Excerpts

Moreover, the P2 amplitudes during the RS condition showed marginal significance than during the NS condition, t = 0.64, p = 0.09.

The difference between the sign learners and the fluent signers was not quite significant ( z = 2.08, p = 0.09).

There was a marginally significant group × word-type interaction, F (1,45) = 3.00, p = 0.090, η 2 = 0.06.

In positive persuasion, univariate analysis of variance revealed significant differences between two and four claims, F (1,5) = 7,32, p = 0.009, as well as borderline significant differences between three and four claims, F (1,2) = 2,97, p = 0.09.

AON AON analyses demonstrated a marginal trend for the effect of movement intensity, F (2, 58) = 2.42, p = 0.09.

Further analysis indicated that for the intact scenes, the accuracy rates of the happy faces in the positive scenes ( M = 0.946, SE = 0.012) were marginally significantly higher than the happy faces in the negative scenes ( M = 0.920, SE = 0.019, p = 0.090), and the differences of the accuracy rates between the fearful faces in the negative scenes ( M = 0.953, SE = 0.014) and the fearful faces in the positive scenes ( M = 0.933, SE = 0.019, p = 0.072) were also marginally significant.

The overall difference in lever pressing between groups was marginally significant, F (1, 22) = 3.05, p = 0.09, η G 2 = 0.08.

A Univariate ANOVA with number of target responses as the dependent measure, number of models as a fixed factor and age as a covariate produced a main effect for age [ F (2,72) = 6.81, p = 0.01, η 2 = 0.90] and a marginally significant effect for number of models [ F (2,72) = 2.50, p = 0.09, η 2 = 0.70].

An ANCOVA on Time 4 executive function controlling for Time 1 only showed a trend toward a difference, with Montessori children scoring more highly: F (2,118) = 3.00, p = 0.09, η p 2 = 0.03.

The relationship between Tapping SPR and the Wrist Width measurement was marginally significant following Bonferroni correction for multiple comparisons, r (18) = 0.49, p = 0.09.

In both language groups, the younger children tended to be less accurate than the older children, although this difference approached significance for the monolingual children, t (60) = −1.75, p = 0.09 (95%CI of this difference [−0.21, 0.01]) and was significant for the bilingual children, t (60) = −3.71, p < 0.0001 (95%CI of this difference [−0.40, −0.12]).

There was a near-significant difference for the younger groups, t (64) = 1.72, p = 0.09 (95%CI of this difference [−0.02, 0.26]), but not the older groups, t (56) = 0.78, p = 0.44 (95%CI of this difference [−0.14, 0.06]).

We found a (partial) correlation of −0.26, which was marginally significant ( p = 0.09), indicating that our assessment of the SZ patients' degree of exploitation may, to some extent, reflect the severity of their positive psychotic symptoms.

Also, WE at T2 was positively associated with both SS at T1 ( r = 0.29, p < 0.01) and resilience at T1 ( r = 0.38, p < 0.001), with SS at T1 also being positively associated with log DHEA(S) at T2, although this association was marginally significant ( r = 0.16, p = 0.09).

The interaction effect between leadership support and team size reveals that the association between change in leadership support and work satisfaction is positive and significant for small-sized teams (effect size = 0.53, SE = 0.20, p = 0.01, CI low = 0.12; CI high = 0.93), it is positive but not significant for average-sized teams (effect size = 0.11, SE = 0.14, p = 0.47, CI low = −0.19; CI high = 0.40), and it is negative and marginally significant for large teams (effect size = −0.32, SE = 0.18, p = 0.09, CI low = −0.69; CI high 0.06; see also the slopes depicted in Figure 3 ).

The interaction between nepotism and frontier was marginally significant, F (1,312) = 2.91, p = 0.09, η p 2 = 0.009.

There was a marginally significant main effect for film condition [ F (5,135) = 2.09, p = 0.09, ε = 0.71, η p 2 = 0.07].

Simple slope analyses (See Figure 1 ) indicated that perceived parent support was associated with risk-taking behaviors marginally significant at low levels of self-control ( b simple slope = −0.04, t = −1.68, p = 0.09), but the association was not significant statistically at high levels of self-control ( b simple slope = 0.03, t = 1.29, p = 0.20).

The correlation coefficient for males was greater than for females and this difference approached significance ( p = 0.09; Table 1 ).

The combined group showed a trend of improvement on TMT-A (combined vs. control, p = 0.09) while memory group did not.

36 ] while incongruent trials showed only marginally significant reduction [ F ( 1 , 26 ) = 3 . 04 p < 0 . 09 , η 2 = 0 . 10 ; see Table 3 and Supplementary Table S2 ].

Lumping patients' data together, we also found that patients' perseveration appears to be negatively correlated ( p = 0.09, trending toward significance) with their PANSS p1 + p3 scores.

In the self-referential condition, there was a marginally significant difference between the memory of positive words and negative words [ F (1,32) = 2.98, p = 0.09, η 2 = 0.09], indicating that the memory of the former was enhanced.

Push) ANOVA indicated a marginally significant Two-Way interaction [ F (1, 49) = 2.93, p = 0.09, η 2 p = 0.057]: Pulling the lever with positive words was a little faster [ t (49) = 1.054, p = 0.297.] than pushing, whereas pulling the lever with negative words [ t (49) = 1.742, p = 0.088] was slower than pushing.

Main effect of language was marginally significant, F (1, 40) = 3.03, p = 0.09, η 2 = 0.07.