A 2 factor model with abuse criteria loading onto one factor and dependence criteria loading onto a second factor was rejected because the goodness of fit criteria (AIC, BIC and ABIC) were almost identical to the 1 class, 1 factor model, and the correlation between the two factors was high (0.91), suggesting that a 1 class, 1 factor model was a more parsimonious solution. Having ruled out the 2 factor model, likelihood ratio tests confirmed that the 2 class, 1 factor model was marginally superior to the other factor mixture models and to the latent class models. Overall, the 2 class, 1 factor model appeared to provide the best fit. Although the BIC for the 1 class, 1 factor model and the 2 class, 1 factor model was very similar, the bootstrap and LMR likelihood ratio tests indicated that the 2 class, 1 factor model was a superior fit to the 1 class, 1 factor model, but that adding a third class did not improve model fit (Table 2). When the legal criterion was excluded from the analysis, the 2
