By the same token, high IAS total scores were associated with high scores on TAS-20 and with high scores on two components of TAS-20, “difficulty identifying feelings” and “difficulty describing feelings.” The results from the regression analysis showed that Interoception was a moderately significant predictor of Alexithymia, explaining 13% of the variance (beta = 0.37, p < 0.001).
Excerpts
A one-way ANOVA performed on the mean emotion identification times with repeated measures of emotion type ( anger, disgust, fear , happiness , sadness and neutral ) revealed a highly significant effect of emotion [ F (5, 190) = 113.68; p < 0.001].
For model 3 predicting the behavioral factor II as a response, which was mainly comprised of the proportion of time tail wagging, licking the trainer’s hand or face, and the frequency of lips licking, we found a clearly significant full-null model comparison (c2 = 27.44, df = 6, p < 0.001).
Sufficient correlations for PCA were indicated, as the Bartlett’s Test of Sphericity was highly significant, χ 2 (780) = 4029.79, p < 0.001.
In NAF condition, there was a highly significant negative association between k values and the mean of the absolute values of ΔF2 for each PWS and each place of articulation ( r = −0.636, p < 0.001 for Pearson product-moment uncorrected scores, based on 63 observations).
As we had expected, the main effect of Manipulations was highly significant, F (3,63) = 130.82, p < 0.001, η 2 = 0.862.
Dynamic Balance Training Dynamic balance training over 4weeks induced a highly significant TIME effect ( Figure 3 ), more precisely an increase in training scores ( F 5.161, ∞ =92.141, p <0.001), but no significant GROUP effect was observed ( F 1.000, ∞ =1.188, p =0.278).
This effect was described by a highly significant linear trend, F (1, 20) = 53.14, p < 0.001, indicating a continuous decrease of relatedness ratings with increasing latency of gaze reactions.
Individual selection biases are shown in Figure 3B and are in all cases highly significant ( z -test, p < 0.001).
Notice that the correlation between these variables is highly significant: AOA Catalan and Catalan proficiency ( r = −0.4, P < 0.001, later exposition to Catalan, decreased proficiency in Catalan) and AOA Catalan and Language use ( r = 0.53, P < 0.002, delayed onset of Catalan exposition, greater use of Spanish).
Crucially, there was also a highly significant interaction of Interference and Target Dimension [Dutch: F (1) = 16.53, p = 0.001, r 2 = 0.09; Brazilian: F (1) = 8.69, p = 0.003, r 2 = 0.05], indicating that the effect of cross-dimensional interference was much greater for duration judgments than for distance judgments (Figure 1 ).
An ANOVA of the threshold values with age group as a between-subjects factor and keyword position and priming condition as within-subject factors demonstrated that there were highly significant effects due to age ( F 1,30 = 151.076, p < 0.001) and priming condition ( F 1,30 = 45.193, p < 0.001).
3.6 Comparative analysis of exam anxiety across related factors ( N = 1,519) The analysis of academic, health and life style variables demonstrates that several key factors are highly significant predictors of exam anxiety ( p ≤ 0.001).
Second, SEW shows a strong and highly significant effect on family governance ( β = 0.62, p < 0.001).
Results of the ANOVA indicated that the main effect of Motion was highly significant [ F (1, 11) = 31.080, p < 0.001], which was also true for that of Duration [ F (2, 22) = 56.407, p < 0.001].
The difference is highly significant [McNemar χ 2 (1) = 10.76, p < 0.001).
A highly significant main effect was obtained for response type [ F (1, 24) = 31.5, p < 0.001] as well as an interaction between group and response type [ F (1, 24) = 11.6, p < 0.001].
The interaction effects showed that all pairwise interactions between the factors were significant: the interaction between participant group and occlusion was significant F(2,118) = 3.910, p = 0.023,η 2 p = 0.062 ; the interaction between group and emotion was marginally significant F(2,118) = 2.923, p = 0.058,η 2 p = 0.047; and the interaction between occlusion and emotion was highly significant F(4,236) = 86.601, p < 0.001,η 2 p = 0.595.
In contrast, the outcome scores of the experimental group decreased after the trial, implying that the volunteers in the experimental group had improved their anxiety (the outcome was recorded as 1 for high positive mood, 2 for equal positive and negative moods, and 3 for high negative moods), and the improvement was also highly significant ( p < 0.001).
As hypothesized, ELE emerged as a highly significant positive predictor of WTC ( β = 0.62, t = 17.48, p < 0.001).
The relationships between all achievement variables were established to be highly significant and generally consistent across the 3 time points ( r = 0.62–0.77; p < 0.001; See Table 5 ).
The most substantial change was observed in the emotion regulation domain, with all items showing highly significant improvement ( p < 0.001), reflecting the AR intervention’s emphasis on emotional engagement and interactive responsiveness.
Behavioral EI had a highly significant relationship (β = 0.64, p < 0.001, n = 100) with perceived leadership effectiveness and no relationship with engagement ( Miller, 2014 ).
The F -test with true value 0 (25.24, both for individual measurements and for mean measurements) was highly significant ( p < 0.001).
However, the predicted interaction between compensation and nation remained marginally significant, although the effect of compensation was slightly stronger among Americans, t (50) = 12.15, p < 0.001, d = 1.63, than among Japanese t (49) = 8.54, p < 0.001, d = 1.22.