The effect of target context and cue type in a postcue word pronunciation task.

Adv Cogn Psychol · 2011 · PMC3195207 · PMID 22007264

Europe PMC DOI

hedged sentences

0.0660

closest p · 1.3× alpha

0.0910

boldest claim

The sentences

approached significancep = .066so close (0.05 < p ≤ 0.1)

The interaction between target location and relatedness approached significance, F (1, 60) = 3.50, p = .066, η p 2 = .06, and revealed a significant priming effect for top located targets (related: M = 691, SE = 12.73; vs. unrelated: M = 702, SE = 12.53, p = .051) and no priming for bottom located targets (related: M = 728, SE = 12.32; vs. unrelated: M = 722, SE = 11.89, p = .399).

also in 8,237 other papers

a marginal trendp = .091so close (0.05 < p ≤ 0.1)

The interaction between cue type and relatedness showed a marginal trend towards significance, F (1, 60) = 2.95, p = .091, η p 2 = .05.

also in 626 other papers

Quoted from the open-access full text in Europe PMC under the licence the publisher applied. The sentence is reproduced exactly as published; the emphasis is ours.