Search alternatives:
significant decrease » significant increase (Expand Search), significantly increased (Expand Search)
greatest decrease » treatment decreased (Expand Search), greater increase (Expand Search)
gender decrease » greater decrease (Expand Search), teer decrease (Expand Search)
significant decrease » significant increase (Expand Search), significantly increased (Expand Search)
greatest decrease » treatment decreased (Expand Search), greater increase (Expand Search)
gender decrease » greater decrease (Expand Search), teer decrease (Expand Search)
-
2681
Preference for the EIA – conjoint results.
Published 2025“…Additionally, preferences polarized along partisan identities, with Democrats favoring impact parity over accuracy maximization while Republicans displayed the reverse preference. Gender and social justice orientations also significantly predicted EIA support. …”
-
2682
Marginal means – Pooled across scenarios.
Published 2025“…Additionally, preferences polarized along partisan identities, with Democrats favoring impact parity over accuracy maximization while Republicans displayed the reverse preference. Gender and social justice orientations also significantly predicted EIA support. …”
-
2683
Sample attribute table.
Published 2025“…Additionally, preferences polarized along partisan identities, with Democrats favoring impact parity over accuracy maximization while Republicans displayed the reverse preference. Gender and social justice orientations also significantly predicted EIA support. …”
-
2684
Subgroup analysis – Political affiliation.
Published 2025“…Additionally, preferences polarized along partisan identities, with Democrats favoring impact parity over accuracy maximization while Republicans displayed the reverse preference. Gender and social justice orientations also significantly predicted EIA support. …”
-
2685
Sample scenario description.
Published 2025“…Additionally, preferences polarized along partisan identities, with Democrats favoring impact parity over accuracy maximization while Republicans displayed the reverse preference. Gender and social justice orientations also significantly predicted EIA support. …”
-
2686
AMCEs – Pooled across scenarios.
Published 2025“…Additionally, preferences polarized along partisan identities, with Democrats favoring impact parity over accuracy maximization while Republicans displayed the reverse preference. Gender and social justice orientations also significantly predicted EIA support. …”
-
2687
Methodological flowchart.
Published 2025“…Additionally, preferences polarized along partisan identities, with Democrats favoring impact parity over accuracy maximization while Republicans displayed the reverse preference. Gender and social justice orientations also significantly predicted EIA support. …”
-
2688
Preference for the EIA vs. ETA across scenarios.
Published 2025“…Additionally, preferences polarized along partisan identities, with Democrats favoring impact parity over accuracy maximization while Republicans displayed the reverse preference. Gender and social justice orientations also significantly predicted EIA support. …”
-
2689
-
2690
-
2691
-
2692
Loss of MALS-1 function suppresses the mitochondrial and axon degeneration phenotypes that are caused by loss of RBM-26 function.
Published 2024“…Asterisks indicate statistically significant difference relative to wild type, Student’s <i>t</i> test (*<i>p</i> < 0.05). …”
-
2693
-
2694
Overexpression of MALS-1 reduces mitochondria in the PLM axon and causes axon degeneration and axon overlap defects.
Published 2024“…Asterisks in panels D and E indicate statistically significant difference relative to wild type, Z-test for proportions (***<i>p</i> < 0.0001). …”
-
2695
-
2696
-
2697
-
2698
-
2699
-
2700