Psychology: Research and Review
From: Factorial validity and measurement invariance of the uncertainty response scale
Gender | Sociocultural levels (SCL) | Type of participant | Age | |||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Male | Female | Lower | Middle | Upper | Students | Professionals | ||
Complete sample (N = 1596) | 468 (29.3%) | 1128 (70.7%) | 576 (36.1%) | 318 (19.9%) | 702 (44.0%) | 888 (55.6%) | 708 (44.4%) | 26.9 (8.61) |
EFA (Sample 1) (N = 512) | 143 (27.9%) | 369 (72.1%) | 182 (35.5%) | 102 (19.9%) | 228 (44.5%) | 282 (55.1%) | 230 (44.9%) | 26.8 (8.53) |
CFA1 (Sample 2) (N = 543) | 165 (30.4%) | 378 (69.6%) | 199 (36.6%) | 105 (19.3%) | 239 (44%) | 309 (56.9%) | 234 (43.1%) | 27.6 (9.31) |
CFA2 (Sample 3) (N = 541) | 160 (29.6%) | 381 (70.4%) | 195 (36.0%) | 111 (20.5%) | 235 (43.4%) | 297 (54.9%) | 244 (45.1%) | 26.3 (7.86) |
Sample Comparison χ2 (df) | .79 (2) | .35 (4) | .54 (2) | ANOVA for age: F(2, 1573) = 3.3, p = .04, ηp2 = .004 Post-hoc comparisons using Tukey HSD test indicate that the mean score for Sample 2 is significantly different from Sample 3 | ||||
Sample comparison p value | .67 | .99 | .76 |