“marginally significant”

Of the other variables, income also had a marginally significant impact (β = 0.11, p = 0.09) on the judgment of tax evasion, suggesting that higher incomes lead to a harsher judgment of tax evasion.

Religion was marginally significant ( p = 0.09).

For non-canonical sentences a marginally significant interaction of C × G was found (F(1,40) = 2.97, p = .09), which was due to a significant main effect of C for the native group only (F(1,18) = 8.56, p < .01).

The recipient CYP3A5 6986A>G genotypes GA and GG and γ-GT ≥70 U/L at 3 months were marginally significant (P = 0.090 and P = 0.102, respectively).

A 2 (tested, control) X 2 (with-context, without-context) X 2 (neutral item, misled item) ANOVA revealed a marginally significant 3-way interaction, F (1, 116) = 2.95, p = .09, ƞ 2 p = .03.

Using these Replication Scan values, an inverse correlation with participants' expected benefit scores was observed, which was marginally significant when examined alone, r (17) = −0.41, p = 0.09, but was significant after controlling for age and sex, r (17) = −0.51, p <0.05 ( Fig. 2 , bottom row).

There was a tendency for readers to have longer reading times on pseudowords in the incongruent condition than pseudowords in the balanced condition; the effect was marginally significant for first fixation duration (mean difference = 9ms, b = -0.02, SE = 0.01, t = -1.78, p = 0.09) and gaze duration (mean difference = 21ms, b = -0.04, SE = 0.03, t = -1.73, p = 0.09), and significant for total fixation time (mean difference = 58ms, b = -0.08, SE = 0.04, t = -1.99, p < 0.05).

Sleep quality was marginally significant on the less stringent 0.10 ( p = 0.09).

A follow-up analysis examining the effects of APOE4 on pain unpleasantness adjusting for differences in stimulus intensity at each percept level across genetic groups indicated that the pattern of results was little changed, with the APOE4 main effect becoming marginally significant ( p < 0.09) but the overall effect size increasing slightly (from d = 0.26 to d = 0.33).

As shown in Table 4 , multivariate regression analysis identified GCL average thickness as the significant factor affecting MD from SITA 10-2 ( p = 0.009 in model 1), and deep VD as marginally significant factor ( p = 0.090 in model 1).

Although the absolute values of these correlation values exceeded 0.4, none of them reached statistical significance after correcting for multiple comparisons; only the correlation of the post-target left transverse temporal - left middle temporal connection with reaction time was found to be marginally significant ( p = 0.090 after correction, marked by an asterisk in Figure 5 ). 3.5.

Post hoc analyses showed that children in the low grade responded more slowly than the children in middle and high grades (ps < 0.05), and children from the middle grade exhibited longer reaction times than the ones in the high grades (p = 0.09, marginally significant).

Of the four environmental factors analysed, only the model containing temperature at the sea bottom ( T SBT ) showed a marginally significant correlation with variation in the 13 high‐LD loci (AIC = 55.89; chi‐squared test: p = .09; Table 3 and Table S5 ).

Orienting There was a marginally significant difference between CBT/MT and control groups in RT difference [ t (199) = 1.68, p = 0.09, Cohen's d = 0.24] and no significant differences in % correct difference scores [ t (199) = −1.06, p = 0.29].

Under a random-effects allelic model, there was marginally significant increased risk of sarcoidosis for -307A allele among Caucasians (OR=1.25; 95% CI: 0.96-1.62; P=0.09) but not among Asians (OR=2.12; 95% CI: 0.31-14.27; P=0.44).

Apart from a marginally significant effect of age ( p = 0.09), no other effects or interactions were significant ( p ’s ≥ 0.13).

2A ), ANOVA with 9 levels of probabilities revealed a significant main effect of probability, F(8,120) = 3.57, p = 0.016, a significant linear main effect, F(1,15) = 5.33, p = 0.036, and a marginally significant quadratic effect, F(1,15) = 3.28, P = 0.09.

The survival benefit of quiescent tumors in comparison to mixed tumors was observed in muscle-invasive BCa (overall log-rank P = 0.011); however, the difference was marginally significant in non-muscle-invasive BCa (log-rank P = 0.09), probably due to the limited sample size.

However, the effect over lateral motor areas remained marginally significant even when posterior 8–14 Hz activity was included as a co-variate ( β =−0.068±0.038, t 20 =−1.8, P =0.09), suggesting that this motor effect was at least partially distinct from the more posterior effect.

The correlation between this threat effect and the interaction term from the ANOVA on fixations was marginally significant, r = 0.331, p = 0.09.

Even with the happy faces, a marginally significant level ( p = 0.09) was observed.

The difference in depression scores between the two groups was marginally significant [ t (71) = 1.72, p = 0.09], with greater depression scores exhibited in the HP group than in the LP group ( Table 1 ).

The hypothesized three-way interaction between income, inequality and economic system justification was marginally significant, B = 4.11, SE = 2.45, p = .09.

No significant differences were found in the TELP and control groups, except in MBI (mean change 2.5, P = 0.04) and GDS (mean change 2, P = 0.03), and a marginally significant change in MMSE (mean change 1.33, P = 0.09) in TELP.

Since the correlation between anxious attachment and avoidant attachment scores was marginally significant ( r = 0.146, p = 0.09), a two-way analysis of covariance (ANCOVA) with other style scores as a covariant was performed on all dependent variables.