Excerpts

However, the interaction was only marginally significant, F (1, 66) = 3.80, p = 0.055.

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).

Simple slope analysis revealed that in the high social norms group, the effect of egoistic motivation on participation behavior was marginally significant (simple slope = 0.404, SE = 0.211, t = 1.918, p = 0.055), whereas in the low social norms group, the effect was not significant (simple slope = 0.206, SE = 0.149, t = 1.380, p = 0.168).

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.

Adding the quadratic estimation yield marginally significant increment in the association, t (57) = 1.96, p = 0.055, boosting the β to 0.48 and the R 2 to 0.23 (see Figure 1 ).

The main effect of gender on Eagerness to Adopt AV was marginally significant, F (1,402) = 3.70, p = 0.055, η 2 = 0.01, suggesting higher Eagerness to Adopt AV in male respondents.

This pattern resulted in the 3-back reaction time responsitivity nearing significance in its difference from 1-back condition responsitivity [ t (24) = 2.01, p = 0.055].

When symbolic responses from the two Single conditions were summed and compared to these responses from the two Multiple conditions, a paired t -test revealed a borderline significant difference, t (15) = 2.1, p = 0.055, d = 0.42 (Multiple > Single).

A follow-up t -test indicated that non-clustered learners showed a marginal trend toward better memory than clustered learners for the first 30 LP trials ( t (60) = 1.96, p = 0.055, Cohen’s d = 0.51, CL effect size = 64%; clustered: M = 0.57, 95% CI [0.51, 0.62]; non-clustered: M = 0.65, 95% CI [0.58, 0.72]).

The main effect of condition approached significance in the route distance task, F (3,74) = 2.65, p = 0.055, partial η 2 = 0.10.

There was a marginally significant interaction between Trial type and Simon score ( t = 1.92, p = 0.055), suggesting a trend that the higher Simon scores showed the greater mixing costs.

In terms of social influences, the meta-analysis indicates that the association between social influences and pandemic fatigue is marginally significant ( p = 0.055).

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).

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).

For FM-Arm, the improvement compared to the control group was significantly higher ( U = 45.0, p = 0.031, r = 0.38) at end of treatment and marginally significant at follow-up ( U = 48.0, p = 0.055, r = 0.33).

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.

With regard to eating behavior, the results showed that those who responded reported almost significant ( U = 96.5, p = 0.055) higher levels of goal achievement than those who did not respond.

When only data from the schizophrenic group were used, the Chlorpromazine Index showed marginally significant correlations with both performance indexes in the Standard Time Bisection task (bias: r = −0.57, p = 0.055; precision: r = −0.54, p = 0.067).

The curvature along the line of disagreement was also marginally significant (curvature test statistic = 0.08, p = 0.056), pointing to a convex surface and suggesting that the willingness to confront injustice decreases toward the midpoint of both scales.

Memory condition exhibited near-significant trend toward predicting lower sadness recovery, b = −1.9007, p = 0.056, 95% CI [−3.8529, 0.0516].

GPA was found to have a nearly significant influence on PAL (Estimate = −17.280, SE = 8.413, t = −2.054, p -value = 0.056). 3.8 Mean weekday and weekend steps The analysis of mean weekday steps revealed a significant effect of learning environment type (Online: Estimate = 750.630, SE = 374.150, t = 2.006, p -value = 0.050), but the intercept was not significant (estimate = 5065.490, SE = 3550.890, t = 1.427, p -value = 0.172).

However this was mitigated by a marginally significant interaction by group [group × change, F (1, 30) = 3.969, p = 0.056], such that this effect was observed in tone speakers ( p < 0.001) but not in the control group ( p = 0.215).

Further, a Group × Sex × Trial interaction approached significance ( F = 3.7, p = 0.056, linear trend), such that male DNC and HD had similar learning over trials, while female HD actually had greater learning over trials than female DNC.

The main effect of the matching condition was marginally significant, F (2, 62) = 3.03, p = 0.056, n p 2 = 0.09.

Regarding threat appraisal, a low level of threat perceived by the athlete due to deterrence effect or risk to health, does not predict more positive doping attitudes, despite this factor is being close to significance ( p = 0.056).