Barely Significant
← all phrases

“almost significant”

1,859 sentences · 1,859 papers · 2,306 search hits before verification · confirmed specimen

Sighted at

p=0.06

Listed by Hankins (2013) · Otte et al. (2022)

In the literature

almost significantp = .0831.7× alphagold
Logistic regression analyses using these dummy coded variables yielded an almost significant interaction effect between violation type and the dummy that contrasted equal compensation with no compensation (Wald = 3.01, p = .083), a significant interaction effect between violation type and the dummy contrasting overcompensation to no compensation (Wald = 5.46, p = .019), and a non-significant interaction effect between violation type and the dummy that contrasted overcompensation with equal compensation (Wald = 0.65, p = .421).
almost significantp = .0841.7× alphagold
In contrast, presenting the bars with perfectly stable (nonflashing) noise patterns did not produce any overestimations: When both, the bars and the pattern, were stable (Experiment 3c, Figure 2(k) ) the two-tailed Wilcoxon test resulted in an almost significant difference, W = 10, p = .084, r =.86, pointing, however, to underestimations on the noise side.
almost significantp = 0.08661.7× alphagold
There were significant differences in the total number of cells (control, 10.30%; BCG, 13.22%; HIMB, 7.82%) between the BCG and HIMB groups ( p = 0.0013), and almost significant differences between the control and BCG groups ( p = 0.0866) and the HIMB ( p = 0.1002) group. 2.2.
almost significantp = 0.0881.8× alphagold
The prominent peak for the FP300‐complex condition that is visible in Figure 3B presumably contributed to the significant main effect for FP ( Fc (1, 23) = 5.41, p = 0.029, η p 2 = 0.19) and to an almost significant RC × FP interaction ( Fc (1, 23) = 3.17, p = 0.088, η p 2 = 0.12). 3.3 S‐Locked Surface Laplacian Waves Figure 4A shows S‐locked SLWs as a function of FP duration and hemisphere, collapsed across RC condition.
almost significantP = 0.0881.8× alphagold
Separate analyses showed that this occurred because the interaction was almost significant for cavity-nesting species ( t 19.3 = −1.933, P = 0.088), significant for branch nesting species ( t 23.7 = −2.632, P = 0.009) and non-significant for ground-nesting species ( t 14.3 = 0.519, P = 0.421).
almost significantp = 0.0891.8× alphagold
This account may also explain why an almost significant difference was found in the word naming task ( p = 0.089, d = 0.22, mean difference of 4.3 words favoring the non-vulnerable group), but not in the color naming task ( p = 0.506, d = 0.09) despite the fact that both are considered to be measures of automatic processes.