Table 3.
Unified SEM (uSEM) model fit results for four exemplar participants.
| Model fit |
AIC for multiple solutions |
||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Participant | df | χ2 | χ2p | RMSEA | SRMR | CFI | NNFI | Selected model | Closest alternative |
| A | 12 | 13.57 | 0.33 | 0.025 | 0.043 | 0.99 | 0.98 | 60.65 | N/A |
| B | 16 | 13.68 | 0.62 | 0.000 | 0.044 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 52.68 | 53.10 |
| C | 12 | 11.58 | 0.48 | 0.000 | 0.044 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 59.41 | 60.36 |
| D | 28 | 18.00 | 0.93 | 0.000 | 0.037 | 1.00 | 1.00 | 116.90 | 129.40 |
Models were estimated in LISREL at the lowest temporal order to produce white noise residuals, and multiple solutions were identified during data-driven model fitting. RMSEA, root mean square error of approximation; SRMR, standardized root mean square residual; CFI, Comparative fit index; NNFI, non-normed fit index; AIC, Akaike information criterion.