Skip to main content
. 2017 Mar 2;8:223. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2017.00223

Table 2.

Goodness-of-fit indices for the tested models.

NFP χ2(df) χ2G1(df) χ2G2(df) CFI TLI RMSEA [90% CI] SRMR AIC (ΔAIC)
Model 1 (G1 = A; G2 = A) 16 22.826(12)* 18.779(6)** 4.047(6)n.s. 0.981 0.981 0.085 [0.026,0.138] 0.081 1318.690(9.68)
Model 2 (G1 = B; G2 = A) 17 11.143(11)n.s. 7.096(5)n.s. 4.047(6)n.s. 1.00 1.00 0.010 [0.000,0.095] 0.047 1309.007(0)
Model 3 (G1 = B; G2 = B) 18 10.378(10)n.s. 7.096(5)n.s. 3.282(5)n.s. 0.999 0.999 0.017 [0.000,0.099] 0.045 1310.242(1.24)
NFP χ2(df) χ2G1(df) χ2G2(df) CFI TLI RMSEA [90% CI] SRMR Δχ2df) of M4 vs. M2
Model 4 15 13.279(13)n.s. 7.920(6)n.s. 5.359(7)n.s. 1.00 1.00 0.013 [0.000,0.090] 0.160 2.136(2)n.s.

G1, intervention group; G2, control group; A, no-change model; B, latent change model; NFP, Number of Free Parameters; df, degrees of freedom; χ2G1, contribution of G1 to the overall chi-square value; χ2G2, contribution of G2 to the overall chi-square value; CFI, Comparative Fit Index; TLI, Tucker-Lewis Index; RMSEA, Root Mean Square Error of Approximation; CI, confidence intervals; SRMR, Standardized Root Mean Square Residual; AIC, Akaike's Information Criterion.

ΔAIC = Difference in AIC between the best fitting model (i.e., Model 2; highlighted in bold) and each model.

Model 4 = Model 2 with mean and variance of intercepts constrained to be equal across groups.

The full Mplus syntaxes for these models were reported in Appendices.

n.s.

p > 0.05;

*

p < 0.05;

**

p < 0.01.