Vertaile menetelmiä
Tarkastele valitsemiasi menetelmiä rinnakkain; eroavat rivit korostetaan.
| Polytomisen konstruktin validiteetti× | Differentiaalinen kohdefunktionaalisuus (DIF)× | |
|---|---|---|
| Tieteenala | Psykometriikka | Psykometriikka |
| Menetelmäperhe | Latent structure | Latent structure |
| Syntyvuosi≠ | 1992–2000 | 1970s–1993 |
| Kehittäjä≠ | Building on Messick (1989) and IRT extensions by Masters, Muraki, and Samejima | William H. Angoff and colleagues (ETS); systematized by Holland & Wainer |
| Tyyppi≠ | Psychometric validity framework | Item-level bias detection |
| Alkuperäislähde≠ | Muraki, E. (1992). A generalized partial credit model: Application of an EM algorithm. Applied Psychological Measurement, 16(2), 159–176. DOI ↗ | Holland, P. W. & Wainer, H. (Eds.) (1993). Differential Item Functioning. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. ISBN: 978-0805809589 |
| Rinnakkaisnimet | polytomous item construct validity, ordered-category construct validity, polytomous measurement validity, multi-category scale validity | DIF, item bias analysis, measurement non-equivalence, item-level measurement bias |
| Liittyvät≠ | 6 | 5 |
| Tiivistelmä≠ | Polytomous construct validity refers to the evaluation of whether a scale composed of ordered, multi-category items (e.g., Likert or rating-scale items) genuinely measures the intended latent construct. It extends classical validity frameworks to polytomous measurement models — such as the Graded Response Model or Generalized Partial Credit Model — ensuring that ordered response categories function as designed and that the resulting scores reflect the target construct. | Differential item functioning identifies test or survey items that behave differently for examinees from different groups — such as gender, ethnicity, or language background — after controlling for the underlying ability or trait being measured. DIF analysis is essential for fairness evaluation in educational testing and psychological scale development. |
| ScholarGateAineisto ↗ |
|
|