What's the DIF? why differential item functioning analyses are an important part of instrument development and validation

Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment

Volumn 29, Issue 4, 2011, Pages 364-376

  Walker, Cindy M ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF WISCONSIN MILWAUKEE   (United States)

Author keywords

Differential Item Functioning; Dimensionality; Item Response Theory; Measurement Invariance; Test Construction; Test Validation

Indexed keywords

EID: 79961235093     PISSN: 07342829     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/0734282911406666     Document Type: Article

References (25)

1. Ackerman, T.A., & Evans, J.A. (1994). The influence of conditioning scores in performing DIF analyses. Applied Psychological Measurement, 18, 329-342.
2. Ackerman, T.A., Gierl, M.J., & Walker, C.M. (2003). Using multidimensional item response theory to evaluate educational and psychological tests. Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice, 22, 37-53.
3. Angoff, W.H. (1993). Perspectives on differential item functioning methodology. In P. W. Holland & H. Wainer (Eds.), Differential item functioning (pp. 3-23). Hillside, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
4. Bollen, K.A. (1989). Structural equations with latent variables. New York, NY: Wiley-Interscience.
5. Chang, H., Mazzeo, J., & Roussos, L.A. (1996). Detecting DIF for polytomously scored items: An adaptation of the SIBTEST procedure. Journal of Educational Measurement, 33, 333-353.
6. De Ayala, R.J. (1998). The theory and practice of IRT. Guilford Press: New York.
7. Douglas, J.E., Roussos, L.A., & Stout, W. (1996). Item-bundle DIF hypothesis testing: Identifying suspect bundles and assessing their differential functioning. Journal of Educational Measurement, 33, 465-484.
8. 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.
9. Flowers, C.P., Raju, N.S., & Oshima, T.C. (2002, April). A comparison of measurement equivalence methods based on confirmatory factor analysis and item response theory. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, New Orleans, LA.
10. Gierl, M.J. (2005). Using dimensionality-based DIF Analyses to identify and interpret constructs that elicit group differences. Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice, 24(1), 3-14.
11. Güler, N.,& Penfield, R.D. (2009). A comparison of the logistic regression and contingency table methods for simultaneous detection of uniform and non-uniform DIF. Journal of Educational Measurement, 46, 314-329.
12. Kim, S., Cohen, A., Alagoz, C., & Kim, S. (2007). DIF detection and effect size measures for polytomously scored items. Journal of Educational Measurement, 44, 93-116.
13. Knol, D.,& Berger, M. (1991). Empirical comparison between factor analysis and multidimensional item response models. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 26, 457-477.
14. Li, H.,& Stout, W.A. (1996). A new procedure for detection of crossing DIF. Psychometrika, 61, 647-677.
15. Miller, T.A., & Spray, J.A. (1993). Logistic discriminant function analysis for DIF identification of polytomously scored items. Journal of Educational Measurement, 30, 107-122.
16. Nandakumar, R. (1993). Simultaneous DIF amplification and cancellation: Shealy-Stout's measure for assessing measurement bias. Journal of Educational Measurement, 16, 169-176.
17. National Council of Teachers of Mathematics. (2000). Principles and standards for school mathematics. Reston VA: Author.
18. Roussos, L.A.,& Stout, W. (1996a). A multidimensionality-based DIF analysis paradigm. Applied Psychological Measurement, 20, 355-371.
19. Roussos, L., & Stout, W. (1996b). 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.
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. Swaminathan, H., & Rogers, H.J. (1990). Detecting differential item functioning using logistic regression procedures. Journal of Educational Measurement, 27, 361-370.
22. Walker, C.M. (2001). A review of DIFPACK: Dimensionality-based IRT analysis package. International Journal of Testing, 4, 305-317.
23. Walker, C.M., & Beretvas, S.N. (2001). An empirical investigation demonstrating the multidimensional DIF paradigm: A cognitive explanation for DIF. Journal of Educational Measurement, 38, 147-163.
24. Walker, C.M., Beretvas, S.N., & Ackerman, T.A. (2001). An examination of conditioning variables used in computer adaptive testing for DIF. Applied Measurement in Education, 14, 3-16.
25. Walker, C.M., Zhang, B., & Surber, J. (2008). Using a multidimensional differential item functioning framework to determine if reading ability affects student performance in mathematics. Applied Measurement in Education, 21, 162-181.