Author:
Svetina Valdivia Dubravka,Huang Sijia,Botter Preston
Abstract
Assessment practices are, among other things, concerned with issues of fairness and appropriate score interpretation, in particular when making claims about subgroup differences in performance are of interest. In order to make such claims, a psychometric concept of measurement invariance or differential item functioning (DIF) ought to be considered and met. Over the last decades, researchers have proposed and developed a plethora of methods aimed at detecting DIF. However, DIF detection methods that allow multilevel data structures to be modeled are limited and understudied. In the current study, we evaluated the performance of four methods, including the model-based multilevel Wald and the score-based multilevel Mantel–Haenszel (MH), and two well-established single-level methods, the model-based single-level Lord and the score-based single-level MH. We conducted a simulation study that mimics real-world scenarios. Our results suggested that when data were generated as multilevel, mixed results regarding performances were observed, and not one method consistently outperformed the others. Single-level Lord and multilevel Wald yielded best control of the Type I error rates, in particular in conditions when latent means were generated as equal for the two groups. Power rates were low across all four methods in conditions with small number of between- and within-level units and when small DIF was modeled. However, in those conditions, single-level MH and multilevel MH yielded higher power rates than either single-level Lord or multilevel Wald. This suggests that current practices in detecting DIF should strongly consider adopting one of the more recent methods only in certain contexts as the tradeoff between power and complexity of the method may not warrant a blanket recommendation in favor of a single method. Limitations and future research directions are also discussed.