Breslow, N.E., & Day, N.E. ( 1980). Statistical methods in cancer research: Volume 1. The analysis of case-control studies. Lyon, France: International Agency for Research on Cancer.
2.
Dorans, N.J., Schmitt, A.P., & Bleistein, C.A. (1992). The standardization approach to assessing comprehensive differential item functioning. Journal of Educational Measurement, 29, 309-319.
3.
Mantel, N., & Haenszel, W. ( 1959). Statistical aspects of the analysis of data from retrospective studies of disease. Journal of the National Cancer Institute , 22, 719-748.
4.
Penfield, R.D. ( 2003). Application of the Breslow-Day test of trend in odds ratio heterogeneity to the detection of nonuniform DIF. Alberta Journal of Educational Research, 49, 231-243.
5.
Penfield, R.D. ( 2008). An odds ratio approach for assessing differential distractor functioning effects under the nominal response model. Journal of Educational Measurement, 45, 247-269.
6.
Penfield, R.D. ( 2010). Modeling DIF effects using distractor-level invariance effects: Implications for understanding the causes of DIF. Applied Psychological Measurement, 34, 151-165.
7.
Thissen, D., Steinberg, L., & Wainer, H. ( 1993). Detection of differential item functioning using the parameters of item response models. In P. W. Holland & H. Wainer (Eds.), Differential item functioning (pp. 67-113). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
