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 All Versions of this Article:
0013164409332223v1
69/5/732    most recent
Right arrow References
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
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 Scopus
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Snow, T. K.
Right arrow Articles by Oshima, T.C.
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?

A Comparison of Unidimensional and Three-Dimensional Differential Item Functioning Analysis Using Two-Dimensional Data

Teresa K. Snow

Georgia Institute of Technology

T.C. Oshima

Georgia State University

Oshima, Raju, and Flowers demonstrated the use of an item response theory—based technique for analyzing differential item function (DIF) and differential test function for dichotomously scored data that are intended to be multidimensional. Their study assumed that the number of intended-to-be measured dimensions was correctly identified. In practice, however, the number of dimensions may be misidentified. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to demonstrate the effects of both underestimation and overestimation of the number of intended-to-be measured dimensions on the multidimensional DIF analysis using simulated two-dimensional data with known DIF items. Results show that overestimation of the number of y traits had a consequence of decreased power. Underestimation resulted in missing a certain type of nonuniform DIF, as well as confounding the impact with DIF. Recommendations are made on how to conduct a DIF investigation with a multidimensional within-item test.

Key Words: differential item function • item response theory • multidimensionality

This version was published on October 1, 2009

Educational and Psychological Measurement, Vol. 69, No. 5, 732-747 (2009)
DOI: 10.1177/0013164409332223
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?