Skip to main content
. 2016 Feb 4;11(2):e0148087. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0148087

Table 2. Comparison of standard and bootstrap results for Q-sort factor loadings.

Standard factor loading c Bootstrapped factor loadings (& SE) d Flagging frequency e
Q−sorts F1 F2 F3 F1 F2 F3 F1 F2 F3
US1 .19 .77 −.17 .15 (.14) .77 (.20) −.20 (.17) .01 .91 .06
US2 −.07 .83 .11 −.08 (.12) .83 (.16) −.02 (.11) .00 .98 .02
US3 .81 −.02 −.09 .81 (.15) −.01 (.14) −.05 (.15) .98 .01 .01
US4 .78 .23 .27 .76 (.19) .19 (.14) .20 (.19) .93 .01 .03
JP5 −.83 .15 .03 −.84 (.15) .14 (.10) −.01 (.11) .96 .01 .01
CA6 .15 −.18 .88 .11 (.13) −.12 (.20) .81 (.21) .02 .08 .87
UK7 .14 −.35 .74 .11 (.10) −.25 (.19) .69 (.31) .01 .13 .83
US8 −.09 .66 −.17 −.06 (.21) .62 (.25) −.22 (.35) .04 .72 .22
FR9 .20 −.18 −.45 .16 (.23) −.07 (.22) −.56 (.36) .11 .11 .59

Note: F, factors. Boldfaces:

c flagged Q-sorts

d SE >.2

e frequency of flagging in the bootstrap >.8.