TABLE 3.
Characterization of the latent profiles and classifying accuracy of the individuals in each profile.
| Latent profiles | n (%) | ngender (%) | |||||
| 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | Female | Male | ||
| 1. LACS | 0.848 | 0.002 | 0.089 | 0.061 | 296 (27.61) | 195 (65.9) | 101 (34.1) |
| 2. HACS | 0.001 | 0.796 | 0.135 | 0.068 | 290 (27.05) | 194 (66.9) | 96 (33.1) |
| 3. SAC | 0.084 | 0.111 | 0.770 | 0.035 | 355 (33.12) | 286 (80.6) | 69 (19.4) |
| 4. CAC | 0.089 | 0.094 | 0.049 | 0.768 | 131 (12.22) | 54 (41.2) | 77 (58.8) |
LACS, profile of low approach coping strategies; HACS, profile of high approach coping strategies; SAC, profile with a prevalence of social approach coping strategies; CAC, profile with a prevalence of cognitive approach coping strategies. The coefficients associated with the groups to which the participants have been assigned are shown in bold.