Testing for nonuniform differential item functioning with multiple indicator multiple cause models

Applied Psychological Measurement

Volumn 35, Issue 5, 2011, Pages 339-361

  Woods, Carol M ^a   Grimm, Kevin J ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF KANSAS   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA   (United States)

Author keywords

differential item functioning; item bias; item response theory; MIMIC; structural equation modeling

Indexed keywords

EID: 79959254279     PISSN: 01466216     EISSN: 15523497     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/0146621611405984     Document Type: Article

References (58)

1. 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.
2. Barendse M.T.,Oort F.,Garst G.J. A.Using restricted factor analysis with latent moderated structures to detect uniform and nonuniform measurement bias; a simulation study.Advances in Statistical Analysis. 2010;94:117-127.
3. Benjamini Y.,Hochberg Y.Controlling the false discovery rate: A practical and powerful approach to multiple testing.Journal of the Royal Statistical Society, Series B. 1995;57:289-300.
4. Birnbaum A.Statistical theories of mental test scores. Lord F.M.Novick M.R., ed. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley; 1968:395-479.
5. Bock R.D.,Aitkin M.Marginal maximum likelihood estimation of item parameters: Application of an EM algorithm.Psychometrika. 1981;46:443-459.
6. Chen C.,Anthony J.C.Possible age-associated bias in reporting of clinical features of drug dependence: Epidemiological evidence on adolescent-onset marijuana use.Addiction. 2003;98:71-82.
7. Christensen H.,Jorm A.F.,MacKinnon A.J.,Korten A.E.,Jacomb P.A.,Henderson A.S.,Rodgers B.Age differences in depression and anxiety symptoms: A structural equation modeling analysis of data from a general population sample.Psychological Medicine. 1999;29:325-339.
8. Cohen A.S.,Kim S.,Wollack J.A.An investigation of the likelihood ratio test for detection of differential item functioning.Applied Psychological Measurement. 1996;20:15-26.
9. Finch H.The MIMIC model as a method for detecting DIF: Comparison with Mantel-Haenszel, SIBTEST, and the IRT likelihood ratio.Applied Psychological Measurement. 2005;29:278-295.
10. Fleishman J.A.,Spector W.D.,Altman B.M.Impact of differential item functioning on age and gender differences in functional disability.Journal of Gerontology: Social Sciences. 2002;57B:S275-S284.
11. Gelin M.N. (2005). Type I error rates of the DIF MIMIC approach using Jöreskog's covariance matrix with ML and WLS estimation (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). University of British Columbia, Canada.
12. Grayson D.A.,Mackinnon A.,Jorm A.F.,Creasey H.,Broe G.A.Item bias in the Center for Epidemiological Studies Depression Scale: Effects of physical disorders and disability in an elderly community sample.Journal of Gerontology: Psychological Sciences. 2000;55B:P273-P282.
13. Hagtvet K.A.,Sipos K.Measuring anxiety by ordered categorical items in data with subgroup structure: The case of the Hungarian version of the trait anxiety scale of the state-trait anxiety inventory for children (STAIC-H).Anxiety, Stress, & Coping. 2004;17:49-67.
14. HillC. D. (2004). Precision of parameter estimates for the graded item response model. Unpublished masters thesis. University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill.
15. Holland P.W.,Thayer D.T.Test validity. Wainer H.Braun H.I., ed. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum; 1988:129-145.
16. Jöreskog K.G.,Goldberger A.S.Estimation of a model with multiple indicators and multiple causes of a single latent variable.Journal of the American Statistical Association. 1975;70:631-639.
17. Kenny D.,Judd C.Estimating the nonlinear and interactive effects of latent variables.Psychological Bulletin. 1984;96:201-210.
18. Kim S.,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.
19. Klein A.,Moosbrugger H.Maximum likelihood estimation of latent interaction effects with the LMS method.Psychometrika. 2000;65:457-474.
20. Klein A.,Muthén B.Quasi-maximum likelihood estimation of structural equation models with multiple interaction and quadratic effects.Multivariate Behavioral Research. 2007;42:647-673.
21. MacIntosh R.,Hashim S.Variance estimation for converting MIMIC model parameters to IRT parameters in DIF analysis.Applied Psychological Measurement. 2003;27:372-379.
22. Mantel N.Chi-square tests with one degree of freedom: Extensions of the Mantel-Haenszel procedure.Journal of the American Statistical Association. 1963;58:690-700.
23. Mantel N.,Haenszel W.Statistical aspects of the analysis of data from retrospective studies of disease.Journal of the National Cancer Institute. 1959;22:719-748.
24. Marsh H.W.,Wen Z.,Hau K.Structural equation models of latent interactions: Evaluation of alternative estimation strategies and indicator construction.Psychological Methods. 2004;9:275-300.
25. Mast B.T.,Lichtenberg P.A.Assessment of functional abilities among geriatric patients: A MIMIC model of the functional independence measure.Rehabilitation Psychology. 2000;45:49-64.
26. Mellenbergh G.J.Item bias and item response theory.International Journal of Educational Research. 1989;13:127-143.
27. Muthén B.O.A method for studying the homogeneity of test items with respect to other relevant variables.Journal of Educational Statistics. 1985;10:121-132.
28. Muthén B.O.Test validity. Wainer H.Braun H.I., ed. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum; 1988:213-238.
29. Muthén B.O.Latent variable modeling in heterogeneous populations.Psychometrika. 1989;54:557-585.
30. Muthén B.O.,Kao C.,Burstein L.Instructionally sensitive psychometrics: An application of a new IRT-based detection technique to mathematics achievement test items.Journal of Educational Measurement. 1991;28:1-22.
31. Muthén L.K.,Muthén B.O.Mplus: Statistical Analysis with Latent Variables. Los Angeles, CA: Author; 2007:.
32. Oishi S.The concept of life satisfaction across cultures: An IRT analysis.Journal of Research in Personality. 2006;40:411-423.
33. Oort F.J.Using restricted factor analysis to detect item bias.Methodika. 1992;6:150-166.
34. Oort F.J.Simulation study of item bias detection with restricted factor analysis.Structural Equation Modeling. 1998;5:107-124.
35. Pei L.K.,Li J.Effects of unequal ability variances on the performance of logistic regression, Mantel-Haenszel, SIBTEST IRT, and IRT likelihood ratio for DIF detection.Applied Psychological Measurement. 2010;34:453-456.
36. Rogers H.J.,Swaminathan H.A comparison of logistic regression and Mantel-Haenszel procedures for detecting differential item functioning.Applied Psychological Measurement. 1993;17:105-116.
37. Samejima F.Handbook of modern item response theory. van der Linden W.J.Hambleton R.K., ed. New York, NY: Springer; 1997:85-100.
38. SAS/STAT 9.1. Cary, NC: Author; 2004:.
39. Satorra A.,Bentler P.M.A scaled difference chi-square test statistic for moments structure analysis.Psychometrika. 2001;66:507-514.
40. Schroeder J.R.,Moolchan E.T.Ethnic differences among adolescents seeking smoking cessation treatment: A structural analysis of responses on the Fagerström test for nicotine dependence.Nicotine & Tobacco Research. 2007;9:137-145.
41. Shih C.L.,Wang W.C.Differential item functioning detection using the multiple indicators, multiple causes method with a pure short anchor.Applied Psychological Measurement. 2009;33:184-199.
42. Somes G.W.The generalized Mantel-Haenszel statistic.American Statistician. 1986;40:106-108.
43. Swaminathan H.,Rogers H.J.Detecting differential item functioning using logistic regression procedures.Journal of Educational Measurement. 1990;27:361-370.
44. SweeneyK. P. (1996). A Monte-Carlo investigation of the likelihood-ratio procedure in the detection of differential item functioning. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Fordham University, New York.
45. Thissen D.L. L. Thurstone Psychometric Laboratory, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill; 2001:.
46. Thissen D.,Steinberg L.,Gerrard M.Beyond group-mean differences: The concept of item bias.Psychological Bulletin. 1986;99:118-128.
47. Thissen D.,Steinberg L.,Kuang D.Quick and easy implementation of the Benjamini-Hochberg procedure for controlling the false positive rate in multiple comparisons.Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics. 2002;27:77-83.
48. Thissen D.,Steinberg L.,Wainer H.Test validity. Wainer H.Braun H., ed. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum; 1988:147-169.
49. Thissen D.,Steinberg L.,Wainer H.Differential item functioning. Holland P.W.Wainer H., ed. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum; 1993:67-111.
50. Wall M.M.,Amemiya Y.Generalized appended product indicator procedure for nonlinear structural equation analysis.Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics. 2001;26:1-29.
51. Wang W.,Yeh Y.Effects of anchor item methods on differential item functioning detection with the likelihood ratio test.Applied Psychological Measurement. 2003;27:479-498.
52. Wang W.C.,Shih C.L.MIMIC methods for assessing differential item functioning in polytomous items.Applied Psychological Measurement. 2010;34:166-180.
53. Wang W.C.,Shih C.L.,Yang C.C.The MIMIC method with scale purification procedure for detecting differential item functioning.Educational and Psychological Measurement. 2009;69:713-731.
54. Williams V.S. L.,Jones L.V.,Tukey J.W.Controlling error in multiple comparisons, with examples from state-to-state differences in educational achievement.Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics. 1999;24:42-69.
55. Woods C.M.Evaluation of MIMIC-model methods for DIF testing with comparison to two-group analysis.Multivariate Behavioral Research. 2009a;44:1-27.
56. Woods C.M.Empirical selection of anchors for tests of differential item functioning.Applied Psychological Measurement. 2009b;33:42-57.
57. Woods C.M.DIF testing for ordinal items with poly-SIBTEST, the Mantel and GMH tests, and IRT-LR-DIF when the latent distribution is nonnormal for both groups.Applied Psychological Measurement. 2011;35:145-164.
58. Woods, C. M., & Grimm, K. (2010, July). Identification of nonuniform differential item functioning using multiple indicator multiple cause models. Presented at the International Meeting of the Psychometric Society, Athens, GA.