05], stimulus orientation (medial/lateral) [ F (1,15) = 9.47, p = 0.005 < 0.05], and body part [ F (1,15) = 5.746, p = 0.03 < 0.05], a significant stimulus congruency by body part interaction [ F (1, 15) = 13.24, p = 0.003 < 0.05] and a marginally significant stimulus orientation by body part interaction effect on RT [ F (1,15) = 4.351, p = 0.054].

The interaction between direction and congruency was marginally significant in accuracy, F (1, 15) = 4.37, p = 0.054, η p 2 = 0.23 (Figure 4C ), while no interaction was found in RT (Figure 4D ).

The interaction between Time and Group was marginally significant, F (1, 60) = 3.87, p = 0.054, η 2 p = 0.061.

The interaction between condition and gender was nearly significant ( F 2,105 = 3.00, p = 0.054, η 2 = 0.05).

The main effect of Emotion was found to be significant F (2, 219) = 55.44 p < 0.001 (partial η 2 = 0.43) and the interaction of Group and Emotion was found to be marginally significant F (2, 219) = 2.57 p = 0.054 (partial η 2 = 0.03; Figure 7 ).

Looking at the effect of Language, Mann–Whitney tests were carried out on participants’ RCA scores in each type of display, revealing a significant effect of Language in the Polychrome condition, U = 42, Z = 4.26, p < 0.001; and a marginally significant effect in the Monochrome condition, U = 114, Z = 1.93, p = 0.054, with RCAs being produced more often in English than in Spanish in both types of display.

Second, the relationship between procedural justice and turnover intention approached significance ( p = 0.054), although it did not reach the conventional threshold of p < 0.05.

Worth mentioning is a tendency toward significance ( p = 0.054) between the SA-Low and SA-High groups in the recovery sample (S2), within the CR-Low group.

The increase in interference effects in accuracy with the number of the SL G alleles was also significant or marginally significant in all four distracter conditions in run1 (threat: r = 0.195, p = 0.054; neutral: r = 0.170, p = 0.082; scrambled: r = 0.192, p = 0.057; null: r = 0.218, p = 0.036; all one-tailed correlations).

The results showed a marginally significant main effect of room geometry on perceived spaciousness, F (3, 102) = 2.629, p = 0.054, partial η 2 = 0.072, indicating a medium effect size.

Availability for reading was a marginally significant predictor for learning, b = 0.4248, SE = 0.2110, p = 0.0542.