. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2009 Jun 8.

Published in final edited form as: Behav Genet. 2009 Mar 13;39(3):265–276. doi: 10.1007/s10519-009-9261-4

Table 4.

Homogeneity and Heterogeneity Model Fits

		Homogeneity	Heterogeneity	Comparison Statistics
MT	−2LL	8,948.38	8946.03	Δχ²	2.35
	df	3224	3221	Δdf	3
	AIC	2500.38	2504.03	p	.50
PMT	−2LL	5537.28	5532.52	Δχ²	4.76
	df	3123	3120	Δdf	3
	AIC	−708.72	−707.48	p	.19
Neglect	−2LL	7066.70	7065.58	Δχ²	1.12
	df	3192	3189	Δdf	3
	AIC	682.70	687.58	p	.77

Note. The heterogentiy model was not tested for SMT due to small cell sizes. −2LL = −2 log likelihood; df = degrees of freedom; AIC = Akaike’s information criterion; Δχ² = difference in chi square from homogeneity model; p = probability. MT = composite maltreatment; PMT = physical maltreatment.