“marginally significant”

The difference in correlations between non-users and users was marginally significant, Z = 1.55, P = 0.061 ( Figure 5a ).

There was a marginally significant negative correlation between these two measures over the midcentral region ( r s = .335, p = .061), indicating that the reduction in reported memory intrusions was reflected in a reduction in the NSW.

The results showed that the three-way interaction was marginally significant for sex on accelerometer measured MVPA/week (p = 0.061) and steps/day (p = 0.047).

This relationship was marginally significant even when controlling for the sparsity condition (β = 0.080, p = 0.061, partial η 2 = 0.047).

Liver fat content was significantly increased with length of exposure to HAFPD alone ( P = 0.003, compare 8WVeh and 16WVeh), but the difference in liver fat between 8W-matched and 16W-matched chow-fed mice was marginally significant (14.0 ± 6.1 and 26.0 ± 5.1%, respectively, P = 0.061).

As for the C1-P4 pair, the increases in synchrony from the baselines were marginally significant in both conditions ( z = 2.16 and p = 0.061, z = 2.08 and p = 0.074, respectively; Bonferroni corrected).

Additionally, there was now a marginally significant negative correlation between MA and counting at T1 ( r (52) = −0.26, p = 0.061) and a significant negative correlation between MA and counting at T2 ( r (52) = −0.32, p = 0.017).

In Experiment 1, the modeled outcome binding effect ( M = 75.97 ms) was statistically significant ( t (17) = 3.98, p<0.001, dz = 0.94, one-tailed paired-samples t-test, BF +0 = 77.53; Figure 5h ), but showed a marginally significant reduction compared to the actual outcome binding effect ( M = 113.47 ms; t (17) = –2.01, p=0.061, dz = 0.47, two-tailed paired-samples t-test, BF 10 = 1.24).

Focusing on the interaction, post-hoc tests showed a significant difference between the first 5 trials and the subsequent five for the SOG group (p = 0.007), and marginally significant difference for the OG group (p = 0.061).

We then ran a Mann–Whitney U test, which had a marginally significant difference in medians ( p = 0.061), with the trend showing a higher likelihood of staying with the organization for those without MDD.

A marginally significant three-factor interaction effect was found, F (4, 160) = 2.299, p = 0.061, η 2 = 0.054.

Results The results of the analysis revealed a marginally significant main effect of the label, b = 0.17, se = 0.09, Z = 1.87, p = .061, a significant main effect of medical diagnosis, b = 0.20, se = 0.09, Z = 2.16, p = .031, and a reliable significant interaction between the two manipulations, b = −0.35, se = 0.09, Z = −3.78, p <.001.

Evaluation of cognitive level as a potential moderator of physiological responsivity showed that IQ was not significant for the ASD group; however, it was a marginally significant moderator for the TYP group, such that children with higher IQ experienced slightly lower cortisol levels (β = −0.014, t = −1.91, P = 0.061) to initial exposure.

Thus, in the Pre-Pyrenees, there are statistically significant differences, especially in the case of the bearded vulture (average growth with wild ungulates only: −5±6%, growth in the real scenario: 4±3%, P = 0.028) and the griffon vulture (with wild ungulates only: 0.03±9%, growth in the real scenario: 10±1.6%, P = 0.039), being marginally significant in the case of the Egyptian vulture (with wild ungulates only: −2±8%, growth in the real scenario: 6±0.8%, P = 0.061).

baseline: F 1,20 = 5.095; p = 0.035, η 2 p = 0.203), a similar (but marginally significant) effect was present for UMTS (UMTS exposure in Mid and Post vs. baseline: F 1,33 = 3.772; p = 0.061, η 2 p = 0.103), and the mid-post temporal interactions were not significant (exposure × time mid vs. post, UMTS: F 1,33 = 0.037; p = 0.849, η 2 p = 0.001; LTE: F 1,20 = 2.932; p = 0.102, η 2 p = 0.128).

However, the elevation of hs-cTnI was marginally significant ( p = 0.061) on admission, although hs-cTnI levels were confirmed to be significantly elevated in all patients with cardiac injury during their hospitalization.

This comparison was marginally significant, t(73) = 1.89, p = .061, d = 0.39.

With affect intensity measures entered into Model 3b, trait emotional intelligence remained a marginally significant predictor of fear ( B = −0.31; CI = [−0.63; 0.01]; p = .061).

InterSC showed a positive association with cognitive reappraisal (β = .21, p< .001), the need to belong (β = .25, p< .001), and API (β = .154, p< .001), but was negatively related to attentional control (β = -.10, p < .05), and a marginally significant association with self-esteem (β = -.068, p = .061).

At T3, there was a marginally significant mean-level difference between the SNI and active control condition on SSB consumption, adjusted for baseline SSB consumption ( b = 0·17, se = 0·10, β = 0·20, P = 0·061, 95 % CI [–0·01, 0·40]).

12 , 13 Although the observed associations are not significant after correction for multiple testing of SNPs selected for these replication analyses, we observed marginally significant evidence of association of SNP rs11624702 in MDGA2 (MAM domain containing glycosylphosphatidylinositol anchor 2) with response in the ISPC alone ( P =0.061) and in the combined ISPC-AMPS-STAR*D meta-analysis ( P =0.029), with the minor allele being associated with lower odds of response (that is, worse clinical outcomes).

In partial support of the first hypothesis, the results of the mixed-effects model indicated a marginally significant difference between groups at posttest ( p = .061; see Table 5 ).

Similarly, the interaction between Dyslipidemia and Social activities is marginally significant ( β = 0.15, p = 0.061), indicating a potential reinforcing effect of social engagement on health care consumption behavior among individuals with dyslipidemia (see Table 6 for details). 4.

Analyses revealed a marginally significant interaction between framing and political affiliation on one’s motivation to participate in the drive [ F (1, 249) = 3.55, p = 0.061].

If we excluded a single control nest with only 20% fledgling success, maternal immunization had a marginally significant effect on fledging success (GLMM, t=−1.969, P =0.061, d.f.=23).