A higher proportion of males also stated readiness to quit smoking within 30 days. Table 1. Demographics and Other Characteristics Confirmatory Factor Analyses The CFA of the original measurement model of WISDM (Piper et al., 2004) indicated inadequate fit with data (��2 = 7,408.4, df = 2132, CFI = 0.0824, TLI selleck = 0.811, RMSEA = 0.059, Cfit < .05; SRMR = 0.069). Modification indices highlighted several error covariances and significant cross-loadings. Moreover, the latent variable covariance matrix was not positive definite owing to correlations close to 1.00 between some factors. Because specification searches based on modification indices are more likely to be successful when the model contains only minor misspecifications (Brown, 2006; MacCallum, 1986), we did not examine further the cross-loadings and error covariances, and we decided to test the shorter version, the brief version of WISDM.

With the brief version of WISDM, we performed a series of CFA with four models. The fit indices of these models are presented in Table 2. Model 1��a one-factor model��indicated inadequate fit, so we cannot support this measurement option. Model 2 with 11 first-order freely correlating factors and no error covariances yielded fit indices in the acceptable range. Model 3 includes 11 first-order freely correlating factors with the error covariances documented by Smith et al. (2010). This latter model yielded significantly better fit than earlier models. Finally, with Model 4, we also tested a model containing 11 first-order factors with the error covariances and 2 second-order factors, namely primary dependence motive and secondary dependence motive (Smith et al.

, 2010). This latter model also yielded fit indices in the acceptable range, but the indices are significantly lower than for Model 3 (Satorra�CBentler scaled ��2difference test =198.9, df = 43, p < .001). Therefore, our data support best Model 3, which contains 11 first-order factors with four freely estimated error covariances (Items 9 and 54; Items 62 and 63; Items 6 and 28; and finally Items 47 and 63), although we cannot reject Model 4. Table 2. Degree of Model Fit of Four Competing Measurement Models of Brief Wisconsin Inventory of Smoking Dependence Motives. Detailed analysis of Model 3 demonstrated that all standardized factor loadings are above 0.62. All factor determinacies are above 0.92.

Correlations between factors are presented in Table Brefeldin_A 3, and the range of correlations is between 0.15 and 0.94. Two correlations are higher than 0.90, which indicates limited discriminant validity between craving, loss of control, and tolerance scales. Internal consistencies of each scale are reported in Table 3. All scales have Cronbach’s �� higher than .80, with the exception of the cue exposure/associative processes scale. Table 3.