Journals / Türk Psikoloji Dergisi / 2009 / Cilt: 24 - Sayı: 64

Detection of measurement equivalence by structural equation modeling and item response theory

Ölçme eşdeğerliğinin yapısal eşitlik modellemesi ve madde cevap kuramı kapsamında incelenmesi

Pages
61–77
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

MACS results showed that the factor loadings were found to be invariant for male and female groups however it was seen in the DIF results that the 10th item was functioning differentially between comparison groups.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:The purpose of the present study was to investigate measurement equivalence for male and female comparison groups in the DIF and MACS methods by using the data obtained from a personality subscale and to discuss the estimated parameter results obtained from these two methods.
📊
Key Findings & Data:The participants were 500 females and 500 males from the adult norm sample of Big Five Personality Inventory Proneness to Anxiety subscale developed by Somer and her colleagues (2004).
💡
Conclusion & Impact:MACS results showed that the factor loadings were found to be invariant for male and female groups however it was seen in the DIF results that the 10th item was functioning differentially between comparison groups.
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:2004 Verileri
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters

Abstract

The purpose of the present study was to investigate measurement equivalence for male and female comparison groups in the DIF and MACS methods by using the data obtained from a personality subscale and to discuss the estimated parameter results obtained from these two methods. The participants were 500 females and 500 males from the adult norm sample of Big Five Personality Inventory Proneness to Anxiety subscale developed by Somer and her colleagues (2004). MACS analyses were conducted by using LISREL 8.8; DIF analyses were conducted by using PARSCALE 4.1 computer programs. MACS results showed that the factor loadings were found to be invariant for male and female groups however it was seen in the DIF results that the 10th item was functioning differentially between comparison groups. Moreover, the results concerning the invariance of the intercepts estimated in the MACS and the item location parameters estimated in the DIF analyses showed that the 5th, 6th, 9th and 11th items were differentiated significantly between males and females in both methods. Although the results obtained from both methods revealed similar results, when the advantages and disadvantages of these methods were taken into consideration, the application of both methods together in measurement equivalence studies is suggested.

Özet

Bu çalışmanın amacı kadın ve erkek karşılaştırma grupları için bir kişilik alt ölçeğinden elde edilen veriler kullanılarak, ölçme eşdeğerliğinin MACS ve DIF yöntemleri kapsamında incelenmesi ve bu yöntemlerden elde edilen parametrelere ilişkin sonuçların tartışılmasıdır. Çalışmada katılımcı olarak Somer ve arkadaşları (2004) tarafından geliştirilen Beş Faktör Kişilik Envanteri’nin (5FKE) yetişkin norm örnekleminin Endişeye Yatkınlık alt ölçeğinden alınan 500 kadın ve 500 erkek yer almıştır. MACS analizlerinde LISREL 8.8; DIF analizlerinde PARSCALE 4.1 programları kullanılmıştır. MACS analizleri sonucunda faktör yüklerine karşılık gelen parametrelerin tüm maddeler için kadın ve erkek gruplarında eşdeğer olduğu bulunurken, DIF analizleri sonucunda ölçekte yer alan 10’uncu maddenin ayırtetme parametresinin farklılaştığı görülmüştür. Ayrıca, MACS analizlerinde regresyon sabitinin ve DIF analizlerinde madde yerleşim parametrelerinin değişmezliğine ilişkin bulgular her iki yaklaşımda da 5., 6., 9., ve 11’inci maddelerin gruplar arasında farklılaştığını göstermiştir. Çalışmada her iki yöntemle elde edilen bulgular benzer sonuçlar vermekle birlikte, söz konusu yöntemlerin avantaj ve dezavantaj durumları göz önünde bulundurulduğunda ölçme eşdeğerliği çalışmalarında her iki yöntemden de faydalanılması önerilmektedir.

🔖

Cite This Article

SOMER, O., KORKMAZ, M., ÇETİNKAYA, S. D., CAN, S. (2009). Detection of measurement equivalence by structural equation modeling and item response theory. Türk Psikoloji Dergisi, Cilt: 24 - Sayı: 64, 61–77. https://ajindex.com/articles/357600

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (11)

  1. Byrne, B. M., Shavelson, R. J. ve Muthen, B. (1989). Testing for the equivalence of factor covariance and mean structures: The issue of partial measurement invariance. Psychological Bulletin, 105(3), 456-466.
  2. Byrne, B. M. ve Stewart, S. M. (2006). The MACS approach to testing for multigroup invariance of a second-order structure: A walk through the process. Structural Equating Modeling, 13(2), 287-321.
  3. Camilli, G. ve Shepard, L. A. (1994). Methods for identifying biased test items. Sage Publication: London. Chan, D. (2000). Detection of differential item functioning on the Kirton Adaption - Innovation Inventory using multiple-group mean and covariance structure analysis. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 35(2), 169-199.
  4. Chernyshenko, O. S., Stark, S., Chan, K. Y., Drasgow, F. ve Williams, B. (2001). Fitting item response theory models to two personality inventories: Issues and insights. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 36(A), 523-562.
  5. Collins, W. C., Raju, S. N. ve Edwards, J. E. (2000). Assessing differential functioning in a satisfaction scale. Journal of Applied Psychology, 85(3), 451-461.
  6. Ferrando, P. J. (1996). Calibration of invariant item parameters in a continuous item response model using the extended lisrel measurement submodel. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 37(4), 419-439.
  7. Flowers, C. P., Oshima, T. C. ve Raju, N. S. (1999). Adescription and demonstration of the polytomous-DFIT framework. Applied Psychological Measurement, 23 (4), 309-326.
  8. Hambleton, R. K, Swaminathan, H. ve Rogers, H. J. (1991). Fundamentals of item response theory. Sage Publications: London. Jöreskog, K. G. ve Sörbom, D. (2006). LISREL (Version 8.8) [Computer software]. Chicago: Scientific Softare International Inc. Korkmaz, M. (2006). Test ve ölçek geliştirmede yeni yaklaşımlar: Madde cevap kuramı kapsamında madde işlevsel farklılığı (madde yanlılık) yöntemleri. Türk Psikoloji Yazıları, 9(18), 63-80.
  9. Little, T. D. (1997). Mean and covariance structure (MACS) analyses of cross-cultural data: Practical and theoretical issues. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 32(1), 53-76.
  10. Lubke, G. H., Dolan, C. V., Kelderman, H. ve Mellenberg, G. J. (2003). Weak measurement invariance with respect to unmeasured variables: An implication of strict factorial invariance. British Journal of Mathematical and Statistical Psychology, 56, 231-248.
  11. Maurer, T. J., Raju, S. N. ve Collins, W. C. (1998). Peer and subordinate performance appraisal measurement equivalence. Journal of Applied Psychology