Skip to main content

Table 3 Analysis for the CFA model with 3 factors and Likert items with 3 categories by study site and by gender

From: Evaluation of large-group lectures in medicine – development of the SETMED-L (Student Evaluation of Teaching in MEDical Lectures) questionnaire

 

Invariance analysis for CFA model by medical school

Invariance analysis for CFA model by gender

Fit Index

Configural

Loadings

Intercepts

Means

Configural

Loadings

Intercepts

Means

CHISQa

1856.2

1541.3

2351.1

2399.15

1712.76

1415.5

1719.03

1566.31

PVALUEb

< 0.001

< 0.001

< 0.001

< 0.001

< 0.001

< 0.001

< 0.001

< 0.001

CFIc

0.97

0.97

0.96

0.96

0.97

0.97

0.97

0.97

TLId

0.96

0.97

0.96

0.96

0.96

0.97

0.97

0.97

RMSEAe

0.06

0.06

0.07

0.07

0.06

0.06

0.06

0.06

RMSEA CI LOWERf

0.06

0.06

0.06

0.07

0.06

0.06

0.05

0.06

RMSEA CI UPPERg

0.07

0.07

0.07

0.08

0.07

0.07

0.06

0.06

LRT TESTh

NA

0

0

0

NA

0.01

0.68

0.18

DFi

144

155

166

169

144

155

166

169

  1. aχ2 Test statistics b p-value of the χ2 Test cComparative Fit Index: satisfying values should be >0.96 dTucker-Lewis Index: satisfying values should be >0.96 eRoot Mean Squared Error Approximation: satisfying values should be <0.06 flower bound of the RMSEA confidence interval gupper bound of the RMSEA confidence interval hLikelihood ratio test (LRT) of the configural model vs. the other types of measurement invariance models iDegrees of Freedom