Table 2.
Results for the individual models with husbands’ W1 Chinese cultural orientation (Models 1–4).
| Path Label and Direct Effect | Unst. | SE | St. |
|---|---|---|---|
| Model 1: Warmth and Mattering | |||
| A. H. Ch. CO (W1) → H. TGB (W2) | .33** | .11 | .21 |
| B. H. TGB (W2) → H. Warmth (W2) | −.38** | .11 | −.23 |
| C. H. Warmth (W2) → W. Mattering (W3) | .30** | .09 | .23 |
| D. H. Ch. CO (W1) → H. Warmth (W2) | .46** | .16 | .18 |
| E. H. TGB (W2) → W. Mattering (W3) | .08 | .14 | .04 |
| F. H. Ch. CO (W1) → W. Mattering (W3) | .26 | .20 | .08 |
| χ2(9) = 13.05, p = .160; RMSEA = .03 [.00, .07]; CFI = .90; SRMR = .02 | |||
| H. Ch. CO (W1) → H. TGB (W2) → H. Warmth (W2) → W. Mattering (W3): −.037* [−.086, −.008] | |||
| Model 2 Hostility and Mattering | |||
| A. H. Ch. CO (W1) → H. TGB (W2) | .33** | .11 | 21 |
| B. H. TGB (W2) → H. Hostility (W2) | .37** | .11 | .28 |
| C. H. Hostility (W2) → W. Mattering (W3) | −.08 | .12 | −.05 |
| D. H. Ch. CO (W1) → H. Hostility (W2) | −.10 | .13 | −.05 |
| E. H. TGB (W2) → W. Mattering (W3) | .01 | .16 | .01 |
| F. H. Ch. CO (W1) → W. Mattering (W3) | .33 | .22 | .10 |
| χ2(9) = 9.12, p = .427; RMSEA = .00 [.00, .06]; CFI = 1.00; SRMR = .02 | |||
| H. Ch. CO (W1) → H. TGB (W2) → H. Hostility (W2) → W. Mattering (W3): −.010 [−.042, .021] | |||
| Model 3: Warmth and Dep. Symptoms | |||
| A. H. Ch. CO (W1) → H. TGB (W2) | .33** | .11 | .21 |
| B. H. TGB (W2) → H. Warmth (W2) | −.38** | .11 | −.23 |
| C. H. Warmth (W2) → W. Dep. Symptoms (W3) | −.06* | .03 | −.17 |
| D. H. Ch. CO (W1) → H. Warmth (W2) | .44** | .16 | .17 |
| E. H. TGB (W2) → W. Dep. Symptoms (W3) | −.03 | .04 | −.05 |
| F. H. Ch. CO (W1) → W. Dep. Symptoms (W3) | .01 | .06 | .01 |
| χ2(9) = 11.14, p = .266; RMSEA = .02 [.00, .06]; CFI = .95; SRMR = .02 | |||
| H. Ch. CO (W1) → H. TGB (W2) → H. Warmth (W2) → W. Dep. Symptoms (W3): .008* [.001, .018] | |||
| Model 4: Hostility and Dep. Symptoms | |||
| A. H. Ch. CO (W1) → H. TGB (W2) | .33** | .11 | .21 |
| B. H. TGB (W2) → H. Hostility (W2) | .38** | .11 | .28 |
| C. H. Hostility (W2) → W. Dep. Symptoms (W3) | .06† | .03 | .15 |
| D. H. Ch. CO (W1) → H. Hostility (W2) | −.10 | .13 | −.05 |
| E. H. TGB (W2) → W. Dep. Symptoms (W3) | −.04 | .04 | −.06 |
| F. H. Ch. CO (W1) → W. Dep. Symptoms (W3) | .00 | .06 | .00 |
| χ2(9) = 7.85, p = .549; RMSEA = .00 [.00, .05]; CFI = 1.00; SRMR = .02 | |||
| H. Ch. CO (W1) → H. TGB (W2) → H. Hostility (W2) → W. Dep. Symptoms (W3): .008 [−.001, .023] | |||
Note. Bolded path letters A through F align with labeling in Figure 1. Model fit statistics and indirect effects for each model are presented below the direct effects. H. = Husband, W. = Wife, CO = Cultural Orientation, Dep. = Depressive, TGB = Traditional Gender Beliefs, Unst. = Unstandardized Estimate, SE = Standard Error, St. = Standardized Estimate. Indirect effects are reported as unstandardized estimates and 95% confidence intervals. For direct effects:
†
p < .1;
*
p < .05;
**
p < .01.
For indirect effects: * = significant to 95% confidence interval.