Barely Significant
← all excerpts

The characteristics of Chinese orthographic neighborhood size effect for developing readers.

PLoS One · 2012 · PMC3466200 · PMID 23056529

Europe PMCDOI
1
hedged sentence
0.0600
closest p · 1.2× alpha
0.0600
boldest claim

The sentences

marginally significantp = .06so close (0.05 < p ≤ 0.1)
A two-way ANOVA for RTs showed that the main effect of neighborhood size was not significant in participant analysis [F 1 (1,105) = 0.65, p = .42], and marginally significant in item analysis [F 2 (1,96) = 3.54, p = .06]; the main effect of grade was significant in both participant and item analysis [F 1 (2,105) = 3.56, p <.05; F 2 (2,96) = 4.92, p <.01], post hoc analysis showed that the 3 rd graders responded significantly slower than the other two groups ( ps <.05), and there was no remarkable difference between the 5 th and 7 th graders ( p >.1); the two-way interaction was significant in participant analysis [F 1 (2,105) = 8.08, p <.01], but non-significant in item analysis [F 2 (2,96) = 0.45, p = .64].

also in 26,082 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.