Barely Significant
← all excerpts

Semantic gradients in picture-word interference tasks: is the size of interference effects affected by the degree of semantic overlap?

Front Psychol · 2014 · PMC4130197 · PMID 25161636

5
hedged sentences
0.0010
closest p · 0.0× alpha
0.0670
boldest claim

The sentences

highly significantp < 0.001actually significant
ANOVAs applied to latencies, with Condition ( unrelated , far , close ) as a fixed variable, showed a highly significant effect of Condition by participants, F 1(2, 126) = 9.07, MSE = 12028, p < 0.001, which was marginally significant in the analysis by items, F 2(2, 30) = 2.85, MSE = 2456, p = 0.074.

also in 132,142 other papers

just failed to reach significancep = 0.051so close (0.05 < p ≤ 0.1)
Planned tests showed that the close condition differed significantly from the unrelated condition in the analysis by participants, t 1(63) = 2.16, p = 0.034, and just failed to reach significance by items, t 2(15) = 2.12, p = 0.051.

also in 279 other papers

approached significancep = 0.067so close (0.05 < p ≤ 0.1)
A RCS model with 4 knots approached significance, F (3, 68) = 2.49, p = 0.067, R 2 = 0.10.

also in 8,237 other papers

marginally significantno p-value reported
A marginally significant pattern was found when ratings were modeled onto interference effects via a non-linear technique, with pronounced interference for very strongly related items.

also in 26,082 other papers

close to significanceno p-value reported
In Experiment 2, two further results from the regression analysis were significant (or close to significance): first, an RCS model with LSA scores as the predictor rendered a marginally significant result.

also in 2,130 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.