. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2018 Jan 1.

Published in final edited form as: Child Abuse Negl. 2016 Dec 4;63:151–161. doi: 10.1016/j.chiabu.2016.11.030

Table 3.

Comparisons between the different person-centered solutions

Model	AIC	BIC	Entropy	LMRT	VLMRT
2-Profile	14542.15	14611.96	.94	835.70^**	−7863.87^**
3-Profile	13871.93	13967.1	.94	591.45^**	−7217.44^**
4-Profile	13706.19	13828.36	.91	173.21	−6913.97
5-Profile	13628.86	13777.20	.92	−122.64	−6717.50
6-Profile	13053.03	13227.55	.94	147.52	−6562.21

Note: AIC = Akaike information criterion; BIC = Bayesian information criterion; LMRT = Lo–Mendell–Rubin likelihood ratio test; VLMRT = Vuong-Lo-Mendell-Rubin likelihood ratio test.

^**

p < .01.

The null hypotheses for the LMRT and VLMRT significance values indicate that a solution with the given number of classes provides the same fit to the data as a solution with one less class (i.e., adding an additional profile does not improve the model fit).