Comparison enhances size sensitivity: neural correlates of outcome magnitude processing.

PLoS One · 2013 · PMC3741373 · PMID 23951108

Europe PMC DOI

hedged sentences

0.0500

closest p · 1.0× alpha

0.0740

boldest claim

The sentences

marginally significantp = .050actually significant

A 2 (context) × 2 (relative outcome magnitude) × 2 (valence) repeated measure analysis of variance (ANOVA) conducted on the response time (RT) for making the initial choice in the trial following presentation of outcomes, yielded a marginally significant effect of valence factor, F(1, 17) = 4.456, p = .050, with a longer response time after wins (769.495±378.808 ms) than after losses (649.482±227.666 ms).

also in 15,194 other papers

failed to reach significancep = .073so close (0.05 < p ≤ 0.1)

The main effect of context failed to reach significance, F(1, 17) = 3.653, p = .073, while the main effect of relative magnitude was significant, F(1, 17) = 21.740, p <0.001, with more positive P300 related to relatively large magnitudes.

also in 2,295 other papers

near-significantp = .074so close (0.05 < p ≤ 0.1)

A near-significant main effect of context was found, F(1, 17) = 3.620, p = .074.

also in 1,669 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.