Table 1.

Model comparisons

Models	χ2	df	CFI	TLI	RMSEA	AIC	Model comparison	∆ df	∆ χ2
Model 1	382.864**	99	0.935	0.911	0.059	488.864
Model 2	388.906**	100	0.934	0.911	0.060	492.906	1 vs 2	1	6.04*
Model 3	452.720**	101	0.920	0.892	0.065	554.720	2 vs 3	1	63.81**
Model 4	501.158**	103	0.909	0.880	0.069	599.158	3 vs 4	2	48.44**
Model 5	1655.889**	170	0.740	0.678	0.104	1775.889	4 vs 5	67	1154.73**

n=336. * P < 0.05; ** P < 0.01. CFI, Comparative Fit Index; TLI, Tucker-Lewis Index; RMSEA, Root Mean Square Error of Approximation; AIC, Akaike Information Criterion.

Model 1: exemplary behaviours (EB), individualised consideration (IC), intellectual stimulation (IS) and contingent reward (CR) were included as four first-order factors under one second-order factor for active leadership (AL), and passive leadership (PL) was intercorrelated with AL.

Model 2: IC and IS were collapsed into one factor, resulting in three first-order factors for the AL second-order factor and PL was intercorrelated with AL.

Model 3: EB, IC and IS were collapsed into one factor, resulting in two first-order factors for the AL second-order factor, and PL was intercorrelated with AL.

Model 4: all the active factors (transformational leadership subfactors and CR) were collapsed into one first-order factor, and PL was intercorrelated with AL.

Model 5: all items loaded on one single factor.