Message/Author |
|
anon9210 posted on Friday, September 17, 2010 - 12:43 pm
|
|
|
Is it a problem if CFI and TLI are greater than 1 in an EFA? Or if RMSEA is exactly 0? There don't seem to be any other issues with the EFA model - i.e., residual variances are all +ve, loadings look as expected, etc. Thanks in advance again! |
|
|
Please send your output and license number to support@statmodel.com. |
|
|
I have the same problem with my path models. CFI is exactly 1 and the TLI is greater than 1. What can I do about this? Thank you in advance! |
|
|
TLI can be greater than one. It sounds like your model is just-identified with zero degrees of freedom. In this case, model fit cannot be assessed. |
|
|
I don't think that is the problem. The chi-square test of model fit indicates a value of 31.339 with 33 degrees of freedom and the number of free parameters is 64. But does these high values of CFI/TLI indicate that there are problems with my model? I don't get any errors and the findings are highly in line with the theoretical expectations. |
|
|
From what you say the p-value for chi-square must be very large which like CFI and TLI points to a well-fitting model. |
|
|
Hello ;) I would desperately need your help and appreciate any of your suggestions ;) So... I used EFA (after running CFA to confirm 2factors structure of my guestionnaire – that was rejected) for my data (N = 213, items 11) and I got: 3 factors: df = 25; x2 = 19.890; p = .7525; CFI = 1.000; TLI = 1.022; RMSEA = .000 4 factors: df = 17; x2 = 9.730; p = .9145; CFI = 1.000; TLI = 1.046; RMSEA = .000 3 factors model seems to be more appropriate to me but... I have no clue how to report this (if I reject the model with 4 factors). Both models should be acceptable according to statistics or??? I´ve already read, that´s no problem if TLI is higher than 1. I´m really thankful in advance  |
|
|
Once you get a p-value greater than .05 you should stop. So three factors would seems best. You should also use theory to support this decision. |
|
|
Thanks a million ;) Yeah, theory is supportive but I wanted to hint as statistic reason as well. So if this is enough I´m fine with it. thank you again |
|
RGL posted on Wednesday, June 13, 2012 - 2:28 pm
|
|
|
Hello, I am in a similar situation, after an EFA with binary variables: RMSEA = 0.000, CFI and TLI greater than 1.00. Chi-squared stats are good, and the fit works theoretically. From this thread, it sounds like this is fine, but I'd love a reference if you have one! Thanks! |
|
|
Please send the output and your license number to support@statmodel.com. CFI cannot be greater than one. |
|
RGL posted on Wednesday, June 13, 2012 - 3:22 pm
|
|
|
Hello - sorry, my mistake, CFI = 1.00, TLI slightly larger than 1.00. I am using MPlus at a computer lab at the University of Michigan (where I am a full-time student), not sure about obtaining the license number Thanks! |
|
Stephen Teo posted on Monday, February 04, 2013 - 5:03 pm
|
|
|
Hello My CFI = 1.000 TFI = 1.004 My Chi-sq = 1.939, df=3 and p = 0.5851 SRMR=0.009 Is there an issue with this model? thanks! |
|
|
You probably have low correlations and/or low sample size so not much power to reject TFI >1 should be rounded to 1. |
|
kja posted on Monday, May 06, 2013 - 6:15 pm
|
|
|
Hello Dr. Muthen, Is it concerning to have a CFI=1.00 and RMSEA=0.00? (I am using MLR). It does not appear that there are any issues with model identification. I ran the same model in EQS, and while the standardized path betas and factor loadings were nearly equivalent, the CFI=0.991 and RMSEA=0.023. Thank you. |
|
kja posted on Monday, May 06, 2013 - 6:19 pm
|
|
|
Hi Dr. Muthen, Sorry - please disregard the previous post, I figured out the issue. Thank you. |
|
|
Hi Dr Muthen, I'm analyzing a model with 4 variables in a sample of 93 subjects. The MPLUS output is the following ( see below) with CFI and TLI =1. What does it means? Is it a problem the sample size? Thanks in advance for your kind attention. Stefano Cacciamani Chi-Square Test of Model Fit Value 0.000 Degrees of Freedom 0 P-Value 0.0000 RMSEA (Root Mean Square Error Of Approximation) Estimate 0.000 90 Percent C.I. 0.000 0.000 Probability RMSEA <= .05 0.000 CFI/TLI CFI 1.000 TLI 1.000 Chi-Square Test of Model Fit for the Baseline Model Value 25.458 Degrees of Freedom 9 P-Value 0.0025 SRMR (Standardized Root Mean Square Residual) Value 0.000 |
|
|
Dear dr. Muthen, just a correction about the previous post: the variables are 5 instead of 4. Thanks again Stefano Cacciamani |
|
|
See our FAQ: TFI fit index: Unusual values |
|
Es Maths posted on Wednesday, February 12, 2020 - 3:42 pm
|
|
|
Hello, should I be concerned with RMSEA = 0, TLI = 1.008, CFI = 1, and p = .570. This is from a latent growth model in which I also fixed the residual variance of first time point to zero. model: i s | CK1@0 CK2@1 CK3@2; CK1@0; |
|
|
Sounds like a very well-fitting model. Which can be due to small sample size and small correlations. |
|
|
Hello Dr. Muthen, When you say "small correlations" in the last post on this thread, do you mean correlations amongst independent variables, or between independent and dependent variables? Many Thanks |
|
|
Both. But you seem to have only DVs. |
|
Amelia Rock posted on Wednesday, April 22, 2020 - 7:46 am
|
|
|
Many thanks for the response. The posting to which I referred was actually not mine. My model is a mediation model with 10 Xs, one continuous mediator, and one binary outcome (and controls). I used probit link function and robust WLS estimator. Sample size is 223. The model fit info is: Chi-Sq = 3.842, 6 DOF, p= 0.6980 RMSEA = 0.000, p=0.888 CFI = 1.000 TLI = 10.043 If you have any thoughts on whether I should be concerned about the CFI, TLI, and RMSEA values, I would be grateful. For reporting, I plan to round the TLI to 1 per your guidance re: a different post. Thanks again. |
|
|
In the current version 8.4 it is already reported as 1. All results are consistent with each other so I don't think there is any concern. |
|
Back to top |