Skip to main content
Empirical Research in Vocational Education and Training

Table 4 Comparing shape of growth for interest and anxiety

From: Understanding why apprentices consider dropping out: longitudinal prediction of apprentices’ workplace interest and anxiety

LGM model tested

Δχ2

χ2

df

p-value

CFI

ΔCFI

AIC

Interest

      

Intercept only

188.428**

16

 

0.749

 

22,230

Linear (vs intercept)

29.092**

13

0.000

0.977

0.228

22,027

Quadratic (vs linear)

29.330**

12

0.626

0.975

0.002

22,029

Cubic (vs linear)

31.878**

11

0.248

0.970

0.007

22,035

Anxiety

      

Intercept only

98.381**

16

 

0.784

 

25,011

Linear (vs intercept)

35.275**

13

0.000

0.942

0.158

24,931

Quadratic (vs linear)

37.383**

12

0.147

0.933

0.009

24,937

Cubic (vs linear)

35.520**

11

0.885

0.936

0.003

24,938

Piecewise 1 (vs linear)a

28.045**

13

–

0.961

–

24,921

Piecewise 2 (vs piecewise 1)b

23.618*

13

–

0.972

–

24,915

  1. Both quadratic models did not converge due to negative variance on linear slope, resolved by fixing the variance to zero. Both cubic models did not converge, resolved by holding the linear and quadratic variances to zero. Italicised entries indicate improved fit
  2. **p < .01, * p < .05
  3. aPiecewise model with linear slope1 at T1–T5 and slope2 at T6 = 0
  4. bPiecewise model with slope1 at T1 and T2 = 0; linear slope2 at T3–T5 and slope 3 at T6 = 0
Back to article page