Kirsch, I.S., & Guthrie, J.T.Construct validity of functional reading tests. Journal of Educational Measurement, 1980, 17, 81-93.
2.
Langendoen, D.T.The study of syntax: The generative-transformational approach to American English. New York: Holt, Rinehart, & Winston, 1969.
3.
Lorge, I., & Kruglov, L.A suggested technique for the improvement of difficulty prediction of test items. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 1952, 12, 554-561.
4.
Lorge, I., & Kruglov, L.The improvement of estimates of test difficulty. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 1953, 13, 34-36.
5.
Miller, G.A.Some psychological studies of grammar. American Psychologist , 1962, 17, 748-762.
6.
Millman, J.Determinants of item difficulty: A preliminary investigation (Report No. 114) . Los Angeles: University of California, Center for the Study of Evaluation, 1978.
7.
Postman N., & Weingartner, C. Linguistics: A reevaluation in teaching. New York: Dell, 1966.
8.
Ryan, J.J.Teacher judgment of test item properties. Journal of Educational Measurement, 1968, 5, 301-306.
9.
Searle, B.W., Lorton, P., & Suppes, P.Structural variables affecting CAI performance on arithmetic word problems of disadvantaged and deaf students. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 1974, 5, 371-384.
10.
Thorndike, R.L.Item and score conversion by pooled judgment. In P. W. Holland & D. B. Rubin (Eds.), Test Equating. New York: Academic Press, 1982.
11.
Tinkelman, S.Difficulty prediction of test items (Teachers College Contributions to Education Report No. 941). New York: Columbia University, 1947.
12.
Valian, V.The wherefores and therefores of the competence-performance distinction. In W. H. Cooper & E. C. T. Walker (Eds.), Sentence processing: Psycholinguistic studies presented to Merrill Garrett. Hillsdale NJ: Erlbaum, 1979.
