Skip to main content

Table 4 Measurement invariance across Hong Kong (n = 400) and Taiwan (n = 307)

From: Attitudes toward and beliefs about obese persons across Hong Kong and Taiwan: wording effects and measurement invariance

 

ATOP

BAOP

Model fit indices

M3_1

M3_2

M3_3

M3_1

M3_2

M3_3

χ2 (df)

286.06 (298)

379.45 (335)*

436.99 (352)*

16.10 (22)

38.36 (35)

66.59 (40)

CFI

1.000

0.990

0.980

1.000

0.996

0.967

RMSEA (90% CI)

0.000 (0.000, 0.017)

0.019 (0.002, 0.029)

0.026 (0.017, 0.034)

0.000 (0.000, 0.029)

0.017 (0.000, 0.043)

0.043 (0.024, 0.061)

SRMR

0.046

0.053

0.056

0.027

0.040

0.052

Model comparison

 

vs. M3_1

vs. M3_2

 

vs. M3_1

vs. M3_2

 ∆χ2 (∆df)

 

93.38 (37)*

57.54 (17)*

 

22.27 (13)

28.23 (5)*

 ∆CFI

 

−0.010

−0.010

 

−0.004

−0.029

 ∆RMSEA

 

0.019

0.007

 

0.017

0.026

 ∆SRMR

 

0.007

0.003

 

0.013

0.012

  1. df degree of freedom, CFI Comparative fit index, TLI Tucker-Lewis index, RMSEA Root mean square error of approximation, SRMR Standardized root mean square residual, ECVI Expected cross-validation index
  2. *p < 0.05
  3. M3_1: Configural model (all the factor loadings and item intercepts were relaxed across Hong Kong and Taiwan)
  4. M3_2: Constrained factor loading model (all the factor loadings were constrained; all the item intercepts were relaxed across Hong Kong and Taiwan)
  5. M3_3: Constrained factor loading and item intercept model (all the factor loadings and item intercepts were constrained across Hong Kong and Taiwan)
Back to article page

Health and Quality of Life Outcomes

ISSN: 1477-7525

Contact us