English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Free Plan

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Researchers are commonly interested in group comparisons such as comparisons of group means, called impact, or comparisons of individual scores across groups. A meaningful comparison can be made between the groups when there is no differential item functioning (DIF) or differential test functioning (DTF). During the past three decades, much progress has been made in detecting DIF and DTF. However, little research has been conducted on what researchers can do after such detection. This study presents and evaluates a confirmatory multigroup multidimensional item response model to obtain the purified item parameter estimates, person scores, and impact estimates on the primary dimension, controlling for the secondary dimension due to DIF. In addition, the item response model approach was compared with current practices of DIF treatment such as deleting and ignoring DIF items and using multigroup item response models through simulation studies. The authors suggested guidelines for DIF treatment based on the simulation study results.

After Differential Item Functioning Is Detected