Importantly, the interaction of Language Type and Order was very highly significant [ F (1, 38) = 60.56, p < 0.0001], because IF phrases abounded in OV, FI phrases in VO languages.
Excerpts
A second model in which we applied nested contrasts testing for an interference effect within each level of anaphor type and question type 11 showed that the interactions were caused by a highly significant interference effect that was present only in questions targeting the anaphor in pronominal possessives (estimate = −1.16, SE = 0.25, z = −4.62, p < 0.0001).
This showed highly significant results ( t = −6.01, p < 0.0001).
Concerning attention behavior during familiarization, a repeated-measures ANOVA with looking time as dependent measure, language group (Catalan, Spanish, bilingual) and familiarization condition (TB or GM) as a between-group factors and trial (first, last) as repeated measures revealed a highly significant effect of familiarization trial [ F (1, 48) = 42.9; p = 0.0001; η 2 = 0.47], and no effect of language group or condition and no significant interactions [familiarization trial × language group: F (2, 48) = 1.15; p = 0.32; η 2 = 0.04; familiarization trial × condition: F (1, 48) = 1.7; p = 0.19; η 2 = 0.03; familiarization trial × language group × condition: F < 1].
A multivariate analysis of variance showed that while role had a highly significant effect ( p < 0.0001) on the content of the communications, neither gender nor the order in which roles were assumed had a significant influence.
The first model was found to be highly significant, F ( 5 , 108 ) = 13.15, p < 0.0001, explaining 37% of the variance in the EAT-26.
The results of Experiment 1 are highly significant ( p < 0.0001), and suggest that the difficulty in perceptually synthesizing a coherent amodally completed surface impaired the ability to detect depth differences in the display containing the alternating red and blue cycles.
All differences turned out highly significant ( p < 0.0001).
Critically, the main effect of Emotion type was highly significant [ F 1 (1,59) = 200.95, p < 0.0001, η 2 = 0.23; F 2 (1,18) = 8.84, p < 0.009, η 2 = 0.27], as putatively basic emotions ( M = 5.72) were rated higher than non-basic emotions ( M = 4.61).
As illustrated in Figure 1B , in the mixed ANOVA run on mean correct RTs, the critical interaction between alignment and congruency was highly significant, F (1,127) = 14.6, p < 0.0001, η 2 = 0.10, MSE = 174.
Results The random effect on our logistic regression model was highly significant ( p < 0.0001), suggesting that subjects varied in their musicality ratings of original order vs. temporally randomized songs of this sample of avian species.
The difference between the two averages of the peak heart rate was highly significant ( p = 0.0001; Wilcoxon signed-rank test, W = −225, n s/ r = 21, z = −3.9).
A non-parametric trend test revealed a significant trend in their responses (Page’s trend test, z = 5.16, p < 0.0001).
Among pictures SR enhancement to phobia-related material was highly significant F (1,87) = 28.21, p < 0.0001, η 2 = 0.25, unlike the comparison between noises ( p > 0.10).
Convergent validity between SDMT and c-SDMT was highly significant ( r = −0.794, p < 0.0001).
This contrast turned out to be highly significant, F (1,78) = 3,298.45, p < 0.0001.
The association between the inner brow raiser and eye movements was highly significant (χ 2 MH = 1322.1, df = 1, P < 0.0001; N = 21).
Results Relationship between Maternal LOC and IQ at 8 The unadjusted difference between the mean IQ of 8-year-old children whose mothers were external compared to those who were internally oriented showed deficits of 7.33, 5.29, and 7.23 IQ points for the verbal, performance and full IQ scales, respectively ( Table 2 ); each was highly significant ( P < 0.0001).
An independent samples t -test revealed that this difference was highly significant [t(71.14)=9.578, p<0.0001 ].
Interestingly, we found a highly significant interaction effect between Distribution Type and Standard Vowel [ F (1,18) = 20.22, p = 0.0003, η p 2 = 0.53], which shows that the attested difference between unimodally and bimodally trained Dutch 2-to-3-month olds differs depending on the standard that they hear in the oddball test (see section Exploratory Results for the Four Groups).
The multiple linear regression model that included all EMG responses (corrugator and zygomaticus) per condition was highly significant F (12, 22) = 5.092, p = 0.0005.
First, all independent factors plus an interaction between norm violation and temporal order yield Pearson (χ 2 = 46.441; p = 0.224) and Cox & Snell = 0.490 with all factors highly significant, p < 0.0005.
Four groups had extremely significant differences in personality of Reasoning ( F = 18.852, P < 0.0005), Apprehension ( F = 21.856, P < 0.0005), and Sensitivity ( F = 7.092, P < 0.001).
Difference between the mean values of the WFs for the four shortest and four longest ICIs proved to be highly significant [ t (9) = 7.21, p < 0.0005].
Benefit For this case, the global Pearson’s chi-squared values were highly significant ( x 2 = 23430.50, df = 16; p < 0.0005).