Skip to main content
. 2019 Jan 11;7:100350. doi: 10.1016/j.ssmph.2019.100350

Table 4.

Model fit comparisons for nested multi-group multilevel models among heterosexual adolescents in the British Columbia Adolescent Health Survey, 2003–2013a.

Model Specification -2LL df AIC BIC aBIC |Δχ2| |Δdf| p
1 γ11= γ12= γ13; γ2g=0 152,182.36 34 152,250.37 152,540.54 152,432.49 – – –
2 γ1g freely estimated; γ2g= 0 151,660.39 36 151,732.39 152,039.64 151,925.23 521.97 2 < .001
3 γ1g and γ2g freely estimated 152,001.17 39 152,079.17 152,412.03 152,288.09 340.78 3 < .001
4 β1g=0; γ1g freely estimated; γ2g=0 152,051.19 33 152,117.19 152,399.00 152,294.13 390.80 3 < .001

Note. -2LL = -2 × Log-likelihood; df = degrees of freedom; AIC = Akaike information criterion; BIC = Bayesian information criterion; aBIC = Bayesian information criterion adjusted for sample size.

a

Model 2 is compared to Model 1; Models 3 and 4 are compared to Model 2. Model 2 is the best fitting model, given the smallest values of -2LL, AIC, BIC, and aBIC.