Department of Child Development and Education, University of Amsterdam, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
Behav Res Methods. 2019 Feb;51(1):138-151. doi: 10.3758/s13428-018-1151-3.
Restricted factor analysis (RFA) is a powerful method to test for uniform differential item functioning (DIF), but it may require empirically selecting anchor items to prevent inflated Type I error rates. We conducted a simulation study to compare two empirical anchor-selection strategies: a one-step rank-based strategy and an iterative selection procedure. Unlike the iterative procedure, the rank-based strategy had a low risk and degree of contamination within the empirically selected anchor set, even with small samples. To detect nonuniform DIF, RFA requires an interaction effect with the latent factor. The latent moderated structural equations (LMS) method has been applied to RFA and has revealed inflated Type I error rates. We propose using product indicators (PI) as a more widely available alternative to measure the latent interaction. A simulation study, involving several sample-size conditions and magnitudes of uniform and nonuniform DIF, revealed that PI obtained similar power but lower Type I error rates, as compared to LMS.
限制因子分析(RFA)是一种强大的方法,用于检验均匀的差异项目功能(DIF),但它可能需要通过经验选择锚定项目来防止 I 类错误率膨胀。我们进行了一项模拟研究,比较了两种经验性的锚定选择策略:基于等级的一步策略和迭代选择程序。与迭代过程不同,基于等级的策略在经验性选择的锚定集中具有较低的风险和污染程度,即使在小样本中也是如此。为了检测非均匀的 DIF,RFA 需要与潜在因子的交互作用。潜在调节结构方程(LMS)方法已应用于 RFA,并显示出 I 类错误率的膨胀。我们建议使用乘积指标(PI)作为更广泛的替代方法来测量潜在的交互作用。一项涉及多个样本大小条件和均匀和非均匀 DIF 程度的模拟研究表明,PI 获得了相似的功效,但与 LMS 相比,I 类错误率更低。