marginally significantp = .06
Results yielded a marginally significant effect of condition, F (3, 116) = 2.56, p = .06, ŋ p 2 = .06, with the moving group reporting more intrusions than did the professor stereotype group (see Table 1 ).
Results yielded a marginally significant effect of condition, F (3, 116) = 2.56, p = .06, ŋ p 2 = .06, with the moving group reporting more intrusions than did the professor stereotype group (see Table 1 ).
No other comparisons were significant. For the relevance ratings, results showed a significant effect of condition, F (2,74) = 4.30, p < .05, ŋ p 2 = .10, with the survival-stereotype group providing higher mean ratings than those in the moving condition (see Table 2 ).The other posthoc analyses failed to reach significance.