Model . | χ^{2}
. | df
. | P . | CFI . | RMSEA . | 90% CI . | AIC . | Notes . | ||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|

Model development: first random half of sample (n = 543) | ||||||||||||||||

All 14 cons | 289.06 | 77 | <0.001 | 0.843 | 0.071 | 0.063-0.080 | 345.06 | Dropped MD rec loading <0.30 | ||||||||

13 cons + 8 pros | 542.04 | 188 | <0.001 | 0.837 | 0.059 | 0.053-0.065 | 670.04 | Dropped 3 cross-loading cons | ||||||||

10 cons + 8 pros | 314.73 | 134 | <0.001 | 0.894 | 0.050 | 0.043-0.057 | 424.73 | |||||||||

10 cons, 8 pros + 4 norms | 621.72 | 206 | <0.001 | 0.832 | 0.061 | 0.056-0.067 | 759.72 | High correlation between norms and pros 0.88, P < 0.001 | ||||||||

10 cons + combined pros and norms factor | 654.33 | 208 | <0.001 | 0.820 | 0.063 | 0.058-0.068 | 788.33 | Not a significant improvement | ||||||||

2nd-order factor of pros and norms correlated with 10 cons | 640.79 | 207 | <0.001 | 0.825 | 0.062 | 0.057-0.068 | 776.79 | Not a significant improvement | ||||||||

Correlated 4-factor model: cons, pros, norms, self-efficacy | 1136.11 | 399 | <0.001 | 0.864 | 0.58 | 0.054-0.62 | 1268.11 | Examined modification indices | ||||||||

Added 3 error covariances to correlated 4-factor model | 960.10 | 396 | <0.001 | 0.896 | 0.051 | 0.047-0.055 | 1098.10 | Final model. significant improvement; χ^{2}Δ = 176.01 (dfΔ = 3) | ||||||||

Final model validation | ||||||||||||||||

Second random half of sample (n = 558) | 1000.77 | 396 | <0.001 | 0.893 | 0.052 | 0.048-0.056 | 1138.77 | |||||||||

Full sample (n = 1,250) | 1507.51 | 396 | <0.001 | 0.909 | 0.047 | 0.045-0.050 | 1705.51 | See Fig. 1 | ||||||||

Full sample at 2-wk follow-up (n = 1,036) | 1014.93 | 396 | <0.001 | 0.917 | 0.039 | 0.036-0.042 | 1212.93 |

Model . | χ^{2}
. | df
. | P . | CFI . | RMSEA . | 90% CI . | AIC . | Notes . | ||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|

Model development: first random half of sample (n = 543) | ||||||||||||||||

All 14 cons | 289.06 | 77 | <0.001 | 0.843 | 0.071 | 0.063-0.080 | 345.06 | Dropped MD rec loading <0.30 | ||||||||

13 cons + 8 pros | 542.04 | 188 | <0.001 | 0.837 | 0.059 | 0.053-0.065 | 670.04 | Dropped 3 cross-loading cons | ||||||||

10 cons + 8 pros | 314.73 | 134 | <0.001 | 0.894 | 0.050 | 0.043-0.057 | 424.73 | |||||||||

10 cons, 8 pros + 4 norms | 621.72 | 206 | <0.001 | 0.832 | 0.061 | 0.056-0.067 | 759.72 | High correlation between norms and pros 0.88, P < 0.001 | ||||||||

10 cons + combined pros and norms factor | 654.33 | 208 | <0.001 | 0.820 | 0.063 | 0.058-0.068 | 788.33 | Not a significant improvement | ||||||||

2nd-order factor of pros and norms correlated with 10 cons | 640.79 | 207 | <0.001 | 0.825 | 0.062 | 0.057-0.068 | 776.79 | Not a significant improvement | ||||||||

Correlated 4-factor model: cons, pros, norms, self-efficacy | 1136.11 | 399 | <0.001 | 0.864 | 0.58 | 0.054-0.62 | 1268.11 | Examined modification indices | ||||||||

Added 3 error covariances to correlated 4-factor model | 960.10 | 396 | <0.001 | 0.896 | 0.051 | 0.047-0.055 | 1098.10 | Final model. significant improvement; χ^{2}Δ = 176.01 (dfΔ = 3) | ||||||||

Final model validation | ||||||||||||||||

Second random half of sample (n = 558) | 1000.77 | 396 | <0.001 | 0.893 | 0.052 | 0.048-0.056 | 1138.77 | |||||||||

Full sample (n = 1,250) | 1507.51 | 396 | <0.001 | 0.909 | 0.047 | 0.045-0.050 | 1705.51 | See Fig. 1 | ||||||||

Full sample at 2-wk follow-up (n = 1,036) | 1014.93 | 396 | <0.001 | 0.917 | 0.039 | 0.036-0.042 | 1212.93 |

Abbreviations: CFI, comparative fit index; RMSEA, root mean square error of approximation; 90% CI, 90% confidence interval; AIC, Akaike information criterion.

This site uses cookies. By continuing to use our website, you are agreeing to our privacy policy.