二级物流多阶段评估中差异项目功能的检测

Psych Pub Date : 2023-05-31 DOI:10.3390/psych5020031
Rudolf Debelak, S. Appelbaum, Dries Debeer, M. Tomasik
{"title":"二级物流多阶段评估中差异项目功能的检测","authors":"Rudolf Debelak, S. Appelbaum, Dries Debeer, M. Tomasik","doi":"10.3390/psych5020031","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The detection of differential item functioning is crucial for the psychometric evaluation of multistage tests. This paper discusses five approaches presented in the literature: logistic regression, SIBTEST, analytical score-based tests, bootstrap score-based tests, and permutation score-based tests. First, using an simulation study inspired by a real-life large-scale educational assessment, we compare the five approaches with respect to their type I error rate and their statistical power. Then, we present an application to an empirical data set. We find that all approaches show type I error rates close to the nominal alpha level. Furthermore, all approaches are shown to be sensitive to uniform and non-uniform DIF effects, with the score-based tests showing the highest power.","PeriodicalId":93139,"journal":{"name":"Psych","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-05-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Detecting Differential Item Functioning in 2PL Multistage Assessments\",\"authors\":\"Rudolf Debelak, S. Appelbaum, Dries Debeer, M. Tomasik\",\"doi\":\"10.3390/psych5020031\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The detection of differential item functioning is crucial for the psychometric evaluation of multistage tests. This paper discusses five approaches presented in the literature: logistic regression, SIBTEST, analytical score-based tests, bootstrap score-based tests, and permutation score-based tests. First, using an simulation study inspired by a real-life large-scale educational assessment, we compare the five approaches with respect to their type I error rate and their statistical power. Then, we present an application to an empirical data set. We find that all approaches show type I error rates close to the nominal alpha level. Furthermore, all approaches are shown to be sensitive to uniform and non-uniform DIF effects, with the score-based tests showing the highest power.\",\"PeriodicalId\":93139,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Psych\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-05-31\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Psych\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.3390/psych5020031\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Psych","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3390/psych5020031","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

不同项目功能的检测对于多阶段测试的心理测量评估至关重要。本文讨论了文献中提出的五种方法:逻辑回归、SIBTEST、基于分析分数的测试、基于bootstrap分数的测试和基于排列分数的测试。首先,利用一项受现实生活中大规模教育评估启发的模拟研究,我们比较了这五种方法的I型错误率和统计能力。然后,我们提出了一个应用于一个经验数据集。我们发现,所有方法都显示出接近标称阿尔法水平的I型错误率。此外,所有方法都对均匀和非均匀DIF效应敏感,基于分数的测试显示出最高的功效。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Detecting Differential Item Functioning in 2PL Multistage Assessments
The detection of differential item functioning is crucial for the psychometric evaluation of multistage tests. This paper discusses five approaches presented in the literature: logistic regression, SIBTEST, analytical score-based tests, bootstrap score-based tests, and permutation score-based tests. First, using an simulation study inspired by a real-life large-scale educational assessment, we compare the five approaches with respect to their type I error rate and their statistical power. Then, we present an application to an empirical data set. We find that all approaches show type I error rates close to the nominal alpha level. Furthermore, all approaches are shown to be sensitive to uniform and non-uniform DIF effects, with the score-based tests showing the highest power.
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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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