Three Generations of DIF Analyses: Considering Where It Has Been, Where It Is Now, and Where It Is Going

By Bruno D. Zumbo. 2007

406 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Subfields: Developmental and Educational Psychology, Experimental and Cognitive Psychology, Management Science and Operations Research

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/3c3aae6697d1ae2bc605da14d54809d763c6a263

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Developmental and Educational Psychology

In Experimental and Cognitive Psychology

In Management Science and Operations Research

Citations in the corpus

Does the EDI Measure School Readiness in the Same Way Across Different Groups of Children? (2007, methodology): “For a comprehensive, in-depth coverage of the method, the interested reader is referred to Zumbo (1999, 2007), and Shimizu and Zumbo (2005).”
Modeling Item-Position Effects Within an IRT Framework (2012, background): “Like in DIF research (Zumbo, 2007), building frameworks for empirically investigating item-position effects probably precedes a next generation of research answering “the why question” of the found effects.”
Early mathematics assessment: validation of the short form of a prekindergarten and kindergarten mathematics measure (2012, background): “The existence of DIF could mean that the Rasch-estimated ability scores from the Short Form are not representative of the individual’s true mathematical competence (Zumbo, 2007).”
Assessing statistical aspects of test fairness with structural equation modelling (2013, background): “…the analysis of item characteristic curves, the presence of DIF is indicated when item difficulty, discrimination, or lower asymptote (e.g., due to a guessing effect) parameter estimates differ appreciably across groups with the same underlying true ability; see Zumbo (2007), for more information.”
An Overview and Practical Guide to IRT Measurement Equivalence Analysis (2015, background): “There have been multiple reviews on DIF statistics/procedures (e.g., Penfield & Camilli, 2007; Potenza & Dorans, 1995; Sireci & Rios, 2013; Zumbo, 2007).”
Accent, listening assessment and the potential for a shared-L1 advantage: A DIF perspective (2012, background): “…in language testing has been defined as existing when candidates of equal ability, but from different groups, have an unequal chance of getting an item correct, or of attaining the same test score due to a factor which is not relevant to the construct under test (see Angoff, 1993; Zumbo, 2007).”