Stocking, M. L. (1994). Three practical issues for modern adaptive testing item pools (Research Report 94-5),. Princeton NJ: Educational Testing Service.

Stocking, M. L. (1996). An alternative method for scoring adaptive tests. Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics, 21, 365-389.

Stocking, M. L., Steffen, M., & Eignor, D. R.. (2001). A method for building a realistic model of test taker behavior for computerized adaptive testing (Research Report 01-22). Princeton NJ: Educational Testing Service.

Stocking, M. L. (1969). Short tailored tests (RB-69-63). Princeton NJ: Educational Testing Service.

Stocking, M. L. (1988). Some considerations in maintaining adaptive test item pools (Tech Rep. No. ERIC ED391814). Educational Testing Service, Princeton, N.J.

Stocking, M. L., Swanson, L., & Pearlman, M.. (1991). Automatic item selection (AIS) methods in the ETS testing environment (Research Memorandum 91-5). Princeton NJ: Educational Testing Service.

Stocking, M. L., & Swanson, L.. (1998). Optimal design of item pools for computerized adaptive testing. Applied Psychological Measurement, 22, 271-279.

Stocking, M. L. (1993). Controlling item exposure rates in a realistic adaptive testing paradigm (Research Report 93-2). Princeton NJ: Educational Testing Service.

Stocking, M. L. (1987). Two simulated feasibility studies in computerized adaptive testing. Applied Psychology: An International Review, 36, 263-277.

Stocking, M. L., Smith, R., & Swanson, L.. (2000). An investigation of approaches to computerizing the GRE subject tests (GRE Board Professional Report No 93-08P; Educational Testing Service Research Report 00-4). Princeton NJ: Educational Testing Service.

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

Stocking, M.,, & Swanson, L.. (1993). A model and heuristic for solving very large item selection problems. Applied Psychological Measurement, 17, 151-166.

Stocking, M. L., & Swanson, L.. (1996). Optimal design of item pools for computerized adaptive testing (Research Report 96-34). Princeton NJ: Educational Testing Service.

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.

Stocking, M. L. (1988). Some considerations in maintaining adaptive test item pools (Research Report 88-33-ONR). Princeton NJ: Educational Testing Service.

Stocking, M. L., & Lewis, C.. (1995). Controlling item exposure conditional on ability in computerized adaptive testing (Research Report 95-25). Princeton NJ: Educational Testing Service.

Stocking, M. L. (1998). A framework for comparing adaptive test designs. Princeton NJ: Educational Testing Service.

Stocking, M.,, & Swanson, L.. (1993). A method for severely constrained item selection in adaptive testing. Applied Psychological Measurement, 17, 277-292.

Stocking, M. L., & Swanson, L.. (1992). A method for severely constrained item selection in adaptive testing. Educational Testing Service Research Report (RR-92-37): Princeton NJ.

Stocking, M. L., & Lewis, C.. (2000). Methods of controlling the exposure of items in CAT. In . W. J. van der Linden and C. A. W. Glas (eds.), Computerized adaptive testing: Theory and practice (pp. 163-182). Norwell MA: Kluwer.

Stocking, M. L., & Lewis, C.. (1998). Controlling item exposure conditional on ability in computerized adaptive testing. Journal of Educational & Behavioral Statistics, 23, 57-75.

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

Stocking, M. L., & Lewis, C.. (1995). A new method of controlling item exposure in computerized adaptive testing (Research Report 95-25). Princeton NJ: Educational Testing Service.

Stocking, M. L. (1993). Modern computerized adaptive testing. In Paper presented at the Joint Statistics and Psychometric Seminar. Princeton NJ.

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

Stocking, M. L. (1997). An alternative method for scoring adaptive tests. Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics, 21, 365-389.

Stocking, M., Steffen, M. Golub-Smith, M. L., & Eignor, D. R.. (2002). An exploration of potentially problematic adaptive tests. Research Report 02-05).

Stocking, M. L., & Swanson, L.. (1993). A Method for Severely Constrained Item Selection in Adaptive Testing. Applied Psychological Measurement, 17(3), 277-292.

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. (1984). Two simulated feasibility studies in computerized adaptive testing (RR-84-15). Princeton NJ: Educational Testing Service.

Stocking, M. L. (2000). A framework for comparing adaptive test designs. Unpublished manuscript.

Stocking, M. L., Ward, W. C., & Potenza, M. T.. (1997). Simulating the use of disclosed items in computerized adaptive testing (Research Report 97-10). Princeton NJ: Educational Testing Service.

Stocking, M. L., Swanson, L., & Pearlman, M.. (1993). The application of an automated item selection method to real data. Applied Psychological Measurement, 17, 167-176.

Stillwell, D. (2017). Concerto 5 Open Source CAT Platform: From Code to Nodes. In IACAT 2017 Conference. presented at the 08/2017, Niigata, Japan: Niigata Seiryo University. Retrieved from https://drive.google.com/open?id=11eu1KKILQEoK5c-CYO1P1AiJgiQxX0E0

Sticha, P. J., & Barber, G.. (2003). CAT-ASVAB prototype Internet delivery system: Final report (FR-03-06). Arlington VA: Human Resources Rsearch Organization.

Stevenson, J. (1984). Computerized adaptive testing in the Maryland Public Schools. MicroCAT News, 1, 1.

Stenson, H., Graves, P., Gardiner, J., & Dally, L.. (1991). Collected works on the legal aspects of computerized adaptive testing. Chicago, IL: National Council of State Boards of Nursing, Inc.

Steinberg, L., Thissen, D., & Wainer, H.,. (1990). Validity. In . H. Wainer (Ed.), Computerized adaptive testing: A primer (pp. 187-231). Hillsdale NJ: Erlbaum.

Steffen, M., & Liu, M.. (1998). Evaluation of methods for the use of underutilized items in a CAT environment. In Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Psychometric Society. Urbana, IL.

Steffen, M. (1999). Test-taking strategies. In Paper presented at the annual meeting of the National Council on Measurement in Education. Montreal, Canada.

Steffen, M., & Way, W. D.. (1999). Test-taking strategies in computerized adaptive testing. In Paper presented at the annual meeting of the National Council on Measurement in Education. Montreal, Canada.

Steele, J. A., Binnie, C. A., & Cooper, W. A.. (1978). Combining auditory and visual stimuli in the adaptive testing of speech discrimination. Journal of Speech and Hearing Disorders, 43, 115-122.

Stark, S., & Chernyshenko, O. S.. (2007). Adaptive testing with the multi-unidimensional pairwise preference model. In . D. J. Weiss (Ed.), Proceedings of the 2007 GMAC Conference on Computerized Adaptive Testing.

Stark, S., & Drasgow, F.. (2002). An EM approach to parameter estimation for the Zinnes and Griggs paired comparison IRT model. Applied Psychological Measurement, 26, 208-227.

Stark, S., & Chernyshenko, O. S.. (2006). Multistage Testing: Widely or Narrowly Applicable?. Applied Measurement in Education, 19, 257-260. doi:10.1207/s15324818ame1903_6

Stark, S., & Drasgow, F.. (1998). Application of an IRT ideal point model to computer adaptive assessment of job performance. In Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Society for Industrial and Organization Psychology. Dallas TX.

Stark, S., & Chernyshenko, O. S.. (2011). Computerized Adaptive Testing with the Zinnes and Griggs Pairwise Preference Ideal Point Model. International Journal of Testing, 11, 231-247. doi:10.1080/15305058.2011.561459

Stahl, J., Shumway, R., Bergstrom, B., & Fisher, A.. (1997). On-line performance assessment using rating scales. Journal of Outcomes Measurement, 1, 173-191.

Stahl, J., Bergstrom, B., & Gershon, R. C.. (2000). CAT administration of language placement examinations. Journal of Applied Measurement, 1, 292-302.

Stahl, J., Gershon, R. C., & Bergstrom, B.. (1999). CAT administration of language placement exams. In Paper presented at the annual meeting of the National Council on Measurement in Education. Montreal, Canada.

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.

Spray, J. A., & Reckase, M. D.. (1993). Comparison of SPRT and sequential Bayes procedures for classifying examinees into two categories using an adaptive test. In Unpublished manuscript. (.

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.

Spray, J. A., & Reckase, M. D.. (1987). The effect of item parameter estimation error on the decisions made using the sequential probability ratio test (ACT Research Report Series 87-17). Iowa City IA: American College Testing.

Spray, J. A., Parshall, C. G., & Huang, C. - H.. (1997). Calibration of CAT items administered online for classification: Assumption of local independence. In Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Psychometric Society. Gatlinburg TN.

Spray, J. A., & Reckase, M. D.. (1996). Comparison of SPRT and sequential Bayes procedures for classifying examinees into two categories using a computerized test. Journal of Educational & Behavioral Statistics, 21, 405-414.

Spray, J. A., Abdel-Fattah, A. A., Huang, C. - Y., & Lau, C. A.. (1997). Unidimensional approximations for a computerized adaptive test when the item pool and latent space are multidimensional (Research Report 97-5). Iowa City IA: ACT Inc.

Spray, J. A., Kalohn, J. C., Schulz, M., & Fleer, J. P.. (1995). The effect of model misspecification on classification decisions made using a computerized test: 3-PLM vs. 1PLM (and UIRT versus MIRT). In Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the Psychometric Society. Minneapolis, MN.

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.

Spray, J. A. (1993). Multiple-category classification using a sequential probability ratio test (Research report 93-7). Iowa City: American College Testing.