TPC Journal V8, Issue 1 - FULL ISSUE

The Professional Counselor | Volume 8, Issue 1 15 no identifiable pattern within these absent values was present. We used the series mean imputation function in IBM SPSS, Version 23, to replace all missing values. Evidence regarding internal structure. We analyzed model fit for the INCA subscales using the SPSS Analysis of Moment Structures Software, Version 22. We conducted our analyses of the INCA subscale factor structures based on the initial factor structure emerging from the analyses completed by Watson and Lenz (2017). Initially, we interpreted the C-minimum/degrees of freedom (CMIN/DF), p- values, root mean residual (RMR), goodness of fit index (GFI), comparative fit index (CFI), Tucker- Lewis index (TLI), and root mean square error of approximation (RMSEA) metrics of model fit. Standards presented by Dimitrov (2012) were used to interpret these values with criteria for a strong model fit represented by CMIN/DF < 2, p > .05, RMR < .08, GFI > .90, CFI > .90, TLI > .90, and RMSEA < .10. When model fit proved inconsistent with these standards, modification indices were evaluated to determine items with potential covaried error. Covarying items provides a scenario within the factorial model wherein two items share their assumed variance. If such instances were identified, the model was computed again to re-inspect fit indices. If a factor model continued to have an inadequate fit, we inspected individual item correlation loadings and considered items for removal from the model. Items were removed if correlation coefficients were found to be less than .70. Evidence regarding relationships with conceptually related constructs. Bivariate correlations were computed between scores on the INCA, MSPSS, and CSEI to depict degree of convergent validity between scores on the INCA subscales (Supportive Network and Belief in Self) with conceptually related constructs of perceived social support and academic self-concept, via the MSPSS and CSEI, respectively. Pearson’s correlation coefficients were interpreted as small (.10), medium (.30), or large (.50) based on the conventions reported by Swank and Mullen (2017) and evaluated at the .05 level of statistical significance. Results All alpha coefficients, descriptive statistics, and bivariate correlations for variables included within the analyses can be found in Table 1. Table 1 Alpha Coefficients, Descriptive Statistics, and Bivariate Correlations for Variables Included Within Analyses. Scale-Construct α M SD 1 2 3 INCA - Belief in Self .74 23.31 3.32 .44* .34* INCA - Supportive Network .74 17.44 2.65 .44* 1. MSPSS - Family Relationships .88 20.02 6.49 2. MSPSS - Relationships with Friends .81 16.70 5.91 3. CSEI - College Self-Efficacy .88 36.77 14.69 Note. * indicates statistical significance at .01 level