. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2021 Jul 19.

Published in final edited form as: J Int Neuropsychol Soc. 2021 Jul;27(6):637–647. doi: 10.1017/S135561772000096X

Table 3.

Fit indices and estimates for parallel process models of cannabis use and motivation indices.

	AIC	SABIC	i1 ←→ i2 r	i2 → s1 B	i1 → s2 B	s2 → s1 B	i1←→s1 r	i2←→s2 r
CU & Apathy	18874.93	18888.06	.15	−.14	−.15	.10	.05	.07
CU & Disengagement	20344.54	20357.68	.25^**	−.25^*	−.01	.11	−.09	.05
CU & Persistence	20499.39	20512.52	−.11	.04	−.09	.11	−.39^*	.05
CU & Planning	20561.26	20574.39	−.22^*	.33	.02	−.28	−.15	.06
CU & Self-Efficacy	20189.19	20202.33	−.09	−.02	.20	−.10	−.10	.06
CU & Valuing School	20496.40	20509.53	−.19^*	.61	.01	−.20	.66	.06

^**

p < .001,

p <.05.

Note: CU = cannabis use; df = degrees of freedom; CFI = Comparative Fit Index; RMSEA = Root Mean Square Error of Approximation; AIC = Akaike Information Criterion; SABIC = Sample-size Adjusted Bayesian Information Criterion; Cov (I/S) = Covariance between intercept and slope. i1 = motivation index intercept; s1 = motivation index slope; i2 = cannabis use intercept; s2 = cannabis use slope; ←→ = correlation; → = regression path.