Table 5.

Results of the path analyses comparing MBI sum score and BDI 2 for the patient sample.

Model	CMIN	X2/df	df model	p model	CFI	Difference test X2 (unrestricted model)
Unrestricted model	80.560	10.070	8	<0.001	0.923	–
Novelty seeking same for BDI and MBI	81.608	9.068	9	<0.001	0.923	n.s.
Harm avoidance same for BDI and MBI	108.651	12.072	9	<0.001	0.894	X2 = 28.091; p < 0.001
Reward dependence same for BDI and MBI	82.805	9.201	9	<0.001	0.992	n.s.
Persistence same for BDI and MBI	95.210	10.579	9	<0.001	0.909	X2 = 14.650; p < 0.001
Self-directedness same for BDI and MBI	162.861	18.096	9	<0.001	0.837	X2 = 82.301; p < 0.001
Cooperativeness same for BDI and MBI	86.386	9.598	9	<0.001	0.918	X2 = 5.826; p = 0.016
Self-transcendence same for BDI and MBI	84.428	9.381	9	<0.001	0.92	X2 = 3.867; p = 0.049
All subscales same for BDI and MBI	302.394	20.160	15	<0.001	0.213	X2 = 221.833; p < 0.001

The table shows the fit of a liberal model (unrestricted model) compared to nested models, which assume the same regression weights between an individual TCI dimension and burnout/depression, while all other respective dimensions stay free (compare Materials and Methods). Furthermore, a model, which assumes the same regression weights for all dimensions, is tested.