Skip to main content

Table 2 Confirmatory Factor Analysis for the total sample, and for the three study samples separately

From: Cultural differences in positive psychotic experiences assessed with the Community Assessment of Psychic Experiences-42 (CAPE-42): a comparison of student populations in the Netherlands, Nigeria and Norway

CAPE-Pos frequency

χ2a,b

dfc

p

Absolute goodness of fit

Comparative fit

RMSEAd (90% CI)

CFId

SRMR

AICb

BICb,e

Factor loadings

Total sample (n = 885)f

 1-factor modelg

789

152

<  0.001

0.084 (0.078; 0.090)

0.821

0.059*

34089

34181

0.315–0.697

 3-factor modelh

543

149

<  0.001

0.066 (0.060; 0.072)*

0.891

0.049*

33715

33812

0.328–0.810

 5-factor modeli

356

142

<  0.001

0.050 (0.043; 0.056)*

0.941*

0.040*

33457

33565

0.350–0.902

Dutch sample (n = 245)f

 1-factor modelg

344

152

<  0.001

0.082 (0.071; 0.094)

0.573

0.085

4035

4048

0.029–0.541

 3-factor modelh

317

149

<  0.001

0.074 (0.063; 0.086)*

0.656

0.083

3973

3987

0.278–0.679

 5-factor modeli

218

142

<  0.001

0.051 (0.037; 0.064)*

0.845

0.068*

3868

3884

0.299–0.988

Nigerian sample (n = 478)f

 1-factor modelg

473

152

<  0.001

0.073 (0.066; 0.081)*

0.770

0.064*

20477

20534

0.039–0.615

 3-factor modelh

363

149

<  0.001

0.060 (0.052; 0.068)*

0.849

0.058*

20344

20404

0.062–0.756

 5-factor modeli

281

142

<  0.001

0.049 (0.041; 0.058)*

0.902*

0.048*

20260

20327

0.242–0.761

Norwegian sample (n = 162)f

 1-factor modelg

362

152

<  0.001

0.101 (0.088; 0.114)

0.452

0.099

3954

3950

0.182–0.534

 3-factor modelh

319

149

<  0.001

0.087 (0.074; 0.101)

0.596

0.090

3876

3871

0.181–0.945

 5-factor modeli

303

142

<  0.001

0.086 (0.073; 0.100)

0.624

0.088

3866

3862

0.212–0.971

  1. aYuan-Bentler scaled test-statistic, bRounded to nearest integer, cItem no. 41 dropped, due to (near-)zero variance in Dutch and Norwegian samples (i.e. (virtually) all scores = 1), dRobust RMSEA and CFI from the scaled test-statistic, eSample size adjusted Bayesian BIC, fMissing datapoints were processed using full information maximum likelihood estimation, gCAPE-Pos one-factor structure as originally reported by [67], hCAPE-Pos three-factor structure as reported by [25], iCAPE-Pos five-factor structure as reported by [26], *Meeting minimally acceptable fit criteria: CFI ≥ 0.90 [75], RMSEA ≤ 0.08 [76], SRMR ≤ 0.08 [77]