Thissen, D., Nelson, L. A., & Swygert, K. A.. (2001). Item response theory applied to combinations of multiple-choice and constructed-response items--approximation methods for scale scores. In Test scoring (pp. 289-315). Mahwah, N.J. USA: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Sireci, S. G., & Clauser, B. E.. (2001). Practical issues in setting standards on computerized adaptive tests. In Setting performance standards: Concepts, methods, and perspectives (pp. 355-369). Mahwah, N.J. USA: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.

Drasgow, F. (2002). The work ahead: A psychometric infrastructure for computerized adaptive tests. In M. P. Potenza, Freemer, J. J., & Ward, W. C., Computer-based tests: Building the foundation for future assessment. Mahwah, N.J. USA: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.

Gierl, M., & Bulut, O.. (2017). Generating Rationales to Support Formative Feedback in Adaptive Testing. In IACAT 2017 Conference. presented at the 08/2017, Niigata, Japan: Niigata Seiryo University. Retrieved from https://drive.google.com/open?id=1O5KDFtQlDLvhNoDr7X4JO4arpJkIHKUP

Reckase, M. D. (2017). How Adaptive is an Adaptive Test: Are all Adaptive Tests Adaptive?. In 2017 IACAT Conference. presented at the 08/2017, Niigata, Japan: Niigata Seiryo University. Retrieved from https://drive.google.com/open?id=1Nj-zDCKk3DvHA4Jlp1qkb2XovmHeQfxu

Hontangas, P., Olea, J., Ponsoda, V., Revuelta, J., & Wise, S. L.. (2004). Assisted self-adapted testing: A comparative study. European Journal of Psychological Assessment, 20, 2-9.

Guzmán, E., Conejo, R., & García-Hervás, E.. (2005). An Authoring Environment for Adaptive Testing. Educational Technology & Society, 8(3), 66-76.

McLeod, L., Lewis, C., & Thissen, D.. (2003). A Bayesian method for the detection of item preknowledge in computerized adaptive testing. Applied Psychological Measurement, 27, 121-137.

Chang, S. - W., & Ansley, T. N.. (2003). A comparative study of item exposure control methods in computerized adaptive testing. Journal of Educational Measurement, 40, 71-103.

Chen, S. - Y., Ankenmann, R. D., & Chang, H. - H.. (2000). A comparison of item selection rules at the early stages of computerized adaptive testing. Applied Psychological Measurement, 24, 241-255.

Pastor, D. A., Dodd, B. G., & Chang, H. - H.. (2002). A comparison of item selection techniques and exposure control mechanisms in CATs using the generalized partial credit model. Applied Psychological Measurement, 26, 147-163.

van der Linden, W. J. (2005). A comparison of item-selection methods for adaptive tests with content constraints. Journal of Educational Measurement, 42, 283-302.

Schneider, R. J., Goff, M., Anderson, S., & Borman, W. C.. (2003). Computerized adaptive rating scales for measuring managerial performance. International Journal of Selection and Assessment, 11, 237-246.

Hol, A. M., Vorst, H. C. M., & Mellenbergh, G. J.. (2007). Computerized adaptive testing for polytomous motivation items: Administration mode effects and a comparison with short forms. Applied Psychological Measurement, 31, 412-429.

Hol, A. M., Vorst, H. C. M., & Mellenbergh, G. J.. (2008). Computerized Adaptive Testing of Personality Traits. Zeitschrift für Psychologie / Journal of Psychology, 216(1), 12-21. doi:10.1027/0044-3409.216.1.12

Cheng, P. E., & Liou, M.. (2003). Computerized adaptive testing using the nearest-neighbors criterion. Applied Psychological Measurement, 27, 204-216.

Chen, S. - Y., & Lei, P. - W.. (2005). Controlling item exposure and test overlap in computerized adaptive testing. Applied Psychological Measurement, 29, 204-217.

Schreiber, M. D., Schneider, R. J., Schweizer, A., Beckmann, J. F., & Baltissen, R.. (2000). Diagnostische programme in der Demenzfrüherkennung: Der Adaptive Figurenfolgen-Lerntest (ADAFI) [Diagnostic programs in the early detection of dementia: The Adaptive Figure Series Learning Test (ADAFI)]. Zeitschrift für Gerontopsychologie & -Psychiatrie, 13, 16-29.

Pitkin, A. K., & Vispoel, W. P.. (2001). Differences between self-adapted and computerized adaptive tests: A meta-analysis. Journal of Educational Measurement, 38, 235-247.

Nering, M. L. (1997). The distribution of indexes of person fit within the computerized adaptive testing environment. Applied Psychological Measurement, 21, 115-127.

Colvin, K., Keller, L. A., & Robin, F.. (2016). Effect of Imprecise Parameter Estimation on Ability Estimation in a Multistage Test in an Automatic Item Generation Context . Journal of Computerized Adaptive Testing, 4(1), 1-18. doi:10.7333/1608-040101

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.

Cheng, P. E., & Liou, M.. (2000). Estimation of trait level in computerized adaptive testing. Applied Psychological Measurement, 24, 257-265.

Laurier, M. (2004). Évaluation et multimédia dans l'apprentissage d'une L2 [Assessment and multimedia in learning an L2]. ReCALL, 16, 475-487.

Archer, R. P., Tirrell, C. A., & Elkins, D. E.. (2001). Evaluation of an MMPI-A short form: Implications for adaptive testing. Journal of Personality Assessment, 76, 76-89.

Buck, D. E. (2000). An examination of the reliability and validity of performance ratings made using computerized adaptive rating scales. Dissertation Abstracts International: Section B: The Sciences and Engineering, 61, 570.

Wise, S. L. (2023). Expanding the Meaning of Adaptive Testing to Enhance Validity. Journal of Computerized Adaptive Testing, 10(2), 22-31. doi:10.7333/2305-1002022

Levy, R., Behrens, J. T., & Mislevy, R. J.. (2023). An Extended Taxonomy of Variants of Computerized Adaptive Testing. Journal of Computerized Adaptive Testing, 10(1). doi:10.7333/2302-100101

Chang, H. - H., & Zhang, J.. (2002). Hypergeometric family and item overlap rates in computerized adaptive testing. Psychometrika, 67, 387-398.

Davis, L. L., & Dodd, B. G.. (2003). Item exposure constraints for testlets in the verbal reasoning section of the MCAT. Applied Psychological Measurement, 27, 335-356.

Hau, K. - T., & Chang, H. - H.. (2001). Item selection in computerized adaptive testing: Should more discriminating items be used first?. Journal of Educational Measurement, 38, 249-266.

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.

Meijer, R. R., & Grégoire, J.. (2001). Nouveaux développements dans le domaine du testing informatisé [New developments in the area of computerized testing]. Psychologie Française, 46, 221-230.

Chang, H. - H., & van der Linden, W. J.. (2003). Optimal stratification of item pools in α-stratified computerized adaptive testing. Applied Psychological Measurement, 27, 262-274.

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

Bradlow, E. T., & Weiss, R. E.. (2001). Outlier measures and norming methods for computerized adaptive tests. Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics, 26, 85-104.

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

Chen, S. - Y., Ankenmann, R. D., & Spray, J. A.. (2003). The relationship between item exposure and test overlap in computerized adaptive testing. Journal of Educational Measurement, 40, 129-145.

van der Linden, W. J. (2003). Some alternatives to Sympson-Hetter item-exposure control in computerized adaptive testing. Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics, 28, 249-265.

Miceli, R., & Molinengo, G.. (2005). Somministrazione di test computerizzati di tipo adattivo: Un' applicazione del modello di misurazione di Rasch [Administration of computerized and adaptive tests: An application of the Rasch Model]. Testing Psicometria Metodologia, 12, 131-149.

Ruscio, J., & Ruscio, A. M.. (2002). A structure-based approach to psychological measurement: Matching measurement models to latent structure. Assessment, 9, 4-16.

Rammsayer, T., & Brandler, S.. (2003). Timing behavior in computerized adaptive testing: Response times for correct and incorrect answers are not related to general fluid intelligence/Zum Zeitverhalten beim computergestützten adaptiveb Testen: Antwortlatenzen bei richtigen und falschen Lösun. Zeitschrift für Differentielle und Diagnostische Psychologie, 24, 57-63.

Hol, A. M., Vorst, H. C. M., & Mellenbergh, G. J.. (2001). Toepassing van een computergestuurde adaptieve testprocedure op persoonlijkheidsdata [Application of a computerised adaptive test procedure on personality data]. Nederlands Tijdschrift voor de Psychologie en haar Grensgebieden, 56, 119-133.

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.

Veldkamp, B. P., van der Linden, W. J., & Ariel, A.. (2002). Mathematical-programming approaches to test item pool design (No. RR 02-09) (pp. 93-108). Twente, The Netherlands: University of Twente, Faculty of Educational Science and Technology.