Skip to main content
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2023 Jul 1.
Published in final edited form as: J Ethn Subst Abuse. 2020 Aug 13;21(3):886–913. doi: 10.1080/15332640.2020.1803780

Table 4.

Latent class analysis model ft statistics for intrapersonal PE among Hispanic Girls

LL AIC (LL) BIC(LL) Npar df p-value Classification Error
Model1 1-Cluster −1498.9955 3013.9911 3047.4972 8 231.6546 160 0.00018 0.0000
Model2 2-Cluster −1454.0972 2934.8982 2982.4536 12 141.8579 156 0.79 0.1388
Model3 3-Cluster −1447.7773 2931.1513 2994.5668 16 129.2180 152 0.91 0.2034
Model4 4-Cluster −1445.9286 2928.5462 3015.6225 20 125.5207 148 0.91 0.2175
Model5 5-Cluster 1443.6928 2931.8951 3035.9039 24 121.0490 144 0.92 0.2909
Model6 6-Cluster −1436.5159 2937.4476 3046.3031 28 106.6952 140 0.98 0.1690
Model7 7-Cluster −1435.1497 2939.0511 3068.3239 32 103.9629 136 0.98 0.2565
Model8 8-Cluster −1429.2613 2949.3790 3081.3002 36 92.1862 132 1.00 0.2214
Model9 9-Cluster −1421.0062 2950.6253 3089.5430 40 75.6759 128 1.00 0.1400
Model10 10-Cluster −1419.8665 2956.4855 3112.0166 44 73.3965 124 1.00 0.1789

Note. Bold text indicates the preferred model. BIC = Bayesian information criterion, AIC = Akaike information criterion, LL = log likelihood, L2 = likelihood ratio Chi square statistic, df = degrees of freedom, Npar = Number of parameters