Skip to main content

Table 2 Confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) and measurement invariance (MI) model fit

From: A translation and validation of the Perceived Political Self-Efficacy (P-PSE) Scale for the use in German samples

Modelχ2 (df)CFIRMSEA [90% CI]SRMRModel comparisonDecision
Ref.Δχ2df)ΔCFIΔRMSEAΔSRMR
CFA 1: Full scale103.58* (35)0.9930.044 [0.034, 0.054]0.048-----Accept
CFA 2: Short scale4.34 (2)0.9990.034 [0.000, 0.078]0.022-----Accept
Invariance
 MI 1: configural185.20* (70)0.9960.035 [0.029, 0.041]0.036-----Accept
 MI 2: metric603.73* (79)0.9810.070 [0.065, 0.076]0.064MI 1418.53* (9)0.0150.0350.028Reject
 MI 2a: partial metric431.67* (78)0.9870.058 [0.053, 0.064]0.054MI 1246.47* (8)0.0090.0230.018Accept
 MI 3: scalar1331.43* (87)0.9540.103 [0.099, 0.108]0.088MI 2a899.76* (9)0.0330.0450.034Reject
 MI 3a: partial scalar593.78* (84)0.9810.067 [0.062, 0.072]0.061MI 2a162.11* (6)0.0060.0090.007Accept
 MI 4: residual682.74* (94)0.9780.068 [0.064, 0.073]0.067MI 3a88.96* (10)0.0030.0010.006Accept
  1. Note. CFA: N = 1025; MI: n1 = 1025; n2 = 1654. We did not consider the χ2 test for model rejection, because its sensitivity increases with sample size: In large samples—as is the case in this study—even small model–data discrepancies produce significant results (Bollen & Long, 1993; Cheung & Rensvold, 2002)
  2. CFI comparative fit index, RMSEA Root Mean Square Error of Approximation, SRMR Standardized Root Mean-square Residual, Ref. reference model
  3. *p < 0.001