Literature DB >> 29795859

It Might Not Make a Big DIF: Improved Differential Test Functioning Statistics That Account for Sampling Variability.

R Philip Chalmers1, Alyssa Counsell1, David B Flora1.   

Abstract

Differential test functioning, or DTF, occurs when one or more items in a test demonstrate differential item functioning (DIF) and the aggregate of these effects are witnessed at the test level. In many applications, DTF can be more important than DIF when the overall effects of DIF at the test level can be quantified. However, optimal statistical methodology for detecting and understanding DTF has not been developed. This article proposes improved DTF statistics that properly account for sampling variability in item parameter estimates while avoiding the necessity of predicting provisional latent trait estimates to create two-step approximations. The properties of the DTF statistics were examined with two Monte Carlo simulation studies using dichotomous and polytomous IRT models. The simulation results revealed that the improved DTF statistics obtained optimal and consistent statistical properties, such as obtaining consistent Type I error rates. Next, an empirical analysis demonstrated the application of the proposed methodology. Applied settings where the DTF statistics can be beneficial are suggested and future DTF research areas are proposed.

Entities:  

Keywords:  differential item functioning; differential test functioning; item response theory; multiple imputation

Year:  2015        PMID: 29795859      PMCID: PMC5965577          DOI: 10.1177/0013164415584576

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Educ Psychol Meas        ISSN: 0013-1644            Impact factor:   2.821


  4 in total

1.  SEM of another flavour: two new applications of the supplemented EM algorithm.

Authors:  Li Cai
Journal:  Br J Math Stat Psychol       Date:  2007-10-29       Impact factor: 3.380

2.  Information matrices and standard errors for MLEs of item parameters in IRT.

Authors:  Ke-Hai Yuan; Ying Cheng; Jeff Patton
Journal:  Psychometrika       Date:  2013-03-27       Impact factor: 2.500

3.  Characterizing Sources of Uncertainty in IRT Scale Scores.

Authors:  Ji Seung Yang; Mark Hansen; Li Cai
Journal:  Educ Psychol Meas       Date:  2011-08-25       Impact factor: 2.821

4.  Incorporating Measurement Non-Equivalence in a Cross-Study Latent Growth Curve Analysis.

Authors:  David B Flora; Patrick J Curran; Andrea M Hussong; Michael C Edwards
Journal:  Struct Equ Modeling       Date:  2008-10-01       Impact factor: 6.125

  4 in total
  16 in total

1.  Plausible-Value Imputation Statistics for Detecting Item Misfit.

Authors:  R Philip Chalmers; Victoria Ng
Journal:  Appl Psychol Meas       Date:  2017-02-01

2.  Model-Based Measures for Detecting and Quantifying Response Bias.

Authors:  R Philip Chalmers
Journal:  Psychometrika       Date:  2018-06-15       Impact factor: 2.500

3.  Improving Factor Score Estimation Through the Use of Observed Background Characteristics.

Authors:  Patrick J Curran; Veronica Cole; Daniel J Bauer; Andrea M Hussong; Nisha Gottfredson
Journal:  Struct Equ Modeling       Date:  2016-09-09       Impact factor: 6.125

4.  Differential item functioning magnitude and impact measures from item response theory models.

Authors:  Marjorie Kleinman; Jeanne A Teresi
Journal:  Psychol Test Assess Model       Date:  2016

5.  Assessing the Robustness of Mixture Models to Measurement Noninvariance.

Authors:  Veronica T Cole; Daniel J Bauer; Andrea M Hussong
Journal:  Multivariate Behav Res       Date:  2019-07-02       Impact factor: 5.923

6.  Practical Assessment of Alcohol Use Disorder in Routine Primary Care: Performance of an Alcohol Symptom Checklist.

Authors:  Kevin A Hallgren; Theresa E Matson; Malia Oliver; Katie Witkiewitz; Jennifer F Bobb; Amy K Lee; Ryan M Caldeiro; Daniel Kivlahan; Katharine A Bradley
Journal:  J Gen Intern Med       Date:  2021-08-16       Impact factor: 6.473

7.  Differential Item Functioning Analyses of the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS®) Measures: Methods, Challenges, Advances, and Future Directions.

Authors:  Jeanne A Teresi; Chun Wang; Marjorie Kleinman; Richard N Jones; David J Weiss
Journal:  Psychometrika       Date:  2021-07-12       Impact factor: 2.500

8.  More flexible response functions for the PROMIS physical functioning item bank by application of a monotonic polynomial approach.

Authors:  Carl F Falk; Felix Fischer
Journal:  Qual Life Res       Date:  2021-05-27       Impact factor: 4.147

9.  Estimating classification consistency of screening measures and quantifying the impact of measurement bias.

Authors:  Oscar Gonzalez; A R Georgeson; William E Pelham; Rachel T Fouladi
Journal:  Psychol Assess       Date:  2021-05-17

10.  Web-based and mixed-mode cognitive large-scale assessments in higher education: An evaluation of selection bias, measurement bias, and prediction bias.

Authors:  Sabine Zinn; Uta Landrock; Timo Gnambs
Journal:  Behav Res Methods       Date:  2020-10-01
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.