Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

Click here for more information on Research and Evaluation in Education and Psychology, 3e

Click here to sign up for SAGE Journal Email Alerts today!

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment
This Article
Right arrow Abstract Freely available
Right arrow Free Full Text (Free PDF) Free
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in Web of Science
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Right arrow Citing Articles via Scopus
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Yasuda, T.
Right arrow Articles by Suen, H. K.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati   Add to Twitter  
What's this?

Detecting Differential Item Functioning in the Japanese Version of the Multiple Affect Adjective Check List—Revised

Tomoyuki Yasuda

Waseda University, Saitama, Japan, yasudaT{at}aoni.waseda.jp

Pui-Wa Lei

Pennsylvania State University, University Park

Hoi K. Suen

Pennsylvania State University, University Park

This study examines the differential item functioning (DIF) of the English version and the Japanese-translated version of the Multiple Affect Adjective Check List—Revised (MAACL-R) using the logistic regression (LR) procedure. The results of the LR are supplemented by multiple group confirmatory factor analysis (MGCFA). A total of five items are consistently flagged as showing DIF by both methods and based on the effect size criteria set forth by Jodoin and Gierl. One item shows nonuniform DIF, whereas four items show uniform DIF. Elimination or modification of the items with DIF can facilitate the appropriate use of the Japanese MAACL-R, especially in cross-cultural studies.

Key Words: differential item functioning • Multiple A fect Adjective Check List—Revised • translation errors • logistic regression • confirmatory factor analysis

References

  • Allalouf, A., Hambleton, R.K., & Sireci, S.G. (1999). Identifying the sources of differential item functioning in translated verbal items. Journal of Educational Measurement, 36, 185-198.[CrossRef][Web of Science]
  • Budgell, G.R., Raju, N.S., & Quartetti, D.A. (1995). Analysis of differential item functioning in translated assessment instruments. Applied Psychological Measurement, 19, 309-321.[Abstract]
  • Camilli, G., & Shepard, L.A. (1994). Methods for identifying biased test items. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
  • Glöckner-Rist, A., Hoijtink, H. (2003). The best of both worlds: Factor analysis of dichotomous data using item response theory and structural equation modeling. Structural Equation Modeling, 10, 544-565.[CrossRef][Web of Science]
  • Hambleton, R.K. (1994). Guidelines for adapting educational and psychological tests: A progress report. European Journal of Psychological Assessment, 10, 229-244.
  • Hambleton, R.K. (2005). Issues, designs, and technical guidelines for adapting tests into multiple languages and cultures. In R. K. Hambleton, P. F. Merenda, & C. D. Spielberger (Eds.), Adapting educational and psychological tests for cross-cultural assessment (pp. 3-38). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
  • Hambleton, R.K., & Kanjee, A. (1995). Increasing the validity of cross-cultural assessments: Use of improved methods for test adaptations. European Journal of Psychological Assessment, 11, 147-157.[Web of Science]
  • Holland, P.W., & Thayer, D.T. (1988). Differential item performance and the Mantel-Haenszel procedure. In H. Wainer & H. Baun (Eds.), Test validity (pp. 129-145). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
  • Holland, P.W., & Wainer, H. (1993). Di ferential item functioning. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
  • Hulin, C.L. (1987). A psychometric theory of evaluations of item and scale translations: Fidelity across languages. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 18, 115-142.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  • Jodoin, M.G., & Gierl, M.J. (2001). Evaluating Type I error and power rates using an effect size measure with the logistic regression procedure for DIF detection. Applied Measurement in Education, 14, 329-349.[CrossRef][Web of Science]
  • Lei, P.W., Chen, S.Y., & Yu, L. (2006). Comparing methods of assessing differential item functioning in computerized adaptive testing environment. Journal of Educational Measurement, 43(3), 245-264.[CrossRef][Web of Science]
  • Lubin, B., Swearngin, S.E., & Zuckerman, M. (1998). Research with the Multiple A fect Adjective Check List and the Multiple A fect Adjective Check List—Revised: 1960-1977. San Diego, CA: Educational and Industrial Testing Service.
  • Lubin, B., & Zuckerman, M. (1999). Manual for the Multiple A fect Adjective Check List—Revised (3rd ed.). San Diego, CA: Educational and Industrial Testing Service.
  • Mazor, K.M., Kanjee, A., & Clauser, B.E. (1995). Using logistic regression and the Mantel-Haenszel with multiple ability estimates to detect differential item functioning. Journal of Educational Measurement, 32, 131-144.[CrossRef][Web of Science]
  • Muthén, L.K., & Muthén, B.O. (2004). Mplus user's guide (3rd ed.). Los Angeles: Muthén & Muthén.
  • Narayanan, P., & Swaminathan, H. (1996). Identification of items that show nonuniform DIF. Applied Psychological Measurement, 20, 257-274.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
  • Sue, S., & Chang, J. (2003). The state of psychological assessment in Asia. Psychological Assessment, 15, 306-310.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  • Swaminathan, H., & Rogers, H.J. (1990). Detecting differential item functioning using logistic regression procedures. Journal of Educational Measurement, 27, 361-370.[CrossRef][Web of Science]
  • van de Vijver, F.J.R., & Poortinga, Y. (1997). Towards an integrated analysis of bias in cross-cultural assessment. European Journal of Psychological Assessment, 13, 29-37.[CrossRef][Web of Science]
  • Watson, D., Clark, L.A., & Tellegen, A. (1984). Cross-cultural convergence in the structure of mood: A Japanese replication and comparison with U.S. findings. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 47, 127-144.[CrossRef][Web of Science]
  • Watson, D., & Tellegen, A. (1985). Toward a consensual structure of mood. Psychological Bulletin, 98, 219-235.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  • Werner, O., & Campbell, D.T. (1970). Translating, working through interpreters, and the problem of decentering. In R. Naroll & R. Cohen (Eds.), A handbook of methods in cultural anthropology (pp. 398-420). New York: American Museum of History.
  • Yasuda, T. (2004, July). Detecting translation errors in the Japanese version of the MAACL-R. Poster presented at the 112th Annual Convention of the American Psychological Association, Honolulu, HI.
  • Yasuda, T., Lubin, B., Kim, J., & Whitlock, R.V. (2003). The Japanese version of the Multiple Affect Adjective Check List—Revised: Development and validation. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 59, 93-109.[CrossRef][Web of Science][Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
  • Zuckerman, M., & Lubin, B. (1965). Manual for the Multiple A fect Adjective Check List. San Diego, CA: Educational and Industrial Testing Service.
  • Zuckerman, M., & Lubin, B. (1985). Manual for the Multiple A fect Adjective Check Lists (2nd ed.). San Diego, CA: Educational and Industrial Testing Service.
  • Zumbo, B.D. (1999). A handbook on the theory and methods of di ferential item functioning (DIF): Logistic regression modeling as a unitary framework for binary and Likert-type (ordinal) item scores. Ottawa, Ontario, Canada: Directorate of Human Resources Research and Evaluation, Department of National Defense.

This version was published on December 1, 2007

Journal of Psychoeducational Assessment, Vol. 25, No. 4, 373-384 (2007)
DOI: 10.1177/0734282906298643


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Complore Complore   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati   Add to Twitter Twitter    What's this?



This Article
Right arrow Abstract Freely available
Right arrow Free Full Text (Free PDF) Free
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in Web of Science
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Right arrow Citing Articles via Scopus
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Yasuda, T.
Right arrow Articles by Suen, H. K.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Complore   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati   Add to Twitter  
What's this?