Skip to main content

Table 2 Results of the four-item communication scale measurement invariance testing across OSCE stations

From: Assessing communication skills during OSCE: need for integrated psychometric approaches

Model

Ļ‡2

df

RMSEA (90% CIs)

CFI

Ī”Ļ‡2

Ī”df

Ī”RMSEA

Ī”CFI

Comparison

Group 1 (nā€‰=ā€‰35)

ā€ƒModel 1. Configural invariance

23.66*

12

0.069 (0.025, 0.110)

0.967

Ā Ā Ā Ā Ā 

ā€ƒModel 2. Metric invariance

41.72*

27

0.052 (0.025, 0.110)

0.959

18.06

15

āˆ’0.017

āˆ’0.008

Model 2 vs. Model 1

ā€ƒModel 3. Scalar invariance

73.27**

47

0.052 (0.027, 0.075)

0.926

31.55*

20

0.000

āˆ’0.033

Model 3 vs. Model 2

ā€ƒModel 4. Strict invariance

159.89***

67

0.082 (0.066, 0.099)

0.739

86.62***

20

0.030

āˆ’0.187

Model 4 vs. Model 3

Group 2 (nā€‰=ā€‰51)

ā€ƒModel 1. Configural invariance

24.72*

12

0.059 (0.025, 0.093)

0.977

Ā Ā Ā Ā Ā 

ā€ƒModel 2. Metric invariance

54.18**

27

0.058 (0.035, 0.080)

0.950

29.46*

15

āˆ’0.001

āˆ’0.027

Model 2 vs. Model 1

ā€ƒModel 3. Scalar invariance

124.41***

47

0.074 (0.058, 0.090)

0.859

70.23***

20

0.016

āˆ’0.091

Model 3 vs. Model 2

ā€ƒModel 4. Strict invariance

150.36***

67

0.064 (0.051, 0.078)

0.848

25.95

20

āˆ’0.010

āˆ’0.011

Model 4 vs. Model 3

Group 3 (nā€‰=ā€‰61)

ā€ƒModel 1. Configural invariance

22.48*

12

0.049 (0.014, 0.080)

0.978

Ā Ā Ā Ā Ā 

ā€ƒModel 2. Metric invariance

41.61*

27

0.039 (0.010, 0.061)

0.969

19.13

15

āˆ’0.010

āˆ’0.009

Model 2 vs. Model 1

ā€ƒModel 3. Scalar invariance

105.10***

47

0.059 (0.044, 0.074)

0.875

63.49***

20

0.020

āˆ’0.094

Model 3 vs. Model 2

ā€ƒModel 4. Strict invariance

171.10***

67

0.066 (0.054, 0.078)

0.777

66.00***

20

0.007

āˆ’0.098

Model 4 vs. Model 3

Group 4 (nā€‰=ā€‰89)

ā€ƒModel 1. Configural invariance

9.57

6

0.047 (0.000, 0.101)

0.993

Ā Ā Ā Ā Ā 

ā€ƒModel 2. Metric invariance

25.69*

12

0.066 (0.030, 0.101)

0.973

16.12*

6

0.019

āˆ’0.020

Model 2 vs. Model 1

ā€ƒModel 3. Scalar invariance

45.83***

20

0.070 (0.043, 0.097)

0.950

20.14**

8

0.004

āˆ’0.023

Model 3 vs. Model 2

ā€ƒModel 4. Strict invariance

74.09***

28

0.079 (0.057, 0.101)

0.910

28.26***

8

0.009

āˆ’0.040

Model 4 vs. Model 3

Group 5 (nā€‰=ā€‰60)

ā€ƒModel 1. Configural invariance

8.38

6

0.047 (0.000, 0.116)

0.991

Ā Ā Ā Ā Ā 

ā€ƒModel 2. Metric invariance

22.27*

12

0.070 (0.018, 0.114)

0.960

13.89*

6

0.023

0.031

Model 2 vs. Model 1

ā€ƒModel 3. Scalar invariance

46.17***

20

0.086 (0.053, 0.119)

0.898

23.90**

8

0.016

āˆ’0.062

Model 3 vs. Model 2

ā€ƒModel 4. Strict invariance

53.33**

28

0.071 (0.041, 0.100)

0.902

7.16

8

0.005

0.004

Model 4 vs. Model 3

  1. Notes. Ļ‡2 Chi-square goodness of fit, df degrees of freedom, RMSEA Root Mean Square Error of Approximation, 90% CIs 90% Confidence Intervals for RMSEA, CFI Comparative Fit Index, Ī”Ļ‡ Chi-square goodness of fit difference, Ī”df degrees of freedom difference, Ī”CFI CFI difference, Ī”RMSEA RMSEA difference. *pā€‰<Ā .05, **pā€‰<Ā .01, ***pā€‰<Ā .001. The best fitting solutions for each group are marked in bold