@article {44,
	title = {Computers in clinical assessment: Historical developments, present status, and future challenges},
	journal = {Journal of Clinical Psychology},
	volume = {60},
	number = {3},
	year = {2004},
	pages = {331-345},
	publisher = {John Wiley \& Sons: US},
	abstract = {Computerized testing methods have long been regarded as a potentially powerful asset for providing psychological assessment services. Ever since computers were first introduced and adapted to the field of assessment psychology in the 1950s, they have been a valuable aid for scoring, data processing, and even interpretation of test results. The history and status of computer-based personality and neuropsychological tests are discussed in this article. Several pertinent issues involved in providing test interpretation by computer are highlighted. Advances in computer-based test use, such as computerized adaptive testing, are described and problems noted. Today, there is great interest in expanding the availability of psychological assessment applications on the Internet. Although these applications show great promise, there are a number of problems associated with providing psychological tests on the Internet that need to be addressed by psychologists before the Internet can become a major medium for psychological service delivery. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2007 APA, all rights reserved)},
	keywords = {clinical assessment, computerized testing method, Internet, psychological assessment services},
	isbn = {0021-9762 (Print); 1097-4679 (Electronic)},
	author = {Butcher, J. N. and Perry, J. L. and Hahn, J. A.}
}
@article {341,
	title = {Comparability and validity of computerized adaptive testing with the MMPI-2},
	journal = {Journal of Personality Assessment},
	volume = {65},
	number = {2},
	year = {1995},
	note = {Roper, B LBen-Porath, Y SButcher, J NUnited StatesJournal of personality assessmentJ Pers Assess. 1995 Oct;65(2):358-71.},
	month = {Oct},
	pages = {358-71},
	edition = {1995/10/01},
	abstract = {The comparability and validity of a computerized adaptive (CA) Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory-2 (MMPI-2) were assessed in a sample of 571 undergraduate college students. The CA MMPI-2 administered adaptively Scales L, E the 10 clinical scales, and the 15 content scales, utilizing the countdown method (Butcher, Keller, \& Bacon, 1985). All subjects completed the MMPI-2 twice, with three experimental conditions: booklet test-retest, booklet-CA, and conventional computerized (CC)-CA. Profiles across administration modalities show a high degree of similarity, providing evidence for the comparability of the three forms. Correlations between MMPI-2 scales and other psychometric measures (Beck Depression Inventory; Symptom Checklist-Revised; State-Trait Anxiety and Anger Scales; and the Anger Expression Scale) support the validity of the CA MMPI-2. Substantial item savings may be realized with the implementation of the countdown procedure.},
	isbn = {0022-3891 (Print)},
	author = {Roper, B. L. and Ben-Porath, Y. S. and Butcher, J. N.}
}
@article {340,
	title = {Comparability of computerized adaptive and conventional testing with the MMPI-2},
	journal = {Journal of Personality Assessment},
	volume = {57},
	number = {2},
	year = {1991},
	note = {Roper, B LBen-Porath, Y SButcher, J NUnited StatesJournal of personality assessmentJ Pers Assess. 1991 Oct;57(2):278-90.},
	month = {Oct},
	pages = {278-290},
	edition = {1991/01/01},
	abstract = {A computerized adaptive version and the standard version of the Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory-2 (MMPI-2) were administered 1 week apart to a sample of 155 college students to assess the comparability of the two versions. The countdown method was used to adaptively administer Scales L, F, the I0 clinical scales, and the 15 new content scales. Profiles across administration modalities show a high degree of similarity, providing evidence for the comparability of computerized adaptive and conventional testing with the MMPI-2. Substantial item savings were found with the adaptive version. Future directions in the study of adaptive testing with the MMPI-2 are discussed.},
	isbn = {0022-3891 (Print)},
	author = {Roper, B. L. and Ben-Porath, Y. S. and Butcher, J. N.}
}
@conference {843,
	title = {An empirical study of the computer adaptive MMPI-2},
	booktitle = {Paper presented at the 25th Annual Symposium on recent developments in the MMPI/MMPI-2},
	year = {1990},
	address = {Minneapolis MN},
	author = {Ben-Porath, Y. S. and Roper, B. L. and Butcher, J. N.}
}
@conference {1130,
	title = {Illustration of computerized adaptive testing with the MMPI-2},
	booktitle = {Paper presented at the 98th Annual Meeting of the American Psychological Association},
	year = {1990},
	address = {Boston MA},
	author = {Roper, B. L. and Ben-Porath, Y. S. and Butcher, J. N.}
}
@article {22,
	title = {A real-data simulation of computerized adaptive administration of the MMPI},
	journal = {Psychological Assessment},
	volume = {1},
	number = {1},
	year = {1989},
	note = {Article},
	pages = {18-22},
	abstract = {A real-data simulation of computerized adaptive administration of the MMPI was conducted with data obtained from two personnel-selection samples and two clinical samples. A modification of the countdown method was tested to determine the usefulness, in terms of item administration savings, of several different test administration procedures. Substantial item administration savings were achieved for all four samples, though the clinical samples required administration of more items to achieve accurate classification and/or full-scale scores than did the personnel-selection samples. The use of normative item endorsement frequencies was found to be as effective as sample-specific frequencies for the determination of item administration order. The role of computerized adaptive testing in the future of personality assessment is discussed., (C) 1989 by the American Psychological Association},
	keywords = {computerized adaptive testing},
	author = {Ben-Porath, Y. S. and Slutske, W. S. and Butcher, J. N.}
}
@conference {841,
	title = {A comparison of two methods for the adaptive administration of the MMPI-2 content scales},
	booktitle = {Paper presented at the 86th Annual Convention of the American Psychological Association},
	year = {1988},
	address = {Atlanta GA},
	author = {Ben-Porath, Y. S. and Waller, N. G. and Slutske, W. S. and Butcher, J. N.}
}
@conference {1164,
	title = {A real-data simulation of adaptive MMPI administration},
	booktitle = {Paper presented at the 23rd Annual Symposium on recent developments in the use of the MMPI},
	year = {1988},
	address = {St. Petersburg FL},
	author = {Slutske, W. S. and Ben-Porath, Y. S. and Butcher, J. N.}
}
@article {43,
	title = {Current developments and future directions in computerized personality assessment},
	journal = {Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology},
	volume = {53},
	number = {6},
	year = {1985},
	note = {Miscellaneous Article},
	pages = {803-815},
	abstract = {Although computer applications in personality assessment have burgeoned rapidly in recent years, the majority of these uses capitalize on the computer{\textquoteright}s speed, accuracy, and memory capacity rather than its potential for the development of new, flexible assessment strategies. A review of current examples of computer usage in personality assessment reveals wide acceptance of automated clerical tasks such as test scoring and even test administration. The computer is also assuming tasks previously reserved for expert clinicians, such as writing narrative interpretive reports from test results. All of these functions represent automation of established assessment devices and interpretive strategies. The possibility also exists of harnessing some of the computer{\textquoteright}s unique adaptive capabilities to alter standard devices and even develop new ones. Three proposed strategies for developing computerized adaptive personality tests are described, with the conclusion that the computer{\textquoteright}s potential in this area justifies a call for further research efforts., (C) 1985 by the American Psychological Association},
	author = {Butcher, J. N. and Keller, L. S. and Bacon, S. F.}
}
