. 2018 Aug 1;29(2):433–442. doi: 10.1007/s10926-018-9803-9

Table 3.

Results of the CFA (fit indices)

Model	df	χ²	χ²_diff Model comparison with	CFI	TLI	RMSEA	90%-CI RMSEA
A	1-factor-model	14	632.25**	–	0.92	0.88	0.11**	[0.10; 0.11]
B	2-factor-model (Items WAI3 and WAI5 loading on factor WAI_F2)	13	469.53**	A (df = 1) 121.57*	0.94	0.91	0.09**	[0.09; 0.10]
C	2-factor-model (Items WAI3, WAI4 and WAI5 loading on factor WAI_F2)	13	289.60**	A (df = 2) 232.89*	0.97	0.94	0.07**	[0.07; 0.08]

Model

χ²

χ²_diff
Model comparison with

CFI

TLI

RMSEA

90%-CI RMSEA

1-factor-model

632.25**

–

0.92

0.88

0.11**

[0.10; 0.11]

2-factor-model

(Items WAI3 and WAI5 loading on factor WAI_F2)

469.53**

A (df = 1)

121.57*

0.94

0.91

0.09**

[0.09; 0.10]

2-factor-model

(Items WAI3, WAI4 and WAI5 loading on factor WAI_F2)

289.60**

A (df = 2)

232.89*

0.97

0.94

0.07**

[0.07; 0.08]

N = 3968

df degree of freedom; χ² Chi-square-test; χ²_diff Chi-square-difference-test, CFI comparative-fit-index, TLI Tucker–Lewis index, RMSEA root-mean-square-error of approximation, CI confidence interval

*p < 0.05, **p < 0.001