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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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

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.

Tai, M. Him, Cooperman, A. W., DeWeese, J. N., & Weiss, D. J.. (2023). How Do Trait Change Patterns Affect the Performance of Adaptive Measurement of Change?. Journal of Computerized Adaptive Testing, 10(3), 32-58. doi:10.7333/2307-1003032

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.

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

Carlson, R. D. (1993). Computer adaptive testing: A comparison of four item selection strategies when used with the golden section search strategy for estimating ability. Dissertation Abstracts International, 54, 1772.

Cowan, P., & Morrison, H.. (2001). Assessment in the twenty-first century: A role of computerised adaptive testing in national curriculum subjects. Teacher Development, 5, 241-57.

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.

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.

van der Linden, W. J., & van Krimpen-Stoop, E. M. L. A.. (2003). Using response times to detect aberrant responses in computerized adaptive testing. Psychometrika, 68, 251-265.

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

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

Finkelman, M. D., Weiss, D. J., & Kim-Kang, G.. (2010). Item Selection and Hypothesis Testing for the Adaptive Measurement of Change. Applied Psychological Measurement, 34(4), 238-254. doi:10.1177/0146621609344844

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

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

Bergstrom, B. A., & Lunz, M. E.. (1994). The equivalence of Rasch item calibrations and ability estimates across modes of administration. In Objective measurement: Theory into practice (Vol. 2, pp. 122-128). Norwood, N.J. USA: Ablex Publishing Co.

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.

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.

Chen, S. - K. (1997). A comparison of maximum likelihood estimation and expected a posteriori estimation in computerized adaptive testing using the generalized partial credit model. Dissertation Abstracts International: Section B: the Sciences & Engineering, 58, 453.

van der Linden, W. J. (2008). Some new developments in adaptive testing technology. Zeitschrift für Psychologie, 216, 3-11.

de Ayala, R. J., Dodd, B. G., & Koch, W. R.. (1990). A simulation and comparison of flexilevel and Bayesian computerized adaptive testing. Journal of Educational Measurement, 27, 227-239.

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.

Veldkamp, B. P. (2010). Bayesian item selection in constrained adaptive testing. Psicologica, 31, 149-169.

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.

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.

DeMars, C. E. (2022). The (non)Impact of Misfitting Items in Computerized Adaptive Testing. Journal of Computerized Adaptive Testing, 9(2). doi:10.7333/2211-0902008

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.

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

Buyske, S. G. (1999). Optimal design for item calibration in computerized adaptive testing. Dissertation Abstracts International: Section B: the Sciences & Engineering, 59, 4220.

Conejo, R., Guzmán, E., Millán, E., Trella, M., Pérez-De-La-Cruz, J. L., & Ríos, A.. (2004). Siette: a web-based tool for adaptive testing. International Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education, 14, 29-61.

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.

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.

van der Linden, W. J., Scrams, D. J., & Schnipke, D. L.. (1999). Using response-time constraints to control for differential speededness in computerized adaptive testing. Applied Psychological Measurement, 23, 195-210.

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.

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

Magis, D., & Raîche, G.. (2011). catR: An R Package for Computerized Adaptive Testing. Applied Psychological Measurement. doi:10.1177/0146621611407482

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.

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

Berg, S. R. (1996). Dynamic scaling: An ipsative procedure using techniques from computer adaptive testing. Dissertation Abstracts International: Section B: the Sciences & Engineering, 56, 5824.