The witness, Dr. D. Laikin: There are questions, sorry, with your permission I'll look at the questionnaire, it's with me. Question number 12 is a valid question
(page 1291)
And later on -
Adv. Dr. Tal Rotman: I'm currently asking about your questionnaire, is your questionnaire valid or not?
The witness, Dr. D. Laikin: It is a questionnaire that has undergone a visible validity check.
Adv. Dr. Tal Rotman: Have you checked?
The witness, Dr. D. Laikin: Visible validity.
Adv. Dr. Tal Rotman: It seems to be valid, Professor Lahad read it and said it was okay.
The witness, Dr. D. Laikin: Some of the questions, another question I can refer to you. I made an adjustment, questionnaire number 19..
[....]
Adv. Dr. Tal Rotman: There is also no reference in the opinion that it is valid, or valid, correct?
The witness, Dr. D. Laikin: It is not written.
Adv. Dr. Tal Rotman: There is no such reference.
The witness, Dr. D. Laikin: We did not write that there is a reference that the questionnaire is valid (Pages 1292-1293)
- Statistical reliability is questionable
For the purposes of this section, we will briefly clarify that the MANOVA (Multivariate Analysis of Variance) test mentioned in the evidence is an advanced statistical method used to examine differences between group averages when there are two or more dependent variables at the same time.
With regard to the marking [P], Prof. Lahad was presented with the fact that the figure of 'significance' does not appear in Table No. 1 in his opinion, as well as in Figures Nos. 1 and 3, and he was asked:
Adv. Dr. Tal Rotman: You don't know. You also didn't check if they split normally.?
The witness, Prof. M. Echo: Maybe, ask Dima, He may have these findings, I think he can answer you.
Adv. Dr. Tal Rotman: Did you know that a condition for running a statistical test of Manova The fact that we are talking about variables that are distributed normally?