Literature DB >> 32616953

Accounting for Differential Item Functioning Using Bayesian Approximate Measurement Invariance.

Georgios D Sideridis1,2, Ioannis Tsaousis3, Abeer A Alamri4.   

Abstract

The main thesis of the present study is to use the Bayesian structural equation modeling (BSEM) methodology of establishing approximate measurement invariance (A-MI) using data from a national examination in Saudi Arabia as an alternative to not meeting strong invariance criteria. Instead, we illustrate how to account for the absence of measurement invariance using relative compared to exact criteria. A secondary goal was to compare latent means across groups using invariant parameters only and through utilizing exact and relative evaluative-MI protocol suggested equivalence of the thresholds using prior variances equal to 0.10. Subsequent differences between groups were evaluated using effect size criteria and the prior-posterior predictive p-value (PPPP), which proved to be invaluable in attesting for differences that are beyond zero, some meaningless nonzero estimate, and the three commonly used indices of effect sizes described by Cohen in 1988 (i.e., .20, .50, and .80). Results substantiated the use of the PPPP for evaluating mean differences across groups when utilizing nonexact evaluative criteria.
© The Author(s) 2019.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Bayesian analysis; approximate measurement invariance; prior-posterior predictive p-value

Year:  2019        PMID: 32616953      PMCID: PMC7307490          DOI: 10.1177/0013164419887482

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


  25 in total

1.  A practical and theoretical guide to measurement invariance in aging research.

Authors:  J L Horn; J J McArdle
Journal:  Exp Aging Res       Date:  1992 Autumn-Winter       Impact factor: 1.645

2.  Bayes factor approaches for testing interval null hypotheses.

Authors:  Richard D Morey; Jeffrey N Rouder
Journal:  Psychol Methods       Date:  2011-07-25

3.  MultiLevel simultaneous component analysis: A computational shortcut and software package.

Authors:  Eva Ceulemans; Tom F Wilderjans; Henk A L Kiers; Marieke E Timmerman
Journal:  Behav Res Methods       Date:  2016-09

4.  What to do when scalar invariance fails: The extended alignment method for multi-group factor analysis comparison of latent means across many groups.

Authors:  Herbert W Marsh; Jiesi Guo; Philip D Parker; Benjamin Nagengast; Tihomir Asparouhov; Bengt Muthén; Theresa Dicke
Journal:  Psychol Methods       Date:  2017-01-12

5.  Scale Reliability Evaluation With Heterogeneous Populations.

Authors:  Tenko Raykov; George A Marcoulides
Journal:  Educ Psychol Meas       Date:  2014-11-25       Impact factor: 2.821

6.  Bayesian structural equation modeling: a more flexible representation of substantive theory.

Authors:  Bengt Muthén; Tihomir Asparouhov
Journal:  Psychol Methods       Date:  2012-09

7.  Hopes and cautions in implementing Bayesian structural equation modeling.

Authors:  Robert C MacCallum; Michael C Edwards; Li Cai
Journal:  Psychol Methods       Date:  2012-09

8.  Why most published research findings are false.

Authors:  John P A Ioannidis
Journal:  PLoS Med       Date:  2005-08-30       Impact factor: 11.613

9.  Facing off with Scylla and Charybdis: a comparison of scalar, partial, and the novel possibility of approximate measurement invariance.

Authors:  Rens van de Schoot; Anouck Kluytmans; Lars Tummers; Peter Lugtig; Joop Hox; Bengt Muthén
Journal:  Front Psychol       Date:  2013-10-23

10.  Psychometric Evaluation of the Overexcitability Questionnaire-Two Applying Bayesian Structural Equation Modeling (BSEM) and Multiple-Group BSEM-Based Alignment with Approximate Measurement Invariance.

Authors:  Niki De Bondt; Peter Van Petegem
Journal:  Front Psychol       Date:  2015-12-24
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.