Sentence examples for items history from inspiring English sources

Introducing big government Reprints Related items History of gold: It defileth notOct 12th 2000 Millennium issue: German hyperinflation: Loads of moneyDec 23rd 1999.

Beckonomics For poorer Copycat Wrong target Police and polis Out of Africa Body double Reprints Related items History lesson: What if Britain had joined in 1999?Jun 12th 2003 Britain and the euro: Can they be serious?Jun 12th 2003 Britain and the euro: No againJun 12th 2003For what it's worth, Bagehot divines a distinct improvement in the central relationship of British politics.

The limits to growth Beyond lucky Infinite variety The reluctant deputy sheriff God under Howard Australians old and new Drizabone Sources Reprints Related items History on an environmental scale: Of porpoises and plantationsJan 13th 2005Mr Diamond's analysis is right, but his conclusion looks wrong.

But Mr Schumer has been promised a vote by July, and his bill may well pass the Senate.Related items History, riots and trade rows: The China questionApr 21st 2005 North Carolina: The human cost of cheaper towelsApr 21st 2005 Central American trade: Five get anxiousMay 27th 2004The Schumer bill's success, which has surprised even its sponsor, is accelerating other measures.

Of the seven items, history of resolved pressure ulcer was the strongest predictor of new pressure ulcers at follow-up in the multivariable model, with an odds ratio of 2.5.

To better assess the hemorrhagic risk during the first three months of anticoagulation, Ruiz-Gimenez et al developed a simple bleeding score based on 6 clinical or biological items: history of recent bleeding, creatinine, anemia, cancer, clinical PE, age >75 years (Table 4).

Rare item history of Scotland by Hectore Boethio published in Paris 1574.

The other factors were reward bias (80% high/20% low or 20% high/80% low) and item history (target or distracter), as in the previous analyses.

The effect of item history was non significant, nor was its interaction with the between-subject factor deception, while the interaction between item history and reward bias was significant both overall (F 1,30) = 5.041, p<0.04, η2p = 0.144) and in its second order interaction with deception (F 1,30) = 7.306, p<.02, η2p = 0.196).

Similarly to what we had found in our previous work [28], neither of the main effects nor the interaction between the two reached statistical significance (reward bias: F 1,15) = 0.033, n.s.; item history: F 1,15) = 0.059, n.s.; reward bias×item history: F 1,15) = 0.094, n.s).s

For RT analysis, trials were first grouped according to the type of shape used as the target in the current test trial, and data were submitted to a ANOVA with reward bias (80% high/20% low or 20% high/80% low) and item history (bias applied when target or distracter during training) as main factors.