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.

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.

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.

Chandra, I. (2017). Item Selection Strategies for Developing CAT in Indonesia. In IACAT 2017 Conference. presented at the 08/2017, Niigata Japan: Niiagata Seiryo University. Retrieved from https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2KuFrRATq9Q

van Groen, M., Eggen, T., & Veldkamp, B.. (2011). Item Selection Methods based on Multiple Objective Approaches for Classification of Respondents into Multiple Levels. In Annual Conference of the International Association for Computerized Adaptive Testing. presented at the 10/2011.

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.

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.

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

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

Shi, Y. (2017). Item Response Time on Task Effect in CAT. In IACAT 2017 Conference. presented at the 08/2017, Niigata, Japan: Niigata Seiryo University.

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.

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

Reckase, M. D., He, W., Xu, J. - R., & Zhou, X.. (2017). Item Pool Design and Evaluation. In IACAT 2017 Conference. presented at the 08/2017, Niigata, Japan: Niigata Seiryo University. Retrieved from https://drive.google.com/open?id=1ZAsqm1yNZlliqxEHcyyqQ_vOSu20xxZs

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.

Gershon, R. C. (2017). Issues in Trait Range Coverage for Patient Reported Outcome Measure CATs - Extending the Ceiling for Above-average Physical Functioning. In IACAT 2017 Conference. presented at the 08/2017, Niigata, Japan: Niigata Seiryo University. Retrieved from https://drive.google.com/open?id=1ZC02F-dIyYovEjzpeuRdoXDiXMLFRuKb

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.

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.

Chang, S. - H. (1991). Inter-subtest branching in computerized adaptive testing. Dissertation Abstracts International, 52, 140-141.

Drasgow, F., & Olson-Buchanan, J. B.. (1999). Innovations in computerized assessment. Mahwah, N.J.: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.

Smith, A. B., Rush, R., Velikova, G., Wall, L., Wright, E. P., Stark, D., et al.. (2007). The initial development of an item bank to assess and screen for psychological distress in cancer patients. Psycho-Oncology, 16, 724-732.

Balajthy, E. (2002). Information technology and literacy assessment. Reading and Writing Quarterly, 18, 369-373.

Balajthy, E. (2002). Information technology and literacy assessment. Reading and Writing Quarterly, 18, 369-373.

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

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.

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.

Chen, T., Huang, C. - Y., & Liu, C.. (2017). An Imputation Approach to Handling Incomplete Computerized Tests. In IACAT 2017 Conference. presented at the 08/2017, Niigata, Japan: Niigata Seiryo University. Retrieved from https://drive.google.com/open?id=1vznZeO3nsZZK0k6_oyw5c9ZTP8uyGnXh

Chakravarty, E. F., Bjorner, J. B., & Fries, J. F.. (2007). Improving patient reported outcomes using item response theory and computerized adaptive testing. Journal of Rheumatology, 34, 1426-31. presented at the Jun.

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.

Barnard, J. J. (2015). Implementing a CAT: The AMC Experience . Journal of Computerized Adaptive Testing, 3(1), 1-12. doi:10.7333/15100301001

Kingsbury, G. G., & Houser, R. L.. (2008). ICAT: An adaptive testing procedure for the identification of idiosyncratic knowledge patterns. Zeitschrift für Psychologie, 216, 40-48.

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

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

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

Reckase, M., Ju, U., & Kim, S.. (2019). How Adaptive Is an Adaptive Test: Are All Adaptive Tests Adaptive?. Journal of Computerized Adaptive Testing, 7(1), 1-14. doi:10.7333/1902-0701001

Krishnan, E. (2011). High-throughput Health Status Measurement using CAT in the Era of Personal Genomics: Opportunities and Challenges. In Annual Conference of the International Association for Computerized Adaptive Testing.

Chien, Y., Shin, D., & Way, W. D.. (2011). A Heuristic Of CAT Item Selection Procedure For Testlets. In Annual Conference of the International Association for Computerized Adaptive Testing.

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

Embretson, S. E. (2002). Generating abstract reasoning items with cognitive theory. In P. Kyllomen, Item generation for test development (pp. 219-250). Mahwah, N.J. USA: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.

Wise, S. L. (2011). From Reliability to Validity: Expanding Adaptive Testing Practice to Find the Most Valid Score for Each Test Taker. In Annual Conference of the International Association for Computerized Adaptive Testing. presented at the 10/2011.

Wise, S. L. (2011). From Reliability to Validity: Expanding Adaptive Testing Practice to Find the Most Valid Score for Each Test Taker. In Annual Conference of the International Association for Computerized Adaptive Testing. presented at the 10/2011.

Wise, S. L. (2011). From Reliability to Validity: Expanding Adaptive Testing Practice to Find the Most Valid Score for Each Test Taker. In Annual Conference of the International Association for Computerized Adaptive Testing. presented at the 10/2011.

Kingsbury, G., & Zara, T.. (2017). From Blueprints to Systems: An Integrated Approach to Adaptive Testing. In IACAT 2017 Conference. presented at the 08/2017, Niigata, Japan: Niigata Seiryo University. Retrieved from https://drive.google.com/open?id=1CBaAfH4ES7XivmvrMjPeKyFCsFZOpQMJ

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

Bjorner, J. B., Kosinski, M., & Ware, J. E., J.. (2003). The feasibility of applying item response theory to measures of migraine impact: a re-analysis of three clinical studies. Quality of Life Research, 12, 887-902.

Bjorner, J. B., Kosinski, M., & Ware, J. E., J.. (2003). The feasibility of applying item response theory to measures of migraine impact: a re-analysis of three clinical studies. Quality of Life Research, 12, 887-902.

Lai, J. - S., Crane, P. K., & Cella, D.. (2006). Factor analysis techniques for assessing sufficient unidimensionality of cancer related fatigue. Quality of Life Research, 15, 1179-90. presented at the Sep.

Bode, R. K., Lai, J. - S., Dineen, K., Heinemann, A. W., Shevrin, D., Von Roenn, J., & Cella, D.. (2006). Expansion of a physical function item bank and development of an abbreviated form for clinical research. Journal of Applied Measurement, 7, 1-15.

Bode, R. K., Lai, J. - S., Dineen, K., Heinemann, A. W., Shevrin, D., Von Roenn, J., & Cella, D.. (2006). Expansion of a physical function item bank and development of an abbreviated form for clinical research. Journal of Applied Measurement, 7, 1-15.

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

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

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.

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.

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.

Kocalevent, R. D., Rose, M., Becker, J., Walter, O. B., Fliege, H., Bjorner, J. B., et al.. (2009). An evaluation of patient-reported outcomes found computerized adaptive testing was efficient in assessing stress perception. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology, 62, 278-287.

Thompson, N., & Stoeger, J.. (2017). Evaluation of Parameter Recovery, Drift, and DIF with CAT Data. In IACAT 2017 Conference. presented at the 08/2017, Niigata, Japan: Niigata Seiryo University. Retrieved from https://drive.google.com/open?id=1F7HCZWD28Q97sCKFIJB0Yps0H66NPeKq

Economides, A. A., & Roupas, C.. (2007). Evaluation of computer adaptive testing systems. International Journal of Web-Based Learning and Teaching Technologies, 2, 70-87.

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

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

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.

van der Linden, W. J. (2006). Equating scores from adaptive to linear tests. Applied Psychological Measurement, 30, 493-508.