marginally significantp = 0.053
There was a marginally significant difference between the stimulus groups ( f (2,84) = 3.04, p = 0.053, η p 2 = 0.068).
There was a marginally significant difference between the stimulus groups ( f (2,84) = 3.04, p = 0.053, η p 2 = 0.068).
The regression model with the dwell time on the pelvic regions of the human-like gynoid robots as dependent variable failed to reach significance ( f (3,11) = 1.051, p = 0.409, R 2 = 0.223), and the model for machine-like gynoid robots was also non-significant ( f (3,11) = 1.280, p = 0.330, R 2 = 0.259).