@inbook {1895,
	title = {Adaptive testing with the multi-unidimensional pairwise preference model},
	year = {2007},
	note = {{PDF file, 145 KB}},
	address = {D. J. Weiss (Ed.), Proceedings of the 2007 GMAC Conference on Computerized Adaptive Testing.},
	author = {Stark, S. and Chernyshenko, O. S.}
}
@article {370,
	title = {An EM approach to parameter estimation for the Zinnes and Griggs paired comparison IRT model},
	journal = {Applied Psychological Measurement},
	volume = {26},
	number = {2},
	year = {2002},
	pages = {208-227},
	abstract = {Borman et al. recently proposed a computer adaptive performance appraisal system called CARS II that utilizes paired comparison judgments of behavioral stimuli. To implement this approach,the paired comparison ideal point model developed by Zinnes and Griggs was selected. In this article,the authors describe item response and information functions for the Zinnes and Griggs model and present procedures for estimating stimulus and person parameters. Monte carlo simulations were conducted to assess the accuracy of the parameter estimation procedures. The results indicated that at least 400 ratees (i.e.,ratings) are required to obtain reasonably accurate estimates of the stimulus parameters and their standard errors. In addition,latent trait estimation improves as test length increases. The implications of these results for test construction are also discussed. },
	keywords = {Adaptive Testing, Computer Assisted Testing, Item Response Theory, Maximum Likelihood, Personnel Evaluation, Statistical Correlation, Statistical Estimation},
	author = {Stark, S. and F Drasgow}
}
@article {36,
	title = {An examination of the comparative reliability, validity, and accuracy of performance ratings made using computerized adaptive rating scales},
	journal = {Journal of Applied Psychology},
	volume = {86},
	number = {5},
	year = {2001},
	note = {214803450021-9010Journal ArticleValidation Studies},
	pages = {965-973},
	abstract = {This laboratory research compared the reliability, validity, and accuracy of a computerized adaptive rating scale (CARS) format and 2 relatively common and representative rating formats. The CARS is a paired-comparison rating task that uses adaptive testing principles to present pairs of scaled behavioral statements to the rater to iteratively estimate a ratee{\textquoteright}s effectiveness on 3 dimensions of contextual performance. Videotaped vignettes of 6 office workers were prepared, depicting prescripted levels of contextual performance, and 112 subjects rated these vignettes using the CARS format and one or the other competing format. Results showed 23\%-37\% lower standard errors of measurement for the CARS format. In addition, validity was significantly higher for the CARS format (d = .18), and Cronbach{\textquoteright}s accuracy coefficients showed significantly higher accuracy, with a median effect size of .08. The discussion focuses on possible reasons for the results.},
	keywords = {*Computer Simulation, *Employee Performance Appraisal, *Personnel Selection, Adult, Automatic Data Processing, Female, Human, Male, Reproducibility of Results, Sensitivity and Specificity, Support, U.S. Gov{\textquoteright}t, Non-P.H.S., Task Performance and Analysis, Video Recording},
	author = {Borman, W. C. and Buck, D. E. and Hanson, M. A. and Motowidlo, S. J. and Stark, S. and F Drasgow}
}
@conference {1180,
	title = {Application of an IRT ideal point model to computer adaptive assessment of job performance},
	booktitle = {Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Society for Industrial and Organization Psychology},
	year = {1998},
	address = {Dallas TX},
	author = {Stark, S. and F Drasgow}
}
