Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

Click here for more information on Research and Evaluation in Education and Psychology, 3e

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
Educational and Psychological Measurement
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow References
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Right arrow Citing Articles via Scopus
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Marañón, P. P.
Right arrow Articles by Costas, C. S. L.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati   Add to Twitter  
What's this?

Identification of Nonuniform Differential Item Functioning: A Comparison of Mantel-Haenszel and Item Response Theory Analysis Procedures

Pedro Prieto Marañón

Universidad de La Laguna

M. Isabel Barbero Garcia

Universidad Nacional de Educación a Distancia

Concepcion San Luis Costas

Universidad de La Laguna

Although practical and one of the most popular methods, the Mantel-Haenszel (MH) procedure was not initially designated for detecting nonuniform differential item functioning (DIF). To improve detection rates for items showing nonuniform DIF, a modification of the standard MH procedure has been proposed by breaking the full sample at approximately the middle of the test score distribution and then rerunning the MH procedure on each subsample separately. The purpose of the present study was to compare this MH variation to a residual procedure based on item response theory analysis to test its capacity for the detection of nonuniform DIF. Different sets of examinee responses were generated to simulate both uniform and nonuniform DIF. Results from this study suggest that although the MH procedure may be effective for detecting nonuniform DIF, and although this capacity may be increased with a simple modification to the MH standard procedure, the residual analysis procedure achieves a higher detection rate with both uniform and nonuniform DIF.

Educational and Psychological Measurement, Vol. 57, No. 4, 559-568 (1997)
DOI: 10.1177/0013164497057004002
Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Complore Complore   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 Educational and Psychological MeasurementHome page
P. Macdonald and S. V. Paunonen
A Monte Carlo Comparison of Item and Person Statistics Based on Item Response Theory versus Classical Test Theory
Educational and Psychological Measurement, December 1, 2002; 62(6): 921 - 943.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 JOURNAL OF EDUCATIONAL AND BEHAVIORAL STATISTICSHome page
B. A. Hanson
Uniform DIF and DIF Defined by Differences in Item Response Functions
Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics, January 1, 1998; 23(3): 244 - 253.
[Abstract] [PDF]