TPC-Journal-V5-Issue4

The Professional Counselor /Volume 5, Issue 4 524 The three-factor measurement model provided good fit to the data (RMSEA = 0.059, CFI = 0.974, TLI = 0.984, χ 2 = 104.849, df = 35, p < 0.001). Table 4 reports the standardized factor loadings, which can be interpreted as correlation coefficients, for the three-factor model. The standardized factor loadings were statistically significant ( p < 0.001) and sizeable, ranging from 0.72 to 0.94. The large standardized factor loadings support convergent validity in that each indicator was primarily related to the respective underlying latent variable. Table 5 reports the correlation coefficients among the three latent variables. The correlation coefficients were less than the standardized factor loadings, thus supporting discriminant validity. Phase 3. Second Confirmatory Factor Analysis Complete descriptive statistics for the items are presented in Table 3. The type of responses for all items was dichotomous. A total of 564 (95.4%) of 591 surveys had all the items complete and were used in the first CFA. The second CFA was conducted on the three-factor measurement model to cross-validate the results from the first CFA. The three-factor model provided acceptable fit to the data in this second CFA (RMSEA = 0.055, CFI = 0.976, TLI = 0.983, χ 2 = 100.032, df = 37, p < 0.001). Table 4 reports the standardized factor loadings, which can be interpreted as correlation coefficients, for the three-factor model. The standardized factor loadings were significantly large, ranging from 0.70 to 0.93. These large standardized factor loadings support convergent validity in that each indicator was largely related to the respective underlying latent variable. Table 5 reports the correlation coefficients among the three latent variables. The correlation coefficients were less than the standardized factor loadings so that discriminant validity was supported. Given these results, it appears that the three-factor model is the most reasonable solution. Table 4 Standardized Factor Loadings for Three-Factor Model Item CFA 1 CFA 2 C1 C2 C3 C1 C2 C3 1 * * .84 * * .86 2 * * .92 * * .93 3 .72 * * .70 * * 4 .88 * * .84 * * 5 * * .86 * * .85 6 .92 * * .90 * * 7 .84 * * .83 * * 8 * .94 * * .91 * 9 * .82 * * .82 * 10 * * .87 * * .85 11 .87 * * .83 * * 12 * .81 * * .73 * 13 .88 * * .85 * *