ANALISIS DIFFERENTIAL ITEM FUNCTIONING (DIF) INSTRUMEN KEPERIBADIAN ISLAM REMAJA (IKIR) MERENTAS JANTINA
DIFFERENTIAL ITEM FUNCTIONING (DIF) ANALYSIS OF THE ISLAMIC
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.35631/IJEPC.1162062Keywords:
Differential Item Functioning, Kesetaraan Pengukuran (Measurement Equivalence), Keperibadian Islam Remaja (Islamic Personality), Model Rasch (Rasch Model), Psikometrik Islam (Islamic Psychometrics)Abstract
Instrumen Keperibadian Islam Remaja (IKIR) dibangunkan berasaskan kerangka psikospiritual Islam yang mengintegrasikan dimensi iman, tanggungjawab khalifah dan akhlak sebagai manifestasi ihsan dalam pembentukan sahsiah remaja Muslim. Pengukuran keperibadian Islam memerlukan instrumen yang sah, boleh dipercayai dan bebas daripada bias pengukuran agar interpretasi skor dapat dibuat secara adil merentas kumpulan responden. Sehubungan itu, kajian ini bertujuan menilai kesetaraan pengukuran Instrumen Keperibadian Islam Remaja merentas jantina menggunakan Model Rasch melalui analisis Differential Item Functioning (DIF). Kajian ini menggunakan pendekatan kuantitatif dengan reka bentuk tinjauan. Seramai 130 orang pelajar sekolah menengah terlibat sebagai responden kajian yang terdiri daripada 52 pelajar lelaki dan 78 pelajar perempuan daripada pelbagai latar institusi pendidikan. Data dianalisis menggunakan pemodelan Rasch bagi menilai fungsi item serta mengesan kewujudan DIF jantina. Dapatan analisis menunjukkan bahawa majoriti item dalam IKIR berfungsi secara setara bagi responden lelaki dan perempuan, dengan hanya sebilangan kecil item menunjukkan perbezaan sederhana yang tidak menjejaskan kestabilan konstruk keseluruhan. Secara keseluruhan, keputusan kajian mengesahkan bahawa IKIR mempunyai tahap kesetaraan pengukuran yang memadai dan boleh digunakan untuk menilai keperibadian Islam remaja tanpa memerlukan pelarasan tafsiran berdasarkan jantina. Instrumen ini berpotensi diaplikasikan dalam konteks pendidikan dan kaunseling Islam sebagai alat penilaian sahsiah remaja yang sistematik, adil dan berasaskan bukti empirik.
The Islamic Personality Instrument for Adolescents (IKIR) was developed based on an Islamic psycho-spiritual framework that integrates the dimensions of faith (iman), the responsibility of humans as khalifah, and moral conduct (akhlaq) as manifestations of ihsan in the development of Muslim adolescents’ character. Measuring Islamic personality requires an instrument that is valid, reliable, and free from measurement bias so that score interpretations can be made fairly across different respondent groups. Therefore, this study aims to examine the measurement equivalence of the Islamic Personality Instrument for Adolescents across gender using the Rasch Model through Differential Item Functioning (DIF) analysis. This study employed a quantitative survey design. A total of 130 secondary school students participated as respondents, consisting of 52 male students and 78 female students from various educational institutions. The data were analysed using Rasch modelling to evaluate item functioning and to detect the presence of gender-related DIF. The findings indicate that the majority of items in IKIR function equivalently across male and female respondents, with only a small number of items showing moderate differences that do not affect the stability of the overall constructs. Overall, the results confirm that IKIR demonstrates adequate measurement equivalence and can be used to assess the Islamic personality of adolescents without requiring gender-based adjustments in score interpretation. The instrument has the potential to be applied in Islamic education and counselling contexts as a systematic, fair, and evidence-based tool for assessing adolescent character development.
Downloads
References
Al-Ghazali. (2004). Ihya’ ‘ulum al-din. Dar al-Ma‘rifah.
Al-Munawi, A. R. (1994). Fayd al-Qadir sharh al-Jami‘ al-Saghir. Dar al-Kutub al-‘Ilmiyyah.
Al-Qaradawi, Y. (2001). Fiqh al-awlawiyyat: Dirasah jadidah fi daw’ al-Qur’an wa al-Sunnah. Maktabah Wahbah.
Bond, T. G., & Fox, C. M. (2015). Applying the Rasch model: Fundamental measurement in the human sciences (3rd ed.). Routledge.
Boone, W. J., Staver, J. R., & Yale, M. S. (2014). Rasch analysis in the human sciences. Springer.
Boone, W. J. (2020). Rasch analysis for instrument development: Why, when, and how? CBE—Life Sciences Education, 19(3), 1–7. https://doi.org/10.1187/cbe.19-12-0253
DeVellis, R. F. (2017). Scale development: Theory and applications (4th ed.). Sage Publications.
Erikson, E. H. (1968). Identity: Youth and crisis. Norton.
Engelhard, G., & Wind, S. A. (2018). Invariant measurement with raters and rating scales: Rasch models for rater-mediated assessments. Routledge.
Fisher, W. P., Jr. (2019). Rasch measurement applications in social science research. Measurement: Interdisciplinary Research and Perspectives, 17(2), 1–14. https://doi.org/10.1080/15366367.2019.1588646
Francis, L. J. (1997). The psychology of gender differences in religion: A review of empirical research. Religion, 27(1), 81–96. https://doi.org/10.1006/reli.1996.0066
Linacre, J. M. (1994). Sample size and item calibration stability. Rasch Measurement Transactions, 7(4), 328.
Miller, A. S., & Hoffmann, J. P. (1995). Risk and religion: An explanation of gender differences in religiosity. Journal for the Scientific Study of Religion, 34(1), 63–75. https://doi.org/10.2307/1386523
Millsap, R. E. (2011). Statistical approaches to measurement invariance. Routledge.
Rasch, G. (1960). Probabilistic models for some intelligence and attainment tests. Danish Institute for Educational Research.
Santrock, J. W. (2019). Adolescence (17th ed.). McGraw-Hill Education.
Tennant, A., & Conaghan, P. G. (2007). The Rasch measurement model in rheumatology: What is it and why use it? Arthritis & Rheumatism, 57(8), 1358–1362. https://doi.org/10.1002/art.23108
Wright, B. D., & Linacre, J. M. (2020). Reasonable mean-square fit values. Rasch Measurement Transactions, 34(1), 1–2.
Zumbo, B. D. (2007). Three generations of DIF analyses: Considering where it has been, where it is now, and where it is going. Language Assessment Quarterly, 4(2), 223–233. https://doi.org/10.1080/15434300701375832
