Assessing giftedness with the CFT 20-R. Psychometric properties and measurement invariance;Begabungsdiagnostik mit dem grundintelligenztest (CFT 20-R) psychometrische eigenschaften und messäquivalenz

Diagnostica

Volumn 54, Issue 4, 2008, Pages 184-192

  Kuhn, Jörg Tobias ^a   Holling, Heinz ^a   Freund, Philipp Alexander ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF MÜNSTER   (Germany)

Author keywords

CFT 20 R; DIF; Giftedness; Measurement invariance; Psychometric quality

Indexed keywords

EID: 53849149002     PISSN: 00121924     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1026/0012-1924.54.4.184     Document Type: Article

References (54)

1. Asparouhov, T. (2005). Sampling weights in latent variable modeling. Structural Equation Modeling, 12, 411-134.
2. Baving, L. (2002). Intelligenzdiagnostik. Vortrag auf dem XX-VII. Kongress der Deutschen Gesellschaft für Kinder- und Jugendpsychiatrie und Psychotherapie, 03.-06. April 2002, Berlin.
3. Byrne, B. M., Shavelson, R. J. & Muthén, B. O. (1989). Testing for the equivalence of factor covariance and mean structures: The issue of partial measurement invariance. Psychological Bulletin, 105, 456-466.
4. Carle, A. C., Millsap, R. E. & Cole, D. A. (2008). Measurement bias across gender on the Children's Depression Inventory: Evidence for invariance from two latent variable models. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 68, 281-303.
5. Cattell, R. B. (1963). Theory of fluid and crystallized intelligence: A critical experiment. Journal of Educational Psychology, 54, 1-22.
6. Cheung, G. W. & Rensvold, R. B. (2002). Evaluating goodness-of-fit indexes for testing measurement invariance. Structural Equation Modeling, 9, 233-255.
7. Cole, D. A., Ciesla, J. A. & Steiger, J. H. (2007). The insidious effects of failing to include design-driven correlated residuals in latent-variable covariance structure analysis. Psychological Methods, 12, 381-398.
8. Dickhäuser, O. & Plenter, I. (2005). "Letztes Halbjahr stand ich zwei" - Zur Akkuratheit selbst berichteter Noten. Zeitschrift für Pädagogische Psychologie, 19, 219-224.
9. Efron, B. & Morris, C. N. (1975). Data analysis using Stein's estimator and its generalizations. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 74, 311-319.
10. Embretson, S. E. & Reise, S. P. (2000). Item response theory for psychologists. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
11. Finch, H. (2005). The MIMIC model as a method for detecting DIF: Comparison with Mantel-Haenszel, SIBTEST, and the IRT likelihood ratio. Applied Psychological Measurement, 29, 278-295.
12. Flora, D. B. & Curran, P. J. (2004). An empirical evaluation of alternative methods of estimation for confirmatory factor analysis with ordinal data. Psychological Methods, 9, 466-491.
13. Glöckner-Rist, A. & Hoijtink, H. (2003). The best of both worlds: Factor analysis of dichotomous data using item response theory and structural equation modelling. Structural Equation Modeling, 10, 544-565.
14. Goldstein, H. & Healy, M. J. R. (1995). The graphical presentation of a collection of means. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society, Series A, 175-177.
15. Gregorich, S. E. (2006). Do self-report instruments allow meaningful comparisons across diverse population groups? Testing measurement invariance using the confirmatory factor analysis framework. Medical Care, 44, 78-94.
16. Heller, K. A. (2000) (Hrsg.). Begabungsdiagnostik in der Schul- und Erziehungsberatung (2., vollst. überarb. Aufl.). Bern: Huber.
17. Hill, P. W. & Rowe, K. J. (1996). Multilevel modelling in school effectiveness research. School Effectiveness and School Improvement, 7, 1-34.
18. Holling, H., Preckel, F. & Vock, M. (2004). Intelligenzdiagnostik. Göttingen: Hogrefe.
19. Holm, S. (1979). A simple sequentially rejective multiple test procedure. Scandinavian Journal of Statistics, 6, 65-70.
20. Jacobs, C. & Petermann, F. (2007). Testinformation: Grundintelligenztest (CFT 20-R). Diagnostica, 53, 109-113.
21. Jäger, A. O., Holling, H., Preckel, F., Schulze, R., Vock, M., Süß, H.-M. & Beauducel, A. (2006). Berliner Intelligenz-strukturtest für Jugendliche: Begabungs- und Hochbega-bungsdiagnostik (BIS-HB). Göttingen: Hogrefe.
22. Kaplan, C. (1992). Ceiling effects in assessing high-IQ children with the WPPSI-R. Journal of Clinical Child Psychology, 21, 403-406.
23. Macmann, G. M., Plasket, C. M., Barnett, D. W. & Siler, R. F. (1991). Factor structure of the WISC-R for children of superior intelligence. Journal of School Psychology, 29, 19-36.
24. 2 (dif) to assess relative model fit in categorical data analysis. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 41, 55-64.
25. Maydeu-Olivares, A., Coffman, D. L. & Hartmann, W. (2007). Asymptotically distribution-free (ADF) interval estimation of coefficient alpha. Psychological Methods, 12, 157-176.
26. McDonald, R. P. (1989). An index of goodness-of-fit based on noncentrality. Journal of Classification, 6, 97-103.
27. Meade, A. W. & Kroustalis, C. M. (2006). Problems with item parceling for confirmatory factor analytic tests of measurement invariance. Organizational Research Methods, 9, 369-403.
28. Millsap, R. E. & Everson, H. T. (1993). Methodology review: Statistical approaches for assessing measurement bias. Applied Psychological Measurement, 17, 297-334.
29. Monahan, P. O., McHorney, C. A., Stump, T. E. & Perkins, A. J. (2007). Odds ratio, delta, ETS classification, and standardization measures of DIF magnitude for binary logistic regression. Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics, 32, 92-109.
30. Muthén, B., du Toit, S. H. C. & Spisic, D. (in press). Robust inference using weighted least squares and quadratic estimating equations in latent variable modeling with categorical and continuous outcomes. Psychometrika.
31. Preckel, F. (2003). Diagnostik intellektueller Hochbegabung: Testentwicklung zur Erfassung der fluiden Intelligenz. Göttingen: Hogrefe.
32. Preckel, F., Holling, H. & Wiese, M. (2006). Intelligence and creativity in gifted and non-gifted students: An investigation of threshold theory. Personality and Individual Differences, 40, 159-170.
33. Rabe-Hesketh, S., Skrondal, A. & Pickles, A. (2004). Generalized multilevel structural equation modelling. Psychometrika, 69, 167-190.
34. Rentz, D. M., Sardinha, L. M., Huh, T. J., Searl, M. M., Daffner, K. R. & Sperling, R. A. (2006). IQ-based norms for highly intelligent adults. The Clinical Neuropsychologist, 20, 637-648.
35. Rost, D. H. (1991). Identifizierung von "Hochbegabung". Zeitschrift für Entwicklungspsychologie und Pädagogische Psychologie 23, 197-231.
36. Rost, D. H. & Hanses, P. (1997). Wer nichts leistet, ist nicht begabt? Zur Identifikation hochbegabter Underachiever durch Lehrkräfte. Zeitschrift für Entwicklungspsychologie und Pädagogische Psychologie, 29, 167-177.
37. Sattler, J. M. (1990). Assessment of children. San Diego: Author.
38. Schlagheck, W. & Petermann, F. (2006). Hochbegabtendiagnostik mit dem HAWIK-III und AID 2. Kindheit und Entwicklung, 15, 93-99.
39. Stark, S., Chernyshenko, O. S. & Drasgow, F. (2006). Detecting differential item functioning with confirmatory factor analysis and item response theory: Towards a unified strategy. Journal of Applied Psychology, 91, 1292-1306.
40. Steiger, J. H. (1989). EzPATH: Causal modeling. Evanston, IL: SYSTAT.
41. Swanson, D. B., Clauser, B. E., Case, S. M., Nungester, R. J. & Featherman, C. (2002). Analysis of differential item functioning (DIF) using hierarchical logistic regression models. Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics, 27, 53-75.
42. Takane, Y. & de Leeuw, J. (1987). On the relationship between item response theory and factor analysis of discretized variables. Psychometrika, 52, 393-408.
43. Teresi, J. A. (2006). Overview of quantitative measurement methods: Equivalence, invariance and differential item functioning in health applications. Medical Care, 44, 39-49.
44. Thissen, D., Steinberg, L. & Wainer, H. (1993). Detection of differential item functioning using the parameters of item response models. In P. W. Holland & H. Wainer (Eds.), Differential item functioning (pp. 67-113). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
45. Thompson, M. S. & Green, S. B. (2006). Evaluating between-group differences in latent variable means. In G. R. Hancock & G. R. Mueller (Eds.), Structural equation modeling: A second course (pp. 119-169). Greenwich, CT: Information Age Publishing.
46. Van den Noortgate, W. & de Boeck, P. (2005). Assessing and explaining differential item functioning using logistic mixed models. Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics, 30, 443-464.
47. Van den Noortgate, W., de Boeck, P. & Meulders, M. (2003). Cross-classification multilevel logistic models in psycho-metrics. Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics, 28, 369-386.
48. Vandenberg, R. J. & Lance, C. E. (2000). A review and synthesis of the measurement invariance literature: Suggestions, practices, and recommendations for organizational research. Organizational Research Methods, 3, 4-69.
49. Weiß, R. H. (1998). Grundintelligenztest Skala 2 mit Wortschatztest (WS) und Zahlenfolgentest (ZF) (CFT 20). Göttingen: Hogrefe.
50. Weiß, R. H. (2006). Grundintelligenztest Skala 2 (CFT 20-R). Göttingen: Hogrefe.
51. Wicherts, J. M., Dolan, C. V. & Hessen, D. J. (2005). Stereotype threat and group differences in test performance: A question of measurement invariance. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 89, 696-716.
52. Wirth, R. J. & Edwards, M. C. (2007). Item factor analysis: Current approaches and future directions. Psychological Methods, 12, 58-79.
53. Woods, C. M. (in press). Empirical selection of anchors for tests of differential item functioning. Applied Psychological Measurement.
54. Yuan, K.-H. & Bentler, P. M. (2000). Three likelihood-based methods for mean and covariance structure analysis with nonnormal missing data. Sociological Methodology, 30, 165-200.