Dorronsoro, J. R., Santa-Cruz, C., Rubio Franco, V. J., & Aguado García, D.. (2000). Algoritmo mixto mínima entropía-máxima información para la selección de ítems en un test adaptativo informatizado. Psicothema, 12, 12-14.

Drasgow, F., & Olson-Buchanan, J. B.. (1999). Innovations in computerized assessment. Mahwah, N.J.: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.

Egberink, I. J. L., Meijer, R. R., Veldkamp, B. P., Schakel, L., & Smid, N. G.. (2010). Detection of aberrant item score patterns in computerized adaptive testing: An empirical example using the CUSUM. Personality and Individual Differences, 48, 921-925.

Eggen, T., & Straetmans, G. J. J. M.. (2000). Computerized adaptive testing for classifying examinees into three categories. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 60, 713-34.

Fan, M. (1995). Assessment of scaled score consistency in adaptive testing from a multidimensional item response theory perspective. Dissertation Abstracts International: Section B: the Sciences & Engineering, 55, 5598.

Fries, J. F., Bruce, B., & Cella, D.. (2005). The promise of PROMIS: using item response theory to improve assessment of patient-reported outcomes. Clinical and Experimental Rheumatology, 23, S53-7.

Garrison, W. M., & Baumgarten, B. S.. (1986). An application of computer adaptive testing with communication handicapped examinees. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 46, 23-35.

Gershon, R. C. (1996). The effect of individual differences variables on the assessment of ability for Computerized Adaptive Testing. Dissertation Abstracts International: Section B: the Sciences & Engineering, 57, 4085.

Glas, C. A. W., & van der Linden, W. J.. (2003). Computerized adaptive testing with item cloning. Applied Psychological Measurement, 27, 247-261.

Green, B. F., Bock, R. D., Humphreys, L. G., Linn, R. L., & Reckase, M. D.. (1984). Technical guidelines for assessing computerized adaptive tests. Journal of Educational Measurement, 21, 347-360.

Grodenchik, D. J. (2002). The implications of the use of non-optimal items in a Computer Adaptive Testing (CAT) environment. Dissertation Abstracts International: Section B: the Sciences & Engineering, 63, 1606.

Hai-qi, D., De-zhi, C., Shuliang, D., & Taiping, D.. (2006). The comparison among item selection strategies of CAT with multiple-choice items. Acta Psychologica Sinica, 38, 778-783.

Häusler, J.. (2006). Adaptive success control in computerized adaptive testing. Psychology Science, 48, 436-450.

Hontangas, P., Ponsoda, V., Olea, J., & Abad, F. J.. (2000). Los tests adaptativos informatizados en la frontera del siglo XXI: Una revisión [Computerized adaptive tests at the turn of the 21st century: A review]. Metodología de las Ciencias del Comportamiento, 2, 183-216.

Hung, P. - H. (1989). Application of computerized adaptive testing to the University Entrance Exam of Taiwan, R.O.C. Dissertation Abstracts International, 49, 3662.

Kalohn, J. C., & Spray, J. A.. (1999). The effect of model misspecification on classification decisions made using a computerized test. Journal of Educational Measurement, 36, 47-59.

Kim, H. - O. (1994). Monte Carlo simulation comparison of two-stage testing and computerized adaptive testing. Dissertation Abstracts International Section A: Humanities & Social Sciences, 54, 2548.

Kingsbury, G. G. (1985). Adaptive self-referenced testing as a procedure for the measurement of individual change due to instruction: A comparison of the reliabilities of change estimates obtained from conventional and adaptive testing procedures. Dissertation Abstracts International, 45, 3057.

Kingsbury, G. G. (2002). An empirical comparison of achievement level estimates from adaptive tests and paper-and-pencil tests. In annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association. New Orleans, LA. USA.

Kingsbury, G. G., & Houser, R. L.. (1993). Assessing the utility of item response models: computerized adaptive testing. Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice, 12, 21-27.

Kingsbury, G. G., & Houser, R. L.. (2008). ICAT: An adaptive testing procedure for the identification of idiosyncratic knowledge patterns. Zeitschrift für Psychologie, 216, 40-48.

Kuan, T. H. (1991). A comparison of paper-and-pencil, computer-administered, computerized feedback, and computerized adaptive testing methods for classroom achievement testing. Dissertation Abstracts International, 52, 1719.

Lai, J. - S., Dineen, K., Reeve, B. B., Von Roenn, J., Shervin, D., McGuire, M., et al.. (2005). An item response theory-based pain item bank can enhance measurement precision. Journal of Pain and Symptom Management, 30, 278-88.

Latu, E., & Chapman, E.. (2002). Computerised adaptive testing. British Journal of Educational Technology, 33, 619-22.

Lei, P. - W., Chen, S. - Y., & Yu, L.. (2006). Comparing methods of assessing differential item functioning in a computerized adaptive testing environment. Journal of Educational Measurement, 43, 245-264.

Leung, C. - K., Chang, H. - H., & Hau, K. - T.. (2003). Incorporation of Content Balancing Requirements in Stratification Designs for Computerized Adaptive Testing. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 63, 257-70.

Li, Y. H., & Schafer, W. D.. (2005). Increasing the homogeneity of CAT's item-exposure rates by minimizing or maximizing varied target functions while assembling shadow tests. Journal of Educational Measurement, 42, 245-269.

Lilley, M., Barker, T., & Britton, C.. (2004). The development and evaluation of a software prototype for computer-adaptive testing. Computers and Education, 43, 109-123.

Linacre, J. M. (2000). Computer-adaptive testing: A methodology whose time has come. In U. Kang, Jean, E., & Linacre, J. M., Development of Computerised Middle School Achievement Tests (Vol. 69). Chicago, IL. USA: MESA.

Luecht, R. M. (1996). Multidimensional computerized adaptive testing in a certification or licensure context. Applied Psychological Measurement, 20, 389-404.

Luecht, R. M., de Champlain, A., & Nungester, R. J.. (1998). Maintaining content validity in computerized adaptive testing. Advances in Health Sciences Education, 3, 29-41.

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.

McLeod, L. D. (1999). Alternative methods for the detection of item preknowledge in computerized adaptive testing. Dissertation Abstracts International: Section B: the Sciences & Engineering, 59, 3765.

Meijer, R. R. (2002). Outlier detection in high-stakes certification testing. Journal of Educational Measurement, 39, 219-233.

Meijer, R. R., & Nering, M. L.. (1999). Computerized Adaptive Testing: Overview and Introduction. Applied Psychological Measurement, 23, 187-94.

Moon, O. (1993). An application of Computerized Adaptive Testing to the Test of English as a Foreign Language. Dissertation Abstracts International, 53, 4257-4258.

Moreno, K. E., Wetzel, C. D., McBride, J. R., & Weiss, D. J.. (1984). Relationship between corresponding Armed Services Vocational Aptitude Battery (ASVAB) and computerized adaptive testing (CAT) subtests. Applied Psychological Measurement, 8, 155-163.

Nandakumar, R., & Roussos, L. A.. (1997). Validation of CATSIB To investigate DIF of CAT data. In annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association. Chicago, IL. USA.

Orban, J. A. (1982). Ability measurement, test bias reduction, and psychological reactions to testing as a function of computer adaptive testing versus conventional testing. Dissertation Abstracts International, 42, 4233.

Passos, V. L., Berger, M. P. F., & Tan, F. E.. (2007). Test design optimization in CAT early stage with the nominal response model. Applied Psychological Measurement, 31, 213-232.

Passos, V. L., Berger, M. P. F., & Tan, F. E. S.. (2008). The D-optimality item selection criterion in the early stage of CAT: A study with the graded response model. Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics, 33, 88-110.

Patsula, L. N. (2000). A comparison of computerized adaptive testing and multistage testing. Dissertation Abstracts International: Section B: the Sciences & Engineering, 60, 5829.

Ping, C., Shuliang, D., Haijing, L., & Jie, Z.. (2006). [Item Selection Strategies of Computerized Adaptive Testing based on Graded Response Model.]. Acta Psychologica Sinica, 38, 461-467.

Powell, Z. - H. E. (1992). Test anxiety and test performance under computerized adaptive testing methods. Dissertation Abstracts International, 52, 2518.

Reckase, M. D. (1989). Adaptive testing: The evolution of a good idea. Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice, 8, 11-15.

Rizavi, S. M. (2002). The effect of test characteristics on aberrant response patterns in computer adaptive testing. Dissertation Abstracts International Section A: Humanities & Social Sciences, 62, 3363.

Robinson, D., Porporino, F. J., & Millson, W. A.. (1991). Patterns of alcohol and drug use among federal offenders as assessed by the Computerized Lifestyle Screening Instrument. Ottawa, ON. Canada: Research and Statistics Branch, Correctional Service of Canada.

Roper, B. L. (1993). Comparability and validity of computerized adaptive testing with the MMPI-2. Dissertation Abstracts International, 53, 3791.

Sands, W. A., Waters, B. K., & McBride, J. R.. (1997). Computerized adaptive testing: From inquiry to operation. Washington, D.C., USA: American Psychological Association.

Schoonman, W. (1989). An applied study on computerized adaptive testing. Faculty of Behavioural and Social Sciences. University of Groingen, Groningen, The Netherlands.

Segall, D. O. (2002). An item response model for characterizing test compromise. Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics, 27, 163-179.

Spray, J. A., & Reckase, M. D.. (1987). The effect of item parameter estimation error on decisions made using the sequential probability ratio test (No. Research Report 87-1). ACT Research Report Series. Iowa City, IA. USA: DTIC Document.

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., Ward, W. C., & Potenza, M. T.. (1998). Simulating the use of disclosed items in computerized adaptive testing. Journal of Educational Measurement, 35, 48-68.

Tang, K. L. (1996). A comparison of the traditional maximum information method and the global information method in CAT item selection. In annual meeting of the National Council on Measurement in Education. New York, NY USA.

Tejada, R., & Antonio, J.. (2001). Pasado, presente y futuro de los test adaptativos informatizados: Entrevista con Isaac I. Béjar [Past, present and future of computerized adaptive testing: Interview with Isaac I. Béjar]. Psicothema, 13, 685-690.

Thompson, N. A. (2007). A practitioner's guide to variable-length computerized classification testing. Practical Assessment, Research and Evaluation. presented at the 7/1/2009.

Thompson, N. A., & Ro, S.. (2007). Computerized classification testing with composite hypotheses. GMAC Conference on Computerized Adaptive Testing. St. Paul, MN: Graduate Management Admissions Council.

Tonidandel, S. (2002). Computer adaptive testing: The impact of test characteristics on perceived performance and test takers' reactions. Dissertation Abstracts International: Section B: the Sciences & Engineering, 62, 3410.

Tseng, F. - L. (2001). Multidimensional adaptive testing using the weighted likelihood estimation. Dissertation Abstracts International Section A: Humanities & Social Sciences, 61, 4746.