Skip to main content
main-content
Top

Tip

Swipe om te navigeren naar een ander artikel

Gepubliceerd in: Journal of Psychopathology and Behavioral Assessment 4/2009

01-12-2009

Illustration of MIMIC-Model DIF Testing with the Schedule for Nonadaptive and Adaptive Personality

Auteurs: Carol M. Woods, Thomas F. Oltmanns, Eric Turkheimer

Gepubliceerd in: Journal of Psychopathology and Behavioral Assessment | Uitgave 4/2009

Log in om toegang te krijgen
share
DELEN

Deel dit onderdeel of sectie (kopieer de link)

  • Optie A:
    Klik op de rechtermuisknop op de link en selecteer de optie “linkadres kopiëren”
  • Optie B:
    Deel de link per e-mail

Abstract

This research provides an example of testing for differential item functioning (DIF) using multiple indicator multiple cause (MIMIC) structural equation models. True/False items on five scales of the Schedule for Nonadaptive and Adaptive Personality (SNAP) were tested for uniform DIF in a sample of Air Force recruits with groups defined by gender and ethnicity. Uniform DIF exists when an item is more easily endorsed for one group than the other, controlling for group mean differences on the variable under study. Results revealed significant DIF for many SNAP items and some effects were quite large. Differentially-functioning items can produce measurement bias and should be either deleted or modeled as if separate items were administered to different groups. Future research should aim to determine whether the DIF observed here holds for other samples.
Voetnoten
1
Uniform DIF occurs when item thresholds differ between groups: An item is more easily endorsed for one group than the other. DIF is nonuniform if item discrimination also differs between groups; thus, the group difference depends on the level of the latent variable.
 
2
Because each scale is evaluated for DIF separately from the other scales, it is not problematic for a SNAP item to be included on more than one scale.
 
Literatuur
go back to reference American Psychiatric Association (1987). Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders (3rd ed.). Washington, DC: Author. American Psychiatric Association (1987). Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders (3rd ed.). Washington, DC: Author.
go back to reference Benjamini, Y., & Hochberg, Y. (1995). Controlling the false discovery rate: a practical and powerful approach to multiple testing. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society, Series B, 57, 289–300. Benjamini, Y., & Hochberg, Y. (1995). Controlling the false discovery rate: a practical and powerful approach to multiple testing. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society, Series B, 57, 289–300.
go back to reference Birnbaum, A. (1968). Some latent trait models. In F. M. Lord, & M. R. Novick (Eds.) Statistical theories of mental test scores (pp. 395–479). Reading, MA: Addison & Wesley. Birnbaum, A. (1968). Some latent trait models. In F. M. Lord, & M. R. Novick (Eds.) Statistical theories of mental test scores (pp. 395–479). Reading, MA: Addison & Wesley.
go back to reference Camilli, G., & Shepard, L. A. (1994). Methods for identifying biased test items. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Camilli, G., & Shepard, L. A. (1994). Methods for identifying biased test items. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
go back to reference Clark, L. (1996). SNAP Manual for administration, scoring, and interpretation. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press. Clark, L. (1996). SNAP Manual for administration, scoring, and interpretation. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota Press.
go back to reference Finch, H. (2005). The MIMIC model as a method for detecting DIF: comparison with Mantel-Haenszel, SIBTEST, and the IRT likelihood ratio. Applied Psychological Measurement, 29, 278–295. CrossRef Finch, H. (2005). The MIMIC model as a method for detecting DIF: comparison with Mantel-Haenszel, SIBTEST, and the IRT likelihood ratio. Applied Psychological Measurement, 29, 278–295. CrossRef
go back to reference Hathaway, S. R., & McKinley, J. C. (1940). A multiphasic personality schedule (Minnesota): I. Construction of the schedule. Journal of Psychology, 10, 249–254. Hathaway, S. R., & McKinley, J. C. (1940). A multiphasic personality schedule (Minnesota): I. Construction of the schedule. Journal of Psychology, 10, 249–254.
go back to reference Holland, P.W. & Wainer, H. (Eds.). (1993). Differential item functioning. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. Holland, P.W. & Wainer, H. (Eds.). (1993). Differential item functioning. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
go back to reference MacIntosh, R., & Hashim, S. (2003). Variance estimation for converting MIMIC model parameters to IRT parameters in DIF analysis. Applied Psychological Measurement, 27, 372–379. CrossRef MacIntosh, R., & Hashim, S. (2003). Variance estimation for converting MIMIC model parameters to IRT parameters in DIF analysis. Applied Psychological Measurement, 27, 372–379. CrossRef
go back to reference Mellenbergh, G. J. (1989). Item bias and item response theory. International Journal of Educational Research, 13, 127–143. CrossRef Mellenbergh, G. J. (1989). Item bias and item response theory. International Journal of Educational Research, 13, 127–143. CrossRef
go back to reference Millsap, R. E., & Everson, H. T. (1993). Methodology review: statistical approaches for assessing measurement bias. Applied Psychological Measurement, 17, 297–334. CrossRef Millsap, R. E., & Everson, H. T. (1993). Methodology review: statistical approaches for assessing measurement bias. Applied Psychological Measurement, 17, 297–334. CrossRef
go back to reference Muthén, B. O. (1985). A method for studying the homogeneity of test items with respect to other relevant variables. Journal of educational statistics, 10, 121–132. CrossRef Muthén, B. O. (1985). A method for studying the homogeneity of test items with respect to other relevant variables. Journal of educational statistics, 10, 121–132. CrossRef
go back to reference Muthén, B. O. (1988). Some uses of structural equation modeling in validity studies: Extending IRT to external variables. In H. Wainer, & H. I. Braun (Eds.) Test Validity (pp. 213–238). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. Muthén, B. O. (1988). Some uses of structural equation modeling in validity studies: Extending IRT to external variables. In H. Wainer, & H. I. Braun (Eds.) Test Validity (pp. 213–238). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
go back to reference Muthén, B. O. (1989). Latent variable modeling in heterogeneous populations. Psychometrika, 54, 557–585. CrossRef Muthén, B. O. (1989). Latent variable modeling in heterogeneous populations. Psychometrika, 54, 557–585. CrossRef
go back to reference Muthén, B. O., Kao, C., & Burstein, L. (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. CrossRef Muthén, B. O., Kao, C., & Burstein, L. (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. CrossRef
go back to reference Muthén, L. K., & Muthén, B. O. (2007). Mplus: Statistical Analysis with Latent Variables, (Version 4.21) [Computer software]. Los Angeles, CA: Muthén & Muthén. Muthén, L. K., & Muthén, B. O. (2007). Mplus: Statistical Analysis with Latent Variables, (Version 4.21) [Computer software]. Los Angeles, CA: Muthén & Muthén.
go back to reference Oltmanns, T. F., & Turkheimer, E. (2006). Perceptions of self and others regarding pathological personality traits. In R. F. Krueger, & J. Tackett (Eds.) Personality and psychopathology: Building bridges. New York: Guilford. Oltmanns, T. F., & Turkheimer, E. (2006). Perceptions of self and others regarding pathological personality traits. In R. F. Krueger, & J. Tackett (Eds.) Personality and psychopathology: Building bridges. New York: Guilford.
go back to reference Simms, L. J., & Clark, L. A. (2006). Chapter 17: The schedule for nonadaptive and adaptive personality (SNAP): A dimensional measure of traits relevant to personality and personality pathology. Differentiating Normal & Abnormal Personality. New York: Springer. Simms, L. J., & Clark, L. A. (2006). Chapter 17: The schedule for nonadaptive and adaptive personality (SNAP): A dimensional measure of traits relevant to personality and personality pathology. Differentiating Normal & Abnormal Personality. New York: Springer.
go back to reference Stark, S., Chernyshenko, O. S., & Drasgow, F. (2006). Detecting differential item functioning with confirmatory factor analysis and item response theory: Toward a unified strategy. Journal of Applied Psychology, 91, 1291–1306. Stark, S., Chernyshenko, O. S., & Drasgow, F. (2006). Detecting differential item functioning with confirmatory factor analysis and item response theory: Toward a unified strategy. Journal of Applied Psychology, 91, 1291–1306.
go back to reference Thissen, D., Steinberg, L., & Gerrard, M. (1986). Beyond group-mean differences: The concept of item bias. Psychological Bulletin, 99, 118–128. CrossRef Thissen, D., Steinberg, L., & Gerrard, M. (1986). Beyond group-mean differences: The concept of item bias. Psychological Bulletin, 99, 118–128. CrossRef
go back to reference Thissen, D., Steinberg, L., & Wainer, H. (1988). Use of item response theory in the study of group difference in trace lines. In H. Wainer, & H. Braun (Eds.) Test validity (pp. 147–169). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum. Thissen, D., Steinberg, L., & Wainer, H. (1988). Use of item response theory in the study of group difference in trace lines. In H. Wainer, & H. Braun (Eds.) Test validity (pp. 147–169). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
go back to reference Thissen, D., Steinberg, L., & Wainer, H. (1993). Detection of differential item functioning using the parameters of item response models. In P.W. Holland, & H. Wainer (Eds.) Differential item functioning (pp. 67–111). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum. Thissen, D., Steinberg, L., & Wainer, H. (1993). Detection of differential item functioning using the parameters of item response models. In P.W. Holland, & H. Wainer (Eds.) Differential item functioning (pp. 67–111). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
go back to reference Thissen, D., Steinberg, L., & Kuang, D. (2002). Quick and easy implementation of the Benjamini-Hochberg procedure for controlling the false positive rate in multiple comparisons. Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics, 27, 77–83. CrossRef Thissen, D., Steinberg, L., & Kuang, D. (2002). Quick and easy implementation of the Benjamini-Hochberg procedure for controlling the false positive rate in multiple comparisons. Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics, 27, 77–83. CrossRef
go back to reference Waller, N. G., Thompson, J. S., & Wenk, E. (2000). Using IRT to separate measurement bias from true group differences on homogeneous and heterogeneous scales: An illustration with the MMPI. Psychological Methods, 5, 125–146. CrossRefPubMed Waller, N. G., Thompson, J. S., & Wenk, E. (2000). Using IRT to separate measurement bias from true group differences on homogeneous and heterogeneous scales: An illustration with the MMPI. Psychological Methods, 5, 125–146. CrossRefPubMed
go back to reference Wang, W. (2004). Effects of anchor item methods on detection of differential item functioning within the family of Rasch models. The Journal of Experimental Education, 72, 221–261. CrossRef Wang, W. (2004). Effects of anchor item methods on detection of differential item functioning within the family of Rasch models. The Journal of Experimental Education, 72, 221–261. CrossRef
go back to reference Wang, W., & Yeh, Y. (2003). Effects of anchor item methods on differential item functioning detection with the likelihood ratio test. Applied Psychological Measurement, 27, 479–498. CrossRef Wang, W., & Yeh, Y. (2003). Effects of anchor item methods on differential item functioning detection with the likelihood ratio test. Applied Psychological Measurement, 27, 479–498. CrossRef
go back to reference Williams, V. S. L., Jones, L. V., & Tukey, J. W. (1999). Controlling error in multiple comparisons, with examples from state-to-state differences in educational achievement. Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics, 24, 42–69. Williams, V. S. L., Jones, L. V., & Tukey, J. W. (1999). Controlling error in multiple comparisons, with examples from state-to-state differences in educational achievement. Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics, 24, 42–69.
go back to reference Woods, C. M. (in press). Evaluation of MIMIC-model methods for DIF testing with comparison to two-group analysis. Multivariate Behavioral Research. Woods, C. M. (in press). Evaluation of MIMIC-model methods for DIF testing with comparison to two-group analysis. Multivariate Behavioral Research.
go back to reference Woods, C. M., Oltmanns, T. F., & Turkheimer, E. (2008). Detection of aberrant responding on a personality scale in a military sample: An application of evaluating person fit with two-level logistic regression. Psychological Assessment, 20, 159–168. CrossRefPubMed Woods, C. M., Oltmanns, T. F., & Turkheimer, E. (2008). Detection of aberrant responding on a personality scale in a military sample: An application of evaluating person fit with two-level logistic regression. Psychological Assessment, 20, 159–168. CrossRefPubMed
Metagegevens
Titel
Illustration of MIMIC-Model DIF Testing with the Schedule for Nonadaptive and Adaptive Personality
Auteurs
Carol M. Woods
Thomas F. Oltmanns
Eric Turkheimer
Publicatiedatum
01-12-2009
Uitgeverij
Springer US
Gepubliceerd in
Journal of Psychopathology and Behavioral Assessment / Uitgave 4/2009
Print ISSN: 0882-2689
Elektronisch ISSN: 1573-3505
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10862-008-9118-9

Andere artikelen Uitgave 4/2009

Journal of Psychopathology and Behavioral Assessment 4/2009 Naar de uitgave