Skip to main content

Table 6 Results of tests for invariance in SBQ-ASC across gender and visual aids in the combined autistic/possibly autistic group, and non-autistic group

From: Development and validation of the suicidal behaviours questionnaire - autism spectrum conditions in a community sample of autistic, possibly autistic and non-autistic adults

Model Χ2 df Model fit CFI TLI ΔM Model difference P
RMSEA Δdf Δχ2
Comparison of gender (combined autistic/possibly autistic group)
M1: Configural invariance (unconstrained) 8.62 8 .015 .999 .998     .375
M2: Metric invariance 9.7 11 .001 1 1 M2–M1 3 1.08 .782
M3: Scalar invariance 11.03 12 .001 1 1 M3–M2 1 1.32 .25
M4: Residual invariance 12.02 16 .001 1 1.01 M4–M3 4 .999 .91
Comparison of visual aids (combined autistic/possibly autistic group)
M1: Configural invariance (unconstrained) 5.58 8 .001 1 1.01     .694
M2: Weak factorial/metric invariance 7.31 11 .001 1 1.01 M2–M1 3 1.73 .631
M3: Scalar invariance 7.45 12 .001 1 1.01 M3–M2 1 .147 .7
M4: Strict invariance 13.73 16 .001 1 1 M4–M3 4 6.27 .18
Comparison of gender (non-autistic group)
M1: Configural invariance (unconstrained) 19.38 6 .093 .98 .933     .004
M2: Weak factorial/metric invariance 23.68 9 .08 .978 .951 M2–M1 3 4.302 .231
1M3: Scalar invariance 24.28 10 .074 .979 .957 M3–M2 1 .595 .44
M4: Strict invariance 42.46 14 .089 .957 .939 M4–M3 4 18.18 .001
Comparison of visual aids (non-autistic group)
M1: Configural invariance (unconstrained) 15.01 6 .075 .987 .955     
M2: Weak factorial/metric invariance 18.31 9 .062 .986 .969 M2–M1 3 3.297 .348
M3: Scalar invariance 18.41 10 .056 .987 .975 M3–M2 1 .105 .746
M4: Strict invariance 20.54 14 .042 .99 .986 M4–M3 4 2.132 .711
  1. RMSEA = Root-mean-square error of approximation. CFI = comparative fit index. TLI = Tucker-Lewis index
  2. 1Marginally significant degradation in fit is seen after this model (increase in RMSEA > .015 and reduction in CFI > .01)