Excerpts

The accuracy rates associated with COs were positively correlated with the bilinguals’ proficiency, though the result showed a tendency toward statistical significance ( p = 0.059).

Compared to the no-contrast condition, the increase triggered by the object contrast was only marginally significant (χ 2 = 3.6, df = 1, n = 76, p = 0.059), whereas the decrease triggered by the liquid contrast was significant (χ 2 = 37.2, df = 1, n = 73, p < 0.001).

Regarding Orienting/regulation, there was a trend approaching significance, suggesting higher scores of mothers than fathers, U = 1314.00, z = −1.89, p = 0.059.

Although not significantly different, there was a statistical trend for perceiving the superset session more pleasurable than the traditional session ( Z = −1.891, p = 0.059, ES = 0.25).

There was also a marginally significant effect on empathy [ t (14) = 1.89, p = 0.059, ES = 0.145], but object-related absorption did not reach a significant level [ t (14) = 0.84, p = 0.403, ES = 0.061].

For high frequency items, the estimate is 23.0% (95% CI [18.0, 28.8]), and this is marginally significant ( z = −1.89, p = 0.059).

Past Surveillance Acceptance Another linear regression showed that prosocial responsibility was a marginally significant predictor of past surveillance acceptance, B = 0.07, SE = 0.04, β = 0.11, p = 0.059.

The second correlation analysis revealed a marginally significant correlation: the longer were the infants’ rhythmic moving times, the smaller were the absolute looking time Δ scores ( r = −0.24, p = 0.059), that is, the weaker were their preferences for looking longer toward one of the two types of trials at test (see Figure 3B ).

It was found that the main effect of group was approaching significance ( F (1, 77) = 3.669, p = 0.059, η 2 = 0.045), with the RT of the HSA group (252.69 ± 339.66) being significantly shorter than that of the LSA group (53.22 ± 503.95); the main effect of emotion type was significant ( F (1, 77) = 29.261, p < 0.001, η 2 = 0.275), and RTs for positive emotional stimuli (126.36 ± 472.04) were significantly shorter than those for negative emotions (179.55 ± 470.57).

The results for males showed that the sensitivity of the Flanker Task to detect any differences between students with and without disabilities for the RT measure revealed a trend approaching significance for an effect of Disability [ F (1) = 4.142, p = 0.059, η p 2 = 0.206].

To examine what WM task was more problematic for patients, we compared the performance of patients and controls in each WM task separately: patients clearly performed worse than controls on LNS (patients' Mdn = 9, controls' Mdn = 13, W = 105.5, p = 0.003); patients also showed poorer performance than controls in Arithmetic , being this between-group difference marginally significant (patients' Mdn = 8, controls' Mdn = 12, W = 89.5, p = 0.059); and there were no significant between-group differences in Dspan (patients' Mdn = 10, controls' Mdn = 12, W = 84.5, p = 0.118).

Additionally, there was an interaction between facial expression and eye size that approached significance [facial expression × eye size F (2.79,61.32) = 2.68, p = 0.059, η 2 = 0.11].

There was a trend toward significance when looking at the wake condition and the absolute OSPAN score ( r 39 = −0.31, p = 0.059), while all other correlations were insignificant ( p > 0.11).

A two-factor ANOVA with the between-subject factors “modality” and “processing” revealed a marginally non-significant interaction of both conditions [ F (2, 85) = 2.936, p = 0.059, η = 0.065].

In addition, for natives, the interaction of Location and Structure was significant in the subjects analysis and close to significant in the items analysis [ F1 (1, 47) = 5.04, p = 0.03, F2 (1, 39) = 3.89, p = 0.056], while for heritage speakers, the interaction approached significance in both types of analysis [ F1 (1, 27) = 3.89, p = 0.059, F2 (1, 39) = 3.15, p = 0.08].

Some selective attention measures, such as the TMT-A, reached marginally statistically significant group*time interactions: ( F (1, 24) = 3.926, p = 0.059, partial η 2 = 0.141) and executive function measures, such as the Stroop Colors and Words ( F (1, 24) = 4.243, p = 0.05, partial η 2 = 0.150), but there was still a large effect size ( Cohen, 1977 ).

As predicted, groups differed on all three sub-scales after watching the video, [inclined-indulgent F (2, 89) = 9.13, p < 0.001; resolved-regulated F (2, 89) = 17.57, p < 0.01], although this fell short of significance for the obsessed-compelled sub-scale [ F (2, 89) = 2.93, p = 0.059].

Results demonstrate that tangible resources show a marginally significant mean value of the slope factor (slope mean = -0.04, p = 0.059; T1–3 means = 3.47, 3.42, and 3.41, respectively), which suggests that the mean level of tangible resources show a decreasing trend over time.

Importantly, the test for the step function, once the other predictor is taken into account, still approached significance, despite the loss of one degree of freedom [ t (93) = 1.91, p = 0.0595], while that for the gradual increase predictor, after taking the other predictor into account, indicated a total absence of effect [ t (93) = 0.002, p =0.9985].

Likewise, in Experiment 2 we also tested for an association between meta d' for “yes” responses on the memory task and (overall) meta d' for the visual task and found a strong trend toward statistical significance ( r = 0.1890, p = 0.0596).

The main effect of Block was marginally significant [ F (2.864,112) = 2.602, p = 0.06, partial η 2 = 0.085], whereas no interaction between Session and Block was identified [ F (4,112) = 0.654, p = 0.625, partial η 2 = 0.023].

The predictability effects were significant at FCZ, CZ, CPZ, and PZ ( p s < 0.0001), but only marginally significant at Fz ( p = 0.06).

The effect was marginally significant [ F (1, 53) = 2.15, p = 0.06, Cohen’s d = 0.47].

Midline analyses revealed a similar pattern of results: the main effect of Language approached significance [ F (1,13) = 4.13, p = 0.06] and was qualified by a Language × Anteriority interaction [ F (2,26) = 8.62, p = 0.01]: Welsh targets elicited more negative ERP amplitudes than English targets at CZ and CPZ sites ( p = 0.003, p < 0.05, respectively; PZ, p = 0.78).

Specifically, mothers’ self-construal had a significant effect on sensitive parenting ( b = 0.43, p = 0.043), whereas efficacy approached but did not reach significance ( b = 0.36, p = 0.06).