Table 2.

Latent Profile Analysis, goodness of fit statistics for the entire sample (n = 8875) in the top half of this table; and for participants with high levels of psychiatric symptoms (n = 855) in its lower half. From left to right, multiple solutions are presented with increasing numbers of classes. Bold print indicates the best fitting solutions, the basis of further analyses (Tables 3 and 4)

[n = 8875]	1 class	2 classes	3 classes	4 classes	5 classes
AIC	191421.05	181745.81	175421.68	158198.93	154358.77
BIC	191534.50	181923.09	175662.77	158503.85	154727.50
BIC-A	191483.66	181843.64	175554.73	158367.20	154562.25
LMR	na	2 v. 1: 9576.20, p < 0.0001	3 v. 2: 6265.55, p = 0.10	4 v. 3: 17070.05, p = 0.16	5 v. 4: 3823.12, p < 0.0001
N for each class (C)	C = 8875	C1 = 6651	C1 = 732	C1 = 591	C1 = 141
		C2 = 2224	C2 = 6616	C2 = 6616	C2 = 961
			C3 = 1527	C3 = 1527	C3 = 1529
				C4 = 141	C4 = 5653
					C5 = 591
[n = 855]	1 class	2 classes	3 classes	4 classes	5 classes
AIC	19661.60	19103.16	18460.00	18085.56	16892.37
BIC	19737.62	19221.94	18621.54	18289.86	17139.43
BIC-A	19686.81	19142.55	18513.57	18153.30	16974.29
LMR	na	2 v. 1: 567.11, p < 0.0001	3 v. 2: 271.46, p = 0.01	4 v. 3: 386.09, p = 0.001	5 v. 4: 230.92, p = 0.18
N for each class (C)	C = 855	C1 = 715	C1 = 541	C1 = 22	C1 = 28
		C2 = 140	C2 = 211	C2 = 587	C2 = 553
			C3 = 103	C3 = 174	C3 = 115
				C4 = 72	C4 = 66
					C5 = 93

AIC: Aikaike Information Criterion; BIC: Bayesian Information Criterion; BIC-A: sample-adjusted BIC; LMR: Lo–Mendell–Rubin adjusted likelihood ratio test.