References in periodicals archive ?
The Comparative Fit Index (CFI = .993) and the Root Mean Square of Residuals (RMSR = .036) showed an excellent fit to the model.
For relative values, faster players in all variables and RVHSR for moderate players showed significant differences between generic and individual thresholds (RMSR: p < 0.01, d = 1.1, mean percentage difference: 19.09%; RHSR: p < 0.01, d = 1.36, mean percentage difference: 29.27%; RVHSR: p < 0.01, d = 0.98, mean percentage difference: 41%; SR: p<0.01, d = 0.55, mean percentage difference: 62.54%, respectively for faster; RVHSR for moderate: p < 0.01, d = 0.90; mean percentage difference: 5.44%) (Table 5).
Values of both GFI (.98) and RMSR (.074) showed a good fit of the data.
The error measure RMSR is computed from repeatedly random drawing training and test data sets and by averaging over the runs.
It shows that Discrepancy (0.0180), RMSR (0.0425) and NFI (0.9109) are in the fit index range.
The original model fit statistics indicated that some re-specifications would increase its fit (CMIN/DF = 16.0; GFI =.88; RMSR = .06; CFI = .87; TLI = .85; RMSEA = .08).
The chi-squared analysis and the CFI, RMSEA, and RMSR values that determine the fit of the factor structure were statistically significant.
Therefore, based on the studies by different authors (Bentler, 1990; Bollen & Long, 1993; McDonald & Marsh, 1990), the fit indices which were considered to evaluate the structural model were: [chi square], [chi square]/d.f., RMSEA (Root Mean Square Error of Approximation), RMSR (Root Mean Square Residual) and the incremental indices (CFI, IFI and TLI).
Los indicadores estadisticos para determinar el ajuste de la estructura de los datos fueron: a de Cronbach, [ji al cuadrado], TLI, CFI, GFI, RMSR.
The internal consistency of the scale was reported as ([alpha] = 0,74) and Confirmatory factor analysis results ([chi square]/df = 7,8 GFI = 0,95 AGFI = 0,86 CFI = 0,93 RMSR = 0,04 RMSEA = 0,10) showed adequate fit.
Acronyms browser ?
Full browser ?