The interaction between these two variables approached significance F (1, 19) = 3.66, p = 0.071, η 2 p = 0.16, indicating a larger singleton distractor compatibility effect in the low load condition [I – N = 3.82%, t (19) = 2.57, p < 0.025] than in the high load condition [I – N = 0.47%, p > 0.5].
The ANOVA revealed a marginally significant effect of Frequency on need satisfaction F (1, 103) = 3.34, p = 0.071, η p 2 = 0.03, 90% CI = [0;0.1].
Furthermore, a near-significant effect was obtained for mean ratings within the LAP intensity category after viewing HA advertisements [ F (2,58) = 2.77, p = 0.071, η 2 = 0.087].
We also found a stimulus type by length interaction [ F (1,24) = 6.488, p = 0.018, partial μ 2 = 0.213], as the length effect was smaller in pseudowords with consistent graphemes than in pseudowords with context-dependent graphemes; the block by stimulus type was close to significance [ F (1,24) = 3.571, p = 0.071, partial μ 2 = 0.130], indicating that RTs of pseudowords with consistent graphemes decreased more quickly with repeated reading; and a block by length interaction [ F (1,24) = 18.629, p < 0.001, partial μ 2 = 0.437], as the typical readers showed a length effect reduction with the repetitions.
The rmANOVA of the frequency values showed a marginally significant effect of the interaction of group and hand [ F (4, 15) = 2.694, p = 0.071, η 2 = 0.418; Table 3 ].
There was no main effect of list position, F (1,36) = 0.096, MSE = 0.634, p = 0.76, partial η 2 = 0.003 but a main effect of distraction, F (1,36) = 6.11, MSE = 0.585, p = 0.018, partial η 2 = 0.15 and a numerical trend towards an interaction of distraction with list position, F (1,36) = 3.46, MSE = 0.38, p = 0.071, partial η 2 = 0.09, as illustrated in Figure 3 .
The coefficients are statistically indistinguishable from zero, with the exception of Panel A Model 2, which is weakly significant ( p =0.071).
Further, the difference between L1 Mismatch and control was marginally significant for AHE [ b = 0.71, χ 2 (1) = 7.57, p = 0.071] but not for NE [ b = 0.50, χ 2 (1) = 0.00, p = 1.00].
Although the group × time interaction was only marginally significant ( p = 0.071), exploratory analyses suggested a tendency for larger post-test P3 amplitudes in the Tai Chi training group, particularly for negative and neutral stimuli.
The MANOVA revealed a marginally significant main effect of Drawing on Linear Overgeneralizations [ F (2,197) = 1.970, p = 0.071; η p 2 = 0.020].
However, on incongruent trials with reward distracters, the amygdala response was significantly positively correlated with the right IFG/insula response, r = 0.553, p = 0.050, and showed a trend toward a positive association with the left IFG/insula response, r = 0.516, p = 0.071.
Similarly, the model was only marginally significant for VH incongruent trials F (4, 118) = 2.22, p = 0.071 and accounted for 7% of the variability in reaction time.
CORRELATION ANALYSIS As a result of an exploratory correlation analysis, we observed a positive relationship between changes in subjective arousal and changes in left amygdala activation between the “permit negative” and “view negative” conditions with a trend toward significance (ρ = 0.324, p = 0.071).
Although the number of saccades was numerically smaller for spaced sentences (mean: 17.74 saccades for spaced, and 18.11 for unspaced), regression analysis revealed only a marginally significant difference (β = −0.447, SE = 0.247, p = 0.071).
Somatosensory was significantly related to Motor ( z = 3.160, p = 0.008; FDR-corrected) and there was a tendency toward significance with Temperature ( z = 2.194; p = 0.071; FDR-corrected).
In the moderate-fatigue condition, the advantage of external focus further, showing a trend toward significance [ t (29) = 1.86, p = 0.071, d = 0.74].
Although, the python jar was poked at a higher frequency than the leopard jar was poked, this difference only approached significance ( F (1,13) =3.850, p =0.072; Cohen’s d =1.1).
The change in fillers approached significance ( p = 0.072).
Extraversion was a marginally significant positive predictor in both the second, β = 0.12, SE = 0.04, p = 0.072, and the third, β = 0.11, SE = 0.04, p = 0.088, steps.
Although this increase of response priming was numerically still larger than the analogous alerting signal based increase for priming by novel primes, this difference was only marginally significant, F (1, 31) = 3.46, p = 0.072, η 2 p = 0.10.
In the emotion dimension, the main effect of testing time was significant, F (3, 147)=3.958, p =0.009, η p 2 =0.075, and the Testing Time × Intervention Status interaction approached significant, F (3, 147)=2.378, p =0.072, η p 2 =0.046, suggesting that the emotion dimension may be relatively sensitive to the EC intervention.
The main effect of Block-Order was not significant, F (1,44) = 0.08, p = 0.780, and the main effect of Depiction had a trend toward significance, F (1,44) = 3.39, p = 0.072, with a suggested advantage of faster naming of photographs over line drawings (888 ms for photographs, and 901 ms for line-drawings).
The target-type by trial type interaction approached but did not reach significance, F (1,13) = 3.84, p = 0.072.
A two-way comparison using the Bonferroni method showed that external locus of control was significantly stronger in the death acceptance group (M = 412.73, SD = 106.14) than in the bargaining group (M = 503.23, SD = 195.13, p < 0.05, 95% CI = [−177.38, −3.62]) and marginally significant compared to the death avoidance group (M = 496.43, SD = 247.39, p = 0.072, 95% CI = [−172.51, 5.10]), with no significant difference in self-control between the bargaining and death avoidance groups. 3.4.
The GLM for happy ratings revealed a main effect of time of assessment, F (1, 68) = 72.479, p < 0.0001, η 2 partial = 0.516 (greater happiness after the memory condition than after the film clip), no main effect of memory condition, F (1, 68) = 0.069, p = 0.793, η 2 partial = 0.001, and only a weak trend toward a significant interaction of time and memory condition, F (1, 68) = 3.328, p = 0.072, η 2 partial = 0.047 (higher increases in happiness in the nostalgia condition).