Examining gender-related differential item functioning using insights from psychometric and multicontext theory

Gender Differences in Mathematics: An Integrative Psychological Approach

Volumn , Issue , 2004, Pages 143-171

  Cohen, Allan S ^a   Ibarra, Robert A ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF GEORGIA   (United States)

^b UNIVERSITY OF NEW MEXICO   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 84923572705     PISSN: None     EISSN: None     Source Type: Book    
DOI: 10.1017/CBO9780511614446.008     Document Type: Chapter

References (46)

1. Ackerman, T. A. (1992).Adidactic explanation of item bias, item impact, and itemalidity from a multidimensional perspective. Journal of Educational Measurement, 29(1), 67-91.
2. Basinger, J. (1997). Graduate Record Exam is poor predictor of success in psychology. Academe Today, web site of the Chronicle of Higher Education, August 6 (8/6/97).
3. Bolt, D. M. (1999). Psychometric methods for diagnostic assessment and dimensionality representation. Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation. Urbana: University of Illinois.
4. Bolt, D. M., Cohen, A. S.,&Wollack, J. A. (2001).Amixture item response model for multiple-choice data. Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics, 26(4), 381-409.
5. Bolt, D. M., Cohen, A. S., & Wollack, J. A. (2002). Item parameter estimation under conditions of test speededness: Application of a mixture Rasch model with ordinal constraints. Journal of Educational Measurement, 39(4), 331-348.
6. Bowen, W. G.,&Bok, D. (1998). The shape of the river: Long-term consequences of considering race in college and university admissions. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
7. Carlton, S. T., & Harris, A. M. (1989). Female/male performance differences on the SAT: Causes and correlates. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, San Francisco.
8. Cohen, A. S., & Bolt, D. M. (in press). A mixture model analysis of differential item functioning. Journal of Educational Measurement.
9. Cohen, A. S., Wollack, J. A., Bolt, D. M., & Mroch, A. A. (2002). A Mixture Rasch Model Analysis of Test Speededness. Paper presented at the annual conference of the American Educational Research Association, New Orleans, LA.
10. Embretson, S. E., & Reise, S. P. (2000). Item response theory for psychologists. Mawhah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
11. Gallagher, A. (1998). Gender and antecedents of performance in mathematics testing. Teachers College Record. 100, 297-314.
12. Gallagher, A., Morley, M. E., & Levin, J. (1999). Cognitive patterns of gender differences on mathematics admissions tests. Graduate Record Examinations FAME Report, 4-11, Princeton, NJ: Author.
13. Gallagher, A. M.,&DeLisi, R. (1994). Gender differences in scholastic aptitude test - mathematics problem solving among high ability students. Journal of Educational Psychology, 86, 204-211.
14. Gallagher, A., Morley, M. E., & Levin, J. (1999). Cognitive patterns of gender differences on mathematics admissions tests. Graduate Record Examinations FAME Report, 4-11, Princeton, NJ: Author.
15. Gierl, M. J., Bisanz, J., Bisanz, G. L., & Boughton, K. A. (2002, April). Identifying content and cognitive skills that produce gender differences in mathematics: A demonstration of the DIF analysis framework. Paper presented at the annual conference of the National Council on Measurement in Education, New Orleans, LA.
16. Hall, E. T. (1959). The silent language. Greenwich, CT: Fawcett.
17. Hall, E. T. (1966). The hidden dimension (2nd ed.). New York: Anchor.
18. Hall, E. T. (1974). Handbook for proxemic research. Washington, DC: Society for the Anthropology of Visual Communication.
19. Hall, E. T. (1984). The Dance of Life: The Other Dimension of Time (2nd ed.). Garden City, NY: Anchor Books.
20. Hall, E. T. (1993). An Anthropology of everyday life (2nd ed.). New York: Anchor.
21. Holland, P. W. (1985). On the study of differential item performance without IRT. Proceedings of the 27th annual conference of the Military Testing Association (Vol. 1, pp. 282-287); San Diego.
22. Holland, P.W.,&Thayer, D.T. (1988). Differential item performance and the Mantel- Haenszel procedure. In H. Wainer & H. Braun (Eds.), Test validity (pp. 129-145). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
23. Ibarra, R. A. (1996). Latino experiences in graduate education: Implications for change. Enhancing the Minority Presence in Graduate Education, no. 7.Washington, DC: Council of Graduate Schools.
24. Ibarra, R. A. (2001). Beyond affirmative action: Reframing the context of higher education. Madison: University ofWisconsin Press.
25. Ibarra, R. A., & Cohen, A. S. (1999, February). Multicontextuality: A hidden dimension in testing and assessment. Paper presented at the ETS Invitational Conference on Fairness, Access, Multiculturalism, and Equity (FAME), Princeton, NJ.
26. Li, Y. (2001). Detecting differences in item response as a function of item characteristics. Unpublished masters thesis, Department of Educational Psychology, Madison: University ofWisconsin.
27. Mislevy, R. J., & Verhelst, N. (1990). Modeling item responses when different subjects employ different solution strategies. Psychometrika, 55, 195-215.
28. Oshima, T. C. (1994). The effect of speededness on parameter estimation in item response theory. Journal of Educational Measurement, 31, 200-219.
29. Pine, S. M. (1977). Application of item characteristic curve theory to the problem of test bias. In D. J.Weiss (Ed.), Application of computerized adaptive testing: Proceedings of a symposium presented at the 18th annual convention of the Military Testing Association (Research Rep. No. 77-1, pp. 37-43). Minneapolis: University of Minnesota, Department of Psychology, Psychometric Methods Program.
30. Ramírez, M., III. (1983). Psychology of the Americas: Mestizo perspectives on personality and mental health. New York: Pergamon.
31. Ramírez, M., III. (1991). Psychotherapy and counseling with minorities: a cognitive approach to individual and cultural differences. New York: Pergamon.
32. Ramírez, M., III. (1998). Multicultural/multiracial psychology: mestizo perspectives in personality and mental health. Northvale, NJ: Jason Aronson.
33. Ramírez, M., III. (1999). Multicultural psychology: an approach to individual and cultural differences (2nd ed.). Needham Heights, MA: Allyn and Bacon.
34. Ramírez, M., III, & Castañeda, A. (1974). Cultural democracy, bicognitive development, and education. New York: Academic Press.
35. Rost, J. (1990). Rasch models in latent classes: An integration of two approaches to item analysis. Applied Psychological Measurement, 14, 271-282.
36. Roussos, L., & Stout, W. (1996). A multidimensionality-based DIF analysis paradigm. Applied Psychological Measurement, 20, 355-371.
37. Scheuneman, J. D., & Gerritz, K. (1990). Using differential item functioning procedures to explore sources of item difficulty and group performance characteristics. Journal of Educational Measurement, 27, 109-131.
38. Steele, C. M., & Aronson, J. (1995). Stereotype threat and the intellectual test performance of African Americans. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 69(5), 797-811.
39. Sternberg, R. J., & Williams, W. M. (1997, June). Does the graduate record examination predict meaningful success in the graduate training of psychologists? A case study. American Psychologist, 52(6), 630-41.
40. Tatsuoka, K. K. (1985). A probabilistic model for diagnosing misconceptions by the pattern classification approach. Journal of Educational Statistics, 10, 55-73.
41. Thissen, D. (1991). MULTILOG [computer program]. Chicago: Scientific Software.
42. 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: Erlbaum.
43. Thissen, D., Steinberg, L., & Wainer, H. (1993). Detection of differential item functioning using the parameters of item response models. In P. W. Holland & H.Wainer (Eds.), Differential item functioning (pp. 67-113). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
44. Wild, C. L., & McPeek, W. M. (1986). Performance of the Mantel-Haenszel statistic in a variety of situations. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, San Francisco.
45. Yamamoto, K.,&Everson, H. (1997). Modeling the effects of test length and test time on parameter estimation using the HYBRID model. In J. Rost & R. Langenheine (Eds.), Applications of latent trait and latent class models in the social sciences. New York
46. 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.