AIMS: To evaluate the construct validity of the Copenhagen Psychosocial Questionnaire II (COPSOQ II) by means of tests for differential item functioning (DIF) and differential item effect (DIE). METHODS: We used a Danish general population postal survey (n = 4,732 with 3,517 wage earners) with a one-year register based follow up for long-term sickness absence. DIF was evaluated against age, gender, education, social class, public/private sector employment, and job type using ordinal logistic regression. DIE was evaluated against job satisfaction and self-rated health (using ordinal logistic regression), against depressive symptoms, burnout, and stress (using multiple linear regression), and against long-term sick leave (using a proportional hazards model). We used a cross-validation approach to counter the risk of significant results due to multiple testing. RESULTS: Out of 1,052 tests, we found 599 significant instances of DIF/DIE, 69 of which showed both practical and statistical significance across two independent samples. Most DIF occurred for job type (in 20 cases), while we found little DIF for age, gender, education, social class and sector. DIE seemed to pertain to particular items, which showed DIE in the same direction for several outcome variables. DISCUSSION: The results allowed a preliminary identification of items that have a positive impact on construct validity and items that have negative impact on construct validity. These results can be used to develop better shortform measures and to improve the conceptual framework, items and scales of the COPSOQ II. CONCLUSIONS: We conclude that tests of DIF and DIE are useful for evaluating construct validity.
AIMS: To evaluate the construct validity of the Copenhagen Psychosocial Questionnaire II (COPSOQ II) by means of tests for differential item functioning (DIF) and differential item effect (DIE). METHODS: We used a Danish general population postal survey (n = 4,732 with 3,517 wage earners) with a one-year register based follow up for long-term sickness absence. DIF was evaluated against age, gender, education, social class, public/private sector employment, and job type using ordinal logistic regression. DIE was evaluated against job satisfaction and self-rated health (using ordinal logistic regression), against depressive symptoms, burnout, and stress (using multiple linear regression), and against long-term sick leave (using a proportional hazards model). We used a cross-validation approach to counter the risk of significant results due to multiple testing. RESULTS: Out of 1,052 tests, we found 599 significant instances of DIF/DIE, 69 of which showed both practical and statistical significance across two independent samples. Most DIF occurred for job type (in 20 cases), while we found little DIF for age, gender, education, social class and sector. DIE seemed to pertain to particular items, which showed DIE in the same direction for several outcome variables. DISCUSSION: The results allowed a preliminary identification of items that have a positive impact on construct validity and items that have negative impact on construct validity. These results can be used to develop better shortform measures and to improve the conceptual framework, items and scales of the COPSOQ II. CONCLUSIONS: We conclude that tests of DIF and DIE are useful for evaluating construct validity.
Authors: Jesper Pihl-Thingvad; Ask Elklit; Lars Peter Andreas Brandt; Lars Louis Andersen Journal: Int Arch Occup Environ Health Date: 2019-03-25 Impact factor: 3.015
Authors: Susel Rosário; Luís F Azevedo; João A Fonseca; Albert Nienhaus; Matthias Nübling; José Torres da Costa Journal: J Occup Med Toxicol Date: 2017-08-09 Impact factor: 2.646