Uniform DIF and DIF Defined by Differences in Item Response Functions

Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics

Volumn 23, Issue 3, 1998, Pages 244-253

  Hanson, Bradley A ^a  

^a American College Testing Incorporated   (United States)

Author keywords

Differential item functioning; Test bias

Indexed keywords

EID: 0032236951     PISSN: 10769986     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.3102/10769986023003244     Document Type: Article

References (24)

1. Ackerman, T. A. (1992). A didactic explanation of item bias, item impact, and item validity from a multidimensional perspective. Journal of Educational Measurement. 29, 67-91.
2. Agresti, A. (1990). Categorical Data Analysis. New York: John Wiley & Sons.
3. Allen, N. L., & Donoghue, J. R. (1996). Applying the Mantel-Haenszel procedure to complex samples of items. Journal of Educational Measurement, 33, 231-251.
4. Clauser, B., Mazor, K. M., & Hambleton, R. K. (1994). The effects of score group width on the Mantel-Haenszel procedure. Journal of Educational Measurement, 31, 67-78.
5. Cressie, N., & Holland, P. W. (1983). Characterizing the manifest probabilities of latent trait models. Psychometrika, 48, 129-141.
6. Donoghue, J. R., & Allen, N. L. (1993). Thin versus thick matching in the Mantel-Haenszel procedure for detecting DIF. Journal of Educational Statistics, 18, 131-154.
7. 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. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
8. Fischer, G. H. (1993). Notes on the Mantel-Haenszel procedure and another chi-squared test for the assessment of DIP. Methodika, 7, 88-100.
9. Fischer, G. H. (1995). Some neglected problems in IRT. Psychometrika, 60, 459-487.
10. 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.
11. Langenfield, T. E. (1997). Test fairness: Internal and external investigations of gender bias in mathematics testing. Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice, 16. 20-26.
12. Lord, F. M. (1980). Applications of item response theory to practical testing problems. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
13. Marañón, P., Garcia, M., & Costas, C. (1997). Identification of nonuniform differential item functioning: A comparison of Mantel-Haenszel and item response theory analysis procedures. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 57, 559-568.
14. Mazor, K. M., Clauser, B. E., & Hambleton, R. K. (1992). The effect of sample size on the functioning of the Mantel-Haenszel statistic. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 52, 443-451.
15. Mazor, K. M., Clauser, B. E., & Hambleton, R. K. (1994). Identification of nonuniform differential item functioning using a variation of the Mantel-Haenszel procedure. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 54, 284-291.
16. Mellenbergh, G. J. (1982). Contingency table methods for assessing item bias. Journal of Educational Statistics, 7, 105-118.
17. Meredith, W., & Millsap, R. E. (1992). On the misuse of manifest variables in the detection of measurement bias. Psychometrika, 57, 289-311.
18. Millsap, R. E., & Everson, H. T. (1993). Methodology review: Statistical approaches for assessing measurement bias. Applied Psychological Measurement, 17, 297-334.
19. Parshall, C. G., & Miller, T. R. (1995). Exact versus asymptotic Mantel-Haenszel DIF statistics: A comparison of performance under small-sample conditions. Journal of Educational Measurement, 32, 302-316.
20. Rogers, H. J., & Swaminathan, H. (1993). A comparison of logistic regression and Mantel-Haenszel procedures for detecting differential item functioning. Applied Psychological Measurement, 17, 105-116.
21. Shealy, R., & Stout, W. (1993). A model-based standardization approach that separates true bias/DIF from group ability differences and detects test bias/DIF as well as item bias/DIF. Psychometrika. 58, 159-194.
22. Swaminathan, H., & Rogers, H. J. (1990). Detecting differential item functioning using logistic regression procedures. Journal of Educational Measurement, 27, 361-370.
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. Zwick, R. (1990). When do item response function and Mantel-Haenszel definitions of differential item functioning coincide? Journal of Educational Statistics, 15, 185-197.