Rocklin, T. R.,, & O’Donnell, A. M.. (1987). Self-adapted testing: A performance improving variation of computerized adaptive testing. Journal of Educational Psychology, 79, 315-319.

Rocklin, T. R. (1994). Self-adapted testing. Applied Measurement in Education, 7, 3-14.

Rijn, P. W. van,, Eggen, T., Hemker, B. T., & Sanders, P. F.. (2000). A selection procedure for polytomous items in computerized adaptive testing (Measurement and Research Department Reports 2000-5). Arnhem, The Netherlands: Cito.

Spray, J. A., & Reckase, M. D.. (1994). The selection of test items for decision making with a computer adaptive test. In Paper presented at the national meeting of the National Council on Measurement in Education. New Orleans LA.

Reckase, M. D., & Spray, J. A.. (1994). The selection of test items for decision making with a computer adaptive test. In Paper presented at the annual meeting of the National Council on Measurement in Education. New Orleans LA.

Spray, J. A., & Reckase, M. D.. (1984). The selection of items for decision making with a computer adaptive test. In Paper presented at the annual meeting of the National Council on Measurement in Education. New Orleans LA.

Smith, R., & Lewis, C.. (1996). A search procedure to determine sets of decision points when using testlet-based Bayesian sequential testing procedures. In Paper presented at the annual meeting of National Council on Measurement in Education. New York.

Choe, E., Williams, B., & Lee, S. - H.. (2017). Scripted On-the-fly Multistage Testing. In IACAT 2017 Conference. presented at the 08/2017, Niigata, Japan: Niigata Seiryo University. Retrieved from https://drive.google.com/open?id=1wKuAstITLXo6BM4APf2mPsth1BymNl-y

Way, W. D., Gawlick, L. A., & Eignor, D. R.. (2001). Scoring alternatives for incomplete computerized adaptive tests (Research Report 01-20). Princeton NJ: Educational Testing Service.

McBride, J. R. (1975). Scoring adaptive tests. In . D. J. Weiss (Ed.), Computerized adaptive trait measurement: Problems and Prospects (Research Report 75-5), pp. 17-25. Minneapolis MN: University of Minnesota, Department of Psychology, Psychometric Methods Program.

Haley, S. M., Coster, W. J., Andres, P. L., Kosinski, M., & Ni, P.. (2004). Score comparability of short forms and computerized adaptive testing: Simulation study with the activity measure for post-acute care. Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, 85, 661-6. presented at the Apr.

Hendrickson, A. B., & Kolen, M. J.. (1992). Scaling of two-stage adaptive test configurations for achievement testing. In Paper presented at the annual meeting of the National Council on Measurement in Education. New Orleans LA.

Stocking, M. L. (1988). Scale drift in on-line calibration (Tech Rep. No. ERIC ED389710). Educational Testing Service, Princeton, N.J.

Stocking, M. L. (1988). Scale drift in on-line calibration (Research Report RR-88-28-ONR). Princeton NJ: Educational Testing Service.

Svetina, D., Liaw, Y. - L., Rutkowski, L., & Rutkowski, D.. (2019). Routing Strategies and Optimizing Design for Multistage Testing in International Large-Scale Assessments. Journal of Educational Measurement, 56, 192-213. doi:10.1111/jedm.12206

Barrada, J. R., Olea, J., & Abad, F. J.. (2008). Rotating item banks versus restriction of maximum exposure rates in computerized adaptive testing. Spanish Journal of Psychology, 11, 618-625.

Roos, L. L., Wise, S. L., & Plake, B. S.. (1997). The role of item feedback in self-adapted testing. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 57, 85-98.

Zhao, J. C. (1999). The robustness of the unidimensional 3PL IRT model when applied to two-dimensional data in computerized adaptive testing. Unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, State University of New York at Albany.

Zhao, J. C., McMorris, R. F., Pruzek, R. M., & Chen, R.. (2002). The robustness of the unidimensional 3PL IRT model when applied to two-dimensional data in computerized adaptive testing. In Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association. New Orleans LA.

Weiss, D. J., & Suhadolnik, D.. (1982). Robustness of adaptive testing to multidimensionality. In . D. J. Weiss (Ed.), Proceedings of the 1982 Item Response Theory and Computerized Adaptive Testing Conference. Minneapolis: University of Minnesota, Department of Psychology, Psychometric Methods Program. {PDF file, 1.

Lau, C. A. (1996). Robustness of a unidimensional computerized testing mastery procedure with multidimensional testing data. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Iowa, Iowa City IA.

Veldkamp, B. P., & Paap, M. C. S.. (2017). Robust Automated Test Assembly for Testlet-Based Tests: An Illustration with Analytical Reasoning Items. Frontiers in Education, 2, 63. doi:10.3389/feduc.2017.00063

Lord, F. M. (1971). Robbins-Monro procedures for tailored testing. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 31, 3-31.

Stocking, M. L. (1997). Revising item responses in computerized adaptive tests: A comparison of three models. Applied Psychological Measurement, 21, 129-142.

Stocking, M. L. (1996). Revising item responses in computerized adaptive testing: A comparison of three models (RR-96-12). Princeton NJ: Educational Testing Service.

Vispoel, W. P. (1998). Reviewing and changing answers on computer-adaptive and self-adaptive vocabulary tests. Journal of Educational Measurement, 35, 328-345.

Andrich, D. (1995). Review of the book Computerized Adaptive Testing: A Primer. Psychometrika, 4?, 615-620.

Hambleton, R. K. (1973). A review of testing and decision-making procedures (Technical Bulletin No. 15. Iowa City IA: American College Testing Program.

Killcross, M. C. (1976). A review of research in tailored testing (Report APRE No. 9/76, Farnborough, Hants, U. K.: Ministry of Defence, Army Personnel Research Establishment.).

Georgiadou, E., Triantafillou, E., & Economides, A. A.. (2007). A review of item exposure control strategies for computerized adaptive testing developed from 1983 to 2005. Journal of Technology,Learning, and Assessment,, 5(8).

Sekula-Wacura, R. (2000). A review of CAT review. Popular Measurement, 3, 47-49.

Wang, C., Chang, H. - H., & Huebner, A.. (2011). Restrictive Stochastic Item Selection Methods in Cognitive Diagnostic Computerized Adaptive Testing. Journal of Educational Measurement, 48, 255–273. doi:10.1111/j.1745-3984.2011.00145.x

Wood, R. L. (1973). Response-contingent testing. Review of Educational Research, 43, 529-544.

Ware, J. E., J., Bjorner, J. B., & Kosinski, M.. (2000). Response to Hays et al and McHorney and Cohen: Practical implications of item response theory and computerized adaptive testing: A brief summary of ongoing studies of widely used headache impact scales. Medical Care, 38, 73-82.

Scrams, D. J., & Schnipke, D. L.. (1999). Response time feedback on computer-administered tests. In Paper presented at the annual meeting of the National Council on Measurement in Education. Montreal, Canada.

Shi, Y. (2017). Response Time and Response Accuracy in Computerized Adaptive Testing. In IACAT 2017 Conference. presented at the 08/2017, Niigata, Japan: Niigata Seiryo University. Retrieved from https://drive.google.com/open?id=1yYP01bzGrKvJnfLwepcAoQQ2F4TdSvZ2

Zara, A. (1990). A research proposal for field testing CAT for nursing licensure examinations. In . Delegate Assembly Book of Reports 1989. Chicago: National Council of State Boards of Nursing.

Zara, A. (1989). A research proposal for field testing CAT for nursing licensure examinations. In . Delegate Assembly Book of Reports 1989. Chicago: National Council of State Boards of Nursing, Inc.

McBride, J. R. (1976). Research on adaptive testing 1973-1976: A review of the literature. Unpublished manuscript, University of Minnesota.

McBride, J. R. (1997). Research antecedents of applied adaptive testing. In B. K. Waters & McBride, J. R., Computerized adaptive testing: From inquiry to practice (xviii., pp. 47-57). Washington D.C. USA: American Psychological Association.

Dunkel, P. (1999). Research and development of a computer-adaptive test of listening comprehension in the less-commonly taught language Hausa. In . M. Chalhoub-Deville (Ed.). Issues in computer-adaptive testing of reading proficiency. Cambridge, UK : Cambridge University Press.

Wainer, H.,. (2000). Rescuing computerized testing by breaking Zipf’s law. Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics, 25, 203-224.

Chang, S. - H., & Zhang, J.. (2005). Rescuing CAT by fixing the problems. In National Council on Measurement in Education. Montreal, Canada.

Olea Díaz, J., Ponsoda Gil, V., Revuelta Menéndez, J., Hontangas Beltrán, P., & Abad, F. J.. (2001). Requerimientos, aplicaciones e investigación en tests adaptativos informatizados [Requirements, applications, and investigation in computerized adaptive testing]. Apuntes de Psicologia, 19, 11-28.

Cleary, T. A., Linn, R. L., & Rock, D. A.. (1968). Reproduction of total test score through the use of sequential programmed tests. Journal of Educational Measurement, 5, 183-187.

Frey, A., Seitz, N. - N., & Kröhne, U.. (2013). Reporting differentiated literacy results in PISA by using multidimensional adaptive testing. . In Research on PISA.. Dodrecht: Springer.

Haley, S. M., Ni, P., Jette, A. M., Tao, W., Moed, R., Meyers, D., & Ludlow, L. H.. (2009). Replenishing a computerized adaptive test of patient-reported daily activity functioning. Quality of Life Research, 18, 461-71. presented at the May.

Sireci, S. G., Wainer, H.,, & Thissen, D.. (1991). On the reliability of testlet-based tests. Journal of Educational Measurement, 28, 237-247.

Lunz, M. E., Bergstrom, B. A., & Wright, B. D.. (1994). Reliability of alternate computer adaptive tests. In Objective measurement, theory into practice (Vol. II). New Jersey: Ablex.

Martin, J. T., McBride, J. R., & Weiss, D. J.. (1983). Reliability and validity of adaptive vs. conventional tests in a military recruit population (Research Rep. No. 83-1). Minneapolis: University of Minnesota, Department of Psychology, Psychometric Methods Program, Computerized Adaptive Testing Laboratory.

McBride, J. R., Martin, J. T., & Weiss, D. J.. (1983). Reliability and validity of adaptive ability tests in a military recruit population (Research Report 83-1). Minneapolis: Department of Psychology, Psychometric Methods Program, Computerized Testing Laboratory.

McBride, J. R., & Martin, J. T.. (1983). Reliability and validity of adaptive ability tests in a military setting. In . D. J. Weiss (Ed.), New horizons in testing: Latent trait test theory and computerized adaptive testing (pp. 224-236). New York: Academic Press.

Davison, M. L., Semmes, R., Huang, L., & Close, C. N.. (2012). On the Reliability and Validity of a Numerical Reasoning Speed Dimension Derived From Response Times Collected in Computerized Testing. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 72, 245-263. doi:10.1177/0013164411408412

Thissen, D. (1990). Reliability and measurement precision. In . H. Wainer, N. J. Dorans, R. Flaugher, B. F. Green, R. J. Mislevy, L. Steinberg, and D. Thissen (Eds.), Computerized adaptive testing: A primer (pp. 161-186). Hillsdale NJ: Erlbaum.

Jodoin, M. G. (2002). Reliability and decision accuracy of linear parallel form and multi stage tests with realistic and ideal item pools. In Paper presented at the International Conference on Computer-Based Testing and the Internet. Winchester, England.

Moreno, K. E., & Segall, O. D.. (1997). Reliability and construct validity of CAT-ASVAB. In . W. A. Sands, B. K. Waters, and J. R. McBride (Eds.). Computerized adaptive testing: From inquiry to operation (pp. 169-179). Washington DC: American Psychological Association.

Wang, S., & Wang, T.. (2002). Relative precision of ability estimation in polytomous CAT: A comparison under the generalized partial credit model and graded response model. In Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association. New Orleans LA.

Riley, B. B., Conrad, K. J., Bezruczko, N., & Dennis, M. L.. (2007). Relative precision, efficiency and construct validity of different starting and stopping rules for a computerized adaptive test: The GAIN Substance Problem Scale. Journal of Applied Measurement, 8, 48-65.

Swanson, D. B., Featherman, C. M., Case, A. M., Luecht, R. M., & Nungester, R.. (1997). Relationship of response latency to test design, examinee ability, and item difficulty in computer-based test administration. In Paper presented at the annual meeting of the National Council on Measurement in Education. Chicago IL.

Chen, S., Ankenmann, R. D., & Spray, J. A.. (2003). The relationship between item exposure and test overlap in computerized adaptive testing. Journal of Educational Measurement, 40, 129-145.