Table 1.
Information on the items used to construct latent variables for socioeconomic stress, family support, peer problems and emotional symptoms.
Fig 1.
Flow chart showing the derivation of the sample used for the analysis.
Fig 2.
Path diagrams of the structural equation models tested.
Note: Single-headed arrows show the hypothesised direction of the relationship. Double-headed arrows show covariance. Latent variables are presented in circles; observed variables are in squares. Separate models were run for males and females. Covariates and indicator variables for the latent variables are not shown for simplicity.
Table 2.
Descriptive statistics for the continuous variables in the sample with complete data, separately for males and females (N = 1950).
Table 3.
Count data for the categorical and ordinal variables separately for males and females, expressed as both frequency and row percentage.
Table 4.
Robust fit statistics for the nested models, including chi-square statistic, df, chi-square difference tests, CFI and RMSEA with 90% CI (N = 1950).
Fig 3.
Results for models 1 and 2 for the male sample.
Note. *** = p < .001, ** = p < .01, * = p < .05. Estimates are unstandardised path coefficients (standardised in parentheses). Amygdala and vmPFC GMV values were divided by 1,000, and WBV was divided by 1,000,000, so that the values were closer in magnitude to other variables in the model.
Fig 4.
Results for models 1 and 2 for the female sample.
Note. *** = p < .001, ** = p < .01, * = p < .05. Estimates are unstandardised path coefficients (standardised in parentheses). Amygdala and vmPFC GMV values were divided by 1,000, and WBV was divided by 1,000,000, so that the values were closer in magnitude to other variables in the model.