This Article Full Text (PDF) References Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Citation Map Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in Web of Science Alert me to new issues of the journal Add to Saved Citations Download to citation manager Request Permissions Request Reprints Add to My Marked Citations Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Web of Science (3) Citing Articles via Google Scholar Citing Articles via Scopus Google Scholar Articles by Wang, W.-C. Articles by Su, Y.-H. Search for Related Content Social Bookmarking                         What's this?

Factors Influencing the Mantel and Generalized Mantel-Haenszel Methods for the Assessment of Differential Item Functioning in Polytomous Items

National Chung Cheng University, Taiwan, psywcw{at}ccu.edu.tw

Ya-Hui Su

National Chung Cheng University, Taiwan

Eight independent variables (differential item functioning [DIF] detection method, purification procedure, item response model, mean latent trait difference between groups, test length, DIF pattern, magnitude of DIF, and percentage of DIF items) were manipulated, and two dependent variables (Type I error and power) were assessed through simulations. Results showed that it was the average signed area between the two item characteristic curves of the reference and focal groups rather than the percentage of DIF items in the test that determined the Type I error of the Mantel and generalized Mantel-Haenszel (GMH) methods. As long as the average signed area approached zero, both methods maintained control over their Type I error, even when the percentage of DIF items was very high (e.g., 40%). The Mantel yielded higher power than the GMH under all but the balanced DIF patterns. The two-stage Mantel is recommended if a single method is to be used.

Key Words: graded response model • partial-credit model • Type I error • power • average signed area • test purification

Applied Psychological Measurement, Vol. 28, No. 6, 450-480 (2004)
DOI: 10.1177/0146621604269792


CiteULike    Complore    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter    What's this?

This article has been cited by other articles:

				A. M. Fidalgo and J. D. Scalon Using Generalized Mantel-Haenszel Statistics to Assess DIF Among Multiple Groups Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment, February 1, 2010; 28(1): 60 - 69. [Abstract] [PDF]

				W.-C. Wang, C.-L. Shih, and C.-C. Yang The MIMIC Method With Scale Purification for Detecting Differential Item Functioning Educational and Psychological Measurement, October 1, 2009; 69(5): 713 - 731. [Abstract] [PDF]

				C.-L. Shih and W.-C. Wang Differential Item Functioning Detection Using the Multiple Indicators, Multiple Causes Method with a Pure Short Anchor Applied Psychological Measurement, May 1, 2009; 33(3): 184 - 199. [Abstract] [PDF]

				A. M. Fidalgo and J. M. Madeira Generalized Mantel-Haenszel Methods for Differential Item Functioning Detection Educational and Psychological Measurement, December 1, 2008; 68(6): 940 - 958. [Abstract] [PDF]

				R. D. Penfield Three Classes of Nonparametric Differential Step Functioning Effect Estimators Applied Psychological Measurement, September 1, 2008; 32(6): 480 - 501. [Abstract] [PDF]