Efficacy of effect size measures in logistic regression: An application for detecting DIF

Methodology

Volumn 5, Issue 1, 2009, Pages 18-25

  Gómez Benito, Juana ^a   Hidalgo, M Dolores ^b   Padilla, José Luis ^c  

^a UNIVERSITY OF BARCELONA   (Spain)

^b UNIVERSITY OF MURCIA   (Spain)

^c UNIVERSITY OF GRANADA   (Spain)

Author keywords

Differential item functioning; Effect size measure; Logistic regression analysis; R2 of Nagelkerke

Indexed keywords

EID: 69949105386     PISSN: 16141881     EISSN: 16142241     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1027/1614-2241.5.1.18     Document Type: Article

References (23)

1. American Psychological Association. (2001). Publication manual of the American Psychological Association, 5th ed. Washington, DC: Author.
2. 2, RFA and IRT based procedures in the detection of DIF. Quality & Quantity, 34, 17-31.
3. Gómez-Benito, J., Hidalgo, M. D., Padilla, J. L., & González, A. (2005). Desarrollo informático para la utilización de la regresión logística como técnica de detección del DIF [Software for the use of logistic regression as DIF detection procedure]. Paper presented at the IX Congreso de Metodología de las Ciencias Sociales y de la Salud, September. Granada, Spain.
4. Hambleton, R. K., & Cook, L. (1983). Robustness of item response models and effects of test length and sample size on the precision of ability estimates. In D. J. Weiss (Ed.), New horizons in testing: Latent trait test theory and computerized adaptative testing (pp. 31-49). New York: Academic Press.
5. Hidalgo, M. D., & Gómez-Benito, J. (2003). Test purification and the evaluation of differential item functioning with multinomial logistic regression. European Journal of Psychological Assessment, 19, 1-11.
6. Hidalgo, M. D., & Go'mez-Benito, J. (2006). Nonuniform DIF detection using discriminant logistic analysis and multinomial logistic regression: A comparison for polytomous items. Quality & Quantity, 40, 805-823.
7. Hidalgo, M. D., & López-Pina, J. A. (2004). DIF detection and effect size: A comparison between logistic regression and Mantel-Haenszel variation. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 64, 903-915.
8. Hidalgo, M. D., Gómez-Benito, J., & Padilla, J. L. (2005). Regresión logística: alternativas de análisis en la detección del funcionamiento diferencial del ítem [Logistic regression: Analysis alternatives in the detection of differential item functioning]. Psicothema, 17, 509-515.
9. 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.
10. Millsap, R. E., & Everson, H. T. (1993). Methodology review: Statistical approaches for assessing measurement bias. Applied Psychological Measurement, 17(4), 297-334.
11. Nagelkerke, N. J. D. (1991). A note on a general definition of the coefficient of determination. Biometrika, 78(3), 691-692.
12. Narayanan, P., & Swaminathan, H. (1996). Identification of items that show nonuniform DIF. Applied Psychological Measurement, 20, 257-274.
13. Navas-Ara, M. J., & Gómez-Benito, J. (2002). Effects of ability scale purification on the identification of DIF. European Journal of Psychological Assessment, 18(1), 9-15.
14. Oshima, T. C., Raju, N. S., & Nanda, A. O. (2006). A new method for assessing the statistical significance in the differential functioning of item and tests (DFIT) framework. Journal of Educational Measurement, 43(1), 1-17.
15. Penfield, R. D., & Lam, T. C. M. (2000). Assessing differential item functioning in performance assessment: Review and recommendations. Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice, 19, 5-15.
16. Potenza, M. T., & Dorans, N. J. (1995). DIF assessment for polytomously scored items: A framework for classification and evaluation. Applied Psychological Measurement, 19, 23-37.
17. Raju, N. S. (1988). The area between two item characteristic curves. Psychometrika, 53, 492-502.
18. 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.
19. Swaminathan, H., & Rogers, H. J. (1990). Detecting differential item functioning using logistic regression procedures. Journal of Educational Measurement, 27, 361-370.
20. Wilkinson, L., & The Task Force on Statistical Inference. (1999). Statistical methods in psychology journals: Guidelines and explanations. American Psychologist, 54, 594-604.
21. Zieky, M. (1993). Practical questions in the use of DIF statistics in test development. In P. W. Holland, & H. Wainer (Eds.), Differential item functioning (pp. 337-347). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Publishers.
22. Zumbo, B. D. (1999). A Handbook on the theory and methods of differential itemfunctioning (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.
23. Zumbo, B. D., & Thomas, D. R. (1997). A measure of effect size for a model-based approach for studying DIF. Prince George, Canada: University of Northern British Columbia, Edgeworht Laboratory for Quantitative Behavioral Science.