“marginally significant”

Human Nature For HN traits, there was a significant main effects of Player, F (1, 216) = 85.14, p < 0.001, η 2 = 0.28, as well as a marginally significant main effect of Condition, F (1, 216) = 2.79, p = 0.10, η 2 = 0.01.

Leader narcissism showed a marginally significant negative relation with entrepreneurial team performance (β = −0.241, p < 0.10).

A paired-samples t-test revealed a marginally significant effect in learning gains when low prior knowledge students were assigned to Tutor Mode (p = .10).

PPWR and PPWG had marginally significant direct associations with low HDL-c (0.05 ≤ p < 0.10).

The peak torque at the CC increased after the intervention in the rBFR (pre: 40.6 N・m [34.3-48.1], post: 44.8 N・m [37.1-74.0]; p = 0.043; r = 0.64) while a marginally significant increase was noted in the CON (pre: 42.5 N・m [35.7-47.3], post: 45.5 N・m [42.2-62.2]; p < 0.10; r = 0.64) versus no increase after the intervention in the eBFR (pre: 41.7 N・m [34.0-46.3], post: 40.3 N・m [34.3-47.2]; r = 0.00).

SG mutation frequencies at doses of 0.125, 0.250, and 0.500 Gy were reduced by BCE combination treatment with significant and marginally significant differences ( p < 0.1, p < 0.1 and p < 0.05, respectively).

Test result is considered significant if p - value < 0.05 (*) and marginally significant if p - value < 0.10 ( · ).

For all the significant ( P < 0.05) and marginally significant ( P < 0.10) year/compartments/growth stage combinations, pairwise comparisons of the genotypes was performed (function “pairwiseAdonis”) [ 49 ].

Initially univariate logistic regressions were analysed to identify any significant or marginally significant relationships (using p<.10 as the inclusion criterion).

7b , at least 50% of the pairs of functional subcategories in each major categories showed significant (p < 0.05) or marginally significant (p < 0.1) correlations, with coefficients above 0.25.

The indirect relationship is marginally significant ( p < 0.10).

This analysis revealed a significant or marginally significant (0.05 < P < 0.10) interaction between microbial inoculation, herbivory, and herbivory time specifically for the GLVs hexanal ( P = 0.08, F = 2.604) and ( Z )‐3‐hexenyl acetate ( P = 0.09, F = 2.53) (Table S7 ).

After controlling the overlap between NSSI and suicidal behaviors, perfectionism was found to account for a marginally significant 1% of variance in NSSI behaviors F (2, 280) = 2.67, p < 0.10).

(2018) find that left-hand 2D:4D is statistically significantly negatively related to men’s self-employment ( p < .01), whereas for women they report a “marginally significant” negative relation ( p < .10).

In addition, 31% of corals from Butaritari (N = 13) had partial mortality scars associated with the 2004 bleaching event, while none from Abaiang and North Tarawa showed such scars (N = 12); this difference was marginally significant (p = 0.10, permutation test).

As the tissue cytokine quantification method used in this study was exploratory, post-hoc multiple comparisons were performed for significant or marginally significant ( p < 0.10) effects or interactions, using the estimated marginal means from the model and Tukey’s method of p value adjustment.

Multivariable logistic regression models were estimated for each outcome separately, including gender, age, and race/ethnicity in all models, as well as covariates that were marginally significant ( p < 0.10) in bivariate analyses.

There were marginally significant decreased odds of reporting having any sex during the measurement period with each additional year of age ( p = 0.10) and for those identifying as heterosexual ( p = 0.092) and Hispanic ( p = 0.068).

Finally, explanatory variables found to be marginally significant (p<0.10) in bivariate analyses were tested in multivariable linear regression Ordinary Least Squares (OLS) models with cluster-robust SEs to account for clustering.

In contrast, the effect of CACS-2 was statistically insignificant ( b = 0.027, p > 0.1), and CACS-8 exhibited only a marginally significant, weak effect ( b = 0.184, p < 0.1).

In addition, we found marginally significant differences ( p < 0.1) for “friendly–unfriendly,” “non-enjoyable–enjoyable,” and “restless–calm.” The results show that the respondents found the thinned forest environment more friendly, favorable, and calm. 3.2.2.

To investigate whether the effects of maternal and paternal psychopathology can be explained by spousal resemblance, we also tested a model in which both the maternal and paternal scores were included that had a marginally significant effect ( p < 0.10) in the first analyses.

For the relationships between the antecedent and outcome variables as mediated by PIC, the indirect effects were significant for perspective-seeking to TDOB ( B = 0.14, p < .05; .95% CI [−0.02, .30]), and marginally significant for trust to KWKW ( B = 0.18, p < .10; 95% CI [−0.01, .43]) Discussion and conclusion The set of studies in this manuscript aimed to create a reliable and valid measure of the perspective integration capability of individuals working in expertise diverse collaborations.

Variables that were marginally significant at a level of P < 0.10 in the univariate analysis were selected in the multivariate model.

Moreover, ΔPSS had significant ( p < 0.05) or marginally significant ( p < 0.1) negative correlations with the subscales, including attention to detail, with the exception of social skills and imagination (Supplementary Table S3).