The Impact of Missing Data on the Performances of DIF Detection Methods-Reference-Cited by-同舟云学术

The Impact of Missing Data on the Performances of DIF Detection Methods

Published:2023-03-25 Issue:1 Volume:14 Page:95-105
ISSN:1309-6575
Container-title:Eğitimde ve Psikolojide Ölçme ve Değerlendirme Dergisi
language:
Short-container-title:

Author:

AKCAN Rabia¹^ORCID,ATALAY KABASAKAL Kübra²^ORCID

Affiliation:

1. T.C. MİLLİ EĞİTİM BAKANLIĞI

2. HACETTEPE UNIVERSITY

Abstract

This study analyzed the impact of missing data techniques on performances of two differential item functioning (DIF) detection methods (Mantel Haenszel and Multiple Indicator and Multiple Causes) under missing completely at random missing data mechanism. Percentage of missing data was set at 5% and 15%. Zero imputation, listwise deletion and fractional hot-deck imputation were used to handle missing data. The data set of the study consisted of 17 items in the S12 item cluster of Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA) 2015 science test. Results showed that fractional hot-deck imputation produced the best results in identifying DIF items in all conditions and it had also the closest DIF values to the values obtained from complete data set. It was also found that multiple indicator and multiple causes method was more adversely affected than Mantel Haenszel by the presence of missing data.

Publisher

Egitimde ve Psikolojide Olcme ve Degerlendirme Dergisi

Subject

Developmental and Educational Psychology,Education

Reference35 articles.

1. Banks, K. (2015). An introduction to missing data in the context of differential item functioning. Practical Assessment, Research & Evaluation, 20(12), 1-10. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ1059748

2. Banks, K., & Walker, C. (2006, April). Performance of SIBTEST when focal group examinees have missing data. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the National Council on Measurement in Education, San Francisco, CA.

3. Camilli, G., & Shepard, L. A. (1994). Methods for identifying biased test items. London Sage.

4. Clauser, B. E., & Mazor, K. M. (1998). Using statistical procedures to identify differentially functioning test items. Educational Measurement Issues and Practice, 17(1), 31-44. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ564712

5. Doğanay Erdoğan, B. (2012). Çoklu atama yöntemlerinin Rasch modelleri için performansının benzetim çalışması ile incelenmesi [Assessing the performance of multiple imputation techniques for Rasch models with a simulation study] (Publication No. 314412) [Doctoral dissertation, Ankara University]. Council of Higher Education Thesis Center.