差异项目功能效应大小用于有效性信息。

IF 2.1 3区 心理学 Q2 MATHEMATICS, INTERDISCIPLINARY APPLICATIONS
W Holmes Finch, Maria Dolores Hidalgo Montesinos, Brian F French, Maria Hernandez Finch
{"title":"差异项目功能效应大小用于有效性信息。","authors":"W Holmes Finch, Maria Dolores Hidalgo Montesinos, Brian F French, Maria Hernandez Finch","doi":"10.1177/00131644241293694","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>There has been an emphasis on effect sizes for differential item functioning (DIF) with the purpose to understand the magnitude of the differences that are detected through statistical significance testing. Several different effect sizes have been suggested that correspond to the method used for analysis, as have different guidelines for interpretation. The purpose of this simulation study was to compare the performance of the DIF effect size measures described for quantifying and comparing the amount of DIF in two assessments. Several factors were manipulated that were thought to influence the effect sizes or are known to influence DIF detection. This study asked the following two questions. First, do the effect sizes accurately capture aggregate DIF across items? Second, do effect sizes accurately identify which assessment has the least amount of DIF? We highlight effect sizes that had support for performing well across several simulated conditions. We also apply these effect sizes to a real data set to provide an example. Results of the study revealed that the log odds ratio of fixed effects (Ln <math> <mrow> <msub> <mrow> <mover><mrow><mi>OR</mi></mrow> <mo>¯</mo></mover> </mrow> <mrow><mi>FE</mi></mrow> </msub> </mrow> </math> ) and the variance of the Mantel-Haenszel log odds ratio ( <math> <mrow> <msup> <mrow> <mover><mrow><mi>τ</mi></mrow> <mo>^</mo></mover> </mrow> <mrow><mn>2</mn></mrow> </msup> </mrow> </math> ) were most accurate for identifying which test contains more DIF. We point to future directions with this work to aid the continued focus on effect sizes to understand DIF magnitude.</p>","PeriodicalId":11502,"journal":{"name":"Educational and Psychological Measurement","volume":" ","pages":"00131644241293694"},"PeriodicalIF":2.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-22","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11583394/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Differential Item Functioning Effect Size Use for Validity Information.\",\"authors\":\"W Holmes Finch, Maria Dolores Hidalgo Montesinos, Brian F French, Maria Hernandez Finch\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/00131644241293694\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>There has been an emphasis on effect sizes for differential item functioning (DIF) with the purpose to understand the magnitude of the differences that are detected through statistical significance testing. Several different effect sizes have been suggested that correspond to the method used for analysis, as have different guidelines for interpretation. The purpose of this simulation study was to compare the performance of the DIF effect size measures described for quantifying and comparing the amount of DIF in two assessments. Several factors were manipulated that were thought to influence the effect sizes or are known to influence DIF detection. This study asked the following two questions. First, do the effect sizes accurately capture aggregate DIF across items? Second, do effect sizes accurately identify which assessment has the least amount of DIF? We highlight effect sizes that had support for performing well across several simulated conditions. We also apply these effect sizes to a real data set to provide an example. Results of the study revealed that the log odds ratio of fixed effects (Ln <math> <mrow> <msub> <mrow> <mover><mrow><mi>OR</mi></mrow> <mo>¯</mo></mover> </mrow> <mrow><mi>FE</mi></mrow> </msub> </mrow> </math> ) and the variance of the Mantel-Haenszel log odds ratio ( <math> <mrow> <msup> <mrow> <mover><mrow><mi>τ</mi></mrow> <mo>^</mo></mover> </mrow> <mrow><mn>2</mn></mrow> </msup> </mrow> </math> ) were most accurate for identifying which test contains more DIF. We point to future directions with this work to aid the continued focus on effect sizes to understand DIF magnitude.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":11502,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Educational and Psychological Measurement\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"00131644241293694\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-11-22\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11583394/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Educational and Psychological Measurement\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"102\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/00131644241293694\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"心理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"MATHEMATICS, INTERDISCIPLINARY APPLICATIONS\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Educational and Psychological Measurement","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/00131644241293694","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"MATHEMATICS, INTERDISCIPLINARY APPLICATIONS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

人们一直在强调差异项目功能(DIF)的效应大小,目的是了解通过统计显著性检验发现的差异的程度。根据分析方法的不同,提出了几种不同的效应大小,以及不同的解释准则。本模拟研究的目的是比较用于量化和比较两个评估中 DIF 量的 DIF 效果大小测量的性能。对一些被认为会影响效应大小或已知会影响 DIF 检测的因素进行了操作。本研究提出了以下两个问题。首先,效应大小是否准确地反映了各项目之间的总体 DIF?其次,效应大小是否能准确确定哪项评估的 DIF 量最少?我们强调了在几种模拟条件下表现良好的效应大小。我们还将这些效应量应用于一个真实数据集,以提供一个示例。研究结果表明,固定效应的对数几率比(Ln OR ¯ FE)和曼特尔-海恩泽尔对数几率比的方差(τ ^ 2)对于识别哪种测试包含更多的 DIF 最为准确。我们指出了这项工作的未来方向,有助于继续关注效应大小以了解 DIF 的程度。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Differential Item Functioning Effect Size Use for Validity Information.

There has been an emphasis on effect sizes for differential item functioning (DIF) with the purpose to understand the magnitude of the differences that are detected through statistical significance testing. Several different effect sizes have been suggested that correspond to the method used for analysis, as have different guidelines for interpretation. The purpose of this simulation study was to compare the performance of the DIF effect size measures described for quantifying and comparing the amount of DIF in two assessments. Several factors were manipulated that were thought to influence the effect sizes or are known to influence DIF detection. This study asked the following two questions. First, do the effect sizes accurately capture aggregate DIF across items? Second, do effect sizes accurately identify which assessment has the least amount of DIF? We highlight effect sizes that had support for performing well across several simulated conditions. We also apply these effect sizes to a real data set to provide an example. Results of the study revealed that the log odds ratio of fixed effects (Ln OR ¯ FE ) and the variance of the Mantel-Haenszel log odds ratio ( τ ^ 2 ) were most accurate for identifying which test contains more DIF. We point to future directions with this work to aid the continued focus on effect sizes to understand DIF magnitude.

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
Educational and Psychological Measurement
Educational and Psychological Measurement 医学-数学跨学科应用
CiteScore
5.50
自引率
7.40%
发文量
49
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: Educational and Psychological Measurement (EPM) publishes referred scholarly work from all academic disciplines interested in the study of measurement theory, problems, and issues. Theoretical articles address new developments and techniques, and applied articles deal with innovation applications.
×
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