Table 1 Confirmatory factor analyses and...

Table 1

Confirmatory factor analyses and longitudinal measurement invariance

Model	MLRχ² (df)	SCF	CFI	RMSEA	SRMR	Model comparison	ΔMLRχ² (Δdf)	p	ΔCFI
Confirmatory factor analyses
T1	418.02 (64)	1.18	0.90	0.09	0.07
T2	180.49 (64)	1.15	0.93	0.08	0.07
T3	166.246 (64)	1.13	0.94	0.08	0.05
Longitudinal measurement invariance
Model 1 (configural invariance)	1399.58 (648)	1.05	0.92	0.04	0.08
Model 2 (equal loadings)	1429.40 (670)	1.04	0.92	0.04	0.08	Model 1 vs. Model 2 (metric invariance)	28.24 (22)	0.17	0.00
Model 3 (+ equal intercepts)	1611.00 (692)	1.04	0.90	0.04	0.08	Model 2 vs. Model 3 (scalar invariance)	196.51 (22)	<0.001	0.02
Model 4 (− constraints of intercepts of two items)	1520.33 (690)	1.04	0.91	0.04	0.08	Model 2 vs. Model 4 (partial scalar invariance)	95.17 (20)	<0.001	0.01

Model	MLRχ² (df)	SCF	CFI	RMSEA	SRMR	Model comparison	ΔMLRχ² (Δdf)	p	ΔCFI
Confirmatory factor analyses
T1	418.02 (64)	1.18	0.90	0.09	0.07
T2	180.49 (64)	1.15	0.93	0.08	0.07
T3	166.246 (64)	1.13	0.94	0.08	0.05
Longitudinal measurement invariance
Model 1 (configural invariance)	1399.58 (648)	1.05	0.92	0.04	0.08
Model 2 (equal loadings)	1429.40 (670)	1.04	0.92	0.04	0.08	Model 1 vs. Model 2 (metric invariance)	28.24 (22)	0.17	0.00
Model 3 (+ equal intercepts)	1611.00 (692)	1.04	0.90	0.04	0.08	Model 2 vs. Model 3 (scalar invariance)	196.51 (22)	<0.001	0.02
Model 4 (− constraints of intercepts of two items)	1520.33 (690)	1.04	0.91	0.04	0.08	Model 2 vs. Model 4 (partial scalar invariance)	95.17 (20)	<0.001	0.01

Note(s): SCF = scaling correction factor. In Model 4, constraints on the intercepts of two items were released at T1, being “collected information about employers, professional development opportunities or the job market in your desired area” and “voluntarily participated in further education, training or other events to support your career”

Source(s): Table by authors

[ViewLarge]

Sharing Unavailable