1. Drechsel, B., Carstensen, C., & Prenzel, M. (2011). The role of content and context in PISA interest scales: A study of the embedded interest items in the PISA 2006 science assessment. International Journal of Science Education, 33(1), 73–95.
2. Goldhammer, F., Naumann, J., Stelter, A., Tóth, K., Rölke, H., & Klieme, E. (2014). The time on task effect in reading and problem solving is moderated by task difficulty and skill: Insights from a computer-based large-scale assessment. Journal of Educational Psychology, 106(3), 608–626.
3. Kaplan, D., & Kuger, S. (2016). The methodology of PISA: Past, present, and future. In S. Kuger, E. Klieme, N. Jude, & D. Kaplan (Eds.), Assessing contexts of learning: An international perspective. Dordrecht: Springer.
4. Klieme, E., & Kuger, S. (2016). PISA 2015 context questionnaires framework. In OECD (Ed.), PISA 2015 assessment and analytical framework: Science, reading, mathematic and financial literacy (pp. 101–127). Paris: OECD Publishing. doi: 10.1787/9789264255425-7-en .
5. Klieme, E., Backhoff, E., Blum, W., Buckley, J., Hong, Y., Kaplan, D., Levin, H., Scheerens, J., Schmidt, W., van de Vijver, A. J. R., & Vieluf, S. (2013). PISA 2012 context questionnaires framework. In Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (Ed.), PISA 2012 assessment and analytical framework: Mathematics, reading, science, problem solving and financial literacy (pp. 167–258). Paris: OECD Publishing.