Nambury S. Raju

Learn More
Current interest in the assessment of measurement equivalence emphasizes 2 major methods of analysis. The authors offer a comparison of a linear method (confirmatory factor analysis) and a nonlinear method (differential item and test functioning using item response theory) with an emphasis on their methodological similarities and differences. The 2(More)
A recent article (W. H. Stewart & P. L. Roth, 2001) in the Journal of Applied Psychology presented the conclusion from meta-analysis that entrepreneurs have a higher risk propensity than managers and that this propensity is particularly pronounced among the growth-oriented. A previously unresolved question was said to be laid to rest and a "vital component"(More)
A specific recommendation of the 1999 Standards for Educational and Psychological Testing by the American Educational Research Association, the American Psychological Association, and the National Council on Measurement in Education is that test publishers report estimates of the conditional standard error of measurement (SEM). Procedures for calculating(More)
The authors examine 3 methods of combining new studies into existing meta-analyses: (a) adding the new study or studies to the database and recalculating the meta-analysis (the medical model); (b) using the Bayesian procedure advocated by F. L. Schmidt and J. E. Hunter (1977) and F. L. Schmidt, J. E. Hunter, K. Pearlman, and G. S. Shane (1979) to update the(More)
In this study, an item response theory-based differential functioning of items and tests (DFIT) framework (N. S. Raju, W. J. van der Linden, & P. F. Fleer, 1995) was applied to a Likert-type scale. Several differential item functioning (DIF) analyses compared the item characteristics of a 10-item satisfaction scale for Black and White examinees and for(More)
  • 1