Cited by 553Psychometric Methodologies and TestingEducational Assessment and PedagogyEducational Technology and Assessment

Item bias and item response theory

Mellenbergh, Gideon J.·1989·International Journal of Educational Research

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/0883-0355(89)90002-5

Cites

40 of 40 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Mellenbergh, G. J.
Affiliations
University of Amsterdam (NL)
Corresponding author
Mellenbergh, Gideon J.
Venue
International Journal of Educational Research
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
1989-01
Volume
13
Issue
2
Pages
127-143
ISSN
0883-0355 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2032579538
Cited by
553
References
40
Citations by year
2026: 21 · 2025: 28 · 2024: 38 · 2023: 27 · 2022: 32 · 2021: 35 · 2020: 26 · 2019: 28 · 2018: 34 · 2017: 27 · 2016: 32 · 2015: 23 · 2014: 21 · 2013: 19 · 2012: 14
FWCI
3.06
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
International Journal of Educational Research (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Management Science and Operations Research › Psychometric Methodologies and Testing
  • Social Sciences › Education › Educational Assessment and Pedagogy
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Information Systems › Educational Technology and Assessment
Keywords
differential item functioning, item response theory, conditional dependence, item characteristic curves, latent trait distribution, test score distribution

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review