Factor 2. The initial analysis for this factor, containing seven items (6, 8, 9, 37, 38, 44, 45), showed a poor fit (? 2 (14) = , p < 0.001; RMSEA = 0.063 [0.044, 0.083], p = 0.124; GFI = 0.978; CFI = 0.955; TLI = 0.933; SRMR = 0.037). Model specifications analysis showed high covariance associated with three items (6, 9, 38). Therefore, these items were removed. The final one-congeneric model with four items (8, 37, 44, 45) showed an excellent fit (? 2 (2) = 3.724, p = 0.155; RMSEA = 0.038 [0.000, 0.097], p = 0.540; GFI = 0.997; CFI = 0.996; TLI = 0.988; SRMR = 0.016). Altogether, this factor contains two items from the original trust difficulty theme (items 44 and 45), one item from the original partner pursue theme (item 8), and one item from the original controlling tendency theme (item 37).
Factor 3. The initial analysis for this factor, containing five items (26, 40, 41, 42, 60), showed an excellent fit (? 2 (5) = 7.638, p = 0.177; RMSEA = 0.029 passion [0.000, 0.069], p = 0.767; GFI = 0.995; CFI = 0.993; TLI = 0.986; SRMR = 0.021). However, item 60 showed a weak regression weight (i.e., < 0.32) and therefore was dropped. The final one-congeneric model with four items (26, 40, 41, 42) also showed an excellent fit (? 2 (2) = 3.873, p = 0.144; RMSEA = 0.039 [0.000, 0.098], p = 0.524; GFI = 0.997; CFI = 0.995; TLI = 0.984; SRMR = 0.017). Altogether, this factor contains three items from the original lack of relationship skills theme (items 40, 41, and 42) and one item from the original contempt theme (item 26).
Studies 3
These analyses resulted in eight items dropped. The final EFA was performed on 12 items. Factorability was established with a KMO at 0.84 and the Bartlett’s test was significant (? 2 (66) = 2,, p < 0.001). The three-component solution explained a total of 60.3% of the total variance, with eigenvalues of 4, 1.7, and 1.5, respectively. No other factor showed eigenvalues above 1. The rotated solution showed all components included moderate to strong loadings (i.e., between 0.54 and 0.88) and the majority of items loaded substantially on only one component. Factor 1 (33.3%) was termed Defensiveness, Factor 2 (14.3%) was termed Trust Difficulty, and Factor 3 (12.7%) was termed Lack of Relationship Skills. Overall, this result demonstrated the three-factor model is superior to the eight and seven factor solution previously identified. The final inventory of 12 items and their respective loadings can be viewed in Table 2.
Try
A sample out of 436 players was recruited for this analysis. An identical specifications to get into new appropriateness away from attempt size since Analysis dos were utilized. Participants’ age varied ranging from 14 and you can 75 decades (Yards = , SD = ). The brand new shipping integrated 128 men players (30.5%) and you may 302 ladies participants (69.5%), and you will half a dozen stated since ‘other’ (1%). Just in case you stated while the ‘other’, half dozen considering definitions for their sex, which included gender fluid (one), sex natural (one), non-binary (one), queer (two), and transgender male (one). 5%) self-identified as gay, eight (2%) stated since ‘other’, and you can seven (1.5%) picked to not respond to. Just in case you claimed as ‘other’, eight given descriptions due to their sex, which included asexual (two), bi-interested (one), mislead (one), panromantic and you will demisexual (one), pansexual (one), and curious (two). Extremely players (250, 57%) reported being in a love (we.e., committed, de- facto, married), which have a documented suggest of 5.68 age (SD = 8.13, variety 0–50) for their longest relationship cycle, and you may a maximum of 93 (21%) players stated with had an affair. In addition, a maximum of 101 (23%) participants advertised in the past enjoying a beneficial psychologist otherwise counselor to have issues regarding a partnership. Professionals was indeed all of the English audio system on the Us (70, 16%), Australian continent (215, 49%), and other (151, 35%).