Utility of the Mantel-Haenszel procedure for detecting differential item functioning in small samples

Educational and Psychological Measurement

Volumn 64, Issue 6, 2004, Pages 925-936

  Fidalgo, Ángel M ^a   Ferreres, Doris ^b   Muñiz, José ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF OVIEDO   (Spain)

^b UNIVERSITY OF VALENCIA   (Spain)

Author keywords

Differential item functioning; Mantel Haenszel procedure; Significance levels; Small samples; Standardization index

Indexed keywords

EID: 10044219782     PISSN: 00131644     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/0013164404267288     Document Type: Article

References (35)

1. Allalouf, A., Hambleton, R., & Sireci, S. (1999). Identifying the causes of translation DIF on verbal items. Journal of Educational Measurement, 36, 185-198.
2. Azocar, F., Areán, P., Miranda, J., & Muñoz, R. F. (2001). Differential item functioning in a Spanish translation of the Beck Depression Inventory. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 57(3), 355-365.
3. Camilli, G., & Shepard, L. (1994). Methods for identifying biased test items. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
4. Camilli, G., & Smith, J. K. (1990). Comparison of the Mantel-Haenszel test with a randomized and a jack knife test for detecting biased items. Journal of Educational Statistics, 15, 53-67.
5. Clauser, B. E., & Mazor, K. M. (1998). Using statistical procedures to identify differentially functioning test items. Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice, 17, 31-44.
6. 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.
7. Ellis, B. B. (1995). A partial test of Hulin's psychometric theory of measurement equivalence in translated test. European Journal of Psychological Assessment, 11(3), 184-193.
8. Ellis, B. B., & Mead, A. D. (2000). Assessment of the measurement equivalence of a Spanish translation of the 16PF Questionnaire. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 60, 787-807.
9. Ercikan, K. (1999, April). Translation DIF on TIMSS. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the National Council on Measurement in Education, Montréal, Quebec, Canada.
10. Ferreres, D., Gonzalez-Roma, V., & Gomez, J. (2002). Funcionamiento diferencial de los ítems en una situación de contacto de lenguas. [Differential item functioning for two interacting languages]. Psicothema, 2, 483-490.
11. Fidalgo, A. M. (1994). MHDIF: A computer program for detecting uniform and nonuniform differential item functioning with the Mantel-Haenszel procedure. Applied Psychological Measurement, 18, 300.
12. Fidalgo, A. M. (in press). Mantel-Haenszel methods. In B. Everitt & D. Howell (Eds.), Encyclopedia of statistics in behavioral science. London: John Wiley.
13. Fidalgo, A. M., & Ferreres, D. (2002). Supuestos y consideraciones en los estudios empíricos sobre funcionamiento diferencial de los items [Assumptions and considerations on differential item functioning with empirical data]. Psicothema, 2, 491-496.
14. Fidalgo, A. M., Mellenbergh, G. J., & Muñiz, J. (1998). Comparación del procedimiento Mantel-Haenszel frente a los modelos loglineales en la detección del funcionamiento diferencial de los items [Comparison of the Mantel-Haenszel procedure versus the log linear models for detecting differential item functioning]. Psicothema, 10, 219-228.
15. Gierl, M. J., Rogers, W. T., & Klinger, D. (1999, April). Consistency between statistical procedures and content reviews for identifying translation DIF. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the National Council on Measurement in Education, Montreal, Quebec, Canada.
16. Hidalgo-Montesinos, M. D., & Lopez-Pina, J. A. (2002). Two-stage equating in differential item functioning detection under the graded response model with the Raju area measures and the Lord statistic. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 62, 32-44.
17. Holland, W. P., & 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: LEA.
18. Kim, M. (2001). Detecting DIF across the different language groups in a speaking test. Language Testing, 18(1), 89-114.
19. 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.
20. 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, 443-452.
21. Millsap, R. E., & Everson, H. T. (1993). Methodology review: Statistical approaches for assessing measurement bias. Applied Psychological Measurement, 17, 297-334.
22. Muñiz, J., Hambleton, R. K., & Xing, D. (2001). Small sample studies to detect flaws in item translations. International Journal of Testing, 1(2), 115-135.
23. Orlando, M., & Marshall, G. N. (2002). Differential item functioning in a Spanish translation of the PTSD Checklist: detection and evaluation of impact. Psychological Assessment, 14(1), 50-59.
24. 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.
25. Penfield, R. D., & Lam, T. C. M. (2000). Assessing differential item functioning in performance assessment: Review and recommendations. Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice. 19, 5-15.
26. 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.
27. Roussos, L. A., Schnipke, D. L., & Pashley, P. J. (1999). A generalized formula for the Mantel-Haenszel differential item functioning parameter. Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics, 24(3), 293-322.
28. Sasaki, M. (1991). A comparison of two methods for detecting differential item functioning in an ESL placement test. Language Testing, 8(2), 95-111.
29. Schmitt, A. P., & Dorans, N. J. (1990). Differential item functioning for minority examinees on the SAT. Journal of Educational Measurement, 27, 67-81.
30. 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.
31. Whitmore, M. L., & Schumacker, R. E. (1999). A comparison of logistic regression and analysis of variance differential item functioning detection methods. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 59, 910-927.
32. Zieky, M. (1993). Practical questions in the use of DIF statistics in test development. In W. P. Holland & H. Wainer (Eds.), Differential item functioning (pp. 337-347). Hillsdale, NJ: LEA.
33. Zwick, R., & Thayer, D. T. (2002). Application of an empirical Bayes enhancement of Mantel-Haenszel differential item functioning analysis to a computed adaptative test. Applied Psychological Measurement, 36, 1-28.
34. Zwick, R., Thayer, D. T., & Lewis, C. (1999). An empirical Bayes approach to Mantel-Haenszel DIF analysis. Journal of Educational Measurement, 36, 1-28.
35. Zwick, R., Thayer, D. T., & Lewis, C. (2000). Using loss functions for DIF detection: An empirical Bayes approach. Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics, 25, 225-247.