Possible determinants of differential item functioning: Familiarity, interest, and emotional reaction

Journal of Educational Measurement

Volumn 36, Issue 4, 1999, Pages 347-366

  Stricker, Lawrence J ^a   Emmerich, Walter ^a  

^a EDUCATIONAL TESTING SERVICE   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 0033235969     PISSN: 00220655     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1745-3984.1999.tb00561.x     Document Type: Review

References (45)

1. Angoff, W. H. (1993). Perspectives on differential item functioning methodology. In P. W. Holland & H. Wainer (Eds.), Differential item functioning (pp. 3-23). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
2. Beal, C. R. (1994). Boys and girls - The development of gender roles. New York: McGraw-Hill.
3. Berk, R. (Ed.) (1982). Handbook of methods for detecting test bias. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.
4. Camilli, G., & Shepard, L. A. (1994). Methods for identifying biased test items. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
5. Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
6. College Board (1992). Advanced placement course description - Psychology. New York: College Entrance Examination Board.
7. Curley, W. E., & Schmitt, A. P. (1993). Revising SAT-Verbal items to eliminate differential item functioning (College Board Report 93-2; ETS Research Report 93-61). New York: College Entrance Examination Board.
8. Donlon, T. F., Hicks, M. M., & Wallmark, M. M. (1980). Sex differences in item responses on the Graduate Record Examination. Applied Psychological Measurement, 4, 19-20.
9. Dorans, N. J., & Holland, P. W. (1993). DIF detection and description: Mantel-Haenszel and standardization. In P. W. Holland & H. Wainer (Eds.), Differential item functioning (pp. 35-66). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
10. Douglas, J. A., Roussos, L. A., & Stout, W. (1996). Item-bundle DIF hypothesis testing: Identifying suspect bundles and assessing their differential functioning. Journal of Educational Measurement, 33, 465-484.
11. Educational Testing Service. (1995). [Test analyses of the AP Psychology Examination.] Unpublished raw data.
12. Eells, K., Davis, A., Havighurst, R. J., Herrick, V. E., & Tyler, R. W. (1951). Intelligence and cultural differences. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
13. Emmerich, W., & Marr, D. (1991). GRE Psychology Test male/female differential item functioning (DIF) based on data aggregated across forms 3KGR, 3LGR, and 3MGR. Unpublished manuscript.
14. Enright, M. K., & Bejar, I. I. (1998). An investigation of the role of educational background on performance on the GRE Analytical measure (GRE Report 92-14; ETS Research Report 97-17). Princeton, NJ: Educational Testing Service.
15. Ericcson, K. A., & Simon, H. A. (1993). Protocol analysis: Verbal reports as data (rev.). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
16. Gottfredson, G. D., Holland, J. L., & Gottfredson, L. S. (1975). The relation of vocational aspirations and assessments to employment reality. Journal of Vocational Behavior, 7, 135-148.
17. Halpern, D. E. (1992). Sex differences in cognitive abilities (2nd ed.). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
18. Harris, A. M., & Carlton, S. J. (1993). Patterns of gender differences on mathematics items on the Scholastic Aptitude Test. Applied Measurement in Education, 6, 137-151.
19. Holland, J. L. (1997). Making vocational choices (3rd ed.). Odessa, FL: Psychological Assessment Resources.
20. Holland, P. W., & Tayer, 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: Erlbaum.
21. Holland, P. W., & Wainer, H. (Eds.). (1993). Differential item functioning. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
22. Izard, C. E. (1977). Human emotions. New York: Plenum.
23. Jensen, A. R. (1980). Bias in mental testing. New York: Free Press.
24. Kirk, R. E. (1995). Experimental design: Procedures for the behavioral sciences (3rd ed.) Pacific Grove, CA: Brooks/Cole.
25. Kubiak, A. (1995). [Factor analyses of the GRE Subject Tests.] Unpublished raw data.
26. Linn, R. L., Levine, M. V., Hastings, C. N., & Wardrop, J. L. (1981). Item bias in a test of reading comprehension. Applied Psychological Measurement, 5, 159-173.
27. Lippa, R. (1998). Gender-related differences and the structure of vocational interests: The importance of the people-things dimension. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 74, 996-1009.
28. Lord, F. M. (1980). Applications of item response theory to practical testing problems. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
29. 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.
30. McPeek, W. M., & Wild, C. L. (1992). Identifying differentially functioning items in the NTE Core Battery (ETS Research Report 92-62). Princeton, NJ: Educational Testing Service.
31. O'Neill, K. A., & McPeek, W. M. (1993). Item and test characteristics that are associated with differential item functioning. In P. W. Holland & H. Wainer, (Eds.), Differential item functioning (pp. 255-276). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
32. Prediger, D. J. (1982). Dimensions underlying Holland's hexagon: Missing link between interests and occupations? Journal of Vocational Behavior, 21, 259-287.
33. Ramsey, P. A. (1993). Sensitivity review: The ETS experience as a case study. In P. W. Holland & H. Wainer (Eds.), Differential item functioning (pp. 367-388). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
34. Reynolds, C. R., & Kaiser, S. M. (1990). Test bias in psychological assessment. In T. B. Gutkin & C. R. Reynolds (Eds.), The handbook of the school psychology (2nd ed., pp. 487-525). New York: Wiley.
35. Rosenthal, R., & Rosnow, R. L. (1991). Essentials of behavioral research (2nd ed.). New York: McGraw-Hill.
36. Roussos, L., & Stout, W. (1996). A multidimensionality-based DIF analysis paradigm. Applied Psychological Measurement, 20, 355-371.
37. Ruble, D. N., & Martin, C. L. (1998). Gender development. In W. Damon (Series Ed.) & N. Eisenberg (Vol. Ed.), Handbook of child psychology: Vol. 3. Social, emotional, and personality development (5th ed., pp. 933-1016). New York: Wiley.
38. Schmitt, A. P., Holland, P. W., & Dorans, N. J. (1993). Evaluating hypotheses about differential item functioning. In P. W. Holland & H. Wainer (Eds.), Differential item functioning (pp. 281-315). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
39. Schulenberg, J., Goldstein, A. E., & Vondracek, F. W. (1991). Gender differences in adolescents' career interests: Beyond main effects. Journal of Research on Adolescence, 1, 37-61.
40. Shrout, P. E., & Fleiss, J. L. (1979). Intraclass correlations: Uses in assessing rater reliability. Psychological Bulletin, 86, 420-428.
41. Stricker, L. J. (1981). A new index of differential subgroup performance: Application to the GRE Aptitude Test (GRE Board Professional Report 78-7P; ETS Research Report 81-13). Princeton, NJ: Educational Testing Service.
42. Tomkins, S. S. (1963). Affect, imagery, and consciousness: Vol. 2, The negative affects. New York: Springer.
43. Wendler, C.L.W., & Carlton, S. R. (1987, April). An examination of SAT-verbal items for differential performance by women and men: An exploratory study. Paper presented at the meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Washinton, DC.
44. Wilder, G. Z. (1996). Correlates of gender differences in cognitive functioning (College Board Report 96-03). New York: College Entrance Examination Board.
45. Zieky, M. (1993). Practical question in the use of DIF statistics in test development. In P. W. Holland & H. Wainer (Eds.), Defferential item functioning (pp. 337-347). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.