“marginally significant”

Time contrasts showed that no treatment-related difference was found from baseline to 3 months (F[1, 104]=2.7, P =0.10), was marginally significant from baseline to 6 months (F[1, 104]=3.2, P =0.08), and was significant from 3 to 6 months (F[1, 104] = 6.43, P =0.01), suggesting no effect of the treatment initially (baseline to 3 months), but a significant effect of the treatment toward the end of the intervention (3-6 months).

The analysis of variance of group differences in change scores was marginally significant ( P <0.08; Supplementary Table S9 ).

To ascertain that these lesion effects were task-specific (task: spatial-variant/temporal-variant), we ran three separate mixed-design, repeated-measures ANOVAs considering only the CON and sdlPFC groups with group as a between-subjects variable and task as a within-subjects variable and confirmed a marginally significant task × group interaction on SDT meta-d′/d′ ( F (1,7) = 4.194, p = 0.080) and on hierarchical-model meta-d′/d′ ( F (1,7) = 4.599, p = 0.069), as well as a slightly weaker effect on φ ( F (1,7) = 1.939, p = 0.206).

We found a significant interaction between group and item related to biological properties [F (2, 86) = 3.414, P<.04], and a marginally significant interaction with perceptual properties [F (2, 86) = 2.714, P<.08].

Marginally significant increases ( P = 0.08) in reports followed the 2017 Title IX guidance change (+ 1.18, + 4.51 and + 2.24 reports per 1000 enrolled students in 2017–2018, 2018–2019 and 2019–2020, respectively), and a marginally significant decrease (− 5.23 reports per 1000 enrolled students in 2020–2021) in SM reports to Title IX offices followed the 2020 Title IX iterations.

20.6%), a marginally significant difference ( p =0.08).

For the DLPFC, there was a marginally significant scan × perceived criticism × valence effect, F (19,679.0) = 1.49, p = . 08 and significant perceived criticism × valence effect, F (1, 429.4) = 19.9, p <.0005 with a larger PC differential response in the criticism condition than in the praise condition.

Compared with the low-risk class, age had no significant effects on the likelihood of being in a particular cluster; while gender (female) had a marginally significant effect on predicting the membership of the moderate-risk class ( OR = 1.407, p = 0.080) and a significant effect on predicting the membership of the high-risk class ( OR = 2.485, p = 0.080).

Results The 3-way ANOVA on discrimination sensitivity (Figure 3 ) revealed a significant main effect of congruency, F (1, 80) = 8.83, p < 0.001, η p 2 = 0.1, a marginally significant interaction between alignment and congruency, F (1, 80) = 3.06, p = 0.08, η p 2 = 0.04, but no main effect of alignment, F (1, 80) = 0.98, p > 0.30.

Similar group differences were found (although SSRT now became marginally significant ( p <0.08)), suggesting the present findings were unlikely to result from comorbid depressive symptoms.

The multivariate model ( Table 2 ) indicated that the rate of change in CD4+CD38+HLA-DR+% (activated) was marginally significant by CMV status (p = 0.08 for CMV status by week interaction).

A linear mixed model using the full sample (Time 1: TD N = 61, autism N = 66; Time 2: TD N = 43, autism N = 47; Time 3: TD N = 31, autism N = 30) revealed a time X hemisphere interaction ( F (2, 414.82) = 4.35, p = 0.01) and a marginally significant group X hemisphere interaction ( F (1, 414.80) = 3.05, p = 0.08).

3B ), with the P -values of the interaction between location and food was marginally significant ( P = 0.08).

Using the directional Steiger Z-test, we found, for fornix MD, that there was a marginally significant difference between the two correlations obtained for scenes and faces ( z (26) = 1.39, p = 0.08).

The repeated measures ANOVA revealed a marginally significant interaction effect between memory load and group, F (4, 244) = 2.29, p = 0.08, η p 2 = 0.04.

When predictive and nonpredictive events were separately compared across delay conditions, speeded RT over time for predictive actions was marginally significant ( t (23) = 1.85, p = 0.08), while slower RT over time for nonpredictive actions was not significant ( t (23) = 1.57, p = 0.13).

However, a marginally significant Emotion × Load × Duration interaction was present, F (1, 10) = 3.82, p = 0.08, and post hoc analyses showed that this interaction was driven by an Emotion × Load interaction for short duration items, F (1, 10) = 7.84, p = 0.02.

Furthermore, we observed a marginally significant interaction between product visibility and integration between identities ( b = 0.57, SE = 0.33, z (1) = 1.76, p = .08).

However, there was a marginally significant time × sex interaction ( p = .08), suggesting that the decrease in suppression mainly applied to boys.

7 B ) demonstrated a marginally significant effect of Voice ( B̂ = 0.89 ± 0.51, z = 1.75, p = 0.08), no effect of Time ( B̂ = −0.19 ± 0.27, z = 0.73, p = 0.98), and no interaction Time × Voice ( B̂ = −0.09 ± 0.33, z = −0.27, p = 0.55).

As for the P2, there was a marginally significant effect of facial expressions [ F (3,174) = 2.25, p = 0.08, η 2 = 0.04].

For total distance, we found a marginally significant effect of group, with the control group having lower total distance than the Nogo-A knockdown group, F (1, 16) = 3.55, p = 0.08, η G 2 = 0 . 16 , and no interaction of group and phase factors, F (1, 16) < 1, p = 0.85, η G 2 = 0 . 00 .

The correlation with phonological distance remained marginally significant even when controlling for both genealogy and geography (p = 0.08).

Repeated-measures ANOVA on the ACC of emotional faces suggested that the main effect of the test was marginally significant ( F (2, 58) = 2.56, p = 0.08, η 2 p = 0.04), and the post-hoc t -test found that the ACC of pre-test was higher than that of mid- and post-test ( p < 0.05), with no significant difference between the mid- and post-test ( p > 0.05).

As can be seen Table 6 , the results showed that the product term of the scenario and the attribution for the old target's behavior was marginally significant (β = −0.15, p = 0.08).