The detection of differential item functioning (DIF) is important in psychological and behavioral sciences. Standard DIF detection methods perform an item-by-item test iteratively, often assuming that all items except the one under investigation are DIF-free. This article proposes a Bayesian adaptive Lasso method to detect DIF in graded response models (GRMs), where the DIF effects for all items can be identified simultaneously. The multiple-group GRMs are specified, and the possible DIF effects for each item are reparameterized using the increment components. Then, a Bayesian adaptive Lasso procedure is developed for parameter estimation, in which DIF effects can be automatically obtained. Our method is evaluated and compared with the commonly used likelihood ratio test method in a simulation study. The results show that our method can recover most model parameters well and has better control of false positive rates in almost all conditions. An application is presented using data from the National Longitudinal Study of Adolescent to Adult Health (Add Health).
BauerD. J. (2017). A more general model for testing measurement invariance and differential item functioning. Psychological Methods, 22(3), 507–526.
3.
BelzakW. C. M.BauerD. J. (2020). Improving the assessment of measurement invariance: Using regularization to select anchor items and identify differential item functioning. Psychological Methods, 25(6), 673–690.
4.
BenjaminiY.HochbergY. (1995). Controlling the false discovery rate: A practical and powerful approach to multiple testing. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society: Series B (Methodological), 57(1), 289–300.
5.
BrandtH.ChenS. M.BauerD. J. (2023). Bayesian penalty methods for evaluating measurement invariance in moderated nonlinear factor analysis. Psychological Methods. https://doi.org/10.1037/met0000552
6.
CandellG. L.DrasgowF. (1988). An iterative procedure for linking metrics and assessing item bias in item response theory. Applied Psychological Measurement, 12(3), 253–260.
7.
CarpenterB.GelmanA.HoffmanM. D.LeeD.GoodrichB.BetancourtM.BrubakerM.GuoJ.LiP.RiddellA. (2017). Stan: A probabilistic programming language. Journal of Statistical Software, 76(1), 1–32.
8.
ChalmersR. P. (2012). mirt: A multidimensional item response theory package for the R environment. Journal of Statistical Software, 48(6), 1–29.
9.
ChangH. H.MazzeoJ.RoussosL. (1996). Detecting DIF for polytomously scored items: An adaptation of the SIBTEST procedure. Journal of Educational Measurement, 33(3), 333–353.
10.
ChenJ. (2022). A generalized partially confirmatory factor analysis framework with mixed Bayesian Lasso methods. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 57(6), 879–894.
11.
ChenJ.GuoZ.ZhangL.PanJ. (2021). A partially confirmatory approach to scale development with the Bayesian Lasso. Psychological Methods, 26(2), 210–235.
12.
ChenS. M.BauerD. J.BelzakW. M.BrandtH. (2022). Advantages of spike and slab priors for detecting differential item functioning relative to other Bayesian regularizing priors and frequentist lasso. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 29(1), 122–139.
13.
ChoiS.GibbonsL.CraneP. (2011). Lordif: An R package for detecting differential item functioning using iterative hybrid ordinal logistic regression/item response theory and Monte Carlo simulations. Journal of Statistical Software, 39(1), 1–30.
14.
CohenA. S.KimS. H.BakerF. B. (1993). Detection of differential item functioning in the graded response model. Applied Psychological Measurement, 17(4), 335–350.
15.
EdelenM. O.StuckyB. D.ChandraA. (2015). Quantifying “problematic” DIF within an IRT framework: Application to a cancer stigma index. Quality of Life Research, 24(1), 95–103.
16.
FanJ.LiR. (2001). Variable selection via nonconcave penalized likelihood and its oracle properties. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 96(456), 1348–1360.
17.
FengX.WuH.SongX. (2017). Bayesian adaptive Lasso for ordinal regression with latent variables. Sociological Methods and Research, 46(4), 926–953.
18.
HastieT.TibshiraniR.FriedmanJ. (2009). The elements of statistical learning: Data mining, inference, and prediction (2nd ed.). Springer.
19.
HollandP. W.ThayerD. T. (1988). Differential item performance and the Mantel-Haenszel procedure. In WainerH.BraunH. I. (Eds.), Test validity (pp. 129–145). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
20.
HuangP. H. (2018). A penalized likelihood method for multi-group structural equation modelling. British Journal of Mathematical and Statistical Psychology, 71(3), 499–522.
21.
IshwaranH.RaoJ. S. (2005). Spike and slab variable selection: Frequentist and Bayesian strategies. The Annals of Statistics, 33(2), 730–773.
22.
JeonM.RijmenF.Rabe-HeskethS. (2013). Modeling differential item functioning using a generalization of the multiple-group bifactor model. Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics, 38(1), 32–60.
23.
KimE. S.YoonM. (2011). Testing measurement invariance: A comparison of multiple-group categorical CFA and IRT. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 18(2), 212–228.
24.
KimJ.OshimaT. C. (2013). Effect of multiple testing adjustment in differential item functioning detection. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 73(3), 458–470.
25.
KimS. K.CohenA. S. (1998). Detection of differential item functioning under the graded response model with the likelihood ratio test. Applied Psychological Measurement, 22(4), 345–355.
26.
KnightKFuW. J. (2000). Asymptotics for Lasso-type estimators. The Annals of Statistics, 28(5), 1356–1378.
27.
LengC.TranM. N.NottD. (2014). Bayesian adaptive Lasso. Annals of the Institute of Statistical Mathematics, 66(2), 221–244.
28.
LordF. M. (1952). A theory of test scores (Psychometric Monograph No. 7). Psychometric Corporation.
29.
MagisD.FaconB. (2013). Item purification does not always improve DIF detection: A counterexample with Angoff’s delta plot. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 73(2), 293–311.
30.
MagisD.TuerlinckxF.De BoeckP. (2015). Detection of differential item functioning using the Lasso approach. Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics, 40(2), 111–135.
31.
MantelN.HaenszelW. (1959). Statistical aspects of the analysis of data from retrospective studies of disease. Journal of the National Cancer Institute, 22(4), 719–748.
32.
MillsapR. E.EversonH. T. (1993). Methodology review: Statistical approaches for assessing measurement bias. Applied Psychological Measurement, 17(4), 297–334.
33.
PanJ.IpE. H.DubéL. (2017). An alternative to post hoc model modification in confirmatory factor analysis: The Bayesian Lasso. Psychological Methods, 22(4), 687–704.
34.
ParkT.CasellaG. (2008). The Bayesian Lasso. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 103(482), 681–686.
R Core Team. (2022). R: A language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for statistical computing, Vienna, Austria. https://www.R-project.org
37.
RosseelY. (2012). lavaan: An R package for structural equation modeling. Journal of Statistical Software, 48(2), 1–36.
38.
SamejimaF. (1969). Estimation of latent ability using a response pattern of graded scores. Psychometrika, 34(1), 1–97.
39.
SamejimaF. (1973). Homogeneous case of the continuous response model. Psychometrika, 38(2), 203–219.
40.
SamejimaF. (1997). Graded response model. In van der LindenW. J.HambletonR. K. (Eds.), Handbook of modern item response theory (pp. 85–100). Springer.
41.
SchaubergerG.MairP. (2020). A regularization approach for the detection of differential item functioning in generalized partial credit models. Behavior Research Methods, 52(1), 279–294.
42.
SerangS.JacobucciRBrimhallK. C.GrimmK. J. (2017). Exploratory mediation analysis via regularization. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 24(5), 733–744.
43.
ShiD.SongH.LiaoX.TerryR.SnyderL. A. (2017). Bayesian SEM for specification search problems in testing factorial invariance. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 52(4), 430–444.
44.
SprayJ.MillerT. (1994). Identifying nonuniform DIF in polytomously scored test items (American College Testing Research Report Series 94 -1). American College Testing Program.
45.
Stan Development Team. (2023). RStan: The R interface to Stan [R package version 2.21.8]. http://mc-stan.org/
46.
StarkS.ChernyshenkoO. S.DrasgowF. (2006). Detecting differential item functioning with confirmatory factor analysis and item response theory: Toward a unified strategy. Journal of Applied Psychology, 91(6), 1292–1306.
47.
SteinbergL.ThissenD. (2006). Using effect sizes for research reporting: Examples using item response theory to analyze differential item functioning. Psychological Methods, 11(4), 402–415.
48.
SvetinaD.RutkowskiL.RutkowskiD. (2020). Multiple-group invariance with categorical outcomes using updated guidelines: An illustration using Mplus and the lavaan/semTools packages. Structural Equation Modeling: A Multidisciplinary Journal, 27(1), 111–130.
49.
SwaminathanH.RogersH. J. (1990). Detecting differential item functioning using logistic regression procedures. Journal of Educational Measurement, 27(4), 361–370.
50.
TeresiJ. A.RamirezM.LaiJ.SilverS. (2008). Occurrences and sources of differential item functioning (DIF) in patient-reported outcome measures: Description of DIF methods, and review of measures of depression, quality of life and general health. Psychology Science, 50(4), 538–612.
51.
ThissenD.SteinbergL.WainerH. (1993). Detection of differential item functioning using the parameters of item response models. In HollandP. W.WainerH. (Eds.), Differential item functioning (pp. 67–113). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
52.
TibshiraniR. (1996). Regression shrinkage and selection via the Lasso. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society: Series B (Methodological), 58(1), 267–288.
TutzG.SchaubergerG. (2015). A penalty approach to differential item functioning in Rasch models. Psychometrika, 80(1), 21–43.
55.
WangC.ZhuR. Y.XuG. J. (2023). Using Lasso and adaptive Lasso to identify DIF in multidimensional 2PL models. Multivariate Behavioral Research, 58(2), 387–407.
56.
WangW. C. (2004). Effects of anchor item methods on the detection of differential item functioning within the family of Rasch models. The Journal of Experimental Education, 72(3), 221–261.
57.
WangW. C.SuY. H. (2004). Effects of average signed area between two item characteristic curves and test purification procedures on the DIF detection via the Mantel-Haenszel method. Applied Measurement in Education, 17(2), 113–144.
58.
WoodsC. M. (2009). Empirical selection of anchors for tests of differential item functioning. Applied Psychological Measurement, 33(1), 42–57.
59.
ZhangC. H. (2010). Nearly unbiased variable selection under minimax concave penalty. The Annals of Statistics, 38(2), 894–942.
60.
ZouH. (2006). The adaptive Lasso and its oracle properties. Journal of the American Statistical Association, 101(476), 1418–1429.
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
