多元计分项目中微分项目和阶跃功能程序的研究

IF 0.5 Q4 PSYCHOLOGY, EDUCATIONAL
Yasemin KUZU, Selahattin GELBAL
{"title":"多元计分项目中微分项目和阶跃功能程序的研究","authors":"Yasemin KUZU, Selahattin GELBAL","doi":"10.21031/epod.1221823","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"This study aimed to compare differential item functioning (DIF) and differential step function (DSF) detection methods in polytomously scored items under various conditions. In this context, the study examined Kazakhstan, Turkey and USA data obtained from the items related to the frequency of using digital devices at school in PISA 2018 students’ “ICT Familiarity Questionnaire”. Mantel test, Liu-Agresti statistics, Cox β and poly-SIBTEST methods were used for polytomous DIF analysis while Adjacent Category Logistic Regression Model and Cumulative Category Log Odds Ratio methods were used for DSF analysis. This study was carried out with correlational survey model, by using “differential category combining, focus group sample size, focus group: reference group sample ratio and DIF/DSF detection method”. SAS and R software were utilized in the creation of conditions; SIBTEST was used for poly-SIBTEST for analysis and DIFAS programs were used for the other methods. Analyses demonstrated that the number of items/steps exhibiting high level of DIF/DSF was higher in the small sample according to polytomous DIF methods and in the large sample compared to DSF methods. During the steps, it was stated that the DIF value was lower in the items containing DSF with the opposite sign; therefore, not performing DSF analysis in an item with no DIF may yield erroneous results. Although the differential category combining conditions created within the scope of the research did not have a systematic effect on the results, it was suggested to examine this situation in future studies, considering that the frequency of marking the combined categories differentiated the results.","PeriodicalId":43015,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Measurement and Evaluation in Education and Psychology-EPOD","volume":"50 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.5000,"publicationDate":"2023-09-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Investigation of differential item and step functioning procedurs in polytomously scored items\",\"authors\":\"Yasemin KUZU, Selahattin GELBAL\",\"doi\":\"10.21031/epod.1221823\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"This study aimed to compare differential item functioning (DIF) and differential step function (DSF) detection methods in polytomously scored items under various conditions. In this context, the study examined Kazakhstan, Turkey and USA data obtained from the items related to the frequency of using digital devices at school in PISA 2018 students’ “ICT Familiarity Questionnaire”. Mantel test, Liu-Agresti statistics, Cox β and poly-SIBTEST methods were used for polytomous DIF analysis while Adjacent Category Logistic Regression Model and Cumulative Category Log Odds Ratio methods were used for DSF analysis. This study was carried out with correlational survey model, by using “differential category combining, focus group sample size, focus group: reference group sample ratio and DIF/DSF detection method”. SAS and R software were utilized in the creation of conditions; SIBTEST was used for poly-SIBTEST for analysis and DIFAS programs were used for the other methods. Analyses demonstrated that the number of items/steps exhibiting high level of DIF/DSF was higher in the small sample according to polytomous DIF methods and in the large sample compared to DSF methods. During the steps, it was stated that the DIF value was lower in the items containing DSF with the opposite sign; therefore, not performing DSF analysis in an item with no DIF may yield erroneous results. Although the differential category combining conditions created within the scope of the research did not have a systematic effect on the results, it was suggested to examine this situation in future studies, considering that the frequency of marking the combined categories differentiated the results.\",\"PeriodicalId\":43015,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Measurement and Evaluation in Education and Psychology-EPOD\",\"volume\":\"50 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-09-30\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Measurement and Evaluation in Education and Psychology-EPOD\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.21031/epod.1221823\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"PSYCHOLOGY, EDUCATIONAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Measurement and Evaluation in Education and Psychology-EPOD","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.21031/epod.1221823","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"PSYCHOLOGY, EDUCATIONAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

本研究旨在比较不同条件下多元计分项目的差分项目功能(DIF)和差分阶跃函数(DSF)检测方法。在此背景下,该研究检查了哈萨克斯坦、土耳其和美国的数据,这些数据来自2018年PISA学生“ICT熟悉度问卷”中与学校使用数字设备频率相关的项目。多元DIF分析采用Mantel检验、Liu-Agresti统计、Cox β和poly-SIBTEST方法,DSF分析采用邻类Logistic回归模型和累积类对数优势比方法。本研究采用相关调查模型,采用“差异类别组合、焦点组样本量、焦点组:参照组样本比例、DIF/DSF检测法”。采用SAS和R软件进行条件创设;采用SIBTEST进行poly-SIBTEST分析,其他方法采用DIFAS程序。分析表明,与多元DIF方法相比,在小样本中表现出高水平DIF/DSF的项目/步骤数量更高,而在大样本中表现出高水平的DIF/DSF。在步骤中,指出DIF值在含有相反符号的DSF的项目中较低;因此,在没有DIF的项目中不执行DSF分析可能会产生错误的结果。虽然在研究范围内创建的差异类别组合条件对结果没有系统影响,但考虑到标记组合类别的频率会对结果产生差异,建议在未来的研究中检查这种情况。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Investigation of differential item and step functioning procedurs in polytomously scored items
This study aimed to compare differential item functioning (DIF) and differential step function (DSF) detection methods in polytomously scored items under various conditions. In this context, the study examined Kazakhstan, Turkey and USA data obtained from the items related to the frequency of using digital devices at school in PISA 2018 students’ “ICT Familiarity Questionnaire”. Mantel test, Liu-Agresti statistics, Cox β and poly-SIBTEST methods were used for polytomous DIF analysis while Adjacent Category Logistic Regression Model and Cumulative Category Log Odds Ratio methods were used for DSF analysis. This study was carried out with correlational survey model, by using “differential category combining, focus group sample size, focus group: reference group sample ratio and DIF/DSF detection method”. SAS and R software were utilized in the creation of conditions; SIBTEST was used for poly-SIBTEST for analysis and DIFAS programs were used for the other methods. Analyses demonstrated that the number of items/steps exhibiting high level of DIF/DSF was higher in the small sample according to polytomous DIF methods and in the large sample compared to DSF methods. During the steps, it was stated that the DIF value was lower in the items containing DSF with the opposite sign; therefore, not performing DSF analysis in an item with no DIF may yield erroneous results. Although the differential category combining conditions created within the scope of the research did not have a systematic effect on the results, it was suggested to examine this situation in future studies, considering that the frequency of marking the combined categories differentiated the results.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
0.70
自引率
20.00%
发文量
14
审稿时长
10 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信