Table 4. Goodness of fit of the four CSS-12 measurement models evaluated (N = 657).
| Model | Short Description | CFI | TLI | RMSEA (90% CI) | SRMR | AIC* | BIC* |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | One-dimension (CFA) | 0.943 | 0.930 | 0.141 (0.132–0.150) | 0.052 | 18650.8 | 18698.0 |
| 2 | Four-dimension (CFA) | 0.959 | 0.944 | 0.126 (0.117–0.136) | 0.043 | 18456.5 | 18644.9 |
| 3 | Bifactor (original paper) | 0.966 | 0.947 | 0.122 (0.112–0.133) | 0.039 | 18189.5 | 18255.2 |
| 4 | Bifactor-ESEM (our proposal) | 0.999 | 0.997 | 0.029 (0.000–0.050) | 0.006 | 18129.9 | 18227.0 |
(*) Models fitted with a Maximum Likelihood Estimation with Robust Standard Errors (MLR) estimator.
CFA, Confirmatory Factor Analysis; ESEM, exploratory structural equation modelling; AIC, Akaike’s information criteria; BIC, sample-size adjusted Bayesian Information Criteria; CFI, comparative fit index; TLI, Tucker–Lewis Index; RMSEA, Root Mean Square Error of Approximation; SRMR, standardised root mean square residual.