Development and demonstration of multidimensional IRT-based internal measures of differential functioning of items and tests

Journal of Educational Measurement

Volumn 34, Issue 3, 1997, Pages 253-272

  Oshima, T C ^a   Raju, Nambury S ^a   Flowers, Claudia P ^a  

^a NONE

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 0031287456     PISSN: 00220655     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1745-3984.1997.tb00518.x     Document Type: Article

References (27)

1. Ackerman, T. A. (1991). The use of unidimensional parameter estimates of multidimensional items in adaptive testing. Applied Psychological Measurement, 15, 13-24.
2. Candell, G. L., & Drasgow, F. (1988). An iterative procedure for linking metrics and assessing item bias in item response theory. Applied Psychological Measurement, 12, 253-260.
3. Davey, T. C. (1991). Some issues in linking multidimensional item calibrations. Paper presented at the Office of Naval Research Contractors Meeting on Model-Based Psychological Measurement, Princeton, NJ.
4. Fleer, P. F. (1993). A Monte Carlo assessment of a new measure of item and test bias. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Illinois Institute of Technology, Chicago.
5. Fleer, P. F., Raju, N. S., & van der Linden, W. J. (1995, April). A Monte Carlo assessment of DFIT with dichotomously scored unidimensional tests. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, San Francisco.
6. Fraser, C. (1988). NOHARM: A computer program for fitting both unidimensional and multidimensional normal ogive models of latent trait theory. New South Wales, Australia: Center for Behavioral Studies, University of New England Armidale.
7. Kim, S., & Cohen, A. S. (1992). Effects of linking methods on detection of DIE Journal of Educational Measurement, 29, 51-66.
8. Lee, K., & Oshima, T. C. (1996). IPLINK: Multidimensional and unidimensional item parameter linking in item response theory. Applied Psychological Measurement, 20, 230.
9. Longford, N. T. (1995). Models for uncertainty in educational testing. New York: Springer-Verlag.
10. Longford, N. T, Holland, P. W., & Thayer, D. T. (1993). Stability of MH D-DIF statistics across populations. In P. W. Holland & H. Wainer (Eds.), Differential item functioning (pp. 171-196). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
11. Lord, F. M. (1980). Applications of item response theory to practical testing problems. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
12. Oshima, T. C., Davey, T. C., & Lee, K. (1996). Multidimensional linking: Four minimization procedures. Unpublished manuscript.
13. Oshima, T. C., & Miller, M. D. (1992). Multidimensionality and item bias in item response theory. Applied Psychological Measurement, 16, 237-248.
14. Oshima, T. C., Raju, N. S., Flowers, C. P., & Monaco, M. (1995, April). A Monte Carlo assessment of DFIT with dichotomously scored multidimensional tests. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, San Francisco.
15. Raju, N. S. (1988). The area between two item characteristic curves. Psychometrika, 53, 495-502.
16. Raju, N. S. (1990). Determining the significance of estimated signed and unsigned areas between two item response functions. Applied Psychological Measurement, 14, 197-207.
17. Raju, N. S., van der Linden, W. J., & Fleer, P. F. (1992, April). An IRT-based internal measure of test bias with applications for differential item functioning. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of American Educational Research Association, San Francisco.
18. Raju, N. S., van der Linden, W. J., & Fleer, P. F. (1995). IRT-based internal measures of differential functioning of items and tests. Applied Psychological Measurement, 19, 353-368.
19. Reckase, M. D. (1985). The difficulty of test items that measure more than one ability. Applied Psychological Measurement, 9, 401-412.
20. Reckase, M. D., & McKinley, R. L. (1991). The discrimination power of items that measure more than one dimension. Applied Psychological Measurement, 15, 361-373.
21. Rudner, L. M. (1977, April). An approach to biased item identification using latent trait measurement theory. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of American Educational Research Association, New York.
22. Shealy, R. T., & Stout, W. F. (1993). A model-based standardization approach that separates true bias/DIF from group ability differences and detects test bias/DTF as well as item bias/DIF. Psychometrika, 58, 159-194.
23. Stocking, M. L., & Lord, P.M. (1983). Developing a common metric in item response theory. Applied Psychological Measurement, 7, 210-210.
24. Swaminathan, H., & Rogers, H. J. (1990). Detecting differential item functioning using the logistic regression procedure. Journal of Educational Measurement, 27, 361-370.
25. Thissen, D., Steinberg, L., & Wainer, H. (1988). Use of item response theory in the study of group differences in trace lines. In H. Wainer & H. Braun (Eds.), Test validity (pp. 147-169). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
26. Traub, R. E. (1983). A priori considerations in choosing an item response model. In R. K. Hambleton (Ed.), Applications of item response theory (pp. 57-70). Vancouver: Educational Research Institute of British Columbia.
27. Wang, W., Wilson, M., & Adams. (1995, April). Item response modeling for multidimensional between-items and multidimensional within-items. Paper presented at the International Objective Measurement Conference, Berkeley, CA.