Table 1.
Presents the CFA results.
| Model | The range of factor loadings | χ2 | df | χ2/df | CFI | TLI | RMSEA |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 4-Factor model (perceived social support, role cognition, work autonomy, professional identity) | 0.457~0.941 | 4803.126 | 970 | 4.952 | 0.891 | 0.884 | 0.074 |
| 3-Factor model (perceived social support, role cognition + work autonomy, professional identity) | 0.470~0.900 | 2928.736 | 399 | 7.340 | 0.882 | 0.871 | 0.094 |
| 2-Factor model (perceived social support + work autonomy + role cognition, professional identity) | 0.473~0.891 | 3483.667 | 251 | 13.879 | 0.815 | 0.797 | 0.134 |
| 1-Factor model (perceived social support + role cognition + work autonomy + professional identity) | 32600.007 | 1,035 | 34.976 | 1.000 | – | 0.217 |
As shown in that table, the fit indices revealed support for the hypothesized 4-factor model suggesting support for the distinctiveness of the constructs used in this study. The lowest factor loading of each item is greater than 0.30, which can effectively represent the latent variable it measures (74).