Skip to main content
. 2023 Mar 30;11(4):68. doi: 10.3390/jintelligence11040068

Table A2.

Fit of the LDS models for observed performance scores.

Model χ2 (df, N), p RMSEA [95% CI] SRMR CFI TLI
switch RT (norm) 47.90 (28, 101), .01 .08 [.04;.12] .08 .97 .96
switch Error (norm) 26.75 (28, 101), .53 .00 [.00;.07] .06 1.00 1.01
incon RT (norm) 64.82 (28, 101), .00 .11 [.08;.15] .08 .94 .93
incon Error (norm) 38.31 (28, 101), .09 .06 [.00;.10] .08 .95 .93

Latent difference score (LDS) models: switch = model for task-switch effect; incon = model for response incongruency effect. The observed scores were transformed to normalize their distribution (high scores indicate poor performance): RT (norm) = 1/RT*(-1); Error (norm) = probit(%Errors).