Excerpts

Finally, in this relationship a three-way interaction effect was close to being significant (Model 3; b = 0.112, t (32) = 1.998, p = 0.0543 with a 95% CI of -0.002 to.226), thus indicating a slight significant moderated moderation of sailing role, by sex category.

This list of significant and nonsignificant effects failed, however, to include the nearly significant interaction between conception risk and man’s availability: F (1, 314) = 3.71, p = 0.055.

Results The results showed that under all the culture priming conditions, the novelty of the story-writing task reached marginal significance [ F (3, 76) = 2.656, p = 0.055, η p 2 = 0.410], and the novelty score of the story-writing task in the United States was significantly higher than that in the control group ( p = 0.01), and there was no significant difference between the other groups.

For NH listeners in the vocoded condition, there were significant main effects for fricative spectrum ( p < 0.001) and formant transitions ( p < 0.05), and a marginally significant effect of vowel ( p = 0.055), all in the expected directions.

The direct comparisons of the gender-specific correlation coefficients via Fisher- Z -tests showed that the relationship of teasing and depression was significantly higher in women than in men ( p = 0.025), and there was a trend towards significance for anxiety ( p = 0.055).

Regarding the frequency of traumatic actions, time had a marginally significant main effect [ F (2,28) = 3.215, p = 0.055, η 2 = 0.187].

Flow did not mediate the relationship between grit and any of the outcomes ( p > 0.05) and is marginally significant for the relationship between flow metacognition and burnout [ b = −0.12, SE = 0.06, p = 0.055, 95% CI (−0.22, −0.02), β = −0.09].

Only a marginally significant group main effect was observed for the BSI of RT, F (1,28) = 4.0, p = 0.055, η p 2 = 0.13, 1-β = 0.42, BF 10 = 2.43, revealing a higher trend of BSI for the training group than for the control group.

The control group also reached significance in the English-to-Chinese direction ( d = 0.64), but only marginally significant in the Chinese-to-English direction ( p = 0.055).

Indeed, we did see that concurrent load increased partner-duplications at generation, consistent with its demonstrated effect on working memory ( Quinn and Ralston, 1986 ; Smyth and Pendleton, 1989 ; Lawrence et al., 2001 ; Can et al., 2017 ), and decreased correct recall of partner actions [this simple effect was marginally significant, F (2,34) = 3.17, MSe = 2.33, p = 0.055, η p 2 = 0.157].

ving flags [χ 2 (1, N = 66) = 16.269, p < 0.001], using personification and choosing among different text-image relations [ χ 2 (2, N = 66) = 13.141, p = 0.001], using personification and using iconography in general [ χ 2 (2, N = 66) = 6.180, p = 0.046], with those instances involving people being marginally significant [ χ 2 (1, N = 66) = 3.681, p = 0.055], but still more significant than the remaining subtypes.

Repeat Measurement Analysis of Variance of 2 (Gender: Male, Female) × 2 (Social Distance: Itimacy, Strangeness) × 2 (Symmetry of Punishments: Symmetric Punishment, Asymmetric Punishment) Performed for Defection Rate The results of repeated measures ANOVA showed that the main effect of gender was nearly significant, with F (1,77) = 3.784, P = 0.055, η p 2 = 0.047, and observed power = 0.384, indicating that the non-cooperation rate of men (0.374) was slightly lower than that of women (0.424).

This was true for the larger individual dataset also, t (93) = 2.38, p = 0.019, η 2 = 0.057, while the trend in the other dataset fell short of significance, t (39) = 1.98, p = 0.055, η 2 = 0.091, though the effect size was larger.

However, the priming effect in the Speech-Only condition was marginally significant, M = 11.65, SD = 54.02, F (1, 173) = 2.58, p = 0.055, Cohen's d = 1.61.

Findings were consistent when limiting the analysis to children of European descent, although the additive model for rs1800497 was not statistically significant ( p = 0.097) and the dominant model for rs1800497 was borderline significant ( p = 0.055) in this subset (Supplementary Table 1).

Likewise, child’s gender was not significantly associated with the prosociality scores, albeit two gender difference approached significance (for Ball 18-months t = −1.93, df = 139, p = 0.055, M male = 0.44 (0.50) M female = 0.60 (0.49); for Pen 18-months t = 1.78, df = 139, p = 0.077, M male = 0.60 (0.49) M female = 0.45 (0.50); for all others measures, t s ranged from 0.014 to 1.36, all p > 0.178).

There was a near to significance main effect of Learning Condition [ F (1,19) = 4.2, p = 0.055] showing that the orthography of target PWs was more accurately learned in the spelling aloud learning condition than in the handwriting learning condition.

Also, two marginally significant interactions of anxiety × skill level [ F (1,34) = 3.93, p = 0.055, η p 2 = 0.10] and anxiety × occlusion time [ F (1,34) = 3.83, p = 0.058, η p 2 = 0.10] were observed.

These factors were included in a marginally significant interaction, F (1, 39) = 3.83, p = 0.055, η p 2 = 0.09.

Apartment-Task Performance As illustrated in Figure 2 , there was a marginally significant difference between the three experimental conditions regarding the apartment-task performance, F (2, 142) = 2.96, p = 0.055, η 2 p = 0.04.

The interaction approached significance [ F (1, 245) = 3.71, p = 0.055] despite the small n of those with phonological awareness deficits using this definition.

Additionally, while partialing out the effect of child age, there were negative correlations between the total CELF score of the child and the total number of adult utterances ( r [19] = −0.48, p = 0.031), total number of adult questions ( r [19] = −0.61, p = 0.004), number of adult closed questions ( r [19] = −0.57, p = 0.008), and marginal significance for number of adult open questions ( r [19] = −0.44, p = 0.055).

Such difference in Group B tended toward significance ( Z = -1.922; p < 0.055; = 5.3 vs. = 6.1 in pre- and post-training , respectively).

Simple main effect analyses demonstrated that somatic anxiety increased from the pre- to the pressure test and was significant for the contraction group ( p < 0.001) and marginally significant for the no-contraction group ( p = 0.055).

However, because of the merely marginal significance of movement shape on attitudes ( p = 0.055), and the small sample size, a replication of the same study with a larger sample is needed in order to analyze the complex influences of movement qualities and movement shape on attitudes and affect.