Table 1.

Model development and validation; PCCaSO, 2005

Model	χ2	df	p	CFI	RMSEA	90% CI	AIC	Notes
Model Development: First random half of sample (n = 543)
All 14 cons	289.06	77	<.001	0.843	0.071	0.063-0.080	345.06	Dropped MDrec loading <.30
13 cons + 8 pros	542.04	188	<.001	0.837	0.059	0.053-0.065	670.04	Dropped 3 cross-loading cons
10 cons + 8 pros	314.73	134	<.001	0.894	0.050	0.043-0.057	424.73
10 cons, 8 pros + 4 norms	621.72	206	<.001	0.832	0.061	0.056-0.067	759.72	High correlation between norms and pros .88, p < .001
10 cons + combined   pros & norms factor	654.33	208	<.001	0.820	0.063	0.058-0.068	788.33	Not a significant improvement
2nd order factor of pros   & norms correlated   with 10 cons	640.79	207	<.001	0.825	0.062	0.057-0.068	776.79	Not a significant improvement
Correlated 4-factor model: cons, pros, norms, self- efficacy	1136.11	399	<.001	0.864	0.58	0.054-0.62	1268.11	Examined modification indices
Added 3 error covariances to correlated 4-factor model	960.10	396	<.001	0.896	0.051	0.047-0.055	1098.10	Final model. Significant improvement; χ2Δ = 176.01 (dfΔ = 3)
Final Model Validation
Second random half of sample (n = 558)	1000.77	396	<.001	0.893	0.052	0.048-0.056	1138.77
Full sample (n = 1,250)	1507.51	396	<.001	0.909	0.047	0.045-0.050	1705.51	See Figure 1
Full sample at 2-week follow-up (n = 1,036)	1014.93	396	<.001	0.917	.039	0.036-0.042	1212.93

CFI = comparative fit index; RMSEA = root mean square error of approximation; CI = confidence interval; AIC = Akaike information criterion