Anxiety, stress, and binge eating tendencies in adolescence: a prospective approach

Table 2 Basic and interaction model goodness of fit indices

	χ2	df	p	CFI	NFI	TLI	RMSEA [90% CI]	SRMR	AIC BIC
Cognitive Restraint
Basic	89.48	59	.006**	.986	.961	.975	.040 [.022, .056]	.040	30,350 30,637
Interaction	68.65	50	.041*	.991	.970	.982	.034 [.097, .052]	.036	30,347 30,668
Uncontrolled Eating
Basic	83.41	59	.020*	.989	.964	.980	.036 [.015, .052]	.038	30,808 31,095
Interaction	67.77	50	.048*	.992	.971	.983	.033 [.003, .052]	.034	30,810 31,132
Emotional Eating
Basic	80.45	59	.033*	.990	.966	.983	.033 [.010, .051]	.036	29,337 29,625
Interaction	62.83	50	.105	.994	.973	.988	.028 [.000, .048]	.032	29,338 29,659

Note: χ2 – chi-square value, df – degrees of freedom, CFI Comparative Fit Index; > .95 indicates good fit. NFI Normed Fit Index; > .95 indicates good fit. TLI Tucker Lewis Index; > .90 indicates good fit. RMSEA Root Mean Squared Error of Approximation; < .05 indicates good fit. 90% CI – 90% confidence interval. SRMR Square Root Mean Residual; < .05 indicates good fit. AIC Akaike Information Criterion. BIC Bayesian Information Criterion
ªAll values bar chi-square are reported to three significant digit decimal places in line with standard SEM practice
*p < .05, **p < .01

ISSN: 2050-2974