Dear Pref. Fox

Sorry, I didn't receive your reply. I try the new sem package. It's
great. The following is the results that I got. The fit indices are
fine.

 Model Chisquare =  208   Df =  98 Pr(>Chisq) = 6.6e-10
 Chisquare (null model) =  1741   Df =  120
 Goodness-of-fit index =  0.9
 Adjusted goodness-of-fit index =  0.87
 RMSEA index =  0.066   90 % CI: (0.054, 0.079)
 Bentler-Bonnett NFI =  0.88
 Tucker-Lewis NNFI =  0.92
 Bentler CFI =  0.93
 BIC =  -336

Thank you very much. You help me out so many problems.

Best wishes,
Wei-Wei


2006/9/4, John Fox <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> Dear Wei-Wei,
>
> As I explained to you in private email yesterday (perhaps you didn't receive
> my reply?), the problem that you point out is due to a bug in the sem
> function that I fixed some time ago and then inadvertently reintroduced.
> Yesterday, I sent a corrected version of the sem package (0.9-5) to CRAN;
> the source package is there now and I'm sure that the compiled Windows
> package will appear in due course.
>
> Thank you once more for bringing the problem to my attention.
>
> John
>

______________________________________________
[email protected] mailing list
https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-help
PLEASE do read the posting guide http://www.R-project.org/posting-guide.html
and provide commented, minimal, self-contained, reproducible code.

Reply via email to