Table 3.

Fit statistics for the ESEM‐ and CFA‐estimated models

Sample/model	χ 2	df	CFI	SRMR	RMSEA (90% CI)	θ1	θ2	θ3	θ4	SEPC
Sample A: Derivation (N = 2455)
1 Factor
ESEM.1F.0θ	9322.49	135	0.679	0.110	0.166 (0.164–0.169)					θ09,10 = 0.71
ESEM.1F.1θ	8575.87	134	0.705	0.107	0.160 (0.157–0.163)	0.55				θ03,04 = 0.57
ESEM.1F.2θ	8107.28	133	0.721	0.104	0.156 (0.153–0.159)	0.54	0.48			θ15,16 = 0.51
ESEM.1F.3θ	7738.56	132	0.734	0.102	0.153 (0.150–0.156)	0.54	0.47	0.43		θ08,14 = 0.51
ESEM.1F.4θ	7556.10	131	0.741	0.101	0.152 (0.149–0.155)	0.54	0.47	0.44	0.55	θ08,13 = 0.53
2 Factors
ESEM.2F.0θ	2756.43	118	0.908	0.041	0.095 (0.092–0.099)					θ09,10 = 0.71
ESEM.2F.1θ	2138.04	117	0.929	0.038	0.084 (0.081–0.087)	0.47				θ15,16 = 0.43
ESEM.2F.2θ	1819.27	116	0.941	0.035	0.077 (0.074–0.080)	0.46	0.36			θ03,04 = 0.31
ESEM.2F.3θ	1726.30	115	0.944	0.035	0.076 (0.072–0.079)	0.46	0.36	0.26		θ16,18 = 0.28
ESEM.2F.4θ	1559.29	114	0.950	0.033	0.072 (0.069–0.075)	0.45	0.39	0.26	0.26	θ17,18 = 0.26
3 Factors
ESEM.3F.0θ	1415.30	102	0.954	0.029	0.072 (0.069–0.076)					θ09,10 = 0.82
ESEM.3F.1θ	1288.48	101	0.959	0.028	0.069 (0.066–0.073)	0.40				θ15,16 = 0.60
ESEM.3F.2θ	1163.02	100	0.963	0.027	0.066 (0.062–0.069)	0.39	0.37			θ03,04 = 0.29
ESEM.3F.3θ	1100.35	99	0.965	0.026	0.064 (0.061–0.068)	0.38	0.37	0.24		θ13,14 = 0.27
ESEM.3F.4θ	1011.00	98	0.968	0.025	0.062 (0.058–0.065)	0.34	0.36	0.23	0.23	θ13,18 = 0.30
4 Factors
ESEM.4F.0θ	1011.58	87	0.968	0.024	0.066 (0.062–0.069)					θ09,10 = 0.96
ESEM.4F.1θ	853.40	86	0.973	0.022	0.060 (0.057–0.064)	0.43				θ15,16 = 0.63
ESEM.4F.2θ	709.81	85	0.978	0.021	0.055 (0.051–0.058)	0.43	0.37			θ13,18 = 0.30
ESEM.4F.3θ	645.13	84	0.980	0.020	0.052 (0.048–0.056)	0.43	0.35	0.30		θ13,14 = 0.28
ESEM.4F.4θ	628.29	83	0.981	0.019	0.052 (0.048–0.056)	0.40	0.33	0.29	0.22	θ03,12 = 0.29
Sample A: Cross‐validation (N = 2454)
ESEM.2F.2θ	1697.04	116	0.945	0.034	0.075 (0.071–0.078)	0.41	.33
CFA.2F.0θ	2152.28	134	0.930	0.048	0.078 (0.075–0.081)
CFA.2F.0θ. orth	5,372.23	135	0.819	0.117	0.126 (0.123–0.129)
CFA.2F.2θ	1709.15	132	0.945	0.044	0.070 (0.067–0.073)	0.42	0.31
CFA.2F.2θ. orth	5106.99	133	0.828	0.116	0.123 (0.121–0.126)	0.41	0.34
CFA.3F.0θ	1820.73	132	0.942	0.044	0.072 (0.069–0.075)
CFA.3F.2θ	1606.68	130	0.949	0.042	0.068 (0.065–0.071)	0.39	0.17
Sample B: Confirmation (N = 2166)
CFA.2F.2θ	1362.80	132	0.966	0.044	0.066 (0.062–0.069)	0.45	0.35

Note: ESEM = exploratory structural equation modeling; CFA = confirmatory factor analysis; #F = number of factors; #θ = number of error correlations; orth = orthogonal; χ2 = chi‐square; df = degrees of freedom; CFI = comparative fit index; SRMR = standardized root mean square residual; RMSEA = root mean square error of approximation; SEPC = highest absolute standardized expected parameter change; i03 = enthusiastic; i04 = inspired; i08 = active; i09 = afraid; i10 = scared; i12 = ashamed; i13 = nervous; i14 = jittery; i15 = upset; i16 = distressed; i17 = hostile; i18 = irritable. For the derivation sample, the error correlations were specified according to the SEPCs of the previous models with the same number of factors. For the cross‐validation and confirmation samples, the two error correlations specified were the two highest identified for the multidimensional models of the derivation sample: i09–i10 (θ1) and i15–i16 (θ2). Model CFA.3 F.2θ corresponds to Mehrabian's (1997) three factors of Positive Affect, Upset, and Afraid. p < 0.001 for all chi‐square tests of model fit and SEPCs.