Raju's Differential Functioning of Items and Tests (DFIT): An NCME instructional module on

Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice

Volumn 27, Issue 3, 2008, Pages 43-50

  Oshima, T C ^a,c   Morris, S B ^b  

^a GEORGIA STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

^b ILLINOIS INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY   (United States)

^c Educational Policy Studies   (United States)

Author keywords

Differential item functioning (DIF); Differential test functioning (DTF); Item response theory (IRT); Measurement equivalence

Indexed keywords

EID: 50849107622     PISSN: 07311745     EISSN: 17453992     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1745-3992.2008.00127.x     Document Type: Article

References (39)

1. Baker, F. B. (1993). EQUATE2: Computer program for equating two metrics in item response theory [Computer program]. Madison : University of Wisconsin, Laboratory of Experimental Design.
2. Bolt, D. M. (2002). A Monte Carlo comparison of parametric and nonparametric polytomous DIF detection methods. Applied Measurement in Education, 2, 113 141.
3. Camilli, G., & Penfield, D. A. (1997). Variance estimation for differential item functioning based on Mantel-Haenszel statistics. Journal of Educational Measurement, 34, 123 139.
4. Candell, G. L., & Drasgow, F. (1988). An iterative procedure for linking metrics and assessing item bias in item response theory. Applied Psychological Measurement, 12, 253 260.
5. Chamblee, M. C. (1998 A Monte Carlo investigation of conditions that impact type 1 error rates of differential functioning of items and tests. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Georgia State University, Atlanta.
6. Cohen, A. S., Kim, S., & Baker, F. B. (1993). Detection of differential item functioning in the graded response model. Applied Psychological Measurement, 17, 335 350.
7. Crocker, L., & Algina, J. (1986). Introduction to classical and modern test theory. New York : Holt, Rinehart & Winston.
8. Flowers, C. P., Oshima, T. C., & Raju, N. S. (1999). A description and demonstration of the polytomous-DFIT framework. Applied Psychological Measurement, 23, 309 326.
9. Frasier, C. (1988). NOHARM: A computer program for fitting both unidimensional and multidimensional normal ogive models of latent trait theory [Computer program]. New South Wales, Australia : Center for Behavioral Studies, University of New England.
10. Gierl, M. J., Bisanz, J., Bisanz, G. L., Boughton, K. A., & Khaliq, S. N. (2001). Illustrating the utility of differential bundle functioning analysis to identify and interpret group differences on achievement tests. Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice, 20(1), 26 36.
11. Hambleton, R. K., Swaminathan, H., & Rogers, H. J. (1991). Fundamentals of item response theory. Thousand Oaks, CA : Sage.
12. 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 : Erlbaum.
13. Kamata, A. (2001). Item analysis by the hierarchical generalized linear model. Journal of Educational Measurement, 38, 79 93.
14. Kim, S.-H., & Cohen, A. S. (1991). A comparison of two area measures for detecting differential item functioning. Applied Psychological Measurement, 15, 269 278.
15. Kolen, M. J., & Brennan, R. L. (2004). Test equating, scaling, and linking: Methods and practices (2nd ed.). New York : Springer.
16. Lee, K., & Oshima, T. C. (1996). IPLINK: Multidimensional and unidimensional item parameter linking in item response theory. Applied Psychological Measurement, 20, 230.
17. Lord, F. M. (1980). Applications of item response theory to practical testing problems. Hillside, NJ : Erlbaum.
18. Muraki, E. (1999). Stepwise analysis of differential item functioning based on multiple-group partial credit model. Journal of Educational Measurement, 36, 217 232.
19. Muraki, E., & Bock, R. D. (1996). PARSCALE: IRT based test scoring and item analysis for graded open-ended exercises and performance tasks. Chicago, IL : Scientific Software.
20. Oshima, T. C., Raju, N. S., & Domaleski, C. S. (2006, April). Conditional DIF and DTF. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of American Educational Research Association, San Francsisco.
21. Oshima, T. C., Raju, N. S., & Flowers, C. P. (1997). Development and demonstration of multidimensional IRT-based internal measures of differential functioning of items and tests. Journal of Educational Measurement, 34, 253 272.
22. Oshima, T. C., Raju, N. S., Flowers, C. P., & Slinde, J. (1998). Differential bundle functioning (DBF) using the DFIT framework: Procedures for identifying possible sources of differential functioning. Applied Measurement in Education, 11, 353 369.
23. Oshima, T. C., Raju, N. S., & Nanda, A. O. (2006). A new method for assessing the statistical significance in the differential functioning of items and tests (DFIT) framework. Journal of Educational Measurement, 43, 1 17.
24. Penfield, R. D., & Algina, J. (2006). A generalized DIF effect variance estimator for measuring unsigned differential test functioning in mixed format tests. Journal of Educational Measurement, 43, 295 312.
25. Psychlink: The Newsletter of the Institute of Psychology 2006). Psychology mourns Dr. Nambury Raju, 8, 1 3. Chicago : Illinois Institute of Technology.
26. Raju, N. S. (1988). The area between two item characteristic curves. Psychometrika, 53, 495 502.
27. Raju, N. S. (1990). Determining the significance of estimated signed and unsigned areas between two item response functions. Applied Psychological Measurement, 14, 197 207.
28. Raju, N. S., Oshima, T. C., Fortmann, K., Nering, M., & Kim, W. (2006, February The new significance test for Raju's polytomous DFIT. Paper presented at the New Directions in Psychological Measurement with Model-Based Approaches at Georgia Institute of Technology in Atlanta, GA.
29. Raju, N. S., Oshima, T. C., & Wolach, A. (2005). Differential functioning of items and tests (DFIT): Dichotomous and polytomous Computer program Chicago : Illinois Institute of Technology.
30. 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.
31. Reise, S. P., & Yu, J. (1990). Parameter recovery in the graded response model using MULTILOG. Journal of Educational Measurement, 27, 133 144.
32. Samejima, F. (1969). Estimation of latent ability using a response pattern of graded scores. Psychometrika, 17 (monograph supplement).
33. Shealy, R. T., & Stout, W. F. (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.
34. Stocking, M. L., & Lord, F. M. (1983). Developing a common metric in item response theory. Applied Psychological Measurement, 7, 201 210.
35. Swaminathan, H., & Rogers, H. J. (1990). Detecting differential item functioning using logistic regression procedures. Journal of Educational Measurement, 27, 361 370.
36. Thissen, D., Steinberg, L., & Wainer, H. (1988). Use of item response theory in the study of group differences in trace lines. In H. Wainer & H. I. Braun (Eds. Test validity (pp. 147 169). Hillsdale, NJ : Erlbaum.
37. Williams, N. J., & Beretvas, S. N. (2006). DIF identification using HGLM for polytomous items. Applied Psychological Measurement, 30, 22 42.
38. Zimowski, M. F., Muraki, E., Mislevy, R. J., & Bock, R. D. (2002). BILOG-MG3 [Computer software]. St. Paul, MN : Assessment Systems Corporation.
39. Zwick, R., Thayer, D. T., & Lewis, C. (1999). An empirical Bayes approach to Mantel-Haenszel DIF analysis. Journal of Educational Measurement, 36, 1 28.