Excerpts

The three-way interaction of Required Response × Gender × Gender Stereotype fell short of significance, F (1, 45) = 3.48, p = 0.07, η p 2 = 0.07 (see Figure 4 ).

On the other hand, a significant stimulus type x belt color interaction with large ES (η 2 p = 0.17) for N450 area, but only a trend toward significance ( P = 0.07) for lower N450 area incongruent compared to congruent trials in the WB group.

When the not significant Incompatibility × Internal motivation, B = -0.20, SE = 0.15, p = 0.191, was entered into the model, the Incompatibility × External motivation interaction remained marginally significant, B = -0.21, SE = 0.11, p = 0.070.

There was, however, a marginal trend toward significance [ t (47) = 1.84, p = 0.07, d = 0.53], whereby ratings in the failure condition tended to be higher than in the loss condition.

Response latencies in Range 3 were faster than in Range 4, although this effect was marginally significant [ F (1,7) = 4.72, MSE = 0.02,4, p < 0.07].

Critically, however, the difference between these two similarity correlations only approached significance, z = 1.84, p = 0.07.

There was also a trivial main effect of the variable quintile, F (4, 156) = 270.59, p < 0.01, partial η 2 = 0.87 (ε = 0.26), and the variable quintile also interacted significantly with congruence, F (4, 156) = 6.97, p < 0.01, partial η 2 = 0.15 (ε = 0.51), with prime type, F (4, 156) = 5.80, p < 0.01, partial η 2 = 0.13 (ε = 0.45), and in a marginally significant three-way interaction with congruence and prime type, F (4, 156) = 3.02, p = 0.07, partial η 2 = 0.07 (ε = 0.38).

The SCZ and the HC group only differed at a statistical trend ( Md SCZ = 6, Md HC = 7; W = 551.1, p = 0.07, d C = 0.27).

We found marginally significant evidence indicating the hypothesized moderating effect of age on peer influence on STEM-related activities (β = −1.44, SE = 0.97, one-sided p = 0.07).

Post-hoc analyses revealed a marginally significant effect of gender on reading fluency in year 1, in year 1, F (1, 1,455) = 3.36, p = 0.07, η 2 = 0.00, indicating that females’ reading fluency ( m = 24.04) was slightly lower than that of males’ ( m = 25.08, SD = 10.48).

For the 1 s delay condition, a marginally significant difference was evident between the high sleep quality group and the low sleep quality group ( p = 0.07).

The analysis of variance revealed a marginally significant difference between the scale values of valence pre and post-training sessions [ F (1, 11) = 3.99; p = 0.07; η 2 = 0.27].

ERPs Results As shown in Figure 3 , the ANOVA on N400 amplitude showed that the main effect of disclosure was marginally significant [ F (1, 32) = 3.515, p = 0.070, η p 2 = 0.099].

It should be noted that some intertask correlations were trending toward significance at an unadjusted alpha level (0.05) but the relationship differed in each group: orientation and motion were modestly correlated in SZ ( r = 0.39, p = 0.07), size and motion in BD ( r = 0.5, p = 0.06), luminance and motion in CO ( r = 0.4, p = 0.07).

Although the relationship between wife’s hair length and husband-rated wife’s attractiveness showed marginal significance ( β = 0.11, SE = 0.06, 95% CI = [−0.014, 0.230], p = 0.070), the indirect effect remained significant. 1 On the other hand, the indirect pathway from husband’s hair length to sexual frequency via wife-rated husband’s attractiveness and wife’s sexual desire did not yield significance.

Similarly, the difference between the score of DMT students group and the score of art studies students group approached significance ( p = 0.07).

They also reported less momentary loneliness, though the relation was only marginally significant this time, r (599) = −0.07, p = 0.07.

There was no significant relationship between context effects and scores on consonant, vowel or sentence recognition (the correlation between vowel recognition and gender context effect approached significance; t = 2.32, adjusted p = 0.07).

The main effect of the group is marginally significant, F (1, 46) = 3.34, p = 0.07, partial η 2 = 0.07, and the N2 amplitude in the music training group was marginally greater than that in the control group. 3.2.2 P3 Results on P3 showed a main effect of group, F (1, 46) = 13.68, p < 0.001, partial η 2 = 0.23.

However, age differences in mixing costs were marginally significant on the basis of means, F (1, 41) = 3.50, p = 0.07, η 2 p = 0.08, but not significant for log-transformed RT ( p = 0.75).

In Model 1, we found a significant positive main effect of ethnicity [ b = 48.20, SE = 6.29, t (656) = 7.67, p < 0.001] and a marginally significant negative main effect of percentage of Turkish-origin students [ b = −0.57.45, SE = 31.76, t (656) = −1.81, p = 0.07], but unexpectedly no cross-level interaction effect on students' performance ( p = 0.81; see Table 2 ).

The regression analysis showed a significant main effect for spatial ability [β = −0.507, se(HC4) = 0.181, p = 0.007], no main effect of condition [β = 0.703, se(HC4) = 0.399, p = 0.10], and a marginally significant interaction effect between spatial ability and condition [β = 0.224, se(HC4) = 0.123, p = 0.07].

Finally, t -tests found a significant difference between the two groups on the Change scale ( t = 2.73, p < 0.001, η 2 p = 0.14), and a marginally significant difference on the Success scale ( t = 1.89, p = 0.07, η 2 p = 0.02).

The main effect of MATH approached significance [ F (1,94) = 3.49, p = 0.07, η 2 = 0.04], indicating that higher growth mindset regarding math ability was marginally associated with larger P300 difference amplitude [with lower quartile scores (3.5) P300: mean at Fz = 5.01 μV, mean at Cz = 6.58 μV, mean at Pz = 4.79 μV; with higher quartile scores (5.25) P300: mean at Fz = 8.24 μV, mean at Cz = 10.14 μV, mean at Pz = 8.56 μV].

The interactions between experiments and measure types were significant when comparing Experiment 1 with Experiment 2 ( B = −0.60, SE = 0.33, p = 0.07, R 2 = 0.10; marginally significant), and comparing Experiment 2 with Experiment 3 ( B = 0.69, SE = 0.33, p = 0.04, R 2 = 0.10).