Literature DB >> 14716726

Test bias in a cognitive test: differential item functioning in the CASI.

Paul K Crane1, Gerald van Belle, Eric B Larson.   

Abstract

Assessment of test bias is important to establish the construct validity of tests. Assessment of differential item functioning (DIF) is an important first step in this process. DIF is present when examinees from different groups have differing probabilities of success on an item, after controlling for overall ability level. Here, we present analysis of DIF in the Cognitive Assessment Screening Instrument (CASI) using data from a large cohort study of elderly adults. We developed an ordinal logistic regression modelling technique to assess test items for DIF. Estimates of cognitive ability were obtained in two ways based on responses to CASI items: using traditional CASI scoring according to the original test instructions as well as using item response theory (IRT) scoring. Several demographic characteristics were examined for potential DIF, including ethnicity and gender (entered into the model as dichotomous variables), and years of education and age (entered as continuous variables). We found that a disappointingly large number of items had DIF with respect to at least one of these demographic variables. More items were found to have DIF with traditional CASI scoring than with IRT scoring. This study demonstrates a powerful technique for the evaluation of DIF in psychometric tests. The finding that so many CASI items had DIF suggests that previous findings of differences between groups in cognitive functioning as measured by the CASI may be due to biased test items rather than true differences between groups. The finding that IRT scoring diminished the impact of DIF is discussed. Some preliminary suggestions for how to deal with items found to have DIF in cognitive tests are made. The advantages of the DIF detection techniques we developed are discussed in relation to other techniques for the evaluation of DIF. Copyright 2004 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Mesh:

Year:  2004        PMID: 14716726     DOI: 10.1002/sim.1713

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Stat Med        ISSN: 0277-6715            Impact factor:   2.373


  62 in total

1.  Development of a computer-administered mobility questionnaire.

Authors:  Jorunn L Helbostad; Line M Oldervoll; Peter M Fayers; Marit S Jordhøy; Kenneth C H Fearon; Florian Strasser; Stein Kaasa
Journal:  Support Care Cancer       Date:  2010-03-26       Impact factor: 3.603

2.  Occurrences and sources of Differential Item Functioning (DIF) in patient-reported outcome measures: Description of DIF methods, and review of measures of depression, quality of life and general health.

Authors:  Jeanne A Teresi; Mildred Ramirez; Jin-Shei Lai; Stephanie Silver
Journal:  Psychol Sci Q       Date:  2008

3.  A differential item functioning (DIF) analysis of the Communicative Participation Item Bank (CPIB): comparing individuals with Parkinson's disease from the United States and New Zealand.

Authors:  Carolyn Baylor; Megan J McAuliffe; Louise E Hughes; Kathryn Yorkston; Tim Anderson; Jiseon Kim; Dagmar Amtmann
Journal:  J Speech Lang Hear Res       Date:  2014-02       Impact factor: 2.297

4.  Analysis of differential item functioning in the depression item bank from the Patient Reported Outcome Measurement Information System (PROMIS): An item response theory approach.

Authors:  Jeanne A Teresi; Katja Ocepek-Welikson; Marjorie Kleinman; Joseph P Eimicke; Paul K Crane; Richard N Jones; Jin-Shei Lai; Seung W Choi; Ron D Hays; Bryce B Reeve; Steven P Reise; Paul A Pilkonis; David Cella
Journal:  Psychol Sci Q       Date:  2009

5.  Rapid detection of differential item functioning in assessments of health-related quality of life: The Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy.

Authors:  Paul K Crane; Laura E Gibbons; Kaavya Narasimhalu; Jin-Shei Lai; David Cella
Journal:  Qual Life Res       Date:  2006-11-17       Impact factor: 4.147

6.  A comparison of three sets of criteria for determining the presence of differential item functioning using ordinal logistic regression.

Authors:  Paul K Crane; Laura E Gibbons; Katja Ocepek-Welikson; Karon Cook; David Cella; Kaavya Narasimhalu; Ron D Hays; Jeanne A Teresi
Journal:  Qual Life Res       Date:  2007-06-07       Impact factor: 4.147

7.  Differential item functioning and health assessment.

Authors:  Jeanne A Teresi; John A Fleishman
Journal:  Qual Life Res       Date:  2007-04-19       Impact factor: 4.147

8.  Differential item functioning impact in a modified version of the Roland-Morris Disability Questionnaire.

Authors:  Paul K Crane; Karynsa Cetin; Karon F Cook; Kurt Johnson; Richard Deyo; Dagmar Amtmann
Journal:  Qual Life Res       Date:  2007-04-19       Impact factor: 4.147

9.  Evaluating measurement equivalence using the item response theory log-likelihood ratio (IRTLR) method to assess differential item functioning (DIF): applications (with illustrations) to measures of physical functioning ability and general distress.

Authors:  Jeanne A Teresi; Katja Ocepek-Welikson; Marjorie Kleinman; Karon F Cook; Paul K Crane; Laura E Gibbons; Leo S Morales; Maria Orlando-Edelen; David Cella
Journal:  Qual Life Res       Date:  2007-05-05       Impact factor: 4.147

Review 10.  Item response theory facilitated cocalibrating cognitive tests and reduced bias in estimated rates of decline.

Authors:  Paul K Crane; Kaavya Narasimhalu; Laura E Gibbons; Dan M Mungas; Sebastien Haneuse; Eric B Larson; Lewis Kuller; Kathleen Hall; Gerald van Belle
Journal:  J Clin Epidemiol       Date:  2008-05-05       Impact factor: 6.437

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.