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 = 0.0681.4× alphagold
Multiple testing of the mean angle in the supralateral sector, which was statistically significant, between PSD, fellow, and controls showed a significant difference between fellow and control and a marginally significant difference between PSD and controls (PSD vs. control; P = 0.068, PSD vs. fellow; P = 0.652, fellow vs. control; P = 0.011, Steel-Dwass test).
marginally significantp = 0.0681.4× alphagold
We also found a marginally significant three‐way interaction between tree species identity, water treatment, and inoculation treatment on leaf number (χ 2 3,298 = 7.14, p = 0.068), suggesting that how foliar growth responds to inoculation in a general sense (i.e., regardless of composition of the inoculum) depends on water regime.
marginally significantp = 0.0681.4× alphagold
Elithorn’s Mazes score positively predicted CELF 4 score in the quiet condition with no visual support, β = 0.012, t = 2.525, p = 0.012; however, there was a marginally significant negative interaction effect between EM and the CELF 4 score in the multi-talker babble noise, β = −0.011, t = −1.837, p = 0.068, indicating that the link between EM and CELF 4 score was weakened in the presence of noise.
marginally significantp = 0.0681.4× alphagold
Accurate responses were significantly faster for good images than bad images (892 ms and 1028 ms respectively; t(8) = 8.82, p <0.001), and this effect was significant across all the categories (t(8) = 8.53, p <0.001 for beaches; t(8) = 6.27, p <0.001 for forests; t(8) = 4.42, p <0.01 for highways; t(8) = 5.2, p <0.001 for mountains and t(8) = 2.58, p <0.05 for offices) except for city streets in which the difference was marginally significant (t(8) = 2.10, p = 0.068).
marginally significantp = 0.0681.4× alphagold
The interaction effect between electrodes and condition was marginally significant (χ 2 (2) = 4.783, p = 0.068), and the post hoc comparison suggested that the ERP responses evoked by aspect violation sentences were larger than those evoked by correct sentences at PZ (β = 2.038, SE = 1.227, z = 2.362, p = 0.017).