Statistical analyses
non-CSA, HT
Many of the hypotheses formulated by the participants were in the format "A was sexually abused by B" and "A was not sexually abused by B". That is, different from what we expected, participants in these cases did not actually do any in-depth analysis of the specific scenarios that could underlie the suspicion of abuse, which is essential for the hypothesis-testing approach. Hence, we reported the analyses using the original hypothesis variables (i.e., the numbers of CSA and non-CSA hypotheses) per the pre-registered plan but also examined Hypothesis 5 using the number of CSA and non-CSA hypotheses after excluding hypotheses of this unanalytical type (named: revised Hypothesis related variables).Bland and Altman [Given that participants who were allocated into either the HT or the HT+Feedback conditions built hypotheses before the first interview, while the Control and the Feedback conditions did not receive any intervention before the first interview, we compared baseline performance according to whether participants built hypotheses or not using a series of In the main analyses, we conducted a series of 2 (Feedback: Present vs. Not present: between subjects) * 2 (Hypothesis-testing (HT): Training in HT and HT before each interview vs. Neither training in HT nor HT before each interview (between subjects) * 5 (Interview number: From 1st to 5th interviews: within-subjects) three-way mixed multivariate analysis of variance (MANOVA) to test the effect of Avatar training on the types of questions, types of details, and the assessment of information from Avatars by using the R package MANOVA.RM [