Enhancing measurement validity in diverse populations: Modern approaches to evaluating differential item functioning

IF 1.5 3区 心理学 Q3 MATHEMATICS, INTERDISCIPLINARY APPLICATIONS British Journal of Mathematical & Statistical Psychology Pub Date : 2023-07-10 DOI:10.1111/bmsp.12316
Daniel J. Bauer
{"title":"Enhancing measurement validity in diverse populations: Modern approaches to evaluating differential item functioning","authors":"Daniel J. Bauer","doi":"10.1111/bmsp.12316","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>When developing and evaluating psychometric measures, a key concern is to ensure that they accurately capture individual differences on the intended construct across the entire population of interest. Inaccurate assessments of individual differences can occur when responses to some items reflect not only the intended construct but also construct-irrelevant characteristics, like a person's race or sex. Unaccounted for, this <i>item bias</i> can lead to apparent differences on the scores that do not reflect true differences, invalidating comparisons between people with different backgrounds. Accordingly, empirically identifying which items manifest bias through the evaluation of <i>differential item functioning</i> (DIF) has been a longstanding focus of much psychometric research. The majority of this work has focused on evaluating DIF across two (or a few) groups. Modern conceptualizations of identity, however, emphasize its multi-determined and intersectional nature, with some aspects better represented as dimensional than categorical. Fortunately, many model-based approaches to modelling DIF now exist that allow for simultaneous evaluation of multiple background variables, including both continuous and categorical variables, and potential interactions among background variables. This paper provides a comparative, integrative review of these new approaches to modelling DIF and clarifies both the opportunities and challenges associated with their application in psychometric research.</p>","PeriodicalId":55322,"journal":{"name":"British Journal of Mathematical & Statistical Psychology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.5000,"publicationDate":"2023-07-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/bmsp.12316","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"British Journal of Mathematical & Statistical Psychology","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/bmsp.12316","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"MATHEMATICS, INTERDISCIPLINARY APPLICATIONS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

When developing and evaluating psychometric measures, a key concern is to ensure that they accurately capture individual differences on the intended construct across the entire population of interest. Inaccurate assessments of individual differences can occur when responses to some items reflect not only the intended construct but also construct-irrelevant characteristics, like a person's race or sex. Unaccounted for, this item bias can lead to apparent differences on the scores that do not reflect true differences, invalidating comparisons between people with different backgrounds. Accordingly, empirically identifying which items manifest bias through the evaluation of differential item functioning (DIF) has been a longstanding focus of much psychometric research. The majority of this work has focused on evaluating DIF across two (or a few) groups. Modern conceptualizations of identity, however, emphasize its multi-determined and intersectional nature, with some aspects better represented as dimensional than categorical. Fortunately, many model-based approaches to modelling DIF now exist that allow for simultaneous evaluation of multiple background variables, including both continuous and categorical variables, and potential interactions among background variables. This paper provides a comparative, integrative review of these new approaches to modelling DIF and clarifies both the opportunities and challenges associated with their application in psychometric research.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
提高不同人群的测量效度:评估差异项目功能的现代方法
在开发和评估心理测量方法时,一个关键的问题是确保它们准确地捕捉到整个感兴趣人群在预期结构上的个体差异。当对某些项目的反应不仅反映了预期的构念,而且反映了与构念无关的特征,比如一个人的种族或性别,就会出现对个体差异的不准确评估。没有解释的是,这种项目偏差会导致分数上的明显差异,而这并不能反映真正的差异,从而使不同背景的人之间的比较无效。因此,通过差异项目功能(DIF)的评估来实证地识别哪些项目表现出偏见一直是许多心理测量学研究的长期焦点。这项工作的大部分集中在评估跨两个(或几个)组的DIF上。然而,现代身份概念强调其多决定和交叉的性质,其中一些方面更好地表现为维度而不是分类。幸运的是,现在存在许多基于模型的方法来建模DIF,这些方法允许同时评估多个背景变量,包括连续变量和分类变量,以及背景变量之间的潜在相互作用。本文对这些模拟DIF的新方法进行了比较、综合的回顾,并阐明了它们在心理测量学研究中的应用所带来的机遇和挑战。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
5.00
自引率
3.80%
发文量
34
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: The British Journal of Mathematical and Statistical Psychology publishes articles relating to areas of psychology which have a greater mathematical or statistical aspect of their argument than is usually acceptable to other journals including: • mathematical psychology • statistics • psychometrics • decision making • psychophysics • classification • relevant areas of mathematics, computing and computer software These include articles that address substantitive psychological issues or that develop and extend techniques useful to psychologists. New models for psychological processes, new approaches to existing data, critiques of existing models and improved algorithms for estimating the parameters of a model are examples of articles which may be favoured.
期刊最新文献
Investigating heterogeneity in IRTree models for multiple response processes with score-based partitioning. A convexity-constrained parameterization of the random effects generalized partial credit model. Handling missing data in variational autoencoder based item response theory. Maximal point-polyserial correlation for non-normal random distributions. Perturbation graphs, invariant causal prediction and causal relations in psychology.
×
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
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 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 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1