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

Table 3 Fit statistics for different invariance models of CAPE-42 positive psychotic experiences across study samples

CAPE-Pos frequency	χ² (Δχ²)^a	df (Δdf)	p (Δp)	CFI (ΔCFI)^b	RMSEA (ΔRMSEA)^b	SRMR (ΔSRMR)	Comparison	Decision
5-dimensional model^c; n = 245^d (Netherlands); n = 478^d (Nigeria); n = 162^d (Norway).
M1 Configural invariance	798	426	< 0.001	0.843	0.058	0.060	–	Reject
M2 Metric invariance	840 (42)	454 (28)	< 0.001 (0.012)	0.825 (0.018)	0.060 (−0.002)	0.071 (−0.011)	M1 vs. M2	Reject
M3 Scalar invariance	1053 (213)	482 (28)	< 0.001 (< 0.001)	0.740 (0.085)	0.071 (− 0.011)	0.087 (− 0.016)	M2 vs. M3	Reject
2-dimensions reduced model (Strange experiences – items 5, 17, 24, 26, 28, 30, 31; Paranoia – items 2, 6, 7, 22); n = 245^d (Netherlands); n = 478^d (Nigeria); n = 162^d (Norway).
M1 Configural invariance	198	129	< 0.001	0.924	0.048	0.048	–	Accept
M2 Metric invariance	217 (19)	147 (18)	< 0.001 (0.206)	0.915 (0.009)	0.048 (0.00)	0.062 (−0.014)	M1 vs. M2	Accept
M3 Scalar invariance	341 (124)	165 (18)	< 0.001 (< 0.001)	0.787 (0.128)	0.071 (−0.023)	0.086 (−0.024)	M2 vs. M3	Reject
M3a Partial scalar invariance^e	231 (14)	159 (12)	< 0.001 (0.300)	0.912 (0.003)	0.046 (0.002)	0.065 (−0.003)	M2 vs. M3a	Accept

ΔCFI < 0.01 implies that invariance assumption holds [81], ^aYuan-Bentler scaled test-statistic (rounded to nearest integer), ^bRobust RMSEA and CFI from the scaled test-statistic, ^cItem no. 41 dropped, due to (near-)zero variance in Dutch and Norwegian samples (i.e. (virtually) all scores = 1), ^dMissing data points were processed using full information maximum likelihood estimation, ^eNo intercept constraints for items 6,7,17

ISSN: 1471-244X