The results remained almost the same after excluding the wrong answers: the difference between trial types approached significance in the egocentric bias version (experimental: Mdn = −4.38; control: Mdn = 4.53), Z = -1.781, p = 0.075; however, no such pattern has been shown for the altercentric bias condition (experimental: Mdn = −1.24; control: Mdn = 3.09), Z = -1.453, p = 0.146.
It shows a near-significant age effect for C2, F (10,4) = 8.5; p = 0.075; a significant age effect for C3, F (10,4) = 27.3; p = 0.00002; for C4, F (10,4) = 15.8; p = 0.003, and for C5, F (10,4) = 23.9; p = 0.00008.
In contrast, the HOC group ( M = 12.48, SD = 5.06) showed a trend toward a higher sense of negative agency compared to the LOC group [( M = 9.64, SD = 2.87), t (22.47) = 1.87, p = 0.075, d = 0.69]. 3.2.3 Explaining implicit sense of agency – regression analysis Tone binding in the HOC group was significantly predicted by OCI-R total scores ( F (1, 13) = 5.53, R 2 = 0.298, p = 0.035; beta = −10.49, t = −2.35, p = 0.035).
The results showed a marginally significant interaction between time and group [ F (1,64) = 3.286, p = 0.075, η p 2 = 0.050]; this result supported the second hypothesis that students from the experimental group improved more on creativity than those from the control group ( Table 2 ).
Moreover, the effect of candidate’s capability on hireability ratings only approached significance, F (2,371) = 2.60, p = 0.075, η 2 = 0.01.
Under the trailing condition with the positive frame, the difference in risk-taking percentages between proficient and expert athletes approached significance ( p = 0.0752), but novice athletes showed significantly lower risk-taking percentages than both expert ( p < 0.001) and proficient athletes ( p < 0.001).
In terms of peak displacement, the difference observed between static and dynamic expressions (1.33 cpf) was marginally significant [95% CI (−1.66, 1.66), p = 0.0759].
We also compared memory accuracy within the same arousal condition, and found that there was a marginally significant difference in d-prime for objects in the cued location compared to the uncued location in the CS+ trials ( p = 0.076).
The hours spent variable showed a trend in explaining EE ( p = 0.076), and age was significant ( p = 0.008) (see Table 7 ).
The initially applied KW test (for VP1, VP2, and CP; df=2) demonstrated the only significant difference for the jerk score ( p = 0.001 with H = 10.227), even though for entropy it was close to significance ( p = 0.076, H = 3.157); immobility exhibited no difference ( p = 0.776, H = 0.081).
In addition, the correlation between male Pf and sociosexual behavior (SOIR1) that approached significance by Spearman rank correlation analysis ( r 100 = −0.22, p = 0.076), reached statistical significance by estimation of the confidence intervals for this correlation (95% CI [−0.406, −0.025]).
The difference between the two lengths was close to significance in the leftward ingoing/rightward outgoing Stimulus ( p = 0.076).
The change in destructive leadership showed marginally significant individual variability (slope σ 2 = 0 0.012, p = 0.076).
However, the result of a chi-square difference test showed that the difference in fit of the two models approached significance, but did not surpass the 0.05 alpha level, Δχ 2 (1) = 3.14, p = 0.076.
In the cellist group, there was a borderline significant T2 Type × Lag interaction effect, F (2, 34) = 2.779, p = 0.076, η p 2 = 0.141.
In the treatment group there is a slight marginally significant decrease (T1 = 2.83; T2 = 1.91; p = 0.076) between the pre and post measure but then there is a significant increase in the follow-up measure (T3 = 3.00; p = 0.000).
The Direction main effect was nearly significant ( p = 0.076), but since a three-factor interaction involving Direction was significant, this main effect has not been further investigated.
The main effect of neuroticism on the hands-on-steering-wheel time was marginally significant [ F (1,30) = 3.310, p = 0.076].
Single-word reading was again found to be a significant predictor of spelling accuracy ( β = 0.751, p < 0.001) and oral language ability also approached significance ( β = 0.148, p < 0.076).
However, discipline identification was marginally significant, β = −0.15 (95% CI = −0.31, 0.01), SE = 0.08, p = 0.076 (all other βs < 0.07, p s > 0.101), such that greater identification with one’s discipline was associated with lower stress.
An Age Group (Young-Old) by Language Status (EFL-ESL) by Target Timbre Between-subjects ANOVA on Mill Hill vocabulary scores found a highly significant effect of language status [EFLs had higher vocabulary scores than ESLs: F (1, 66) = 26.905, p < 0.001], and a nearly significant effect of Age-Group [ F (1, 66) = 3.258, p = 0.076] where older adults had higher vocabulary scores than younger adults.
However, for participants who read-aloud with the child, there was a positive and marginally significant relationship between amount of extra-textual talk and participants’ positive mood scores ( r =0.58, p =. 076).
Our analysis of beta values revealed a marginally significant effect of presentation time [ F (2,66) = 2.67, p = 0.076, η p 2 = 0.075], which was qualified by a significant interaction between presentation time and task [ F (1266) = 6.15, p = 0.004, η p 2 = 0.16].
Importantly, there was also a marginally significant three-way interaction between self-status, other-status, and offer level, F (1,92) = 3.22, p = 0.076, η p 2 = 0.03.
Other interactions with these two factors were also not significant, except the marginally significant T2 Side × Lag × Number of Distractors interaction ( F (2, 80) = 2.7, p = 0.076, η 2 = 0.06), which reflects the slightly decreased LVF advantage at Lag 5 when the number of distractors was reduced (T2 Side × Number of Distractors for Lag 5 only: F (1, 40) = 4.0, p = 0.051; LVF vs.