Skip to main content

Table 3 Model comparison for the multi-group analysis based on different type A personality and neuroticism groups

From: Do type A personality and neuroticism moderate the relationships of occupational stressors, job satisfaction and burnout among Chinese older nurses? A cross-sectional survey

Goodness-of-fit statistics

χ2(df)

△χ2(df)

P

GFI

CFI

TLI

RMSEA

Type A personality groups

 Model with no restrictions

51.24(30)

  

.98

.98

.97

.04

 Model with restricted measurement weights

57.96(35)

6.73(5)

.242

.97

.98

.97

.04

 Model with restricted structural weights

62.60(38)

4.64(3)

.200

.97

.98

.97

.04

 Model with restricted structural covariance

69.86(39)

7.26(1)

.007

.97

.98

.97

.04

 Model with restricted structural residuals

70.04(41)

0.18(2)

.916

.97

.98

.97

.04

 Model with restricted measurement residuals

98.60(51)

28.57(10)

.001

.96

.96

.96

.04

Neuroticism groups

 Model with no restrictions

48.28(30)

  

.98

.99

.97

.03

 Model with restricted measurement weights

58.13(35)

9.86(5)

.079

.97

.98

.97

.04

 Model with restricted structural weights

62.32(38)

4.18(3)

.242

.97

.98

.97

.04

 Model with restricted structural covariance

63.39(39)

1.08(1)

.299

.97

.98

.97

.04

 Model with restricted structural residuals

71.11(41)

7.71(2)

.021

.97

.98

.97

.04

 Model with restricted measurement residuals

87.29(51)

16.18(10)

.095

.96

.97

.97

.04

  1. GFI Goodness of Fit Index, CFI Comparative Fit Index, TLI Tucker-Lewis Index, RMSEA Root Mean Square Error of Approximation