Excerpts

In IAT 3, there was a marginally significant effect in the expected direction, suggesting that participant's associate triangle with yellow and square with red, as Kandinsky would have predicted.

A main effect of Belief condition revealed a non-significant trend, F (1, 23) = 2.958, p = 0.099, indicating that anti-free will participants tended to be slower to respond than controls (though this interpretation should be approached with caution due to the marginal significance level).

Results indicated a trend toward significant recruitment above baseline for actively learned letters in the left fusiform gyrus [ t (11) = 2.02, p = 068] (Figure 7A ) and right fusiform gyrus [ t (11) = 1.98, p = 0.073], (Figure 7B ) but no other contrasts approached significance.

Although, the associations between these parameters and performance only approached significance, estimated values of these same parameters had basically no relationship with performance in the EV Decay ( r = −0.04 for w ) and PVL Decay models ( λ = 0.05, where the tendency to select options based on their expected values is conflated with the tendency to persevere.

As expected, both the Grammaticality effect and the Interference effect are highly significant, and the interaction between Interference and CS scores is also significant.

There seems to be a numerical trend of interference, but the effect of Interference wasn't significant ( p > 0.2) (licensed 434 ms; unlicensed 480 ms; interference 458 ms).

The split group analysis showed a small trend of modulation by CS scores: only the low-CS-scores group showed Interference, but it is difficult to draw any conclusions from this result since the high-CS-scores group did not show any difference between conditions, let alone an interference effect.

Mirror-touch was associated with all six subtypes of synesthesia (association with temporal sequence-color was marginally significant, depending on the level of statistical correction) and ticker tape was associated with every subtype except temporal sequence-color, and only marginally with grapheme-color.

In the case of egorrhea symptoms, as discussed above, having a strong conviction can work to some extent as a cultural adjustment, and suggests that a kind of delusion may be the extreme manifestation of cultural adjustment and a factor other than the presentation and conviction of symptoms may be significant to intervene.

A marginally significant group difference was observed in the task measuring spatial span (YA vs.

Multiple comparisons for the reward variant using Tukey's Honestly Significant Difference test showed that only the unidirectional instructions for seeking reward differed from the standard and no hint instructions; however, the significance levels of these variables were p = 0.08 and p = 0.09, respectively, indicating marginal significance.

From a neuroanatomical perspective, the restriction of a highly significant inhibition effect to the LH in the present study is consistent with fMRI studies reviewed by Kan and Thompson-Schill ( 2004 ).

In contrast, the effect of grammaticality status, resulting from 5 days of implicit acquisition, was highly significant.

Furthermore, the difference between switch and non-switch trials was only marginally significant when the set size was large.

We first investigated whether infants’ overall fair choice score differed as a function of condition: there was a marginally significant difference in infants’ selection of the fair distributor in the CF/CUF condition (Caucasian Fair / Caucasian Unfair, M = 0.72, SE = 0.05) versus the AF/CUF condition (Asian Fair / Caucasian Unfair, M = 0.57, SE = 0.09), t (34) = 1.50, p = 0.07, d = 0.51.

When comparing early Spanish-English bilingual to English monolingual speakers, the FE in both groups was not significantly different while the monolinguals tended to be overall faster (this effect was marginally significant; Gollan et al., 2011 , p. 196).

Contrarily, FCQ-T-r scores positively predicted state food craving after the task while the influence of food deprivation was only marginally significant.

Interestingly, a clear trend was observed in the PC vs.

There was a trend approaching significance for children in the No Book control condition to attribute fewer anthropomorphic traits to animals than did the children in the Full Anthropomorphism condition ( p = 0.07).

Thus, even though one measure was only marginally significant, both indicate that infants in the point group anticipated the give outcome, but not the take outcome.

Still, this difference was only marginally significant, so it is assumed that the Early Bilinguals did form separate phonetic categories for their Spanish and English /l/s.

However, standardized factor loadings of the 2 hot EF tasks were again very low and only marginally significant indicating that the tasks were not represented well by one underlying hot EF factor.

A paired t -test revealed that gains in verbal STM were highly significant, as the difference between the two time points was, on average 0.26 (95% CI from 0.17 to 0.35).

The first significant improvement in the model for motor response conflict (Knock and Tap) came with the addition of verbal STM at T1 in the fifth step, although the addition of non-verbal intelligence (step 3) was marginally significant.

The differences in ANS between the groups were small and the contrast in the predicted order was only marginally significant.