Descriptive and Inferential Procedures for Assessing Differential Item Functioning in Polytomous Items

Applied Measurement in Education

Volumn 10, Issue 4, 1997, Pages 321-344

  Zwick, Rebecca ^a   Thayer, Dorothy T ^a   Mazzeo, John ^a  

^a EDUCATIONAL TESTING SERVICE   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 0031517575     PISSN: 08957347     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1207/s15324818ame1004_2     Document Type: Article

References (29)

1. Allen, N. L., & Donoghue, J. R. (1996). Applying the Mantel-Haenszel procedure to complex samples of items. Journal of Educational Measurement, 33, 231-251.
2. Chang, H., Mazzeo, J., & Roussos, L. (1996). Detecting DIF for polytomously scored items: An adaptation of the SIBTEST procedure. Journal of Educational Measurement, 33, 333-353.
3. Donoghue, J. R., Holland, P. W., & Thayer, D. T. (1993). A Monte Carlo study of factors that affect the Mantel-Haenszel and standardization measures of differential item functioning. In P. W. Holland & H. Wainer (Eds.) Differential item functioning (pp. 137-166). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
4. Dorans, N. J., & Kulick, E. (1986). Demonstrating the utility of the standardization approach to assessing unexpected differential item performance on the Scholastic Aptitude Test. Journal of Educational Measurement, 23, 355-368.
5. Dorans, N. J., & Schmitt, A. P. (1991). Constructed response and differential item functioning: A pragmatic approach (Research Rep. No. 91-47). Princeton, NJ: Educational Testing Service.
6. Douglas, J., Stout, W., & DiBello, L. (1996). A kernel smoothed version of SIBTEST with applications to local DIF inference and function estimation. Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics, 21, 333-363.
7. Fischer, G. H. (1993). Notes on the Mantel-Haenszel procedure and another chi-squared test for the assessment of DIP. Methodika, 7, 88-100.
8. Holland, P. W., & Thayer, D. T. (1988). Differential item performance and the Mantel-Haenszel procedure. In H. Wainer & H. I. Braun (Eds.), Test validity (pp. 129-145). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
9. Kelley, T. L. (1923). Statistical methods. New York: Macmillan.
10. Lewis, C. (1993). A note on the value of including the studied item in the test score when analyzing test items for DIF. In P. W. Holland & H. Wainer (Eds.), Differential item functioning (pp. 317-319). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
11. Lord, F. M., & Novick, M. R. (1968) Statistical theories of mental test scores. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
12. Mantel, N. (1963). Chi-square tests with one degree of freedom; extensions of the Mantel-Haenszel procedure. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 58, 690-700.
13. Mantel, N., & Haenszel, W. (1959). Statistical aspects of the analysis of data from retrospective studies of disease. Journal of the National Cancer Institute, 22, 719-748.
14. Masters, G. N. (1982). A Rasch model for partial credit scoring. Psychometrika, 47, 149-174.
15. Mazzeo, J., & Chang, H.-H. (1994, April). Detecting DIF for polytomously scored items: Progress in adaptation of Shealy-Stout's SIBTEST procedure. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, New Orleans, LA.
16. Meredith, W., & Millsap, R. E. (1992). On the misuse of manifest variables in the detection of measurement bias. Psychometrika, 57, 289-311.
17. Millsap, R. E., & Meredith, W. (1992). Inferential conditions in the statistical detection of measurement bias. Applied Psychological Measurement, 16, 389-402.
18. Muraki, E. (1992). A generalized partial credit model: Application of an EM algorithm. Applied Psychological Measurement, 16, 159-176.
19. Potenza, M. T., & Dorans, N. J. (1995). DIF assessment for polytomously scored items: A framework for classification and evaluation. Applied Psychological Measurement, 19, 23-37.
20. Roussos, L. A., & Stout, W. F. (1993, April). Simulation studies of effects of small sample sized and studied item parameters on SIBTEST and Mantel-Haenszel Type I error performance. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Atlanta, GA.
21. Shealy, R. (1989). An item response theory-based statistical procedure for detecting concurrent internal bias in ability tests. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign.
22. Shealy, R., & Stout, W. (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. Uttaro, T., & Millsap, R. E. (1994). Factors influencing the Mantel-Haenszel procedure in the detection of differential item functioning. Applied Psychological Measurement, 18, 15-25.
24. Welch, C. J., & Miller, T. (1995). Assessing differential item functioning in direct writing assessments: Problems and an example. Journal of Educational Measurement, 32, 163-178.
25. Zwick, R. (1990). When do item response function and Mantel-Haenszel definitions of differential item functioning coincide? Journal of Educational Statistics, 15, 185-197.
26. Zwick, R., Donoghue, J. R., & Grima, A. (1993). Assessment of differential item functioning for performance tasks. Journal of Educational Measurement, 30, 233-251.
27. Zwick, R., & Thayer, D. T. (1996). Evaluating the magnitude of differential item functioning in polytomous items. Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics, 21, 187-201.
28. Zwick, R., Thayer, D. T., & Mazzeo, J. ( 1997). Describing and categorizing DIF in polytomous items: Final report (Research Rep. No. 97-05, GRE Rep. No. 93-10P). Princeton, NJ: Educational Testing Service.
29. Zwick, R, Thayer, D. T., & Wingersky, M. (1994). A simulation study of methods for assessing differential item functioning in computerized adaptive tests. Applied Psychological Measurement, 18, 121-140.