“marginally significant”

For stride length variability, the marginally significant main effect of Beat Perception [ F (1,40) = 3.46, p = 0.07, η 2 p = 0.08] was qualified by a significant Cue x Beat Perception interaction [ F (2,40) = 4.40, p = 0.015, η 2 p = 0.10], as weak beat-perceivers showed greater increases in stride length variability than strong beat-perceivers with low-groove music [preferred: t (40) = 1.84, p = 0.07, faster: t (40) = 2.22, p = 0.03], and metronome cues [preferred: t (40) = 2.79, p = 0.008, faster: t (40) = 1.96, p = 0.05], but not with high-groove music [preferred: t (40) = 0.71, p = 0.48, faster: t (40) = 0.11, p = 0.91].

However, there was a marginally significant effect of grazing on Hemiptera total biomass (p = 0.07; Table 1 ), but this effect was only evident in late July; late-grazed plots had 37% less Hemiptera biomass than control plots, but only 6% less Hemiptera biomass when compared to early-grazed plots ( Table 2 ).

The overall model explained a marginally significant proportion of variance in VO 2 max, [ R 2 = 0.41, F (2,10) = 3.52, p < 0.07].

Marginally significant effects of the interaction was also reported for two additional combinations: Sch-58261+ Merck 22 (p = 0.07) and Tozadenant + Radiprodil (p = 0.06).

There was a marginally significant difference between the two cohorts in the number of perspectives represented [ t (7.30) = 2.33, p = 0.07, two-tailed, adjusted for unequal variances], although a Levene's test showed that the first cohort signers were significantly more variable in their performance ( F = 13.75, p < 0.01).

poeciliae GpCM and guppies (Pearson correlation coefficient r = 0.479, p = 0.027), and a marginally significant correlation (Pearson correlation coefficient r = 0.775, p = 0.070) between F ST values of GtC and guppies (see Fig. 3 ), but not for Gb1 (Pearson correlation coefficient r = -0.230, p = 0.522).

There was a marginally significant group effect [ F (1, 19) = 3.7, p = 0.07], indicating that AMSA had higher EI values than ICH-CI patients.

rettgeri load of flies reared on the low glucose diet ( p = 0.45) but was marginally significant when flies were reared on the high glucose diet ( p = 0.07; Fig. 5a ).

Interaction between HbA 1c and age was marginally significant ( p = 0.07).

We found a marginally significant difference, t (38) = 1.86, p = .070, d = 0.61 (medium effect).

Saturnidae in Mabira show a marginally significant decline ( χ 2 = 6.94, df = 3, P = 0.07, Fig. 3 ), and there was no statistical difference among the Sphingidae in Zika ( χ 2 = 4.50, df = 3, P = 0.212, Fig. 3 ).

TNF- α There was a marginally significant time by negative social relationship interaction among the romantic partner model on TNF- α responses to the stressor ( F (2, 56) = 2.80, p = .07, ηp 2 = .09).

Conversational-1st order resulted in a significant difference in the two speech styles; for learning efficiency, t (23) = 3.60, p = 0.002; immediate memory, t (23) = 2.49, p = 0.021; and marginally significant for delayed memory, t (23) = 1.90, p = 0.07.

There were marginally significant increases in net N-mineralization and nitrification rates in the UAN plots ( Fig. 6a ,b, p = 0.07 and 0.06, respectively for net N-mineralization and nitrification).

In addition, we found a marginally significant interaction effect between embodiment and attitude, p = 0.07.

The increases of 1,25(OH) 2 D concentrations at 16-weeks in the 4000 IU group versus the placebo or 600 IU group was marginally significant ( p = 0.07 and 0.08, respectively).

A marginally significant main effect of button function was found [ F (1,80) = 3.38, p = 0.070, η p 2 = 0.04], together with a significant interaction effect of age group and button function [ F (2,80) = 3.51, p = 0.035, η p 2 = 0.08].

At TL2 we found marginally significant reduced power in the alpha band for LATE versus EARLY questions between about 600 to 900 ms after the onset of the last word (p = .07).

However, the marginally significant effect of size ( F 1,228 = 3.36, P = 0.07) suggests that size is at best weakly associated with fast-start swimming performance.

There was a marginally significant effect of expertise level on the average magnification, F (2, 37.22) = 2.94, p = .07.

The amount of saliva cortisol of caregiver controls rose to a significantly higher level at 15 and 30 min after awakening compared to that immediately after awakening ( P < 0.001 for both) and subsided to a marginally significant level at 45 min after awakening ( P < 0.07).

The older adults showed a significant effect for Target Gender (χ 2 = 4.34, df: 1, p < 0.05), and this effect was marginally significant for the fifth-graders (χ 2 = 3.37, df: 1, p = 0.07).

The analysis revealed a marginally significant main effect of Target, F (1, 17) = 3.66, p = 0.07, η p 2 = 0.18; however, we found no significant main effect of Cue, F (1, 17) = 0.75, p = 0.399, η p 2 = 0.04.

Psychological test scores and rGMV in the Pt We found a marginally significant correlation between the change ratio of one attention domain subtest (D-CAT1) and post−pre thalamic rGMV (x = 8, y = −12, z = 7; P = 0.07, SVC).

The task × force level interaction was marginally significant, F (1,24) = 3.50, p = .07, η p 2 = .127.