Differential Item Functioning by Sex and Race in the Hogan Personality Inventory

Abstract

The authors examined measurement bias in the Hogan Personality Inventory by investigating differential item functioning (DIF) across sex and two racial groups (Caucasian and Black). The sample consisted of 1,579 Caucasians (1,023 men, 556 women) and 523 Blacks (321 men, 202 women) who were applying for entry-level, unskilled jobs in factories. Although the group mean differences were trivial, more than a third of the items showed DIF by sex (38.4%) and by race (37.3%). A content analysis of potentially biased items indicated that the themes of items displaying DIF were slightly more cohesive for sex than for race. The authors discuss possible explanations for differing clustering tendencies of items displaying DIF and some practical and theoretical implications of DIF in the development and interpretation of personality inventories.

Differential Item Functioning in Online Learning Instrument (EPFun)

“…The findings of this study reveal otherwise, indicating that there is no significant difference between male and female young learners in gaining fun during web-based learning. These findings are parallel with another study, which indicates that itembias does not adversely affect the measurement quality and predictive validity of the overall instrument (Sheppard et al, 2006). Hence, there is no difference with regard to the capability of male and female young learners in Fun learning during web-based learning, as perceived by some scholars (Prensky, 2001;Rahamat et al, 2011).…”

“…Meanwhile, several astonishing findings were revealed with regards to the issue discussed (Sheppard et al, 2006;Zaharudin et al, 2011). Though gender bias has been detected in some items under the construct (Satisfaction), it could not be the reason for the researchers to drop these items.…”

“…This explanation can be accepted because males tend to take matters lightly, especially if they do not trigger their interest. Males seldom focus on details or irrelevant issues (Hanizah et al, 2006;Sheppard et al, 2006).…”

“…Their studies have become the local references from different field to ensure that DIF analysis on the item functioning is essential to confirm its reliability. In some other related DIF studies, Sheppard et al (2006) investigated the Hogan Personality Inventory across gender and two racial groups (Caucasian and Black) and have revealed 38.4% (53 out of 138 items) gender-based DIF and 37.7% (52 out of 138 items) race-based DIF. These indicate potential bias for the items displaying DIF more for Caucasians than Blacks.…”

Biased Against Whom? The Problems of “Group” Definition and Membership in Test Bias Analyses

“…Unfortunately, the basis for categorizing people into groups has received little attention by measurement and personnel selection scholars. More nuanced approaches for classifying people into groups have rarely been proposed in the test bias literature (Sheppard, Han, Colarelli, Dai, & King, 2006). Naïvely dichotomous classifications do not reflect the underlying complexity of race and racial identity.…”