Skip to main content
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2013 Jul 9.
Published in final edited form as: Assessment. 2011 Aug 3;19(1):42–52. doi: 10.1177/1073191111415365

Table 6.

CFA Goodness-of-Fit Indices to Assess Gender Invariance of the 6-Item MAAS at Time 3

Model χ2 df CFI TLI SRMR RMSEA (90% CI) Nested Tests
Models Compared Δχ2 Δdf ΔCFI
Configural
 Females 127.69 9 .978 .96 .02 .09 (.07, .10)
 Males 105.15 9 .981 .97 .02 .08 (.07, .09)
Measurement
 M0 232.84 18 .980 .97 .02 .08 (.07, .09)
 M1 244.91 23 .979 .97 .03 .08 (.07, .08) M1-M0 12.07 5 −.001
 M2 308.10 28 .974 .97 .04 .08 (.07, .08) M2-M1 63.19** 5 −.005
 M2P 245.04 24 .979 .97 .03 .07 (.07, .08) M2P-M1 .13 1 .005
 M3 256.73 30 .979 .98 .04 .07 (.06, .07) M3-M2P 11.69 6 .000
Structural
 M4 246.21 25 .979 .98 .04 .07 (.06, .08) M4-M2P 1.17 1 .000

Note. CFA = confirmatory factor analysis; MAAS = Mindful Attention Awareness Scale; CFI = comparative fit index; TLI = Tucker–Lewis index; RMSEA = root mean square error of approximation; CI = confidence interval; SRMR = standardized root mean square residual. No measurement errors are correlated; M1 = metric invariance; M2 = scalar invariance; M3 = uniqueness invariance; P indicates partial invariance for model; intercepts constrained for M2P = Items 2, 3, 4, 5.

**

p<.01.