Analysis of Sources of Latent Class Differential Item Functioning in International Assessments
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this study, we investigated differential item functioning (DIF) and its sources using a latent class (LC) modeling approach. Potential sources of LC DIF related to instruction and teacher-related variables were investigated using substantive and three statistical approaches: descriptive discriminant function, multinomial logistic regression, and multilevel multinomial logistic regression analyses. Results revealed that differential response patterns, as indicated by identification of LCs, were most strongly associated with student achievement levels and teacher-related variables rather than manifest characteristics such as gender, test language, and country, which are the focus of typical measurement comparability research. Findings from this study have important implications for measurement comparability and validity research. Evidence of within-group heterogeneity in the test data structure suggests that the identification of DIF and its sources may not apply to all examinees in the group and that measurement incomparability may be greater among groups that are not defined by manifest variables such as gender and ethnicity. Results suggest that alternative variables that may be more closely related to the investigated construct should be examined when conducting measurement comparability research.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.057 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it