. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2005 Sep 29.

Published in final edited form as: AIDS Educ Prev. 2005 Jun;17(3):200–216. doi: 10.1521/aeap.17.4.200.66532

TABLE 2.

Goodness–of–Fit Statistics for Latent Variable Path Model Predicting Risky Sexual Behavior (n = 172)

			Measures of Absolute Fit			Measures of Relative Fit
Outcome Measure	Treatment of Age in the Analysis	Number of Variables^a	χ²	df	RMSEA	GFI	CFI	TLC	R²
Risky sex	Ignore age	9	39.80	21	.072	.95	.96	.93	.30
	Residualize for age	9	34.95	21	.062	.95	.96	.94	.10
	Include age	10	51.10	27	.072	.94	.95	.92	.35

Note. RMSEA = root mean square error of approximation (Browne & Cudeck, 1989; Steiger, 1990). GFI = goodness–of–fit index (Joreskog & Sorbom, 1996). CFI = comparative fit index (Bentler, 1990). TLC = Tucker–Lewis coefficient (Tucker & Lewis, 1973). The four–factor model for risky sexual behavior contained 24 estimated parameters (9 loadings, 6 factor correlations, and nine unique variances). Given the total sample size of 172, the ratio of participants to estimated model parameters (7.2) was within the recommended range of 5 to 10 (Kline, 1998).

Number of variables refers to the number of measured variables in the latent variable model.