ABSTRACT
When evaluating the goodness of fit of structural equations models (SEMs), researchers rely in part on subjective indices of fit as well as a variety of other characteristics (for more extensive overviews of assessing goodness of fit, see Bentler, 1990; Bentler & Bonett, 1980; Bollen, 1989b; Browne 8c Cudeck, 1989; Cudeck 8c Browne, 1988; Gerbing 8c Anderson, 1993; Marsh, Balia, 8c McDonald, 1988; McDonald 8c Marsh, 1990; Tanaka, 1993). There are, however, a plethora of different indices vvith no consensus as to vvhich are the best. Adding to this confusion, major statistical packages (e.g., LISREL8, EQS, CALIS: SAS) tend to be overinclusive in their default presentation of indices, automatically including some that are knovvn to have undesirable properties. Because there is no “best” index, researchers are advised to use a variety of qualitatively different indices from different families of measures (Bollen 8c Long, 1993; Tanaka, 1993). Whereas there is no broadly agreed upon typology of indices, the family of incremental fit indices is one of the most popular.
