“marginally significant”

As shown in Figure 5D , there was no effect of illusory target size on constant error, F (1, 13) = 0.299, p = 0.594, η p 2 = 0.022, a marginally significant effect of physical size, F (3, 39) = 2.58, p = 0.067, η p 2 = 0.166, and no interaction, F (3, 39) = 1.23, p = 0.311, η p 2 = 0.087.

However, the log-rank test for Kaplan-Meier method was marginally significant (p = 0.067).

The interaction between FCLD and habitat in the full model was marginally significant (estimate = −0.075 ± 0.041, p = 0.067; Table 1a ), suggesting that the selection tended to be stronger in the forest.

Moreover, the main effect of the IPD was marginally significant, F (1, 35) = 3.580, p = 0.067, and η 2 = 0.093.

In line with this hypothesis, the interaction between antibiotic treatment and time of sampling on beta diversity was marginally significant (PERMANOVA treatment x time: p = 0.067).

We observed a marginally significant association between chronic stress and rTL ( p = 0.067).

The main effect of identification was marginally significant, F (1, 229) = 3.38, p = .067, η 2 p = .01, 90% CI [.000, .05], β = −.11.

The social relationships domain accounted for 7.2% of the variance ( R 2 = 0.072), marginally significant ( F (16, 332) = 1.601, p = 0.067), where dentistry students (β = 7.823, p = 0.024) and those aged 20–23 (β = 10.296, p = 0.009) showed higher scores, in contrast to lower scores from second (β = −11.146, p = 0.007), third (β = −13.629, p = 0.002), and fourth-year students (β = −10.144, p = 0.012).

Interpretation: Marginally significant difference favoring SVM over MLP ( p = 0.067, approaching significance) 3.5.2.

Comparing the effects of writing about the fear-inducing event and writing about a walk in the city park/forest revealed a weak and marginally significant main effect of measurement point for positive affect, Greenhouse–Geisser F (2.59, 329.24) = 2.51, p = .067, η p 2 = .019, and a strong significant main effect for negative affect, Greenhouse–Geisser F (2.18, 276.96) = 49.38, ε = 0.727, p < .001, η p 2 = .280.

Moreover, two way repeated-measure ANOVA (consistency & patch visual field) showed a marginally significant effect on the visual field in the visual-delay task [ Figure 6A : visual field: F (1,27) = 3.645, p = 0.067, η p 2 = 0. 119; consistency: F (1,27) = 1.784, p = 0.197, η p 2 = 0.061; interaction: F (1,27) = 1.691, p = 0.204, η p 2 = 0.059].

This finding is manifested as a significantly greater difference in the liking ratings between the CS+s and the CS−s following reinstatement relative to the baseline (β = 0.24, t(144) = 2.403, p = 0.0175) and a marginally significant difference relative to counterconditioning (β = 0.18, t(144) = 1.845, p = 0.0671) in the No-Retrieval group, indicating the potential recovery of the liking of the CS+s.

We find a striking correspondence between regions of low ILS and the regions devoid of Neanderthal introgression for European populations (p-value = 0.00021, permutation test) and a marginally significant association with the more introgressed Asian populations (p-value = 0.06721, Fig 5 ).

Although the difference was marginally significant ( P = 0.0673; Figure 3 ), there was a trend toward a poorer PFS for UDT-Seq(+) patients (hazard ratio [HR] = 1.826, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.958–3.479).

seed quality) was significant, with the quadratic selection gradient for this principal component being marginally significant ( P = 0.0674).

This association remained marginally significant after multivariable adjustments in Model 2 (HR = 1.389, 95% CI: 0.977–1.976, P = .0674) and Model 3 (HR = 1.369, 95% CI: 0.957–1.957, P = .0851).

Association of abstinence length with GRIN2B rs2058878 was marginally significant ( P =0.0675); as in the discovery sample, the minor A allele was associated with longer abstinence.

A cerebrovascular accident significantly increased the likelihood of having a DNR order for both males (OR = 3.84, p = 0.0414) and females, although it was marginally significant for the latter (OR = 5.23, p = 0.0675).

In the unadjusted model (Model 1), the logarithmic transformation of NPAR demonstrated a positive but marginally significant association with constipation (OR = 1.04, 95% CI: 1.00–1.08, p = 0.0675).

The analysis revealed a statistically significant positive correlation between questions and CD (Spearman’s ρ = 0.1076, P < 0.001) and a marginally significant negative correlation between questions and T (Spearman’s ρ = 0.0512, P = 0.0677).

In the first 2 min of the session, there was a marginally significant effect of Age on the percentage of freezing (Fig. 7a ; F 3,510 = 2.39, p = 0.0678) and there was a significant Age effect on distance traveled (Fig. 7b ; F 3,510 = 5.67, p = 0.0008).

The comparison of a randomly selected subset of between-pair correlations that matched the number of within-pair correlations showed a similar, albeit slightly reduced, effect (marginally significant cluster: p = 0.0679; a cluster-randomization approach controlling for multiple comparisons over sensors; see Figure 3—figure supplement 1A for the group-averaged temporal similarity maps).

For the skilled readers, there was no significant 2-way interaction for regular words ( p = 0.267), a marginally significant 2-way interaction for the pseudohomophones ( p = 0.068), and a significant 2-way interaction for the nonwords ( p = 0.047).

The results revealed a marginally significant main effect of coordinate system, F (1, 11) = 4.09, p = 0.068, .

Results A marginally significant difference in the physiological cost index when using the two support products, where it tends to be lower with the use of AK (Z = -1,82; p = 0,068).