Excerpts

This means that a strongly nonsignificant p -value is equally likely to be treated by publication selection bias and dropped with an equal probability in the case of publication bias as it is in the case of p-hacking (e.g., borderline significant results, p = 0.051 or far off p = 0.9).

When correlating the constructs of the health belief model with experienced hesitancy, perceived severity did show a borderline significant association with hesitancy ( r = -.14, p = .051).

Subsequent analysis revealed a strong trend for an age x treatment interaction during the 19.30–20.30 interval (F (3,21) = 4.264, p = 0.051).

The results indicated that the correlation between responses to the anticipation question and responses to the disappointment question was not statistically significant, but was approaching significance ( r s = 0.091, p = .051, N = 55). 3.3 Experiment 3 We first confirmed that all participants answered all test questions, and that no participants failed to respond correctly (i.e. “Paris”) to the attention check question.

Log-rank test showed a near-significant difference among the three groups (P = 0.051).

The only measure that approached significance was the WAB-R (p = .051) with a medium effect size (partial eta squared = .12).

Other findings are similar to model 2 except that the adjusted odds ratio for the birth order ‘2–4’ was marginally significant at the conventional 5% level ( p = 0.051).

When separated by condition, there was a comparable valence effect for the EXP-certain condition (p = 0.90); but there was a marginally significant valence effect for the EXP-uncertain (M (positive) = 4.029, M (negative) = 1.604, p = 0.051) and a significant UNEXP-uncertain (M (positive) = 4.911, M (negative) = −0.042, p < 0.001) conditions, with a larger FRN amplitude observed for negative than positive feedback. 3.2.1.2.

The relationship between social anxiety severity and attention to the eye region of sad faces approached significance (R 2 = .18, F (3, 39) = 2.82, β = -.29, p = .051).

For number of revolutions, the Sex×Prenatal drug×Postnatal drug interaction was nearly significant, F (3,93) = 2.68, p = 0.051.

Statistical analysis revealed that whilst the abundance of most bacterial DNA, at different taxonomic levels, was unaffected by disease status, the abundance of Raoultella was borderline significant (P = 0.051) and observed as the almost exclusive presence of this organism’s DNA in the synovial fluid of RA patients only ( Fig 3 ).

The WAB-R result was again just short of significance (p = .051; partial eta squared = .13).

Age was shown to have a marginally significant influence on the tibial meniscal SH at the medial (p = 0.051) and lateral (p = 0.09) region B and medial region C (p = 0.054).

However, in our intention-to-treat analysis, the use of metformin in people prescribed insulin was still associated with a lower risk of all-cause mortality, and risk approached significance for the MACE endpoint (p = 0.051).

Model 4 with TNC and 1q25 did not give additional information with a difference between AIC lower than 3 (AIC: 967.8, iAUC = 0.70) even if TNC was marginally significant with HR = 1.49 [0.99; 2.22] (p = 0.051).

Both traits were influence by systematic position within the Tropidurinae lineage (significant phylogenetic signal, see Table 2 ) under most models tested (clutch size exhibited marginally non-significant phylogenetic signal under constant branch lengths, P = 0.051, Table 2 ).

Additionally, anxiety operationalized with the DASS scale exhibited a trend towards significance as a predictor of anhedonia (b = −0.69, t (109) = −1.971, p = .051), as well as ISR OCD scores (b = 1.82, t (109) = 1.723, p = .088).

On average, older age at menopause achieved a borderline significance in breast cancer ( P = 0.051).

Fig 2C presents PC2 score distributions showing a marginally non-significant trend (p = 0.051) toward higher PC2 values in young subjects.

For work engagement, we observed no significant change in the intervention group, but there was a marginally significant ( d = -.26, p = .051) decrease in the control group over the study period.

The total effect of physical activity was found borderline significant (β = -0.11, p = 0.051).

Similarly, line R had an almost significantly (p-value = 0.051) greater C value than line A.

In the non-trained test positions that were tested at the 45° and the 135° reference orientation (compare square symbols), there was a near-significant trend for orientation specificity ( t (9) = -3.446, p = .051).

This analysis revealed essentially the same pattern of effects as the RT ANOVA: a significant validity effect, F (2, 23) = 34.130, p < .001, η p 2 = .597, and a marginally significant interaction, F (2, 46) = 3.172, p = .051, η p 2 = .121.

Non-PH controls showed a borderline significant association of Ang-1 with cardiac index (r = 0.307, p = 0.051), but no significant associations with other baseline parameters were evident ( Fig 5 ).