Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 491

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 7 of the 7 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Methodology Review: Statistical Approaches for Assessing Measurement Bias

Millsap, Roger E., Everson, Howard T.·1993·Applied Psychological Measurement

Abstract

Statistical methods developed over the last decade for detecting measurement bias in psycho logical and educational tests are reviewed. Earlier methods for assessing measurement bias generally have been replaced by more sophisticated statistical techniques, such as the Mantel-Haenszel procedure, the standardization approach, logistic regression models, and item response theory approaches. The review employs a conceptual framework that distin guishes methods of detecting measurement bias based on either observed or unobserved conditional invariance models. Although progress has been made in the development of statistical methods for detecting measurement bias, issues related to the choice of matching variable, the nonuniform nature of measurement bias, the suitability of cur rent approaches for new and emerging perform ance assessment methods, and insights into the causes of measurement bias remain elusive. Clearly, psychometric solutions to the problems of measurement bias will further understanding of the more central issue of construct validity. The con tinuing development of statistical methods for detecting and understanding the causes of mea surement bias will continue to be an important scientific challenge.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1177/014662169301700401

Cites

7 of 7 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 7 references

Cited by

See all 491

Metadata

Authors
Millsap, R. E., & Everson, H. T.
Venue
Applied Psychological Measurement
Published
1993-12
Volume
17
Issue
4
Pages
297-334
ISSN
  • 0146-6216 (ISSN-L)
  • 1552-3497
OpenAlex
W2171273909
Cited by
491
References
7
FWCI
8.26
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

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

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Methodology Review: Statistical Approaches for Assessing Measurement Bias. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1177/014662169301700401
The paper
Millsap, R. E., & Everson, H. T. (1993). Methodology Review: Statistical Approaches for Assessing Measurement Bias. Applied Psychological Measurement. https://doi.org/10.1177/014662169301700401

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.