___

• Angoff, W. H. (1971). Scales, norms and equivalent scores. In Thorndike, R. L. (Ed.), Educational Measurement (p. 509-600). Washington: American Council on Education.
• Angoff, W. H. (1981). Summary and derivation of equating methods used at ETS. In P. W. Holland & D. B. Rubin (Eds.). Test Equating. New York: Academic Press.
• Baker, F. B. & Al-Karni, A. (1991). A Comparison of two procedures for computing IRT Equating Coefficients. Journal of Educational Measurement, 28 (2), 147-162.
• Barnard, J. J. (1996). In search for equity in educational measurement: Traditional versus modern equating methods. Paper presented at ASEESA’s national conference at the HRSC Conference Centre, Pretoria, South Africa.
• Battauz, M. (2013). IRT test equating in complex linkage plans. Psychometrika, 78, 464-480.
• Battauz, M. (2015). equateIRT: An R Package for IRT Test Equating. Accepted for publication in Journal of Statistical Software.
• Braun, H. I., & Holland, P. W. (1982). Observed-score test equating: A mathematical analysis of some ETS equating procedures. In P. W. Holland & D. B. Rubin (Eds.), Test equating (pp. 9–49). New York: Academic.
• Casbarro, J. (2004). Reducing anxiety in the era of highstakes testing. Principals, 83(5), 36-38.
• Chu, K. L. & Kamata, A. (2000). Nonequivalent Group Equating via 1-P HGLLM. New Orleans, LA: Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research
• Cizek, G. J. (2001). Cheating to the test. Education Matters Journal, 1(1), 40-47.
• Cohen, A. S. & Kim, S. H. (1998). An ınvestigation of linking methods under the graded response model. Applied Psychological Measurement, 22 (2), 116-130.
• Dorans, N. J. (2000). Research notes: distinctions among classes of linkages. The College Board, Office of Research and Development.
• Haebara, T. (1980). Equating logistic ability scales by a weighted least squares method. Japanese Psychological Research, 22 (3), 144-149.
• Hambleton, R. K. & Swaminathan, H. (1985). Item Response Theory: Principles and Applications. Boston: Academic Puslishers Group.
• Hambleton, R. K., Swaminathan, H. & Rogers, H. (1991). Fundamentals of Item Response Theory. Newbury Park CA: Sage.
• Hanson, B. A. & Beguin, A. A. (2002). Obtaining a common scale for ıtem response theory ıtem parameters using separate versus concurrent estimation in the common-ıtem equating design. Applied Psychological Measurement, 26 (1), 3–24.
• Hung, P., Wu, Y., & Chen, Y. (1991). IRT Item Parameter Linking: Relevant Issues for the Purpose of Item Banking. Paper presented at the International Academic Symposium on Psychological Measurement, Taiwan.
• Karkee, T. B. & Wright, K. R. (2004, April). Evaluation of linking methods for placing three parameter logistic ıtem parameter estimates onto rasch scale. Paper presented at the Meeting of the American Educational Research, San Diego, California.
• Kaskowitz, G. S. & De Ayala, R. J. (2001). The effect of error in ıtem parameter estimates on the test response function method of linking. Applied Psychological Measurement, 25 (1), 39-52.
• Kim, S. & Kolen, M. J. (2006). Robustness of Format Effects of IRT Linking Methods for Mixed Format Tests. Applied Measurement in Education, 19 (4), 357-381
• Kim, S. & Kolen, M. J. (2004). Optimally defining criterion functions for the characteristic curve procedures in the ırt scale linking. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, San Diego, CA.
• Kim, S. & Lee, W. (2004). IRT Scale linking methods for mixed-format tests (ACT research report 2004). Iowa City, IA: ACT, Inc.
• Kim, S. & Lee, W. C. (2006). An Extension of Four IRT Linking Methods for Mixed-Format Tests. Journal of Educational Measurement, 43 (1), 53–76.
• Kim, S. & Song, M.-Y. (2004). Least squares estimation of IRT scale linking coefficients under the graded response model. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, San Diego, CA.
• Kolen, M. J. & Brennan, R. L. (2004). Test equating: Methods and practices. New York: Springer.
• Loyd, B. H. & Hoover, H. D. (1980). Vertical equating using the rasch model. Journal of Educational Measurement, 17 (3), 179-193.
• Marco, G. L. (1977). Item characteristic curve solutions to three ıntractable testing problems. Journal of Educational Measurement, 14 (2), 139- 160.
• Mâsse, L. C., Allen, D., Wılson, M., ve Wıllıams, G. (2006). Introducing equating methodologies to compare test scores from two different self-regulation scales”. Health Education Research 21, 110-120.
• Ogasawara, H. (2001). Standard errors of ıtem response theory equating/linking by response function methods. Applied Psychological Measurement, 25 (1), 53–67.
• Raju, N. S. & Arenson, E. A. (April, 2002). Developing a common metric in ıtem response theory: an area-minimization approach. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the National Council on Measurement in Education, New Orleans, LA.
• Resnick, M. (2004). The educated student: Defining and advancing student achievement. Alexandria VA: National School Boards Association
• Stocking, M. L. & Lord, F. M. (1983). Developing a common metric in ıtem response theory. Applied Psychological Measurement, 7 (2), 201- 210.
• Tanguma, J. (2000). “Equating test scores using the linear method: A primer.” Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Southwest Educational Research Association. Dallas, TX.
• Way, W. D. & Tang, K. L. (1991, April 4-6). A comparison of four logistic model equating methods. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Chicago, IL.