Testing features of graphical DIF: Application of a regression correction to three nonparametric statistical tests

Journal of Educational Measurement

Volumn 43, Issue 4, 2006, Pages 313-333

  Bolt, Daniel M ^a,c   Gierl, Mark J ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF ALBERTA   (Canada)

^c UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN MADISON   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 33845466950     PISSN: 00220655     EISSN: 17453984     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1745-3984.2006.00019.x     Document Type: Article

References (31)

1. Allalouf, A. (2003). Revising translated differential item functioning items as a tool for improving cross-lingual assessment. Applied Measurement in Education, 16, 55-73.
2. Allalouf, A., Hambleton, R. K., & Sireci, S. G. (1999). Identifying the causes of DIF in translated verbal items. Journal of Educational Measurement, 36, 185-198.
3. Budgell, G. R., Raju, N. S., & Quartetti, D. A. (1995). Analysis of differential item functioning in translated assessment instruments. Applied Psychological Measurement, 19, 309-321.
4. Burton, E., & Burton, N. W. (1993). The effect of item screening on test scores and test characteristics. In P. Holland & H. Wainer (Eds.), Differential Item Functioning (pp. 321-335). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
5. Chee-Cheong, C. (1999). Public examinations in Hong Kong. Assessment in Education, 6, 405-417.
6. Crocker, L., & Algina, J. (1985). Introduction to classical and modern test theory. Orlando, FL: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich.
7. Dorans, N. J., & Holland, P. W. (1993). DIF detection and description: Mantel-Haenszel and standardization. In P. W. Holland & H. Wainer (Eds.), Differential item functioning (pp. 35-66). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
8. Douglas, J. A., Stout, W., & DiBello, L. V. (1996). A kernel smoothed version of SIBTEST with applications to local DIF inference and function estimation. Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics, 21, 333-363.
9. Ellis, B. B. (1989). Differential item functioning: Implications for test translations. Journal of Applied Psychology, 74, 912-921.
10. 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, 787-808.
11. Ellis, B. B., Minsel, B., & Becker, P. (1989). Evaluation of attitude survey translations: An investigation using item response theory. International Journal of Psychology, 24, 665-684.
12. Gierl, M. J., & Bolt, D. M. (2001). Illustrating the use of nonparametric regression to assess differential item and bundle functioning across multiple groups. International Journal of Testing, 3 & 4, 249-270.
13. Gierl, M. J., Cheng, L., Rogers, W. T., Gotzmann, A., & Vanderberghe, C. (2000). Translation differential item functioning on the Hong Kong Certificate of Education Examination in six content areas. CRAME Research Report RR-00-01. Edmonton, AB: University of Alberta, Centre for Research in Applied Measurement and Evaluation.
14. Gierl, M. J., & Khaliq, S. N. (2001). Identifying sources of differential item and bundle functioning on translated achievement tests. Journal of Educational Measurement, 38, 164-187.
15. Holland, P.W., & 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: Lawrence Erlbaum.
16. Kanji, G. K. (1993). 100 statistical tests. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
17. Li, H., & Stout, W. (1996). A new procedure for detection of crossing DIF. Psychometrika, 61, 647-677.
18. 2 statistics. Journal of Educational Measurement, 18, 229-248.
19. Maydeu-Olivares, A., Morera, O. F., & D'Zurilla, T. J. (1999). Using graphical methods in assessing measurement invariance in inventory data. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 34, 397-420.
20. 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.
21. Meijer, R. R., & Baneke, J. J. (2004). Analyzing psychopathology items: A case for nonparametric item response theory modeling. Psychological Methods, 9, 354-368.
22. Penfield, R. D., & Camilli, G. (in press). Differential item functioning and item bias. In S. Sinharay & C. R. Rao (Eds.), Handbook of statistics, Volume 27: Psychometrics. North Holland.
23. Raju, N. S. (1988). The area between two item characteristic curves. Psychometrika, 53, 495-502.
24. Raju, N. S., van der Linden, W. J., & Fleer, P. F. (1995). An IRT-based internal measure of test bias with applications for differential item functioning. Applied Psychological Measurement, 19, 353-368.
25. Ramsay, J. O. (2000). TESTGRAF manual. Montreal, Quebec, Canada: McGill University.
26. Roussos, L. A., & Stout, W. F. (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.
27. Santor, D. A., Ramsay, J. O., & Zuroff, D. C. (1994). Nonparametric item analyses of the Beck Depression Inventory: Evaluating gender item bias and response option weights. Psychological Assessment, 6 ,255-270.
28. Scrams, D. J., & McLeod, L. D. (2000). An expected response function approach to graphical differential item functioning. Journal of Educational Measurement, 37, 263-280.
29. 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.
30. Tan, X., & Gierl, M. J. (2005). Using local DIF analyses to assess group differences on multilingual examinations. Poster presented at the annual meeting of the National Council on Measurement in Education. Montreal, QC, Canada.
31. van de Vijver, F., & Leung, K. (1997). Methods and data analysis for cross cultural research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.