Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39055539›Full record

ArticleApplied psychological measurement2024

Using Interpretable Machine Learning for Differential Item Functioning Detection in Psychometric Tests.

Elisabeth Barbara Kraus, Johannes Wild, Sven Hilbert

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Applied psychological measurement, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Elisabeth Barbara KrausLMU Munich, Germany.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8007-0321
Johannes WildUniversity of Regensburg, Germany.
Sven HilbertUniversity of Regensburg, Germany.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

This study presents a novel method to investigate test fairness and differential item functioning combining psychometrics and machine learning. Test unfairness manifests itself in systematic and demographically imbalanced influences of confounding constructs on residual variances in psychometric modeling. Our method aims to account for resulting complex relationships between response patterns and demographic attributes. Specifically, it measures the importance of individual test items, and latent ability scores in comparison to a random baseline variable when predicting demographic characteristics. We conducted a simulation study to examine the functionality of our method under various conditions such as linear and complex impact, unfairness and varying number of factors, unfair items, and varying test length. We found that our method detects unfair items as reliably as Mantel-Haenszel statistics or logistic regression analyses but generalizes to multidimensional scales in a straight forward manner. To apply the method, we used random forests to predict migration backgrounds from ability scores and single items of an elementary school reading comprehension test. One item was found to be unfair according to all proposed decision criteria. Further analysis of the item's content provided plausible explanations for this finding. Analysis code is available at: https://osf.io/s57rw/?view_only=47a3564028d64758982730c6d9c6c547.

Indexed as

differential item functioninginterpretable machine learningmachine learningpsychometricsrandom foresttest fairness

Identifiers

PMID39055539
PMCPMC11268249

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.