Significance was set at an alpha level of P < 0.05 and a highly significant level of P < 0.01, with the Holm correction, applied for the post-hoc test.
Excerpts
As shown in Appendix , all the AVEs values of all constructs surpasses the 0.50 level ( Fornell and Larcker, 1981 ), and the factor loadings were highly significant ( P < 0.01), ranging from 0.659 to 0.821.
Military performance also indicated positive and highly significant relationships with self-efficacy (MLP&SFE, r = 0.525, p < 0.01).
Assessing the baseline, a significant trend was observed: c-statistic = 0.62 ( SE = 0.22), z (two-tailed) = 2.82, p < 0.01 ( p = 0.0024).
Curiosity presented a correlation coefficient of 0.188, and imagination, a correlation coefficient of 0.205, both highly significant at the p < 0.01 level.
This value indicates that the degree of interaction between the two variables is not high, but there is a significant correlation between them (In this paper, * indicates that the correlation between the two variables is significant, that is, p < 0.05; ** indicates that the correlation is highly significant, that is, p < 0.01).
Age was a highly significant covariate in the model for negative affect ( p < 0.01), with older participants demonstrating lower negative affect.
Even when the mediating variable (teacher support) was entered into the regression link, the indirect effect of academic resilience on academic performance remained quite significant ( β = 0.27, t = 7.59, p < 0.01), supporting H3.
As can be seen from Table 1 , there are extremely significant differences between junior high school and senior high school teenagers in their usual performance and exam performance ( p < 0.01), and junior high school students score lower than senior high school students.
The correlations between each of the 70 items and the overall scores of the SMPS-PPE were highly significant ( p < 0.01, see Table 5 for details), with correlation coefficients greater than 0.40.
Results The results revealed a highly significant difference between the levels of trauma experience that induced PTSD and the frequency of IMEs ( p < 0.01).
In the overall sample, both boys and girls show statistically highly significant differences ( p < 0.01) in the majority of motor performance items.
Moreover, the main effect of the informational factor was marginally significant [ F 1(1, 63) = 7.62, p < 0.01; F 2(1, 11) = 3.64, p = 0.08], with given-new sentences processed more accurately than new-given sentences.
As shown in Figure 3 , the analysis revealed a marginally significant main effect of trustworthiness, F (2,86) = 4.82, p = 0.01, η p 2 = 0.10, BF 10 = 27.008.
A moderately significant positive correlation was found between the VOE and trait EI ( r = 0.33), hope ( r = 0.49), career adaptability ( r = 0.56) variables ( p < 0.01).
The test–retest reliability coefficient in ranged from 0.83 to 0.87 in the Canadian sample and 0.72 to 0.89 in the American sample, and all coefficients were highly significant ( p < 0.01; LaFreniere and Dumas, 2003 ).
p -values were viewed as highly significant when p < 0.01 and as significant when p < 0.05.
A highly significant main effect of disciplinary intensity was observed, F (2, 541) = 4,047.23, p < 0.01, η p 2 = 0.88, reflecting a large effect size.
The T-value of beta regression coefficients of the predictor variable has been found to be highly significant ( p < 0.01).
However, these main effects should not be interpreted given the highly significant interaction effect of country and event valence ( Ψ ^ = −125.72, p < 0.01).
Specifically, if chronic promotion and prevention are computed into a difference score such that positive scores indicate a stronger promotion focus and negative scores indicate a stronger prevention focus, the effect of the manipulation is highly significant among those who are more promotion-focused ( b = 0.45, SE = 0.18, z = 2.52, p = 0.01, 95% CI = [0.101, 0.805]), but not significant among those who are more prevention-focused ( z < 1).
Results The ML has a highly significant positive relationship with SP (0.87, p < 0.01).
The results of the between-subjects effect test, simple effect analysis ( Tables 2 – 4 ), and pairwise comparative analysis of the tennis players’ reaction time when making a stroke landing prediction showed that the main effect of sport level was highly significant [ F (1,42) = 307.854, p < 0.01, η 2 = 0.880].
The correlations between the 60 individual items and the overall IHLS-CSMK score were highly significant ( p < 0.01, see Supplementary Table S5 ), correlating with each other to exceed 0.40.
According to the findings, a positive and moderately significant relationship was found between career engagement and perception of professional identity ( r = 0.350, p < 0.01, 95% CI [0.257, 0.436]).