“marginally significant”

A marginally significant three-way interaction of Group × Agent × Context was also revealed ( F (1,70) = 3.83, p = 0.054, η p 2 = 0.05).

Yet despite these differences in mean contribution by sleep condition, the standard deviations were high enough that the difference was not significant (two tailed p = .303), though marginally significant with cohort 1 included ( p = .054).

positive words was marginally significant (t = 2.72; p = 0.054).

The relationship between the satisfaction to work for one’s organization and the degree to which one’s work is manageable is positive at the 0.05 significance level for all regions except Region B, where the relationship is marginally significant ( p = 0.054 ).

The increase in interference effects in accuracy with the number of the SL G alleles was also significant or marginally significant in all four distracter conditions in run1 (threat: r = 0.195, p = 0.054; neutral: r = 0.170, p = 0.082; scrambled: r = 0.192, p = 0.057; null: r = 0.218, p = 0.036; all one-tailed correlations).

For trust (H5), the analysis revealed a marginally significant interaction effect (F(1, 504) = 3.729, p =.054, η2 = 0.004).

Three-quarters were not breastfed, indicating a marginally significant relationship with health outcomes (Chi-square = 3.699, p = 0.054).

The ANOVA on inter-bout-interval data resulted in a marginally significant main effect of Day 5 Treatment ( F 1 , 24 = 4.01, p = 0.054; Supplementary Figure 3C ) but no other main effects or interactions ( F ’s < 1.94, p ’s > 0.05).

We also observed a marginally significant, medium, effect for emotion dysregulation ( p = 0.054, d = 0.45), such that having stopped NSSI was associated with lower scores on this variable.

The power of the circatidal period in the treatment group was higher compared to that of the control group, although the difference between them was marginally significant (χ 2 = 3.70, P = 0.054).

A marginally significant difference was observed in the LF/HF band [F(2,102) = 2.995, p = 0.054, ηp 2 = 0.055, observed power = 0.570] in the frequency domain, and a significant difference was observed in the SD1/SD2 band [F(2,102) = 4.291, p = 0.016, ηp 2 = 0.078, observed power = 0.736] of the nonlinear measure before, during, and after periods of standardized error during the competition.

In contrast, MREG , a gene that suppresses melanization, showed marginally significant downregulation in dark-colored frogs ( p = 0.054, Mann–Whitney U test) ( Figure 5 e). 4.

Although the correlation with NO 3 − -N was not statistically significant ( p < 0.05), it was marginally significant ( p = 0.054).

Individuals carrying ERCC1 118TT homozygote genotype had a 2.01-fold (marginally significant) increased risk of cancer compared with the wild genotype (95%CI 0.99-4.10, P = 0.054).

Due to a violation of equality of error variance, and a marginally significant violation of equality of covariance ( p = 0.054) total scores on the BCI were log transformed.

Marginally significant differences were found for CD68+ macrophages (low-grade vs. high-grade tumors: 1.94% [IQR: 0.65–5.16%] vs. 3.56% [IQR: 0.98–10.54%]; p = .054) and CD3 + T-cells (low-grade vs. high-grade tumors: 1.87% [0.62–5.15%]; p = .063).

However, the tendon width of the MR showed a marginally significant correlation with the corrective effect in the ANP group ( P = 0.054, r = 0.59), in contrast to the ET group ( P = 0.62, r = 0.09) (Table 2 ).

Additionally, CKD reached marginally significant (OR=3•58, 95% CI: 0•98–13•06, P = 0•054) in multivariable analysis for female.

The main effect of Emotion was found to be significant F (2, 219) = 55.44 p < 0.001 (partial η 2 = 0.43) and the interaction of Group and Emotion was found to be marginally significant F (2, 219) = 2.57 p = 0.054 (partial η 2 = 0.03; Figure 7 ).

The results showed a marginally significant main effect of room geometry on perceived spaciousness, F (3, 102) = 2.629, p = 0.054, partial η 2 = 0.072, indicating a medium effect size.

The marginally significant three-way interaction among the main effects (ANOVA, P = 0.054, Table 2 ), however, suggested that F v / F m was affected by an interaction between damage and flow that varied between temperatures.

The difference was marginally significant with p = 0.054.

For ICF, the results suggest a marginally significant interaction between the group and training periods, F (1,30) = 4.17, p = 0.054, η 2 = 0.167.

4 When breaking trials down by the first versus second half of the experiment, we observed a marginally significant main interaction between room condition and image position at encoding, F (2, 198) = 2.96, p = 0.054, and a marginally significant three-way interaction, F (2, 198) = 2.79, p = 0.064.

As can be seen in Table 2 , across both groups there was a marginally significant relationship between age and the initial perception of risk, E(q 1 ), r (43) = −0.290, p = 0.054, such that older individuals had higher initial perceptions of risk.