Pommerich, M. (2007). The Effect of Using Item Parameters Calibrated from Paper Administrations in Computer Adaptive Test Administrations. The Journal of Technology, Learning, and Assessment, 5.

Pine, S. M., Church, A. T., Gialluca, K. A., & Weiss, D. J.. (1980). Effects of computerized adaptive testing on Black and White students (Research Report 79-2). Minneapolis: University of Minnesota, Department of Psychology, Psychometric Methods Program.

Yang, X., Poggio, J. C., & Glasnapp, D. R.. (2006). Effects of Estimation Bias on Multiple-Category Classification With an IRT-Based Adaptive Classification Procedure. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 66, 545-564. doi:10.1177/0013164405284031

Roos, L. L., Plake, B. S., & Wise, S. L.. (1992). The effects of feedback in computerized adaptive and self-adapted tests. In Paper presented at the annual meeting of the NMCE. San Francisco.

Prestwood, J. S. (1977). Effects of Knowledge of Results and Varying Proportion Correct on Ability Test Performance and Psychological Variables. In . D. J. Weiss (Ed.), Proceedings of the 1977 Computerized Adaptive Testing Conference. Minneapolis MN: University of Minnesota, Department of Psychology, Psychometric Methods Program.

Patience, W. M., & Reckase, M. D.. (1980). Effects of program parameters and item pool characteristics on the bias of a three-parameter tailored testing procedure. In Paper presented at the annual meeting of the National Council on Measurement in Education. Boston MA, U.

Ponsoda, V., Olea, J., Rodriguez, M. S., & Revuelta, J.. (1999). The effects of test difficulty manipulation in computerized adaptive testing and self-adapted testing. Applied Measurement in Education, 12, 167-184.

Choi, S., Reise, S. P., Pilkonis, P. A., Hays, R. D., & Cella, D.. (2010). Efficiency of static and computer adaptive short forms compared to full-length measures of depressive symptoms. Quality of Life Research, 19(1), 125–136.

Park, R., Kim, J., Chung, H., & Dodd, B. G.. (2014). Enhancing Pool Utilization in Constructing the Multistage Test Using Mixed-Format Tests. Applied Psychological Measurement, 38, 268-280. doi:10.1177/0146621613515545

Penfield, R. D. (2007). Estimating the Standard Error of the Maximum Likelihood Ability Estimator in Adaptive Testing Using the Posterior-Weighted Test Information Function. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 67, 958-975. doi:10.1177/0013164407301544

Lee, Y. H., Park, J. H., & Park, I. Y.. (2006). Estimation of an examinee's ability in the web-based computerized adaptive testing program IRT-CAT. J Educ Eval Health Prof, 3, 4.

Lee, Y. H., Park, J. H., & Park, I. Y.. (2006). Estimation of an examinee's ability in the web-based computerized adaptive testing program IRT-CAT. J Educ Eval Health Prof, 3, 4.

Lu, Y., Pitoniak, M., Rizavi, S., Way, W. D., & Steffan, M.. (2003). Evaluating computerized adaptive testing design for the MCAT with realistic simulated data. In Paper presented at the annual meeting of the National Council on Measurement in Education. Chicago IL.

Puhan, G., & Gierl, M.. (2003). Evaluating the comparability of English- and French-speaking examinees on a science achievement test administered using two-stage testing. In Paper presented at the annual meeting of the National Council on Measurement in Education. Chicago IL.

Ito, K., Pommerich, M., & Segall, D.. (2009). An evaluation of a new procedure for computing information functions for Bayesian scores from computerized adaptive tests. In . D. J. Weiss (Ed.), Proceedings of the 2009 GMAC Conference on Computerized Adaptive Testing.

Paterson, J. J. (1962). An evaluation of the sequential method of testing. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Michigan State University.

Davis, L. L., Pastor, D. A., Dodd, B. G., Chiang, C., & Fitzpatrick, S. J.. (2003). An examination of exposure control and content balancing restrictions on item selection in CATs using the partial credit model. Journal of Applied Measurement, 4, 24-42.

Davis, L. L., Pastor, D. A., Dodd, B. G., Chiang, C., & Fitzpatrick, S.. (2000). An examination of exposure control and content balancing restrictions on item selection in CATs using the partial credit model. In Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association. New Orleans, LA.

Bowles, R., & Pommerich, M.. (2001). An examination of item review on a CAT using the specific information item selection algorithm. In Paper presented at the annual meeting of the National Council on Measurement in Education. Seattle WA.

Bowles, R., & Pommerich, M.. (2001). An examination of item review on a CAT using the specific information item selection algorithm. In Paper presented at the annual meeting of the National Council on Measurement in Education. Seattle WA.

Potenza, M. (1994). The exploration of an alternative method for scoring computer adaptive tests. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Lincoln NE: University of Nebraska.

Frick, T. W., Plew, G. T., & Luk, H. - K.. (1989). EXSPRT: An expert systems approach to computer-based adaptive testing. In Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association (Vol. San Francisco.).

Potenza, M. T., & Stocking, M. L.. (1997). Flawed items in computerized adaptive testing. Journal of Educational Measurement, 4, 79-96.

Pommerich, M., & Burden, T.. (2000). From simulation to application: Examinees react to computerized testing. In Paper presented at the annual meeting of the National Council of Measurement in Education. New Orleans, April 2000.

Barrada, J. R., Olea, J., Ponsoda, V., & Abad, F. J.. (2008). Incorporating randomness in the Fisher information for improving item-exposure control in CATs. British Journal of Mathematical and Statistical Psychology, 61, 493-513.

Fischer, G. H., & Pendl, P.. (1980). Individualized testing on the basis of the Rasch model. In . In J. Th. Van der Kamp, W. F. Langerak, and D. N. M. de Gruijter (Eds.). Psychometrics for educational debates. New York: Wiley.

Patton, J. M., Ying Cheng,, Yuan, K. - H., & Diao, Q.. (2013). The Influence of Item Calibration Error on Variable-Length Computerized Adaptive Testing. Applied Psychological Measurement, 37, 24-40. doi:10.1177/0146621612461727

Parshall, C. G., Davey, T., & Pashley, P.. (2002). Innovative item types for computerized testing. In . In W. J. van der Linden and C. A. W. Glas (Eds.), Computerized adaptive testing: Theory and practice. Norwell MA: Kluwer (in press).

Parshall, C. G., Davey, T., & Pashley, P.. (2002). Innovative item types for computerized testing. In . In W. J. van der Linden and C. A. W. Glas (Eds.), Computerized adaptive testing: Theory and practice. Norwell MA: Kluwer (in press).

Parshall, C. G., Harmes, J. C., Davey, T., & Pashley, P. J.. (2010). Innovative Items for Computerized Testing. In Elements of Adaptive Testing (pp. 215-230). doi:10.1007/978-0-387-85461-8

Parshall, C. G., Harmes, J. C., Davey, T., & Pashley, P. J.. (2010). Innovative Items for Computerized Testing. In Elements of Adaptive Testing (pp. 215-230). doi:10.1007/978-0-387-85461-8

Ponsoda, V., Wise, S. L., Olea, J., & Revuelta, J.. (1997). An investigation of self-adapted testing in a Spanish high school population. Educational and Psychological Measurement, 57, 210-221.

Smith, R. W., Plake, B. S., & de Ayala, R. J.. (2001). Item and passage selection algorithm simulations for a computerized adaptive version of the verbal section of the Medical College Admission Test (MCAT). MCAT Monograph Series.

Pilkonis, P. A., Choi, S. W., Reise, S. P., Stover, A. M., Riley, W. T., & Cella, D.. (2011). Item banks for measuring emotional distress from the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS®): depression, anxiety, and anger. Assessment.

Parshall, C. G. (1998). Item development and pretesting in a computer-based testing environment. In Paper presented at the Educational Testing Service Sponsored Colloquium on Computer-Based Testing: Building the Foundation for Future Assessments. Philadelphia.

Parshall, C., Harmes, J. C., & Kromrey, J. D.. (2000). Item exposure control in computer-adaptive testing: The use of freezing to augment stratification. Florida Journal of Educational Research, 40, 28-52.

Parshall, C., Hogarty, K., & Kromrey, J.. (1999). Item exposure in adaptive tests: An empirical investigation of control strategies. In Paper presented at the annual meeting of the Psychometric Society. Lawrence KS.

Bock, B. D.,, Muraki, E., & Pfeiffenberger, W.. (1988). Item pool maintenance in the presence of item parameter drift. Journal of Educational Measurement, 25, 275-285.

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., & Pashley, P. J.. (2000). Item selection and ability estimation in adaptive testing. In Computerized adaptive testing: Theory and practice (pp. 1–25). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers.

van der Linden, W. J., & Pashley, P. J.. (2010). Item Selection and Ability Estimation in Adaptive Testing. In Elements of Adaptive Testing (pp. 3-30). New York: Springer. doi:10.1007/978-0-387-85461-8

Barrada, J. R., Olea, J., Ponsoda, V., & Abad, F. J.. (2009). Item selection rules in computerized adaptive testing: Accuracy and security. Methodology, 5, 7-17.

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.

Paap, M. C. S., Kroeze, K. A., Terwee, C. B., van der Palen, J., & Veldkamp, B. P.. (2017). Item usage in a multidimensional computerized adaptive test (MCAT) measuring health-related quality of life. Quality of Life Research, 26, 2909–2918. doi:10.1007/s11136-017-1624-3

Gonçalves, J. P., Aluisio, S. M., de Oliveira, L. H. M., & Oliveira Jr., O. N.. (2004). A Learning Environment for English for Academic Purposes Based on Adaptive Tests and Task-Based Systems. In J. C. Lester, Vicari, R. M., & Paraguaçu, F., Intelligent Tutoring Systems (Vol. 3220, pp. 1-11). Springer Berlin / Heidelberg. doi:10.1007/978-3-540-30139-4_1

PITON-GONÇALVES, J., ALUISIO, S. M., MENDONCA, L. H., & NOVAES, O. O.. (2004). A learning environment for english for academic purposes based on adaptive tests and task-based systems. In Intelligent Tutoring Systems. . Springer Berlin Heidelberg.

Pommerich, M., & Segall, D. O.. (2008). Local Dependence in an Operational CAT: Diagnosis and Implications. Journal of Educational Measurement, 45, 201–223. doi:10.1111/j.1745-3984.2008.00061.x

Pohl, S. (2013). Longitudinal Multistage Testing. Journal of Educational Measurement, 50, 447–468. doi:10.1111/jedm.12028

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.

Patsula, L. N., & Steffen, M.. (1997). Maintaining item and test security in a CAT environment: A simulation study. In Paper presented at the annual meeting of the National Council on Measurement in Education. Chicago IL).

Smith, R. L., Rizavi, S., Paez, R., Damiano, M., & Herbert, E.. (2003). Maintaining scale in computer adaptive testing. In Paper presented at the annual meeting of the National Council on Measurement in Education. Chicago IL.

Paap, M. C. S., Born, S., & Braeken, J.. (In Press). Measurement efficiency for fixed-precision multidimensional computerized adaptive tests: Comparing health measurement and educational testing using example banks. Applied Psychological Measurement.

Paap, M. C. S., Born, S., & Braeken, J.. (2019). Measurement Efficiency for Fixed-Precision Multidimensional Computerized Adaptive Tests: Comparing Health Measurement and Educational Testing Using Example Banks. Applied Psychological Measurement, 43, 68-83. doi:10.1177/0146621618765719

Paap, M. C. S., Kroeze, K. A., Glas, C. A. W., Terwee, C. B., van der Palen, J., & Veldkamp, B. P.. (2018). Measuring patient-reported outcomes adaptively: Multidimensionality matters!. Applied Psychological Measurement. doi:10.1177/0146621617733954

Siebens, H., Andres, P. L., Pengsheng, N., Coster, W. J., & Haley, S. M.. (2005). Measuring physical function in patients with complex medical and postsurgical conditions: a computer adaptive approach. American Journal of Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation, 84, 741-8. presented at the Oct.

Mulcahey, M. J., Haley, S. M., Duffy, T., Pengsheng, N., & Betz, R. R.. (2008). Measuring physical functioning in children with spinal impairments with computerized adaptive testing. Journal of Pediatric Orthopedics, 28, 330-5. presented at the Apr-May.

Barrada, J. R., Olea, J., Ponsoda, V., & Abad, F. J.. (2010). A Method for the Comparison of Item Selection Rules in Computerized Adaptive Testing. Applied Psychological Measurement, 34, 438-452. doi:10.1177/0146621610370152

Pollack, I. (1968). Methodological determination of the PEST (parameter estimation by sequential testing) procedure. Perception and psychophysics, 3, 285-289.

Barrada, J. R., Olea, J., & Ponsoda, V.. (2007). Methods for restricting maximum exposure rate in computerized adaptative testing. Methodology: European Journal of Research Methods for the Behavioral and Social Sciences, 3, 14-23.

Revuelta, J., & Ponsoda, V.. (1996). Metodos sencillos para el control de las tasas de exposicion en tests adaptativos informatizados [Simple methods for item exposure control in CATs]. Psicologica, 17, 161-172.