Differential item functioning detection and effect size: A comparison between logistic regression and Mantel-Haenszel procedures

Educational and Psychological Measurement

Volumn 64, Issue 6, 2004, Pages 903-915

  Dolores Hidalgo, M ^a   López Pina, José Antonio ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF MURCIA   (Spain)

Author keywords

Differential item functioning; Effect size measures; Logistic regression analysis; Mantel Haenszel statistic

Indexed keywords

EID: 10044266665     PISSN: 00131644     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/0013164403261769     Document Type: Review

References (25)

1. Bennett, R. E., Rock, D. A., & Kaplan, B. A. (1987). SAT differential item performance for nine handicapped groups. Journal of Educational Measurement, 24, 56-64.
2. Clauser, B. E., & Mazor, K. M. (1998). Using statistical procedures to identify differential item functioning test items. Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice, 17, 31-44.
3. Clauser, B. E., Mazor, K. M., & Hambleton, R. K. (1993). The effects of purification of the matching criterion on the identification of DIF using the Mantel-Haenszel procedure. Applied Measurement in Education, 6, 269-279.
4. Clauser, B. E., 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. Cohen, J. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
6. Ellis, B. (1989). Differential item functioning: Implications for test translations. Journal of Applied Psychology, 74, 912-921.
7. 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.
8. Hambleton, R. K., & Rogers, H. J. (1989). Detecting potentially biased test items: Comparison of IRT area and Mantel-Haenszel methods. Applied Measurement in Education, 2, 313-334.
9. Hambleton, R. K., & Rovinelli, R. (1973). A FORTRAN IV program for generating examinee response data from logistic test models. Behavioral Science, 18, 73-74.
10. Holland, P. W., & Thayer, D. T. (1988). Differential item performance and Mantel-Haenszel procedure. In H. Wainer & H. I. Braun (Eds.), Test validity (pp. 129-145). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
11. Jodoin, M. G., & Gierl, M.J. (2001). Evaluating Type I error and power rates using an effect size measure with logistic regression procedure for DIF detection. Applied Measurement in Education, 14, 329-349.
12. Kirk, R. E. (1996). Practical significance: A concept whose time has come. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 56, 746-759.
13. 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.
14. 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.
15. Mellenbergh, G. J. (1982). Contingency table models for assessing item bias. Journal of Educational Statistics, 7, 105-118.
16. Narayan, P., & Swaminathan, H. (1994). Performance of the Mantel-Haenszel and simultaneous item bias procedures for detecting differential item functioning. Applied Psychological Measurement, 18, 315-338.
17. Narayan, P., & Swaminathan, H. (1996). Identification of items that show nonuniform DIF. Applied Psychological Measurement, 20, 257-274.
18. Raju, N. S. (1988). The area between two item characteristic curves. Psychometrika, 53, 284-291.
19. Rogers, H. J. (1989). Item bias investigation with logistic regression (Doctoral dissertation, University of Massachusetts at Amherst, 1989). Dissertation Abstract International, 50, 3928.
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. Roussos, L. A., & Stout, W. P. (1996). Simulation studies of the effects of small sample size and studied item parameters on SIBTEST and Mantel-Haenszel Type I error performance. Journal of Educational Measurement, 33, 215-230.
22. Swaminathan, H., & Rogers, H. J. (1990). Detecting differential item functioning using logistic regression procedures. Journal of Educational Measurement, 27, 361-370.
23. Zumbo, B. D. (1999). A handbook on the theory and methods of differential item functioning (DIF): Logistic regression modeling as a unitary framework for binary and Likert-type (ordinal) item scores. Ottawa, Canada: Directorate of Human Resources Research and Evaluation, Department of National Defense.
24. Zumbo, B. D., & Thomas, D. R. (1997). A measure of effect size for a model-based approach for studying DIF (Working paper of the Edgeworth Laboratory for Quantitative Behavioral Science). Prince George, Canada: University of Northern British Columbia.
25. Zwick, R., & Ercikan, K. (1989). Analysis of differential item functioning in the NAEP history assessment. Journal of Educational Measurement, 26, 55-66.