Examining differential item functioning due to item difficulty and alternative attractiveness

A method for analyzing test item responses is proposed to examine differential item functioning (DIF) in multiple-choice items through a combination of the usual notion of DIF, for correct/incorrect responses and information about DIF contained in each of the alternatives. The proposed method uses incomplete latent class models to examine whether DIF is caused by the attractiveness of the alternatives, difficulty of the item, or both. DIF with respect to either known or unknown subgroups can be tested by a likelihood ratio test that is asymptotically distributed as a chi-square random variable.

[1]  F. Lord.  Applications of Item Response Theory To Practical Testing Problems , 1980 .

[2]  R. McHugh.  Efficient estimation and local identification in latent class analysis , 1956 .

[3]  Georg Rasch,et al.  Probabilistic Models for Some Intelligence and Attainment Tests , 1981, The SAGE Encyclopedia of Research Design.

[4]  G. J. Mellenbergh.  Contingency Table Models for Assessing Item Bias , 1982 .

[5]  F. Baker.  Advances in Item Analysis , 1977 .

[6]  P. Holland,et al.  Discrete Multivariate Analysis. , 1976 .

[7]  Lawrence M. Rudner.  Biased Item Detection Techniques. , 1980 .

[8]  George B. Macready,et al.  The Use of Loglinear Models for Assessing Differential Item Functioning Across Manifest and Latent Examinee Groups , 1990 .

[9]  D. Thissen,et al.  Multiple-Choice Models: The Distractors Are also Part of the Item. , 1989 .

[10]  Bengt Muthén,et al.  Multiple Group IRT Modeling: Applications to Item Bias Analysis , 1985 .

[11]  Stephen E. Fienberg,et al.  Discrete Multivariate Analysis: Theory and Practice , 1976 .

[12]  Jay Magidson,et al.  Analyzing qualitative/categorical data: Log-linear models and latent-structure analysis , 1978 .

[13]  J. Scheuneman.  A METHOD OF ASSESSING BIAS IN TEST ITEMS , 1979 .

[14]  Henk Kelderman,et al.  Item bias detection using loglinear irt , 1989 .

[15]  T. Plomp,et al.  The implemented and attained mathematics curriculum: Some results of the second international mathematics study in The Netherlands , 1987 .

[16]  C. Clogg.  Latent Structure Models of Mobility , 1981, American Journal of Sociology.

[17]  Lawrence M. Rudner,et al.  A MONTE CARLO COMPARISON OF SEVEN BIASED ITEM DETECTION TECHNIQUES , 1980 .

[18]  R. Berk.  Handbook of methods for detecting test bias , 1982 .

[19]  Steven J. Osterlind,et al.  Test item bias , 1983 .

[20]  S. Haberman.  Analysis of qualitative data , 1978 .

[21]  Howard Wainer,et al.  Detection of differential item functioning using the parameters of item response models. , 1993 .

[22]  Robert J. Mislevy,et al.  Modeling item responses when different subjects employ different solution strategies , 1990 .

[23]  Noel A Cressie,et al.  Characterizing the manifest probabilities of latent trait models , 1983 .

[24]  Paul F. Lazarsfeld,et al.  Latent Structure Analysis. , 1969 .

[25]  B. Green,et al.  A Method for Studying Differential Distractor Functioning , 1989 .

[26]  Alfred Binet,et al.  The Development Of Intelligence In Children , 1916 .

[27]  Assessing Cultural Bias Using Foil Response Data: Cultural Variation. , 1983 .

[28]  R. Darrell Bock,et al.  Estimating item parameters and latent ability when responses are scored in two or more nominal categories , 1972 .