___

• Abbott, M.L. (2007). A Confirmatory Approach to Differential İtem Functioning on an ESL Reading Assessment. Language Testing 2007 24: 7. Retrieved January 24 2011 from http://ltj.sagepub.com/content/24/1/7
• Acar, T. (2008). Maddenin Farklı Fonksiyonlaşmasını Belirlemede Kullanılan Genelleştirilmiş Aşamalı Doğrusal Modelleme, Lojistik Regresyon Ve Olabilirlik Oranı Tekniklerinin Karsılaştırılması. [Determination of a Differential Item Functioning (DIF) Procedure Using the Hierarchical Generalized Linear Model: A Comparison Study with Logistic Regression and Likelihood Ratio Procedure] Yayımlanmamış doktora tezi, Hacettepe Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü, Ankara.
• Angoff, William,H. (1993). Perspectives on differential item functioning methodology. In Differentional item functioning Eds. (Paul. W. Holland and Howard Wainer). p.3-23.IEA: NJ USA.
• Ateşok Deveci, N. (2008). Üniversitelerarası Kurul Yabancı Dil Sınavının Madde Yanlılığı Bakımından İncelenmesi. [Examination of Inter-University Board Foreign Language Test in The Frame of Item Bias] Yayımlanmamış doktora tezi, Ankara Üniversitesi Eğitim Bilimleri Enstitüsü, Ankara.
• Bakan Kalaycıoğlu, Dilara. (2008). Öğrenci Seçme Sınavı’nın Madde Yanlılığı Açısından İncelenmesi [Item Bias Analysis of the University Entrance Examination]. Yayımlanmamış doktora tezi, Hacettepe Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü, Ankara.
• Baker, F. B. (2001). The Basıcs of Item Response Theory. Second edition. ERIC Clearinghouse on Assessment and Evaluation
• Bertrand, R. & Boiteau, N. (2003). Comparing the Stability of IRT- Based and non IRT-Based DIF Methods in Different Cultural Contexts Using TIMSS Data. Educational Resources information center (ERIC)
• Benito, J.G. & Ara, M. J. N. (2000). A Comporison of X2, RFA ve IRT Based Procedures in the Detection of DIF. Klıwer Academic Publishers. Netherlands. Quality & iquantity 34: 17-31
• Bolt, S.E. & Ysseldyke, J.E. (2006). Comparingd DIF acrass Math and Reading/Language Arts Tests for Students Receiving a Read – Aloud Accommodation. Applied Measurement in Education. 19.(4), 329-355
• Camilli, G. & Shepard, A., L., (1994). Methods for Identifying Biased Test Items. SAGE Publications. California.
• ÇET, S. (2006). A Multıvarıate Analysıs In Detectıng Dıfferentıally Functıonıng Items Through The Use Of Programme For Internatıonal Student Assessment (Pısa) 2003 Mathematıcs Lıteracy Items. Yayınlanmamış doktora tezi, ODTÜ, Ankara
• Doğan, N. & Öğretmen, T. (2006). Madde Yanlılığını Belirleme Teknikleri Arasında Bir Karşılaştırma. Eurasian Journal of Educational Research, 23, pp, 94-105.
• Donoghue, J.R, Holland P.W. & Thayer, D.T. (1993). A Monte Carlo Study of Factors That Affect the Mantel-Haenszel and Standadization Measures of Differential Item Functioning. Differantial İtem Functioning. Edicted By J.R.Holland and H. Wainer. Lawrence Erlbaum Associaten. London.
• Dorans. N.J. & Holland, P.W, (1992). DIF Detection and Desciription: Mantel-Haenszel and Standardizasion. In P.W.Holland and H. Wainer (Eds.). Differantial İtem Functioning.Lawrence Erlbaum.
• Ellis, B. B., & Raju, N.S.(2003). Test and İtem Bias: What They Are, What They Aren’t, and How To Detect Them. Educational Resources information center (ERIC)
• Embretson, S.E. & Reise, S.T, (2000). Item Perponse Theory For Psychologists. London: Lawrance Erlbaum Associates Publishers
• Ercikan, K. (2002). Disentangling sources of Differential Item Functioning in Multilanguage Assessments. International Journal of Testing, 2(3&4), 199-215.
• Ercikan, K., Gierl, M. J., McCreith, T., Puhan, G., & Koh, K. (2004). Comparability of bilingual versions of assessments: sources of incomparability of English and French versions of Canada’s national achievement tests. Applied Measurement in Education, 17, 301–321. Retrieved August 23 2011 from Web: http://dx.doi.org/10.1207/s15324818ame1703_4
• Ercikan, K., Mc Creith, T. & Lapointe V. (2005). Factors Associated with Mathematics Achievement and Participation in Advanced Mathematics Courses: An Examination of Gender Differences From an International Perspective. Volume 105(1), Retrieved January 8 2007 from Web: http://qix.sagepub.com/ cgi/reprint/9/6/859
• Ercikan, K. & Kim, K. (2005): Examining the Construct Comparability of the English and French Versions of TIMSS, International Journal of Testing, 5:1, 23-35. Retrieved August 19 2011 from Web: http://dx.doi.org/10.1207/s15327574ijt0501_3.
• Gierl, M.J.(2000). Construct Equivalance on Translated Achievement Test. Canadian Journal of Education 25, 4 (2000), 280-296.
• Gierl, M. J., & Khaliq, S. N. (2001). Identifying sources of differential item and bundle functioning on translated achievement tests. Journal of Educational Measurement, 38, 164–187.
• Gierl, M., Khaliq, S. N. & Boughton, K. (1999). Gender Differential Item Functioning in Mathematics and Science: Prevalence and Policy Implications. Paper Presented at the Symposium entitled “Improving Large-Scale Assessment in Education” at the Annual Meeting of the Canadian Society for the Study of Education. Sherbrooke, Québec.
• Gotzmann, A.J.(2002). The Effect of Large Ability Differences on Type I Error and Power Rates Using SIBTEST and TESTGRAF DIF Detection Procedures. Paper prepared at the Annual Meeting of American Educational Research Association. New Orleans.
• Gotzmann, A., Wright, K. & Rodden, L.(2006). A Comparison of Power Rates for Items Favoring the Reference and Focal group for the Mantel-Haenszel and SIBTEST Procedures. Paper presented at the American Educational Research Association (AERA) in San Francisco, California.
• Hambleton, R. K., Clauser, B. E., Mazor,K. M. & Jones, R. W. (1993). Advances in the detection of differentially functioning test items.European Journal of Psychological Assessment, 9(1), 1-18.
• Hambleton, R. & Rodgers, J. (1995). Item bias review. Practical Assessment, Research & Evaluation, 4(6). Retrieved February 11, 2013 from http://PAREonline.net/getvn.asp?v=4&n=6).
• Hambleton, R. K., & Swaminathan, H. (1985). Item response theory: Principles and applications. Boston: Kluwer.
• Hambleton, R.K., Swaminathan, H. & Rogers, H. J. (1991). Fundamentals of Item Response Theory. California:SAGE Publications.
• Jöreskog, K. G. & Sörbon, D. (1993). LISREL 8: structural equation modeling with the SİMPLİS command language. Scientific software.
• Kelloway, E. K. (1998). Using LISREL for structural equation modeling. London: Sage.
• Le, L.T. (2009). Investigating Gender Differential Item Functioning Across Countries and Test Language of PISA Science Items.International Journal of Testing, 9: 122-133.
• MEB (2007). PISA 2006 Ulusal Ön Rapor. MEB Eğitimi Araştırma ve Geliştirme Dairesi. Ankara.
• MEB (2010). Pısa 2006 Projesi Ulusal Nihai Rapor. MEB Eğitimi Araştırma ve Geliştirme Dairesi Başkanlığı. Ankara.
• OECD.(2005). PISA 2003 Data Analysis Manual . PISA 2003 Data Analysis Manual: SPSS® Users
• Osterlind, S.J. (1983). Test Item Bias. Sage Publications, California
• Reynolds, C., Livingston, R.B. & Wilson, V. (2006). Measurement and Assessment in Education. Boston: Pearson.
• Shepard, L. A., Camili, G. & Williams, D. M. (1985). Validity of Approximation Techniques for Detecting Item Bias. Journal of Educatıonal Measurement. Volume 22, No. 2, Summer 1985, pp. 77-105
• Skaggs, G. & Lissitz, R.W. (1992) The Consistency of Detecting İtem Bias Across Different Test Administrations: İmplications of Another Failure. Journal of Educational Measurement Fall 1992,vol.29, No.3, pp 227-242
• Stout, W., Bolt, D. Froelich, A. G., Habing, B, Hartz, S. ve Roussos, L. (2003). Development of a SIBTEST Bundle Methodology for Improving Test Equity With Applications for GRE Test Development. Princeton, NJ: ETS.
• Şimşek, Ö.F. (2007). Yapısal Eşitlik Modellemesine Giriş (Temel İlkeler ve LISREL Uygulamaları). Ankara: Ekinoks Yayınevi.
• Tabachnick, B. G. & Fidell, L. S. (2007). Using Multivariate Statistics. Fifth Edition. Pearson: AB
• Thissen, D. (2001). IRTLRDIF v.2.0b: Software For The Computation of The Statistics Involved In Item Response Theory Likelihood-Ratio Tests For Differential Item Functioning.
• Thissen, D., Steinberg, L. & Wainer, H. (1993). Detection of differential Item Functioning Using the Parameters of Item Response Models. In P.W.Holland and H. Wainer (Eds.). Differantial İtem Functioning.Lawrence Erlbaum.
• Waller, N.G. (2005). EZDIF: A Computer Program For Detecting Uniform And Nonuniform Differential Item Functioning With The Mantel-Haenszel And Logistic Regression Procedures. Retrieved September 25 2010 from Web: http://www.psych.umn.edu/faculty/ waller/downloads.htm
• Welkenhuysen-Gybels, J. & Billiet, J. (2002). A Comparison of Techniques for Detecting Cross-Cultural Inequivalence at the Item Level. Kluwer Academic Publishers. 197–218. Netherlands.
• Yıldırım, H. H & Berberoğlu, G. (2009). Judgmental and Statistical DIF Analyses of the PISA-2003 Mathematics Literacy Items. International Journal of Testing, 9: 108–121, 2009. Retrieved July 17 2011 from http://www.informaworld.com/smpp/title~content=t775653658
• Yıldırım, H., Hüseyin. (2006).The Dıfferentıal Item Functıonıng (Dıf) Analysıs of Mathematıcs Items in The Internatıonal Assessment Programs. Yayınlanmamış doktora tezi, ODTÜ, Ankara.
• Yıldırım, S. (2008). Farklı işleyen maddelerin belirlenmesinde sınırlandırılmış faktör çözümlemesinin olabilirlik–oranı ve Mantel-Haenszel yöntemleriyle karşılaştırılması [Comparison of Restricted-Factor Analysis With Likelihood Ratio and Mantel-Haenszel Methods in DİF Analyses]. H.Ü.eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi 34:297-307.
• Zhou,j., Gierl, M. J. & Tan, X. (2005).Evaluating the Performance of SIBTEST and MULTISIB Using Different Matching Criteria. Retrieved September 25 2010 from www2.education.ualberta.ca/educ/psych/crame/files/ncme06_jz.pdf
• Zumbo, B.D. (1999). A Handbook on the Theory and Methods of Differential Item Functioning (DIF): Logistic Regression Modeling as a Unitary Framework for Binary and Likert-Type (Ordinal) Item Scores. Ottawa, ON: Directorate of Human Resources Research and Evaluation, Department of National Defense.
• http://pisa2006.acer.edu.au/downloads.php
• http://earged.meb.gov.tr