Explanatory Secondary Dimension Modeling of Latent Differential Item Functioning

Abstract

The models used in this article are secondary dimension mixture models with the potential to explain differential item functioning (DIF) between latent classes, called latent DIF. The focus is on models with a secondary dimension that is at the same time specific to the DIF latent class and linked to an item property. A description of the models is provided along with a means of estimating model parameters using easily available software and a description of how the models behave in two applications. One application concerns a test that is sensitive to speededness and the other is based on an arithmetic operations test where the division items show latent DIF.

Keywords

differential item functioning dimensionality item response model latent class model

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Ackerman

T. A.

(1992). A didactic explanation of item bias, item impact, and item validity from a multidimensional perspective. Journal of Educational Measurement, 29, 67-91.

Adams

R. J.

Wilson

M. R.

Wang

(1997). The multidimensional random coefficients multinomial logit model. Applied Psychological Measurement, 21, 1-23.

Akaike

(1974). A new look at the statistical model identification. IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control, 19, 716-723.

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, 331-348.

Bolt

Stout

W. F.

(1996). Differential item functioning: Its multidimensional model and resulting Sibtest detection procedure. Behaviormetrika, 23, 67-95.

Bradlow

E. T.

Wainer

Wang

(1999). A Bayesian random effects model for testlets. Psychometrika, 64, 153-168.

Camilli

(1992). A conceptual analysis of differential item functioning in terms of a multidimensional item response model. Applied Psychological Measurement, 16, 129-147.

Camilli

Penfield

D. A.

(1997). Variance estimation for differential test functioning based on the Mantel-Haenszel log-odds ratio. Journal of Educational Measurement, 34, 123-139.

Cho

S.-J.

Cohen

A. S.

(2010). Multilevel mixture IRT model with an application to DIF. Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics, 35, 336-370.

10.

Cho

S.-J.

Cohen

A. S.

Templin

(2008, April). A multidimensional mixture IRT model for DIF analysis. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the National Council on Measurement in Education, New York, NY.

11.

Cohen

A. S.

Bolt

D. M.

(2005). A mixture model analysis of differential item functioning. Journal of Educational Measurement, 42, 133-148.

12.

Cohen

A. S.

Gregg

Deng

(2005). The role of extended time and item content on a high-stakes mathematics test. Learning Disabilities Research & Practice, 20, 225-233.

13.

Congdon

(2003). Applied Bayesian modelling. New York, NY: Wiley.

14.

DeAyala

R. J.

Kim

S.-H.

Stapleton

L. M.

Dayton

C. M.

(2002). Differential item functioning: A mixture distribution conceptualization. International Journal of Testing, 2, 243-276.

15.

Douglas

Rim

H. R.

Habing

Gao

(1998). Investigating local dependence with conditional covariance functions. Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics, 23, 129-151.

16.

Douglas

Roussos

L. A.

Stout

W. F.

(1996). Item bundle DIF hypothesis testing: Identifying suspect bundles and assessing their DIF. Journal of Educational Measurement, 33, 465-485.

17.

Finch

(2005). The MIMIC model as a method for detecting DIF: Comparison with Mantel-Haenszel, SIBTEST, and IRT likelihood ratio. Applied Psychological Measurement, 29, 278-295.

18.

Fleishman

J. A.

Spector

W. D.

Altman

B. M.

(2002). Impact of differential item functioning on age and gender differences in functional disability. Journal of Gerontology, 57B, S275-S284.

19.

Frühwirth-Schnatter

(2006). Finite mixture and Markov switching models. New York, NY: Springer.

20.

Glöckner-Rist

Hoijtink

(2003). The best of two worlds: Factor analysis of dichotomous data using item response theory and structural equation. Structural Equation Modelling, 10, 544-565.

21.

Goegebeur

De Boeck

Wollack

J. A.

Cohen

A. S.

(2008). A speeded item response model with gradual process change. Psychometrika, 73, 65-87.

22.

Holland

P. W.

Wainer

(1993). Differential item functioning. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

23.

Horn

J. L.

McArdle

J. J.

(1992). A practical guide to measurement invariance in aging research. Experimental Aging Research, 18, 117-144.

24.

E. H.

(2010). Empirically indistinguishable multidimensional IRT and locally dependent unidimensional item response models. British Journal of Mathematical and Statistical Psychology, 63, 395-416.

25.

Jansen

B. R. J.

van der Maas

H. L. J.

(2002). The development of children’s rule use on the balance scale task. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 81, 383-416.

26.

Kok

(1988). Item bias and test multidimensionality. In Langeheine

Rost

(Eds.), Latent trait and latent class models (pp. 263-274). New York, NY: Plenum.

27.

Longford

N. T.

Holland

P. W.

Thayer

D. T.

(1993). Stability of MH D-DIF statistics across populations. In Holland

P. W.

Wainer

(Eds.), Differential item functioning (pp. 171-196). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

28.

MacIntosh

Hashim

(2003). Variance estimation for converting MIMIC model parameters to IRT parameters in DIF analysis. Applied Psychological Measurement, 27, 372-379.

29.

McLachlan

Peel

(2000). Finite mixture models. New York, NY: Wiley.

30.

Meredith

(1993). Measurement invariance, factor analysis and factorial invariance. Psychometrika, 58, 525-543.

31.

Millsap

R. E.

Everson

H. T.

(1993). Methodology review: Statistical approaches for assessing measurement bias. Applied Psychological Measurement, 17, 297-334.

32.

Millsap

R. E.

Kwok

O.-M.

(2004). Evaluating the impact of partial factorial invariance on selection in two populations. Psychological Methods, 9, 93-115.

33.

Mislevy

R. J.

Wilson

(1996). Marginal maximum likelihood estimation for a psychometric model of discontinuous development. Psychometrika, 61, 41-71.

34.

Mroch

A. A.

Bolt

D. M.

(2006, April). An IRT-based response likelihood approach for addressing test speededness. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the National Council on Measurement in Education, San Francisco, CA.

35.

Muthén

Brown

C. H.

Booil

J. K. M.

Khoo

S.-T.

Yang

C. C.

Wang

C.-P.

Kellam

S. G.

(2002). General growth mixture modelling for randomized preventive interventions. Biostatistics, 3, 459-475.

36.

Muthén

B. O.

Kao

Burstein

(1991). Instructionally sensitive psychometrics: An application of a new IRT-based detection technique to mathematics achievement test items. Journal of Educational Measurement, 28, 1-22.

37.

Muthén

B. O.

Lehman

(1985). Multiple group IRT modelling: Applications to item bias analysis. Journal of Educational Statistics, 10, 133-142.

38.

Oort

(1998). Simulation study of item bias detection with restricted factor analysis. Structural Equation Modelling, 5, 107-124.

39.

Oshima

T. C.

Miller

M. D.

(1992). Multidimensionality and item bias in item response theory. Applied Psychological Measurement, 16, 237-248.

40.

Penfield

R. D.

(2010). Modelling DIF effects using distractor-level invariance effects: Implications for understanding the causes of DIF. Applied Psychological Measurement, 34, 151-165.

41.

Roussos

Stout

(1996). A multidimensionality-based DIF analysis paradigm. Applied Psychological Measurement, 20, 355-371.

42.

Samuelsen

(2005). Examining differential item functioning from a latent class perspective (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). University of Maryland, College Park, MD.

43.

Scheuneman

J. D.

(1979). A method of assessing bias in test items. Journal of Educational Measurement, 16, 143-152.

44.

Schwarz

G. E.

(1978). Estimating the dimension of a model. Annals of Statistics, 6, 461-464.

45.

Semmes

Davison

(2011). Modeling individual differences in numerical reasoning speed as a random effect of response time limits. Applied Psychological Measurement, 35, 433-446.

46.

Shealy

Stout

W. F.

(1993a). An item response theory model for test bias. In Holland

P. W.

Wainer

(Eds.), Differential item functioning (pp. 197-239.). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

47.

Shealy

Stout

W. F.

(1993b). 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.

48.

Siegler

R. S.

(1976). Three aspects of cognitive development. Cognitive Psychology, 8, 481-520.

49.

Steenkamp

J.-B. E. M.

Baumgartner

(1998). Assessing measurement invariance in cross-national consumer research. Journal of Consumer Research, 25, 78-90.

50.

Stout

W. F.

(1987). A nonparametric approach for assessing latent trait unidimensionality. Psychometrika, 52, 589-617.

51.

Stout

W. F.

Roussos

L. A.

(1995). SIBTEST users manual (2nd ed.) [Computer program manual]. Urbana-Champaign: University of Illinois.

52.

Suh

Cho

S.-J.

Wollack

J. A.

(2011, April). A comparison of item calibration procedures in the presence of test speededness. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the National Council on Measurement in Education, New Orleans, LA.

53.

Teresi

J. A.

Fleishman

J. A.

(2007). Differential item functioning and health assessment. Quality of Life Research, 16, 33-42.

54.

Tuerlinckx

De Boeck

(2004). Models for residual dependencies. In De Boeck

Wilson

(Eds.), Explanatory item response models (pp. 289-316). New York, NY: Springer.

55.

Vandenberg

R. J.

Lance

C. E.

(2000). A review and synthesis of the measurement invariance literature: Suggestions, practices and recommendations for organizational research. Organizational Research Methods, 3, 4-70.

56.

Van den Noortgate

De Boeck

(2005). Assessing and explaining differential item functioning using logistic mixed models. Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics, 30, 443-464.

57.

van der Maas

H. L. J.

Quinlan

P. T.

Jansen

B. R. J.

(2007). Towards better computational models of the balance scale task: A reply to Schultz and Takana. Cognition, 103, 473-479.

58.

Van Nijlen

Janssen

(2010). Contextualized and non-contextualized mathematics items in large-scale assessment (Unpublished manuscript). K. U. Leuven, Belgium.

59.

Vermunt

J. K.

Magidson

(2005). Technical guide for Latent GOLD 4.0: Basic and advanced. Belmont, MA: Statistical Innovations.

60.

Vermunt

J. K.

Magidson

(2007). Latent GOLD 4.5 syntax module [Computer program]. Belmont, MA: Statistical Innovations.

61.

Wilson

(1989). Saltus: A psychometric model of discontinuity in cognitive development. Psychological Bulletin, 105, 276-289.

62.

Wollack

J. A.

Cohen

A. S.

Wells

C. S.

(2003). A method for maintaining scale stability in the presence of test speededness. Journal of Educational Measurement, 40, 307-330.

63.

Woods

C. M.

(2009). Evaluation of the MIMIC-model methods for DIF testing with comparison to two-group analysis. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 44, 1-27.

64.

Zumbo

B. D.

Gelin

M. N.

(2005). A matter of test bias in educational policy research: Bringing the context into picture by investigating sociological/community moderated (or mediated) test and item bias. Journal of Educational Research & Policy Studies, 5, 1-23.