“marginally significant”

Furthermore, the negative effect of threat on booking intention continues to be marginally significant (β = −0.47, p = .06), even after introducing both moderators into the regression.

Wilcoxon rank-sum tests showed that there were no significant differences between the unilateral and bilateral groups in the number of trials (p = 0.59), the duration (p = 0.22), the number of rewarded trials (p = 0.84), or the reaction time from the go-signal (p = 0.9), although the difference in the ratio of rewarded trials was marginally significant (p = 0.06). c-Fos-positive cell density maps Figure 3 shows c-Fos-positive cell density maps (PCDMs) at five levels for each of the three task groups.

Compared with the neutral PA, PA with emotional feedback led to higher intrinsic motivation (marginally significant) [ F (1, 107) = 3.72, p = 0.06, η p 2 = 0.034].

If we accept the movements of scavengers in response to a lack of resources as used in the old model, the difference in the projected 2029 griffon vulture populations between using the parameters of the updated and non‐updated model was marginally significant ( p = 0.06, Figure 4 ).

In terms of the direct paths from reading conditions to the outcome, there was a marginally significant direct path from Agent non‐DR to the story comprehension score ( β = −0.34, p = .06), suggesting that children in the Agent non‐DR condition may have had lower learning performance compared to those in the Agent DR condition while controlling for irrelevant and relevant vocalization mediators and other covariates.

The changes observed in the present study were marginally significant and of moderate effect size ( p = 0.06: d = 0.5), which may have been due to dropout rate and decreased power during the 1-week assessment.

One of the regression models identified a marginally significant ( P = 0.06) inverse association between depressive symptoms and PA.

The test for interaction between treatment and HLA-A*02 status was marginally significant ( P = .06).

39 Even after controlling for potentially biasing contextual factors, these results revealed a marginally significant association between school level TUPE activities and decreased smoking index scores over the 2-year period (p=0.06), suggesting that TUPE implementation activities helped to reduce student smoking over time; however, the normally robust inverse association between school-level SES measures and the smoking index became non-significant at the 2-year follow-up, possibly because of increased dropout among low-SES smokers in the 12th grade.

Higher maternal education had a marginally significant association with lower AOSI scores [ t (37) = −1.97, p = 0.06].

There was a marginally significant change in fruit intake (g) between the two groups (t = −1.88, p = 0.06, ƒ 2 = 0.02).

Pairwise comparison showed that the difference between sex congruent and incongruent trials in the “above 12” group was not significant for face stimuli ( p = 0.5), but marginally significant for body stimuli ( p = 0.06).

Yellow males obtained significantly more copulations after winning against blue males (Wilcoxon matched paired test, z = 2.67, n = 15, P < 0.01) and marginally significant after winning against immaculata males (Wilcoxon matched paired test, z = 1.83, n = 10, P = 0.06).

Next, a Mann–Whitney U test on posttest length shows a marginally significant difference between the two HNU conditions ( U = 495, p = .06) with the Adaptive condition ( Mean = 39, SD = 8) forming marginally significantly shorter proofs than the Control ( Mean = 44, SD = 12), and a moderate effect size (Cohen’s d = .49).

There was a marginally significant ( P = 0.06) shorter time since last drug use among those with a positive urine test [median 225 days (95% confidence limits 120, 365 days) vs 420 days (95% confidence limits 180, 730 days)].

There was a marginally significant difference for gestation length ( P = 0.06), such that heifers in the MUD treatment calved approximately 3.1 days before the heifers in the CON treatment.

A significant main effect of time, F (1,54) = 5.84, p = .02, partial η 2 = .10, was revealed for compassionate feelings that was qualified by a marginally significant interaction between time and training, F (1,54) = 3.61, p = .06, partial η 2 = .06.

In addition, there was a marginally significant difference in blood Leucocytes count ( p = 0.06) and fecal Calprotectin ( p = 0.06) between the three groups. 3.2.

Allelic and genotypic odds ratios for individual SNPs As shown in Table 4 , the G allele and the GG genotype of the -11377C>G SNP significantly increased the risk of obesity (OR, 1.48 and 2.30, respectively, in the G3 group), although the regression model for the genotypic test was marginally significant (p=0.06).

In addition, random-effects models demonstrated significantly lower left hippocampus N-acetyl aspartate (NAA) in PTSD when referenced to creatine (Cr) (k = 7 studies; pooled standardized mean difference −0.99, 95% CI −1.94 to −0.04, P = .04) with a marginally significant decrease on the right (k = 6 studies; pooled standardized mean difference −0.75, 95% CI −1.54 to 0.04, P = .06), while NAA referenced otherwise demonstrated significant effect for both left (k = 7 studies; pooled standardized mean difference −0.78, 95% CI −1.11 to −0.45, P = .001) and right (k = 6 studies; pooled standardized mean difference −0.73, 95% CI −1.25 to −0.22, P = .01) hippocampus.

A closer look at the data (see Table 2 ), show a marginally significant but negative correlation (r 2 = −0.65, p = 0.06) between baseline TCD velocity in all 10 participants and TAMV on the left side, at the screening time point.

However, only a marginally significant effect on the interaction of risk feedback and emotion regulation to predict selective exposure was found ( b = 0.49; p = 0.06; R 2 change when adding the moderator = 0.004; see Table 2 ), and the main effect of risk feedback that was found before disappeared when including the interaction term.

Results yielded a marginally significant effect of condition, F (3, 116) = 2.56, p = .06, ŋ p 2 = .06, with the moving group reporting more intrusions than did the professor stereotype group (see Table 1 ).

There was also marginally significant effect of item-type, F(1,54) = 3.839, p<0.06, which reflected the children's overall better performance on the even numbers – 2, 4 & 6 – than the odd numbers – 3, 5 & 7 – in both the pre- and post-tests.

Total calendar years of yoga practice was marginally significant, P = 0.06.