Table 5. Model comparisons for different constraint conditions.

Model		χ2	df	p	CFI	TLI	SRMR	RMSEA [90% CI]	Model comparison	Δχ2	Δdf	Δp
SMSCF-Mindfulness	A1	0.151	1	0.697	1.000	1.009	0.003	0.000 [0.000, 0.080]
	B1	2.628	3	0.453	1.000	1.001	0.014	0.000 [0.000, 0.066]	A1 vs. B1	2.477	2	0.290
	C1	3.760	3	0.289	0.999	0.997	0.017	0.021 [0.000, 0.075]	A1 vs. C1	3.137	2	0.208
	D1	5.765	5	0.330	0.999	0.998	0.023	0.016 [0.000, 0.061]	A1 vs. D1	5.614	4	0.230
SMSCF-Subjective vitality	A2	3.045	1	0.081	0.998	0.976	0.014	0.059 [0.000, 0.139]
	B2	9.482	3	0.024	0.995	0.975	0.027	0.060 [0.020, 0.105]	A2 vs. B2	6.437	2	0.040*
	C2	5.444	3	0.142	0.998	0.990	0.018	0.037 [0.000, 0.086]	A2 vs. C2	2.399	2	0.301
	D2	10.252	5	0.068	0.996	0.988	0.026	0.042 [0.000, 0.079]	A2 vs. D2	7.206	4	0.125
SMSCF- Life satisfaction	A3	0.021	1	0.884	1.000	1.010	0.001	0.000 [0.000, 0.054]
	B3	0.253	3	0.969	1.000	1.010	0.005	0.000 [0.000, 0.000]	A3 vs. B3	0.231	2	0.891
	C3	0.078	3	0.994	1.000	1.010	0.002	0.000 [0.000, 0.000]	A3 vs. C3	0.057	2	0.972
	D3	0.418	5	0.995	1.000	1.010	0.006	0.000 [0.000, 0.000]	A3 vs. D3	0.397	4	0.983

SMSCF = Social media self-control failure, Model A: unconstrained model, Model B: constrained the autoregressive paths to be equal, Model C: constrained the cross-lagged paths to be equal, Model D: constrained both autoregressive paths and cross-lagged paths to be equal.

*p < .05