Yes, that is probably what was intended, given the phrases "of the pairs".
Of course statistically significant, especially with a large enough sample, does not need to mean substantial.
Added as a response to comments:
The context seems to be described here, including
Imagine you are confronted with the names of two German cities, and
you recognize neither of them. There is no more information available
to infer which city is larger. What can you do?
Drösemeyer (2000) and Hell used the names of smaller German cities,
between 45.000 and 60.000 and between 20.000 and 25.000 inhabitants.
This resulted in their German participants sometimes having heard of
neither of the two, and sometimes just recognizing the two by name,
but with no further information available from memory. In the former
case, participants correctly chose the larger city in 55% of the
pairs, in the latter in 54% of the pairs, both rates significantly
different from chance. Although these effects are tiny, they point to
an interesting exploitation of information from the mere names, even
if both cities are unrecognized.
That makes it clear that guessing one out of two is what was involved and suggests that there is on average a tiny positive amount of information about cities' sizes in their names. But obviously it is not a particularly reliable way of estimating city size.