IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/sae/jedbes/v15y1990i1p53-67.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Comparison of the Mantel-Haenszel Test With a Randomized and a Jackknife Test for Detecting Biased Items

Author

Listed:
  • Gregory Camilli
  • Jeffrey K. Smith

Abstract

The Mantel-Haenszel (MH) chi-square test has been shown to have desirable statistical properties in detecting biased items. However, small sample sizes are still of concern, especially when large differences in ability exist between the focal and reference groups. This is because the accuracy and power of the MH test depends on the range of overlap between the focal and reference groups on raw scores, as well as the total sample size at any particular raw score. The MH procedure is compared with (a) a randomization test and (b) a jackknife test, which make weaker distributional assumptions. The MH chi-square significance levels were found to be extremely robust.

Suggested Citation

  • Gregory Camilli & Jeffrey K. Smith, 1990. "Comparison of the Mantel-Haenszel Test With a Randomized and a Jackknife Test for Detecting Biased Items," Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics, , vol. 15(1), pages 53-67, March.
    • Handle: RePEc:sae:jedbes:v:15:y:1990:i:1:p:53-67
    DOI: 10.3102/10769986015001053
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.3102/10769986015001053
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.3102/10769986015001053?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:sae:jedbes:v:15:y:1990:i:1:p:53-67. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: SAGE Publications (email available below). General contact details of provider: .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.