Likewise, participants decreased their mean bribe level in the low-norm condition, although the change was only marginally significant ( F = 3.08, p = .08, eta 2 = .04).
← all phrases
“only marginally significant”
Sighted at
p<1.0p=0.9
In the literature
Although this effect was only marginally significant ( P =0.08), it might be specific.
However, on removal of the first function the second was only marginally significant on its own (Λ = 0.90, χ 2 (8) = 13.96, P = .08).
A comparison across the two treatments indicated that the proportion of S-shaped probability weighting functions was higher in the sampling treatment, although the difference was only marginally significant ( p = 0.08 , two-sided Fisher’s exact test).
However, the estimated effect difference is only marginally significant from a statistical perspective (p = 0.08) and highly sensitive to model specification.
Daytime and nighttime ‘active’ networks predicted each other well ( r 2 = 0.95), but this result was only marginally significant according to the permutation test ( p = 0.08).
Proportions of euthanasia were highest in puppies less than six months of age (30.6%), dogs 12–18 months (28.0%) and dogs over 24 months of age (27.7%), however, these differences were only marginally significant ( P = 0.08).
The mortality rate among populations displaced to camps was 1.5 (CI: 0.95-2.38) times greater than populations in neighborhoods; however, this finding was only marginally significant (p = 0.080).
While the main effects of cue validity on RTs were only marginally significant with a trend towards faster RTs for valid cues compared to invalid cues, F (1, 24) = 3.4, p = 0.08, there was a stronger main effect of cue type, F (1, 24) = 10.2, p = 0.004, where RTs were slower when the target preceding cues were numbers ( M = 568 ms) compared to when they were rectangles ( M = 544 ms).
The effect of similarity was only marginally significant [ F (1, 9) = 3.82, p = 0.08, η p 2 = 0.30], showing stronger illusion for similar ( M = 0.09, SD = 0.09) compared with dissimilar ( M = 0.08, SD = 0.09) target and flankers’ element type.
Among the additional HAMD‐31 items (also in Table 2 ), the only marginally significant effect in favor of lamotrigine was on item 28 (motor retardation; p = .08, d = .09).
The estimates for birth weight were only marginally significant ( p = 0.08) among those women living near moderate methyl bromide use, whereas those for head circumference were marginally significant ( p = 0.06) among those with high use.
Further, fruiting success was higher in plants that experienced recurrent drought, although only marginally significant ( χ 2 = 3.1, df = 1, P = 0.08).
This contrast was only marginally significant, F (1, 180) = 3.05, p = .08, η p 2 = .02.
For ventral rostral putamen, connectivity strength with inferior frontal gyrus was lower in PD ON than PD OFF but was only marginally significant ( t 24 = 1.81, p = 0.08, Figure S3 D in Supplementary Material).
Those who report palpitations at their initial visit have a 36% increase in the rate of POTS treatment changes, however this result is only marginally significant ( p = 0.08).
The effect was only marginally significant (p = 0.08) but the power was low (P = 50%).
The model was significantly associated with increased levels of Cov-Anx ( F (5, 928) = 225.4, p < 0.001), but the interaction between positive and negative religious coping was only marginally significant ( p = 0.08).
Chl c content increased in the HC-grown cells, although the difference was only marginally significant ( p = 0.08–0.71) ( Fig. 2C ).
Low TMT was also associated with in-hospital recovery (OR 0.59, 95% CI 0.38–0.86, P = 0.007), but this association was only marginally significant when adjusted for covariates (aOR 0.67, 95% CI 0.42–1.06, P = 0.08).
The interaction between self-regulatory depletion and the imaginary item was only marginally significant but had a medium effect size [ F (3,80) = 3.18, p = 0.08, η p 2 = 0.04; see Figure 3 ].
Drought effects were highly significant (P<0.001) when fitted before plot-level annual above-ground productivity ( Table 2A ), but they were only marginally significant (P = 0.08) when fitted after plot-level annual above-ground productivity ( Table 2B ).
Last, the share of participants who chose the taller person in the photograph when asked about knowledge differed significantly from 50% for children (girls and boys, p<0.001 in both), but only marginally significant for adults (women, p = 0.08; men, p = 0.09).
Women who delivered in a facility had a 1.8 times higher hazard than women who delivered at home, but the difference is only marginally significant ( p = .08).
According to multivariate analysis, DoI-1 ( P = 0.009, HR 2.03), the total number of examined LNs for N0 (10 or less, P < 0.004, HR 2.63), number of metastatic LNs (≥4, P < 0.001, HR 5.24), and completeness of resection (R2, P = 0.003, HR 66.41) remained significant (Table 5 ), although when the number of metastatic LNs was between 1 and 3, the P -value was only marginally significant ( P < 0.08, HR 1.85).