Skip to main content
. 2018 Oct 23;6:299. doi: 10.3389/fpubh.2018.00299

Table 4.

Goodness-of-fit for CYRM-28, CYRM-28 with replacement variable, and CYRM-12.

Models χ2 (df) CFI RMSEA AIC
CYRM-28
1 Canadian Model 600.229 (339) 0.775 0.057 790.229
2 Aotearoa New Zealand Model 553.931 (344) 0.811 0.051 733.931
3 South African Model 602.784 (345) 0.778 0.056 780.784
4 Survey context 532.914 (336) 0.828 0.050 728.914
5 Being Knowing Doing 633.564 (399) 0.815 0.050 825.564
CYRM-28 (REPLACEMENT VARIABLE)
1 Canadian 577.253 (339) 0.792 0.055 767.253
2 Aotearoa New Zealand 538.709 (344) 0.822 0.049 718.709
3 South African 582.152 (345) 0.793 0.054 760.152
4 Survey context 518.358 (336) 0.841 0.048 714.358
5 Being Knowing Doing 639.348 (344) 0.740 0.061 819.348
SOURCES AND EXPRESSIONS OF RESILIENCE
Sources of resilience 133.363 (88) p = 0.001 0.922 0.047 197.363
Expressions of resilience 75.071 (65) p = 0.184 0.960 0.029 127.071
CYRM 12
CYRM12 95.429 (51) 0.818 0.061 149.429

df, degrees of freedom; CFI, comparative fit index; RMSEA, Root mean square error of approximation; AIC, Akaike Information Criterion.