Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 607

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 30 of the 30 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Application of a Method of Estimating DIF for Polytomous Test Items

Camilli, Gregory, Congdon, Peter·1999·Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics
DOI 10.2307/1165366
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

In this paper, a method for studying DIF is demonstrated that can used with either dichotomous or polytomous items. The method is shown to be valid for data that follow a partial credit IRT model. It is also shown that logistic regression gives results equivalent to those of the proposed method. In a simulation study, positively biased type 1 error rates of the method are shown to be in accord with results from previous studies; however, the size of the bias in the log odds is moderate. Finally, it is demonstrated how these statistics can be used to study DIF variability with the method of Longford, Holland, & Thayer (1993) .

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 · 10.2307/1165366

Cites

30 of 30 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

Cited by

See all 607

Metadata

Authors
Camilli, G., & Congdon, P.
Venue
Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics
Publisher
American Educational Research Association (AERA)
Published
1999
Volume
24
Issue
4
Pages
323
ISSN
1076-9986 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.2307/1165366
OpenAlex
W2088379584
Cited by
607
References
30
FWCI
11.73
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

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.