Barely Significant
← all phrases

“marginally significant”

26,083 sentences · 26,083 papers · 36,483 search hits before verification · confirmed specimen

Sighted at

p>=0.1

Listed by Hankins (2013) · Otte et al. (2022)

In the literature

marginally significantp = 0.061.2× alphagold
Correlation analysis showed a positive albeit marginally significant association between workload and JA ( r = 0.17, p = 0.06), whereas zero-order correlations between log cortisol/DHEA(S) ratio and workload ( r = 0.07, p = 0.46) or JA ( r = 0.10, p = 0.28) were not significant.
marginally significantp = 0.061.2× alphagold
Preliminary Analyses Parental background variables (i.e., parents’ age and education at the time of their child’s birth) and adolescent background variables (i.e., age at the adolescence assessment and intelligence scores measured at 13.5 years of age) did not correlate with any of the dependent variables, r s < 0.20, p s > 0.15, except for mother’s years of education, which had a marginally significant correlation with adolescents’ N2 amplitude at age 17 years, r = −0.25, p = 0.06; therefore, it was controlled in further analyses.
marginally significantp = 0.0601.2× alphagold
In HC, the opposite pattern emerged, with marginally significant negative correlations between learning from negative feedback and ∆FRN in the first ( r = −0.347 , p = 0.060) and the second half ( r = −0.350 , p = 0.058) of the observation condition, but not the control condition ( r = −0.155 , p = 0.412 and r = −0.275 , p = 0.142, respectively).
marginally significantp = 0.061.2× alphagold
Factors Impacting Gene Flow The Mantel test was significant only for the relationship between the genetic distance and the connectivity of sites by water flow ( r = 0.33, p = 0.003) and marginally significant for water type ( r = 0.16, p = 0.06), but neither for the geographic distance nor for the Euclidean distance of environmental parameters (Figure 4 ).
marginally significantP = 0.0601.2× alphagold
Despite this caveat, the control preference was marginally significant (5/6, X 2 = 5.6, df = 2, P = 0.060), whereas analysis of the CPP rats that swam to the pre-trained over the mass trained annulus was significant (6/7, X 2 = 7.4, df = 2, P = 0.025).
marginally significantp = 0.061.2× alphagold
Additionally, using a co-dominant model for GSTP1 , although the interaction between GSTP1 and GSTM1 was marginally significant (overall interaction p = 0.06), we found that among children with GSTM1 DD genotype, the odds of having a detectable BAlC in children with the GSTP1 Val/Val genotype was 0.20 times (or 1/5 times) that of those with the Ile/Ile genotype [OR (95% CI) = 0.20 (0.05, 0.82), p = 0.03].