“marginally significant”

An independent-sample t-test indicated that the D -score of the cognitive SC-IAT was significantly above the zero point ( t = 2.18, p <.05) and that of affective SC-IAT was marginally significant ( t = 1.80, p = .078), but that of behavioral SC-IAT was not significant ( t = 1.56, p >.05).

The interaction effect of maternal smoking, GSTM1 and GSTT1 genotypes was marginally significant on birthweight (−234.5 g, P = 0.078).

For the discrimination task, the similarity ratio was a significant predictor of collective benefit using similarity from day 1 ( B = 0.71, SE = 0.27, t (18) = 2.60, p = 0.018, 95% CI [0.13, 1.29]) and marginally significant for calculating similarity for day 2 ( B = 0.34, t (18) = 1.87, p = 0.078, 95% CI [−0.04, 0.73]).

There was a significant main effect of target gender, F (1, 90) = 19.12, p < .001, η p 2 = .18, and target race, F (1.80, 161.94) = 26.27, p < .001, η p 2 = .23, qualified by a marginally significant Gender × Race interaction, F (2, 180) = 2.59, p = .078, η p 2 = .03 ( Table 1 , left).

Since we need to test the U-shaped moderating effect of political ties, we mainly focus on the result of the second-order product term in model (4), where the result of the second-order product term of outward internationalization orientation and political ties is positive and significant ( β = 7.433,t = 2.00,p<0.05) and the result of the second-order product term of inward internationalization orientation is marginally significant at the level of 0.1 ( β = 239.4,t = 1.76,p<0.078), indicating that political ties play a U-shaped moderating role in the relationship between internationalization and firm performance, which is supported by H3 and H4.

The correlation for the pseudoword trials was significant (r = 0.386, p = 0.024), and the correlation for the word trials was marginally significant (r = 0.306, p = 0.078). 4.

The interaction between expressions and gender reached marginally significant, F (2, 44) = 2.698, p = 0.078, η p 2 = 0.454.

These three types of humor were not statistically different from one another, all p > .65, and overall, the model resulted in a marginally significant effect of experimental condition on hiring intentions, F(3,396) = 2.29, p = .078, η p 2 = .02.

The 2-way RM ANOVA performed on AR showed a marginally significant effect of Task ( F (1,33) = 3.30, p = .078, η p 2 = .09) and non-significant effects of Sonic Condition ( F (2,66) = 0.24, p = .785, η p 2 < .01) and Task × Sonic Condition interaction ( F (2,66) = 0.33, p = .717, η p 2 = .01).

For task-related self-efficacy (see Figure 3 ), compared with T1 task performance, participants receiving positive feedback had improved levels of self-efficacy compared to those receiving negative feedback and those receiving control feedback at the second CPT, whereas the task self-efficacy levels of the subsequent two groups did not differ from each other at the second CPT. The Condition*Time interaction was marginally significant on intended effort ( p = 0.078), though Positive condition showed larger intended effort investment compared to Negative condition at the second CPT.

Our comparative analysis of the boy group ( n = 16) and the girl ( n = 16) group demonstrated marginally significant difference (independent t -test: t 30 = 1.82, p = 0.078; Cohen's d = 0.64, medium effect size), with the boy group showing higher values (1.80 ± 0.66 vs. 1.54 ± 0.63).

This indicates a reduced but marginally significant (p = 0.078) greater estimated proportion of Mtb infection as defined by TST compared to IGRA even when restricting our sample to a population where the possibility of BCG cross-reactivity was minimized.

Comparison of Chinese and German participants regarding these composite scores revealed a marginally significant difference ( t (138) = 1.78, p = .078, d = .30).

In addition, a marginally significant interaction effect of SBPV × gender on AD risk was found ( p = 0.078).

In addition, a marginally significant effect of group was detected in the right NAc, adjusted P = .078.

Differences in idea flexibility (range of idea categories) and idea originality (novelty of ideas) also favored the no real-time feedback condition, though these were marginally significant ( p = 0.078 and p = 0.067, respectively).

Although two‐way ANOVA only detected a marginally significant difference among treatments ( p = .078), the multiple comparisons indicated that DW significantly increased k ( p = .028), whereas WW tended to increase k ( p = .128, Figure 2 b).

When investigating the role of the size of the Bayesian prediction by adding variable True and the appropriate set of interactions for the diff-in-diff-in-diff, we observe the triple interaction marginally significant (p = 0.078) and positive for the private signals (column 4) which means that the precision of subjects in treatment group was relatively to the control group a little worse after the treatment intervention.

We found statistically significant correlations between age and relational support at 14 years of age (r = − 0.05; p = 0.021), whereas the correlation was marginally significant for relational support at 12 years ( p = 0.078) and relational tensions at 14 years of age ( p = 0.054).

For the compartment preference data the main effect of AGE was marginally significant ( F 1,41 = 3.28, P = 0.078) and a significant main effect of GENOTYPE was observed ( F 1,41 = 7.50, P = 0.009).

group emotion had a marginally significant multivariate effect, F (3,119) = 2.33, p = 0.078, η p 2 = 0.055, although none of its univariate effects was significant.

The heritability for the male mean rate, to our knowledge the first such estimate, was also marginally significant (h 2 = 0.14; p = 0.078).

For RII biomass , significant/marginally significant difference was found for cushions in the size classes III ( p = 0.078) and IV ( p = 0.017), but not in classes I ( p = 0.768) and II ( p = 0.324).

Meanwhile, the initiation and activity of the Korea Suicide Prevention Center, one of the control variables, was marginally significant (t=1.93, p=0.078), and the other control variable, the suicide rate of Gyeonggi Province, was not significant (t=1.32, p=0.210).

Regarding cooperation skills, the intervention had a marginally significant positive effect on increasing them among third grade boys (0.528, p = 0.078), whereas for the first graders the effect was slightly negative, but again not significantly different from zero (-0.328, p = 0.234).