The impact of academic quality on nonpositive student engagement in higher education. The impact of academic quality on nonpositive student engagement in higher education. The impact of academic quality on nonpositive student engagement in higher education. The impact of academic quality on nonpositive student engagement in higher education. The impact of academic quality on nonpositive student engagement in higher education. The impact of academic quality on nonpositive student engagement in higher education. The impact of academic quality on nonpositive student engagement in higher education. The impact of academic quality on nonpositive student engagement in higher education. The impact of academic quality on nonpositive student engagement in higher education. The impact of academic quality on nonpositive student engagement in higher education. The impact of academic quality on nonpositive student engagement in higher education. The impact of academic quality on nonpositive student engagement in higher education. The impact of academic quality on nonpositive student engagement in higher education. The impact of academic quality on nonpositive student engagement in higher education. The impact of academic quality on nonpositive student engagement in higher education. The impact of academic quality on nonpositive student engagement in higher education. The impact of academic quality on nonpositive student engagement in higher education. The impact of academic quality on nonpositive student engagement in higher education. The impact of academic quality on nonpositive student engagement in higher education. The impact of academic quality on nonpositive student engagement in higher education. The impact of academic quality on nonpositive student engagement in higher education. The impact of academic quality on nonpositive student engagement in higher education.
MINISTRY OF EDUCATION AND TRAINING NATIONAL ECONOMICS UNIVERSITY PHAM THI KIM THANH THE IMPACT OF ACADEMIC QUALITY ON NON-POSITIVE STUDENT ENGAGEMENT IN HIGHER EDUCATION PHD DISSERTATION IN BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION HANOI – 2023 MINISTRY OF EDUCATION AND TRAINING NATIONAL ECONOMICS UNIVERSITY PHAM THI KIM THANH THE IMPACT OF ACADEMIC QUALITY ON NON-POSITIVE STUDENT ENGAGEMENT IN HIGHER EDUCATION Specialization: BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION Code: 9340101 PHD DISSERTATION Supervisor: Asocc Prof Dr VU TRI DUNG HANOI – 2023 DECLARATION I hereby declare that this dissertation is my own work, which I have never submitted for a degree at this or any other educational institution I also certify that all of the dissertation's references have been properly credited I have read and comprehended the University's policy on plagiarism and academic integrity violations With my own honor, I certify that this research was carried out by me and that it does not violate regulations of good academic practice PhD candidate i TABLE OF CONTENTS DECLARATION I TABLE OF CONTENTS II LIST OF TABLES V LIST OF FIGURES VI LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS VII INTRODUCTION 1 THE RATIONALE FOR THE RESEARCH TOPIC PURPOSE OF THE RESEARCH 3 RESEARCH QUESTIONS 4 RESEARCH METHOD STRUCTURE OF THE DISSERTATION CHAPTER 1: LITERATURE REVIEW 1.1 LITERATURE REVIEW ON CUSTOMER ENGAGEMENT IN MARKETING 1.1.1 The theory of customer engagement 1.1.2 The antecedents and outcomes of customer engagement 22 1.2 CUSTOMER ENGAGEMENT IN HIGHER EDUCATION 25 1.2.1 Literature on marketing in higher education 25 1.2.2 Literature on student engagement in higher education 27 1.3 LIMITATIONS AND RESEARCH GAPS 32 1.3.1 In customer engagement in marketing 32 1.3.2 In Customer engagement/ Student engagement in higher education 34 SUMMARY OF CHAPTER 35 CHAPTER 2: THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK AND HYPOTHESIS DEVELOPMENT 37 2.1 THE ACADEMIC QUALITY IN HIGHER EDUCATION AND CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK IN CE VALENCE 37 2.1.1 HedPerf model in assessing academic quality and student satisfaction in HE 37 2.1.2 The conceptual model of Customer engagement valence 41 2.1.3 Theory of Planned Behavior 43 ii 2.2 RESEARCH MODEL AND HYPOTHESES DEVELOPMENT 46 2.2.1 Academic quality, student satisfaction, and student non-positive engagement intention 46 2.2.2 The moderating effects stemming from school preference and major preference 51 SUMMARY OF CHAPTER 54 CHAPTER 3: RESEARCH METHODS 56 3.1 RESEARCH DESIGN 56 3.1.1 Questionnaire Survey process 56 3.1.2 Development of instrument and questionnaire 58 3.1.3 Data collection and analysis 66 3.2 METHODS OF STATISTICAL ANALYSIS 71 3.2.1 Data Screening 71 3.2.2 Refinement and Validation of Instrument 71 3.2.3 Statistical Procedure 73 SUMMARY OF CHAPTER 77 CHAPTER 4: RESULTS OF THE RESEARCH 78 4.1 RESEARCH SAMPLE 78 4.2 MODEL MEASUREMENT 79 4.2.1 Descriptive statistics 79 4.2.2 Factor Analysis and Reliability Test 86 4.3 HYPOTHESES TESTING 92 4.3.1 Evaluation of the Structural Measurement Model 92 4.3.2 Hypotheses testing results 93 4.3.3 The relationship between student disengagement and negative engagement testing results 101 SUMMARY OF CHAPTER 103 CHAPTER 5: DISCUSSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS 104 5.1 DISCUSSION OF RESEARCH FINDINGS 104 5.1.1 Results of descriptive and path analysis 104 5.1.2 The Moderating Effects of major preference and school preference 108 5.1.3 The relationship between student disengagement and negative engagement intention testing results 109 iii 5.2 THEORETICAL CONTRIBUTION 109 5.3 PRACTICAL IMPLICATIONS 111 5.4 LIMITATIONS AND FUTURE RESEARCH 113 SUMMARY OF CHAPTER 114 CONCLUSION 115 LIST OF PUBLISHED WORKS 118 REFERENCES 119 APPENDIXES 147 APPENDIX A: SURVEY QUESTIONNAIRE (ENGLISH VERSION) 147 APPENDIX B: SURVEY QUESTIONNAIRE (VIETNAMESE VERSION) 151 APPENDIX C EFA, CFA AND SEM MODEL 156 APPENDIX D MULTIGROUP TESTING 203 iv LIST OF TABLES Table 1.1: CE definitions in highly ranked and cited articles Table 1.2: Constructs related to customer engagement 14 Table 1.3: Constructs related to negative engagement 20 Table 2.1: Description of the original HEdPERF scale dimensions 40 Table 2.2: CE manifestation in research 43 Table 3.1: Measurement items for perceived academic quality and student dissatisfaction 61 Table 3.2: Measurement items for Student Disengagement Behavior intention 62 Table 3.3: Measurement items for Negative Engagement Intention 63 Table 3.4: Measurement items for three component factors in TPB 64 Table 4.1: Demographic and Basic Information of Respondents 78 Table 4.2: Descriptive statistics for Measurement Items 80 Table 4.3: KMO and Bartlett's Test 87 Table 4.4: Total Variance Explained 87 Table 4.5: Pattern Matrixa 88 Table 4.6: Results of multiple fit indices 90 Table 4.7: Convergent and Discriminant Validity 91 Table 4.8: Results of Structural Equation Model 93 Table 4.9: Mediation Results for Dissatisfaction 96 Table 4.10: Global Test Results –major_preference 97 Table 4.11: Global Test Results –school_preference 97 Table 4.12: Multigroup Tests Desired_major – Not_desired_major 98 Table 4.13: Multigroup Tests Desired_school – Not_desired_school 99 Table 4.14: Relationship between non-positive engagement behaviors testing results .101 v LIST OF FIGURES Figure 1: Research design Figure 2.1: The conceptual Framework of CE Valence 42 Figure 2.2: The theoretical framework 54 Figure 3.1: Research Process 57 Figure 4.1: Structural Model Results 102 vi LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS Abbreviations Full form ATDB Attitude toward student disengagement behavior ATNEB Attitude toward negative engagement behavior CE Customer engagement CEB Customer engagement behavior CEM Customer engagement marketing CRM Customer relationship management DIS Dissatisfaction eWOM Electronic Word of Mouth HE Higher education HEI Higher education institute NEB Negative customer engagement behavior/ Negative engagement behavior NEBO Actual negative engagement behavior outside HEI NEBW Actual negative engagement behavior within HEI NEIO Intention to Negative engagement behavior outside HEI NEIW Intention to Negative engagement behavior within HEI PAQ Perceived academic quality PBNEB Perceived behavioral control toward negative engagement behavior SD Student disengagement SDB Student disengagement behavior SDI Student disengagement intention SE Student engagement SEM Structural Equation Model SET Student Evaluation of Teaching SNDB Subjective norm toward student disengagement behavior SNNEB Subjective norm toward negative engagement behavior SNS Social Networking Site TPB Theory of Planned Behavior UA University Autonomy VNU Vietnam National University vii INTRODUCTION The rationale for the research topic For the last two decades, since the early 2000s, the term "customer engagement" (CE) has risen as a phenomenon in marketing and has drawn the attention of a large number of marketing practitioners and scholars (e.g., Ng et al., 2020; Palmatier et al., 2018) The idea of leveraging customer engagement emerged when the digital age was booming Researchers have been working on CE to deeply understand and clarify the definition, firm-related and customer-related antecedents, the outcomes, and the different contexts of customer engagement to complete the theory (Brodie et al., 2011; Maslowska et al., 2016; Storbacka et al 2016; Van Doorn et al., 2010) Previous research findings reveal that customer engagement's valence includes both positive and non-positive However, the non-positive side of CE which consists of disengagement and negative engagement, is so far under-discovered in current literature, except for just a few papers addressing these forms of engagement (e.g., Hollebeek & Chen, 2014; Alexander et al., 2018; Naumann et al., 2017) These gaps are calling for research as the fact is that satisfied customers not necessarily positively engage but customers who experience stressful or unpleasant service encounters are likely to release their anger and disappointment with a brand as a means of self-preservation through negative engagement (Hollebeek & Chen, 2014) In the higher education (HE) sector, the literature seems to draw its own picture of CE in the theory of CE so far as it was considered a “non-customer” sector (Ng et al., 2020) Research in HE focuses on the term “Student engagement” in learning activities from the perspective of educators and students as the “product” of higher education institutions (HEI) This research direction focuses on identifying antecedents, dimensions, measurements, and outcomes of student engagement (SE) in learning tasks (e.g Chickering & Gamson, 1999; Pike, 2003; Trowler, 2010) As an educator, academia pays attention to SE for quality assurance in HEI, higher retention, and prevention of school dropout However, academic quality issues are their core concern not only for quality assurance but also due to the changes in the labor market and the more and more demanding customers - students Specifically, in the world of employers, skills-based hiring is rising, and de-emphasizing degrees is the trend (Fuller et al., 2022) Even though the jobs had not changed in the previous 20 years, employers started putting degree requirements in the job descriptions Following the Great Recession, several businesses started making efforts to relax those PAAQ9 PAAQ8 PAAQ7 PAAQ6 PAAQ5 PAAQ4 PAAQ3 PAAQ2 PAAQ1 ATNEB3 ATNEB4 ATNEB5 ATNEB6 ATNEB7 SNNEB4 SNNEB3 SNNEB2 SNNEB1 DIS3 DIS2 DIS1 DBI4 DBI3 DBI2 DBI1 ATDB3 ATDB4 ATDB2 ATDB1 NEBIW4 NEBIW3 NEBIW2 NEBIW1 NEBIO3 NEBIO2 NEBIO1 SNDB2 SNDB1 PBNEB1 PBNEB2 Estimate S.E C.R P Label 5.982 051 116.871 *** 5.556 057 97.798 *** 5.468 060 91.797 *** 5.843 053 110.365 *** 5.875 053 111.395 *** 5.693 054 104.505 *** 5.506 060 92.360 *** 5.805 054 108.288 *** 5.946 054 110.230 *** 3.232 079 40.941 *** 3.160 078 40.767 *** 3.107 079 39.554 *** 3.243 080 40.556 *** 3.270 079 41.191 *** 3.612 077 46.894 *** 3.668 078 47.193 *** 3.658 079 46.067 *** 3.712 078 47.415 *** 3.660 083 44.328 *** 3.633 082 44.123 *** 3.580 081 44.197 *** 2.422 072 33.694 *** 2.168 069 31.644 *** 2.208 068 32.652 *** 2.409 067 36.083 *** 5.530 072 76.547 *** 5.433 080 68.184 *** 5.286 080 65.758 *** 5.018 079 63.731 *** 2.379 073 32.603 *** 2.442 074 32.973 *** 2.813 076 37.104 *** 3.067 082 37.298 *** 2.688 075 36.072 *** 2.613 069 37.759 *** 2.728 071 38.530 *** 3.572 082 43.552 *** 3.502 081 43.180 *** 4.297 078 55.316 *** 4.153 079 52.902 *** 224 Estimate S.E C.R P Label PBNEB3 4.048 078 52.000 *** Covariances: (Truong_UT - Default model) Estimate S.E C.R P Label SNNEB < > SNDB 1.087 158 6.896 *** PBNEB < > SNDB 522 133 3.928 *** PBNEB < > SNNEB 1.740 153 11.407 *** PBNEB < > ATNEB 1.329 135 9.835 *** ATNEB < > ATDB 247 117 2.109 035 ATDB < > SNDB 872 139 6.257 *** SNNEB < > ATDB 418 129 3.235 001 PBNEB < > ATDB 728 118 6.189 *** PAAQ < > ATDB 729 092 7.958 *** ATNEB < > SNDB 1.327 152 8.743 *** ATNEB < > SNNEB 2.375 173 13.722 *** PAAQ < > ATNEB -.085 087 -.981 326 PAAQ < > SNDB 003 099 027 979 PAAQ < > SNNEB -.056 095 -.592 554 PBNEB < > PAAQ 411 085 4.818 *** e1 < > e2 085 015 5.824 *** e3 < > e4 354 032 11.206 *** e2 < > e10 110 017 6.571 *** e37 < > e38 1.065 079 13.481 *** e4 < > e7 112 020 5.686 *** e5 < > e6 079 013 5.868 *** e7 < > e8 123 025 5.015 *** Correlations: (Truong_UT - Default model) Estimate SNNEB < > SNDB 298 PBNEB < > SNDB 169 PBNEB < > SNNEB 582 PBNEB < > ATNEB 487 ATNEB < > ATDB 088 ATDB < > SNDB 274 SNNEB < > ATDB 135 PBNEB < > ATDB 280 PAAQ < > ATDB 361 ATNEB < > SNDB 398 225 Estimate ATNEB < > SNNEB 735 PAAQ < > ATNEB -.040 PAAQ < > SNDB 001 PAAQ < > SNNEB -.024 PBNEB < > PAAQ 210 e1 < > e2 269 e3 < > e4 535 e2 < > e10 297 e37 < > e38 719 e4 < > e7 207 e5 < > e6 328 e7 < > e8 224 Variances: (Truong_UT - Default model) Estimate S.E C.R PAAQ 1.519 102 14.871 ATNEB 2.952 217 13.617 SNNEB 3.540 217 16.341 ATDB 2.686 211 12.710 SNDB 3.764 247 15.220 PBNEB 2.525 207 12.177 e69 3.693 230 16.084 e65 2.015 130 15.524 e64 1.350 124 10.888 e68 2.109 134 15.731 e1 302 020 14.941 e2 333 021 15.568 e3 491 031 16.043 e4 893 052 17.167 e5 242 017 14.012 e6 237 017 13.969 e7 327 021 15.239 e8 926 055 16.856 e9 232 016 14.076 e10 409 026 15.817 e13 512 034 15.038 e14 318 024 13.299 e15 253 021 11.911 e16 383 028 13.872 P Label *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** 226 e17 e20 e21 e22 e23 e24 e25 e26 e27 e28 e29 e30 e31 e32 e33 e34 e35 e36 e37 e38 e39 e40 e41 e54 e55 e61 e62 e63 Estimate S.E C.R P Label 987 060 16.499 *** 493 032 15.200 *** 238 020 11.885 *** 286 023 12.710 *** 291 022 12.944 *** 671 051 13.124 *** 549 047 11.715 *** 332 040 8.219 *** 1.274 074 17.103 *** 161 016 10.245 *** 134 015 9.143 *** 322 022 14.672 *** 1.673 099 16.908 *** 508 048 10.609 *** 306 044 6.908 *** 1.187 075 15.760 *** 336 038 8.941 *** 224 037 6.064 *** 1.225 075 16.272 *** 1.791 107 16.682 *** 710 046 15.284 *** 150 025 6.012 *** 296 029 10.284 *** 190 093 2.050 040 346 089 3.895 *** 808 069 11.711 *** 478 064 7.513 *** 1.261 085 14.765 *** Squared Multiple Correlations: (Truong_UT - Default model) Estimate DIS 020 SDBI 182 NEBIO 257 NEBIW 446 PBNEB3 667 PBNEB2 876 PBNEB1 786 SNDB1 916 227 SNDB2 NEBIO1 NEBIO2 NEBIO3 NEBIW1 NEBIW2 NEBIW3 NEBIW4 ATDB1 ATDB2 ATDB4 ATDB3 DBI1 DBI2 DBI3 DBI4 DIS1 DIS2 DIS3 SNNEB1 SNNEB2 SNNEB3 SNNEB4 ATNEB7 ATNEB6 ATNEB5 ATNEB4 ATNEB3 PAAQ1 PAAQ2 PAAQ3 PAAQ4 PAAQ5 PAAQ6 PAAQ7 PAAQ8 PAAQ9 PAAQ10 Estimate 955 905 950 795 576 659 935 899 694 924 872 487 884 953 945 605 919 870 843 924 927 937 867 749 904 934 915 869 775 871 583 824 864 862 597 756 797 834 Truong KUT Estimates (Truong_KUT - Default model) 228 Scalar Estimates (Truong_KUT - Default model) Maximum Likelihood Estimates Regression Weights: (Truong_KUT - Default model) Estimate S.E C.R P Label DIS < - PAAQ -.267 074 -3.604 *** SDBI < - ATDB -.107 047 -2.278 023 SDBI < - SNDB 242 036 6.798 *** SDBI < - DIS 088 033 2.717 007 SDBI < - PAAQ -.036 058 -.614 539 NEBIW < - ATNEB 140 047 2.981 003 NEBIO < - ATNEB 277 066 4.227 *** NEBIW < - SNNEB 115 042 2.735 006 NEBIO < - SNNEB -.001 058 -.022 983 NEBIW < - PBNEB 090 046 1.941 052 NEBIO < - PBNEB 026 064 404 686 NEBIO < - DIS 078 039 1.978 048 NEBIW < - DIS 096 029 3.356 *** NEBIW < - PAAQ -.072 048 -1.507 132 NEBIO < - PAAQ -.236 067 -3.526 *** NEBIO < - SDBI 199 053 3.774 *** NEBIW < - SDBI 355 041 8.599 *** PAAQ10 < - PAAQ 1.000 PAAQ9 < - PAAQ 965 030 31.817 *** PAAQ8 < - PAAQ 1.053 043 24.635 *** PAAQ7 < - PAAQ 1.031 048 21.513 *** PAAQ6 < - PAAQ 1.078 036 30.043 *** PAAQ5 < - PAAQ 1.063 037 29.034 *** PAAQ4 < - PAAQ 1.077 038 28.358 *** PAAQ3 < - PAAQ 1.025 046 22.197 *** PAAQ2 < - PAAQ 1.076 036 29.929 *** PAAQ1 < - PAAQ 971 037 26.566 *** ATNEB3 < - ATNEB 1.090 039 27.714 *** ATNEB4 < - ATNEB 1.103 034 32.267 *** ATNEB5 < - ATNEB 1.130 035 32.565 *** ATNEB6 < - ATNEB 1.102 036 31.031 *** ATNEB7 < - ATNEB 1.000 SNNEB4 < - SNNEB 906 020 44.242 *** SNNEB3 < - SNNEB 978 017 57.438 *** SNNEB2 < - SNNEB 1.001 017 59.124 *** SNNEB1 < - SNNEB 1.000 DIS3 < - DIS 1.009 025 40.356 *** DIS2 < - DIS 978 024 40.752 *** 229 DIS1 DBI4 DBI3 DBI2 DBI1 ATDB3 ATDB4 ATDB2 ATDB1 NEBIW4 NEBIW3 NEBIW2 NEBIW1 NEBIO3 NEBIO2 NEBIO1 SNDB2 SNDB1 PBNEB1 PBNEB2 PBNEB3 < - DIS < - SDBI < - SDBI < - SDBI < - SDBI < - ATDB < - ATDB < - ATDB < - ATDB < - NEBIW < - NEBIW < - NEBIW < - NEBIW < - NEBIO < - NEBIO < - NEBIO < - SNDB < - SNDB < - PBNEB < - PBNEB < - PBNEB Estimate S.E C.R 1.000 938 039 23.777 1.061 026 41.217 1.023 025 40.336 1.000 912 048 19.103 1.105 047 23.750 1.167 047 24.661 1.000 1.241 061 20.468 1.263 061 20.770 1.064 040 26.453 1.000 991 028 35.413 998 025 39.367 1.000 969 039 25.114 1.000 1.164 042 27.979 1.146 041 27.755 1.000 P Label *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** Standardized Regression Weights: (Truong_KUT - Default model) DIS SDBI SDBI SDBI SDBI NEBIW NEBIO NEBIW NEBIO NEBIW NEBIO NEBIO NEBIW NEBIW NEBIO Estimate < - PAAQ -.163 < - ATDB -.114 < - SNDB 312 < - DIS 119 < - PAAQ -.029 < - ATNEB 161 < - ATNEB 252 < - SNNEB 155 < - SNNEB -.001 < - PBNEB 097 < - PBNEB 022 < - DIS 086 < - DIS 133 < - PAAQ -.061 < - PAAQ -.158 230 Estimate NEBIO < - SDBI 163 NEBIW < - SDBI 366 PAAQ10 < - PAAQ 860 PAAQ9 < - PAAQ 836 PAAQ8 < - PAAQ 823 PAAQ7 < - PAAQ 760 PAAQ6 < - PAAQ 914 PAAQ5 < - PAAQ 899 PAAQ4 < - PAAQ 888 PAAQ3 < - PAAQ 775 PAAQ2 < - PAAQ 911 PAAQ1 < - PAAQ 858 ATNEB3 < - ATNEB 886 ATNEB4 < - ATNEB 955 ATNEB5 < - ATNEB 959 ATNEB6 < - ATNEB 938 ATNEB7 < - ATNEB 848 SNNEB4 < - SNNEB 920 SNNEB3 < - SNNEB 965 SNNEB2 < - SNNEB 969 SNNEB1 < - SNNEB 962 DIS3 < - DIS 932 DIS2 < - DIS 935 DIS1 < - DIS 939 DBI4 < - SDBI 766 DBI3 < - SDBI 954 DBI2 < - SDBI 947 DBI1 < - SDBI 919 ATDB3 < - ATDB 757 ATDB4 < - ATDB 890 ATDB2 < - ATDB 920 ATDB1 < - ATDB 800 NEBIW4 < - NEBIW 934 NEBIW3 < - NEBIW 961 NEBIW2 < - NEBIW 792 NEBIW1 < - NEBIW 701 NEBIO3 < - NEBIO 907 NEBIO2 < - NEBIO 944 NEBIO1 < - NEBIO 928 SNDB2 < - SNDB 939 231 SNDB1 PBNEB1 PBNEB2 PBNEB3 < - SNDB < - PBNEB < - PBNEB < - PBNEB Estimate 968 939 933 826 Intercepts: (Truong_KUT - Default model) PAAQ10 PAAQ9 PAAQ8 PAAQ7 PAAQ6 PAAQ5 PAAQ4 PAAQ3 PAAQ2 PAAQ1 ATNEB3 ATNEB4 ATNEB5 ATNEB6 ATNEB7 SNNEB4 SNNEB3 SNNEB2 SNNEB1 DIS3 DIS2 DIS1 DBI4 DBI3 DBI2 DBI1 ATDB3 ATDB4 ATDB2 ATDB1 NEBIW4 NEBIW3 Estimate S.E C.R P Label 5.583 059 94.265 *** 5.723 059 97.257 *** 5.210 065 79.959 *** 5.027 069 72.764 *** 5.551 060 92.393 *** 5.551 060 92.209 *** 5.341 062 86.433 *** 5.097 067 75.682 *** 5.527 060 91.846 *** 5.775 058 100.208 *** 3.314 085 39.041 *** 3.157 080 39.589 *** 3.072 081 37.767 *** 3.231 081 39.804 *** 3.301 081 40.520 *** 3.663 080 46.034 *** 3.733 082 45.572 *** 3.737 083 44.774 *** 3.795 084 45.205 *** 3.871 090 42.796 *** 3.850 087 44.041 *** 3.718 089 41.768 *** 2.528 076 33.174 *** 2.195 069 31.711 *** 2.210 067 32.886 *** 2.434 068 35.948 *** 5.201 080 64.944 *** 5.386 082 65.341 *** 5.129 084 60.878 *** 4.714 083 56.757 *** 2.437 080 30.476 *** 2.506 079 31.665 *** 232 NEBIW2 NEBIW1 NEBIO3 NEBIO2 NEBIO1 SNDB2 SNDB1 PBNEB1 PBNEB2 PBNEB3 Estimate S.E 2.939 081 3.227 086 2.987 083 2.877 080 3.061 082 3.657 083 3.498 083 4.241 080 4.222 080 4.083 078 C.R P Label 36.311 *** 37.572 *** 35.985 *** 35.864 *** 37.421 *** 44.204 *** 42.248 *** 52.809 *** 53.039 *** 52.087 *** Covariances: (Truong_KUT - Default model) Estimate S.E C.R P Label SNNEB < > SNDB 964 160 6.024 *** PBNEB < > SNDB 359 127 2.830 005 PBNEB < > SNNEB 1.539 150 10.281 *** PBNEB < > ATNEB 1.110 126 8.844 *** ATNEB < > ATDB 007 111 059 953 ATDB < > SNDB 702 136 5.176 *** SNNEB < > ATDB 321 131 2.457 014 PBNEB < > ATDB 776 116 6.686 *** PAAQ < > ATDB 683 092 7.437 *** ATNEB < > SNDB 903 140 6.445 *** ATNEB < > SNNEB 1.968 167 11.805 *** PAAQ < > ATNEB -.147 084 -1.750 080 PAAQ < > SNDB 004 098 039 969 PAAQ < > SNNEB -.021 097 -.216 829 PBNEB < > PAAQ 315 082 3.863 *** e1 < > e2 191 026 7.470 *** e3 < > e4 439 046 9.551 *** e2 < > e10 151 024 6.358 *** e37 < > e38 928 087 10.619 *** e4 < > e7 068 027 2.536 011 e5 < > e6 067 020 3.325 *** e7 < > e8 140 032 4.341 *** Correlations: (Truong_KUT - Default model) Estimate SNNEB < > SNDB 282 233 Estimate PBNEB < > SNDB 131 PBNEB < > SNNEB 558 PBNEB < > ATNEB 471 ATNEB < > ATDB 003 ATDB < > SNDB 250 SNNEB < > ATDB 113 PBNEB < > ATDB 342 PAAQ < > ATDB 383 ATNEB < > SNDB 309 ATNEB < > SNNEB 669 PAAQ < > ATNEB -.079 PAAQ < > SNDB 002 PAAQ < > SNNEB -.010 PBNEB < > PAAQ 181 e1 < > e2 371 e3 < > e4 502 e2 < > e10 299 e37 < > e38 582 e4 < > e7 101 e5 < > e6 197 e7 < > e8 220 Variances: (Truong_KUT - Default model) Estimate S.E C.R PAAQ 1.367 111 12.309 ATNEB 2.514 208 12.075 SNNEB 3.442 229 15.042 ATDB 2.326 215 10.840 SNDB 3.387 252 13.456 PBNEB 2.212 193 11.482 e69 3.588 252 14.231 e65 1.810 133 13.647 e64 1.303 145 9.002 e68 2.572 187 13.770 e1 482 034 14.369 e2 551 037 14.921 e3 721 049 14.864 e4 1.063 069 15.350 e5 313 025 12.507 P Label *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** *** 234 e6 e7 e8 e9 e10 e13 e14 e15 e16 e17 e20 e21 e22 e23 e24 e25 e26 e27 e28 e29 e30 e31 e32 e33 e34 e35 e36 e37 e38 e39 e40 e41 e54 e55 e61 e62 e63 Estimate S.E C.R P Label 365 028 13.011 *** 427 031 13.747 *** 955 063 15.142 *** 324 025 13.010 *** 461 032 14.398 *** 814 056 14.571 *** 294 026 11.370 *** 279 026 10.864 *** 419 033 12.856 *** 985 065 15.083 *** 513 036 14.342 *** 242 021 11.381 *** 221 021 10.690 *** 274 023 11.772 *** 564 053 10.637 *** 504 049 10.339 *** 491 050 9.896 *** 1.267 083 15.333 *** 229 025 9.344 *** 245 024 10.181 *** 375 030 12.600 *** 1.446 100 14.484 *** 743 069 10.818 *** 576 066 8.737 *** 1.310 094 13.883 *** 429 051 8.429 *** 252 047 5.308 *** 1.288 087 14.825 *** 1.977 128 15.421 *** 644 054 11.948 *** 368 043 8.529 *** 487 048 10.230 *** 428 114 3.749 *** 227 119 1.905 057 401 051 7.872 *** 433 051 8.526 *** 1.027 073 14.087 *** Squared Multiple Correlations: (Truong_KUT - Default model) 235 DIS SDBI NEBIO NEBIW PBNEB3 PBNEB2 PBNEB1 SNDB1 SNDB2 NEBIO1 NEBIO2 NEBIO3 NEBIW1 NEBIW2 NEBIW3 NEBIW4 ATDB1 ATDB2 ATDB4 ATDB3 DBI1 DBI2 DBI3 DBI4 DIS1 DIS2 DIS3 SNNEB1 SNNEB2 SNNEB3 SNNEB4 ATNEB7 ATNEB6 ATNEB5 ATNEB4 ATNEB3 PAAQ1 PAAQ2 PAAQ3 PAAQ4 Estimate 026 113 154 319 683 870 882 937 881 862 892 823 492 627 924 873 640 846 792 572 845 897 909 586 882 875 869 926 940 932 846 719 879 920 912 786 736 830 601 788 236 Estimate PAAQ5 809 PAAQ6 835 PAAQ7 578 PAAQ8 678 PAAQ9 698 PAAQ10 739 Model Fit Summary CMIN Model NPAR CMIN DF P CMIN/DF Default model 330 3564.339 1560 000 2.285 Saturated model 1890 000 Independence model 168 61387.839 1722 000 35.649 Baseline Comparisons NFI RFI IFI TLI CFI Delta1 rho1 Delta2 rho2 Default model 942 936 966 963 966 Saturated model 1.000 1.000 1.000 Independence model 000 000 000 000 000 Model Parsimony-Adjusted Measures Model PRATIO PNFI PCFI Default model 906 853 875 Saturated model 000 000 000 Independence model 1.000 000 000 NCP Model NCP LO 90 HI 90 Default model 2004.339 1834.520 2181.798 Saturated model 000 000 000 Independence model 59665.839 58859.671 60478.344 FMIN Model FMIN F0 LO 90 HI 90 Default model 3.094 1.740 1.592 1.894 Saturated model 000 000 000 000 Independence model 53.288 51.793 51.093 52.499 RMSEA Model RMSEA LO 90 HI 90 PCLOSE Default model 033 032 035 1.000 Independence model 173 172 175 000 AIC Model Default model AIC BCC BIC CAIC 4224.339 4278.048 237 Model AIC BCC BIC CAIC Saturated model 3780.000 4087.608 Independence model 61723.839 61751.181 ECVI Model ECVI LO 90 HI 90 MECVI Default model 3.667 3.520 3.821 3.714 Saturated model 3.281 3.281 3.281 3.548 Independence model 53.580 52.880 54.285 53.603 HOELTER HOELTER HOELTER 05 01 Default model 536 549 Independence model 36 36 Model 238