The number of bouts (defined as at least 2 infusions with ≤ 120 seconds between reinforcers) per session showed a trend towards significance ( Fig 2C ; F 2,14 = 3.6, P = 0.055), however, the power may have been insufficient to observe a significant change.
However, the effect of the social treatment on dopamine levels in RA fell just short of statistical significance in the present study (p = 0.055; Table 1 ).
These analyses revealed significant effects of fingertip surface area (r = 0.206, one-tailed p = 0.031) and volume (r = 0.230, one-tailed p = 0.016), and a marginally significant effect of between-ridge sweat pore spacing (r = 0.182, one-tailed p = 0.055) ( Figure 4 ).
Finally, a near-significant interaction (β = 2.36, p = .055) suggested that dual-task performance was more constrained by patients’ attentional capacity in external focus conditions.
Lastly, the item standing on a balance beam (BOT-2), showed a trend towards differences between the two groups on pre-test values ( t = -2.06, df = 16.59, p = 0.055, corrected for unequal variance; TD 9.9 (0.33) DCD 8.6 (SD 2.4).
Table 2 also shows a marginally significant effect for the PII (F (2,50) = 3.01; p = .055), and PIx3 concerning the high frequency band (F (2,50) = 2.99, p = .056); these parameters trended to be higher for the SFT than for the FT and SIT tasks.
Moreover, the ANOVA test revealed a marginally significant interaction between the reflexive and antecedent factors ( F (2, 68) = 3.022, p = 0.055, η 2 = 0.011).
Weekly MVPA time (≥150 minutes versus <150 minutes) exhibited a borderline significant inverse association with low handgrip strength (OR = 0.395, p = .055).
Post-hoc comparisons indicated a marginally significant difference between ordered and scrambled text (428 and 475 wpm, respectively; p = .055) with the latter read faster than the former.
It was significant for the siblings (r = −0.51, P = 0.003) and nearly significant for the field males (r = −0.57, P = 0.055) but not for the museum specimens (r = −0.495, P = 0.089).
In the fully adjusted Model 3, females in the higher PIV group had 20% higher odds of probable depression (OR = 1.20, 95% CI: 1.03–1.40, P = 0.018), while PIV as a continuous variable showed a marginally significant association (OR = 1.13, 95% CI: 1.00–1.27, P = 0.055).
Using spatial randomization procedures ( Figure S4 ) and home made R scripts we were able to show that outbreaks localities tend to be closer to refugee areas ( Figure S5 ) than expected by chance alone, though being marginally significant ( P = 0.055).
Analysis of OT-E Time scores revealed that the trained group showed a trend toward significance for improvement over the six month of training (p = 0.055, Supporting Information, Table S3 ) while the control group did not show any significant improvement ( Fig. 1D ).
Only two out of the 13 parcellations yielded significant ROI-pairs at the p<0.05 significance level (‘Power264’ and ‘Talairach’), while a third parcellation produced only marginally significant ROI-pairs (‘Shen100’, p = 0.055)—see Table 8 and Fig 5 .
The Tau K r tests revealed slightly different results with the significance of non-independent data between spatial proximity and relatedness occurring in session 1 (Tau K r = −0.106, p = 0.003), 4 (Tau K r = −0.101, p = 0.006), the single day (Tau K r = −0.121, p = 0.003), approaching significance in session 2 (Tau K r = −0.029, p = 0.055), but none in session 3 (Tau K r = −0.049, p = 0.180).
Supratidal invertebrates Taxa richness in the fallout traps had a trend towards being lowest at Restore Low, but there were no significant differences, although the pairwise difference between Protect Low and Restore Low was marginally significant ( p = 0.055) ( S1 Fig , Tables 1 , 2 , S3 Table ).
Alternatively, significant genetic structure was detected in sampling session 2, but not in the Tau K r test, although it approached significance (p = 0.055).
There was a marginally significant higher HIV incidence rate among women who knew their partners' HIV status compared to those who did not know their partners' HIV status (p = 0.055).
The results showed that the effect of emotion group was marginally significant, F (1, 53) = 3.86, p = .055, η p 2 = .07, with worse delayed memory in the positive condition ( M = .26, SE = .02) than in the control condition ( M = .31, SE = .02).