Table 3.
Factor loadings and model fit statistics for one factor, three-correlated-factor, 3FBF, and revised 2F solutions for parent-reported ICU (Frick, 2004)
| One factor | Three correlated factor | Three-factor bifactor | Three-factor bifactor with MI | Three-factor bifactor with MI (alternative caregiver report) | Two-factor | |||||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| ||||||||||||||||||
| Callous | Uncar | Unemo | G | Callous | Uncar | Unemo | G | Callous | Uncar | Unemo | G | Callous | Uncar | Unemo | Callous | Uncar | ||
| 1. Expresses feelings openly | .47*** | .63*** | .42*** | .52*** | .43*** | .51*** | .51*** | .65*** | ||||||||||
| 6. Does not show emotions. | .55*** | .71*** | .51*** | .39*** | .52*** | .38*** | .42*** | .23*** | .55*** | |||||||||
| 14. Easy to tell how s/he is feeling | .60*** | .81*** | .56*** | .54*** | .58*** | .52*** | .50*** | .36*** | ||||||||||
| 19. Expressive and emotional | .35*** | .47*** | .30*** | .43*** | .31*** | .42*** | .24*** | .58*** | ||||||||||
| 22. Hides feelings from others | .35*** | .45*** | .30*** | .35*** | .29*** | .37*** | .28*** | .33*** | ||||||||||
| 2. Does not know right from wrong | .60*** | .65*** | .54*** | .37*** | .53*** | .42*** | .37*** | .49*** | ||||||||||
| 4. Does not care who is hurts | .68*** | .73*** | .61*** | .38*** | .60*** | .44*** | .77*** | .36*** | .78*** | |||||||||
| 7. Does not care about being on time | .44*** | .48*** | .36*** | .40*** | .30*** | .46*** | .16*** | .68*** | ||||||||||
| 8. Concerned about feelings of others | .68*** | .73*** | .73*** | −.07ns | .73*** | - | .73*** | - | .73*** | |||||||||
| 9. Does not care if in trouble | .64*** | .69*** | .56*** | .43*** | .55*** | .47*** | .52*** | .49*** | .74*** | |||||||||
| 11. Does not care about doing well | .65*** | .70*** | .51*** | .63*** | .45*** | .51*** | .38*** | .56*** | .61*** | |||||||||
| 12. Seems very cold and uncaring | .69*** | .73*** | .63*** | .37*** | .61*** | .43*** | .71*** | .37*** | .77*** | |||||||||
| 18. Shows no remorse | .66*** | .71*** | .59*** | .43*** | .58*** | .48*** | .55*** | .49*** | .78*** | |||||||||
| 20. Does not put the time into things | .56*** | .60*** | .42*** | .55*** | .33*** | .44*** | .31*** | .43*** | ||||||||||
| 21. Feelings of others unimportant | .56*** | .61*** | .46*** | .48*** | .45*** | .55*** | .35*** | .48*** | .67*** | |||||||||
| 3. Concerned about school work | .40*** | .41*** | .43*** | −.17* | .43*** | - | .40*** | - | ||||||||||
| 5. Feels bad or guilty | .65*** | .68*** | .70*** | −.16* | .70*** | - | .68*** | - | .70*** | |||||||||
| 13. Easily admits to being wrong | .60*** | .62*** | .63*** | −.02ns | .64*** | - | .69*** | - | ||||||||||
| 15. Always tries his/her best | .68*** | .71*** | .71*** | .07ns | .61*** | .29*** | .59*** | .38*** | ||||||||||
| 16. Apologizes to persons | .80*** | .82*** | .80*** | .19*** | .79*** | .29*** | .78*** | .27*** | .83*** | |||||||||
| 17. Tries not to hurt others feelings | .78*** | .81*** | .77*** | .42*** | .77*** | .35*** | .79*** | .27*** | .82*** | |||||||||
| 24. Does things to make others feel good | .71*** | .74*** | .71*** | .24*** | .71*** | .26*** | .68*** | .26*** | .74*** | |||||||||
|
| ||||||||||||||||||
| Χ2 | 1510.95*** | 1096.73*** | 891.29*** | 603.32*** | 428.75*** | 173.42*** | ||||||||||||
| df | df =209 | df =206 | df =187 | df =186 | df = 186 | df =53 | ||||||||||||
| CFI; RMSEA | .83; 10 | .89; .08 | .91; .08 | .95; .06 | .95; 05 | .98; .05 | ||||||||||||
Note.
p <.05;
p<.01;
p<.001.
Items paraphrased for brevity. All parent-reported ICU except if stated. MI =modification indices. In the three-factor bifactor model with MI, error terms of the following items were allowed to correlate: 15 with 07; 15 with 11; 22 with 12; 20 with 11; 20 and 15. In addition, items 8, 3, 5, and 13 were specified to only have general CU factor variance (no specific factor variance). Note that a 2BF (i.e., general CU factor and two specific factors of callous and uncaring) ran into estimation problems as the uncaring items loaded strongly (all loadings > .70) onto the general factor. Thus, the two-correlated factor appears to offer a more parsimonious method to express the variance in these two factors.