The regression models testing Condition and Block revealed a highly significant main effect of Block ( b = 0.39, z = 4.67, p < 0.001).
Excerpts
Specifically, for the mediating effect proposed by H 2 , the indirect effect between intra-organizational SC and product innovation when the mediating variable RACAP is introduced in the research model is strong and highly significant (β = 0.255, p < 0.001).
All the main effects and interactions were highly significant, p < 0.001, except for the age group x target congruency interaction, which was marginally significant, F (1, 45) = 3.46, MSE < 0.001, p = 0.069.
Exceptions were highly significant positive correlations ( p < 0.001) between the statements concerning duty scheduling and work environment in general ( r = 0.47), comments about quality of supervision and personnel capacity ( r = 0.40), as well as salary and working hours ( r = 0.40).
For Place of Articulation , a highly significant main effect was found across all three CLMMs (unaspirated: χ 2 (2) = 21.87, p < 0.001; aspirated: χ 2 (2) = 47.38, p < 0.001; fricatives: χ 2 (2) = 25.98, p < 0.001).
A paired Wilcoxon Rank test demonstrated that this difference is highly significant (W = 40.5, p < 0.001). 5.2.1.
A paired samples Wilcoxon test (since the responses did not follow a normal distribution) shows a highly significant difference ( W = 30, 433, p < 0.001) between the two types of stimuli. 4.1.
This interpretation of digit specific influences of increasing magnitude are corroborated by the fact that the raw correlation of unit sum with overall RT (which is one possible measure of problem size in addition) was highly significant ( r = 0.48, p < 0.001).
The relationships between all achievement variables were established to be highly significant and generally consistent across the 3 time points ( r = 0.62–0.77; p < 0.001; See Table 5 ).
The test showed that the full model is highly significant for both analyses compared to the additive only model [detailed coordinate system: χ ( 50 ) 2 = 234.54, p < 0.001, V = 0.52; simple coordinate system: χ ( 50 ) 2 = 287.39; p < 0.001, V = 0.47], which in turn is also highly significant compared to the null model [detailed coordinate system: χ ( 51 ) 2 = 220.14, p < 0.001, V = 0.45; simple coordinate system: χ ( 51 ) 2 = 6832.17, p < 0.001, V = 2.55].
First, data suitability tests yielded ideal results: the KMO measure of sampling adequacy was 0.76 (>0.7), and Bartlett’s test of sphericity was highly significant ( χ 2 = 782.82, p < 0.001), indicating the data were well-suited for factor analysis.
The estimated difference between the “Low Cognitive Reserve” and “Healthy” clusters decreased from −0.222 to −0.175 but remained highly significant ( p < 0.001).
The model yields a highly significant F -value [ F (2, 1,285] = 123.46, p < 0.001), confirming that the set of predictor variables collectively makes a statistically significant contribution to explaining variance in the outcome variable.
Bartlett’s test of sphericity also yielded a highly significant result (Approx. = 16,704.881; df = 861; p < 0.001), indicating that the factors were appropriately correlated for factor analysis ( Bartlett, 1950 , 1951 ).
Identity Priming Effects For response latency, as expected, the effect of Prime type was highly significant ( t = 9.58, p < 0.001).
As expected, a model including Activity ratings ( Table 2 , alternative model) did not yield a close fit between sampled data and the estimated model as shown by a highly significant chi-square ( p < 0.001) and CFI < 0.96.
Simple slope analysis ( Figure 3 ) showed that for patients with low resilience (−1 SD), the negative association between SPB and lifestyle was steep and highly significant (Slope = −1.60, p < 0.001).
In Model 2, the inclusion of the core independent variable— DAB —resulted in a highly significant increase in the model’s explanatory power (△ R 2 = 0.164, △ F = 27.157, p < 0.001).
different = 2), as an additional level 1 predictor in a second step produced a highly significant effect for this variable, β = 34.21, t = 9.30, p < 0.001, and it rendered the effect for the CL variable non-significant, β = 0.59, t = 0.28, p = 0.78.
ANOVAs applied to latencies, with Condition ( unrelated , far , close ) as a fixed variable, showed a highly significant effect of Condition by participants, F 1(2, 126) = 9.07, MSE = 12028, p < 0.001, which was marginally significant in the analysis by items, F 2(2, 30) = 2.85, MSE = 2456, p = 0.074.
In this model, the direct effect of moral context on intentionality ( b = 1.74, SE = 0.26, p < 0.001) was approximately halved, yet remained highly significant ( b = 0.85, SE = 0.22, p < 0.001).
In addition, with respect to perceived learning achievement, participants showed highly significant differences in stressors, stress symptoms, coping strategies, and overall academic engagement and its dimensions, with U > 23790.500 and p = 0.001, such that greater perceived learning was associated with lower stress-related factors and higher academic engagement, although the effect sizes were small to approaching moderate (see Table 4 ).
The standardized total effect of cognitive fusion on symptoms ( c = 0.82) was highly significant (95% BCI: 0.73–0.91, p < 0.001, two-tailed) with a non-significant total effect (0.05, 95% BCI: −0.06-0.16) in the case of self-compassion.
Additionally, the interaction effect between phonological and orthographic similarity was highly significant [ F 1 (1, 521) = 30.36, p < 0.001, η 2 = 0.06; F 2 (1, 252) = 115.24, p < 0.001, η 2 = 0.31].
There is a moderate, yet highly significant correlation between Raven and CRT scores (Spearman's ρ = 0.306, p < 0.001) which suggests that they may have a common source, but do not capture the same cognitive skills.