. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2010 Oct 12.

Published in final edited form as: Aging Ment Health. 2008 Jul;12(4):434–443. doi: 10.1080/13607860802224318

Table 1.

Causal relations between coping strategies and burnout in cross-lagged effects models (N = 546).

	Goodness of fit					Coping T₁→Coping T₂	Burnout T₁→Burnout T₂	Coping T₁→Burnout T₂	Burnout T₁→Coping T₂
	df	χ²	GFI	AGFI	RMSEA	Coping T₁→Coping T₂	Burnout T₁→Burnout T₂	Coping T₁→Burnout T₂	Burnout T₁→Coping T₂
Keeping Their Own Pace	93	245.485	0.957	0.904	0.054	0.364^**^a (0.339)^b	0.543^*** (0.578)	−0.106 (−0.156)	−0.203 (−0.137)
Diversion	58	181.241	0.967	0.903	0.058	0.681^*** (0.677)	0.529^*** (0.559)	−0.121^* (−0.112)	0.055 (0.063)
Positive Acceptance of Caregiving Role	133	337.157	0.948	0.901	0.052	0.421^*** (0.392)	0.609^*** (0.635)	−0.050 (−0.059)	−0.288^*** (−0.239)
Informal Support Seeking	94	183.106	0.968	0.929	0.040	0.589^*** (0.555)	0.590^*** (0.625)	0.049 (0.061)	0.020 (0.016)
Formal Support Seeking	134	249.683	0.962	0.927	0.038	0.816^*** (0.809)	0.593^*** (0.629)	0.033 (0.040)	0.081 (0.070)

Notes: T₁ = Initial survey. T₂ = Follow-up survey.

Standardized regression coefficient.

Metric (unstandardized) coefficient.

p < 0.05,

^**

p < 0.01,

^***

p < 0.001.