“marginally significant”

The interactions between graduate institutions and internship enterprises were marginally significant ( F (1, 31) = 3.60, p = 0.070, η 2 p = 0.09, and 95%CI [−0.038, 7.383]).

Additionally, the pathway from Week 4 SPA to Week 8 PA was marginally significant (β = .11, p = .07).

The test for an interaction between phoneme expectation and temporal predictability revealed a marginally significant effect (largest cluster −250 to −160 ms, p = 0.07; second largest cluster p = 0.09) that started before word onset and was evident bilaterally over temporal and frontal regions (see Fig. 2B ).

However, within a sub-sample of CHC member respondents, there was a marginally significant decrease in trust (−0.26, CI (−0.53, 0.02), p = 0.07) and social solidarity (−0.27, CI (−0.56, 0.02), p = 0.07) factor scores from baseline to final.

In contrast, the analysis of waking duration prior to sessions showed a marginally significant interaction between testing time and chronotype, F (1, 25) = 4.16, p = .07, ŋp 2 = 0.12.

Yoghourt intake increased, but only to a marginally significant degree ( p = 0.070).

Participants’ Evaluation An ANOVA on the participants’ evaluation revealed a significant main effect of PDB (M high PDB = 4.26, M low PDB = 4.84; F(1,92) = 7.706, p = 0.007) and marginally significant main effect of the purchase type (M material purchase = 4.35, M experiential purchase = 4.74; F(1,92) = 3.407, p = 0.07).

For the P2 component, repeated-measures ANOVA confirmed a marginally significant main effect of salience, F (1, 25) = 3.68, p = 0.07, η 2 p = 0.13, in the absence of a significant congruency effect, F (1, 25) = 0.04, p = 0.85, η 2 p = 0.001.

The results showed that this indirect effect was marginally significant when emotion suppression was low ( indirect effect = 0.022, SE = 0.01, p = .07, 95% CI [-0.027, 0.032]), but not significant when emotion suppression was high ( indirect effect = 0.002, SE = 0.02, ns ), and the difference between these two indirect effects was significant ( indirect effect = − 0.019, SE = 0.01, p < .05, 95% CI [-0.037, − 0.001]), providing support for the moderated mediated effect.

Marginally significant differences were observed in the distribution of the time elapsed since the last cigarette (p=0.07) and the FTND score (p=0.067) among the 5 groups.

Previous joint surgery was marginally significant (OR 1.89, 95% CI 0.96–3.75, p = 0.07).

However, the group without long COVID had a marginally significant higher proportion of fully vaccinated individuals compared to the group with long COVID (69.4% vs. 50%; p = .07).

Also, a moderate, marginally significant correlation was found in the Down condition (Pearson’s r = 0.55, p = 0.07, Figure 4B ).

In the case of the pairwise comparisons on the number of thumbs up between the six types of video content, videos recommending harmful therapies received more thumbs up than those that claim to deny the efficacy of harmful therapies, although this difference was marginally significant ( p = 0.07). 4.

Manifest anxiety showed a marginally significant influence ( P = .070), but multiple comparison analysis showed no significant differences for T0 to T1 ( P = .128), T0 to T2 ( P = .150), and T1 to T2 ( P = .985) (Table 2 ).

2022 ) suggested that higher PLAG1 expression in blood had a marginally significant association with longer overall survival ( P = 0.07) ( Fig. 6 H), while higher SMAD1 expression had a marginally significant association with shorter overall survival ( P = 0.096) ( Fig. 6 H).

Additionally, marginally significant increases in serum triglyceride (170.9 ± 11.5 at the baseline vs. 185.9 ± 97.4 after 6 weeks, P = 0.07) and LDL-c (80.9 ± 30.3 at the baseline vs. 86.6 ± 30.1 after 6 weeks, P = 0.07) was found in control group.

In Model 1, we found a significant positive main effect of ethnicity [ b = 48.20, SE = 6.29, t (656) = 7.67, p < 0.001] and a marginally significant negative main effect of percentage of Turkish-origin students [ b = −0.57.45, SE = 31.76, t (656) = −1.81, p = 0.07], but unexpectedly no cross-level interaction effect on students' performance ( p = 0.81; see Table 2 ).

The coefficient for alcohol consumption was negative and marginally significant for VSTMRS ( - 7.2, p-value = 0.07), hinting that moderate alcohol consumption may be linked to poor short-term memory.

The occurrence of diarrhoea was highest among the goats under 1 year (18%) followed by adolescents (1–2 years; 12%) and adults (more than 2 year: 11%) and the difference was found marginally significant ( p = 0.07).

In addition, the difference was marginally significant for pT ( p = 0.07), Dukes classification ( p = 0.10), and v ( p = 0.07).

Conversational-1st order resulted in a significant difference in the two speech styles; for learning efficiency, t (23) = 3.60, p = 0.002; immediate memory, t (23) = 2.49, p = 0.021; and marginally significant for delayed memory, t (23) = 1.90, p = 0.07.

Post hoc analysis indicated that patients were significantly higher on anxiety compared to staff ( p = 0.007) and with a marginally significant difference with healthy persons ( p = 0.07).

Simple effects analyses found that in pain condition, participants experienced marginally significant more self-uncomfortableness for high facial attractive actors ( M = 3.41, SE = 0.12) compared to those for low facial attractive actors ( M = 3.34, SE = 0.12, p = 0.07); in non-pain condition, no such difference was found ( p = 0.18).

The G1 domain showed a marginally significant effect ( p = 0.07), while no statistically significant difference was found in the social relationships domain ( p = 0.45) ( Figure 16 ).