Frey, A., & Moosbrugger, H.. (2004). Kann die Konfundierung von Konzentrationsleistung und Aktivierung durch adaptives Testen mit dern FAKT vermieden werden? [Avoiding the confounding of concentration performance and activation by adaptive testing with the FACT]. Zeitschrift für Differentielle und Diagnostische Psychologie, 25, 1-17.

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.

Ponsoda, V. (2000). Overview of the computerized adaptive testing special section. Psicológica, 21, 115-120.

Allen, D. D., Ni, P., & Haley, S. M.. (2008). Efficiency and sensitivity of multidimensional computerized adaptive testing of pediatric physical functioning. Disability & Rehabilitation, 30, 479-84.

Haley, S. M., Ni, P., Ludlow, L. H., & Fragala-Pinkham, M. A.. (2006). Measurement precision and efficiency of multidimensional computer adaptive testing of physical functioning using the pediatric evaluation of disability inventory. Archives of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, 87, 1223-9. presented at the Sep.

Butcher, J. N., Perry, J. L., & Hahn, J. A.. (2004). Computers in clinical assessment: Historical developments, present status, and future challenges. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 60, 331-345.

Jiao, H., Wang, S., & Lau, C. A.. (2004). An investigation of two combination procedures of SPRT for three-category classification decisions in computerized classification test. annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association. presented at the 04/2004, San Antonio, Texas.

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.

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

Paek, P. (2005). Recent trends in comparability studies (No. 05-05). PEM Research Report 05-05. presented at the August, 2005, Pearson.

Rubio, V. J., Aguado, D., Hontangas, P. M., & Hernández, J. M.. (2007). Psychometric properties of an emotional adjustment measure: An application of the graded response model. European Journal of Psychological Assessment, 23, 39-46.

Nandakumar, R., & Roussos, L. A.. (2004). Evaluation of the CATSIB DIF procedure in a pretest setting. Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics, 29, 177-199.

Ariel, A., Veldkamp, B. P., & van der Linden, W. J.. (2004). Constructing rotating item pools for constrained adaptive testing. Journal of Educational Measurement, 41, 345-359.

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.

Ben-Porath, Y. S., Slutske, W. S., & Butcher, J. N.. (1989). A real-data simulation of computerized adaptive administration of the MMPI. Psychological Assessment, 1, 18-22.

Veldkamp, B. P. (2003). Item selection in polytomous CAT. In A. Okada, Shigenasu, K., Kano, Y., & Meulman, J., New developments in psychometrics (pp. 207–214). Tokyo, Japan: Psychometric Society, Springer.

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.

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.

Chang, H. - H., & Ying, Z.. (1999). a-stratified multistage computerized adaptive testing. Applied Psychological Measurement, 23, 211-222.

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.

van der Linden, W. J. (1999). Multidimensional adaptive testing with a minimum error-variance criterion. Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics, 24, 398-412.

Davis, L. L. (2004). Strategies for controlling item exposure in computerized adaptive testing with the generalized partial credit model. Applied Psychological Measurement, 28, 165-185.

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.

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.

van Rijn, P. W., Eggen, T., Hemker, B. T., & Sanders, P. F.. (2002). Evaluation of selection procedures for computerized adaptive testing with polytomous items. Applied Psychological Measurement, 26, 393-411.

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.

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.

Bergstrom, B. A., Lunz, M. E., & Gershon, R. C.. (1992). Altering the level of difficulty in computer adaptive testing. Applied Measurement in Education, 5, 137-149.

Hart, D. L., Cook, K. F., Mioduski, J. E., Teal, C. R., & Crane, P. K.. (2006). Simulated computerized adaptive test for patients with shoulder impairments was efficient and produced valid measures of function. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 59(3), 290-298.

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

Armstrong, R. D., Jones, D. H., Koppel, N. B., & Pashley, P. J.. (2004). Computerized adaptive testing with multiple-form structures. Applied Psychological Measurement, 28, 147-164.

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.

Chen, S. - Y., & Ankenmann, R. D.. (2004). Effects of practical constraints on item selection rules at the early stages of computerized adaptive testing. Journal of Educational Measurement, 41, 149-174.

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

van der Linden, W. J., & Glas, C. A. W.. (2000). Capitalization on item calibration error in adaptive testing. Applied Measurement in Education, 13, 35-53.

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.

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.

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

Jiao, H., Wang, S., & Lau, C. A.. (2004). An investigation of two combination procedures of SPRT for three-category classification decisions in computerized classification test. annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association. presented at the 04/2004, San Antonio, Texas.

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.

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

Chang, H. - H., Qian, J., & Yang, Z.. (2001). a-stratified multistage computerized adaptive testing with b blocking. Applied Psychological Measurement, 25, 333-41.

Reckase, M. D. (2024). The Influence of Computerized Adaptive Testing on Psychometric Theory and Practice. Journal of Computerized Adaptive Testing, 11(1). doi:10.7333/2403-1101001

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.

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

Coyle, J. (2001). Final answer?. American School Board Journal, 188, 24-26.

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.

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.

van der Linden, W. J., & Veldkamp, B. P.. (2004). Constraining item exposure in computerized adaptive testing with shadow tests. Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics, 29, 273-291.

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.

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.

Bergstrom, B. A., & Lunz, M. E.. (1999). CAT for certification and licensure. In Innovations in computerized assessment (pp. 67-91). Mahwah, N.J.: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Hart, D. L., Mioduski, J. E., Werneke, M. W., & Stratford, P. W.. (2006). Simulated computerized adaptive test for patients with lumbar spine impairments was efficient and produced valid measures of function. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 59, 947–956. doi:10.1016/j.jclinepi.2005.10.017

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.

Almond, R. G., & Mislevy, R. J.. (1999). Graphical models and computerized adaptive testing. Applied Psychological Measurement, 23, 223-37.

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.

Chen, S. - K., Hou, L. Y., Fitzpatrick, S. J., & Dodd, B. G.. (1997). The effect of population distribution and method of theta estimation on computerized adaptive testing (CAT) using the rating scale model. Educational & Psychological Measurement, 57, 422-439.

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.

van der Linden, W. J., Ariel, A., & Veldkamp, B. P.. (2006). Assembling a computerized adaptive testing item pool as a set of linear tests. Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics, 31, 81-99.

de la Torre Sanchez, R. (1992). The development and evaluation of a system for computerized adaptive testing. Dissertation Abstracts International, 52, 4304.