Examining the relationship between differential item functioning and differential test functioning

Language Testing

Volumn 23, Issue 4, 2006, Pages 475-496

  Pae, Tae Il ^a   Park, Gi Pyo ^b  

^a Yeungnam University   (South Korea)

^b Soonchunhyang University   (South Korea)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 33750591648     PISSN: 02655322     EISSN: 14770946     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1191/0265532206lt338oa     Document Type: Article

References (48)

1. AERA, APA and NCME 1999: Standards for educational and psychological testing. Washington, DC: American Educational Research Association.
2. Anderson, J.C. and Gerbing, D.W. 1988: Structural equation modelling in practice: A review and recommended two-step approach. Psychological Bulletin 103, 411-23.
3. Angoff, W.H. 1993: Perspectives on Differential Item Functioning methodology. In Holland, P.W. and Wainer, H., editors, Differential Item Functioning. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum, 3-23.
4. Bentler, P.M. and Bonett, D.G. 1980: Significance tests and goodness of fit in the analysis of covariance structures. Psychological Bulletin 88, 588-606.
5. Bollen, K.A. 1989: Structural equations with latent variables. New York: Wiley.
6. Byrne, B.M., Shavelson, R.J. and Muthen, B. 1989: Testing for the equivalence of factor covariance and mean structures: the issue of partial measurement invariance. Psychological Bulletin 105, 456-66.
7. Camilli, G. and Shepard, L. 1994: Methods for identifying biased test items. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
8. Carlton, S.T. and Harris, A.M. 1992: Characteristics associated with Differential Item Functioning on the Scholastic Aptitude Test: gender and majority/minority group comparisons. ETS Research Report, 92-64. Princeton, NJ: Educational Testing Service.
9. Chen, Z. and Henning, G. 1985: Linguistic and cultural bias in language proficiency tests. Language Testing 2, 155-63.
10. Cleary, T.A. 1968: Test bias: prediction of grades of Negro and white students in integrated colleges. Journal of Educational Measurement 5, 115-24.
11. Cole, N.S. and Moss, P.A. 1989: Bias in test use. In Linn, R.L., editor, Educational Measurement, 3rd edition. New York: American Council on Education/Macmillan, 201-19.
12. Crocker, L. and Algina, J. 1986:. Introduction to classical and modern test theory. New York: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich.
13. Dorans, N. and Holland, P.W. 1993: DIF detection and description: Mantel-Haenszel and standardization. In Holland, P.W. and Wainer, H., editors, Differential Item Functioning. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum, 35-66.
14. Drasgow, F. 1987: Study of the measurement bias of two standardized psychological tests. Journal of Applied Psychology 72, 19-29.
15. Elder, C. 1996: The effect of language background on foreign language test performance: the case of Chinese, Italian, and modern Greek. Language Learning 46, 233-82.
16. Ellis, B. and Raju, N. 2003: Test and item bias: what they are, what they aren't, and how to detect them. ERIC Document ED 480042. Rockville, MD: Educational Resources Information Center.
17. Gafni, N. 1991: Differential Item Functioning: performance by sex on reading comprehension tests. ERIC Document ED 331844. Rockville, MD: Educational Resources Information Center.
18. Hair, J.F., Anderson, R.E., Tatham, R.L. and Black, W.C. 1995: Multivariate data analysis. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall.
19. Harris, A.M. and Carlton, S.T. 1993: Patterns of gender differences on mathematics items on the Scholastic Aptitude Test. Applied Measurement in Education 6, 137-51.
20. Holland, P.W. and Thayer, D.T. 1988: Differential item performance and Mantel-Haenszel procedure. In Wainer, H. and Braun, H., editors, Test validity. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum, 129-45.
21. Holland, P.W. and Wainer, H. 1993: Differential Item Functioning. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
22. Hoyle, R.H. and Panter, A.T. 1995: Writing about Structural Equation Models. In Hoyle, R.H., editor, Structural Equation Modeling: concepts, issues, and applications. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage, 158-78.
23. Jensen, A.R. 1980: Bias in mental testing. New York: Free Press
24. Jöreskog, K.G. 1971: Simultaneous factor analysis in several populations. Psychometrika 36, 409-26.
25. Jöreskog, K. and Sörbom, D. 1996: LISREL 8: user's reference guide. Chicago, IL: Scientific Software International.
26. Jöreskog, K. 2001: LISREL 8.5: Analysis of linear structural relationships by the method of maximum likelihood. Chicago, IL: Scientific, Software International.
27. Lawrence, I.M. and Curley, W.E. 1989: Differential Item Functioning for males and females on SAT-Verbal Reading subscore items: follow-up study. ETS Research Report, 89-22. Princeton, NJ: Educational Testing Service.
28. Long, L.S. 1983: Confirmatory factor analysis. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
29. Maller, S.J. 1997: Deafness and WISC-III item difficulty: invariarice and fit. Journal of School Psychology 35, 299-314.
30. Maller, S.J 2001: Differential item functioning in the WISC-III: Item parameters for boys and girls in the national standardization sample. Educational and Psychological Measurement 61, 793-817.
31. Maller, S.J. and Ferron, J. 1997: WISC-III factor invariance across deaf and standardized samples. Educational and Psychological Measurement 57, 987-94.
32. Pae, T.-I. 2004: DIF for examinees with different academic backgrounds. Language Testing 21, 53-73.
33. Petersen, N.S. and Novick, M.R. 1976: An evaluation of some models for culture fair selection. Journal of Educational Measurement 13, 3-29.
34. Raju, N.S., Laffitte, L.J. and Byrne, B.M. 2002: Measurement equivalence: A comparison of methods based on confirmatory factor analysis and item response theory. Journal of Applied Psychology 87, 517-29.
35. Raudenbush, S. and Bryk, A.S. 2002: Hierarchical linear models. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
36. Reise, S., Widaman, K. and Pugh, R. 1993: Confirmatory factor analysis and item response theory: two approaches for exploring measurement invariance. Psychological Bulletin 114, 552-66.
37. Roznowski, M. 1987: Use of tests manifesting sex differences as measures of intelligence: implications for measurement bias. Journal of Applied Psychology 72, 480-83.
38. Roznowski, M. and Reith, J. 1999: Examining the measurement quality of tests containing differentially functioning items: do biased items result in poor measurement? Educational and Psychological Measurement 59, 248-69.
39. Ryan, K. and Bachman, L.F. 1992: Differential item functioning on two tests of EFL Proficiency. Language Testing 9, 12-29.
40. Scheuneman, J.D. and Gerritz, K. 1990: Using differential item functioning procedures to explore sources of item difficulty and group performance characteristics. Journal of Educational Measurement 27, 109-31.
41. Schmitt, A. and Dorans, N. 1990: Differential item functioning for minority examinees on the SAT. Journal of Educational Measurement 27, 67-81.
42. Stout, W. 1987: A non-parametric approach for assessing latent trait unidimensionality. Psychometrika 52, 589-617.
43. Takala, S. and Kaftandjieva, F. 2000: Test fairness: A DIF analysis of an L2 vocabulary test. Language Testing 17, 323-40.
44. Thissen, D., Steinberg, L. and Wainer, H. 1988: Use of item response theory in the study of group differences in trace lines. In Wainer, H. and Braun, H., editors, Test Validity. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum, 147-69.
45. Thissen, D., 1993: Detection of Differential Item Functioning using the parameters of item response models. In Holland, P.W. and Wainer, H., editors, Differential Item Functioning. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence ErIbaum, 35-66.
46. Thorndike, RL. 1971: Concepts of culture-fairness. Journal of Educational Measurement 8, 63-70.
47. Wood, R., Wilson, D., Gibbons, R., Schilling, S., Muraki, E. and Bock, D. 2002: TESTFACT 4.0. Chicago, IL: Scientific Software International.
48. Zumbo, B. 2003: Does item-level DIF manifest itself in scale-level analyses? Implications for translating language tests. Language Testing 20, 136-47.