Table 1.
Fit indices and other key dimensionality parameters derived from factor analysis of the Emotional Processing Scale-25.
| Framework | Model | Data | Items | χ2 | χ2/df | P | CFI | TLI | RMSEA (90% CI) | SRMR | AIC | BIC | Cross-loadings or as indicated | All loadings < 0.4 | Factor corr |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phase 1: test of a priori models | |||||||||||||||
| CFA | A priori 5F two-tier | Total | 25 | 1060 | 3.9 | < 0.001 | 0.84 | 0.82 | 0.082 (0.077, 0.087) | 0.079 | 57,211.8 | 57,443.6 | MOI: 6, 14, 17, 19, 23 | 4, 14 | 0.66–0.96a |
| CFA | A priori 5F | Total | 25 | 1016 | 3.8 | < 0.001 | 0.85 | 0.83 | 0.080 (0.075, 0.085) | 0.074 | 57,166.8 | 57,419.6 | MOI: 6, 14, 17, 18, 19, 23 | 4, 14 | 0.42–0.84 |
| CFA | A priori 2F | Total | 25 | 1323 | 4.8 | < 0.001 | 0.78 | 0.76 | 0.094 (0.089, 0.099) | 0.085 | 57,516.0 | 57,730.9 | MOI: 5, 6, 14 | 4, 14 | 0.63 |
| Phase 2: exploratory modeling | |||||||||||||||
| EFA | 1F | Training | 25/23c | 1078 | 3.9 | < .001 | 0.67 | 0.107 (0.100, 0.114) | − 447 | Not applicable | 4, 14 | Not applicable | |||
| EFA | Free 2Fb | Training | 25/21c | 667 | 2.7 | < .001 | 0.81 | 0.080 (0.073, 0.088) | − 725 | ≥ 0.4: 14 | 4, 5, 6, 12 | 0.66 | |||
| EFA | Free 5F | Training | 25/22c | 300 | 1.6 | < 0.001 | 0.93 | 0.049 (0.039, 0.060) | − 725 | ≥ 0.4: 6, 8, 19, 23 | 9, 10, 14 | 0.14–0.74 | |||
| CFA | EPS-15 5Fd | Training | 15 | 125 | 1.6 | 0.001 | 0.96 | 0.95 | 0.049 (0.031, 0.065) | 0.046 | 17,875.0 | 18,016.8 | MOI: 2, 3, 5, 8, 9, 21, 22, 24, 25 | None | 0.45–0.75 |
| Phase 3: validation | |||||||||||||||
| CFA | EPS-15 5Fd | Validation | 15 | 180 | 2.2 | < 0.001 | 0.92 | 0.89 | 0.075 (0.060, 0.090) | 0.053 | 16,987.9 | 17,127.7 | MOI: 5, 16 | None | 0.36–0.83 |
Robust fit indices from confirmatory factor analysis. Note that because these models are fitted on different data (the total, training, and validation sample) all values are not directly comparable. Note also that the 2 and 5 factor solutions derived from exploratory factor analysis where all items are allowed to freely load on all factors (that is, cross-loadings are estimated freely over all factors) do not necessarily correspond to other published factor solutions such as those of Baker et al. (2010) or Lauriola et al. (2021). Due to software limitations, fewer fit indices are provided for the EFA models.
2F two-factor, 5F five-factor, AIC Akaike information criterion, BIC Bayesian information criterion, CFI comparative fit index, EPS-15 15-item version of the emotional processing scale, MOI 20 largest modification indices (1-df), RMSEA root mean square error of approximation, SRMR standardized root mean square residual, TLI Tucker Lewis index.
aLoadings on the latent “emotional processing” factor.
bArguably the most promising model according to the scree plot, with a clear increase in eigenvalue and deviation from factors derived from simulated data occurring between factor 3 and 2 (see Fig. 1).
cNote that while all 25 items were included in the analysis, none of the factor solutions derived from EFA resulted in all 25 items having factor loadings of at least 0.4 on at least one factor. For example, in the 5-factor solution derived from EFA, items 9, 10, and 14 did not load 0.4 or higher on any factor, which means that this was in effect a 22-item solution.
dThis is the final 15-item factor solution, reached primarily via stepwise modification of the original CFA a priori 5F (non-two-tier) model. See the main text for details.