Comparing the Robustness of Three Nonparametric DIF Procedures to Differential Rapid Guessing

Autor/inn/en	Abulela, Mohammed A. A.; Rios, Joseph A.
Titel	Comparing the Robustness of Three Nonparametric DIF Procedures to Differential Rapid Guessing
Quelle	In: Applied Measurement in Education, 35 (2022) 2, S.81-94 (14 Seiten)Infoseite zur Zeitschrift PDF als Volltext Verfügbarkeit
Zusatzinformation	ORCID (Abulela, Mohammed A. A.) ORCID (Rios, Joseph A.)
Sprache	englisch
Dokumenttyp	gedruckt; online; Zeitschriftenaufsatz
ISSN	0895-7347
DOI	10.1080/08957347.2022.2067542
Schlagwörter	Comparative Analysis; Robustness (Statistics); Nonparametric Statistics; Item Analysis; Error of Measurement; Simulation; Regression (Statistics); Sample Size; Difficulty Level; Classification; Responses; Achievement Tests; Secondary School Students; Foreign Countries; International Assessment; Test Items; Guessing (Tests); Program for International Student Assessment + Suchen Sie Ihr Suchwort? Widerstandsfähigkeit; Itemanalyse; Messfehler; Simulation program; Simulationsprogramm; Regression; Regressionsanalyse; Schwierigkeitsgrad; Classification system; Klassifikation; Klassifikationssystem; Achievement test; Achievement; Testing; Test; Tests; Leistungsbeurteilung; Leistungsüberprüfung; Leistung; Testdurchführung; Testen; Sekundarschüler; Ausland; Test content; Testaufgabe; Erraten
Abstract	When there are no personal consequences associated with test performance for examinees, rapid guessing (RG) is a concern and can differ between subgroups. To date, the impact of differential RG on item-level measurement invariance has received minimal attention. To that end, a simulation study was conducted to examine the robustness of the Mantel-Haenszel (MH), standardization index (STD), and logistic regression (LR) differential item functioning (DIF) procedures to type I error in the presence of differential RG. Sample size, test difficulty, group impact, and differential RG rates were manipulated. Findings revealed that the LR procedure was completely robust to type I errors, while slightly elevated false positive rates (< 1%) were observed for the MH and STD procedures. An applied analysis examining data from the Programme for International Student Assessment showed minimal differences in DIF classifications when comparing data in which RG responses were unfiltered and filtered. These results suggest that large rates of differences in RG rates between subgroups are unassociated with false positive classifications of DIF. (As Provided).
Anmerkungen	Routledge. Available from: Taylor & Francis, Ltd. 530 Walnut Street Suite 850, Philadelphia, PA 19106. Tel: 800-354-1420; Tel: 215-625-8900; Fax: 215-207-0050; Web site: http://www.tandf.co.uk/journals
Erfasst von	ERIC (Education Resources Information Center), Washington, DC
Update	2024/1/01