Skip to main content
. 2023 Oct 5;14:1222845. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2023.1222845

TABLE 2.

Model comparison.

Construct(s) Model Description #Parameters DIC
EmEx M1 Unconditional Multilevel AR(1) Model 5 37829.69
M1a M1 with variance of AR(1) path fixed to a close-to-zero (0.001) value 4 40622.21
M2 Residual DSEM (RDSEM) with a linear trend 9 108224.44
M2a RDSEM with a linear trend but its variance fixed to a close-to-zero (0.001) value 8 139776.64
MWB M1 Unconditional Multilevel AR(1) Model 5 48175.75
M1a M1 with variance of AR(1) path fixed to a close-to-zero (0.001) value 4 50666.04
M2 Residual DSEM (RDSEM) with a linear trend 9 148709.85
M2a RDSEM with a linear trend but its variance fixed to a close-to-zero (0.001) value 8 149756.94
EmEx & MWB M3 VAR(1) model 22 174096.25
M3a VAR(1) model with “EmEx → MWB” (φ3) level-2 variance (τ44) fixed to a close-to-zero (i.e., 0.001) value 21 174319.45
M3b VAR(1) model with “MWB → EmEx” (φ4) level-2 variance (τ55) fixed to a close-to-zero (i.e., 0.001) value 21 174955.32

EmEx, emotional exhaustion; MWB, mental well-being; #Parameters, number of estimated parameters; DIC, Deviance Information Criterion. Preferred models are reported in bold.