Hostname: page-component-745bb68f8f-mzp66 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-01-08T16:18:16.619Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Not all DIF is shaped similarly

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 January 2025

Paul De Boeck  and
Sun-Joo Cho
Paul De Boeck*
Affiliation:
The Ohio State University
Sun-Joo Cho
Affiliation:
Vanderbilt University
*
Correspondence should be made to Paul De Boeck, Department of Psychology, The Ohio State University, 240 Lazenby Hall, 1827 Neil Avenue, Columbus, OH 43210, USA. Email: deboeck.2@osu.edu
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

In response to the target article by Teresi et al. (2021), we explain why the article is useful and we also present a different approach. An alternative category of differential item functioning (DIF) is presented with a corresponding way of modeling DIF, based on random person and random item effects and explanatory covariates.

Keywords

differential item functioningexplanatory covariatesrandom effects
Type
Application Reviews and Case Studies
Information
Psychometrika , Volume 86 , Issue 3: Special Section: Advancing Methods to Assess Patient-Reported Outcomes: Lessons Learned from the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System® (PROMIS®) Initiative , September 2021 , pp. 712 - 716
Copyright
Copyright © 2021 The Psychometric Society

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Ackerman, T. A. A didactic explanation of item bias, item impact, and item validity from a multidimensional perspective.Journal of Educational Measurement,(1992).29,67–91CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bauer, D. J., Belzak, W.C.M., Cole, V. T. Simplifying the assessment of measurement invariance over multiple background variables: Using regularized moderated nonlinear factor analysis to detect differential item functioning.Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal,(2020).27,43–55CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bechger, T. M., Maris, G. A statistical test for differential item pair functioning.Psychometrika,(2015).80,317–340CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Cheng, C.-P., Chen, C.-C., Shin, C.-L. (2020).An exploratory strategy to identify and define sources of differential item functioning. Applied Psychological Measurement, 44, 548-560.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cho, S.-J., Partchev, I., De Boeck, P. Parameter estimation of multiple item profiles models.British Journal of Mathematical and Statistical Psychology,(2012).65,438–466CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cho, S.-J., Suh, Y., Lee, W.-Y. After DIF items are detected: IRT calibration and scoring in the presence of DIF.Applied Psychological Measurement,(2016).40,573–591CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Cho, S.-J., Suh, Y., Lee, W.-Y. An NCME instructional module on latent DIF analysis using mixture item response models.Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice,(2016).35,48–61CrossRefGoogle Scholar
De Boeck, P. Random item IRT models.Psychometrika,(2008).73,533–559CrossRefGoogle Scholar
De Boeck, P., Cho, S.-J., Wilson, M. Explanatory secondary dimension modeling of latent differential item functioning.Applied Psychological Measurement,(2011).35,583–603CrossRefGoogle Scholar
P Boeck, P.., & Wilson, M. (Eds.).(2004). Explanatory item response models: A generalized linear and nonlinear approach. New York: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Magis, D., De Boeck, P. A robust outlier approach to prevent Type 1 error inflation in DIF.Educational and Psychological Measurement,(2011).72,291–311CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Magis, D., Tuerlinckx, F., De Boeck, P. Detection of differential item functioning using the Lasso approach.Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics,(2015).40,111–135CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shealy, R. T., Stout, W. F. Holland, P. W., Wainer, H. An item response theory model for test bias and differential test functioning.Differential item functioning,(1993).Hillsdale:Lawrence Erlbaum 197–239Google Scholar
Teresi, J. A., Wang, C., Kleinman, M., Jones, B. N., & Weiss, D. J. (2021). Differential item functioning analyses of the patient reported outcomes measurement information system (PROMIS) measures: Methods, challenges, advances, and future directions. Psychometrika.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tutz, G., Schauberger, G. A penalty approach to differential item functioning in Rasch models.Psychometrika,(2015).80,21–43CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Van den Noortgate, W., De Boeck, P. Assessing and explaining differential item functioning using logistic mixed models.Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics,(2005).30,443–464CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Verhagen, A. J., Fox, J. P. Bayesian tests of measurement invariance.British Journal of Mathematical and Statistical Psychology,(2013).66,383–401CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Wainer, H. 14 conversations about three things.Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics,(2010).35,5–25CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wang, W-C. Effects of anchor item methods on the detection of differential item functioning within the family of Rasch models.Journal of Experimental Education,(2004).72,221–261CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Yuan, K.-H., Liu, H., & Han, Y.(2021). Differential item functioning analysis without a priori information on anchor items: QQ plots and graphical test. Psychometrika.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zumbo, B. D. Three generations of DIF analyses: Considering where it has been, where it is now, and where it is going.Language Assessment Quarterly,(2007). 4,223–233CrossRefGoogle Scholar