An analytic comparison of effect sizes for differential item functioning

Applied Measurement in Education

Volumn 24, Issue 3, 2011, Pages 189-209

  Demars, Christine E ^a  

^a JAMES MADISON UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 79960170717     PISSN: 08957347     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/08957347.2011.580255     Document Type: Review

References (29)

1. Camilli, G., & Shepard, L. A. (1994). Methods for identifying biased test items. Thousands Oaks, CA: Sage.
2. Donoghue, J. R., Holland, P.W., & Thayer, D. T. (1993). A Monte Carlo study of factors that affect the Mantel-Haenszel and standardization measures of differential item functioning. In P. W. Holland & H. Wainer (Eds.), Differential item functioning (pp. 137-166). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
3. Dorans, N. J. (1989). Two new approaches to assessing differential item functioning: Standardization and the Mantel-Haenszel method. Applied Measurement in Education, 2, 217-233.
4. Dorans, N. J., & Holland, P.W. (1993). DIF detection and description: Mantel-Haenszel and standardization. In P. W. Holland & H. Wainer (Eds.), Differential item functioning (pp. 35-66). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
5. Dorans, N. J., & Kulick, E. (1986). Demonstrating the utility of the standardization approach to assessing unexpected differential item performance on the SAT. Journal of Educational Measurement, 23, 355-368.
6. French, B. F., & Maller, S. J. (2007). Iterative purification and effect size use with logistic regression for differential item functioning detection. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 67, 373-393.
7. Hidalgo, M. D., & López-Pina, J. A. (2004). Differential item functioning detection and effect size: A comparison between logistic regression and Mantel-Haenszel procedures. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 64, 903-915.
8. 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.
9. Jiang, H., & Stout, W. (1998). Improved Type I error control and reduced estimation bias for DIF detecting using SIBTEST. Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics, 23, 291-322.
10. Jodoin, M. G., & Gierl, M. J. (2001). Evaluating Type I error and power rates using an effect size measure with the logistic regression procedure for DIF detection. Applied Measurement in Education, 14, 329-349.
11. 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.
12. Penfield, R. D. (2007). An approach for categorizing DIF in polytomous items. Applied Measurement in Education, 20, 335-355.
13. Penfield, R. D., & Camilli, G. (2007). Differential item functioning and item bias. In C. R. Rao & S. Sinharay (Eds.), Handbook of statistics, vol. 26: Psychometrics (pp. 125-167). Amsterdam, Holland: Elsevier.
14. Pratt, J. W. (1987, June). Dividing the indivisible: Using simple symmetry to partition variance explained. In T. Pukkila & S. Puntanen (Eds.), Proceedings of the 2nd International Tampere Conference in Statistics (pp. 245-260). Tampere, Finland: University of Tampere, Department of Mathematical Statistics.
15. Raju, N. S. (1988). The area between two item characteristic curves. Psychometrika, 53, 495-502.
16. Raju, N. S., van der Linden, W. J., & Fleer, P. F. (1995). IRT-based internal measures of differential functioning of items and tests. Applied Psychological Measurement, 19, 353-368.
17. Roussos, L. A., Schnipke, D. L., & Pashley, P. J. (1999). A generalized formula for the Mantel- Haenszel differential item functioning parameter. Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics, 24, 293-322.
18. Roussos, L. A., & Stout, W. F. (1996). Simulation studies of the effects of small sample size and studied item parameters on SIBTEST and Mantel-Haenszel Type I error performance. Journal of Educational Measurement, 33, 215-230.
19. Schnipke, D. L., Roussos, L. A., & Pashley, P. J. (2000). A comparison of Mantel-Haenszel differential item functioning parameters. (Research Report 98-03). Newtown, PA: Law School Admission Council. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED469180)
20. Shealy, R., & Stout, W. (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.
21. Spray, J. A., & Miller, T. R. (1992). Performance of the Mantel-Haenszel statistic and the standardized difference in proportion correct when population distributions are incongruent. (Research Report 92-1). Iowa City, IA: ACT. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED352388)
22. Steinberg, L., & Thissen, D. (2006). Using effect sizes for research reporting: Examples using item response theory to analyze differential item functioning. Psychological Methods, 11, 402-415.
23. Swaminathan, H., & Rogers, H. J. (1990). Detecting differential item functioning using logistic regression procedures. Journal of Educational Measurement, 27, 361-370.
24. Wainer, H. (1993). Model-based standardized measurement of an item's differential impact. In P. W. Holland & H. Wainer (Eds.), Differential item functioning (pp. 123-135). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
25. 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: Erlbaum.
26. Zumbo, B. D. (1999). A handbook on the theory and methods of differential item functioning (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. Retrieved from http://educ.ubc.ca/faculty/zumbo/DIF/index.html
27. Zumbo, B. D. (2001, April). Investigating DIF by the statistical modeling of the probability of endorsing an item: Logistic regression and extensions there of. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the National Council for Measurement in Education, Seattle, WA.
28. Zumbo, B. D., & Thomas, D. R. (2005). A measure of differential item functioning (DIF) effect size for logistic regression procedures. (Paper 2005-1). Edgeworth Laboratory for Quantitative Behavioral Science, Vancouver, BC, Canada: University of British Columbia.
29. Zwick, R., & Ercikan, K. (1989). Analysis of differential item functioning in the NAEP history assessment. Journal of Educational Measurement, 26, 55-66.