. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2014 Nov 1.

Published in final edited form as: Cognition. 2013 Aug 14;129(2):10.1016/j.cognition.2013.07.002. doi: 10.1016/j.cognition.2013.07.002

Table 6.

Confirmatory Factor Analyses Testing for Factorial Invariance

	χ²(df)	p	CFI	NFI	RMSEA	Δχ²(df)	p
Ability Model
Model 1	106.78 (46)	<.01	.95	.92	.08	–
Model 1a	141.63 (92)	<.001	.96	.89	.05	–
Model 1b	165.45 (101)	<.001	.94	.87	.06	23.82 (9)	<.01
Model 1c	170.79 (105)	<.001	.94	.86	.06	5.43 (4)	.25
Model 1d	175.50 (112)	<.001	.94	.86	.05	4.71 (7)	.70
Event Model
Model 2	12.26 (24)	.98	1.00	.98	.00	–
Model 2a	52.40 (48)	.31	.99	.94	.02	–
Model 2b	54.09 (54)	.47	1.00	.93	.00	1.69 (6)	.95
Model 2c	64.18 (57)	.24	.99	.92	.03	10.09 (3)	.02
Model 2d	66.60 (60)	.26	.99	.92	.02	2.42 (3)	.49

Note. Nested model comparisons compare each model to preceding model. For the Ability Model, correlated errors (Operation Span x Reading Span) were constrained to equivalence in Model 2d.