Table 4.
Confirmatory factor analysis for the CuNETa scale using a cross-sectional validation sample of forcibly displaced adolescents living in the slums of Kampala, Uganda (n=121).
| CuNET scale items | Factor loadings | |
| CuNet 1: While sexting, I am not embarrassed to suggest using condoms to my partner | 0.91 | |
| CuNet 2: While sexting, it is really easy to bring up issues of using condoms to my partner | 0.98 | |
| CuNet 3: While sexting, it is easy to suggest to my partner that we use a condom | 0.96 | |
| CuNet 4: While sexting, I am comfortable talking about condoms with my partner | 0.96 | |
| CuNet 5: While sexting, I know what to say to my partner when I want to talk about condoms or other protections | 0.93 | |
| Fit indices from CFAb; one latent factor | ||
|
|
Chi-square | 5.29c |
|
|
RMSEAd | 0.05 |
|
|
CFIe | 0.99 |
|
|
TLIf | 0.99 |
| Internal consistency of the final model | ||
|
|
Number of items | 5 |
|
|
Cronbach α | 0.98 |
|
|
Average variance extracted | 0.90 |
|
|
Composite reliability index | 0.98 |
aCuNET: condom use negotiated experiences through the technology scale.
bCFA: confirmatory factor analysis.
cP=.26.
dRMSEA: root mean square error approximation.
eCFI: comparative fit index.
fTLI: Tucker–Lewis index.