Skip to Main Content
Table 1.

Model development and validation (PCCaSO, 2005)

Modelχ2dfPCFIRMSEA90% CIAICNotes
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; χ2Δ = 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  
Modelχ2dfPCFIRMSEA90% CIAICNotes
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; χ2Δ = 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.

Close Modal

or Create an Account

Close Modal
Close Modal