“marginally significant”

The ANOVA on the data from the iambic condition yielded a marginally significant effect of Congruence, F (1,18) = 3.936, p = 0.063, η p 2 = 0.179, indicating a tendency of congruent items to evoke more negative potentials.

When major COVID-19 impacts were added to the model (Model 2), the overall effects of social support and engagement were largely unchanged, except for those with high instrumental support, which became marginally significant ( p = 0.063).

001, d = 1.18) and marginally significant higher on IOS ( t (53.92) = 1.90, p = 0.063, d = 0.46) than native Dutch.

Subjective Feelings of Sadness The 3 (time: at baseline, after rumination induction, after mood induction) × 3 (group: anger group, joy group, neutral mood group) repeated measures ANOVA of sadness indicated that the main effect of time was significant [ F (2,174) = 62.614, p < 0.001, η 2 = 0.419], the main effect of group was marginally significant [ F (2,87) = 2.847, p = 0.063, η 2 = 0.061], the interaction between time and group was significant [ F (4,174) = 2.630, p < 0.05, η 2 = 0.057].

A significant conditional effect of vocational training on severe recidivism (HR = 0.69, p < 0.01) and a marginally significant effect of school training on non-violent/-sexual recidivism (HR = 0.87, p = 0.063) was found.

Taking the low baseline RDW group as the reference, in Model 1, the mortality risk of the Q2 group (HR = 2.478, 95% CI: 1.697–3.619, P < 0.001) and Q3 group (HR = 5.595, 95% CI: 3.949–7.927, P < 0.001) was significantly increased; in Model 2, the HR of the two groups was 2.254 (95% CI: 1.539–3.300, P < 0.001) and 5.032 (95% CI: 3.537–7.159, P < 0.001) respectively; in Model 3, the association of the Q2 group was weakened to marginally significant (HR = 1.442, 95% CI: 0.981–2.121, P = 0.063), while the Q3 group still significantly increased the mortality risk (HR = 2.666, 95% CI: 1.854–3.834, P < 0.001).

This main effect was significant for the PI-II , PR-2 and PR-5 genes ( p ≤ 0.040) and marginally significant also for PI-I ( p = 0.063).

As illustrated in Figure 3 , there was a marginally significant main effect of Group, suggesting a trend for experts to be faster than novices overall [ F (1, 28) = 3.754, p = 0.063, η p 2 = 0.118].

There was a marginally significant association between adequate knowledge and centers with increased HIV testing rates (OR 1.51; CI 95% 0.98–2.34; p = 0.063), as well as a statistically significant association between a strong knowledge base and centers with greater new HIV diagnosis rates (OR 1.61; CI 95% 1.04–2.49; p = 0.032).

Stratified analyses Subgroup analyses revealed a marginally significant interaction for sex ( P = 0.063), with male patients demonstrating a stronger negative association (β = − 0.24, 95% CI: − 0.50–0.02) than females did (β = −0 .06, 95% CI: − 0.16–0.05), suggesting a potential trend toward heightened sensitivity of male patients to temporal variations in surgical scheduling.

In our sampled population, our female participants had marginally significant higher sensitivity than men in detecting happy faces ( p = .063), but not in angry or yawning faces.

Longitudinally, the model also showed an interactive effect of LO and RO ( b = 0.06, SE = 0.02, p = .006), and a marginally significant main effect of partner LO ( b = -0.05, SE = 0.03, p = .063).

When comparing between the two groups, the improvement in scores was higher in the hands-on training group than the observational training group, and this was marginally significant (p=0.063).

Two-way ANOVAs revealed a main effect of reward value on felt achievement [ M high value = 5.03, M low value = 4.41; F (1, 259) = 9.40, p = 0.002, ω p 2 = 0.031] and a marginally significant main effect of reward value on competence [ M high value = 4.77, M low value = 4.43; F (1, 259) = 3.47, p = 0.063, ω p 2 = 0.009].

Singleton status, on the other hand, had significant effects on dwell time, F (1, 12) = 9.316, p = .010, η p 2 = .437, and on the probability of capturing the first fixation, F (1, 12) = 7.828, p = .016, η p 2 = .395; it had a marginally significant effect on the number of fixations, F (1, 12) = 4.196, p = .063, η p 2 = .259.

It showed that the three-way interaction was marginally significant ( F 1 , 50 = 3.62, p = 0.063, partial η 2 = 0.068).

unpracticed items) showed a marginally significant main effect of delay , F (3,92) = 2.51, M S E = 0.05, p = .063, η 2 = 0.08, and a main effect of item type , F (1,92) = 66.48, M S E = 0.03, p < .001, η 2 = 0.42, but no interaction between the two factors, F (3,92) < 1.

The Relationship Between Food Addiction and Body Mass Index Z Score/Waist-to-Height Ratio In the present study, FA score was independent of age ( r = 0.050, p = 0.299), but gender showed a marginally significant effect on FA (boys > girls: t = 1.866, p = 0.063).

The partial effects on cognitive reflection were moderate and marginally significant, correct answers ( M DIFF = -0.7): t (37) = 1.92, p = .063, d = 0.64; intuitive answers ( M DIFF = 0.6): t (37) = -2.03, p = .050, d = 0.68, and the effect on probabilistic reasoning was small and non-significant ( M DIFF = -0.3), t (37) = 1.12, p = .272, d = 0.37.

The ANOVA yielded a significant fixed effect of Age (F(1,118) = 17,541, p < .0001, partial ŋ 2 = 0.411 due to longer overall looking times in 4-month-olds than in 8-month-olds, a significant interaction between Order and Age (F(1,118) = 5.194, p = .025, partial ŋ 2 = .042), and a marginally significant interaction between Order, Age, and Type of AV information (F(1,118) = 3.514, p = .063, partial ŋ 2 = .029).

We observed marginally significant score difference between pre- and post-intervention in Group E (Z = −2.023, p = 0.063).

Period and microhabitat had non significant effects on the GLMM ( p > 0.4), but the interaction term was marginally significant ( p = 0.063; Table 2 ). 3.4 Seed dispersal effectiveness Seed dispersal effectiveness provided by different bird groups (residents, and sub‐Saharan and European migrants) changed remarkably in time due to temporal changes in the quantity and quality components (Figure 4 a).

Exploratory analysis of ERP latency The repeated-measures ANOVA with factors age (1, 2, and 3 years) and time (13 time windows of 100 ms each, ranging from 0−1300 ms) revealed a significant main effect of age (F = 4.85, p = 0.01), a significant main effect of time (F = 8.68, p < 0.001), and a marginally significant age*time interaction (F = 1.46, p = 0.063).

A one cell increase in CD4 cell counts among HIV patients increased the odds of having a hearing loss by 0.1% (OR = 1.001; 95%CI: 0.999–1.0003) and was marginally significant (p-value = 0.063).

Concerning the nodule free amino acid content, drought increased proline content, whereas glutamic acid and asparagine (marginally significant; P =0.063) decreased.