Transforming SIBTEST to Account for Multilevel Data Structures

SIBTEST is a differential item functioning (DIF) detection method that is accurate and effective with small samples, in the presence of group mean differences, and for assessment of both uniform and nonuniform DIF. The presence of multilevel data with DIF detection has received increased attention. Ignoring such structure can inflate Type I error. This simulation study examines the performance of newly developed multilevel adaptations of SIBTEST in the presence of multilevel data. Data were simulated in a multilevel framework and both uniform and nonuniform DIF were assessed. Study results demonstrated that naïve SIBTEST and Crossing SIBTEST, ignoring the multilevel data structure, yield inflated Type I error rates, while certain multilevel extensions provided better error and accuracy control.     

Detecting DIF for Polytomously Scored Items: An Adaptation of the SIBTEST Procedure

Shealy and Stout (1993) proposed a DIF detection procedure called SIBTEST and demonstrated its utility with both simulated and real data sets'. Current versions of SIBTEST can be used only for dichotomous items. In this article, an extension to handle polytomous items is developed. Two simulation studies are presented which compare the modified SIBTEST procedure with the Mantel and standardized mean difference (SMD) procedures. The first study compares the procedures under conditions in which the Mantel and SMD procedures have been shown to perform well (Zwick, Donoghue, & Grima, 1993). Results of Study I suggest that SIBTEST performed reasonably well, but that the Mantel and SMD procedures performed slightly better. The second study uses data simulated under conditions in which observed-score DIF methods for dichotomous items have not performed well. The results of Study 2 indicate that under these conditions the modified SIBTEST procedure provides better control of impact-induced Type I error inflation than the other procedures.     

Comparing Methods of Assessing Differential Item Functioning in a Computerized Adaptive Testing Environment

Mantel-Haenszel and SIBTEST, which have known difficulty in detecting non-unidirectional differential item functioning (DIF), have been adapted with some success for computerized adaptive testing (CAT). This study adapts logistic regression (LR) and the item-response-theory-likelihood-ratio test (IRT-LRT), capable of detecting both unidirectional and non-unidirectional DIF, to the CAT environment in which pretest items are assumed to be seeded in CATs but not used for trait estimation. The proposed adaptation methods were evaluated with simulated data under different sample size ratios and impact conditions in terms of Type I error, power, and specificity in identifying the form of DIF. The adapted LR and IRT-LRT procedures are more powerful than the CAT version of SIBTEST for non-unidirectional DIF detection. The good Type I error control provided by IRT-LRT under extremely unequal sample sizes and large impact is encouraging. Implications of these and other findings are discussed.     

Differential Item Functioning Assessment in Cognitive Diagnostic Modeling: Application of the Wald Test to Investigate DIF in the DINA Model

Analyzing examinees’ responses using cognitive diagnostic models (CDMs) has the advantage of providing diagnostic information. To ensure the validity of the results from these models, differential item functioning (DIF) in CDMs needs to be investigated. In this article, the Wald test is proposed to examine DIF in the context of CDMs. This study explored the effectiveness of the Wald test in detecting both uniform and nonuniform DIF in the DINA model through a simulation study. Results of this study suggest that for relatively discriminating items, the Wald test had Type I error rates close to the nominal level. Moreover, its viability was underscored by the medium to high power rates for most investigated DIF types when DIF size was large. Furthermore, the performance of the Wald test in detecting uniform DIF was compared to that of the traditional Mantel‐Haenszel (MH) and SIBTEST procedures. The results of the comparison study showed that the Wald test was comparable to or outperformed the MH and SIBTEST procedures. Finally, the strengths and limitations of the proposed method and suggestions for future studies are discussed.     

Simulation Studies of the Effects of Small Sample Size and Studied Item Parameters on SIBTEST and Mantel-Haenszel Type I Error Performance

Two simulation studies investigated Type I error performance of two statistical procedures for detecting differential item functioning (DIF): SIBTEST and Mantel-Haenszel (MH). Because MH and SIBTEST are based on asymptotic distributions requiring "large" numbers of examinees, the first study examined Type 1 error for small sample sizes. No significant Type I error inflation occurred for either procedure. Because MH has the potential for Type I error inflation for non-Rasch models, the second study used a markedly non-Rasch test and systematically varied the shape and location of the studied item. When differences in distribution across examinee group of the measured ability were present, both procedures displayed inflated Type 1 error for certain items; MH displayed the greater inflation. Also, both procedures displayed statistically biased estimation of the zero DIF for certain items, though SIBTEST displayed much less than MH. When no latent distributional differences were present, both procedures performed satisfactorily under all conditions.     

An Investigation of the Power of the Likelihood Ratio Goodness-of-Fit Statistic in Detecting Differential Item Functioning

The purpose of this study was to investigate the power and Type I error rate of the likelihood ratio goodness-of-fit (LR) statistic in detecting differential item functioning (DIF) under Samejima's (1969, 1972) graded response model. A multiple-replication Monte Carlo study was utilized in which DIF was modeled in simulated data sets which were then calibrated with MULTILOG (Thissen, 1991) using hierarchically nested item response models. In addition, the power and Type I error rate of the Mantel (1963) approach for detecting DIF in ordered response categories were investigated using the same simulated data, for comparative purposes. The power of both the Mantel and LR procedures was affected by sample size, as expected. The LR procedure lacked the power to consistently detect DIF when it existed in reference/focal groups with sample sizes as small as 500/500. The Mantel procedure maintained control of its Type I error rate and was more powerful than the LR procedure when the comparison group ability distributions were identical and there was a constant DIF pattern. On the other hand, the Mantel procedure lost control of its Type I error rate, whereas the LR procedure did not, when the comparison groups differed in mean ability; and the LR procedure demonstrated a profound power advantage over the Mantel procedure under conditions of balanced DIF in which the comparison group ability distributions were identical. The choice and subsequent use of any procedure requires a thorough understanding of the power and Type I error rates of the procedure under varying conditions of DIF pattern, comparison group ability distributions.–or as a surrogate, observed score distributions–and item characteristics.     

Simulated Tests of Differential Item Functioning Using SIBTEST With and Without Impact

Monte Carlo simulations with 20,000 replications are reported to estimate the probability of rejecting the null hypothesis regarding DIF using SIBTEST when there is DIF present and/or when impact is present due to differences on the primary dimension to be measured. Sample sizes are varied from 250 to 2000 and test lengths from 10 to 40 items. Results generally support previous findings for Type I error rates and power. Impact is inversely related to test length. The combination of DIF and impact, with the focal group having lower ability on both the primary and secondary dimensions, results in impact partially masking DIF so that items biased toward the reference group are less likely to be detected.     

Evaluating Type I Error and Power Rates Using an Effect Size Measure With the Logistic Regression Procedure for DIF Detection

The logistic regression (LR) procedure for differential item functioning (DIF) detection is a model-based approach designed to identify both uniform and nonuniform DIF. However, this procedure tends to produce inflated Type I errors. This outcome is problematic because it can result in the inefficient use of testing resources, and it may interfere with the study of the underlying causes of DIF. Recently, an effect size measure was developed for the LR DIF procedure and a classification method was proposed. However, the effect size measure and classification method have not been systematically investigated. In this study, we developed a new classification method based on those established for the Simultaneous Item Bias Test. A simulation study also was conducted to determine if the effect size measure affects the Type I error and power rates for the LR DIF procedure across sample sizes, ability distributions, and percentage of DIF items included on a test. The results indicate that the inclusion of the effect size measure can substantially reduce Type I error rates when large sample sizes are used, although there is also a reduction in power.     

Simultaneous DIF Amplification and Cancellation: Shealy-Stout's Test for DIF

The present study investigates the phenomena of simultaneous DIF amplification and cancellation and SIBTEST's role in detecting such. A variety of simulated test data were generated for this purpose. In addition, real test data from various sources were analyzed. The results from both simulated and real test data, as Sheafy and Stout's theory (1993a, 1993b) suggests, show that the SIBTEST is effective in assessing DIF amplification and cancellation (partially or fully) at the test score level. Finally, methodological and substantive implications of DIF amplification and cancellation are discussed.     

Testing Features of Graphical DIF: Application of a Regression Correction to Three Nonparametric Statistical Tests

Inspection of differential item functioning (DIF) in translated test items can be informed by graphical comparisons of item response functions (IRFs) across translated forms. Due to the many forms of DIF that can emerge in such analyses, it is important to develop statistical tests that can confirm various characteristics of DIF when present. Traditional nonparametric tests of DIF (Mantel-Haenszel, SIBTEST) are not designed to test for the presence of nonuniform or local DIF, while common probability difference (P-DIF) tests (e.g., SIBTEST) do not optimize power in testing for uniform DIF, and thus may be less useful in the context of graphical DIF analyses. In this article, modifications of three alternative nonparametric statistical tests for DIF, Fisher's χ ² test, Cochran's Z test, and Goodman's U test ( Marascuilo & Slaughter, 1981 ), are investigated for these purposes. A simulation study demonstrates the effectiveness of a regression correction procedure in improving the statistical performance of the tests when using an internal test score as the matching criterion. Simulation power and real data analyses demonstrate the unique information provided by these alternative methods compared to SIBTEST and Mantel-Haenszel in confirming various forms of DIF in translated tests.     

Effect of Sample Size Ratio and Model Misfit When Using the Difficulty Parameter Differences Procedure to Detect DIF

This study examined the effect of sample size ratio and model misfit on the Type I error rates and power of the Difficulty Parameter Differences procedure using Winsteps. A unidimensional 30-item test with responses from 130,000 examinees was simulated and four independent variables were manipulated: sample size ratio (20/100/250/500/1000); model fit/misfit (1 PL and 3PLc =. 15 models); impact (no difference/mean differences/variance differences/mean and variance differences); and percentage of items with uniform and nonuniform DIF (0%/10%/20%). In general, the results indicate the importance of ensuring model fit to achieve greater control of Type I error and adequate statistical power. The manipulated variables produced inflated Type I error rates, which were well controlled when a measure of DIF magnitude was applied. Sample size ratio also had an effect on the power of the procedure. The paper discusses the practical implications of these results.     

A Comparison of the Logistic Regression and Contingency Table Methods for Simultaneous Detection of Uniform and Nonuniform DIF

In this study, we investigate the logistic regression (LR), Mantel-Haenszel (MH), and Breslow-Day (BD) procedures for the simultaneous detection of both uniform and nonuniform differential item functioning (DIF). A simulation study was used to assess and compare the Type I error rate and power of a combined decision rule (CDR), which assesses DIF using a combination of the decisions made with BD and MH to those of LR. The results revealed that while the Type I error rate of CDR was consistently below the nominal alpha level, the Type I error rate of LR was high for the conditions having unequal ability distributions. In addition, the power of CDR was consistently higher than that of LR across all forms of DIF.     

Hierarchical Logistic Regression: Accounting for Multilevel Data in DIF Detection

The purpose of this study was to examine the performance of differential item functioning (DIF) assessment in the presence of a multilevel structure that often underlies data from large-scale testing programs. Analyses were conducted using logistic regression (LR), a popular, flexible, and effective tool for DIF detection. Data were simulated using a hierarchical framework, such as might be seen when examinees are clustered in schools, for example. Both standard and hierarchical LR (accounting for multilevel data) approaches to DIF detection were employed. Results highlight the differences in DIF detection rates when the analytic strategy matches the data structure. Specifically, when the grouping variable was within clusters, LR and HLR performed similarly in terms of Type I error control and power. However, when the grouping variable was between clusters, LR failed to maintain the nominal Type I error rate of .05. HLR was able to maintain this rate. However, power for HLR tended to be low under many conditions in the between cluster variable case.     

Identifying differential item functioning in multi-stage computer adaptive testing

The purpose of this study is to evaluate the performance of CATSIB (Computer Adaptive Testing-Simultaneous Item Bias Test) for detecting differential item functioning (DIF) when items in the matching and studied subtest are administered adaptively in the context of a realistic multi-stage adaptive test (MST). MST was simulated using a 4-item module in a 7-panel administration. Three independent variables, expected to affect DIF detection rates, were manipulated: item difficulty, sample size, and balanced/unbalanced design. CATSIB met the acceptable criteria, meaning that the Type I error and power rates met 5% and 80%, respectively, for the large reference/moderate focal sample and the large reference/large focal sample conditions. These results indicate that CATSIB can be used to consistently and accurately detect DIF on an MST, but only with moderate to large samples.     

Detecting Multidimensional DIF in Polytomous Items with IRT Methods and Estimation Approaches

The purpose of this study was to investigate multidimensional DIF with a simple and nonsimple structure in the context of multidimensional Graded Response Model (MGRM). This study examined and compared the performance of the IRT-LR and Wald test using MML-EM and MHRM estimation approaches with different test factors and test structures in simulation studies and applying real data sets. When the test structure included two dimensions, the IRT-LR (MML-EM) generally performed better than the Wald test and provided higher power rates. If the test included three dimensions, the methods provided similar performance in DIF detection. In contrast to these results, when the number of dimensions in the test was four, MML-EM estimation completely lost precision in estimating the nonuniform DIF, even with large sample sizes. The Wald with MHRM estimation approaches outperformed the Wald test (MML-EM) and IRT-LR (MML-EM). The Wald test had higher power rate and acceptable type I error rates for nonuniform DIF with the MHRM estimation approach.The small and/or unbalanced sample sizes, small DIF magnitudes, unequal ability distributions between groups, number of dimensions, estimation methods and test structure were evaluated as important test factors for detecting multidimensional DIF.     

题组DIF检验方法在HSK（高等）阅读理解中的应用

本研究引入能够处理题组效应的项目功能差异检验方法,为篇章阅读测验提供更科学的DIF检验法。研究采用GMH法、P—SIBTEST法和P—LR法对中国汉语水平考试（HSK）（高等）阅读理解试题进行了DIF检验。结果表明,这三种方法的检验结果具有较高的一致性,该部分试题在性别与国别变量上不存在显著的DIF效应。本研究还将传统的DIF检验方法与变通的题组DIF检验方法进行了比较,结果表明后者具有明显的优越性。     

二级计分数据DIF模拟研究的数据产生原理及其软件实现

和基于实测数据的DIF研究相比,基于模拟数据的DIF研究不仅可以自由操纵实验条件,而且可以给出检验力和I型错误指标。本文详细阐述了二级计分DIF模拟数据的产生原理,其产生过程包括四个阶段：选择DIF产生思路,选择项目反应理论模型,确定考生特征、题目特征和复本数,计算考生在题目上的正确作答概率并转化为二级计分数据。并且分别利用常用软件Excel和专业软件WinGen3展示了二级计分DIF模拟数据的产生过程。     

A SIBTEST Approach to Testing DIF Hypotheses Using Experimentally Designed Test Items

This paper considers a modification of the DIF procedure SIBTEST for investigating the causes of differential item functioning (DIF). One way in which factors believed to be responsible for DIF can be investigated is by systematically manipulating them across multiple versions of an item using a randomized DIF study (Schmitt, Holland, & Dorans, 1993). In this paper: it is shown that the additivity of the index used for testing DIF in SIBTEST motivates a new extension of the method for statistically testing the effects of DIF factors. Because an important consideration is whether or not a studied DIF factor is consistent in its effects across items, a methodology for testing item x factor interactions is also presented. Using data from the mathematical sections of the Scholastic Assessment Test (SAT), the effects of two potential DIF factors—item format (multiple-choice versus open-ended) and problem type (abstract versus concrete)—are investigated for gender Results suggest a small but statistically significant and consistent effect of item format (favoring males for multiple-choice items) across items, and a larger but less consistent effect due to problem type.     

Detection of Differential Item Functioning for More Than Two Groups: A Monte Carlo Comparison of Methods

ABSTRACT

Differential item functioning (DIF) assessment is a crucial component in test construction, serving as the primary way in which instrument developers ensure that measures perform in the same way for multiple groups within the population. When such is not the case, scores may not accurately reflect the trait of interest for all individuals in the population. Most DIF research has focused on the two groups case. However, in practice researchers may wish to investigate DIF for more than two groups; that is, for examinee ethnicity, nation of origin, or treatment condition, among others. DIF detection methods for such cases have been proposed, but little empirical work has been done to investigate their performance. Therefore, the goal of the current study was to use a simulation methodology to compare four proposed methods for assessing DIF in the multiple groups case, including the Generalized Mantel-Haenszel test, Generalized Logistic Regression, Lord’s chi-square test, and the multiple group alignment procedure. Results showed that the Generalized Mantel-Haenszel and alignment procedures provided the optimal combination of Type I error control and power.     

DIF Detection Using Multiple‐Group Categorical CFA With Minimum Free Baseline Approach

The aim of this study is to assess the efficiency of using the multiple‐group categorical confirmatory factor analysis (MCCFA) and the robust chi‐square difference test in differential item functioning (DIF) detection for polytomous items under the minimum free baseline strategy. While testing for DIF items, despite the strong assumption that all but the examined item are set to be DIF‐free, MCCFA with such a constrained baseline approach is commonly used in the literature. The present study relaxes this strong assumption and adopts the minimum free baseline approach where, aside from those parameters constrained for identification purpose, parameters of all but the examined item are allowed to differ among groups. Based on the simulation results, the robust chi‐square difference test statistic with the mean and variance adjustment is shown to be efficient in detecting DIF for polytomous items in terms of the empirical power and Type I error rates. To sum up, MCCFA under the minimum free baseline strategy is useful for DIF detection for polytomous items.