Although the interaction between social media self-disclosure and gender in predicting cyberbullying victimization was only marginally significant ( β = −0.166, p = 0.057, 95% CI = [−0.336, 0.005]), post-hoc analysis found the simple slope was significant for females ( β = 0.180, t = 4.141, p < 0.001, 95% CI = [0.095, 0.266]) but not significant for males ( β = 0.015, t = 0.195, p = 0.846, 95% CI = [−0.133, 0.162]) ( Figure 3 ).
← all phrases
“only marginally significant”
Sighted at
p<1.0p=0.9
In the literature
urticae showed a similar pattern although this result is only marginally significant (Fig. 3 ; t -test: t 118 = 1.92, P = 0.057).
Exceptions were the appreciation of life subscale, where the quadratic terms were only marginally significant for the prediction of PTSD, β=−.14, p =.057, relating to others, where the quadratic term was marginally significant for depression, β=−.15, p =.08, and spiritual change, where the quadratic term did not predict PTSD symptom severities, β = −.02, p =.238.
For the object interaction proportion, we found that the dogs tended to interact more with the target object than with the distractors following the disappear event than the reappear event, although the effect was only marginally significant ( χ 2 (1) = 3.61, p = 0.057; figure 4 b ).
However, this result was only marginally significant ( p = 0.057) and should be interpreted with caution.
The normalized N1m source strengths in the 7/8 oct +30 dB condition (mean = 0.94, SD = 0.14) were also smaller as compared to the NFN-condition, though this effect was only marginally significant, F (1, 11) = 2.94, p = 0.057 (one-sided), η p 2 = 0.21.
Indeed, the two participants who did not recover any global stereopsis had more severe amblyopia than the three participants who recovered, although this difference was only marginally significant (independent-samples one-tailed t -test t (3) = 2.22, p = 0.057, Hedge’s g = 2.02, BF10 = 1.37).
Among women, higher agency was associated with a greater likelihood of at least 5% waist circumference reduction (WCR) by T3 (OR = 2.70, CI 95% 1.19-6.15); among men, the association was reversed (but only marginally significant p = .057).
However, the results in the female and stage III−IV subgroups were not satisfactory, which may be due to the small sample size; the p value was only marginally significant in stage III−IV ( p = 0.057).
In terms of exam points, cluster regular had a significant difference with cluster inactive ( p <.0001), while the difference between cluster inactive and cluster exam was only marginally significant ( p =.057).
The material status was considered the only marginally significant predictor in this study with (p-value= 0.057); this study showed that the married participant either male or female had a better global quality of life score.
However, this difference was only marginally significant (p=0.057), which may be due to limited sample size.
While this effect was robust and significant for visual stimuli in all DMN regions, it was only marginally significant in one region (left angular gyrus: t = 1.94, P = 0.057) for audio stimuli.
Latencies In the analysis of latencies, the effect of prime type was only marginally significant by participants [F(1,35) = 3.88; MSe = 4718.14, p = .057; F(1,163) = 2.45, ns].
Femoral length, however, tended to be larger in the experimental group than in the control groups, but this difference was only marginally significant ( p = 0.057; Table 3 ).
Although AIS osteoblasts showed a rising trend with increasing leptin concentrations, this linear relationship was only marginally significant (p = 0.057).
In addition, among those who responded, the consenters had greater proportions of African-Americans and Hispanics than did the refusers, although the differences were only marginally significant for African-Americans ( p = 0.057).
However, due to the sample size limitation, this result is only marginally significant ( P = 0.057), and we will add more samples in future experiments to provide stronger evidence that RAC1 promotes brain metastasis.
Analyses suggested positive selection on the het-e2 haplogroup only, although the test was only marginally significant (2Δln L = 3.61, df = 2, P = 0.0573; supplementary table S6 , Supplementary Material online).
The local response in nodule number tended to differ between functional groups: nodulation in legume soil was lower than in soil conditioned by non-legumes, but this effect was only marginally significant and probably due to the strong response to V. cracca soil inoculum (interaction between functional group and compartment, F 1,54 = 3.77, P = 0.0574).
piceatus had smaller clutches, but this difference was only marginally significant after standardization for HL (χ 2 (df = 1) = 3.60, p = 0.0579).
Participants who had never tested before had increased odds of an invalid result, but this finding was only marginally significant (OR = 2.81; p = 0.0579 by Fisher’s Exact Test).
On the biconditional analysis, Group and Time also interacted, F (1,76) = 7.966, p = .006, η ρ 2 = .095, although this was only marginally significant when covariates were included, F (1,72) = 3.697, p = .058, η ρ 2 = .049.
This effect was reversed for the recognition task, although this was only marginally significant ( t 15 = 2.05, P = 0.058).
The oesophageal cancer risk among males compared with females was only marginally significant (adjusted IRR = 1.22; 95% CI: 0.99, 1.49; p = 0.058).