An examination of power and type i errors for two differential item functioning indices using the graded response model

Organizational Research Methods

Volumn 15, Issue 2, 2012, Pages 229-246

  Clark, Patrick C ^a   LaHuis, David M ^a  

^a WRIGHT STATE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

ANOVA methods; bootstrapping; computer simulation procedures; item response theory; Monte Carlo

Indexed keywords

EID: 84857719208     PISSN: 10944281     EISSN: 15527425     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/1094428111403815     Document Type: Article

References (39)

1. Angoff W.H.,Ford S.F.Item-race interaction on a test of scholastic aptitude.Journal of Educational Measurement. 1973;10:.
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:.
3. Baker F.B.University of Wisconsin, Laboratory of Experimental Design: Madison; 1995:.
4. Bolt D.M.A Monte Carlo comparison of parametric and nonparametric polytomous DIF detection methods.Applied Measurement in Education. 2002;15:.
5. Braddy P.W.,Meade A.W.,Johnson E.C. 2006. Practical implications of using different tests of measurement invariance for polytomous measures. Paper presented at the 21st Annual Conference of the Society for Industrial and Organizational Psychology, Dallas, TX; 2006.
6. Candell G.L.,Drasgow F.An iterative procedure for linking metrics and assessing item bias in item response theory.Applied Psychological Measurement. 1988;12:.
7. Chang H.H.,Mazzeo J.,Roussos L.Detecting DIF for polytomously scored items: An adaptation of the SIBTEST procedure.Journal of Educational Measurement. 1996;33:.
8. Collins W.C.,Raju N.S.,Edwards J.E.Assessing differential functioning in a satisfaction scale.Journal of Applied Psychology. 2000;85:.
9. Donovan M.A.,Drasgow F.,Probst T.M.Does computerizing paper-and-pencil job attitude scales make a difference? New IRT analyses offer insight.Journal of Applied Psychology. 2000;85:.
10. Flowers C.P.,Oshima T.C.,Raju N.S.A description and demonstration of the polytomous-DFIT framework.Applied Psychological Measurement. 1999;23:.
11. Henry M.S.,Raju N.S.The effects of trailed and situational impression management on a personality test: An empirical analysis.Psychological Science. 2006;48:.
12. Holland, P. W., Thayer, D. T. (1988). Differential item functioning and the Mantel-Haenszel procedure. InH. Wainer H.I. Braun (Eds.), Test validity (pp. 139-145). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum
13. Kim S. -H.,Cohen A.S.Detection of differential item functioning under the graded response model with the likelihood ratio test.Applied Psychological Measurement. 1988;22:.
14. Lord F.M.Applications of item response theory to practical testing problems. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum; 1980:.
15. Mantel N.,Haenszel W.Statistical aspects of the analysis of data from retrospective studies of disease.Journal of the National Cancer Institute. 1959;22:.
16. Maurer T.J.,Raju N.S.,Collins W.C.Peer and subordinate performance appraisal measurement equivalence.Journal of Applied Psychology. 1998;83:.
17. Meade A.W.A taxonomy of effect size measures for the differential functioning of items and scales.Journal of Applied Psychology. 2010;95:.
18. Meade A.W.,Lautenschlager G.J.A comparison of item response theory and confirmatory factor analytic methodologies for establishing measurement equivalence/invariance.Organizational Research Methods. 2004;7:.
19. Meade A.W.,Lautenschlager G.J.,Johnson E.C.A Monte Carlo examination of the sensitivity of the differential functioning of items and tests framework for tests of measurement invariance with Likert data.Applied Psychological Measurement. 2007;31:.
20. Morales L.S.,Flowers C.,Gutierrez P.,Kleinman M.,Teresi J.A.Item and scale differential functioning of the Mini-Mental State Exam assessed using the differential item and test functioning (DFIT) framework.Medical Care. 2006;44:.
21. MorrisS. (2008). Polycov [Computer program]. Retrieved August 2009 fromhttp://mypages.iit.edu/~morriss/polycov/polycov.html.
22. Muraki E.A generalized partial credit model: Application of an EM algorithm.Applied Psychological Measurement. 1992;16:.
23. Muraki E.,Bock R.D.PARSCALE 4: IRT item analysis and test scoring for rating-scale data. Chicago: Scientific Software; 2003:.
24. Oshima T.C.,Kushubar S.,Scott J.C.,Raju N.S.St. Paul, MN: Assessment Systems Corporation; 2009:.
25. Oshima T.C.,Raju N.S.,Nanda A.O.A new method for assessing the statistical significance in the differential functioning of items and tests (DFIT) framework.Journal of Educational Measurement. 2006;43:.
26. Raju N.S.The area between two item characteristic curves.Psychometrika. 1988;53:.
27. Raju N.S.Determining the significance of estimated signed and unsigned areas between two item response functions.Applied Psychological Measurement. 1990;14:.
28. Raju N.S.,Fortmann-Johnson K.A.,Kim W.,Morris S.B.,Nering M.L.,Oshima T.C.The item parameter replication method for detecting differential functioning in the polytomous DFIT framework.Applied Psychological Measurement. 2009;33:.
29. Raju N.S.,Laffitte L.J.,Byrne B.M.Measurement equivalence: A comparison of methods based on confirmatory factor analysis and item response theory.Journal of Applied Psychology. 2002;87:.
30. Raju N.S.,van der Linden W.J.,Fleer P.F.IRT-based internal measures of differential functioning of items and tests.Applied Psychological Measurement. 1995;19:.
31. Rivas G.E.,Stark S.,Chernyshenko O.S.The effects of referent item parameters on differential item functioning detection using the free baseline likelihood ratio test.Applied Psychological Measurement. 2009;33:.
32. Roberts J.S.,Donoghue J.R.,Laughlin J.E.A general item response theory model for unfolding unidimensional polytomous responses.Applied Psychological Measurement. 2000;24:.
33. Robie C.,Zickar M.J., & Schmit, M. J.Measurement equivalence between applicant and incumbent groups: An IRT analysis of personality scales.Human Performance. 2001;14:.
34. Samejima F.Estimation of latent ability using a response pattern of graded scores. Richmond, VA: Psychometric Society; 1969:.
35. Stark S.,Chernyshenko O.S.,Drasgow F.,Williams B.A.Detecting differential item functioning with confirmatory factor analysis and item response theory: Toward a unified strategy.Journal of Applied Psychology. 2006;91:.
36. Thissen D.IRTLRDIF v.2.0b: Software for the computation of the statistics involved in item response theory likelihood-ratio tests for differential item functioning. Chapel Hill: University of North Carolina; 2001:.
37. Thissen, D., Steinberg, L., & Wainer, H. (1988). Use of item response theory in the study of group differences in trace lines. In H. Wainer & H. I. Braun (Eds.), Test validity (pp. 147-169). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum
38. Wang W.C.Effects of anchor item methods on differential item functioning detection within the family of Rasch models.Journal of Experimental Education. 2004;72:.
39. Wang W.C.,Yeh Y.L.Effects of anchor item methods on differential item functioning detection with the likelihood ratio test.Applied Psychological Measurement. 2003;27:.