Applied Psychological Measurement

 

Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

Click here for more information

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
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
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 HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Donoghue, J. R.
Right arrow Articles by Isham, S. P.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati  
What's this?
Applied Psychological Measurement, Vol. 22, No. 1, 33-51 (1998)
DOI: 10.1177/01466216980221002

A Comparison of Procedures to Detect Item Parameter Drift

John R. Donoghue

Steven P. Isham

Educational Testing Service

Monte carlo methods were used to compare several measures of item parameter drift. Number of examinees, number of items, and number of drift items in the test were manipulated. Overall, Lord's x2 measure was the most effective in identifying items that exhibited drift. However, the measure was accurate only when the studied item's c parameter was constrained to be equal across the two assessment years. Of the remaining measures, the best methods (a z test based on Raju's exact unsigned integral, the NAEP BILOG/PARSCALE computer program's x2 by subgroup, and Kim and Cohen's closed-interval signed-area measure) required empirical estimates of critical values for the test statistics in order to function well. This requirement detracts from their usefulness.


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 Applied Psychological MeasurementHome page
D. A. Pastor and S. N. Beretvas
Longitudinal Rasch Modeling in the Context of Psychotherapy Outcomes Assessment
Applied Psychological Measurement, March 1, 2006; 30(2): 100 - 120.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 Educational and Psychological MeasurementHome page
A. A. Rupp and B. D. Zumbo
Understanding Parameter Invariance in Unidimensional IRT Models
Educational and Psychological Measurement, February 1, 2006; 66(1): 63 - 84.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 Educational and Psychological MeasurementHome page
A. A. Rupp and B. D. Zumbo
A Note on How to Quantify and Report Whether Irt Parameter Invariance Holds: When Pearson Correlations are Not Enough
Educational and Psychological Measurement, August 1, 2004; 64(4): 588 - 599.
[Abstract] [PDF]

Home page
 Applied Psychological MeasurementHome page
J. S. Roberts, J. R. Donoghue, and J. E. Laughlin
A General Item Response Theory Model for Unfolding Unidimensional Polytomous Responses
Applied Psychological Measurement, March 1, 2000; 24(1): 3 - 32.
[Abstract] [PDF]