Angoff, W.H. (1993). Perspectives on differential item functioning methodology. In P. W. Holland & H. Wainer (Eds.), Differential item functioning . Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
2.
Angoff, W.H., & Ford, S.F. (1973). Item-race interaction on a test of scholastic aptitude. Journal of Educational Measurement, 10, 95-105.
3.
Curley, E., & Schmitt, A. (1992, April). Revising SA T- Verbal items to eliminate DIF. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, San Francisco .
Green, D.R., & Draper, J.F. (1972). Exploratory studies of bias in achievement tests . Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Psychological Association, Honolulu, Hawaii. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 070 794).
6.
Holland, P.W. & Thayer, D.T. (1986). Differential item performance and the Mantel-Haenszel procedure. (Research Report No 86-31)Princeton, NJ: Educational Testing Service.
7.
Jackson, C., & Braswell, J. (1992, April). An analysis of factors causing differential item functioning on SAT-Mathematics items. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association , San Francisco.
8.
Linn, R.L., Levin, M.V., Hastings, C.N., & Wardrop, J.L. (1981). Item bias in a test of reading comprehension. Applied Psychological Measurement, 5, 159-173.
9.
Shealy, R. & Stout, W. (1993). An item response theory model for test bias and differential test functioning. In P. Holland and H. Wainer (Eds.), Differential item functioning. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
10.
Wainer, H., & Steinberg, L.S. (1992). Sex differences in performance on the mathematics section of the Scholastic Aptitude Test: A bidirectional validity study. Harvard Educational Review, 62, 323-326.
