lavaan 0.6-8 ended normally after 98 iterations
Estimator DWLS
Optimization method NLMINB
Number of model parameters 25
Used Total
Number of observations 17452 17640
Number of missing patterns 46
Model Test User Model:
Standard Robust
Test Statistic 2.118 2.797
Degrees of freedom 2 2
P-value (Chi-square) 0.347 0.247
Scaling correction factor 0.757
Shift parameter 0.001
simple second-order correction
Model Test Baseline Model:
Test statistic 5830.631 5214.212
Degrees of freedom 15 15
P-value 0.000 0.000
Scaling correction factor 1.119
User Model versus Baseline Model:
Comparative Fit Index (CFI) 1.000 1.000
Tucker-Lewis Index (TLI) 1.000 0.99
Robust Comparative Fit Index (CFI) NA
Robust Tucker-Lewis Index (TLI) NA
Root Mean Square Error of Approximation:
RMSEA 0.002 0.005
90 Percent confidence interval - lower 0.000 0.000
90 Percent confidence interval - upper 0.015 0.017
P-value RMSEA <= 0.05 1.000 1.000
Robust RMSEA NA
90 Percent confidence interval - lower 0.000
90 Percent confidence interval - upper NA
Standardized Root Mean Square Residual:
SRMR 0.014 0.014
Parameter Estimates:
Standard errors Robust.sem
Information Expected
Information saturated (h1) model UnstructuredWhat should I cite in the instance in which Robust fit indices are set to NA and I should use the standard formulas? (as bove) Would it be the same Brosseau-Liard papers that justify the use of robust indices?