An Empirical Comparison of DDF Detection Methods for Understanding the Causes of DIF in Multiple-Choice Items

Autor/inn/en	Suh, Youngsuk; Talley, Anna E.
Titel	An Empirical Comparison of DDF Detection Methods for Understanding the Causes of DIF in Multiple-Choice Items
Quelle	In: Applied Measurement in Education, 28 (2015) 1, S.48-67 (20 Seiten)Infoseite zur Zeitschrift PDF als Volltext Verfügbarkeit
Sprache	englisch
Dokumenttyp	gedruckt; online; Zeitschriftenaufsatz
ISSN	0895-7347
DOI	10.1080/08957347.2014.973560
Schlagwörter	Test Bias; Multiple Choice Tests; Test Items; Methods; Comparative Analysis; Item Response Theory; Mathematics Tests; College Mathematics; Effect Size + Suchen Sie Ihr Suchwort? Testkritik; Multiple choice examinations; Multiple-choice tests, Multiple-choice examinations; Multiple-Choice-Verfahren; Test content; Testaufgabe; Method; Methode; Item-Response-Theorie
Abstract	This study compared and illustrated four differential distractor functioning (DDF) detection methods for analyzing multiple-choice items. The log-linear approach, two item response theory-model-based approaches with likelihood ratio tests, and the odds ratio approach were compared to examine the congruence among the four DDF detection methods. Data from a college-level mathematics placement test were analyzed to understand the causes of differential functioning. Results indicated some agreement among the four detection methods. To facilitate practical interpretation of the DDF results, several possible effect size measures were also obtained and compared. (As Provided).
Anmerkungen	Routledge. Available from: Taylor & Francis, Ltd. 325 Chestnut Street Suite 800, Philadelphia, PA 19106. Tel: 800-354-1420; Fax: 215-625-2940; Web site: http://www.tandf.co.uk/journals
Erfasst von	ERIC (Education Resources Information Center), Washington, DC
Update	2020/1/01