The influence of instructional experience on achievement item bias;La explicación del sesgo en los ítems de rendimiento

Psicothema

Volumn 10, Issue 2, 1998, Pages 481-490

  García, José Luis Padilla ^a   Meléndez, Cristino Pérez ^a   Gómez, Andrés González ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF GRANADA   (Spain)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 0347297862     PISSN: 02149915     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Article

References (36)

1. Angoff, W. H. (1993). Perspectives on differential item functioning methodology. En PAY. Holland y H. Wainer (Eds.), Differential item functioning, (pp. 3-23). Hillsdale, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Publishers.
2. Angoff, W. H., y Ford, S. F. (1973). Item-race interaction on a test of scholastic aptitude. Journal of Educational Measurement. 10, 95-106.
3. Camilli, G. (1992). A conceptual analysis of differential item functioning in terms of a multidimensional item response model. Journal of Educational Measurement, 16, 129-147.
4. Camilli, G. y Shepard, L. (1994). Methods for identifying biased test item. Thousand Oaks. CA: Sage Publications, Inc.
5. Crocker, L. y Algina, J. (1986). Introduction to clasical and modern test theory. Rinehart and Winston, New York.
6. Cuesta, M. (1993). Utilizatión de modelos logísticos unidimensionales con datas multidimensionales. Tesis doctoral no publicada, Universidad de Oviedo. Oviedo. España.
7. Donoghue, J. R. y Allen, N. L. (1993). Thin versus thick matching in the Mantel-Haenszel procedure for detecting DIP. Journal of Educational Statistics. 18, 131-154.
8. Dorans, N. J. y Holland, P. W. (1993). DIP detection and description: Mantel-Haenszel and standardization. En P. W. Holland y H. Wainer (Eds.), Differential item functioning, (pp. 35-66). Hillsdale, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Publishers.
9. Fidalgo, A. M. (1996). Funcionamiento diferencial de los ítems. En J. Muñiz (cord). Psicometría. (pp. 371-457). Madrid: Editorial Universitas, S.A.
10. Gagné, R. M. (1987). Instructional Technology: Foundation. Hillsdale, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Publishers.
11. Gagné, R. M. y Glaser, R. (1987). Foundations in learning research. En R. M. Gagné (Ed.) Instructional Technology: Foundation, (pp. 49-84). Hillsdale, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Publishers.
12. Gagné, R. M., Briggs, L. J. y Wager, W. W. (1988). Principles of instructional design. (3ed). New York: Holt, Rinehart y Winston.
13. Hambleton, R. K., Clauser, B. E., Mazor, K. M. y Jones, R. W. (1993). Advances in the detec-tion of differential functioning test items. European Journal of Psychological Assessment. 9, 1-18.
14. Hattie, J., Krakowski, K., Rogers, H. J. y Swaminathan, H. (1996). An assessment of Stout's index of essential unidimensionality. Applied Psychological Measurement. 20, 1-14.
15. Holland, P. W. y Thayer, D. T. (1988). Differential item performance and the Mantel-Haenszel procedure. En H. Wainer y H. Braun (Eds.), Test validity, (pp. 129-145). Hillsdale, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Publishers.
16. 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. 22, 295-303.
17. Linn, R. L. y Harnish, D. L. (1981). Interaction between item content and group menbership on achievement test items. Journal of educational measurement. 18, 109-118.
18. Magnusson, D. (1968). Teoría de los tests. Trillas. Mexico.
19. Merrill, M. D., Tennyson, R. D. y Posey, L. O. (1992). Teaching concepts: An instructional design guide. Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey: Educational Technology Publications, Inc.
20. Miller, M. D. y Linn, R. L. (1988). Invariance of item characteristic functions with variations in instructional coverage. Journal of Educational Measurement. 25, 205-219.
21. Muthén, B. O. (1989). Using item-specific instructional information in achievement modeling. Psychometrika. 135-396.
22. Nandakumar, R. (1993). Assessing essential unidimensionality of real data. Applied Psychological Measurement. 17, 29-38.
23. Nandakumar, R. (1994). Assessing dimensionality of a set of item responses. Comparasion of different approaches. Journal of Educational Measurement. 31, 17-35.
24. O'Neill, K. A. y McPeek, W. M. (1993). Item and test characteristics that are associated with differential item functioning. En P.W. Holland y H. Wainer (Eds.), Differential item functioning, (pp. 255-277). Hillsdale, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Publishers.
25. Oshima, T. C. y Miller, M. D. (1992). Multidimensionality and item bias in item response theory. Applied Psychological Measurement. 16, 237-248.
26. Osterlind, S. J. (1989). Constructing test items. Norwell. Massachusetts: Kluwer Academic Publishers.
27. Raju, N.S., Bode, R.K. y Larsen, V.S. (1989). An empirical assesment of the Mantel-Haenszel statistic for studying differential item performance. Applied Psychological Measurement. 2, 1-13.
28. Scheuneman, J. D. (1982). A posteriori analyses of biased items. En R.A. Berk (Ed.), Handbook of methods for detecting test bias. (pp. 6496). Baltimore. Maryland: The Johns Hopkins University Press.
29. Scheuneman, J. D. (1987). An experimental, exploratory study of causes of bias in test items. Journal of Educational Measurement. 24, 97-118.
30. Scheuneman, J. D. y Gerriz, K. (1990). Using differential items functioning procedures to explore sources of items difficulty and group performance characteristics. Journal of Educational Measurement. 27, 109-131.
31. Schmitt, A.P. y Dorans, N.J. (1990). Differential item functioning for minority examinees on the SAT. Jounal of Educational Measurement. 27,67-81.
32. Schmitt, A. P., Holland, P. W. y Dorans, N. J. (1993). Evaluating hypotheses about differential item functioning. En P.W. Holland y H. Wainer (Eds), Differential item functioning, (pp. 281-313). Hillsdale, New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Assocites, Publishers.
33. Skagg, G. y Lissitz, R. W. (1992). The consistency of detecting item bias across different test administrations: implications of another failure. Journal of Educational Measurement. 29, 227-242.
34. Stout, W. F. (1987). A nonparametric approach for assessing latent trait unidimensionality. Psychometrika. 52, 589-617.
35. Stout, W. F. (1990). A new item response theory modeling approach with applications to unidimensionality assessment and ability estimation. Psychometrika. 55, 293-325.
36. Tatsuoka, K. K., Linn, R. L., Tatsuoka, M. M. y Yamamoto, K. (1988). Differential item functioning resulting from the use of different solution strategies. Journal of Educational Measurement. 25, 301-319.