Potential sources of bias in a numerical aptitud test;Fuentes potenciales de sesgo en una prueba de aptitud numérica

Psicothema

Volumn 12, Issue 3, 2000, Pages 376-382

  Elosua Oliden, Paula ^a   López Jáuregui, Alicia ^b   Egaña Makazaga, Josu ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF THE BASQUE COUNTRY UPV EHU   (Spain)

^b NONE

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 0346388532     PISSN: 02149915     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Article

References (55)

1. Ackerman, T.A. (1992). Didactic explanation of item bias, item impact, and item validity from a multidimensional perspective. Journal of Educational Measurement, 29(1), 67-91.
2. Anderson, J. R. (1976). Language, memory, and thought. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
3. Ausubel, David P., Joseph D. Novak, and Helen Hanesian . (1978). Educational psychology: A cognitive view. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, Inc . (Trad. Cast. Psicología educativa: un punto de vista cognoscitivo. México: Trillas, 1983)
4. Baker, F.B. (1994) EQUATE2: Computer program for equating two metrics in item response theory [Computer program]. Madison: University of Wisconsin, Laboratory of Experimental Design
5. Candell, G.L. y Drasgow, F. (1988): An iterative procedure for linking metrics and assessing item bias in item response theory. Applied psychological measurement, 12(3), 253-260.
6. Cronbach, L.J. (1951). Coefficient Alpha and the Interntal Structure of Tests, Psychometrika, 16, 297-334.
7. Cronbach, L.J. (1971). Test validation. In R.L. Thorndike(Ed.), Educational Measurement(pp.443-501). Washington, DC: American Council on Education.
8. Dorans, N.J. y Kulick, E. (1986). Demonstrating the utility of the Standarization Approach to assessing unexpected Differential Item Performance on the Scholastic Aptitude Test. Journal of Educational Measurement, 23(4), 355-368.
9. Elosua, P. López, A y Egaña, J. (2000) Idioma de aplicación y rendimiento en una prueba de comprensión verbal. Psicothema 12(2), 201-206.
10. Elosua, P., López, A., Egaña, J., Artamendi, J. y Yenes, F. (Revista de Metodología de las Ciencias del Comportamiento). Funcionamiento diferencial de los ítems en la aplicación de pruebas psicológicas en entornos bilingues (En prensa).
11. Fidalgo, A.M. (1994). MHDIF: A computer program for detecting uniform and nouniform differentzial item functioning with the Mantel-Haenszel procedure.[Computer program] Dpto. Psicología, Universidad de Oviedo.
12. Greeno, J.G. (1980) Some examples of cognitive task analysis with instructional implications, en R.E. Snow, P. Federico y W.E: Montague (Eds.) Aptitude, Learning an Instruction. Hillsdale, N.J.Erlbaum
13. Hambleton, R.K., Clauser, B.E., Mazor, K.M. y Jones, R.W. (1993) Advances in the detection of differentially functioning test items. European Journal of Psychological Assessment, 9(1), 1-18.
14. Hambleton, R.K. y Rogers, H.J. (1989). Detecting potentially biased test items: Comparison of IRT area and Mantel-Haenszel Methods. Applied Measurement in Education, 2(4), 313-334.
15. Hambleton, R.K., Swaminathan, H. y Rogers, H.J. (1991). Fundamentals of Item Response Theory. Newbury Park: SAGE publications.
16. Hattie, J., Krakowski, K., Rogers, H.J. y Swaminathan, H. (1996) An assessment of Stout's index of essential unidimensionality. Applied psychological measurement, 20(1), 1-14.
17. Holland, P.W. y Thayer, D.T. (1988). Differential Item Performance and the Mantel-Haenszel procedure. En H. Wainer y H.J. Braun (Eds.), Test validity (pp. 129-145). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
18. Kim, S.H. y Cohen, A.S. (1991). A comparison of two area measures for detecting Differential Item Functioning. Applied Psychological Measurement, 15(3), 269-278.
19. Kim S.H. y Cohen, A.S. (1992). IRTDIF: A computer program for IRT differential item functioning analysis [Computer Program] University of Wisconsin-Madison.
20. Kok, F.G., Mellenbergh, G.J. y Van der Flier, H. (1985). Detecting experimentally induced item bias using the iterative logit method. Journal of Educational Measurement, 2, 295-303.
21. Linn, R.L. y Harnisch, D.L. (1981). Interactions between item content and group membership on achievement test items. Journal of Educational Measurement, 18(2), 109-118.
22. Lord, F.M. (1977). A study of item bias, using item characteristic curve theory. En Y.H. Poortinga(Ed.), Basic problems Cross-Cultural Psychology (pp. 19-29).Amsterdam: Swets y Zeitlinger.
23. Lord, F.M. (1980). Applications of Item Response Theory to practical testing problems. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers.
24. Mayer, R.E. (1985). Capacidad matemática. En R.J. Sternberg, (de.) Human abilities. An information processing approach. New York: Freeman and company. (Trad. Cast. Las capacidades humanas. Un enfoque desde el procesamiento de la información. Barcelona. Labor, 1986)
25. Mantel, N. y Haenszel, W. (1959) Statistical aspects of the analysis of data from retrospective studies of disease. Journal of the national cancer institute, 22, 719-748.
26. Mazor, K.M., Clauser, P.E. y 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.
27. Mellenbergh, G.J. (1982). Contingency table models for assessing item bias. Journal of Educational Statistics, 7(2), 105-118.
28. Mellenbergh, G.J. (1989). Item bias and Item Response Theory. International Journal of Educational Research, 13, 127-143.
29. Millsap, R.E. y Everson, H.T. (1993). Methodology review: Statistical approaches for assessing measurement bias. Applied Psychological Measurement, 17(4), 297-334.
30. Mislevy, R.J. y Bock, R.D. (1990). BILOG·3: Item analysis and test scoring with binary logistic models.[Computer program]. Mooresville, IN: Scientific software.
31. Nandakumar, R. (1994) Assessing dimensionality pf a set of item responses. Comparison of different approaches. Journal of educational measurement, 31, 17-35.
32. Nandakumar, R. y Stout, W. (1993) Refinements of Stout's procedure for assessing latent trait unidimensionality. Journal of educational statistics, 18, 41-68
33. Nandakumar, R. y Yu, F. (1996) Empirical validation of DIMTEST on nonnormal ability distributions. Journal of educational measurement, 33, 355-368.
34. Padilla, J.L., Pérez, C. y González, A. (1999) Efecto de la instrucción sobre la dimensionalidad del test. Psicothema, 11(1), 183-193.
35. Raju, N.S. (1988). The area between two item characteristic curves. Psychometrika, 53(4), 495-502.
36. Raju, N.S. (1990). Determining the significance of estimated signed and unsigned areas between two item response functions. Applied Psychological Measurement, 14(2), 197-207.
37. Raju, N.S., Drasgow, F. y Slinde, J.A. (1993). An empirical comparison of the area methods, Lord's Chi-square test and Mantel-Haenszel technique for assessing Differential Item Functioning. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 53(2), 301-314.
38. Resnick, L.B. y Ford, W.W. (1981) The psychology of mathematics for instruction, Hillsdale, N.J. Erlbaum
39. Riley, M., Greeno, J.G. y Heller, J. (1982) The development of children's problem solving ability in arithmetic, en H. Ginsburg(ed.) The development of mathematical thinking, Nueva York:Academic Press.
40. Rudner, L.M. (1977, April). An approach to biased item identification using latent trait measurement theory. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of The American Educational Research Association, New York.
41. Shealy, R. y Stout, W. (1993). An Item Response Theory model of test bias and Differential Test Functioning. In W.P. Holland y H. Wainer(Eds.), Differential Item Functioning(pp.197-240). Hillsadale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
42. Shepard, L.A., Camilli, G. y Williams, D.M. (1985). Validity of aproximation techniques for detecting item bias. Journal of Educational Measurement, 22(2), 77-105.
43. Scheuneman, J.D. (1979). A method of assessing bias in test items. Journal of Educational Measurement, 16(3), 143-152.
44. Scheuneman, J.D. (1987). An experimental exploratory study of causes of bias in test items. Journal of Educational Measurement, 24(1), 97-118.
45. Stocking, M.L. y Lord, F.M. (1983) Developing a common metric in item response theory. Applied psychological measurement, 7(2), 201.210.
46. Stout, W.F. (1987). A nonparametric approach for assessing latent trait unidimensionality. Psychometrika, 52, 589-617.
47. Swaminathan, H. y Rogers, H.J. (1990). Detecting Differential Item Functioning using logistic regresion procedures. Journal of Educational measurement, 27(4), 361-370.
48. Title, C.K. (1982). Use of judgmental methods in item bias studies. En R.A. Berk (Ed.) Handbook of methods for detecting test bias (pp.31-63). Baltimore, MD:The John Hopkins University Press.
49. Thissen, D. y Steinberg, L. (1988). Data analysis using Item Response Theory. Psychological Bulletin, 104(3), 385-395.
50. Thissen, D., Steinberg, L. y Wainer, H. (1988). Usee of item response theory in the study of group differences in trace lines. En H. Wainer y H.I. Braun (Eds.) Test validity (pág. 147-169). Hillsdale, NJ: LEA
51. Thissen, D., Steinberg, L. y Wainer, H. (1993). Detection of differential item functioning using the parameters of item response models. En W.P. Holland y H. Wainer (Eds.) Differential item functioning (pág. 67-113). Huillsdale, NJ: LEA
52. Van der Flier, H., Mellenbergh, G.J., Adèr, H.J. y Wijn, M. (1984) An iterative item bias detection method. Journal of educational measurement, 21(2), 131-145.
53. Wright, B.D., Mead, R. y Draba, R. (1976). Detecting and correcting item bias with a logistic response model. (Research memorandum, No22). Chicago, IL: University of Chicago, Statistical lab., Departament of Education.
54. Yuste, C. (1988). BADYG-E. Madrid. Ciencias de la educación preescolar y especial.
55. Zorroza, J. y Sánchez Cánovas, J. (1995).Los componentes cognitivos de la capacidad matemática: Representación mental, esquemas estrategias y algoritmos. Psicológica, 16, 305-320.