Psicologia: Reflexão e Crítica

Table 1 IEM unifactorial model in the 2014/2015 sample: completely standardized maximum likelihood estimates, average variance extracted, and composite reliability

From: Gender, planning, and academic expectations in first-year higher education students: testing two alternative mediation models

	Model 1		Model 2
Item (factor)	β	R²	β	R²
1 (self-checking)	.58	.34	–	–
2 (planning)	.62	.39	.60	.36
3 (planning)	.61	.38	.64	.40
4 (planning)	.57	.32	–	–
5 (self-checking)	.57	.32	–	–
6 (self-checking)	.51	.26	–	–
7 (self-checking)	.51	.26	–	–
8 (planning)	.61	.37	.61	.37
9 (self-checking)	.63	.40	.67	.45
10 (self-checking)	.39	.15	–	–
11 (planning)	.59	.34	–	–
12 (planning)	.60	.36	.60	.36
13 (self-checking)	.69	.48	.69	.47
14 (self-checking)	.66	.43	.65	.42
15 (self-checking)	.57	.33	–	–
16 (planning)	.63	.40	.64	.41
17 (planning)	.56	.31	–	–
18 (self-checking)	.63	.40	.61	.38
19 (planning)	.57	.33	–	–
20 (planning)	.65	.43	.65	.42
AVE	.35		.41
CR	.91		.87

Factor factor name in the IEM bi-factorial oblique model, β factor loading, R² (communality) = 1 − ε (standardized residual), AVE average variance extracted, CR composite reliability

Back to article page