Distinguishing between net and global DIF in polytomous items

Journal of Educational Measurement

Volumn 47, Issue 2, 2010, Pages 129-149

  Penfield, Randall D ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF MIAMI   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 77954700004     PISSN: 00220655     EISSN: 17453984     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1745-3984.2010.00105.x     Document Type: Article

References (52)

1. Standards for educational and psychological testing 1999, American Educational Research Association, American Psychological Association, & National Council on Measurement in Education, Washington, DC, American Psychological Association
2. Ankenmann R D, Witt E A, Dunbar S B. An investigation of the power of the likelihood ratio goodness-of-fit statistic in detecting differential item functioning. Journal of Educational Measurement 1999, 36:277-300.
3. Bolt D. A Monte Carlo comparison of parametric and nonparametric polytomous DIF detection methods. Applied Measurement in Education 2002, 15:113-141.
4. Camilli G. Test fairness. Educational measurement 2006, 221-256. Brennan R L. In, Ed., 4th ed., pp, Westport, CT, Praeger
5. Camilli G, Congdon P. Application of a method of estimating DIF for polytomous test items. Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics 1999, 24:323-341.
6. Camilli G, Shepard L A. Methods for identifying biased test items 1994, Newbury Park, CA, Sage
7. Chang H, Mazzeo J. The unique correspondence of the item response function and the item category response functions in polytomously scored item response models. Psychometrika 1994, 59:391-404.
8. Chang H, Mazzeo J, Roussos L. Detecting DIF for polytomously scored items: An adaptation of the SIBTEST procedure. Journal of Educational Measurement 1996, 33:333-353.
9. Cohen A S, Kim S-H, Baker F B. Detection of differential item functioning in the graded response model. Applied Psychological Measurement 1993, 17:335-350.
10. Cox D R. The regression analysis of binary sequences. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society, Series B (Methodological) 1958, 20:215-232.
11. DeMars C E. Detection of item parameter drift over multiple test administrations. Applied Measurement in Education 2004, 17:265-300.
12. Donoghue J R, Isham S P. A comparison of procedures to detect item parameter drift. Applied Psychological Measurement 1998, 22:33-51.
13. Dorans N J, Schmitt A P. Constructed response and differential item functioning: A pragmatic approach 1991, (Research Report 91-47, Princeton, NJ, Educational Testing Service
14. Dorans N J, Schmitt A P. Constructed response and differential item functioning: A pragmatic approach. Construction versus choice in cognitive measurement: Issues in constructed response, performance testing, and portfolio assessment 1993, 135-165. Bennett R E, Ward W C. In, Eds., pp, Hillsdale, NJ, Lawrence Erlbaum
15. Flowers C P, Oshima T C, Raju N S. A description and demonstration of the polytomous-DFIT framework. Applied Psychological Measurement 1999, 23:309-326.
16. French A W, Miller T R. Logistic regression and its use in detecting differential item functioning in polytomous items. Journal of Educational Measurement 1996, 33:315-332.
17. Holland P W, Thayer D T. Differential item performance and the Mantel-Haenszel procedure. Test validity 1988, 129-145. Wainer H, Braun H I. In, Eds., pp, Hillsdale, NJ, Erlbaum
18. Kane M T. Validation. Educational measurement 2006, 17-64. Brennan R L. In, Ed., 4th ed., pp, Westport, CT, Praeger
19. Kim S-H, Cohen A S. Detection of differential item functioning under the graded response model with the likelihood ratio test. Applied Psychological Measurement 1998, 22:345-355.
20. Kim S-H, Cohen A S, Alagoz C, Kim S. DIF detection and effect size measures for polytomously scored items. Journal of Educational Measurement 2007, 44:93-116.
21. Liu I-M, Agresti A. Mantel-Haenszel-type inference for cumulative odds ratios with a stratified ordinal response. Biometrics 1996, 52:1223-1234.
22. Mantel N. Chi-square tests with one degree of freedom: Extension of the Mantel-Haenszel procedure. Journal of the American Statistical Association 1963, 58:690-700.
23. Masters G N. A Rasch model for partial credit scoring. Psychometrika 1982, 47:149-174.
24. Masters G N, Wright B D. The partial credit model. Handbook of modern item response theory 1997, 101-121. van der Linden W J, Hambleton R K. In, Eds., pp, New York, NY, Springer
25. Mellenbergh G J. Conceptual notes on models for discrete polytomous item responses. Applied Psychological Measurement 1995, 19:91-100.
26. Meredith W, Millsap R E. On the misuse of manifest variables in the detection of measurement bias. Psychometrika 1992, 57:289-311.
27. Messick S. Validity. Educational measurement 1989, 13-103. Linn R L. In, Ed., 3rd ed., pp, New York, NY, American Council on Education and Macmillan
28. Miller T M, Spray J A. Logistic discriminant function analysis for DIF identification of polytomously scored items. Journal of Educational Measurement 1993, 30:107-122.
29. Millsap R E. Four unresolved problems in studies of factorial invariance. Contemporary psychometrics 2005, 153-171. Maydeu-Olivares AMcArdle J J. In, Eds., pp, Mahwah, NJ, Erlbaum
30. Millsap R E, Meredith W. Inferential conditions in the statistical detection of measurement bias. Applied Psychological Measurement 1992, 16:389-402.
31. Penfield R D. DIFAS: Differential item functioning analysis system. Applied Psychological Measurement 2005, 29:150-151.
32. Penfield R D. Assessing differential step functioning in polytomous items using a common odds ratio estimator. Journal of Educational Measurement 2007a, 44:187-210.
33. Penfield R D. An approach for categorizing DIF in polytomous items. Applied Measurement in Education 2007b, 20:335-355.
34. Penfield R D. Three classes of nonparametric differential step functioning effect estimators. Applied Psychological Measurement 2008a, 32:480-501.
35. Penfield R D. An odds ratio approach for assessing differential distractor functioning effects under the nominal response model. Journal of Educational Measurement 2008b, 45:247-269.
36. Penfield R D, Algina J. Applying the Liu-Agresti estimator of the cumulative common odds ratio to DIF detection in polytomous items. Journal of Educational Measurement 2003, 40:353-370.
37. Penfield R D, Alvarez K, Lee O. Using a taxonomy of differential step functioning form to improve the interpretation of DIF in polytomous items. Applied Measurement in Education 2009, 22:61-78.
38. Penfield R D, Camilli G. Differential item functioning and item bias. Handbook of Statistics, Vol. 26: Psychometrics 2007, 125-167. Sinharay S, Rao C R. In, Eds., pp, New York, NY, Elsevier
39. Penfield R D, Gattamorta K, Childs R A. An NCME instructional module on using differential step functioning to refine the analysis of DIF in polytomous items. Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice 2009, 28(1):38-49.
40. Penfield R D, Lam T C M. Assessing differential item functioning in performance assessment: Review and recommendations. Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice 2000, 19(3):5-15.
41. Potenza M T, Dorans N J. DIF assessment for polytomously scored items: A framework for classification and evaluation. Applied Psychological Measurement 1995, 19:23-37.
42. Raju N S. The area between two item characteristic curves. Psychometrika 1988, 53:495-502.
43. Samejima F. Estimation of latent ability using a response pattern of graded scores 1969, No. 17, Psychometric Monograph
44. Samejima F. A general model for free response data 1972, No. 18, Psychometric Monograph
45. Samejima F. Graded response model. Handbook of modern item response theory 1997, 85-100. van der Linden W JHambleton R K. In, Eds., pp, New York, NY, Springer
46. Somes G W. The generalized Mantel-Haenszel statistic. The American Statistician 1986, 40:106-108.
47. Thissen D. IRTLRDIF (Version 2). 2001, http://www.unc.edu/~dthissen/dl.html, Computer software, Retrieved from the University of North Carolina website
48. Wainer H. Model-based standardized measurement of an item's differential impact. Differential item functioning 1993, 123-135. Holland P WWainer H. In, Eds., pp, Hillsdale, NJ, Lawrence Erlbaum
49. Wang W-C, Su Y-H. Factors influencing the Mantel and Generalized Mantel-Haenszel methods for the assessment of differential item functioning in polytomous items. Applied Psychological Measurement 2004, 28:450-480.
50. Zieky M. Practical questions in the use of DIF statistics in item development. Differential item functioning 1993, 337-347. Holland P WWainer H. In, Eds., pp, Hillsdale, NJ, Lawrence Erlbaum
51. Zwick R, Donoghue J R, Grima A. Assessment of differential item functioning for performance tasks. Journal of Educational Measurement 1993, 30:233-251.
52. Zwick R, Thayer D T. Evaluating the magnitude of differential item functioning in polytomous items. Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics 1996, 21:187-201.