Visuo-spatial cueing in children with differential reading and spelling profiles.

PLoS One · 2017 · PMC5501541 · PMID 28686635

Europe PMC DOI

hedged sentences

0.0700

closest p · 1.4× alpha

0.0800

boldest claim

The sentences

approached significancep = .07so close (0.05 < p ≤ 0.1)

The interaction cueing x group was also significant, F (3, 187) = 3.40, p = .02, η 2 = .05 and the interaction position x group approached significance, F (3, 187) = 2.41, p = .07, η 2 = .04.

also in 8,237 other papers

a trend towards significancep = .08so close (0.05 < p ≤ 0.1)

A group (S-; S+; C) x cueing x position ANOVA showed a significant cueing effect F (1, 160) = 23.43, p < .001, η 2 = .13 and a trend towards significance for the cueing x group interaction F (2, 160) = 2.54, p = .08, η 2 = .03 and the cueing x position interaction F (1, 160) = 3.54, p = .06, η 2 = .02.

also in 2,760 other papers

marginally significantno p-value reported

To explore the marginally significant cueing x group interaction, paired-sample t-tests were conducted on the two spelling level groups, separately.

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.