Detecting Differential Item Functioning of Polytomous Items for an Ideal Point Response Process

Applied Psychological Measurement

Volumn 37, Issue 4, 2013, Pages 316-335

  Wang, Wei ^a   Tay, Louis ^b   Drasgow, Fritz ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF ILLINOIS AT URBANA CHAMPAIGN   (United States)

^b PURDUE UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

differential item functioning; ideal point model; item response theory; the generalized graded unfolding model (GGUM)

Indexed keywords

EID: 84877947417     PISSN: 01466216     EISSN: 15523497     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1177/0146621613476156     Document Type: Article

References (58)

1. Ackerman P. L.,Humphreys L. G.Handbook of industrial and organizational psychology. Dunnette M. D.Hough L. M., ed. Palo Alto, CA: Consulting Psychologist Press; 1990:223-282.
2. Akaike H.Proceedings of the second international symposium on information theory. Petrov B. N.Csaki F., ed. Budapest, Hungary: Akademiai Kiado; 1973:267-281.
3. Akaike H.A new look at the statistical model identification.IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control. 1974;19:716-723.
4. Andrich D.,Luo G.A hyperbolic cosine latent trait model for unfolding dichotomous single-stimulus responses.Applied Psychological Measurement. 1993;17:253-276.
5. Candell G.,Drasgow F.An iterative procedure for linking metrics and assessing item bias in item response theory.Applied Psychological Measurement. 1988;12:253-260.
6. Carter N. T.,Dalal D. K.An ideal point account of the JDI work satisfaction scale.Personality and Individual Differences. 2010;49:743-748.
7. Carter N. T.,Zickar M.A comparison of the LR and DFIT frameworks of differential functioning applied to the generalized graded unfolding model.Applied Psychological Measurement. 2011;35:623-642.
8. Chang H.,Mazzeo J.,Roussos L.Detecting DIF for polytomously scored items: An adaptation of the SIBTEST procedures.Journal of Educational Measurement. 1996;33:333-353.
9. Chernyshenko O. S.,Stark S.,Chan K.,Drasgow F.,Williams B.Fitting item response theory models to two personality inventories: Issues and insights.Multivariate Behavioral Research. 2001;36:523-562.
10. 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.
11. Cohen J.A power primer.Psychological Bulletin. 1992;112:155-159.
12. Cohen R. J.,Swerdlik M.Psychological testing and assessment: An introduction to tests and measurement. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill; 2002:.
13. Coombs C. H.A theory of data. New York, NY: Wiley; 1964:.
14. Davison M. L.On a metric, unidimensional unfolding model for attitudinal and developmental data.Psychometrika. 1977;42:523-548.
15. De Ayala R. J.,Sava-Bolesta M.Item parameter recovery in the nominal response model.Applied Psychological Measurement. 1999;23:3-20.
16. Donoghue J. R.,Holland P.,Thayer D.Differential item functioning. Holland P. W.Wainer H., ed. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum; 1993:137-166.
17. Donoghue J. R.,Isham S. P.A comparison of procedures to detect item parameter drift.Applied Psychological Measurement. 1998;22:33-51.
18. Drasgow F.,Chernyshenko O. S.,Stark S.Improving the measurement of psychological variables: Ideal point models rock!.Industrial and Organizational Psychology: Perspectives on Science and Practice. 2010a;3:515-520.
19. Drasgow F.,Chernyshenko O. S.,Stark S.75 years after Likert: Thurstone was right!.Industrial and Organizational Psychology: Perspectives on Science and Practice. 2010b;3:465-476.
20. Edelen M. O.,Thissen D.,Teresi J. A.,Kleinman M.,Ocepek-Welikson K.Identification of differential item functioning using item response theory and the likelihood-based model comparison approach: Application to the Mini-Mental State Examination.Medical Care. 2006;44:S134-S142.
21. 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.
22. Hough L. M.,Oswald F. L.Personnel selection: Looking toward the future-Remembering the past.Annual Review of Psychology. 2000;2000:631-664.
23. Kirk R. E.Effect magnitude: A different focus.Journal of Statistical Planning and Inference. 2006;137:1634-1646.
24. Likert R.A technique for the measurement of attitudes.Archives of Psychology. 1932;22:1-55.
25. Lim R. G.,Drasgow F.Evaluation of two methods for estimating item response theory parameters when assessing differential item functioning.Journal of Applied Psychology. 1990;75:164-174.
26. Lord F. M.Applications of item response theory to practical testing problems. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum; 1980:.
27. Maydeu-Olivares A.,Cai L.A cautionary note on using G2 (dif) to assess relative model fit in categorical data analysis.Multivariate Behavioral Research. 2006;41:55-64.
28. Maydeu-Olivares A.,Hernandez A.,McDonald R. P.A multidimensional ideal point item response theory model for binary data.Multivariate Behavioral Research. 2006;41:445-471.
29. McCrae R. R.,Terracciano A.,De Fruyt F.,De Bolle M.,Gelfand M. J.,Costa P. T.The validity and structure of culture-level personality scores: Data from ratings of young adolescents.Journal of Personality. 2010;78:815-838.
30. McLaughlin M. E.,Drasgow F.Lord's chi-square test of item bias with estimated and with known person parameters.Applied Psychological Measurement. 1987;11:161-173.
31. Meade A. W.A taxonomy of effect size measures for the differential functioning of items and scales.Journal of Applied Psychology. 2010;95:728-743.
32. Mitchell T. R.,Daniels D.Handbook of industrial and organizational psychology. Borman W. C.Ilgen D. R.Klimoski R. J., ed. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley; 2003:225-254.
33. Motowidlo S. J.,Borman W. C.,Schmit M. J.A theory of individual differences in task and contextual performance.Human Performance. 1997;10:71-83.
34. Mullis I.,Dossey J.,Owen E.,Phillips G.NAEP 1992 mathematics report card for the nation and the states. Washington, DC: National Center for Education Statistics; 1993:.
35. NyeC. D. (2011). The development and validation of effect size measures for IRT and CFA studies of measurement equivalence (Doctoral dissertation). University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, Champaign.
36. Penfield R. D.Distinguishing between net and global DIF in polytomous items.Journal of Educational Measurement. 2010;47:129-149.
37. R Development Core Team. (2011). R: A language and environment for statistical computing. Vienna, Austria: R Foundation for Statistical Computing. Available from http://www.R-project.org/.
38. Raju N. S.The area between two item characteristic curves.Psychometrika. 1988;53:495-502.
39. Raju N. S.,Drasgow F.,Slinde J. A.An empirical comparison of the area methods, Lords' chi-square test, and the Mantel-Haenszel technique for assessing differential item functioning.Educational and Psychological Measurement. 1993;53:301-314.
40. 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;19:353-368.
41. Roberts J. S.GGUMLINK version1.0 user's manual. Atlanta: Georgia Polytechnic University; 2002:.
42. Roberts J. S.,Donoghue J. R.,Laughlin J. E.A general item response theory model for unfolding unidimensional polytomous responses.Applied Psychological Measurement. 2000;24:3-32.
43. Roberts J. S.,Donoghue J. R.,Laughlin J. E.Characteristics of MML/EAP parameter estimates in the generalized graded unfolding model.Applied Psychological Measurement. 2002;26:192-207.
44. Roberts J. S.,Gordon J. D. (2008, March). Identification of differentially functioning items in the generalized graded unfolding model. Paper presented at the American Educational Research Association Meeting; New York, NY;.
45. Roberts J. S.,Laughlin J. E.,Wedell D. H.Validity issues in the Likert and Thurstone approaches to attitude measurement.Educational and Psychological Measurement. 1999;59:211-233.
46. Roberts J. S.,Shim H. S.GGUM2004 technical reference manual. Atlanta: Georgia Polytechnic University; 2008:.
47. Stark S.,Chernyshenko O. S.,Drasgow F.Examining the effects of differential item (functioning and differential) test functioning on selection decisions: When are statistically significant effects practically important?.Journal of Applied Psychology. 2004;89:497-508.
48. Stark S.,Chernyshenko O. S.,Drasgow F.Detecting differential item functioning with confirmatory factor analysis and item response theory: Toward a unified strategy.Journal of Applied Psychology. 2006;91:1292-1306.
49. Stark S.,Chernyshenko O. S.,Drasgow F.,Williams B. A.Examining assumptions about item responding in personality assessment: Should ideal point models be considered for scale development and scoring?.Journal of Applied Psychology. 2006;91:25-39.
50. Tay L.,Ali U. S.,Drasgow F.,Williams B. A.Fitting simulated dichotomous and polytomous data: Examining the difference between ideal point and dominance models.Applied Psychological Measurement. 2011;35:280-295.
51. Tay L.,Drasgow F.Theoretical, statistical, and substantive issues in the assessment of construct dimensionality: Accounting for the item response process.Organizational Research Methods. 2012;15:363-384.
52. Tay L.,Drasgow F.,Rounds J.,Williams B.Fitting measurement models to vocational interest data: Are dominance models ideal?.Journal of Applied Psychology. 2009;94:1287-1304.
53. Thissen D.,Steinberg L.,Wainer H.Differential item functioning. Holland P. W.Wainer H., ed. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum; 1993:67-113.
54. Thissen D.,Wainer H.Test scoring. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum; 2001:.
55. Thurstone L. L.Attitudes can be measured.American Journal of Sociology. 1928;33:529-554.
56. Thurstone L. L.Theory of attitude measurement.Psychological Review. 1929;36:222-241.
57. Wang W.-C.,Su Y.-H.Effects of average signed area between two item characteristic curves and test purification procedures on the DIF detection via the Mantel-Haenszel method.Applied Measurement in Education. 2004a;17:113-144.
58. 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. 2004b;28:450-480.