. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2020 Feb 1.

Published in final edited form as: J Abnorm Child Psychol. 2019 Feb;47(2):345–357. doi: 10.1007/s10802-018-0453-3

Table 3.

Model Fit Statistics for Unconditional and Conditional Latent Growth Models

	Neuroticism	Extraversion	Conscientiousness	Agreeableness	Openness
Unconditional Models
χ²(p)	3.27 (.66)	4.43 (.62)	.73 (.98)	2.57 (.77)	13.53 (.02)
CFI	1.00	1.00	1.00	1.00	.93
TLI	1.08	1.03	1.04	1.02	.92
RMSEA	< .001	< .001	< .001	< .001	.12
Test of Close Fit	.78	.76	.99	.86	.06
Conditional Models: Maternal Ratings
χ²(p)	16.71 (.27)	13.15 (.59)	16.19 (.30)	21.85 (.13)	27.38 (.02)
CFI	.99	1.00	.99	.98	.93
TLI	.97	1.02	.99	.97	.87
RMSEA	.04	< .001	.03	.06	.09
Test of Close Fit	.57	.84	.60	.39	.11
Conditional Models: Teacher Ratings
χ²(p)	15.13 (.37)	10.32 (.80)	14.85 (.39)	11.53 (.71)	20.73 (.11)
CFI	.99	1.00	1.00	1.00	.95
TLI	.98	1.07	.99	1.03	.91
RMSEA	.03	< .001	.02	< .001	.06
Test of Close Fit	.67	.94	.68	.90	.34

Note: df = degrees of freedom, CFI = Comparative Fit Index, TLI = Tucker-Lewis Index, RMSEA = Root Mean Square Error of Approximation.