Wikia

Psychology Wiki

Computer assisted testing

Talk1
34,138pages on
this wiki

Redirected from Computer-based assessment

Assessment | Biopsychology | Comparative | Cognitive | Developmental | Language | Individual differences | Personality | Philosophy | Social |
Methods | Statistics | Clinical | Educational | Industrial | Professional items | World psychology |

Social Processes: Methodology · Types of test


This article is in need of attention from a psychologist/academic expert on the subject.
Please help recruit one, or improve this page yourself if you are qualified.
This banner appears on articles that are weak and whose contents should be approached with academic caution
.

Computer assisted testing (CAT) is the use of computers as an aid in the administration, scoring and interpretation of psychological measures.


Various terms are used to describe the use of a computer for assessment purposes. These include:

  1. Computer-Assisted Assessment or Computer-Aided Assessment (CAA)
  2. Computer-Mediated Assessment (CMA)
  3. Computer-Based Assessment (CBA)
  4. online assessment.

Although these terms are commonly used interchangeably, they have distinct meanings.

Computer Assisted/Mediated Assessment refers to any application of computers within the assessment process; the role of the computer may be extrinsic or intrinsic. It is, therefore, a synonym for e-assessment which also describes a wide range of computer-related activities. Within this definition the computer often plays no part in the actual assessment of responses but merely facilitates the capture and transfer of responses between candidate and human assessor.

Computer-Based Assessment refers to assessment which is built around the use of a computer; the use of a computer is always intrinsic to this type of assessment. This can relate to assessment of IT practical skills or more commonly the on screen presentation of knowledge tests. The defining factor is that the computer is marking or assessing the responses provided from candidates.

Online assessment refers to assessment activity which requires the use of the internet. In reality few high stakes assessment sessions are actually conducted online in real time but the transfer of data prior to and after the assessment session is conducted via the internet. There are many examples of practice and diagnostic tests being run real time over the internet.

Computer-Based Assessment Edit

A Computer-Based Assessment (CBA), also known as Computer-Based Testing (CBT), e-assessment, computerized testing and computer-administered testing, is a method of administering tests in which the responses are electronically recorded, assessed, or both. As the name implies, Computer-Based Assessment makes use of a computer or an equivalent electronic device such as a cell phone or PDA. CBA systems enable educators and trainers to author, schedule, deliver, and report on surveys, quizzes, tests and exams.[1] Computer-Based Assessment may be a stand-alone system or a part of a virtual learning environment, possibly accessed via the World Wide Web.

AdvantagesEdit

General advantages of CBA systems over traditional paper-and-pencil testing (PPT) have been demonstrated in several comparative works and include: increased delivery, administration and scoring efficiency; reduced costs for many elements of the testing lifecycle; improved test security resulting from electronic transmission and encryption; consistency and reliability; faster and more controlled test revision process with shorter response time; faster decision-making as the result of immediate scoring and reporting; unbiased test administration and scoring; fewer response entry and recognition errors; fewer comprehension errors caused by the testing process; improved translation and localization with universal availability of content; new advanced and flexible item types; increased candidate acceptance and satisfaction; evolutionary step toward future testing methodologies.[2]

In addition to traditional testing approaches carried out in a PPT mode, there are a variety of aspects needed to be taken into account when CBA is deployed, such as software quality, secure delivery, reliable network (if Internet-based), capacities, support, maintenance, software costs for development and test delivery, including licenses. Any of the delivery modes, whether Paper-Pencil and/or computer-based, comprises advantages and challenges which can hardly be compared, especially in relation to estimated costs. The use of CBA includes additional benefits which can be achieved from an organisational, psychological, analytical and pedagogical perspective. Many experts agree on the overall added value and advantages of e-testing in large scale assessments.[3]

It is also envisaged that computer-based formative assessment, in particular, will play an increasingly important role in learning,[4] with the increased use of banks of question items for the construction and delivery of dynamic, on-demand assessments. This can be witnessed by current pioneering projects such as the SQA's SOLAR Project.[5]

NotesEdit

  1. TCExam
  2. Asuni 2008
  3. Scheuermann 2008
  4. Gomersall 2005
  5. Scottish Qualifications Authority 2008

See also Edit


ReferencesEdit

</cite>

</cite>

</cite>

Further reading=Edit

  • Abedi, J., & Bruno, J. E. (1989). Testetest reliability of computer based MCW-super(PM test scoring methods: Journal of Computer-Based Instruction Vol 16(1) Win 1989, 29-35.
  • Abedi, J., & Bruno, J. E. (1989). Test-retest reliability of computer based MCW-APM test scoring methods: Journal of Computer-Based Instruction Vol 16(1) Win 1989, 29-35.
  • Ackerman, T. A., Evans, J., Park, K.-S., Tamassia, C., & Turner, R. (1999). Computer assessment using visual stimuli: A test of dermatological skin disorders. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers.
  • Adema, J. J., & Van der Linden, W. J. (1989). Algorithms for computerized test construction using classical item parameters: Journal of Educational Statistics Vol 14(3) Fal 1989, 279-290.
  • Ager, T. A. (1990). From interactive instruction to interactive testing. Hillsdale, NJ, England: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
  • Aguado, D., Rubio, V. J., Hontangas, P. M., & Hernandez, J. M. (2005). Psychometric properties of an Emotional Adjustment Computerized Adaptive Test: Psicothema Vol 17(3) Aug 2005, 484-491.
  • Aguinis, H., Bommer, W. H., & Pierce, C. A. (1996). Improving the estimation of moderating effects by using computer-administered questionnaires: Educational and Psychological Measurement Vol 56(6) Dec 1996, 1043-1047.
  • Ahn, S. J., Legge, G. E., & Luebker, A. (1995). Printed cards for measuring low-vision reading speed: Vision Research Vol 35(13) Jul 1995, 1939-1944.
  • Aiken, L. R. (1990). MAKETEST and TAKETEST: Two computer programs for constructing and administering objective tests: Educational and Psychological Measurement Vol 50(1) Spr 1990, 143-146.
  • Aiken, L. R. (1996). A program for constructing and scoring several types of ratings scales and checklists: Educational and Psychological Measurement Vol 56(6) Dec 1996, 1048-1051.
  • Albiero, P., Di Stefano, G., Visentini, P., & Passalacqua, C. (1996). Planning skills in children: Preliminary data from two new computerized planning tasks. Padova, Italy: Cooperativa Libraria Editrice Universita di Padova.
  • Aldenkamp, A. P., Blennow, G., Sandstedt, P., Alpherts, W. C. J., Elmqvist, D., Heijbel, J., et al. (1994). Computerized assessment of cognitive function and quality of life. New York, NY: Raven Press.
  • Alderton, D. L., & Larson, G. E. (1994). Dimensions of ability: Diminishing returns? Hillsdale, NJ, England: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
  • Allen, C. C., Ellinwood, E. H., & Logue, P. E. (1993). Construct validity of a new computer-assisted cognitive neuromotor assessment battery in normal and inpatient psychiatric samples: Journal of Clinical Psychology Vol 49(6) Nov 1993, 874-882.
  • Allen, D. F. (1987). Computers versus scanners: An experiment in nontraditional forms of survey administration: Journal of College Student Personnel Vol 28(3) May 1987, 266-273.
  • Almond, R. G., & Mislevy, R. J. (1999). Graphical models and computerized adaptive testing: Applied Psychological Measurement Vol 23(3) Sep 1999, 223-237.
  • Andaloro, G., Bellomonte, L., Lupo, L., & Sperandeo-Mineo, R. M. (1994). Construction and validation of a computer-based diagnostic module on average velocity: Journal of Research in Science Teaching Vol 31(1) Jan 1994, 53-63.
  • Anderer, P., Gruber, G., Parapatics, S., Woertz, M., Miazhynskaia, T., Klosch, G., et al. (2005). An E-Health Solution for Automatic Sleep Classification according to Rechtschaffen and Kales: Validation Study of the Somnolyzer 24 x 7 Utilizing the Siesta Database: Neuropsychobiology Vol 51(3) May 2005, 115-133.
  • Anderson, J. L. (1987). Computerized MAST for college health service: Journal of American College Health Vol 36(2) Sep 1987, 83-88.
  • Andres, P. L., Black-Schaffer, R. M., Ni, P., & Haley, S. M. (2004). Computer Adaptive Testing: A Strategy for Monitoring Stroke Rehabilitation Across Settings: Topics in Stroke Rehabilitation Vol 11(2) Sum 2004, 33-39.
  • Andresen, E. M., Vahle, V. J., & Lollar, D. (2001). Proxy reliability: Health-related quality of life (HRQoL) measures for people with disability: Quality of Life Research: An International Journal of Quality of Life Aspects of Treatment, Care & Rehabilitation Vol 10(7) 2001, 609-619.
  • Andrewes, D. G., & Maude, D. (1990). A computerised clinical test of forgetting based on the ACT model of memory retrieval: International Journal of Man-Machine Studies Vol 32(2) Feb 1990, 233-244.
  • Andrews, M. W., & Rosenblum, L. A. (2001). New methodology applied to bonnet macaques (Macaca radiata) to address some contradictory evidence on manual asymmetries in old world monkeys: Journal of Comparative Psychology Vol 115(4) Dec 2001, 418-422.
  • Anger, W. K., Rohlman, D. S., & Sizemore, O. J. (1994). A comparison of instruction formats for administering a computerized behavioral test: Behavior Research Methods, Instruments & Computers Vol 26(2) May 1994, 209-212.
  • Aojula, H., Barber, J., Cullen, R., & Andrews, J. (2006). Computer-based, online summative assessment in undergraduate pharmacy teaching: The Manchester experience: Pharmacy Education Vol 6(4) Dec 2006, 229-236.
  • Applegate, B. (1993). Construction of geometric analogy problems by young children in a computer-based test: Journal of Educational Computing Research Vol 9(1) 1993, 61-77.
  • Applegate, B., Fernandez, T., & Sarkar, D. (1992). Analogical problem solving in an expert system: IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, & Cybernetics Vol 22(5) Sep-Oct 1992, 1138-1144.
  • Arendasy, M., & Sommer, M. (2007). Using psychometric technology in educational assessment: The case of a schema-based isomorphic approach to the automatic generation of quantitative reasoning items: Learning and Individual Differences Vol 17(4) 2007, 366-383.
  • Argentero, P. (1989). Computerized psychological testing: An annotated bibliography: Bollettino di Psicologia Applicata No 190 Apr-Jun 1989, 21-38.
  • Ariel, A., Veldkamp, B. P., & Breithaupt, K. (2006). Optimal Testlet Pool Assembly for Multistage Testing Designs: Applied Psychological Measurement Vol 30(3) May 2006, 204-215.
  • Ariel, A., Veldkamp, B. P., & van der Linden, W. J. (2004). Constructing Rotating Item Pools for Constrained Adaptive Testing: Journal of Educational Measurement Vol 41(4) Win 2004, 345-359.
  • Armstrong, R. D., Jones, D. H., Koppel, N. B., & Pashley, P. J. (2004). Computerized Adaptive Testing With Multiple-Form Structures: Applied Psychological Measurement Vol 28(3) May 2004, 147-164.
  • Armstrong, R. D., Jones, D. H., & Kunce, C. S. (1998). IRT test assembly using network-flow programming: Applied Psychological Measurement Vol 22(3) Sep 1998, 237-247.
  • Arrowood, V. E. (1994). Effects of computerized adaptive test anxiety on nursing licensure examination. Dissertation Abstracts International Section A: Humanities and Social Sciences.
  • Arthur, W., Strong, M. H., & Williamson, J. (1994). Validation of a visual attention test as a predictor of driving accident involvement: Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology Vol 67(2) Jun 1994, 173-182.
  • Artiola i Fortuny, L., & Heaton, R. K. (1996). Standard versus computerized administration of the Wisconsin Card Sorting Test: Clinical Neuropsychologist Vol 10(4) Nov 1996, 419-424.
  • Ashton, H. S., Beevers, C. E., Korabinski, A. A., & Youngson, M. A. (2005). Investigating the medium effect in computer-aided assessment of school Chemistry and college Computing national examinations: British Journal of Educational Technology Vol 36(5) Sep 2005, 771-787.
  • Atlis, M. M., Hahn, J., & Butcher, J. N. (2006). Computer-Based Assessment With the MMPI-2. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
  • Auger, E., Mourey, F., & Cottraux, J. (1986). Entering, scoring, and statistical analysis of rating scales of depression and anxiety states with an interactive micro-computer: Psychologie Medicale Vol 18(5) Apr 1986, 757-758.
  • Auger, R., & Seguin, S. P. (1996). Comprehensive validity of an adaptive testing strategy for academic certification in Quebec: Canadian Journal of Education Vol 21(2) Spr 1996, 143-154.
  • Babik, M. (1998). Demanding life situations simulated by virtual reality: Psychometric verification of "Subjective Emotional Balance Questionnaire": Studia Psychologica Vol 40(4) 1998, 357-360.
  • Backhoff Escudaro, E., Ibarra R, M. A., & Rosas M, M. (1995). A computerized exam system: Revista Mexicana de Psicologia Vol 12(1) Jun 1995, 55-62.
  • Bader, P., Hofmann, K., & Kubinger, K. D. (1993). The fitness of standardizations of paper-pencil tests for computer administration: An experiment on the German-made Gie[sen Test: Zeitschrift fur Differentielle und Diagnostische Psychologie Vol 14(2) 1993, 129-135.
  • Baek, S.-G. (1995). Computerized adaptive attitude testing using the partial credit model. Dissertation Abstracts International Section A: Humanities and Social Sciences.
  • Baer, L., Brown-Beasley, M. W., Sorce, J., & Henriques, A. I. (1993). Computer-assisted telephone administration of a structured interview for obsessive-compulsive disorder: American Journal of Psychiatry Vol 150(11) Nov 1993, 1737-1738.
  • Baker, E. L., & Mayer, R. E. (1999). Computer-based assessment of problem solving: Computers in Human Behavior Vol 15(3-4) May-Jul 1999, 269-282.
  • Baker, H. G., Berry, V. M., Kazan, J. B., & Diamond, E. E. (1988). Career plans check-up: Automated assessment of career maturity: Journal of Computer-Based Instruction Vol 15(1) Win 1988, 29-32.
  • Baker, H. G., Berry, V. M., McClintock, V. M., & Norris, L. (1990). Automated assessment of reasons for joining an organization: Journal of Psychology: Interdisciplinary and Applied Vol 124(6) Nov 1990, 711-719.
  • Baker, H. G., & Ellis, R. T. (1989). Computerized vocational guidance systems. New York, NY, England: Praeger Publishers.
  • Balajthy, E. (2002). Information technology and literacy assessment: Reading & Writing Quarterly: Overcoming Learning Difficulties Vol 18(4) Oct-Dec 2002, 369-373.
  • Ban, J.-C., Hanson, B. A., Wang, T., Yi, Q., & Harris, D. J. (2001). A comparative study of on-line pretest item--calibration/scaling methods in computerized adaptive testing: Journal of Educational Measurement Vol 38(3) Fal 2001, 191-212.
  • Ban, J.-C., Hanson, B. A., Yi, Q., & Harris, D. J. (2002). Data sparseness and on-line pretest item calibration-scaling methods in CAT: Journal of Educational Measurement Vol 39(3) Fal 2002, 207-218.
  • Banerjee, J., & Clapham, C. (2003). Test review: The TOEFL CBT (Computer-based test): Language Testing Vol 20(1) Jan 2003, 111-123.
  • Bangsberg, D. R., Bronstone, A., & Hofmann, R. (2002). A computer-based assessment detects regimen misunderstandings and nonadherence for patients on HIV antiretroviral therapy: AIDS Care Vol 14(1) Feb 2002, 3-15.
  • Barak, A., & Buchanan, T. (2004). Internet-based psychological testing and assessment. New York, NY: Elsevier Science.
  • Barbera, K. M. (1996). Multimedia employment tests: The influence of attitudes and experiences on validity. Dissertation Abstracts International: Section B: The Sciences and Engineering.
  • Barnard, G. W., Nicholson, R. A., Hankins, G. C., Raisani, K. K., & et al. (1992). Itemmetric and scale analysis of a new computer-assisted competency assessment instrument (CADCOMP): Behavioral Sciences & the Law Vol 10(3) Sum 1992, 419-435.
  • Barnes, J. H., Banahan, B. F., & Fish, K. E. (1995). The response effect of question order in computer-administered questioning in the social sciences: Social Science Computer Review Vol 13(1) Spr 1995, 47-63.
  • Barrada, J. R., Mazuela, P., & Olea, J. (2006). Metodo de estratificacion por maxima informacion para el control de la exposicion en tests adaptativos informatizados: Psicothema Vol 18(1) Feb 2006, 156-159.
  • 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 Vol 3(1) 2007, 14-23.
  • Bartram, D. (1987). The development of an automated testing system for pilot selection: The MICROPAT project: Applied Psychology: An International Review Vol 36(3-4) Sep 1987, 279-298.
  • Bartram, D. (1994). Computer-based assessment. Oxford, England: John Wiley & Sons.
  • Bartram, D. (2002). The MICROPAT Pilot Selection Battery: Application of generative techniques for item-based and task-based tests. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers.
  • Bartram, D. (2006). The Internationalization of Testing and New Models of Test Delivery on the Internet: International Journal of Testing Vol 6(2) 2006, 121-131.
  • Bartram, D. (2006). Testing on the Internet: Issues, Challenges and Opportunities in the Field of Occupational Assessment. New York, NY: John Wiley & Sons Ltd.
  • Bartram, D., & Dale, H. C. A. (1991). Validation of the MICROPAT battery of pilot aptitude tests. New York, NY: Kluwer Academic/Plenum Publishers.
  • Bartram, D., & Hambleton, R. K. (2006). Computer-based testing and the Internet: Issues and advances. New York, NY: John Wiley & Sons Ltd.
  • Baumann, U., Laireiter, A. R., & Krebs, A. (1996). Computer-assisted interaction diary on social networks, social support, and interpersonal strain. Ashland, OH: Hogrefe & Huber Publishers.
  • Beach, D. A. (1989). Identifying the random responder: Journal of Psychology: Interdisciplinary and Applied Vol 123(1) Jan 1989, 101-103.
  • Beaumont, J. G. (1991). New directions in intelligent cognitive systems. New York, NY: Kluwer Academic/Plenum Publishers.
  • Beaumont, J. G., & French, C. C. (1987). A clinical field study of eight automated psychometric procedures: The Leicester/DHSS project: International Journal of Man-Machine Studies Vol 26(6) Jun 1987, 661-682.
  • Beckmann, J. F., Guthke, J., & Vahle, H. (1997). Analysis of item response latencies in computer-aided adaptive intelligence learning ability tests: Diagnostica Vol 43(1) 1997, 40-62.
  • Beevers, C. E., & Paterson, J. S. (2003). Automatic assessment of problem-solving skills in mathematics: Active Learning in Higher Education Vol 4(2) Jul 2003, 127-144.
  • Beins, B. C., & Porter, J. W. (1989). A ratio scale measurement of conformity: Educational and Psychological Measurement Vol 49(1) Spr 1989, 75-80.
  • Bennett, D. E., & Davis, M. A. (2001). The Development of a Computer-Based Alternate Assessment System: Assessment for Effective Intervention Vol 26(3) Spr 2001, 15-34.
  • Bennett, D. E., Zentall, S. S., French, B. F., & Giorgetti-Borucki, K. (2006). The Effects of Computer-Administered Choice on Students With and Without Characteristics of Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder: Behavioral Disorders Vol 31(2) Feb 2006, 189-203.
  • Bennett, J. R. (1993). Micro-computer adolescent pregnancy health risk appraisal: Dissertation Abstracts International.
  • Bennett, R. E. (1994). Environments for presenting and automatically scoring complex constructed-response items. Hillsdale, NJ, England: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
  • Bennett, R. E. (1999). Computer-based testing for examinees with disabilities: On the road to generalized accomodation. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers.
  • Bennett, R. E. (2003). An electronic infrastructure for a future generation of tests. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers.
  • Bennett, R. E. (2006). Moving the Field Forward: Some Thoughts on Validity and Automated Scoring. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers.
  • Bennett, R. E., & Bejar, I. I. (1998). Validity and automated scoring: It's not only the scoring: Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice Vol 17(4) Win 1998, 9-16.
  • Bennett, R. E., Goodman, M., Hessinger, J., Kahn, H., Ligget, J., Marshall, G., et al. (1999). Using multimedia in large-scale computer-based testing programs: Computers in Human Behavior Vol 15(3-4) May-Jul 1999, 283-294.
  • Bennett, R. E., Morley, M., & Quardt, D. (2000). Three response types for broadening the conception of mathematical problem solving in computerized tests: Applied Psychological Measurement Vol 24(4) Dec 2000, 294-309.
  • Bennett, R. E., Morley, M., Quardt, D., Rock, D. A., Singley, M. K., Katz, I. R., et al. (1999). Psychometric and cognitive functioning of an under-determined computer-based response type for quantitative reasoning: Journal of Educational Measurement Vol 36(3) Fal 1999, 233-252.
  • Bennett, R. E., & Rock, D. A. (1995). Generalizability, validity, and examinee perceptions of a computer-delivered Formulating-Hypotheses test: Journal of Educational Measurement Vol 32(1) Spr 1995, 19-36.
  • Bennett, R. E., & Sebrechts, M. M. (1997). A computer-based task for measuring the representational component of quantitative proficiency: Journal of Educational Measurement Vol 34(1) Spr 1997, 64-77.
  • Benoit, C., Grice, M., & Hazan, V. (1996). The SUS test: A method for the assessment of text-to-speech synthesis intelligibility using semantically unpredictable sentences: Speech Communication Vol 18(4) Jun 1996, 381-392.
  • Berg, I., Lucas, C., & McGuire, R. (1992). Meaurement of behaviour difficulties in children using standard scales administered to mothers by computer: Reliability and validity: European Child & Adolescent Psychiatry Vol 1(1) Jan 1992, 14-23.
  • Berg, S. R. (1996). Dynamic scaling: An ipsative procedure using techniques from computer adaptive testing. Dissertation Abstracts International: Section B: The Sciences and Engineering.
  • Berger, M. (2006). Computer Assisted Clinical Assessment: Child and Adolescent Mental Health Vol 11(2) May 2006, 64-75.
  • Bergman, T. P. (1994). The effects of computer testing system interface attributes on item searches. Dissertation Abstracts International Section A: Humanities and Social Sciences.
  • Bergstrom, B. A., & Lunz, M. E. (1992). Confidence in pass/fail decisions for computer adaptive and paper and pencil examinations: Evaluation & the Health Professions Vol 15(4) Dec 1992, 453-464.
  • Bergstrom, B. A., & Lunz, M. E. (1999). CAT for certification and licensure. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers.
  • Bergstrom, B. A., Lunz, M. E., & Gershon, R. C. (1992). Altering the level of difficulty in computer adaptive testing: Applied Measurement in Education Vol 5(2) 1992, 137-149.
  • Bersky, A. K. (1994). Effect of audiovisual enhancement on problem-solving and decision-making activities during a computerized clinical simulation test (CST-super(TM)) of nursing competence: Evaluation & the Health Professions Vol 17(4) Dec 1994, 446-464.
  • Bersoff, D. N., & Hofer, P. J. (1991). Legal issues in computerized psychological testing. Hillsdale, NJ, England: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
  • Beuscart-Zephir, M.-C., Anceaux, F., Duhamel, A., & Quenton, S. (1996). Cognitive assessment: An example: Psychologie Francaise Vol 41(1) 1996, 65-76.
  • Bhandari, I., Simon, H. A., & Siework, D. P. (1995). Models of test selection: IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, & Cybernetics Vol 25(10) Oct 1995, 1349-1364.
  • Bilek, M., & Huzl, V. (1988). Development of computer administration of the DOPEN questionnaire: Psychologie v Ekonomicke Praxi Vol 23(2) 1988, 81-93.
  • Biocca, F., David, P., & West, M. (1994). Continuous response measurement (CRM): A computerized tool for research on the cognitive processing of communication messages. Hillsdale, NJ, England: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
  • Birenbaum, M., & Tatsuoka, K. K. (1987). Effects of "on-line" test feedback on the seriousness of subsequent errors: Journal of Educational Measurement Vol 24(2) Sum 1987, 145-155.
  • Bisson, T. (1990). Toward a shortened, computerized, and modifiable form of the MMPI: The MINI-PI: Revue de Psychologie Appliquee Vol 40(3) 1990, 321-329.
  • Bisson, T., Baudu, C., & Pras, P. (1992). The MINI-PI in gerontology: The clinical utility of a computerized personality inventory with older adults: Psychologie Medicale Vol 24(14) 1992, 1495-1498.
  • Black, F. O. (2001). What can posturography tell us about vestibular function? New York, NY: New York Academy of Sciences.
  • Black, M. M., & Ponirakis, A. (2000). Computer-administered interviews with children about maltreatment: Methodological, developmental and ethical issues: Journal of Interpersonal Violence Vol 15(7) Jul 2000, 682-695.
  • Blair, D. V., O'Neil, H. F., Jr., & Price, D. J. (1999). Effects of expertise on state self-efficacy and state worry during a computer-based certification test: Computers in Human Behavior Vol 15(3-4) May-Jul 1999, 511-530.
  • Blanche, M. J. T. (1987). Computer technology and the prospects for innovation in personality assessment. Pretoria, South Africa: Human Sciences Research Council.
  • Blanchet, L., Pepin, M., & Loranger, M. (1998). Intelligence testing and computerized assessment: Revue Quebecoise de Psychologie Vol 19(2) 1998, 183-205.
  • Bleiberg, J., Cernich, A., & Reeves, D. (2006). Sports Concussion Applications of the Automated Neuropsychological Assessment Metrics Sports Medicine Battery. New York, NY: Guilford Press.
  • Bleiberg, J., Kane, R. L., Reeves, D. L., Garmoe, W. S., & Halpern, E. (2000). Factor analysis of computerized and traditional tests used in mild brain injury research: Clinical Neuropsychologist Vol 14(3) Aug 2000, 287-294.
  • Bochner, J., Garrison, W., Palmer, L., MacKenzie, D., & et al. (1997). A computerized adaptive testing system for speech discrimination measurement: The Speech Sound Pattern Discrimination Test: Journal of the Acoustical Society of America Vol 101(4, Pt 1) Apr 1997, 2289-2298.
  • Bode, R. K., Cella, D., Lai, J.-s., & Heinemann, A. W. (2003). Developing an Initial Physical Function Item Bank from Existing Sources: Journal of Applied Measurement Vol 4(2) 2003, 124-136.
  • Bode, R. K., Lai, J.-s., Dineen, K., Heinemann, A. W., Shevrin, D., Von Roenn, J., et al. (2006). Expansion of a physical function item bank and development of an abbreviated form for clinical research: Journal of Applied Measurement Vol 7(1) 2006, 1-15.
  • Bodmann, S. M., & Robinson, D. H. (2004). Speed and performance differences among computer-based and paper and pencil tests: Journal of Educational Computing Research Vol 31 2004, 51-60.
  • Bolton, R. N., & Bronkhorst, T. M. (1996). Questionnaire pretesting: Computer-assisted coding of concurrent protocols. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
  • Boodoo, G. M. (1998). Addressing cultural context in the development of performance-based assessments and computer-adaptive testing: Preliminary validity considerations: Journal of Negro Education Vol 67(3) Sum 1998, 211-219.
  • Booth, J. (1991). The key to valid computer-based testing: The user interface: European Review of Applied Psychology/Revue Europeenne de Psychologie Appliquee Vol 41(4) 1991, 281-293.
  • Booth, J. F. (1998). The user interface in computer-based selection and assessment: Applied and theoretical problematics of an evolving technology: International Journal of Selection and Assessment Vol 6(2) Apr 1998, 61-81.
  • Booth, J. F. (1998). Uses of PC technology in selection and assessment: International Journal of Selection and Assessment Vol 6(2) Apr 1998, 57-60.
  • Booth-Kewley, S., Edwards, J. E., & Rosenfeld, P. (1992). Impression management, social desirability, and computer administration of attitude questionnaires: Does the computer make a difference? : Journal of Applied Psychology Vol 77(4) Aug 1992, 562-566.
  • Booth-Kewley, S., Larson, G. E., & Miyoshi, D. K. (2007). Erratum to: "Social desirability effects on computerized and paper-and-pencil questionnaires": Computers in Human Behavior Vol 23(4) Jul 2007, 2093.
  • Booth-Kewley, S., Larson, G. E., & Miyoshi, D. K. (2007). Social desirability effects on computerized and paper-and-pencil questionnaires: Computers in Human Behavior Vol 23(1) Jan 2007, 463-477.
  • Booth-Kewley, S., Rosenfeld, P., & Edwards, J. E. (1993). Computer-administered surveys in organizational settings: Alternatives, advantages, and applications. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, Inc.
  • Bouman, T. K., Luteijn, F., & Schoenmaker, N. A. (1988). Personality scales on the personal computer: An equivalency study: Psycholoog Vol 23(7-8) Jul-Aug 1988, 377-380.
  • Bouman, T. K., & Schaufeli, W. B. (1988). Equivalence and evaluation of conventional and computer administrations of a symptom check list: Nederlands Tijdschrift voor de Psychologie en haar Grensgebieden Vol 43(2) Mar 1988, 86-92.
  • Bowers, D. R. (1991). Computer-based adaptive testing in music research and instruction: Psychomusicology Vol 10(1) Spr 1991, 49-63.
  • Boyd, A. M. (2004). Strategies for controlling testlet exposure rates in computerized adaptive testing systems. Dissertation Abstracts International: Section B: The Sciences and Engineering.
  • Bracken, A. C., Hersh, A. L., & Johnson, D. J. (1998). A computerized school-based health assessment with rapid feedback to improve adolescent health: Clinical Pediatrics Vol 37(11) Nov 1998, 677-683.
  • Bradlow, E. T., & Weiss, R. E. (2001). Outlier measures and norming methods for computerized adaptive tests: Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics Vol 26(1) Spr 2001, 85-104.
  • Braun, H. (1994). Assessing technology in assessment. Hillsdale, NJ, England: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
  • Braun, H., Bejar, I. I., & Williamson, D. M. (2006). Rule-Based Methods for Automated Scoring: Application in a Licensing Context. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers.
  • Breithaupt, K., Ariel, A., & Veldkamp, B. P. (2005). Automated Simultaneous Assembly for Multistage Testing: International Journal of Testing Vol 5(3) 2005, 319-330.
  • Breithaupt, K., & Hare, D. R. (2007). Automated Simultaneous Assembly of Multistage Testlets for a High-Stakes Licensing Examination: Educational and Psychological Measurement Vol 67(1) Feb 2007, 5-20.
  • Breithaupt, K. J., Mills, C. N., & Melican, G. J. (2006). Facing the Opportunities of the Future. New York, NY: John Wiley & Sons Ltd.
  • Breland, H., Lee, Y.-W., & Muraki, E. (2005). Comparability of TOEFL CBT Essay Prompts: Response-Mode Analyses: Educational and Psychological Measurement Vol 65(4) Aug 2005, 577-595.
  • Bridgeman, B., Bejar, I. I., & Friedman, D. (1999). Fairness issues in a computer-based architectural licensure examination: Computers in Human Behavior Vol 15(3-4) May-Jul 1999, 419-440.
  • Bridgeman, B., & Cline, F. (2004). Effects of Differentially Time-Consuming Tests on Computer-Adaptive Test Scores: Journal of Educational Measurement Vol 41(2) Sum 2004, 137-148.
  • Bridgeman, B., Lennon, M. L., & Jackenthal, A. (2003). Effects of screen size, screen resolution, and display rate on computer-based test performance: Applied Measurement in Education Vol 16(3) 2003, 191-205.
  • Bridgeman, B., & Rock, D. A. (1993). Relationships among multiple-choice and open-ended analytical questions: Journal of Educational Measurement Vol 30(4) Win 1993, 313-329.
  • Bringsjord, E. L. (2001). Computerized-adaptive versus paper-and-pencil testing environments: An experimental analysis of examinee experience. Dissertation Abstracts International Section A: Humanities and Social Sciences.
  • Britton, B. K., & Tidwell, P. (1995). Cognitive structure testing: A computer system for diagnosis of expert-novice differences. Hillsdale, NJ, England: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
  • Brosnan, M. J. (1998). The impact of computer anxiety and self-efficacy upon performance: Journal of Computer Assisted Learning Vol 14(3) Sep 1998, 223-234.
  • Brothen, T., & Wambach, C. (2001). Effective student use of computerized quizzes: Teaching of Psychology Vol 28(4) Nov 2001, 292-294.
  • Brothen, T., & Wambach, C. (2004). The Value of Time Limits on Internet Quizzes: Teaching of Psychology Vol 31(1) Win 2004, 62-64.
  • Brown, A. L., & Campione, J. C. (1986). Cognitive science principles and work force education: Advances in Reading/Language Research Vol 4 1986, 217-229.
  • Browndyke, J. N. (2001). The remote neuropsychological assessment-category test: Development and validation of a computerized, Internet-based neuropsychological assessment measure. Dissertation Abstracts International: Section B: The Sciences and Engineering.
  • Brugha, T. S., Kaul, A., Dignon, A., Teather, D., & et al. (1996). Present state examination by microcomputer: Objectives and experience of preliminary steps: International Journal of Methods in Psychiatric Research Vol 6(3) Oct 1996, 143-151.
  • Bruno, J. E., Holland, J. R., & Ward, J. W. (1988). Enhancing academic support services for special action students: An application of information referenced testing: Measurement and Evaluation in Counseling and Development Vol 21(1) Apr 1988, 5-15.
  • Buchan, B. D., DeAngelis, D. L., & Levinson, E. M. (2005). A Comparison of the Web-Based and Paper-and-Pencil Versions of the Career Key Interest Inventory With a Sample of University Women: Journal of Employment Counseling Vol 42(1) Mar 2005, 39-46.
  • Buchanan, T. (2002). Online assessment: Desirable or dangerous? : Professional Psychology: Research and Practice Vol 33(2) Apr 2002, 148-154.
  • Buchanan, T., & Smith, J. L. (1999). Research on the internet: Validation of a World-Wide Web mediated personality scale: Behavior Research Methods, Instruments & Computers Vol 31(4) Nov 1999, 565-571.
  • Buchanan, T., & Smith, J. L. (1999). Using the Internet for psychological research: Personality testing on the World Wide Web: British Journal of Psychology Vol 90(1) Feb 1999, 125-144.
  • Buchheim, A., & Mergenthaler, E. (2000). The relationship among attachment representation, emotion-abstraction patterns, and narrative style: A computer-based text analysis of the Adult Attachment Interview: Psychotherapy Research Vol 10(4) Win 2000, 390-407.
  • Bucholz, K. K., Robins, L. N., Shayka, J. J., Przybeck, T. R., & et al. (1991). Performance of two forms of a computer psychiatric screening interview: Version I of the DISSI: Journal of Psychiatric Research Vol 25(3) 1991, 117-129.
  • 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.
  • Bukasa, B., Kisser, R., & Wenninger, U. (1990). Computer-assisted assessment in traffic psychology: Assessment of driver aptitude: Diagnostica Vol 36(2) 1990, 148-165.
  • Bull, J., Dalziel, J., & Vreeland, T. (2003). Assessing Question Banks: Chapter 14: Journal of Interactive Media in Education Vol 2003(1) 2003, No Pagination Specified.
  • Bultler, S. F., Budman, S. H., Goldman, R. J., Newman, F. J., Beckley, K. E., Trottier, D., et al. (2001). Initial validation of a computer-administered Addiction Severity Index: The ASI-MV: Psychology of Addictive Behaviors Vol 15(1) Mar 2001, 4-12.
  • Bunderson, C. V., Inouye, D. K., & Olsen, J. B. (1989). The four generations of computerized educational measurement. New York, NY, England: Macmillan Publishing Co, Inc; American Council on Education.
  • Burin, D. I., Prieto, G., & Delgado, A. (1995). Solution strategies and spatial visualization strategies: Design of a computerized test for their assessment: Interdisciplinaria Revista de Psicologia y Ciencias Afines Vol 12(2) 1995, 123-137.
  • Burke, J. D., Burke, K. C., Baker, J. H., & Hillis, A. (1995). Testetest reliability in psychiatric patients of the SF-36 Health Survey: International Journal of Methods in Psychiatric Research Vol 5(3) Oct 1995, 189-194.
  • Burke, J. D., Burke, K. C., Baker, J. H., & Hillis, A. (1995). Test-retest reliability in psychiatric patients of the SF-36 Health Survey: International Journal of Methods in Psychiatric Research Vol 5(3) Oct 1995, 189-194.
  • Burke, M. J., Normand, J., & Raju, N. S. (1987). Examinee attitudes toward computer-administered ability testing: Computers in Human Behavior Vol 3(2) 1987, 95-107.
  • Burroughs, W. A., Murray, J., Wesley, S. S., Medina, D. R., Penn, S. L., Gordon, S. R., et al. (1999). Easing the implementation of behavioral testing through computerization. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers.
  • Buse, L., & Pawlik, K. (1996). Ambulatory behavioral assessment and in-field performance testing. Ashland, OH: Hogrefe & Huber Publishers.
  • Buse, L., & Pawlik, K. (2001). Computer-assisted ambulatory performance tests in everyday situations: Construction, evaluation, and psychometric properties of a test battery measuring mental activation. Ashland, OH: Hogrefe & Huber Publishers.
  • Butcher, J. N. (2000). Computerized assessment: Kazdin, Alan E (Ed).
  • Butcher, J. N. (2002). How to use computer-based reports. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
  • Butcher, J. N. (2003). Computerized psychological assessment. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons Inc.
  • Butcher, J. N., Perry, J., & Hahn, J. (2004). Computers in clinical assessment: Historical developments, present status, and future challenges: Journal of Clinical Psychology Vol 60(3) Mar 2004, 331-345.
  • Butcher, J. N., Perry, J. N., & Atlis, M. M. (2000). Validity and utility of computer-based test interpretation: Psychological Assessment Vol 12(1) Mar 2000, 6-18.
  • Butler, N., Newton, T., & Slade, P. (1989). Validation of a computerized version of the SCANS questionnaire: International Journal of Eating Disorders Vol 8(2) Mar 1989, 239-241.
  • Butler, S. F., Chiauzzi, E., Bromberg, J. I., Budman, S. H., & Buono, D. P. (2003). Computer-Assisted Screening and Intervention for Alcohol Problems in Primary Care: Journal of Technology in Human Services Vol 21(3) 2003, 1-19.
  • Buyske, S. G. (1999). Optimal design for item calibration in computerized adaptive testing. Dissertation Abstracts International: Section B: The Sciences and Engineering.
  • Byckovsky, P., & Dobrovska, D. (1988). A computer version of a psychodiagnostic means and verification of measuring stability: Ceskoslovenska Psychologie Vol 32(5) 1988, 413-421.
  • Byrne, J. M., Connolly, J. F., MacLean, S. E., Dooley, J. M., Gordon, K. E., & Beattie, T. L. (1999). Brain activity and language assessment using event-related potentials: Development of a clinical protocol: Developmental Medicine & Child Neurology Vol 41(11) Nov 1999, 740-747.
  • Camara, W. (2002). Examinee behavior and scoring of CBTs. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers.
  • Camp, G. H. (1987). An examination of the effects of frequency and nonfrequency computer-based testing on achievement, test anxiety, student attitudes, and retention: Dissertation Abstracts International.
  • Campbell, K. A., Rohlman, D. S., Storzbach, D., Binder, L. M., Anger, W. K., Kovera, C. A., et al. (1999). Test-retest reliability of psychological and neurobehavioral tests self-administered by computer: Assessment Vol 6(1) Mar 1999, 21-32.
  • Cann, A. J. (2005). Extended matching sets questions for online numeracy assessments: A case study: Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education Vol 30(6) Dec 2005, 633-640.
  • Cantillon, P., Irish, B., & Sales, D. (2004). Using computers for assessment in medicine: BMJ: British Medical Journal Vol 329(7466) Sep 2004, 606-609.
  • Capitman, J. A., Abrahams, R., & Ritter, G. (1997). Measuring the adequacy of home care for frail elders: The Gerontologist Vol 37(3) Jun 1997, 303-313.
  • Carbonara, D. D. (1991). The efficacy of the use of a computer-branched prose analysis model in evaluating the presentation of physics test questions to shelled examinees: Dissertation Abstracts International.
  • Carey, N. B. (1994). Computer predictors of mechanical job performance: Marine Corps findings: Military Psychology Vol 6(1) 1994, 1-30.
  • Carlsmith, K. M., & Chabot, H. F. (1997). A review of computer-based survey methodology: Journal of Psychological Practice Vol 3(2) Spr 1997, 20-26.
  • Carlson, D. A., Jr. (2001). Computerized vs. written administration of the MMPI-A in clinical and non-clinical settings. Dissertation Abstracts International: Section B: The Sciences and Engineering.
  • Carlson, J. F., & Harvey, V. S. (2004). Using computer-related technology for assessment activities: Ethical and professional practice issues for school psychologists: Computers in Human Behavior Vol 20(5) Sep 2004, 645-659.
  • 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.
  • Carr, N. T. (2004). A Review of Lertap (Laboratory of Educational Research Test Analysis Package) 5.2: International Journal of Testing Vol 4(2) 2004, 189-195.
  • Carretta, T. R., & Ree, M. J. (1993). Basic Attributes Test: Psychometric equating of a computer-based test: International Journal of Aviation Psychology Vol 3(3) 1993, 189-201.
  • Casey, M. M. (1999). Response latency to computer-administered personality inventory items: A method to control for reading speed and item length. Dissertation Abstracts International: Section B: The Sciences and Engineering.
  • Caspar, F., Berger, T., & Hautle, I. (2004). The Right View of Your Patient: A Computer-Assisted, Individualized Module for Psychotherapy Training: Psychotherapy: Theory, Research, Practice, Training Vol 41(2) Sum 2004, 125-135.
  • Cassitto, M. G., Gilioli, R., & Camerino, D. (1989). Experiences with the Milan Automated Neurobehavioral System (MANS) in occupational neurotoxic exposure: Neurotoxicology and Teratology Vol 11(6) Nov-Dec 1989, 571-574.
  • Cates, W. M. (1993). A small-scale comparison of the equivalence of paper-and-pencil and computerized versions of student end-of-course evaluations: Computers in Human Behavior Vol 9(4) Win 1993, 401-409.
  • Catterson, S. K. (1993). A comparison of computerized adaptive and paper-and-pencil tests on reliability and susceptibility to testwiseness: Dissertation Abstracts International.
  • Chan, C. B. L. (2006). Dual coding item formats for Computerized Adaptive Test (CAT) environments. Dissertation Abstracts International Section A: Humanities and Social Sciences.
  • Chang, H.-H., Qian, J., & Ying, Z. (2001). a-stratified multistage computerized adaptive testing with b blocking: Applied Psychological Measurement Vol 25(4) Dec 2001, 333-341.
  • Chang, H.-H., & van der Linden, W. J. (2003). Optimal stratification of item pools in alpha -stratified computerized adaptive testing: Applied Psychological Measurement Vol 27(4) Jul 2003, 262-274.
  • Chang, H.-H., & Ying, Z. (1996). A global information approach to computerized adaptive testing: Applied Psychological Measurement Vol 20(3) Sep 1996, 213-229.
  • Chang, H.-H., & Ying, Z. (1999). a-Stratified multistage computerized adaptive testing: Applied Psychological Measurement Vol 23(3) Sep 1999, 211-222.
  • Chang, H.-H., & Zhang, J. (2002). Hypergeometric family and item overlap rates in computerized adaptive testing: Psychometrika Vol 67(3) Sep 2002, 387-398.
  • Chang, S.-W., & Ansley, T. N. (2003). A comparative study of item exposure control methods in computerized adaptive testing: Journal of Educational Measurement Vol 40(1) Spr 2003, 71-103.
  • Chapelle, C. A., & Douglas, D. (2006). Assessing language through computer technology. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
  • Chatelois, J., Pineau, H., Belleville, S., Peretz, I., & et al. (1993). A computerized memory test battery based on the cognitive approach: Canadian Psychology/Psychologie Canadienne Vol 34(1) Jan 1993, 45-63.
  • Cheesman, M. F. (1992). An automated technique for estimating speech reception thresholds in multi-talker babble: Journal of Speech-Language Pathology and Audiology Vol 16(3) Sep 1992, 223-227.
  • Chen, P.-H. (2006). IRT-based automated test assembly: A sampling and stratification perspective. Dissertation Abstracts International Section A: Humanities and Social Sciences.
  • 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 and Engineering.
  • Chen, S.-K., Hou, L., & Dodd, B. G. (1998). A comparison of maximum likelihood estimation and expected a posteriori estimation in CAT using the partial credit model: Educational and Psychological Measurement Vol 58(4) Aug 1998, 569-595.
  • Chen, S.-Y., Ankemann, R. D., & Spray, J. A. (2003). The relationship between item exposure and test overlap in computerized adaptive testing: Journal of Educational Measurement Vol 40(2) Sum 2003, 129-145.
  • Chen, S.-Y., & Ankenmann, R. D. (2004). Effects of Practical Constraints on Item Selection Rules at the Early Stages of Computerized Adaptive Testing: Journal of Educational Measurement Vol 41(2) Sum 2004, 149-174.
  • 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 Vol 24(3) Sep 2000, 241-255.
  • Chen, S.-Y., & Lei, P.-W. (2005). Controlling Item Exposure and Test Overlap in Computerized Adaptive Testing: Applied Psychological Measurement Vol 29(3) May 2005, 204-217.
  • Cheng, P. E., & Liou, M. (2000). Estimation of trait level in computerized adaptive testing: Applied Psychological Measurement Vol 24(3) Sep 2000, 257-265.
  • Cheng, P. E., & Liou, M. (2003). Computerized adaptive testing using the nearest-neighbors criterion: Applied Psychological Measurement Vol 27(3) May 2003, 204-216.
  • Cheng, Y., Chang, H.-H., & Yi, Q. (2007). Two-phase item selection procedure for flexible content balancing in CAT: Applied Psychological Measurement Vol 31(6) Nov 2007, 467-482.
  • Chin, C. H., Donn, J. S., & Conry, R. F. (1991). Effects of computer-based tests on the achievement, anxiety, and attitudes of Grade 10 science students: Educational and Psychological Measurement Vol 51(3) Fal 1991, 735-745.
  • Choca, J., & Morris, J. (1992). Administering the Category Test by computer: Equivalence of results: Clinical Neuropsychologist Vol 6(1) Jan 1992, 9-15.
  • Choi, I.-C., Kim, K. S., & Boo, J. (2003). Comparability of a paper-based language test and a computer-based language test: Language Testing Vol 20(3) Jul 2003, 295-320.
  • Christie, M., Mehmet, A., & Muijen, M. (1990). Holistic assessment of mood states in field trials of psychoactive drugs. Oxford, England: John Wiley & Sons.
  • Chuah, S. C., Drasgow, F., & Luecht, R. (2006). How Big Is Big Enough? Sample Size Requirements for CAST Item Parameter Estimation: Applied Measurement in Education Vol 19(3) 2006, 241-255.
  • Chuah, S. C., Drasgow, F., & Roberts, B. W. (2006). Personality assessment: Does the medium matter? No: Journal of Research in Personality Vol 40(4) Aug 2006, 359-376.
  • Chung, G. K. W. K., O'Neil, H. F., Jr., & Herl, H. E. (1999). The use of computer-based collaborative knowledge mapping to measure team processes and team outcomes: Computers in Human Behavior Vol 15(3-4) May-Jul 1999, 463-493.
  • Clariana, R., & Wallace, P. (2002). Paper-based versus computer-based assessment: Key factors associated with the test mode effect: British Journal of Educational Technology Vol 33(5) Nov 2002, 593-602.
  • Clarke, D. E. (2000). Evaluation of a networked self-testing program: Psychological Reports Vol 86(1) Feb 2000, 127-128.
  • Clarke, S., Lindsay, K., McKenna, C., & New, S. (2004). INQUIRE: A case study in evaluating the potential of online MCQ tests in a discursive subject: ALT-J Research in Learning Technology Vol 12(3) Sep 2004, 249-260.
  • Clauser, B. E., Kane, M. T., & Swanson, D. B. (2002). Validity issues for performance-based tests scored with computer-automated scoring systems: Applied Measurement in Education Vol 15(4) Oct 2002, 413-432.
  • Clauser, B. E., & Margolis, M. J. (2006). Review of Item Generation for Test Development: International Journal of Testing Vol 6(3) 2006, 301-304.
  • Clauser, B. E., Margolis, M. J., Clyman, S. G., & Ross, L. P. (1997). Development of automated scoring algorithms for complex performance assessments: A comparison of two approaches: Journal of Educational Measurement Vol 34(2) Sum 1997, 141-161.
  • Clauser, B. E., Ross, L. P., Clyman, S. G., Rose, K. M., Margolis, M. J., Nungester, R. J., et al. (1997). Development of a scoring algorithm to replace expert rating for scoring a complex performance-based assessment: Applied Measurement in Education Vol 10(4) 1997, 345-358.
  • Clauser, B. E., Swanson, D. B., & Clyman, S. G. (1999). A comparison of the generalizability of scores produced by expert raters and automated scoring systems: Applied Measurement in Education Vol 12(3) 1999, 281-299.
  • Cockrell, J. G. (1991). A comparison of the effects of computerized testing programs on the test performance of U.S. Army soldiers at Fort Gordon, Georgia: Dissertation Abstracts International.
  • Coffee, K., Pearce, J., & Nishimura, R. (1999). State of California: Civil service testing moves into cyberspace: Public Personnel Management Vol 28(2) Sum 1999, 283-300.
  • Cohen, J. B. (1990). Misuse of computer software to detect faking on the Rorschach: A reply to Kahn, Fox, and Rhode: Journal of Personality Assessment Vol 54(1-2) Spr 1990, 58-62.
  • Cole, J. C., & Lutkus, A. D. (1997). Score comparisons of ACCUPLACER (computer-adaptive) and COMPANION (paper) reading tests: Empirical validation and school policy: Research in the Schools Vol 4(2) Fal 1997, 65-70.
  • Cole, M. S., Bedeian, A. G., & Feild, H. S. (2006). The Measurement Equivalence of Web-Based and Paper-and-Pencil Measures of Transformational Leadership: A Multinational Test: Organizational Research Methods Vol 9(3) Jul 2006, 339-368.
  • Collins, A. (1986). High pay-off research areas in the cognitive sciences: Advances in Reading/Language Research Vol 4 1986, 245-251.
  • Collins, M., & Odell, K. (1986). Computerization of a traditional test for nonverbal visual problem solving: Cognitive Rehabilitation Vol 4(5) Sep-Oct 1986, 16-18.
  • Colom, R., Contreras, M. J., Shih, P. C., & Santacreu, J. (2003). The assessment of spatial ability with a single computerized test: European Journal of Psychological Assessment Vol 19(2) 2003, 92-100.
  • Colom, R., Contreras, M. s. J., Shih, P. C., & Santacreu, J. (2003). The assessment of spatial ability with a single computerized test: European Journal of Psychological Assessment Vol 19(2) 2003, 92-100.
  • Colom-Maranon, B. R., Crespo, J., Garcia, T., Perez, N., & et al. (1996). MET: Integrated system for the measurement and training of the skill to manage three-dimensional relations represented in two-dimensions: a prototype and some consequences: Estudios de Psicologia No 55 1996, 75-97.
  • Coniam, D. (2006). Evaluating computer-based and paper-based versions of an English-language listening test: ReCALL: Journal of Eurocall Vol 18(2) Nov 2006, 193-211.
  • Conole, G. (2004). Editorial: ALT-J Research in Learning Technology Vol 12(3) Sep 2004, 203-204.
  • Conole, G., & Warburton, B. (2005). A review of computer-assisted assessment: ALT-J Research in Learning Technology Vol 13(1) Mar 2005, 17-31.
  • Conoley, C. W., Plake, B. S., & Kemmerer, B. E. (1991). Issues in computer-based test interpretive systems: Computers in Human Behavior Vol 7(3) 1991, 97-101.
  • Cook, I. A., Balasubramani, G. K., Eng, H., Friedman, E., Young, E. A., Martin, J., et al. (2007). Electronic source materials in clinical research: Acceptability and validity of symptom self-rating in major depressive disorder: Journal of Psychiatric Research Vol 41(9) Nov 2007, 737-743.
  • Cook, K. F., O'Malley, K. J., & Roddey, T. S. (2005). Dynamic Assessment of Health Outcomes: Time to Let the CAT Out of the Bag? : Health Services Research Vol 40(5,part2) Oct 2005, 1694-1711.
  • Cooksey, R. W., & Freebody, P. (1987). Aspects of a computer-managed test of children's reading vocabulary: Reliability, validity, and characterization of knowledge: Reading Psychology Vol 8(2) 1987, 103-118.
  • Copeland, B. W., & Straub, W. F. (1995). Assessment of team cohesion: A Russian approach: Perceptual and Motor Skills Vol 81(2) Oct 1995, 443-450.
  • Cordova Claudio, M. J. (1998). Applications of network flows to computerized adaptive testing. Dissertation Abstracts International: Section B: The Sciences and Engineering.
  • Couper, M. P., Conrad, F. G., & Tourangeau, R. (2007). Visual context effects in Web surveys: Public Opinion Quarterly Vol 71(4) Win 2007, 623-634.
  • Couper, M. P., & Rowe, B. (1996). Evaluation of a computer-assisted self-interview component in a computer-assisted personal interview survey: Public Opinion Quarterly Vol 60(1) Spr 1996, 89-105.
  • Courtney, J. C., Dinkins, J. P., Allen, L. M., III, & Kuroski, K. (2003). Age related effects in children taking the Computerized Assessment of Response Bias and Word Memory Test: Child Neuropsychology Vol 9(2) Jun 2003, 109-116.
  • Cox, R. H. (1988). Utilization of psychomotor screening for USAF pilot candidates: Enhancing predictive validity: Aviation, Space, and Environmental Medicine Vol 59(7) Jul 1988, 640-645.
  • Coyne, I. (2006). International Guidelines on Computer-Based and Internet-Delivered Testing: International Journal of Testing Vol 6(2) 2006, 143-171.
  • Coyne, I., & Bartram, D. (2006). Design and Development of the ITC Guidelines on Computer-Based and Internet-Delivered Testing: International Journal of Testing Vol 6(2) 2006, 133-142.
  • Coyne, I., & Bartram, D. (2006). Introduction to the Special Issue on the ITC Guidelines on Computer-Based and Internet-Delivered Testing: International Journal of Testing Vol 6(2) 2006, 115-119.
  • Crandall, B. D. (1998). Item response latency in computerized personality assessment and the effect of socially desirable responding. Dissertation Abstracts International: Section B: The Sciences and Engineering.
  • Crerar, M. A. (1992). A computer-based microworld for the assessment and remediation of sentence processing deficits in aphasia: Dissertation Abstracts International.
  • Crook, T. H., Youngjohn, J. R., & Larrabee, G. J. (1992). Multiple equivalent test forms in a computerized, everyday memory battery: Archives of Clinical Neuropsychology Vol 7(3) 1992, 221-232.
  • Cusick, G. M. (1989). Computer-assisted vocational assessment: Vocational Evaluation & Work Adjustment Bulletin Vol 22(1) Spr 1989, 19-23.
  • Cutler, N. R., Veroff, A. E., Frackiewicz, E. J., Welke, T. L., & et al. (1996). Assessing the neuropsychological profile of stable schizophrenic outpatients: Journal of Neuropsychiatry & Clinical Neurosciences Vol 8(4) Fal 1996, 423-428.
  • Czarnolewski, M., Eliot, J., & Rinehart, J. (1997). An exploratory study of task order in computer test batteries: Psychological Reports Vol 81(3, Pt 2) Dec 1997, 1291-1302.
  • Dabbs, J. M., Jr., Bassett, J. F., & Dyomia, N. V. (2003). The Palm IAT: A portable version of the implicit association task: Behavior Research Methods, Instruments & Computers Vol 35(1) Apr 2003, 90-95.
  • Dahl, R. E. (1993). Response bias: Interactive effects of interview method, social desirability, evaluation apprehension on self-reported data: Dissertation Abstracts International.
  • Dahms, P., & Meissner, A. (1995). Correlational study of the validity of two computer-based signal-detection tests: Diagnostica Vol 41(2) 1995, 95-107.
  • D'Amico, A., Cardaci, M., & Guarnera, M. (2001). SAVIO: Automated System for the Evaluation of Operational Intelligence: Description and pilot study of the instrument: Bollettino di Psicologia Applicata No 235 Sep-Dec 2001, 63-67.
  • Damos, D. L., & Koonce, J. M. (1997). Methodological and analytical concerns on the pilot selection research of Park and Lee (1992): Human Factors Vol 39(1) Mar 1997, 9-13.
  • Dann, P. L., Irvine, S. H., & Collis, J. M. (1991). Advances in computer-based human assessment. New York, NY: Kluwer Academic/Plenum Publishers.
  • Dassa, C., Vazquez-Abad, J., & Ajar, D. (1993). Formative assessment in a classroom setting: From practice to computer innovations: Alberta Journal of Educational Research Vol 39(1) Mar 1993, 111-125.
  • Davey, T., & Pitoniak, M. J. (2006). Designing Computerized Adaptive Tests. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers.
  • Davidson, O. R., Stevens, D. E., Goddard, G. V., Bilkey, D. K., & et al. (1987). The performance of a sample of traumatic head-injured patients on some novel computer-assisted neuropsychological tests: Applied Psychology: An International Review Vol 36(3-4) Sep 1987, 329-342.
  • Davies, P. (2004). Don't write, just mark: The validity of assessing student ability via their computerized peer-marking of an essay rather than their creation of an essay: ALT-J Research in Learning Technology Vol 12(3) Sep 2004, 261-277.
  • Davis, C., & Cowles, M. (1989). Automated psychological testing: Method of administration, need for approval, and measures of anxiety: Educational and Psychological Measurement Vol 49(2) Sum 1989, 311-320.
  • Davis, L. J., & Morse, R. M. (1991). Self-Administered Alcoholism Screening Test: A comparison of conventional versus computer-administered formats: Alcoholism: Clinical and Experimental Research Vol 15(2) Apr 1991, 155-157.
  • Davis, L. L. (2004). Strategies for Controlling Item Exposure in Computerized Adaptive Testing With the Generalized Partial Credit Model: Applied Psychological Measurement Vol 28(3) May 2004, 165-185.
  • Davis, L. L., & Dodd, B. G. (2003). Item Exposure Constraints for Testlets in the Verbal Reasoning Section of the MCAT: Applied Psychological Measurement Vol 27(5) Sep 2003, 335-356.
  • 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 Vol 4(1) 2003, 24-42.
  • Davis, R. N. (1999). Web-based administration of a personality questionnaire: Comparison with traditional methods: Behavior Research Methods, Instruments & Computers Vol 31(4) Nov 1999, 572-577.
  • Day, C. L. (1999). A predictive validity study of computer adaptive placement tests for Tennessee higher education institutions. Dissertation Abstracts International Section A: Humanities and Social Sciences.
  • Day, V. P., & Sweitzer, H. F. (1990). Microcomputers: Tools for creating curriculum modifications: Academic Therapy Vol 25(4) Mar 1990, 429-437.
  • de Ayala, R. J. (1988). Computerized adaptive testing: A comparison of the nominal response model and the three parameter model: Dissertation Abstracts International.
  • de Ayala, R. J. (1989). A comparison of the nominal response model and the three-parameter logistic model in computerized adaptive testing: Educational and Psychological Measurement Vol 49(4) Win 1989, 789-805.
  • de Ayala, R. J. (1992). The nominal response model in computerized adaptive testing: Applied Psychological Measurement Vol 16(4) Dec 1992, 327-343.
  • 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 Vol 27(3) Fal 1990, 227-239.
  • De Ayala, R. J., Dodd, B. G., & Koch, W. R. (1992). A comparison of the partial credit and graded response models in computerized adaptive testing: Applied Measurement in Education Vol 5(1) 1992, 17-34.
  • De Beer, M. (2001). The construction and evaluation of a dynamic computerised adaptive test for the measurement of learning potential. Dissertation Abstracts International: Section B: The Sciences and Engineering.
  • de Beer, M., & Visser, D. (1998). Comparability of the paper-and-pencil and computerised adaptive versions of the General Scholastic Aptitude Test (GSAT) Senior: South African Journal of Psychology Vol 28(1) Mar 1998, 21-27.
  • De Clercq, A., & Buysse, A. (1999). An inexpensive system for measuring the processing of relational information by romantic partners: Behavior Research Methods, Instruments & Computers Vol 31(2) May 1999, 299-304.
  • de la Torre Sanchez, R. (1992). The development and evaluation of a system for computerized adaptive testing: Dissertation Abstracts International.
  • De Leeuw, E., Hox, J., & Kef, S. (2003). Computer-Assisted Self-Interviewing Tailored for Special Populations and Topics: Field Methods Vol 15(3) Aug 2003, 223-251.
  • De Neys, W., D'Ydewalle, G., Schaeken, W., & Vos, G. (2002). A Dutch, computerized, and group administrable adaptation of the operation span test: Psychologica Belgica Vol 42(3) 2002, 177-190.
  • de Rivera, J. L. G., Concepcion, A., Monterrey, A., & Rodriguez-Pulido, F. (1993). Automated measurement of immediate memory parameter in healthy subjects over 65: Archivos de Neurobiologia Vol 56(5) Sep-Oct 1993, 245-254.
  • Deane, P. (2006). Strategies for Evidence Identification Through Linguistic Assessment of Textual Responses. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers.
  • DeAngelis, S. (2000). Equivalency of Computer-based and Paper-and-pencil Testing: Journal of Allied Health Vol 29(3) Fal 2000, 161-164.
  • Degner, L. F., Davison, B. J., Sloan, J. A., & Mueller, B. (1998). Development of a scale to measure information needs in cancer care: Journal of Nursing Measurement Vol 6(2) Winter 1998, 137-153.
  • Degraff, A. J. (2006). Monitoring growth in early reading skills: Validation of a Computer Adaptive Test. Dissertation Abstracts International: Section B: The Sciences and Engineering.
  • Deskovitz, M. (2006). Interpretive reliability of six Computer-Based Test Interpretation programs for the Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory-2. Dissertation Abstracts International: Section B: The Sciences and Engineering.
  • Desmarais, M. C., & Maluf, A. (1995). User-expertise modeling with empirically derived probabilistic implication networks: User Modeling and User-Adapted Interaction Vol 5(3-4) 1995, 283-315.
  • Desmarais, M. C., & Pu, X. (2005). A Bayesian Student Model without Hidden Nodes and its Comparison with Item Response Theory: International Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education Vol 15(4) 2005, 291-323.
  • Desrochers, M. N. (1992). Computer-based versus human assessment of vocal responses with developmentally handicapped individuals: Dissertation Abstracts International.
  • Devivo, K., Rothland, J., Price, L., & Fein, G. (1997). Computerized assessment of arithmetic computation skills with MicroCog: Journal of the International Neuropsychological Society Vol 3(2) Mar 1997, 199-200.
  • DeVoe, E. R., & Faller, K. C. (2002). Question strategies in interviews with children who may have been sexually abused: Child Welfare Journal Vol 81(1) Jan-Feb 2002, 5-31.
  • DiBello, L. V., Stout, W. F., & Roussos, L. A. (1995). Unified cognitive/psychometric diagnostic assessment likelihood-based classification techniques. Hillsdale, NJ, England: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
  • Dignon, A. M. (1996). Acceptability of a computer-administered psychiatric interview: Computers in Human Behavior Vol 12(2) Sum 1996, 177-191.
  • DiLalla, D. L. (1996). Computerized administration of the Multidimensional Personality Questionnaire: Assessment Vol 3(4) Dec 1996, 365-374.
  • D'Ilio, V. R. (1990). Reliability and validity of a computer-based version of the Social Performance Survey Schedule: Dissertation Abstracts International.
  • Dillon, G. F. (1993). A comparison of traditional and computerized test modes and the effect of computerization on achievement test performance: Dissertation Abstracts International.
  • Dimock, P. H., & Cormier, P. (1991). The effects of format differences and computer experience on performance and anxiety on a computer-administered test: Measurement and Evaluation in Counseling and Development Vol 24(3) Oct 1991, 119-126.
  • Ditkowsky, B. R. (2002). Onset recognition computerized assessment system: A validation of measuring the right skills at the right time in the right way. Dissertation Abstracts International Section A: Humanities and Social Sciences.
  • Divgi, D. R. (1989). Estimating reliabilities of computerized adaptive tests: Applied Psychological Measurement Vol 13(2) Jun 1989, 145-149.
  • Dixon, W. E., Jr., Woodard, T., & Merry, M. S. (1998). TouchStat: A Monte Carlo program for calculating sequential touching probabilities: Behavior Research Methods, Instruments & Computers Vol 30(4) Nov 1998, 592-604.
  • Dobrusin, S. J. (2000). Determining the diagnostic capabilities of computer performance tests for adults with attention deficit disorder. Dissertation Abstracts International: Section B: The Sciences and Engineering.
  • Dodd, B. G., De Ayala, R. J., & Koch, W. R. (1995). Computerized adaptive testing with polytomous items: Applied Psychological Measurement Vol 19(1) Mar 1995, 5-22.
  • Dodd, B. G., & Fitzpatrick, S. J. (2002). Alternatives for scoring CBTs. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers.
  • Dodd, B. G., Koch, W. R., & de Ayala, R. J. (1989). Operational characteristics of adaptive testing procedures using the graded response model: Applied Psychological Measurement Vol 13(2) Jun 1989, 129-143.
  • Dodd, B. G., Koch, W. R., & de Ayala, R. J. (1993). Computerized adaptive testing using the partial credit model: Effects of item pool characteristics and different stopping rules: Educational and Psychological Measurement Vol 53(1) Spr 1993, 61-77.
  • Donovan, M. A., Drasgow, F., & Probst, T. M. (2000). Does computerizing paper-and-pencil job attitude scales make a difference? New IRT analyses offer insight: Journal of Applied Psychology Vol 85(2) Apr 2000, 305-313.
  • Dorans, N. J. (2000). Scaling and equating. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers.
  • Douglas, K. M. (1991). A comparison of conventional and computerized adaptive administration of the Differential Aptitude Tests: Dissertation Abstracts International.
  • Dowsing, R. D. (2000). Assessing word processing skills by event stream analysis: International Journal of Human-Computer Studies Vol 52(3) Mar 2000, 453-469.
  • Drakeford, C. A. (1996). High school guidance counseling by computers: A study of the Therapeutic Learning Program. Dissertation Abstracts International Section A: Humanities and Social Sciences.
  • Draney, K. L., Pirolli, P., & Wilson, M. (1995). A measurement model for a complex cognitive skill. Hillsdale, NJ, England: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
  • Drapeau, C. E., Bastien-Toniazzo, M., Rous, C., & Carlier, M. (2007). Nonequivalence of computerized and paper-and-pencil versions of Trail Making Test: Perceptual and Motor Skills Vol 104(3, Pt 1) Jun 2007, 785-791.
  • Drasgow, F. (2002). The work ahead: A psychometric infrastructure for computerized adaptive tests. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers.
  • Drasgow, F., & Chuah, S. C. (2006). Computer-Based Testing. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
  • Drasgow, F., & Mattern, K. (2006). New Tests and New Items: Opportunities and Issues. New York, NY: John Wiley & Sons Ltd.
  • Drasgow, F., & Olson-Buchanan, J. B. (1999). Innovations in computerized assessment. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers.
  • Drasgow, F., Olson-Buchanan, J. B., & Moberg, P. J. (1999). Development of an interactive video assessment: Trials and tribulations. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers.
  • Du, Y., Lewis, C., & Pashley, P. J. (1993). Computerized mastery testing using fuzzy set decision theory: Applied Measurement in Education Vol 6(3) 1993, 181-193.
  • Dudek, B., & Kolasa, W. (2002). Evaluation of the computerized program in stress testing: Medycyna Pracy Vol 53(2) 2002, 125-129.
  • Dunlop, O., Myrvang, B., & Bjorklund, R. (1992). Neuropsychological tests in HIV: Neurology Vol 42(10) Oct 1992, 2055-2056.
  • Duran, R. P. (1991). Diagnostic testing of reasoning skills. Albany, NY: State University of New York Press.
  • Duwairi, R. M. (2006). A framework for the computerized assessment of university student essays: Computers in Human Behavior Vol 22(3) May 2006, 381-388.
  • Dwight, S. A., & Feigelson, M. E. (2000). A quantitative review of the effect of computerized testing on the measurement of social desirability: Educational and Psychological Measurement Vol 60(3) Jun 2000, 340-360.
  • Eaves, R. C., & Smith, E. (1986). The effect of media and amount of microcomputer experience on examination scores: Journal of Experimental Education Vol 55(1) Fal 1986, 23-26.
  • Eberl, I., & Petermann, F. (2002). Computerized version of the Assessment of Aggressive Behavior (Erfassungsbogen fur aggressives Verhalten in konkreten Situationen--EAS-C): Kindheit und Entwicklung Vol 11(1) 2002, 48-52.
  • Ebmeier, H., & Ng, J. (2005). Development and Field Test of an Employment Selection Instrument for Teachers in Urban School Districts: Journal of Personnel Evaluation in Education Vol 18(3) Sep 2005, 201-218.
  • Eckblad, G., & Vandvik, I. H. (1992). A computerized scoring procedure for the Kvebaek Family Sculpture Technique applied to families of children with rheumatic diseases: Family Process Vol 31(1) Mar 1992, 85-98.
  • Economides, A. A., & Roupas, C. (2007). Evaluation of computer adaptive testing systems: International Journal of Web-Based Learning and Teaching Technologies Vol 2(1) 2007, 70-87.
  • Edelstein, R. A., Reid, H. M., Usatine, R., & Wilkes, M. S. (2000). A comparison study of measures to evaluate medical students' performances: Academic Medicine Vol 75(8) Aug 2000, 825-833.
  • Edwards, J. D., Vance, D. E., Wadley, V. G., Cissell, G. M., Roenker, D. L., & Ball, K. K. (2005). Reliability and Validity of Useful Field of View Test Scores as Administered by Personal Computer: Journal of Clinical and Experimental Neuropsychology Vol 27(5) Jul 2005, 529-543.
  • Eggen, T. J. H. M. (1999). Item selection in adaptive testing with the sequential probability ratio test: Applied Psychological Measurement Vol 23(3) Sep 1999, 249-261.
  • Eggen, T. J. H. M., & Straetmans, G. J. J. M. (2000). Computerized adaptive testing for classifying examinees into three categories: Educational and Psychological Measurement Vol 60(5) Oct 2000, 713-734.
  • Eggen, T. J. H. M., & Verschoor, A. J. (2006). Optimal Testing With Easy or Difficult Items in Computerized Adaptive Testing: Applied Psychological Measurement Vol 30(5) Sep 2006, 379-393.
  • Eignor, D. R. (2007). Linking scores derived under different modes of test administration. New York, NY: Springer Science + Business Media.
  • Eisen, S. V., Toche-Manley, L. L., & Grissom, G. R. (2004). Computer-administered versus paper-and-pencil mental health surveys: Psychiatric Services Vol 55(11) Nov 2004, 1316-1317.
  • Elder, C. M., & Menzel, C. R. (2001). Dissociation of cortisol and behavioral indicators of stress in an orangutan (Pongo pygmaeus) during a computerized task: Primates Vol 42(4) Oct 2001, 345-357.
  • Ellis, C. R. (1991). The utility of a computerized assessment battery to evaluate cognitive functioning and attention: Dissertation Abstracts International.
  • Elsmore, T. F. (1994). SYNWORK1: A PC-based tool for assessment of performance in a simulated work environment: Behavior Research Methods, Instruments & Computers Vol 26(4) Nov 1994, 421-426.
  • Elwood, D. L. (1970). Automation of testing procedures: Elwood replies to Moses: American Psychologist Vol 25(8) Aug 1970, 764-765.
  • Elwood, R. W. (2001). MicroCog: Assessment of cognitive functioning: Neuropsychology Review Vol 11(2) Jun 2001, 89-100.
  • Embretson, S. E. (1992). Computerized adaptive testing: Its potential substantive contributions to psychological research and assessment: Current Directions in Psychological Science Vol 1(4) Aug 1992, 129-131.
  • Embretson, S. E. (2005). Measuring human intelligence with artificial intelligence: Adaptive item generation. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.
  • Engelbrecht, W. (1994). Automated vocation-oriented test interpretation for vocational guidance: Zeitschrift fur Arbeits- und Organisationspsychologie Vol 38(4) 1994, 175-181.
  • Epstein, J. (1993). The utility of computer versus clinician-authored assessments in aiding the prediction of symptomatology: Dissertation Abstracts International.
  • Epstein, J., & Klinkenberg, W. D. (2001). From Eliza to Internet: A brief history of computerized assessment: Computers in Human Behavior Vol 17(3) May 2001, 295-314.
  • Epstein, J., Klinkenberg, W. D., Wiley, D., & McKinley, L. (2001). Insuring sample equivalence across Internet and paper-and-pencil assessments: Computers in Human Behavior Vol 17(3) May 2001, 339-346.
  • Epstein, J., & Rotunda, R. J. (2000). The utility of computer versus clinician-authored assessments in aiding the prediction of patient symptomatology: Computers in Human Behavior Vol 16(5) Sep 2000, 519-536.
  • Evans, L. D., Tannehill, R., & Martin, S. (1995). Children's reading skills: A comparison of traditional and computerized assessment: Behavior Research Methods, Instruments & Computers Vol 27(2) May 1995, 162-165.
  • Everson, H. T. (2007). Keeping Score: PsycCRITIQUES Vol 52 (16), 2007.
  • Eyde, L. D. (1987). Computerised psychological testing: An introduction: Applied Psychology: An International Review Vol 36(3-4) Sep 1987, 223-235.
  • Eyde, L. D., & Kowal, D. M. (1987). Computerised test interpretation services: Ethical and professional concerns regarding U.S. producers and users: Applied Psychology: An International Review Vol 36(3-4) Sep 1987, 401-417.
  • Eyde, L. D., Kowal, D. M., & Fishburne, F. J., Jr. (1991). The validity of computer-based test interpretations of the MMPI. Hillsdale, NJ, England: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
  • Eyde, L. D., & Northrop, L. C. (1988). Computers Describe and Interpret Behavior: PsycCRITIQUES Vol 33 (10), Oct, 1988.
  • Fairbank, B. A., Jr., Tirre, W. C., & Anderson, N. S. (1991). Measures of thirty cognitive tasks: Analysis of reliabilities, intercorrelations, and correlations with aptitude battery scores. New York, NY: Kluwer Academic/Plenum Publishers.
  • Fan, X., Gong, Y., & Wei, Y. (2004). Comparing the Computer and Paper-and-Pencil Administrations of the Chinese Version of EPQ: Chinese Mental Health Journal Vol 18(4) Apr 2004, 276-277.
  • Farrell, A. D. (1989). Impact of standards for computer-based tests on practice: Consequences of the information gap: Computers in Human Behavior Vol 5(1) 1989, 1-11.
  • Farrell, A. D. (1999). Development and evaluation of problem frequency scales from Version 3 of the Computerized Assessment System for Psychotherapy Evaluation and Research (CASPER): Journal of Clinical Psychology Vol 55(4) Apr 1999, 447-464.
  • Farrell, A. D. (2001). Are We There Yet? : PsycCRITIQUES Vol 46 (1), Feb, 2001.
  • Faust, D., & Ziskin, J. (1989). Computer-assisted psychological evaluation as legal evidence: Some day my prints will come: Computers in Human Behavior Vol 5(1) 1989, 23-36.
  • Federico, P.-A. (1992). Assessing semantic knowledge using computer-based and paper-based media: Computers in Human Behavior Vol 8(2-3) 1992, 169-181.
  • Feigelson, M. E., & Dwight, S. A. (2000). Can asking questions by computer improve the candidness of responding? A meta-analytic perspective: Consulting Psychology Journal: Practice and Research Vol 52(4) Fal 2000, 248-255.
  • Fekken, G. C., & Holden, R. R. (1989). Psychometric evaluation of the microcomputerized Personality Research Form: Educational and Psychological Measurement Vol 49(4) Win 1989, 875-882.
  • Feldstein, S. N., Keller, F. R., Portman, R. E., Durham, R. L., Klebe, K. J., & Davis, H. P. (1999). A comparison of computerized and standard versions of the Wisconsin Card Sorting Test: Clinical Neuropsychologist Vol 13(3) Aug 1999, 303-313.
  • Felker, C. S. (2000). CASPER as a typological classification system for college student problems: Verification and validation with the Five-Factor and Millon theoretical models. (Millon's personology). Dissertation Abstracts International: Section B: The Sciences and Engineering.
  • Felmlee, S. C. (2001). Pictorial priming in Alzheimer's disease: A degraded-figures priming task. Dissertation Abstracts International: Section B: The Sciences and Engineering.
  • Ferdous, A. A., Plake, B. S., & Chang, S.-R. (2007). The effect of including pretest items in an operational computerized adaptive test: Do different ability examinees spend different amounts of time on embedded pretest items? : Educational Assessment Vol 12(2) 2007, 161-173.
  • Fernandez, R., Carro, J., Prieto, G., Gonzalez-Tablas, M. d. M., & et al. (1992). Design and analysis of a computerized test of complex spatial relations: Psicologica International Journal of Methodology and Experimental Psychology Vol 13(1) 1992, 43-56.
  • Ferrara, S. (2006). Editorial: Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice Vol 25(2) Sum 2006, 1-3.
  • Ferraris, M. (1991). An approach to the use of computers in instructional testing. New York, NY: Kluwer Academic/Plenum Publishers.
  • Ferri, R., Bruni, O., Miano, S., Smerieri, A., Spruyt, K., & Terzano, M. G. (2005). Inter-rater reliability of sleep cyclic alternating pattern (CAP) scoring and validation of a new computer-assisted CAP scoring method: Clinical Neurophysiology Vol 116(3) Mar 2005, 696-707.
  • Field, K. A. (1999). Assessment and application of psychomotor abilities using a new computerized (touch-panel) method. Dissertation Abstracts International: Section B: The Sciences and Engineering.
  • Fifield, M. B. (1989). Analysis of the technical adequacy of a computer version of the Walker-McConnell Scale of Social Competence: Dissertation Abstracts International.
  • Finger, M. S., & Ones, D. S. (1999). Psychometric equivalence of the computer and booklet forms of the MMPI: A meta-analysis: Psychological Assessment Vol 11(1) Mar 1999, 58-66.
  • Finney, S. A. (2001). FTAP: A Linux-based program for tapping and music experiments: Behavior Research Methods, Instruments & Computers Vol 33(1) Feb 2001, 65-72.
  • Fisher, K. M. (2000). SemNet software as an assessment tool. San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
  • Fitzgerald, J. T., Wolf, F. M., Davis, W. K., Barclay, M. L., & et al. (1994). A preliminary study of the impact of case specificity on computer-based assessment of medical student clinical performance: Evaluation & the Health Professions Vol 17(3) Sep 1994, 307-321.
  • Flaugher, R. (2000). Item pools. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers.
  • Fleishman, E. A. (1988). Some new frontiers in personnel selection research: Personnel Psychology Vol 41(4) Win 1988, 679-701.
  • Flender, J., & Christmann, U. (1999). Development of a computer-based economical form of the scale of passive argumentational-rhetorical competence: Zeitschrift fur Medienpsychologie Vol 11(1) Mar 1999, 21-37.
  • Fletcher, J. D. (1999). Using networked simulation to assess problem solving by tactical teams: Computers in Human Behavior Vol 15(3-4) May-Jul 1999, 375-402.
  • Fllessbach, K., Hoppe, C., Schlegel, U., Elger, C. E., & Helmstaedter, C. (2006). NeuroCogFX-A Computer-Based Neuropsychological Assessment Battery for the Follow-Up Examination of Neurological Patients: Fortschritte der Neurologie, Psychiatrie Vol 74(11) Nov 2006, 643-650.
  • Flowers, J. V., Booraem, C. D., & Schwartz, B. (1993). Group therapy client outcome and satisfaction as a function of the therapists' use of rapid assessment instruments: Small Group Research Vol 24(1) Feb 1993, 116-126.
  • Flowers, J. V., Booraem, C. D., & Schwartz, B. (1993). Impact of computerized rapid assessment instruments on counselors and client outcome: Computers in Human Services Vol 10(2) 1993, 9-18.
  • Flude, R. (2000). The journey into work--an innovative approach to tackling long-term youth unemployment: Education & Training Vol 42(1) 2000, 6-16.
  • Flynn, C. F., Sipes, W. E., Grosenbach, M. J., & Ellsworth, J. (1994). Top performer survey: Computerized psychological assessment in aircrew: Aviation, Space, and Environmental Medicine Vol 65(5, Sect 2, Suppl) May 1994, A39-A44.
  • Foldnyi, M., Giovanoli, A., Tagwerker-Neuenschwander, F., Schallberger, U., & Steinhausen, H.-C. (2000). Reliability and retest stability of attentional perfomance of 7-10-year-old children on the TAP: Zeitschrift fur Neuropsychologie Vol 11(1) Feb 2000, 1-11.
  • Forbey, J. D., Handel, R. W., & Ben-Porath, Y. S. (2000). A real-data simulation of computerized adaptive administration of the MMPI-A: Computers in Human Behavior Vol 16(1) Jan 2000, 83-96.
  • Ford, B. D., Vitelli, R., & Stuckless, N. (1996). The effects of computer versus paper-and-pencil administration on measures of anger and revenge with an inmate population: Computers in Human Behavior Vol 12(1) Spr 1996, 159-166.
  • Foreman, N., & Hemmings, R. (1987). The Gollin incomplete figures test: A flexible, computerised version: Perception Vol 16(4) 1987, 543-548.
  • Fossett, T. R. D., McNeil, M. R., Doyle, P. J., Rubinsky, H., Nixon, S., Hula, W., et al. (2004). Assessing the validity of multiple-choice questions for RAPP story comprehension: Aphasiology Vol 18(5-7) May-Jul 2004, 493-519.
  • Fouladi, R. T., McCarthy, C. J., & Moller, N. P. (2002). Paper-and-pencil or online? Evaluating mode effects on measures of emotional functioning and attachment: Assessment Vol 9(2) Jun 2002, 204-215.
  • Fowler, R. D., & Butcher, J. N. (1987). International applications of computer-based testing and interpretation: Applied Psychology: An International Review Vol 36(3-4) Sep 1987, 419-429.
  • Fox, S., & Dinur, Y. (1989). Computerized tests: The state of the art: Megamot Vol 32(2) Jun 1989, 197-217.
  • Foxcroft, C. D., & Davies, C. (2006). Taking Ownership of the ITC's Guidelines for Computer-Based and Internet-Delivered Testing: A South African Application: International Journal of Testing Vol 6(2) 2006, 173-180.
  • Franceschina, E., Dorz, S., & Bari, M. (2001). Computer and traditional administration of the Cognitive Behavioral Assessment 2.0: Bollettino di Psicologia Applicata No 235 Sep-Dec 2001, 57-62.
  • Franke, G. H. (1998). Effects of computer administration on the Freiburger Personality Inventory with a special focus on the item sequence. An experimental study: Zeitschrift fur Differentielle und Diagnostische Psychologie Vol 19(3) 1998, 187-199.
  • Franke, G. H. (1999). Effects of computer administration on the Symptom Checklist (SCL-90-R) with a special focus on the item sequence: Diagnostica Vol 45(3) 1999, 147-153.
  • Franklin, C., Nowicki, J., Trapp, J., Schwab, A. J., & et al. (1993). A computerized assessment system for brief, crisis-oriented youth services: Families in Society Vol 74(10) Dec 1993, 602-616.
  • Frase, L. T., Almond, R. G., Burstein, J., Kukich, K., Sheehan, K. M., Steinberg, L. S., et al. (2003). Technology and assessment. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers.
  • Freeman, B. (1996). The use and perceived effectiveness of career assessment tools: A survey of high school counselors: Journal of Career Development Vol 22(3) Spr 1996, 185-196.
  • French, C. C., & Beaumont, J. G. (1987). The reaction of psychiatric patients to computerized assessment: British Journal of Clinical Psychology Vol 26(4) Nov 1987, 267-278.
  • French, C. C., & Beaumont, J. G. (1990). A clinical study of the automated assessment of intelligence by the Mill Hill Vocabulary test and the Standard Progressive Matrices test: Journal of Clinical Psychology Vol 46(2) Mar 1990, 129-140.
  • French, C. C., & Beaumont, J. G. (1991). The Differential Aptitude Test (Language Usage and Spelling): A clinical study of a computerized form: Current Psychology: Research & Reviews Vol 10(1-2) Spr-Sum 1991, 31-48.
  • French, C. C., & Beaumont, J. G. (1992). Microcomputer version of a digit span test in clinical use: Interacting with Computers Vol 4(2) Aug 1992, 163-178.
  • Frey, A., & Moosbrugger, H. (2004). Avoiding the Confounding of Concentration Performance and Activation by Adaptive Testing with the FACT: Zeitschrift fur Differentielle und Diagnostische Psychologie Vol 25(1) 2004, 1-17.
  • Frick, T. W. (1990). A comparison of three decision models for adapting the length of computer-based mastery tests: Journal of Educational Computing Research Vol 6(4) 1990, 479-513.
  • Frick, T. W. (1992). Computerized adaptive mastery tests as expert systems: Journal of Educational Computing Research Vol 8(2) 1992, 187-213.
  • Friedman, E. H., & Sanders, G. G. (1992). Speech timing of mood disorders: Computers in Human Services Vol 8(3-4) 1992, 121-142.
  • Fuchs, L. S., & Fuchs, D. (1989). Enhancing curriculum-based measurement through computer applications: Review of research and practice: School Psychology Review Vol 18(3) 1989, 317-327.
  • Fulcher, G. (2003). Interface design in computer-based language testing: Language Testing Vol 20(4) Oct 2003, 384-408.
  • Funke, J. (1998). Computer-based testing and training with scenarios from complex problem-solving research: Advantages and disadvantages: International Journal of Selection and Assessment Vol 6(2) Apr 1998, 90-96.
  • Funke, U., & Schuler, H. (1998). Validity of stimulus and response components in a video test of social competence: International Journal of Selection and Assessment Vol 6(2) Apr 1998, 115-123.
  • Gallagher, A., Bennett, R. E., Cahalan, C., & Rock, D. A. (2002). Validity and Fairness in Technology-Based Assessment: Detecting Construct-Irrelevant Variance in an Open-Ended Computerized Mathematics Task: Educational Assessment Vol 8(1) Sep 2002, 27-41.
  • Gallagher, A., Bridgeman, B., & Cahalan, C. (2002). The effect of computer-based tests on racial-ethnic and gender groups: Journal of Educational Measurement Vol 39(2) Sum 2002, 133-147.
  • Gamliel, E., & Davidovitz, L. (2005). Online versus traditional teaching evaluation: Mode can matter: Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education Vol 30(6) Dec 2005, 581-592.
  • Garcia, D. A., Santa Cruz, C., Dorronsoro, J. R., & Rubio Franco, V. J. (2000). Item selection algorithms in computerized adaptive testing: Psicothema Vol 12(Suppl2) 2000, 12-14.
  • Gardner, L., Sheridan, D., & White, D. (2002). A Web-based learning and assessment system to support flexible education: Journal of Computer Assisted Learning Vol 18(2) Jun 2002, 125-136.
  • Gardner, W., Kelleher, K. J., & Pajer, K. A. (2002). Multidimensional adaptive testing for mental health problems in primary care: Medical Care Vol 40(9) Sep 2002, 812-823.
  • Gati, I., Kleiman, T., Saka, N., & Zakai, A. (2003). Perceived benefits of using an Internet-based interactive career planning system: Journal of Vocational Behavior Vol 62(2) Apr 2003, 272-286.
  • Gaviria, J.-L. (2005). Increase in Precision when Estimating Parameters in Computer Assisted Testing Using Response Time: Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology Vol 39(1) Feb 2005, 45-69.
  • Gelfand, S. A. (2003). Tri-word presentations with phonemic scoring for practical high-reliability speech recognition assessment: Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research Vol 46(2) Apr 2003, 405-412.
  • Gel'man, V. Y., Dmitrieva, E. S., & Nemirovskaya, A. V. (1998). Psychoacoustic testing with the use of computer technology: Human Physiology Vol 24(2) Mar-Apr 1998, 246-247.
  • Gendre, F., Capel, R., Salanon, A., & Vuilleumier, N. (1995). Interests and decision: The construction of an inventory of simulated vocational decision making: Swiss Journal of Psychology/Schweizerische Zeitschrift fur Psychologie/Revue Suisse de Psychologie Vol 54(1) 1995, 19-33.
  • George, C. E., Lankford, J. S., & Wilson, S. E. (1992). The effects of computerized versus paper-and-pencil administration on measures of negative affect: Computers in Human Behavior Vol 8(2-3) 1992, 203-209.
  • George, M., & Skinner, H. (1990). Innovative use of microcomputers for measuring the accuracy of assessment. Oxford, England: John Wiley & Sons.
  • George, M. S., & Skinner, H. A. (1990). Using response latency to detect inaccurate responses in a computerized lifestyle assessment: Computers in Human Behavior Vol 6(2) 1990, 167-175.
  • Gerber, M. M., Semmel, D. S., & Semmel, M. I. (1994). Computer-based dynamic assessment of multidigit multiplication: Exceptional Children Vol 61(2) Oct-Nov 1994, 114-125.
  • 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 and Engineering.
  • Gershon, R. C. (2005). Computer Adaptive Testing: Journal of Applied Measurement Vol 6(1) 2005, 109-127.
  • Gibson, W. M., & Weiner, J. A. (1998). Generating random parallel test forms using CTT in a computer-based environment: Journal of Educational Measurement Vol 35(4) Win 1998, 297-310.
  • Gilbert, J. M. (1991). Validation and reliability estimation of a computerized interview to assess identity in adolescents: Dissertation Abstracts International.
  • Gissurarson, L. R., & Morris, R. L. (1991). Examination of six questionnaires as predictors of psychokinesis performance: Journal of Parapsychology Vol 55(2) Jun 1991, 119-145.
  • Gitzinger, I. (1990). Acceptance of test presentation on a personal computer by clinical subjects: Psychotherapie Psychosomatik Medizinische Psychologie Vol 40(3-4) Mar-Apr 1990, 143-145.
  • Giusti, A., & Valotto, F. (1992). Artificial intelligence (AI) tools for solving problems in the clinical and research domains (CAPS, CAT, MMPI): Rivista di Psichiatria Vol 27(4) Jul-Aug 1992, 165-169.
  • Glas, C. A. W. (1997). Towards an integrated testing service system: European Journal of Psychological Assessment Vol 13(1) 1997, 38-48.
  • Glas, C. A. W., & van der Linden, W. J. (2003). Computerized adaptive testing with item cloning: Applied Psychological Measurement Vol 27(4) Jul 2003, 247-261.
  • Glaze, R. C., & Cox, J. L. (1991). Validation of a computerised version of the 10-item (self-rating) Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale: Journal of Affective Disorders Vol 22(1-2) May-Jun 1991, 73-77.
  • Goel, D. R., Joseph, S., & Shinde, L. (1994). Development of computer software for assessing research aptitude: Psycho-Lingua Vol 24(2) Jul 1994, 83-91.
  • Goeters, K.-M., & Lorenz, B. (2002). On the implementation of item-generation principles of the design of aptitude testing in aviation. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers.
  • Goldberg, A. L. (2000). Test-level, item-level, and experiential differences on computerized and paper-and-pencil versions of a practice Graduate Record Exam (GRE). Dissertation Abstracts International Section A: Humanities and Social Sciences.
  • Goldsmith, T. E., & Johnson, P. J. (1990). A structural assessment of classroom learning. Westport, CT: Ablex Publishing.
  • Gonzalez, G. M., Costello, C. R., La Tourette, T. R., Joyce, L. K., & Valenzuela, M. (1997). Bilingual Telephone-Assisted Computerized Speech-Recognition Assessment: Is a Voice-Activated Computer Program a Culturally and Linguistically Appropriate Tool for Screening Depression in English and Spanish? : Cultural Diversity and Mental Health Vol 3(2) 1997, 93-111.
  • Goodfellow, R., Lamy, M.-N., & Jones, G. (2002). Assessing learners' writing using lexical frequency: ReCALL: Journal of Eurocall Vol 14(1) May 2002, 133-145.
  • Gorassini, D. R., Harris, J. A., Diamond, A., & Flynn-Dastoor, E. (2006). Computer assessment of interrogative suggestibility: Personality and Individual Differences Vol 40(3) Feb 2006, 569-577.
  • Gore, B. A. (2001). Reducing and detecting faking on a computer-administered biodata questionnaire. Dissertation Abstracts International: Section B: The Sciences and Engineering.
  • Gorin, J. S., Dodd, B. G., Fitzpatrick, S. J., & Shieh, Y. Y. (2005). Computerized Adaptive Testing With the Partial Credit Model: Estimation Procedures, Population Distributions, and Item Pool Characteristics: Applied Psychological Measurement Vol 29(6) Nov 2005, 433-456.
  • Gottschalk, L. A. (1994). The development, validation, and applications of a computerized measurement of cognitive impairment from the content analysis of verbal behavior: Journal of Clinical Psychology Vol 50(3) May 1994, 349-361.
  • Gournaris, M. J., Leigh, I. W., & Mitchell, R. E. (2005). Consistency of Structural Summary Scores in Computerized Rorschach Programs: Journal of Projective Psychology & Mental Health Vol 12(1) Jan 2005, 20-26.
  • Grandjean, P., White, R. F., Sullivan, K., Debes, F., Murata, K., Otto, D. A., et al. (2001). Impact of contrast sensitivity performance on visually presented neurobehavioral tests in mercury-exposed children: Neurotoxicology and Teratology Vol 23(2) Mar-Apr 2001, 141-146.
  • Grant, C. D. (1994). The computer-assisted hypnosis scale: Reliability and validity investigations of a computer-administered measure of hypnotic ability. Dissertation Abstracts International: Section B: The Sciences and Engineering.
  • Green, B. F. (1988). Construct validity of computer-based tests. Hillsdale, NJ, England: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
  • Green, B. F. (1991). Computer-based adaptive testing in 1991: Psychology & Marketing Vol 8(4) Win 1991, 243-257.
  • Green, B. F. (1991). Guidelines for computer testing. Hillsdale, NJ, England: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
  • Green, L. C. (2000). Computerized versus standard administration of the Inventory of Problems: An examination of reliability and validity. Dissertation Abstracts International: Section B: The Sciences and Engineering.
  • Green, R. C., Clarke, V. C., Thompson, N. J., Woodard, J. L., & Letz, R. (1997). Early detection of Alzheimer disease: Methods, markers, and misgivings: Alzheimer Disease & Associated Disorders Vol 11(Suppl 5) 1997, S1-S5.
  • Greenwood, C. R., Carta, J. J., Kamps, D., Terry, B., & et al. (1994). Development and validation of standard classroom observation systems for school practitioners: Ecobehavioral Assessment Systems Software (EBASS): Exceptional Children Vol 61(2) Oct-Nov 1994, 197-210.
  • Gretes, J. A., & Songer, T. (1989). Validation of the Learning Style Survey: An interactive videodisc instrument: Educational and Psychological Measurement Vol 49(1) Spr 1989, 235-241.
  • Gribble, J. N., Miller, H. G., Cooley, P. C., Catania, J. A., Pollack, L., & Turner, C. F. (2000). The impact of T-ACASI interviewing on reported drug use among men who have sex with men: Substance Use & Misuse Vol 35(6-8) 2000, 869-890.
  • Griffith, J. M., Sorenson, J. R., Bowling, J. M., & Jennings-Grant, T. (2005). Assessment of an Interactive Computer-Based Patient Prenatal Genetic Screening and Testing Education Tool: Health Education & Behavior Vol 32(5) Oct 2005, 613-626.
  • Grisanti, G., Cusimano, F., & D'Amico, A. (1986). Frequency discrimination for pure-tone and modulated stimuli: An evaluation of automatic and computerized test versions: Journal of Auditory Research Vol 26(2) Apr 1986, 135-145.
  • 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 and Engineering.
  • Grosjean, F., Hirt, C., Monnin, P., Racine, I., Yersin-Besson, C., Hester, D., et al. (1997). Developing a battery of on-line speech comprehension tests for aphasic patients: First two tests: Revue de Neuropsychologie Vol 7(3) Sep 1997, 313-335.
  • Groth-Marnat, G., & Schumaker, J. (1989). Computer-based psychological testing: Issues and guidelines: American Journal of Orthopsychiatry Vol 59(2) Apr 1989, 257-263.
  • Gu, L. (2007). Designing optimal item pools for Computerized Adaptive Tests with exposure controls. Dissertation Abstracts International Section A: Humanities and Social Sciences.
  • Guastello, S. J., Guastello, D. D., & Craft, L. L. (1989). Assessment of the Barnum effect in computer-based test interpretations: Journal of Psychology: Interdisciplinary and Applied Vol 123(5) Sep 1989, 477-484.
  • Guastello, S. J., & Rieke, M. L. (1990). The Barnum effect and validity of computer-based test interpretations: The Human Resource Development Report: Psychological Assessment: A Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology Vol 2(2) Jun 1990, 186-190.
  • Guazzini, A., Lauro-Grotto, R., & Giannini, M. (2006). A computerized version of the Halstead Category Test: Preliminary data from an Italian sample: Testing Psicometria Metodologia Vol 13(2) 2006, 91-109.
  • Guerreiro, M. M., & Moura-Ribeiro, M. V. (1991). Visuo-spatial function in cerebral palsy and proposition of a new test with computer aid: Arquivos de Neuro-Psiquiatria Vol 49(3) Sep 1991, 310-314.
  • Gushchin, V. I., Efimov, V. A., & Kholin, S. F. (1995). A technique for computerized diagnosis of operators' mental performance: Aviakosmicheskaya i Ecologicheskaya Meditsina Vol 29(1) 1995, 58-61.
  • Guthke, J., & Beckmann, J. F. (2003). Dynamic assessment with diagnositic problems. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
  • Guthke, J., & Beckmann, J. F. (2003). Dynamic assessment with diagnostic programs. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
  • Gutkin, T. B., & Wise, S. L. (1991). The computer and the decision-making process. Hillsdale, NJ, England: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
  • Guzdial, M., & Turns, J. (2000). Computer-supported collaborative learning in engineering: The challenge of scaling-up assessment. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers.
  • Gyntelberg, F., Flarup, M., Mikkelsen, S., Palm, T., & et al. (1990). Computerized coordination ability testing: Acta Neurologica Scandinavica Vol 82(1) Jul 1990, 39-42.
  • Hahn, E. A., Cella, D., Bode, R. K., Gershon, R., & Lai, J.-S. (2006). Item Banks and Their Potential Applications to Health Status Assessment in Diverse Populations: Medical Care Vol 44(11, Suppl 3) Nov 2006, S189-S197.
  • 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 Vol 38(5) Sep 2006, 778-783.
  • Halama, P. (2005). Computerized adaptive testing: Application of item response theory in diagnostics of intelligence: Psychologia a Patopsychologia Dietata Vol 40(3) 2005, 252-266.
  • Haley, S. M., Fragala-Pinkham, M., & Ni, P. (2006). Sensitivity of a computer adaptive assessment for measuring functional mobility changes in children enrolled in a community fitness programme: Clinical Rehabilitation Vol 20(7) Jul 2006, 616-622.
  • Halkitis, P. N. (1995). An examination of the precision of measurement of computerized adaptive tests with limited item pools. Dissertation Abstracts International: Section B: The Sciences and Engineering.
  • Hallfors, D., Khatapoush, S., Kadushin, C., Watson, K., & Saxe, L. (2000). A comparison of paper vs computer-assisted self interview for school alcohol, tobacco, and other drug surveys: Evaluation and Program Planning Vol 23(2) May 2000, 149-155.
  • Hambleton, R. K. (2006). Psychometric Models, Test Designs and Item Types for the Next Generation of Educational and Psychological Tests. New York, NY: John Wiley & Sons Ltd.
  • Hambleton, R. K., & Xing, D. (2006). Optimal and Nonoptimal Computer-Based Test Designs for Making Pass-Fail Decisions: Applied Measurement in Education Vol 19(3) 2006, 221-239.
  • Hambleton, R. K., Zaal, J. N., & Pieters, J. P. M. (1991). Computerized adaptive testing: Theory, applications, and standards. New York, NY: Kluwer Academic/Plenum Publishers.
  • Hammainen, L. (1994). Computerized support for neuropsychological test interpretation in clinical situations: Clinical Neuropsychologist Vol 8(2) Jun 1994, 167-185.
  • Hank, P., & Schwenkmezger, P. (1996). Computer-assisted versus paper-and-pencil based self-monitoring: An analysis of experiential and psychometric equivalence. Ashland, OH: Hogrefe & Huber Publishers.
  • Hannan, S. E. (2003). Computer administered visual-analog personality ratings: Validation of a measure and analyses of response patterns. Dissertation Abstracts International: Section B: The Sciences and Engineering.
  • Hanney, J. L. (1989). Detection of faked responses on a computer administered questionnaire by means of response latency: Dissertation Abstracts International.
  • Hansen, E. G. (1989). Validation of a computerized adaptive test of secondary school biological science: Dissertation Abstracts International.
  • Hansen, J.-I. C., Neuman, J. L., Haverkamp, B. E., & Lubinski, B. R. (1997). Comparison of user reaction to two methods of Strong Interest Inventory administration and report feedback: Measurement and Evaluation in Counseling and Development Vol 30(3) Oct 1997, 115-127.
  • Hanson, M. A., Borman, W. C., Mogilka, H. J., Manning, C., & Hedge, J. W. (1999). Computerized assessment of skill for a highly technical job. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers.
  • Hargreaves, M., Shorrocks-Taylor, D., Swinnerton, B., Tait, K., & Threlfall, J. (2004). Computer or paper? That is the question: Does the medium in which assessment questions are presented affect children's performance in mathematics? : Educational Research Vol 46(1) Spr 2004, 29-42.
  • Harper, R. (2003). Correcting computer-based assessments for guessing: Journal of Computer Assisted Learning Vol 19(1) Mar 2003, 2-8.
  • Harrell, T. H., Honaker, L. M., Hetu, M., & Oberwager, J. (1987). Computerized versus traditional administration of the Multidimensional Aptitude Battery--Verbal scale: An examination of reliability and validity: Computers in Human Behavior Vol 3(2) 1987, 129-137.
  • Harriott, J. S. (1997). Using JavaScript to build a psychology practice exam: Behavior Research Methods, Instruments & Computers Vol 29(2) May 1997, 232-236.
  • Harris, W. G. (1987). Computer-based test interpretations: Some development and application issues: Applied Psychology: An International Review Vol 36(3-4) Sep 1987, 237-247.
  • Hattori, T. (1990). Measuring of verbal ability with computerized adaptive testing: Japanese Journal of Educational Psychology Vol 38(4) Dec 1990, 445-454.
  • Hattrup, K., O'Connell, M. S., & Yager, J. R. (2006). Pre-screening job applicants with Interactive Voice Response and Web-based technologies: Are the methods equivalent? : Applied H R M Research Vol 11(1) 2006, 15-26.
  • Hau, K.-T., & Chang, H.-H. (2001). Item selection in computerized adaptive testing: Should more discriminating items be used first? : Journal of Educational Measurement Vol 38(3) Fal 2001, 249-266.
  • Hausler, J. (2006). Adaptive success control in computerized adaptive testing: Psychology Science Vol 48(4) 2006, 436-450.
  • Hausler, J., Sommer, M., & Chroust, S. (2007). Optimizing technical precision of measurement in computerized psychological assessment on Windows platforms: Psychology Science Vol 49(2) 2007, 116-131.
  • Hawkins, J. H. (1991). Comparing the effectiveness of content-specific, corrective feedback with test-taking skill feedback as applied to a computer-based testing and instructional program: Dissertation Abstracts International.
  • Hays, R. D., Bell, R. M., Gillogly, J. J., Hill, L., & et al. (1997). Impact of response options and feedback about response inconsistencies on frequency of alcohol use self reports by microcomputer: Journal of Alcohol and Drug Education Vol 42(2) Win 1997, 1-18.
  • Hays, R. D., Gillogly, J. J., Hill, L., Lewis, M. W., & et al. (1992). A Microcomputer Assessment System (MAS) for administering computer-based surveys: Preliminary results from administration to clients at an impaired-driver treatment program: Behavior Research Methods, Instruments & Computers Vol 24(2) May 1992, 358-365.
  • Hays, S., & McCallum, R. S. (2005). A Comparison of the Pencil-and-Paper and Computer-Administered Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory-Adolescent: Psychology in the Schools Vol 42(6) Jul 2005, 605-613.
  • He, Q., & Tymms, P. (2005). A computer-assisted test design and diagnosis system for use by classroom teachers: Journal of Computer Assisted Learning Vol 21(6) Dec 2005, 419-429.
  • Hedlund, J. L., & Vieweg, B. W. (1988). Automation in psychological testing: Psychiatric Annals Vol 18(4) Apr 1988, 217-227.
  • Helwig, R., Anderson, L., & Tindal, G. (2002). Using a concept-grounded, curriculum-based measure in mathematics to predict statewide test scores for middle school students with LD: The Journal of Special Education Vol 36(2) Sum 2002, 102-112.
  • Hendrickson, A. (2007). Review of Automated Scoring of Complex Tasks in Computer-Based Testing: Journal of Educational Measurement Vol 44(4) Win 2007, 385-390.
  • Henly, S. J., Klebe, K. J., McBride, J. R., & Cudeck, R. (1989). Adaptive and conventional versions of the DAT: The first complete test battery comparison: Applied Psychological Measurement Vol 13(4) Dec 1989, 363-371.
  • Herl, H. E., O'Neil, H. F., Jr., Chung, G. K. W. K., & Schacter, J. (1999). Reliability and validity of a computer-based knowledge mapping system to measure content understanding: Computers in Human Behavior Vol 15(3-4) May-Jul 1999, 315-333.
  • Herrero, J., & Meneses, J. (2006). Short Web-based versions of the perceived stress (PSS) and Center for Epidemiological Studies-Depression (CESD) Scales: A comparison to pencil and paper responses among Internet users: Computers in Human Behavior Vol 22(5) Sep 2006, 830-846.
  • Hesketh, B., Wilson, L., Faulkner, A., & Jackson, C. (1987). GRADSCOPE: An analysis of the item structure and a survey of usage: British Journal of Guidance & Counselling Vol 15(2) May 1987, 197-213.
  • Hetter, R. D., Segall, D. O., & Bloxom, B. M. (1994). A comparison of item calibration media in computerized adaptive testing: Applied Psychological Measurement Vol 18(3) Sep 1994, 197-204.
  • Hetter, R. D., Segall, D. O., & Bloxom, B. M. (1997). Evaluating item calibration medium in computerized adaptive testing. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
  • Hetter, R. D., & Sympson, J. B. (1997). Item exposure control in CAT-ASVAB. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
  • Hodgson, M., & Golding, J. F. (1991). Psychometric evaluation of divers performing a series of heliox non-saturation dives: Aviation, Space, and Environmental Medicine Vol 62(5) May 1991, 407-413.
  • Hoeft, R. M., Jentsch, F. G., Harper, M. E., Evans, A. W., III, Bowers, C. A., & Salas, E. (2003). TPL-KATS--Concept Map: A computerized knowledge assessment tool: Computers in Human Behavior Vol 19(6) Nov 2003, 653-657.
  • Hoerger, M. L., & Mace, F. C. (2006). A computerized test of self-control predicts classroom behavior: Journal of Applied Behavior Analysis Vol 39(2) Sum 2006, 147-159.
  • Hofer, P. J. (1985). Developing standards for computerized psychological testing: Computers in Human Behavior Vol 1(3-4) 1985, 301-315.
  • Hol, A. M., Vorst, H. C. M., & Mellenbergh, G. J. (2001). Application of a computerised adaptive test procedure on personality data: Nederlands Tijdschrift voor de Psychologie en haar Grensgebieden Vol 56(3) Jun 2001, 119-133.
  • Hol, A. M., Vorst, H. C. M., & Mellenbergh, G. J. (2005). A Randomized Experiment to Compare Conventional, Computerized, and Computerized Adaptive Administration of Ordinal Polytomous Attitude Items: Applied Psychological Measurement Vol 29(3) May 2005, 159-183.
  • 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 Vol 31(5) Sep 2007, 412-429.
  • Holden, R. R., Fekken, G. C., & Cotton, D. H. (1990). Clinical reliabilities and validities of the microcomputerized Basic Personality Inventory: Journal of Clinical Psychology Vol 46(6) Nov 1990, 845-849.
  • Holden, R. R., & Hickman, D. (1987). Computerized versus standard administration of the Jenkins Activity Survey (Form T): Journal of Human Stress Vol 13(4) Win 1987, 175-179.
  • Honaker, L. M. (1988). The equivalency of computerized and conventional MMPI administration: A critical review: Clinical Psychology Review Vol 8(6) 1988, 561-577.
  • Honaker, L. M., Harrell, T. H., & Buffaloe, J. D. (1988). Equivalency of Microtest computer MMPI administration for standard and special scales: Computers in Human Behavior Vol 4(4) 1988, 323-337.
  • Hontangas, P., Olea, J., Ponsoda, V., Revuelta, J., & Wise, S. L. (2004). Assisted Self-Adapted Testing: A Comparative Study: European Journal of Psychological Assessment Vol 20(1) 2004, 2-9.
  • Horne, J. (2007). Gender differences in computerised and conventional educational tests: Journal of Computer Assisted Learning Vol 23(1) Feb 2007, 47-55.
  • Hornikova, M., & Vyrost, J. (1995). Validation studies of computer versions of the Test of Concentration of Attention and Vigilance, and of the Test of Optical Perception: Psychologia a Patopsychologia Dietata Vol 30(3) 1995, 314-322.
  • Hornke, L. F. (1993). Potential gains of computer-assisted adaptive testing: Diagnostica Vol 39(2) 1993, 109-119.
  • Hornke, L. F. (1999). Benefits from computerized adaptive testing as seen in simulation studies: European Journal of Psychological Assessment Vol 15(2) 1999, 91-98.
  • Hornke, L. F. (2005). Response time in computer-aided testing: A "Verbal Memory" test for routes and maps: Psychology Science Vol 47(2) 2005, 280-293.
  • Hornke, L. F., & Kersting, M. (2006). Optimizing Quality in the Use of Web-Based and Computer-Based Testing for Personnel Selection. New York, NY: John Wiley & Sons Ltd.
  • Hornke, L. F., & Rettig, K. (1993). Evaluation and revision of an item bank of verbal analogy items: Zeitschrift fur Differentielle und Diagnostische Psychologie Vol 14(2) 1993, 113-128.
  • Horton, S. V., & Lovitt, T. C. (1994). A comparison of two methods of administering group reading inventories to diverse learners: Computer versus pencil and paper: Remedial and Special Education Vol 15(6) Nov 1994, 378-390.
  • Hosoi, H., Murata, K., & Imaizumi, S. (1996). A new method of measurement of most comfortable loudness: Audiology & Neurotology Vol 1(4) Jul-Aug 1996, 234-242.
  • Howe, J. A. M. (1971). Individualizing Instruction: PsycCRITIQUES Vol 16 (12), Dec, 1971.
  • Hrabovsky, M. (1988). Computer-aided method of selecting the operators in a robotized plant: Studia Psychologica Vol 30(1) 1988, 13-23.
  • Hrabovsky, M. (1995). Computerized psychological methods using Windows 3.1: Ceskoslovenska Psychologie Vol 39(2) 1995, 170-176.
  • Hsu, T.-c., & Shermis, M. D. (1989). The development and evaluation of a microcomputerized adaptive placement testing system for college mathematics: Journal of Educational Computing Research Vol 5(4) 1989, 473-485.
  • Hsu, T.-c., & Yu, L. (1989). Using computers to analyze item response data: Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice Vol 8(3) Fal 1989, 21-28.
  • Huba, G. J. (1987). On probabilistic computer-based test interpretations and other expert systems: Applied Psychology: An International Review Vol 36(3-4) Sep 1987, 357-373.
  • Huba, G. J. (1988). Comparability of traditional and computer Western Personnel Test (WPT) versions: Educational and Psychological Measurement Vol 48(4) Win 1988, 957-959.
  • Hudson, M. L. (1990). Performance and reliability differences of college students' multiple-choice test responses administered by computer or paper-and-pencil: Dissertation Abstracts International.
  • Huff, K. L., & Sireci, S. G. (2001). Validity issues in computer-based testing: Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice Vol 20(3) Fal 2001, 16-25.
  • Huguenin, N. H. (1997). Employing computer technology to assess visual attention in young children and adolescents with severe mental retardation: Journal of Experimental Child Psychology Vol 65(2) May 1997, 141-170.
  • Hulsheger, U. R., Spinath, F. M., Kuppers, A., & Etzel, S. (2004). Experimental study on two methods to reduce social desirability in a computer-based test for personnel selection and development: Zeitschrift fur Personalpsychologie Vol 3(1) 2004, 24-33.
  • Hulsman, R. L., Mollema, E. D., Hoos, A. M., de Haes, J. C. J. M., & Donnison-Speijer, J. D. (2004). Assessment of medical communication skills by computer: Assessment method and student experiences: Medical Education Vol 38(8) Aug 2004, 813-824.
  • Hummel-Schluger, A. O., & Baer, J. S. (1996). A computer-controlled administration of the Matching Familiar Figures Test: Behavior Research Methods, Instruments & Computers Vol 28(1) Feb 1996, 93-95.
  • Hung, P.-h. (1989). Application of computerized adaptive testing to the University Entrance Exam of Taiwan, R.O.C: Dissertation Abstracts International.
  • Hunt, A. W. (1993). The effects of computerized testing on the performance and attitudes of college precalculus students: Dissertation Abstracts International.
  • Hunt, E. (1995). Where and when to represent students this way and that way: An evaluation of approaches to diagnostic assessment. Hillsdale, NJ, England: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
  • Hunt, N., Hughes, J., & Rowe, G. (2002). Formative Automated Computer Testing (FACT): British Journal of Educational Technology Vol 33(5) Nov 2002, 525-535.
  • Hunter, D. R., & Burke, E. F. (1987). Computer-based selection testing in the Royal Air Force: Behavior Research Methods, Instruments & Computers Vol 19(2) Apr 1987, 243-245.
  • Hwang, G.-J., Lin, B. M. T., & Lin, T.-L. (2006). An effective approach for test-sheet composition with large-scale item banks: Computers & Education Vol 46(2) Feb 2006, 122-139.
  • Iregren, A., & Letz, R. (1992). Computerized testing in neurobehavioural toxicology: Applied Psychology: An International Review Vol 41(3) Jul 1992, 247-255.
  • Irvin, L. K., & Walker, H. M. (1994). Assessing children's social skills using video-based microcomputer technology: Exceptional Children Vol 61(2) Oct-Nov 1994, 182-196.
  • Irvine, S. H., & Dann, P. L. (1991). Challenges of computer-based assessment. New York, NY: Kluwer Academic/Plenum Publishers.
  • Ivie, J. L. (2007). Test taking strategies in computer adaptive testing that will improve your score: Fact or fiction? Dissertation Abstracts International: Section B: The Sciences and Engineering.
  • Ivnik, R. J., Malec, J. F., Tangalos, E. G., & Crook, T. H. (1996). Older persons' reactions to computerized testing versus traditional testing by psychometrists: Clinical Neuropsychologist Vol 10(2) May 1996, 149-151.
  • Izquierdo-Porrera, A. M., Manchanda, R., Powell, C. C., Sorkin, J. D., & Bradham, D. D. (2002). Factors influencing the use of computer technology in the collection of clinical data in a predominantly African-American population: Journal of the American Geriatrics Society Vol 50(8) Aug 2002, 1411-1415.
  • Jackson, D. N. (1985). Computer-based personality testing: Computers in Human Behavior Vol 1(3-4) 1985, 255-264.
  • Jackson, D. N. (1991). Computer-assisted personality test interpretation: The dawn of discovery. Hillsdale, NJ, England: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
  • Jacobs, E. L. (1998). KIDTALK: A computerized language screening test: Journal of Computing in Childhood Education Vol 9(2) 1998, 113-131.
  • Jacobs, E. L. (2001). The effects of adding dynamic assessment components to a computerized preschool language screening test: Communication Disorders Quarterly Vol 22(4) Sum 2001, 217-226.
  • Jacobs-Cassuto, M. S. (2005). A comparison of adaptive mastery testing using testlets with the -parameter logistic model. Dissertation Abstracts International: Section B: The Sciences and Engineering.
  • Jager, R. S. (1994). Computerized testing in educational setting: What should be done? : European Journal of Psychological Assessment Vol 10(1) 1994, 62-70.
  • Jager, R. S., & Krieger, W. (1994). Future prospects of computer-based assessment, exemplified on the basis of treatment-oriented assessment: Diagnostica Vol 40(3) 1994, 217-243.
  • Janikowski, T. P., Berven, N. L., & Bordieri, J. E. (1991). Validity of the microcomputer evaluation screening and assessment aptitude scores: Rehabilitation Counseling Bulletin Vol 35(1) Sep 1991, 38-51.
  • Jarvis, P. E., & Jarvis, C. P. (1991). A tool to assist in the serial testing of attention as a means of monitoring the effectiveness of rehabilitation: Cognitive Rehabilitation Vol 9(4) Jul-Aug 1991, 20-23.
  • Jiao, H. (2003). The effects of model specification error in item response theory-based computerized classification test using sequential probability ratio test. Dissertation Abstracts International Section A: Humanities and Social Sciences.
  • Jodoin, M. G. (2003). Measurement efficiency of innovative item formats in computer-based testing: Journal of Educational Measurement Vol 40(1) Spr 2003, 1-15.
  • Jodoin, M. G. (2003). Psychometric properties of several computer-based test designs with ideal and constrained item pools. Dissertation Abstracts International: Section B: The Sciences and Engineering.
  • Jodoin, M. G., Zenisky, A., & Hambleton, R. K. (2006). Comparison of the Psychometric Properties of Several Computer-Based Test Designs for Credentialing Exams With Multiple Purposes: Applied Measurement in Education Vol 19(3) 2006, 203-220.
  • Johannsson, V. (1993). Does a fibromyalgia personality exist? : Journal of Musculoskeletal Pain Vol 1(3-4) 1993, 245-252.
  • Johnson, A. M., Copas, A. J., Erens, B., Mandalia, S., Fenton, K., Korovessis, C., et al. (2001). Effect of computer-assisted self-interviews on reporting of sexual HIV risk behaviours in a general population sample: A methodological experiment: AIDS Vol 15(1) Jan 2001, 111-115.
  • Johnson, C. (2006). Issues that Simulations Face as Assessment Tools. New York, NY: John Wiley & Sons Ltd.
  • Johnson, C. G. (1987). The feasibility of delivering a learning-style inventory via a computer-based delivery system: Dissertation Abstracts International.
  • Johnson, J. A., & Rust, J. O. (2003). Correlational Analysis of MicroCog: Assessment of Cognitive Functioning With the Wechsler Adult Intelligence Scale-III For a Clinical Sample of Veterans: Psychological Reports Vol 93(3,Pt2) Dec 2003, 1261-1266.
  • Johnson, M. A. (2007). An investigation of stratification exposure control procedures in CATS using the generalized partial credit model. Dissertation Abstracts International: Section B: The Sciences and Engineering.
  • Johnson, P. J., Goldsmith, T. E., & Teague, K. W. (1995). Similarity, structure, and knowledge: A representational approach to assessment. Hillsdale, NJ, England: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
  • Johnson, R. B., & Franks, I. M. (1991). Measuring the reliability of a computer-aided systematic observation instrument: Canadian Journal of Sport Sciences Vol 16(1) Mar 1991, 45-57.
  • Jones, D. H., & Jin, Z. (1994). Optimal sequential designs for on-line item estimation: Psychometrika Vol 59(1) Mar 1994, 59-75.
  • Jorgensen, M. J., Suomi, S. J., & Hopkins, W. D. (1995). Using a computerized testing system to investigate the preconceptual self in nonhuman primates and humans. Amsterdam, Netherlands: North-Holland/Elsevier Science Publishers.
  • Ju, G.-F. N. (1993). A computer-based chinese edition of dat mechanical reasoning: Comparing computer-based and paper-pencil formats of a timed pictorial test in Taiwan: Dissertation Abstracts International.
  • Kahn, M. W., Fox, H., & Rhode, R. (1988). Detecting faking on the Rorschach: Computer versus expert clinical judgment: Journal of Personality Assessment Vol 52(3) Fal 1988, 516-523.
  • Kahn, M. W., Fox, H., & Rhode, R. (1990). Detecting faking on the Rorschach: Computer versus expert clinical judgment: A reply to Cohen: Journal of Personality Assessment Vol 54(1-2) Spr 1990, 63-66.
  • Kalohn, J. C., & Spray, J. A. (1999). The effect of model misspecification on classification decisions made using a computerized test: Journal of Educational Measurement Vol 36(1) Spr 1999, 47-59.
  • Kamakura, W. A., & Balasubramanian, S. K. (1989). Tailored interviewing: An application of item response theory for personality measurement: Journal of Personality Assessment Vol 53(3) Fal 1989, 502-519.
  • Kandra, J., Barrett, G. V., & Doverspike, D. (1993). Validity of a computerized information-processing-based test battery for the prediction of performance in a transport driver simulation: Educational and Psychological Measurement Vol 53(4) Win 1993, 965-971.
  • Kane, R. L., & Kay, G. G. (1992). Computerized assessment in neuropsychology: A review of tests and test batteries: Neuropsychology Review Vol 3(1) Mar 1992, 1-117.
  • Kanning, U. P. (2005). Computer-based personnel selection of police officers: Zeitschrift fur Arbeits- und Organisationspsychologie Vol 49(3) 2005, 140-146.
  • Kantor, J. (1991). The effects of computer administration and identification on the Job Descriptive Index (JDI): Journal of Business and Psychology Vol 5(3) Spr 1991, 309-323.
  • Kantor, J. E., & Carretta, T. R. (1988). Aircrew selection systems: Aviation, Space, and Environmental Medicine Vol 59(11, Sect 2) Nov 1988, 32-38.
  • Kapes, J. T., & Vansickle, T. R. (1992). Comparing paper-pencil and computer-based versions of the Harrington-O'Shea Career Decision Making System: Measurement and Evaluation in Counseling and Development Vol 25(1) Apr 1992, 5-13.
  • Kaplan, E., Roditty, S., & Dover, S. (1991). ComPsy: A modular-integrated answer to the differential demands of a computerized testing system: European Review of Applied Psychology/Revue Europeenne de Psychologie Appliquee Vol 41(4) 1991, 303-306.
  • Kaplan, H. L. (1992). Representation of on-line questionnaires in an editable, auditable database: Behavior Research Methods, Instruments & Computers Vol 24(2) May 1992, 373-384.
  • Kapustin, S. A., & Kuznetsova, O. g. G. (1989). Experience with the use of computerized testing in the practical component of a university psychology course: Vestnik Moskovskogo Universiteta - Seriya 14: Psikhologiya No 2 Apr-Jun 1989, 67-73.
  • Kaushik, T., & Erlanger, D. M. (2006). The HeadMinder Concussion Resolution Index. New York, NY: Guilford Press.
  • Keidser, G. (1991). Computerized measurement of speech intelligibility: I. Development of system and procedures: Scandinavian Audiology Vol 20(3) 1991, 147-152.
  • Keidser, G. (1991). Computerized measurement of speech intelligibility: II. Normative data from a "closed response" test: Scandinavian Audiology Vol 20(3) 1991, 153-158.
  • Keith, M. S., Stanislav, S. W., & Wesnes, K. A. (1998). Validity of a cognitive computerized assessment system in brain-injured patients: Brain Injury Vol 12(12) Dec 1998, 1037-1043.
  • Keller, L. A., & Jodoin, M. G. (2004). An Indispensable Handbook on Computer-Based Testing: PsycCRITIQUES Vol 49 (1), Feb, 2004.
  • Kelley-Gomez, D. J. (1999). Test-retest reliability and validity of the Computerized Version of the Category Test-Young Children's Version. Dissertation Abstracts International Section A: Humanities and Social Sciences.
  • Kelly, K. R. (2002). Concurrent validity of the Kuder Career Search Activity Preference Scales and Career Clusters: Journal of Career Assessment Vol 10(1) Feb 2002, 127-144.
  • Kennedy, R. S., Baltzley, D. R., Turnage, J. J., & Jones, M. B. (1989). Factor analysis and predictive validity of microcomputer-based tests: Perceptual and Motor Skills Vol 69(3, Pt 2) Dec 1989, 1059-1074.
  • Kennedy, R. S., Baltzley, D. R., Wilkes, R. L., & Kuntz, L. A. (1989). Psychology of computer use: IX. A menu of self-administered microcomputer-based neurotoxicology tests: Perceptual and Motor Skills Vol 68(3, Pt 2) Jun 1989, 1255-1272.
  • Kennedy, R. S., Odenheimer, R. C., Baltzley, D. R., Dunlap, W. P., & et al. (1990). Differential effects of scopolamine and amphetamine on microcomputer-based performance tests: Aviation, Space, and Environmental Medicine Vol 61(7) Jul 1990, 615-621.
  • Kennedy, R. S., Wilkes, R. L., Dunlap, W. P., & Kuntz, L. A. (1987). Development of an automated performance test system for environmental and behavioral toxicology studies: Perceptual and Motor Skills Vol 65(3) Dec 1987, 947-962.
  • Kerrigan, J. F. (1989). A flexible microcomputer test scoring system: Journal of College Student Development Vol 30(2) Mar 1989, 163-164.
  • Kersting, M. (2001). On the construct and criterion validity of problem-solving scenarios based on the prediction of supervisor assessment of job performance: Diagnostica Vol 47(2) 2001, 67-76.
  • Kertzman, S., Grinspan, H., Birger, M., Shliapnikov, N., Alish, Y., Nahum, Z. B., et al. (2006). Simple Real-Time Computerized Tasks for Detection of Malingering Among Murderers with Schizophrenia: Israel Journal of Psychiatry and Related Sciences Vol 43(2) 2006, 112-118.
  • Kimball, J. C. (1988). Career Interest Search: A prototype, computer-assisted occupational interest inventory for functionally illiterate adults: Journal of Employment Counseling Vol 25(4) Dec 1988, 180-185.
  • Kindsvater, S., & Sturm, W. (2003). Computerised vs paper-pencil testing: A study concerning the equivalence of these two test procedures for the Nonverbal Learning Test (NVLT): Zeitschrift fur Neuropsychologie Vol 14(1) Feb 2003, 13-21.
  • Kingsbury, G. G. (1990). Adapting adaptive testing: Using the MicroCAT testing system in a local school district: Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice Vol 9(2) Sum 1990, 3-6, 29.
  • Kingsbury, G. G. (1992). Issues in the Development of Computerized Adaptive Tests: PsycCRITIQUES Vol 37 (6), Jun, 1992.
  • Kingsbury, G. G., & Houser, R. L. (1999). Developing computerized adaptive tests for school children. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers.
  • Kinnaman, J. E. S., Farrell, A. D., & Bisconer, S. W. (2006). Evaluation of the Computerized Assessment System for Psychotherapy Evaluation and Research (CASPER) as a Measure of Treatment Effectiveness With Psychiatric Inpatients: Assessment Vol 13(2) Jun 2006, 154-167.
  • Kircher, J. C., & Raskin, D. C. (2002). Computer methods for the psychophysiological detection of deception. San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
  • Klainberg, M. B. (2004). Computers and Testing. New York, NY: Springer Publishing Co.
  • Klass, G., & Crothers, L. (2000). An experimental evaluation of Web-based tutorial quizzes: Social Science Computer Review Vol 18(4) Win 2000, 508-515.
  • Kleiman, T., & Gati, I. (2004). Challenges of Internet-Based Assessment: Measuring Career Decision-Making Difficulties: Measurement and Evaluation in Counseling and Development Vol 37(1) Apr 2004, 41-55.
  • Kleinmann, M., & Strauss, B. (1998). Validity and application of computer-simulated scenarios in personnel assessment: International Journal of Selection and Assessment Vol 6(2) Apr 1998, 97-106.
  • Klepsch, R. (1990). Is computer assessment of obsession and compulsion applicable in obsessive-compulsive disorder? Preliminary results using the Hamburg Obsession Compulsion Inventory--Computer Short Form (HOCI--CS): Computers in Human Behavior Vol 6(2) 1990, 133-139.
  • Klieger, D. M. (1990). Flexible testing without programming: Behavior Research Methods, Instruments & Computers Vol 22(2) Apr 1990, 138-141.
  • Klinck, D. (1998). Paper-and-pencil versus computerized administration of cognitive ability tests: A study addressing the question of equivalence: Diagnostica Vol 44(2) 1998, 61-70.
  • Knight, L. H. (1992). The development and validation of a microcomputer-based test to assess science process skills in grade five students: Dissertation Abstracts International.
  • Kobak, K. A., Reynolds, W. M., & Greist, J. H. (1993). Development and validation of a computer-administered version of the Hamilton Rating Scale: Psychological Assessment Vol 5(4) Dec 1993, 487-492.
  • Kobak, K. A., Reynolds, W. M., Rosenfeld, R., & Greist, J. H. (1990). Development and validation of a computer-administered version of the Hamilton Depression Rating Scale: Psychological Assessment: A Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology Vol 2(1) Mar 1990, 56-63.
  • Koch, W. (2003). Review of Practical considerations in computer-based testing: Journal of Educational Measurement Vol 40(4) Win 2003, 371-373.
  • Koch, W. R., & Dodd, B. G. (1995). An investigation of procedures for computerized adaptive testing using the successive intervals Rasch model: Educational and Psychological Measurement Vol 55(6) Dec 1995, 976-990.
  • Koch, W. R., Dodd, B. G., & Fitzpatrick, S. J. (1990). Computerized adaptive measurements of attitudes: Measurement and Evaluation in Counseling and Development Vol 23(1) Apr 1990, 20-30.
  • Kondraske, G. (1989). Measurement science concepts and computerized methodology in the assessment of human performance. Boston, MA, England: Butterworth Publishers.
  • Konradt, U., Hertel, G., & Joder, K. (2003). Web-based assessment of call center agents: Development and validation of a computerized instrument: International Journal of Selection and Assessment Vol 11(2-3) Jun-Sep 2003, 184-193.
  • Kostecka, K. S. (1992). Development and validation of a computerized-adaptive test for placement in general chemistry: Dissertation Abstracts International.
  • Kovac, R. N. (1990). The effects of computerized selection tests on job applicant performance: Dissertation Abstracts International.
  • Kramer, J. J. (1988). Computer-based test interpretation in psychoeducational assessment: An initial appraisal: Journal of School Psychology Vol 26(2) Sum 1988, 143-153.
  • Kramer, J. J., & Gutkin, T. B. (1990). School psychology, assessment, and computer: An analysis of current relationships and future potential. Hillsdale, NJ, England: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
  • Kreindler, D., Levitt, A., Woolridge, N., & Lumsden, C. J. (2003). Portable mood mapping: The validity and reliability of analog scale displays for mood assessment via hand-held computer: Psychiatry Research Vol 120(2) Sep 2003, 165-177.
  • Kreiter, C., Peterson, M. W., Ferguson, K., & Elliott, S. (2003). The effects of testing in shifts on a clinical in-course computerized exam: Medical Education Vol 37(3) Mar 2003, 202-204.
  • Krieger, W., & Dlugosch, G. E. (1991). Interactive computerized assessment: Description and evaluation of an instrument to measure psychosocial strains and resources: European Review of Applied Psychology/Revue Europeenne de Psychologie Appliquee Vol 41(4) 1991, 309-315.
  • Krumboltz, J. D. (1991). Computers for counseling: PsycCRITIQUES Vol 36 (2), Feb, 1991.
  • Kubinger, K. D., & Farkas, M. G. (1992). The fitness of standardizations of paper-pencil tests for computer administration: Objections supported by an experiment on Raven's SPM: Zeitschrift fur Differentielle und Diagnostische Psychologie Vol 13(1) 1992, 75.
  • Kubinger, K. D., Formann, A. K., & Farkas, M. G. (1991). Psychometric shortcomings of Raven's Standard Progressive Matrices, in particular for computerized testing: European Review of Applied Psychology/Revue Europeenne de Psychologie Appliquee Vol 41(4) 1991, 295-300.
  • Kubinger, K. D., Karner, T., & Menghin, S. (1999). Multiple moderator effects on a testee's answer to personality questionnaire items: Review of Psychology Vol 6(1-2) 1999, 25-31.
  • Kuhlman, A., Little, D., & Sekuler, R. (2006). An Interactive Test of Serial Behavior: Age and Practice Alter Executive Function: Journal of Clinical and Experimental Neuropsychology Vol 28(1) Jan 2006, 126-144.
  • Kveton, P., Jelinek, M., Voboril, D., & Klimusova, H. (2007). Computer-based tests: The impact of test design and problem of equivalency: Computers in Human Behavior Vol 23(1) Jan 2007, 32-51.
  • Kwon, M., Goetz, E. T., & Zellner, R. D. (1998). Developing a computer-based TTCT: Promises and problems: Journal of Creative Behavior Vol 32(2) 1998, 96-106.
  • Kwon, M. C. (1997). An exploratory study of a computerized creativity test: Comparing paper-pencil and computer-based versions of the Torrance Tests of Creative Thinking. Dissertation Abstracts International Section A: Humanities and Social Sciences.
  • Kyllonen, P. C. (1991). Principles for creating a computerized test battery: Intelligence Vol 15(1) Jan-Mar 1991, 1-15.
  • Kyllonen, P. C. (1997). Smart testing. Westport, CT: Greenwood Press/Greenwood Publishing Group.
  • Lai, J.-s., Cella, D., Chang, C.-H., Bode, R. K., & Heinemann, A. W. (2003). Item banking to improve, shorten and computerize self-reported fatigue: An illustration of steps to create a core item bank from the FACIT-Fatigue Scale: Quality of Life Research: An International Journal of Quality of Life Aspects of Treatment, Care & Rehabilitation Vol 12(5) Aug 2003, 485-501.
  • Lai, S.-L., Horng, R.-D., & Chen, S.-S. (1999). The efficacy of CNES-2 in detecting the neurobehavioral changes o epileptic patients: Neurotoxicology and Teratology Vol 21(1) Jan-Feb 1999, 77-81.
  • Lambert, M. E., Andrews, R. H., Rylee, K., & Skinner, J. R. (1987). Equivalence of computerized and traditional MMPI administration with substance abusers: Computers in Human Behavior Vol 3(2) 1987, 139-143.
  • Lane, S. (1989). Implications of cognitive psychology for measurement and testing: Diagnosis of procedural errors: Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice Vol 8(4) Win 1989, 17-20.
  • Lankford, J. S. (1991). Computerized versus standard personality measures: Equivalency, computer anxiety, and gender differences: Dissertation Abstracts International.
  • LaPlace, A. C. (1991). The concurrent validation of the computer-assisted Child Diagnostic System: Dissertation Abstracts International.
  • Larrabee, G. J., & Crook, T. H. (1989). Dimensions of everyday memory in age-associated memory impairment: Psychological Assessment: A Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology Vol 1(2) Jun 1989, 92-97.
  • Larrabee, G. J., & Crook, T. H., III. (1991). Computerized memory testing in clinical trials. Lisse, Netherlands: Swets & Zeitlinger Publishers.
  • Larrazolo Reyna, N., & Velasco Ariza, V. (2000). A criterion-referenced English test: Revista Intercontinental de Psicologia y Educacion Vol 2(2) Jul-Dec 2000, 44-52.
  • Larson, M. A. (2002). Assessment of the construct validity of simultaneous processing as a component of a PC synthetic work environment. Dissertation Abstracts International: Section B: The Sciences and Engineering.
  • Lau, C.-M. A. (1997). Robustness of a unidimensional computerized mastery testing procedure with multidimensional testing data. Dissertation Abstracts International Section A: Humanities and Social Sciences.
  • Laufer, B., & Goldstein, Z. (2004). Testing vocabulary knowledge: Size, strength, and computer adaptiveness: Language Learning Vol 54(3) Sep 2004, 399-436.
  • Laurier, M. D. (1992). Strengths and weaknesses of two types of tests of classification of French as a second language: With or without directions: Dissertation Abstracts International.
  • Lautenschlager, G. J., & Flaherty, V. L. (1990). Computer administration of questions: More desirable or more social desirability? : Journal of Applied Psychology Vol 75(3) Jun 1990, 310-314.
  • Lawler, R. W., & Yazdani, M. (1987). Artificial intelligence and education, Vol. 1: Learning environments and tutoring systems. Westport, CT: Ablex Publishing.
  • Lee, C. J., & Miller, L. T. (1995). Measuring reaction time without measuring movement time: A modification of the Hormann and Allen millisecond timer for the Commodore 64 or 128: Behavior Research Methods, Instruments & Computers Vol 27(1) Feb 1995, 83-87.
  • Lee, Y.-W., Breland, H., & Muraki, E. (2005). Comparability of TOEFL CBT Writing Prompts for Different Native Language Groups: International Journal of Testing Vol 5(2) 2005, 131-158.
  • Lee-Sammons, W. H., & Wollen, K. A. (1989). Computerized practice tests and effects on in-class exams: Behavior Research Methods, Instruments & Computers Vol 21(2) Apr 1989, 189-194.
  • Leeson, H. V. (2006). The mode effect: A literature review of human and technological issues in computerized testing: International Journal of Testing Vol 6(1) 2006, 1-24.
  • Legg, S. M., & Buhr, D. C. (1992). Computerized adaptive testing with different groups: Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice Vol 11(2) Sum 1992, 23-27.
  • Leij, A. v. d., & Smeets, H. (1992). Assessment of reading disabilities. Amsterdam, Netherlands: John Benjamins Publishing Company.
  • Leitner, Y., Doniger, G. M., Barak, R., Simon, E. S., & Hausdorff, J. M. (2007). A novel multidomain computerized cognitive assessment for attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder: Evidence for widespread and circumscribed cognitive deficits: Journal of Child Neurology Vol 22(3) Mar 2007, 264-276.
  • Lejuez, C. W., Kahler, C. W., & Brown, R. A. (2003). A modified computer version of the Paced Auditory Serial Addition Task (PASAT) as a laboratory-based stressor: the Behavior Therapist Vol 26(4) Sum 2003, 290-293.
  • Lenne, R. C., Vingrys, A. J., & Smith, G. (1995). Using computers to test visual acuity: Journal of the American Optometric Association Vol 66(12) Dec 1995, 766-774.
  • Lensvelt-Mulders, G. J. L. M., & Boeije, H. R. (2007). Evaluating compliance with a computer assisted randomized response technique: A qualitative study into the origins of lying and cheating: Computers in Human Behavior Vol 23(1) Jan 2007, 591-608.
  • Leon, A. C., Kelsey, J. E., Pleil, A., Burgos, T. L., Portera, L., & Lowell, K. (1999). An evaluation of a computer assisted telephone interview for screening for mental disorders among primary care patients: Journal of Nervous and Mental Disease Vol 187(5) May 1999, 308-311.
  • Leon-Carrion, J., Morales, M., Forastero, P., Dominguez-Morales, M. D., & et al. (1991). The computerized Tower of Hanoi: A new form of administration and suggestions for interpretation: Perceptual and Motor Skills Vol 73(1) Aug 1991, 63-66.
  • Lesgold, A., Ivill-Friel, J., & Bonar, J. (1989). Toward intelligent systems for testing. Hillsdale, NJ, England: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
  • Leung, C.-K., Chang, H.-H., & Hau, K.-T. (2002). Item selection in computerized adaptive testing: Improving the a-stratified design with the Sympson-Hetter algorithm: Applied Psychological Measurement Vol 26(4) Dec 2002, 376-392.
  • 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 Vol 63(2) Apr 2003, 257-270.
  • Leutner, D., & Plass, J. L. (1998). Measuring learning styles with questionnaires versus direct observation of preferential choice behavior in authentic learning situations: The Visualizer/Verbalizer Behavior Observation Scale (VV-BOS): Computers in Human Behavior Vol 14(4) Dec 1998, 543-557.
  • Levander, S. (1987). Evaluation of cognitive impairment using a computerized neuropsychological test battery: Nordisk Psykiatrisk Tidsskrift Vol 41(6) 1987, 417-422.
  • Levaux, M.-N., Potvin, S., Sepehry, A. A., Sablier, J., Mendrek, A., & Stip, E. (2007). Computerized assessment of cognition in schizophrenia: Promises and pitfalls of CANTAB: European Psychiatry Vol 22(2) Mar 2007, 104-115.
  • Levinson, E. M., Zeman, H. L., & Ohler, D. L. (2002). A critical evaluation of the Web-based version of the Career Key: The Career Development Quarterly Vol 51(1) Sep 2002, 26-35.
  • Levitan, R. D., Blouin, A. G., Navarro, J. R., & Hill, J. (1991). Validity of the computerized DIS for diagnosing psychiatric inpatients: The Canadian Journal of Psychiatry / La Revue canadienne de psychiatrie Vol 36(10) Dec 1991, 728-731.
  • Levy, A. J., & Barowsky, E. I. (1986). Comparison of computer-administered Harris-Goodenough Draw-A-Man Test with standard paper-and-pencil administration: Perceptual and Motor Skills Vol 63(2, Pt 1) Oct 1986, 395-398.
  • Lewis, C., & Sheehan, K. (1990). Using Bayesian decision theory to design a computerized mastery test: Applied Psychological Measurement Vol 14(4) Dec 1990, 367-386.
  • 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 Vol 42(3) Fal 2005, 245-269.
  • Li, Y. H., & Schafer, W. D. (2005). Trait Parameter Recovery Using Multidimensional Computerized Adaptive Testing in Reading and Mathematics: Applied Psychological Measurement Vol 29(1) Jan 2005, 3-25.
  • Lieberman, S. A., Frye, A. W., Litwins, S. D., Rasmusson, K. A., & Boulet, J. R. (2003). Introduction of Patient Video Clips into Computer-Based Testing: Effects on Item Statistics and Reliability Estimates: Academic Medicine Vol 78(Suppl10) Oct 2003, S48-S51.
  • Lievens, F. (2006). The ITC Guidelines on Computer-Based and Internet-Delivered Testing: Where Do We Go From Here? : International Journal of Testing Vol 6(2) 2006, 189-194.
  • Lightfoot, M., Comulada, W. S., & Stover, G. (2007). Computerized HIV preventive intervention for adolescents: Indications of efficacy: American Journal of Public Health Vol 97(6) Jun 2007, 1027-1030.
  • Limpisathian, S. (1993). The effects of interactive computerized testing on attitudes of college students toward computers: Dissertation Abstracts International.
  • Lin, H., & Ding, S. (2007). An exploration and realization of computerized adaptive testing with cognitive diagnosis: Acta Psychologica Sinica Vol 39(4) Jul 2007, 747-753.
  • Lin, M. T., Chen, Y. B., Li, Y. C., & Young, M. S. (1994). A high-precision ultrasonic system for vertical movement counts in rats: Physiology & Behavior Vol 56(4) Oct 1994, 781-784.
  • Lipton, D. S., & Goldstein, M. F. (1997). Measuring substance abuse among the deaf: Journal of Drug Issues Vol 27(4) Fal 1997, 733-754.
  • Litaker, D. (2003). New technology in quality of life research: Are all computer-assisted approaches created equal? : Quality of Life Research: An International Journal of Quality of Life Aspects of Treatment, Care & Rehabilitation Vol 12(4) Jun 2003, 387-393.
  • Liu, M., Papathanasiou, E., & Hao, Y.-W. (2001). Exploring the use of multimedia examination formats in undergraduate teaching: Results from the fielding testing: Computers in Human Behavior Vol 17(3) May 2001, 225-248.
  • Liu, X., Zou, Y., Liu, J., Wang, J., Qu, Y., Xu, S., et al. (2002). Comparison between traditional and multimedia administration of the Clinical Memory Scale: Chinese Mental Health Journal Vol 16(9) Sep 2002, 640-641.
  • Llabre, M. M., Clements, N. E., Fitzhugh, K. B., Lancelotta, G., & et al. (1987). The effect of computer-administered testing on test anxiety and performance: Journal of Educational Computing Research Vol 3(4) 1987, 429-433.
  • Locke, S. D., & Gilbert, B. O. (1995). Method of psychological assessment, self-disclosure, and experiential differences: A study of computer, questionnaire, and interview assessment formats: Journal of Social Behavior & Personality Vol 10(1) Mar 1995, 255-263.
  • Long, S., Dowsing, R., & Craven, P. (2003). Knowledge-based systems for marking professional IT skills examinations: Knowledge-Based Systems Vol 16(5-6) Jul 2003, 287-294.
  • Lopez, S. J., Sumerall, S. W., & Ryan, J. J. (2002). Factor structure of MicroCog in a clinical sample: Applied Neuropsychology Vol 9(3) Sep 2002, 183-186.
  • Lopez-Bascuas, L. E., Marin, C. C., & Serradilla Garcia, F. J. (1999). A software tool for auditory and speech perception experimentation: Behavior Research Methods, Instruments & Computers Vol 31(2) May 1999, 334-340.
  • Lucente, S., & Fals-Stewart, W. (1992). A computer application for calculation of the Ego Impairment Index: Perceptual and Motor Skills Vol 75(3, Pt 2) Dec 1992, 1281-1282.
  • Luchins, A. S., & Luchins, E. H. (1996). Einstellung effects: The influence of computer-assisted vs paper-and-pencil presentation of classical "water jug" problems: A research report: Gestalt Theory Vol 18(2) Jun 1996, 143-147.
  • Luecht, R., Brumfield, T., & Breithaupt, K. (2006). A Testlet Assembly Design for Adaptive Multistage Tests: Applied Measurement in Education Vol 19(3) 2006, 189-202.
  • Luecht, R. M. (1996). Multidimensional computerized adaptive testing in a certification or licensure context: Applied Psychological Measurement Vol 20(4) Dec 1996, 389-404.
  • Luecht, R. M. (1998). Computer-assisted test assembly using optimization heuristics: Applied Psychological Measurement Vol 22(3) Sep 1998, 224-236.
  • Luecht, R. M. (2006). Operational Issues in Computer-Based Testing. New York, NY: John Wiley & Sons Ltd.
  • Luecht, R. M., Champlain, A. D., & Nungester, R. J. (1998). Maintaining content validity in computerized adaptive testing: Advances in Health Sciences Education Vol 3(1) 1998, 29-41.
  • Luecht, R. M., Hadadi, A., Swanson, D. B., & Case, S. M. (1998). A comparative study of a comprehensive basic sciences test using paper-and-pencil and computerized formats: Academic Medicine Vol 73(Suppl 10) Oct 1998, S51-S53.
  • Luecht, R. M., & Hirsch, T. M. (1992). Item selection using an average growth approximation of target information functions: Applied Psychological Measurement Vol 16(1) Mar 1992, 41-51.
  • Luecht, R. M., & Nungester, R. J. (1998). Some practical examples of computer-adaptive sequential testing: Journal of Educational Measurement Vol 35(3) Fal 1998, 229-249.
  • Lunz, M. E., & Bergstrom, B. (1995). Computerized adaptive testing: Tracking candidate response patterns: Journal of Educational Computing Research Vol 13(2) 1995, 151-162.
  • Lunz, M. E., & Bergstrom, B. A. (1994). An empirical study of computerized adaptive test administration conditions: Journal of Educational Measurement Vol 31(3) Fal 1994, 251-263.
  • Lunz, M. E., & Deville, C. W. (1996). Validity of item selection: A comparison of automated computerized adaptive and manual paper and pencil examinations: Teaching and Learning in Medicine Vol 8(3) 1996, 152-157.
  • Lustig, D. C., Brown, C. D., & Lott, A. C. (1998). Reliability of the CareerScope career assessment and reporting system: Vocational Evaluation & Work Adjustment Journal Vol 31(1) Spr 1998, 19-21.
  • Lustina, M. J. (2005). A comparison of Andrich's rating scale model and Rost's successive intervals model (Juergen Rost). Dissertation Abstracts International Section A: Humanities and Social Sciences.
  • Lynch, W. J. (1996). Computer-administered cognitive assessment update: Journal of Head Trauma Rehabilitation Vol 11(2) Apr 1996, 99-101.
  • MacCann, R., Eastment, B., & Pickering, S. (2002). Responding to free response examination questions: Computer versus pen and paper: British Journal of Educational Technology Vol 33(2) Mar 2002, 173-188.
  • MacDonell, L. E., Skinner, F. K., & Glen, E. M. (1987). The use of two automated neuropsychological tests, Cogfun and the Perceptual Maze Test, with alcoholics: Alcohol and Alcoholism Vol 22(3) 1987, 285-295.
  • Mackersie, C. L., Boothroyd, A., & Minniear, D. (2001). Evaluation of the Computer-Assisted Speech Perception Assessment test (CASPA): Journal of the American Academy of Audiology Vol 12(8) Sep 2001, 390-396.
  • MacLennan, R. N., Jackson, D. N., & Bellantino, N. (1988). Response latencies and the computerized assessment of intelligence: Personality and Individual Differences Vol 9(4) 1988, 811-816.
  • Maddux, C. D., & Johnson, L. (1993). Best practices in computer-assisted assessment. Brandon, VT: Clinical Psychology Publishing Co.
  • Maddux, C. D., & Johnson, L. (1998). Computer-assisted assessment. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons Inc.
  • Maeland, K., Barth, T., Lundal, E., & Sortland, N. (1991). Test usage among Norwegian psychologists: Results of a brief survey: Tidsskrift for Norsk Psykologforening Vol 28(7) Jul 1991, 591-595.
  • Magliano, J. P., Wiemer-Hastings, K., Millis, K. K., Munoz, B. D., & McNamara, D. (2002). Using latent semantic analysis to assess reader strategies: Behavior Research Methods, Instruments & Computers Vol 34(2) May 2002, 181-188.
  • Maguire, K. B., Knobel, M.-L. M., Knobel, B. L., & Sedlacek, L. G. (1991). Computer-adapted PPVT--R: A comparison between standard and modified versions within an elementary school population: Psychology in the Schools Vol 28(3) Jul 1991, 199-205.
  • Maiwald, J., & Conrad, W. (1993). Development and evaluation of a computer version of the Mannheim Test of Physical and Technical Problem Solving (MTP--C): Diagnostica Vol 39(4) 1993, 352-367.
  • Maki, W. S., & Maki, R. H. (2001). Mastery quizzes on the Web: Results from a Web-based introductory psychology course: Behavior Research Methods, Instruments & Computers Vol 33(2) May 2001, 212-216.
  • Malizio, A. G. (1987). Effects of item format and feedback on confidence, difficulty, and response latency using microcomputer-administered tests: Dissertation Abstracts International.
  • Maloy, C. E. (1988). A comparison of paper and pencil, micro-computer and mini-computer formats of the UNIACTCopyright Vocational Interest Inventory: Dissertation Abstracts International.
  • Mancuso, K., Neitz, M., & Neitz, J. (2006). An adaptation of the Cambridge Colour Test for use with animals: Visual Neuroscience Vol 23(3-4) May-Aug 2006, 695-701.
  • Manning, C. A., Mills, S. H., Mogilka, H. J., Hedge, J. W., Bruskiewicz, K. W., & Pfleiderer, E. M. (2000). Prediction of subjective ratings of air traffic controller performance by computer-derived measures and behavioral observations: FAA Office of Aviation Medicine Reports DOT-FAA-AM-00-2 Jan 2000, 19-A1.
  • Maolin, Y. (2005). A Comment on Web-Based Testing: Psychological Science (China) Vol 28(2) Mar 2005, 423-425.
  • Mardberg, B., & Carlstedt, B. (1998). Swedish Enlistment Battery (SEB): Construct validity and latent variable estimation of cognitive abilities by the CAT-SEB: International Journal of Selection and Assessment Vol 6(2) Apr 1998, 107-114.
  • Margolis, M. J., & Clauser, B. E. (2006). A Regression-Based Procedure for Automated Scoring of a Complex Medical Performance Assessment. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers.
  • Marshall-Mies, J. C., Fleishman, E. A., Martin, J. A., Zaccaro, S. J., Baughman, W. A., & McGee, M. L. (2000). Development and evaluation of cognitive and metacognitive measures for predicting leadership potential: Leadership Quarterly Vol 11(1) Spr 2000, 135-153.
  • Marszalek, J. (2007). Computerized adaptive testing and the experience of flow in examinees. Dissertation Abstracts International Section A: Humanities and Social Sciences.
  • Martin, C. J., & Hoshaw, C. R. (1997). Policy and program management perspective. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
  • Martin, J., & VanLehn, K. (1995). A Bayesian approach to cognitive assessment. Hillsdale, NJ, England: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
  • Martin, M. R. (1988). Reciprocal effects of acceptance of personality feedback and computer attitudes: Dissertation Abstracts International.
  • Martin, T. A., & Wilcox, K. L. (1989). HyperCard administration of a block-design task: Behavior Research Methods, Instruments & Computers Vol 21(2) Apr 1989, 312-315.
  • Maruff, P., Wood, S., Currie, J., McArthur-Jackson, C., & et al. (1994). Computer-administered visual analogue mood scales: Rapid and valid assessment of mood in HIV positive individuals: Psychological Reports Vol 74(1) Feb 1994, 39-42.
  • Mason, B. J., Patry, M., & Bernstein, D. J. (2001). An examination of the equivalence between non-adaptive computer-based and traditional testing: Journal of Educational Computing Research Vol 24(1) 2001, 29-39.
  • Matarazzo, J. D. (1985). Clinical psychological test interpretations by computer: Hardware outpaces software: Computers in Human Behavior Vol 1(3-4) 1985, 235-253.
  • Mattila, M. J., Aranko, K., Mattila, M. E., & Paakkari, I. (1994). Effects of psychotropic drugs on digit substitution: Comparison of the computerized symbol-digit substitution and traditional digit-symbol substitution tests: Journal of Psychopharmacology Vol 8(2) 1994, 81-87.
  • Mayer, J., Mooney, V., Matheson, L., Leggett, S., Verna, J., Balourdas, G., et al. (2005). Reliability and Validity of a New Computer-Administered Pictorial Activity and Task Sort: Journal of Occupational Rehabilitation Vol 15(2) Jun 2005, 203-213.
  • McAlpine, M. (2004). Easing the transition from paper to screen: An evaluatory framework for CAA migration: ALT-J Research in Learning Technology Vol 12(3) Sep 2004, 231-248.
  • McBride, J. R. (1997). Dissemination of CAT-ASVAB technology. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
  • McBride, J. R. (1997). The Marine Corps Exploratory Development Project: 1977-1982. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
  • McBride, J. R. (1997). Research antecedents of applied adaptive testing. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
  • McBride, J. R. (1997). Technical perspective. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
  • McBride, J. R. (1998). Innovations in computer-based ability testing: Promise, problems, and perils. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers.
  • McBride, J. R., Wetzel, C. D., & Hetter, R. D. (1997). Preliminary psychometric research for CAT-ASVAB: Selecting an adaptive testing strategy. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
  • McClarty, K. L. (2007). A feasibility study of a computerized adaptive test of the international personality item pool NEO. Dissertation Abstracts International: Section B: The Sciences and Engineering.
  • McCullough, C. S., & Miller, D. C. (2003). Computerized assessment. New York, NY: Guilford Press.
  • McCullough, J. A., & Wilson, R. H. (2001). Performance on a Spanish picture-identification task using a multimedia format: Journal of the American Academy of Audiology Vol 12(5) May 2001, 254-260.
  • McFarlane, A. (2003). Editorial. Assessment for the Digital Age: Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice Vol 10(3) Nov 2003, 261-266.
  • McGuire, M., Bakst, K., Fairbanks, L., McGuire, M., Sachinvala, N., Von Scotti, H., et al. (2000). Cognitive, mood, and functional evaluations using touchscreen technology: Journal of Nervous and Mental Disease Vol 188(12) Dec 2000, 813-817.
  • McHenry, J. J., & Schmitt, N. (1994). Multimedia testing. Hillsdale, NJ, England: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
  • McKee, L. M., & Levinson, E. M. (1990). A review of the computerized version of the Self-Directed Search: The Career Development Quarterly Vol 38(4) Jun 1990, 325-333.
  • McKenna-Byington, E. (2005). Assessment Practices in an Online Lecture-Based Course and a Seminar-Based Course: Notable Differences. Bolton, MA: Anker Publishing Company.
  • McKenzie, K. A. (1996). McK-Score: The development of a computerized training tool for improving WISC-III assessments. Dissertation Abstracts International Section A: Humanities and Social Sciences.
  • McLeod, L. D. (1999). Alternative methods for the detection of item preknowledge in computerized adaptive testing. Dissertation Abstracts International: Section B: The Sciences and Engineering.
  • McLeod, L. D., & Lewis, C. (1999). Detecting item memorization in the CAT environment: Applied Psychological Measurement Vol 23(2) Jun 1999, 147-160.
  • Mead, A. D. (2006). An Introduction to Multistage Testing: Applied Measurement in Education Vol 19(3) 2006, 185-187.
  • Meade, A. W., Michels, L. C., & Lautenschlager, G. J. (2007). Are internet and paper-and-pencil personality tests truly comparable?: An experimental design measurement invariance study: Organizational Research Methods Vol 10(2) Apr 2007, 322-345.
  • Meier, S. T. (1988). Predicting individual differences in performance on computer-administered tests and tasks: Development of the Computer Aversion Scale: Computers in Human Behavior Vol 4(3) 1988, 175-187.
  • Meier, S. T., & Wick, M. T. (1991). Computer-based unobtrusive measurement: Potential supplements to reactive self-reports: Professional Psychology: Research and Practice Vol 22(5) Oct 1991, 410-412.
  • Meijer, R. R. (2004). Using Patterns of Summed Scores in Paper-and-Pencil Tests and Computer-Adaptive Tests to Detect Misfitting Item Score Patterns: Journal of Educational Measurement Vol 41(2) Sum 2004, 119-136.
  • Meijer, R. R., & Nering, M. L. (1999). Computerized adaptive testing: Overview and introduction: Applied Psychological Measurement Vol 23(3) Sep 1999, 187-194.
  • Melnick, D. E. (1990). Computer-based clinical simulation: State of the art: Evaluation & the Health Professions Vol 13(1) Mar 1990, 104-120.
  • Melnick, D. E., & Clauser, B. E. (2006). Computer-Based Testing for Professional Licensing and Certification of Health Professionals. New York, NY: John Wiley & Sons Ltd.
  • Merenda, P. (2006). New Methods in Automated Test Design: PsycCRITIQUES Vol 51 (7), 2006.
  • Mergenthaler, E., & Bucci, W. (1999). Linking verbal and non-verbal representations: Computer analysis of referential activity: British Journal of Medical Psychology Vol 72(3) Sep 1999, 339-354.
  • Merrell, C., & Tymms, P. (2007). Identifying reading problems with computer-adaptive assessments: Journal of Computer Assisted Learning Vol 23(1) Feb 2007, 27-35.
  • Merrick, P. I., Secker, D. I., Fright, R., & Melding, P. (2004). The ECO computerized cognitive battery: Collection of normative data using elderly New Zealanders: International Psychogeriatrics Vol 16(1) Mar 2004, 93-105.
  • Merten, T. (1999). Conventional and computerized test administration: The visual retention test: Zeitschrift fur Differentielle und Diagnostische Psychologie Vol 20(2) 1999, 97-115.
  • Merten, T. (2000). The computerized version of the Concentrations Endurance Test (test d2) and the problem of transfer equivalence: Psychologische Beitrage Vol 42(4) 2000, 572-589.
  • Merten, T., & Ruch, W. (1996). A comparison of computerized and conventional administration of the German versions of the Eysenck Personality Questionnaire and the Carroll Rating Scale for Depression: Personality and Individual Differences Vol 20(3) Mar 1996, 281-291.
  • Mervielde, I. (1988). Cognitive processes and computerized personality assessment: European Journal of Personality Vol 2(2) Jun 1988, 97-111.
  • Meurling, A. W., Tonning-Olsson, I., & Levander, S. (2000). Sex differences in strategy and performance on computerized neuropsychological tests as related to gender identity and age at puberty: Scandinavian Journal of Psychology Vol 41(2) Jun 2000, 81-90.
  • Miceli, R., & Molinengo, G. (2005). Administration of computerized and adaptive tests: An application of the Rasch Model: Testing Psicometria Metodologia Vol 12(3) 2005, 131-149.
  • Miclea, M., & Mihalca, L. (2007). A computerized platform for the assessment of school readiness: Cognitie Creier Comportament Vol 11(1) Mar 2007, 83-90.
  • Miles, E. W., & King, W. C., Jr. (1998). Gender and administration mode effects when pencil-and-paper personality tests are computerized: Educational and Psychological Measurement Vol 58(1) Feb 1998, 68-76.
  • Miller, E. N., Satz, P., & Visscher, B. (1991). Computerized and conventional neuropsychological assessment of HIV-1-infected homosexual men: Neurology Vol 41(10) Oct 1991, 1608-1616.
  • Miller, M. J. (2007). Examining the degree of congruency between a traditional career instrument and an online self-assessment exercise: Journal of Employment Counseling Vol 44(1) Mar 2007, 11-16.
  • Miller, P. (1991). Use of the Peabody Picture Vocabulary Test--Revised (PPVT--R) with individuals with severe speech and motor impairment: Effect of response mode on test results: Dissertation Abstracts International.
  • Millman, J., & Westman, R. S. (1989). Computer-assisted writing of achievement test items: Toward a future technology: Journal of Educational Measurement Vol 26(2) Sum 1989, 177-190.
  • Mills, C. N. (1999). Development and introduction of a computer adaptive Graduate Record Examinations General Test. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers.
  • Mills, C. N., Potenza, M. T., Fremer, J. J., & Ward, W. C. (2002). Computer-based testing: Building the foundation for future assessments. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers.
  • Mills, C. N., & Stocking, M. (1996). Practical issues in large-scale computerized adaptive testing: Applied Measurement in Education Vol 9(4) 1996, 287-304.
  • Mills, G. M. (1991). Analysing learning strategies through microcomputer-based problem solving tasks. New York, NY: Kluwer Academic/Plenum Publishers.
  • Millward, L. J., Bryan, K., Everatt, J., & Collins, R. (2005). Clinicians and dyslexia--A Computer-based assessment of one of the key cognitive skills involved in drug administration: International Journal of Nursing Studies Vol 42(3) Mar 2005, 341-353.
  • Minnis, H., Millward, R., Sinclair, C., Kennedy, E., Greig, A., Towlson, K., et al. (2006). The Computerized MacArthur Story Stem Battery--A pilot study of a novel medium for assessing children's representations of relationships: International Journal of Methods in Psychiatric Research Vol 15(4) 2006, 207-214.
  • Mirza, A., & Matei, L. (1989). The computer-assisted psychological examination with the Eysenck Personality Questionnaire (EPQ): Revista de Psihologie Vol 35(4) Oct-Dec 1989, 345-349.
  • Mislevy, R. J., & Haertel, G. D. (2006). Implications of Evidence-Centered Design for Educational Testing: Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice Vol 25(4) Win 2006, 6-20.
  • Mislevy, R. J., Steinberg, L. S., Almond, R. G., & Lukas, J. F. (2006). Concepts, Terminology, and Basic Models of Evidence-Centered Design. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers.
  • Mislevy, R. J., Steinberg, L. S., Breyer, F. J., Almond, R. G., & Johnson, L. (1999). A cognitive task analysis with implications for designing simulation-based performance assessment: Computers in Human Behavior Vol 15(3-4) May-Jul 1999, 335-374.
  • Mislevy, R. J., Steinberg, L. S., Breyer, F. J., Almond, R. G., & Johnson, L. (2002). Making sense of data from complex assessments: Applied Measurement in Education Vol 15(4) Oct 2002, 363-389.
  • Mizushima, K., & Yasutake, Y. (1992). Schematic projective techniques (SPT) by personal computer: Japanese Journal of Counseling Science Vol 25(1) Mar 1992, 9-18.
  • Moon, O. (1993). An application of Computerized Adaptive Testing to the Test of English as a Foreign Language: Dissertation Abstracts International.
  • Moon, Y. (1998). Impression management in computer-based interviews: The effects of input modality, output modality, and distance: Public Opinion Quarterly Vol 62(4) Win 1998, 610-622.
  • Mooney, J. (2002). Pre-employment testing on the Internet: Put candidates a click away and hire at modem speed: Public Personnel Management Vol 31(1) Spr 2002, 41-52.
  • Moore, J. N. (1991). Equivalence of the National Computer Systems computerized administration and booklet administration of the MMPI: Dissertation Abstracts International.
  • Moore, L., Carnine, D., Stepnoski, M., & Woodward, J. (1987). Research on the efficiency of low-cost networking: Journal of Learning Disabilities Vol 20(9) Nov 1987, 574-576.
  • Moreland, K. L. (1985). Computer-assisted psychological assessment in 1986: A practical guide: Computers in Human Behavior Vol 1(3-4) 1985, 221-233.
  • Moreland, K. L. (1987). Computer-based test interpretations: Advice to the consumer: Applied Psychology: An International Review Vol 36(3-4) Sep 1987, 385-399.
  • Moreland, K. L. (1990). Some observations on computer-assisted psychological testing: Journal of Personality Assessment Vol 55(3-4) Win 1990, 820-823.
  • Moreland, K. L. (1991). Assessment of validity in computer-based test interpretations. Hillsdale, NJ, England: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
  • Moreland, K. L. (1993). Computer-assisted interpretation of the MCMI-II. Hillsdale, NJ, England: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
  • Moreno Angel, L., Hernandez, J. M., Garcia Leal, O., & Santacreu, J. (2000). Computerized test for the tolerance frustration assessment: Anales de Psicologia Vol 16(2) 2000, 143-155.
  • Moreno, K. E. (1997). CAT-ASVAB operational test and evaluation. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
  • Moreno, K. E., & Segall, D. O. (1997). Reliability and construct validity of CAT-ASVAB. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
  • Moreno, K. E., Segall, D. O., & Hetter, R. D. (1997). The use of computerized adaptive testing in the military. Westport, CT: Greenwood Press/Greenwood Publishing Group.
  • Morozov, I. S., Zhirnov, E. N., Barchukov, V. G., Efimova, L. P., & et al. (1992). The use of microcomputers for studying the effects of drugs on the psychophysiological status and quality of the performance of operators of different skill: Eksperimental'naya i Klinicheskaya Farmakologiya Vol 55(5) Sep-Oct 1992, 68-70.
  • Morris, R. G., Rushe, T., Woodruffe, P. W. R., & Murray, R. M. (1995). Problem solving in schizophrenia: A specific deficit in planning ability: Schizophrenia Research Vol 14(3) Feb 1995, 235-246.
  • Mosenthal, P. B. (1998). Defining prose task characteristics for use in computer-adaptive testing and instruction: American Educational Research Journal Vol 35(2) Sum 1998, 269-307.
  • Moser, K., Selig, J. G., & Rebstock, M. (1990). Process variables in a computer-assisted performance test: Diagnostica Vol 36(4) 1990, 321-328.
  • Moshinsky, A., & Kazin, C. (2005). Constructing a Computerized Adaptive Test for University Applicants With Disabilities: Applied Measurement in Education Vol 18(4) 2005, 381-405.
  • Most, R. (1987). Levels of error in computerised psychological inventories: Applied Psychology: An International Review Vol 36(3-4) Sep 1987, 375-383.
  • Mueller, A. C. (1987). Effects of short-term delay in item feedback during computer testing on retention of performance: Dissertation Abstracts International.
  • Mueller, K., Liebig, C., & Hattrup, K. (2007). Computerizing organizational attitude surveys: An investigation of the measurement equivalence of a multifaceted job satisfaction measure: Educational and Psychological Measurement Vol 67(4) Aug 2007, 658-678.
  • Mulkey, J. R. (1997). The effects of high-stakes computer-based certification examination on self-efficacy and worry. Dissertation Abstracts International Section A: Humanities and Social Sciences.
  • Mulkey, J. R., & O'Neil, H. F., Jr. (1999). The effects of test item format on self-efficacy and worry during a high-stakes computer-based certification examination: Computers in Human Behavior Vol 15(3-4) May-Jul 1999, 495-509.
  • Mullin, J. P. (2000). Reaction time in normal aging: An examination of the complexity hypothesis of cognitive slowing. Dissertation Abstracts International: Section B: The Sciences and Engineering.
  • Mulloy-Steinborn, J. M. (1994). Affective and cognitive effects on response time to a computer-administered version of the Eysenck Personality Questionnaire. Dissertation Abstracts International: Section B: The Sciences and Engineering.
  • Mundt, J. C., Katzelnick, D. J., Kennedy, S. H., Eisfeld, B. S., Bouffard, B. B., & Greist, J. H. (2006). Validation of an IVRS version of the MADRS: Journal of Psychiatric Research Vol 40(3) Apr 2006, 243-246.
  • Munoz, B., Magliano, J. P., Sheridan, R., & McNamara, D. S. (2006). Typing versus thinking aloud when reading: Implications for computer-based assessment and training tools: Behavior Research Methods Vol 38(2) May 2006, 211-217.
  • Munro, D. (1995). Response latencies for ability test items: Some explorations with the Newcastle Gate Test: Australian Psychologist Vol 30(1) Mar 1995, 17-20.
  • Murakami, Y. (1993). Differences of booklet administration from the computer form of MINI personality inventory: Japanese Journal of Psychology Vol 64(4) Oct 1993, 279-283.
  • Murakami, Y., & Murakami, C. (1988). The automated Rorschach system for Klopfer-Kataguchi technique: Japanese Journal of Behaviormetrics Vol 15(2) Mar 1988, 22-31.
  • Murphy-Berman, V., Rosell, J., & Wright, G. (1986). Measuring children's attention span: A microcomputer assessment technique: Journal of Educational Research Vol 80(1) Sep-Oct 1986, 23-28.
  • Myers, M. J. (2002). Computer-assisted second language assessment: To the top of the pyramid: ReCALL: Journal of Eurocall Vol 14(1) May 2002, 167-181.
  • Nam, S. S. (1997). Validity of a parent-completed, computer-based screening questionnaire for the development of 15- to 36-month olds. Dissertation Abstracts International Section A: Humanities and Social Sciences.
  • Namlu, A. G., & Odabasi, H. F. (2007). Unethical computer using behavior scale: A study of reliability and validity on Turkish university students: Computers & Education Vol 48(2) Feb 2007, 205-215.
  • Nandakumar, R., & Roussos, L. (2004). Evaluation of the CATSIB DIF Procedure in a Pretest Setting: Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics Vol 29(2) Sum 2004, 177-199.
  • Naumov, N. D. (1991). Psychological-pedagogical problems of computer diagnostics of comprehension: Voprosy Psychologii Vol 2 1991, 127-132.
  • Neal, L. A., Busuttil, W., Herapath, R., & Strike, P. W. (1994). Development and validation of the computerized Clinician Administered Post-traumatic Stress Disorder Scale-1--Revised: Psychological Medicine Vol 24(3) Aug 1994, 701-706.
  • Nelson, S. E., LaPlante, D. A., Peller, A. J., LaBrie, R. A., Caro, G., & Shaffer, H. J. (2007). Implementation of a computerized psychiatric assessment tool at a DUI treatment facility: A case example: Adminstration and Policy in Mental Health and Mental Health Services Research Vol 34(5) Sep 2007, 489-493.
  • Nering, M. L. (1997). The distribution of indexes of person fit within the computerized adaptive testing environment: Applied Psychological Measurement Vol 21(2) Jun 1997, 115-127.
  • Neubauer, A. C., Urban, E., & Malle, B. F. (1991). Raven's Advanced Progressive Matrices: Computer-assisted presentation vs standard presentation: Diagnostica Vol 37(3) 1991, 204-212.
  • Neuman, G., & Baydoun, R. (1998). Computerization of paper-and-pencil tests: When are they equivalent? : Applied Psychological Measurement Vol 22(1) Mar 1998, 71-83.
  • Newman, J. C., Des Jarlais, D. C., Turner, C. F., Gribble, J., Cooley, P., & Paone, D. (2002). The differential effects of face-to-face and computer interview modes: American Journal of Public Health Vol 92(2) Feb 2002, 294-297.
  • Nicewander, W. A., & Thomasson, G. L. (1999). Some reliability estimates for computerized adaptive tests: Applied Psychological Measurement Vol 23(3) Sep 1999, 239-247.
  • No authorship, i. (1990). Review of Cognition and Personal Structure: Computer Access and Analysis: PsycCRITIQUES Vol 35 (5), May, 1990.
  • Noonan, J. V., & Sarvela, P. D. (1988). Implementation decisions in computer-based testing programs: Performance & Instruction Vol 27(6) Jul 1988, 5-13.
  • Noyes, J., Garland, K., & Robbins, L. (2004). Paper-based versus computer-based assessment: Is workload another test mode effect? : British Journal of Educational Technology Vol 35(1) Jan 2004, 111-113.
  • Noyes, J. M., & Bruneau, D. P. J. (2007). A self-analysis of the NASA-TLX workload measure: Ergonomics Vol 50(4) Apr 2007, 514-519.
  • Nurius, P. S. (1990). Computer literacy in automated assessment: Challenges and future directions: Computers in Human Services Vol 6(4) 1990, 283-297.
  • Nurius, P. S. (1990). A review of automated assessment: Computers in Human Services Vol 6(4) 1990, 265-281.
  • Obersaat, R. C. (1992). In-class microcomputer health and safety assessment among Tennessee third, fourth and fifth-grade students: Dissertation Abstracts International.
  • Ogilvie, R. W., Trusk, T. C., & Blue, A. V. (1999). Students' attitudes towards computer testing in a basic science course: Medical Education Vol 33(11) Nov 1999, 828-831.
  • Ogles, B. M., France, C. R., Lunnen, K. M., Bell, M. T., & Goldfarb, M. (1998). Computerized depression screening and awareness: Community Mental Health Journal Vol 34(1) Feb 1998, 27-38.
  • O'Hare, D. (1997). Cognitive ability determinants of elite pilot performance: Human Factors Vol 39(4) Dec 1997, 540-552.
  • Olea Diaz, J., Ponsoda Gil, V., Revuelta Menendez, J., Hontangas Beltran, P., & Abad Garcia, F. J. (2001). Requirements, applications, and investigation in computerized adaptive testing: Apuntes de Psicologia Vol 19(1) May 2001, 11-28.
  • Olea, J., Ponsoda, V., Felipe, L., & Carretie, L. (1998). Computerized assessment strategies and anxiety: A comparative study in a risk sample: Ansiedad y Estres Vol 4(1) 1998, 71-79.
  • Olea, J., Ponsoda, V., Revuelta, J., & Belchi, J. (1996). Psychometric properties of an computerized adaptive test for the measurement of english vocabulary: Estudios de Psicologia No 55 1996, 61-73.
  • Oliver, L. W., & Chartrand, J. M. (2000). Strategies for career assessment research on the internet: Journal of Career Assessment Vol 8(1) Win 2000, 95-103.
  • Olsen, J. B. (1990). Applying computerized adaptive testing in schools: Measurement and Evaluation in Counseling and Development Vol 23(1) Apr 1990, 31-38.
  • Olsen, J. B., Cox, A., Price, C., Strozeski, M., & et al. (1990). Development, implementation, and validation of a computerized test for statewide assessment: Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice Vol 9(2) Sum 1990, 7-10, 32.
  • Olsen, J. B., Maynes, D. D., Slawson, D., & Ho, K. (1989). Comparisons of paper-administered, computer-administered and computerized adaptive achievement tests: Journal of Educational Computing Research Vol 5(3) 1989, 311-326.
  • Olson-Buchanan, J. B. (2002). Computer-based advances in assessment. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
  • Olsson, R. H. (1987). Evaluation of an automated leisure assessment for leisure services: Dissertation Abstracts International.
  • O'Neill, T., Lunz, M. E., & Thiede, K. (2000). The impact of receiving the same items on consecutive computer adaptive test administrations: Journal of Applied Measurement Vol 1(2) 2000, 131-151.
  • Ortiz-Nance, E. W. (1999). Distinguishing world view orientation: An FTC analysis of verbal content. (feeling thinking contract, word coding, Afrocentric, Eurocentric). Dissertation Abstracts International: Section B: The Sciences and Engineering.
  • Osimani, A., Alon, A., Berger, A., & Abarbanel, J. M. (1997). Use of the Stroop phenomenon as a diagnostic tool for malingering: Journal of Neurology, Neurosurgery & Psychiatry Vol 62(6) Jun 1997, 617-621.
  • Osin, L., & Nesher, P. (1989). Comparison of student performance in arithmetic exercises: TOAM vs paper-and-pencil testing: International Journal of Man-Machine Studies Vol 31(3) Sep 1989, 293-313.
  • Oswald, F. L. (2006). Review of Measuring and Analyzing Behavior in Organizations: Applied Psychological Measurement Vol 30(3) May 2006, 253-255.
  • Ott, R., & Scholz, O. B. (1999). The Electronic Bonn Pain Diary: Report of a computer-aided procedure for pain diagnosis: Zeitschrift fur Klinische Psychologie, Psychiatrie und Psychotherapie Vol 47(2) 1999, 191-206.
  • Overton, R. C., Taylor, L. R., Zickar, M. J., & Harms, H. J. (1996). The pen-based computer as an alternative platform for test administration: Personnel Psychology Vol 49(2) Sum 1996, 455-464.
  • Padawer, J. R. (2001). Computer-modified Rorschach inkblots: A new method for studying projectives. Dissertation Abstracts International: Section B: The Sciences and Engineering.
  • Palmer, R. D., & Keyser, D. (1984). Automated psychological testing with psychiatric patients: International Journal of Partial Hospitalization Vol 2(4) Dec 1984, 275-281.
  • Paluzzi, S., Paolillo, V., & Santoro Bellini, M. A. (1994). Computer version of Occupational Stress Inventory: An instrument to investigate, prevent and control work stress: Medicina Psicosomatica Vol 39(2) Apr-Jun 1994, 89-100.
  • Paolo, A. M. (1988). Traditional and automated psychological assessment: A study of the equivalence of administration methods: Dissertation Abstracts International.
  • Papanastasiou, E. C. (2005). Item Review and the Rearrangement Procedure: Its process and its results: Educational Research and Evaluation Vol 11(4) Aug 2005, 303-321.
  • Park, J. (2005). Learning in a New Computerized Testing System: Journal of Educational Psychology Vol 97(3) Aug 2005, 436-443.
  • Park, K. S., & Lee, S. W. (1992). A computer-aided aptitude test for predicting flight performance of trainees: Human Factors Vol 34(2) Apr 1992, 189-204.
  • Parshall, C. G. (1993). Computer testing vs. paper-and-pencil testing: An analysis of examinee characteristics associated with mode effects on the GRE general test: Dissertation Abstracts International.
  • Parshall, C. G., & Balizet, S. (2001). Audio computer-based tests (CBTs): An initial framework for the use of sound in computerized tests: Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice Vol 20(2) Sum 2001, 5-15.
  • Parshall, C. G., Spray, J. A., Kalohn, J. C., & Davey, T. (2003). Practical considerations in computer-based testing: Book review: Applied Psychological Measurement Vol 27(1) Jan 2003, 78-80.
  • 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 Vol 31(3) May 2007, 213-232.
  • 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 Vol 26(2) Jun 2002, 147-163.
  • Patsula, L. N. (2000). A comparison of computerized adaptive testing and multistage testing. Dissertation Abstracts International: Section B: The Sciences and Engineering.
  • Patton, G. C., Coffey, C., Posterino, M., Carlin, J. B., Wolfe, R., & Bowes, G. (1999). A computerized screening instrument for adolescent depression: Population-based validation and application to a two-phase case-control study: Social Psychiatry and Psychiatric Epidemiology Vol 34(3) Mar 1999, 166-172.
  • Paul, R. H., Lawrence, J., Williams, L. M., Richard, C. C., Cooper, N., & Gordon, E. (2005). Preliminary validity of "IntegNeuroTM": A new computerized battery of neurocognitive tests: International Journal of Neuroscience Vol 115(11) Nov 2005, 1549-1567.
  • Pavlov, R., Eskenasi, A., & Mitkov, R. (1986). An adaptive system of examining and training children: Bulletin of the International Test Commission No 22 Jun 1986, 29-32.
  • Peat, M., & Franklin, S. (2002). Supporting student learning: The use of computer-based formative assessment modules: British Journal of Educational Technology Vol 33(5) Nov 2002, 515-523.
  • Pelissolo, A., Veysseyre, O., & Lepine, J.-P. (1997). Validation of computerized version of the Temperament and Character Inventory (TCI) in psychiatric inpatients: Psychiatry Research Vol 72(3) Oct 1997, 195-199.
  • Pellegrino, J. W., & Hunt, E. B. (1989). Computer-controlled assessment of static and dynamic spatial reasoning. New York, NY, England: Praeger Publishers.
  • Pellegrino, J. W., Hunt, E. B., Abate, R., & Farr, S. (1987). A computer-based test battery for the assessment of static and dynamic spatial reasoning abilities: Behavior Research Methods, Instruments & Computers Vol 19(2) Apr 1987, 231-236.
  • Penfield, R. D. (2006). Applying Bayesian Item Selection Approaches to Adaptive Tests Using Polytomous Items: Applied Measurement in Education Vol 19(1) 2006, 1-20.
  • Perrez, M. (1988). The relationship between strategies for coping with everyday stress and mental health: Results of computer-assisted self-observations and questionnaires: Zeitschrift fur Klinische Psychologie Vol 17(4) 1988, 292-306.
  • Perrez, M., & Reicherts, M. (1996). A computer-assisted self-monitoring procedure for assessing stress-related behavior under real life conditions. Ashland, OH: Hogrefe & Huber Publishers.
  • Perriolat, R. (1987). The development of computerized tests at the Psychology Services of the French National Railways: Applied Psychology: An International Review Vol 36(3-4) Sep 1987, 299-310.
  • Peterson, L., Johannsson, V., & Carlsson, S. G. (1996). Computerized testing in a hospital setting: Psychometric and psychological effects: Computers in Human Behavior Vol 12(3) Fal 1996, 339-350.
  • Peterson, M. W., Gordon, J., Elliott, S., & Kreiter, C. (2004). Computer-Based Testing: Initial Report of Extensive Use in a Medical School Curriculum: Teaching and Learning in Medicine Vol 16(1) Win 2004, 51-59.
  • Pfister, H. P. (1995). New technology for administering group tests: Australian Psychologist Vol 30(1) Mar 1995, 24-26.
  • Picard, M., Ilecki, H. J., & Baxter, J. D. (1993). Clinical use of BOBCAT: Testing reliability and validity of computerized pure-tone audiometry with noise-exposed workers, children and the aged: Audiology Vol 32(1) Jan-Feb 1993, 55-67.
  • Ping, C., Shuliang, D., Haijing, L., & Jie, Z. (2006). Item Selection Strategies of Computerized Adaptive Testing based on Graded Response Model: Acta Psychologica Sinica Vol 38(3) May 2006, 461-467.
  • Pinsoneault, T. B. (1996). Equivalency of computer-assisted and paper-and-pencil administered versions of the Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory-2: Computers in Human Behavior Vol 12(2) Sum 1996, 291-300.
  • Pitariu, H., & Chioreanu, M. (1989). Computer-assisted psychological examination: Potentials and limits: Revista de Psihologie Vol 35(1) Mar 1989, 49-54.
  • Pitcher, N., Goldfinch, J., & Beevers, C. (2002). Aspects of computer-based assessment in mathematics: Active Learning in Higher Education Vol 3(2) Jul 2002, 159-176.
  • Pitkin, A. K., & Vispoel, W. P. (2001). Differences between self-adapted and computerized adaptive tests: A meta-analysis: Journal of Educational Measurement Vol 38(3) Fal 2001, 235-247.
  • Plake, B. S. (2002). Alternatives for scoring CBTs and analyzing examinee behavior. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers.
  • Plew, G. T. (1990). An empirical investigation of major adaptive testing methodologies and an expert systems approach: Dissertation Abstracts International.
  • Pogacnik, V. (1988). The development of the computer test for fluid intelligence: Anthropos Vol 18(1-3) 1988, 208-218.
  • Polk, T. A., VanLehn, K., & Kalp, D. (1995). ASPM2: Progress toward the analysis of symbolic parameter models. Hillsdale, NJ, England: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
  • Pomplun, M. (2007). A bifactor analysis for a mode-of-administration effect: Applied Measurement in Education Vol 20(2) 2007, 137-152.
  • Pomplun, M., & Custer, M. (2005). Does Deferring Items Change Their Psychometric Characteristics? : Applied Measurement in Education Vol 18(2) Apr 2005, 185-197.
  • Pomplun, M., Frey, S., & Becker, D. F. (2002). The score equivalence of paper-and-and pencil and computerized versions of a speeded test of reading comprehension: Educational and Psychological Measurement Vol 62(2) Apr 2002, 337-354.
  • Pomplun, M., & Ritchie, T. (2004). An Investigation of Context Effects for item Randomization Within Testlets: Journal of Educational Computing Research Vol 30(3) 2004, 243-254.
  • Pomplun, M., Ritchie, T., & Custer, M. (2006). Factors in Paper-and-Pencil and Computer Reading Score Differences at the Primary Grades: Educational Assessment Vol 11(2) 2006, 127-143.
  • Ponsoda, V., Olea, J., & Revuelta, J. (1994). ADTEST: A computer-adaptive test based on the maximum information principle: Educational and Psychological Measurement Vol 54(3) Fal 1994, 680-686.
  • 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 Vol 12(2) 1999, 167-184.
  • 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 Vol 57(2) Apr 1997, 210-221.
  • Popham, S. M., & Holden, R. R. (1990). Assessing MMPI constructs through the measurement of response latencies: Journal of Personality Assessment Vol 54(3-4) Sum 1990, 469-478.
  • Popper, R., Dragsbaek, H., Siegel, S. F., & Hirsch, E. (1988). Use of pocket computers for self-administration of cognitive tests in the field: Behavior Research Methods, Instruments & Computers Vol 20(5) Oct 1988, 481-484.
  • Post, E. M., Burko, M. S., & Gordon, M. (1990). Single-component microcomputer-driven assessment of attention: Behavior Research Methods, Instruments & Computers Vol 22(3) Jun 1990, 297-301.
  • Potenza, M. T., & Stocking, M. L. (1997). Flawed items in computerized adaptive testing: Journal of Educational Measurement Vol 34(1) Spr 1997, 79-96.
  • Potosky, D. (1996). Beliefs about computers and their subsequent effects on response distortion. Dissertation Abstracts International Section A: Humanities and Social Sciences.
  • Potosky, D., & Bobko, P. (1997). Computer versus paper-and-pencil administration mode and response distortion in noncognitive selection tests: Journal of Applied Psychology Vol 82(2) Apr 1997, 293-299.
  • Pouwer, F., Snoek, F. J., van der Ploeg, H. M., Heine, R. J., & Brand, A. N. (1998). A comparison of the standard and the computerized versions of the Well-being Questionnaire (WBQ) and the Diabetes Treatment Satisfaction Questionnaire (DTSQ): Quality of Life Research: An International Journal of Quality of Life Aspects of Treatment, Care & Rehabilitation Vol 7(1) Jan 1998, 33-38.
  • Powell, D. H. (1997). Comment on Computerized assessment of arithmetic computation skills with MicroCog: Journal of the International Neuropsychological Society Vol 3(2) Mar 1997, 200.
  • Powell, M. B., Wilson, J. C., & Hasty, M. K. (2002). Evaluation of the usefulness of 'Marvin': A computerized assessment tool for investigative interviewers of children: Computers in Human Behavior Vol 18(5) Sep 2002, 577-592.
  • Powell, Z.-H. E. (1992). Test anxiety and test performance under computerized adaptive testing methods: Dissertation Abstracts International.
  • Powers, D. E. (2001). Test anxiety and test performance: Comparing paper-based and computer-adaptive versions of the Graduate Record Examination (GRECopyright ) General Test: Journal of Educational Computing Research Vol 24(3) 2001, 249-273.
  • Powers, D. E., & O'Neill, K. (1993). Inexperienced and anxious computer users: Coping with a computer-administered test of academic skills: Educational Assessment Vol 1(2) Spr 1993, 153-173.
  • Prescott, R. (1990). Local independence and item context in a simulated adaptive version of the Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory: Dissertation Abstracts International.
  • Prete, F. R., Hurd, L. E., Branstrator, D., & Johnson, A. (2002). Responses to computer-generated visual stimuli by the male praying mantis, Sphodromantis lineola (Burmeister): Animal Behaviour Vol 63(3) Mar 2002, 503-510.
  • Preussler, W. (1998). Structural knowledge as a precondition of controlling complex dynamic systems: Zeitschrift fur Experimentelle Psychologie Vol 45(3) 1998, 218-240.
  • Prieto, G., Carro, J., Orgaz, B., & Pulido, R. F. (1993). Cognitive analysis of a visualization computerized test: Psicothema Vol 5(2) Oct 1993, 293-301.
  • Prieto, G., Carro, J., Orgaz, B., Pulido, R. F., & et al. (1993). Use of the Hypercard program to construct computerized spatial aptitude tests: Psicologica International Journal of Methodology and Experimental Psychology Vol 14(2) 1993, 229-237.
  • Prieto, G., Carro, J., Pulido, R. F., & Orgaz, B. (1992). RE.1: A computerized test for the evaluation of simple spatial behavior: Cognitiva Vol 4(2) 1992, 209-226.
  • Prieto, G., Carro, J., Pulido, R. F., Orgaz, B., & et al. (1996). Measuring spatial visualization by computerized tests: Estudios de Psicologia No 55 1996, 41-59.
  • Primi, R., Cruz, M. B. Z., Nascimento, M. M., & Petrini, M. C. (2006). Construct validity of a computerized dynamic assessment of Fluid Intelligence Test: PSICO Vol 37(2) May-Aug 2006, 109-122.
  • Pruneti, C. A. (1994). Administration and psychophysiological evaluation of a computerized version of Raven's Coloured Progressive Matrices: Bollettino di Psicologia Applicata No 210 Apr-Jun 1994, 41-47.
  • Pruneti, C. A., Cocci, D., Fenu, A., Marchionni, M., & Rota, S. (1996). Preliminary data on the administration of a computerized version of the Coloured Progressive Matrices to a sample of school-age children: Bollettino di Psicologia Applicata No 219 Jul-Sep 1996, 47-51.
  • Rabbitt, P. (1990). Small computers, big transformations: Computers and models of perceptuo-motor performance. Oxford, England: John Wiley & Sons.
  • Rafacz, B., & Hetter, R. D. (1997). ACAP hardware selection, software development, and acceptance testing. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
  • Rafaeli, S., & Tractinsky, N. (1989). Computerized tests and time: Measuring, limiting and providing visual cues for response time in on-line questioning: Behaviour & Information Technology Vol 8(5) Sep-Oct 1989, 335-351.
  • Rafaeli, S., & Tractinsky, N. (1991). Time in computerized tests: A multitrait, multimethod investigation of general-knowledge and mathematical-reasoning on-line examinations: Computers in Human Behavior Vol 7(3) 1991, 215-225.
  • Rammsayer, T. (1999). Timing behavior in computerized adaptive testing: Response times as a function of correct and incorrect answers: Diagnostica Vol 45(4) 1999, 178-183.
  • Rammstedt, B., Holzinger, B., & Rammsayer, T. (2004). Comparison of paper-and-pencil vs. computerized administration of the NEO-Five-Factor-Inventory (NEO-FFI): Diagnostica Vol 50(2) 2004, 88-97.
  • Rannie, M. D. (1997). The standardized memory assessment: A psychometric evaluation of a computerized cognitive battery. Dissertation Abstracts International: Section B: The Sciences and Engineering.
  • Rapp, J. (2006). Review of Computer-Based Testing and the Internet: Issues and Advances: International Journal of Testing Vol 6(2) 2006, 195-200.
  • Rasulis, R., Schuldberg, D., & Murtagh, M. (1996). Computer-administered testing with the Rotter Incomplete Sentences Blank: Computers in Human Behavior Vol 12(4) Win 1996, 497-513.
  • Raymond, P. D., Hinton-Bayre, A. D., Radel, M., Ray, M. J., & Marsh, N. A. (2006). Test-retest norms and reliable change indices for the microcog battery in a healthy community population over 50 years of age: Clinical Neuropsychologist Vol 20(2) Jun 2006, 261-270.
  • Reardon, R., & Loughead, T. (1988). A comparison of paper-and-pencil and computer versions of the Self-Directed Search: Journal of Counseling & Development Vol 67(4) Dec 1988, 249-252.
  • Reardon, R. C. (1987). Development of the computer version of the self-directed search: Measurement and Evaluation in Counseling and Development Vol 20(2) Jul 1987, 62-67.
  • Ree, M. J., & Carretta, T. R. (1998). Computerized testing in the United States Air Force: International Journal of Selection and Assessment Vol 6(2) Apr 1998, 82-106.
  • Reeve, B. B. (2006). Special Issues for Building Computerized-Adaptive Tests for Measuring Patient-Reported Outcomes: The National Institute of Health's Investment in New Technology: Medical Care Vol 44(11, Suppl 3) Nov 2006, S198-S204.
  • Regian, J. W. (1987). An assessment procedure for configurational knowledge of large-scale space: Dissertation Abstracts International.
  • Reigosa Crespo, V., Perez Abalo, M. C., Manzano Mier, M., & Antelo Cordoves, J. M. (1993). A computer system for reading assessment in Spanish-speaking school-age children: Revista Latina de Pensamiento y Lenguaje Vol 2(1) 1993-1994, 141-159.
  • Reigosa Crespo, V., Perez Abalo, M. C., Pineiro Martinez, A., & Lopez Oliva, I. (2002). Reliability and validity of a computerized test battery for the cognitive assessment of reading: Revista Latina de Pensamiento y Lenguaje Vol 10(2) 2002, 229-248.
  • Reise, S. P., & Henson, J. M. (2000). Computerization and adaptive administration of the NEO PI-R: Assessment Vol 7(4) Dec 2000, 347-364.
  • Revuelta, J., & Ponsoda, V. (1998). A comparison of item exposure control methods in computerized adaptive testing: Journal of Educational Measurement Vol 35(4) Win 1998, 311-327.
  • Revuelta, J., & Ponsoda, V. (1998). A logical analysis computerized adaptive test based on automatic item generation: Psicothema Vol 10(3) Nov 1998, 709-716.
  • Revuelta, J., Ponsoda, V., & Olea, J. (1993). An adaptive computerized English vocabulary test: Description of the program: Psicologica International Journal of Methodology and Experimental Psychology Vol 14(3) 1993, 347-354.
  • Revuelta, J., Ximenez, M. C., & Olea, J. (2003). Psychometric and psychological effects of item selection and review on computerized testing: Educational and Psychological Measurement Vol 63(5) Oct 2003, 791-808.
  • Rexer, J. L. (2002). Evaluating a new approach for the detection of malingering in traumatic brain injury patients. Dissertation Abstracts International: Section B: The Sciences and Engineering.
  • Reynolds, R. V. (1987). Computer-automated service delivery: A primer: the Behavior Therapist Vol 10(5) May 1987, 115-120.
  • Rezaei, A. R., & Katz, L. (2004). Evaluation of the reliability and validity of the cognitive styles analysis: Personality and Individual Differences Vol 36(6) Apr 2004, 1317-1327.
  • Richard, D. C. S., & Lauterbach, D. (2004). Computers in the training and practice of behavioral assessment. Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons Inc.
  • Richardson, M., Baird, J.-A., Ridgway, J., Ripley, M., Shorrocks-Taylor, D., & Swan, M. (2002). Challenging minds? Students' perceptions of computer-based World Class Tests of problem solving: Computers in Human Behavior Vol 18(6) Nov 2002, 633-649.
  • Richman, W. L., Kiesler, S., Weisband, S., & Drasgow, F. (1999). A meta-analytic study of social desirability distortion in computer-administered questionnaires, traditional questionnaires, and interviews: Journal of Applied Psychology Vol 84(5) Oct 1999, 754-775.
  • Ricketts, C., & Wilks, S. J. (2002). Improving student performance through computer-based assessment: Insights from recent research: Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education Vol 27(5) Oct 2002, 463-479.
  • Ricketts, C., & Zakrzewski, S. (2005). A risk-analysis approach to implementing web-based assessment: Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education Vol 30(6) Dec 2005, 603-620.
  • Riedel, G., Wetzel, W., & Reymann, K. G. (1994). Computer-assisted shock-reinforced Y-maze training: A method for studying spatial alternation behaviour: Neuroreport: An International Journal for the Rapid Communication of Research in Neuroscience Vol 5(16) Oct 1994, 2061-2064.
  • Rizziello, J., & Suler, J. (1992). A computer program for the block figure imagery test: A preliminary report: Journal of Mental Imagery Vol 16(3-4) Fal-Win 1992, 205-209.
  • Roach, R. L. (1994). Assessment of trial competency in hospitalized criminal defendants. Dissertation Abstracts International: Section B: The Sciences and Engineering.
  • Roberts, J. S., Lin, Y., & Laughlin, J. E. (2001). Computerized adaptive testing with the generalized graded unfolding model: Applied Psychological Measurement Vol 25(2) Jun 2001, 177-196.
  • Robertson, I. T., & Smith, M. (1989). Personnel selection methods. Oxford, England: John Wiley & Sons.
  • Rocklin, T. R. (1994). Self-adapted testing: Applied Measurement in Education Vol 7(1) 1994, 3-14.
  • Rocklin, T. R., & O'Donnell, A. M. (1987). Self-adapted testing: A performance-improving variant of computerized adaptive testing: Journal of Educational Psychology Vol 79(3) Sep 1987, 315-319.
  • Rocklin, T. R., O'Donnell, A. M., & Holst, P. M. (1995). Effects and underlying mechanisms of self-adapted testing: Journal of Educational Psychology Vol 87(1) Mar 1995, 103-116.
  • Roever, C. (2006). Validation of a web-based test of ESL pragmalinguistics: Language Testing Vol 23(2) Apr 2006, 229-256.
  • Rohde, M. E. (1987). An examination of selected aspects of an automated social history for children and adolescents: Dissertation Abstracts International.
  • Roid, G. H. (1985). Computer-based test interpretation: The potential of quantitative methods of test interpretation: Computers in Human Behavior Vol 1(3-4) 1985, 207-219.
  • Roid, G. H. (1986). Computer technology in testing. Hillsdale, NJ, England: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
  • Roid, G. H. (1989). Item writing and item banking by microcomputer: An update: Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice Vol 8(3) Fal 1989, 17-20.
  • Roizen, M. F., Coalson, D., Hayward, R. S., Schmittner, J., & et al. (1992). Can patients use an automated questionnaire to define their current health status? : Medical Care Vol 30(5, Suppl) May 1992, 74-84.
  • Rombouts, R., Gazendam, A., & Nijholt, M. J. (1989). Study of the equivalence of computer-assisted vs paper-and-pencil versions of some psychological questionnaires: Nederlands Tijdschrift voor de Psychologie en haar Grensgebieden Vol 44(2) Mar 1989, 88-93.
  • Roos, L. L., Wise, S. L., & Plake, B. S. (1997). The role of item feedback in self-adapted testing: Educational and Psychological Measurement Vol 57(1) Feb 1997, 85-98.
  • Roos, L. L., Wise, S. L., Yoes, M. E., & Rocklin, T. R. (1996). Conducting self-adapted testing using MicroCAT: Educational and Psychological Measurement Vol 56(5) Oct 1996, 821-827.
  • Roper, B. L., Ben-Porath, Y. S., & Butcher, J. N. (1991). Comparability of computerized adaptive and conventional testing with the MMPI-2: Journal of Personality Assessment Vol 57(2) Oct 1991, 278-290.
  • Roper, B. L., Ben-Porath, Y. S., & Butcher, J. N. (1995). Comparability and validity of computerized adaptive testing with the MMPI--2: Journal of Personality Assessment Vol 65(2) Oct 1995, 358-371.
  • Rose, F. E., Hall, S., & Szalda-Petree, A. D. (1995). Portland Digit Recognition Test--Computerized: Measuring response latency improves the detection of malingering: Clinical Neuropsychologist Vol 9(2) May 1995, 124-134.
  • Rose, F. E., Hall, S., & Szalda-Petree, A. D. (1998). A comparison of four tests of malingering and the effects of coaching: Archives of Clinical Neuropsychology Vol 13(4) May 1998, 349-363.
  • Rosen, E. F., Feeney, B., & Petty, L. C. (1994). An introductory statistics class and examination using SPSS/PC: Behavior Research Methods, Instruments & Computers Vol 26(2) May 1994, 242-244.
  • Rosenfeld, P., Booth-Kewley, S., & Edwards, J. E. (1993). Computer-administered surveys in organizational settings: Alternatives, advantages, and applications: American Behavioral Scientist Vol 36(4) Mar-Apr 1993, 485-511.
  • Rosenfeld, P., Doherty, L. M., Vicino, S. M., Kantor, J., & et al. (1989). Attitude assessment in organizations: Testing three microcomputer-based survey systems: Journal of General Psychology Vol 116(2) Apr 1989, 145-154.
  • Rosenfeld, P., Giacalone, R. A., Knouse, S. B., Doherty, L. M., & et al. (1991). Impression management, candor, and microcomputer-based organizational surveys: An individual differences approach: Computers in Human Behavior Vol 7(1-2) 1991, 23-32.
  • Rosenfeld, R., Dar, R., Anderson, D., Kobak, K. A., & Greist, J. H. (1992). A computer-administered version of the Yale-Brown Obsessive-Compulsive Scale: Psychological Assessment Vol 4(3) Sep 1992, 329-332.
  • Ross, R. G. (1991). Appraising one's own performance: Self-appraisal using a computer-aided mixed standard scale: Dissertation Abstracts International.
  • Rothwell, J., Bandar, Z., O'Shea, J., & McLean, D. (2006). Silent Talker: A New Computer-Based System for the Analysis of Facial Cues to Deception: Applied Cognitive Psychology Vol 20(6) Sep 2006, 757-777.
  • Rowland, P. E., Jr. (1994). Development and validation of a computerized word match test as an alternative to the matching familiar figures test as a measure of impulsivity-reflectivity. Dissertation Abstracts International: Section B: The Sciences and Engineering.
  • Rozencwajg, P., & Francequin, G. (1999). Contribution of the analysis of problem solving strategies to psychological assessment: Orientation Scolaire et Professionnelle Vol 28(1) Mar 1999, 63-82.
  • Rubenzer, S. J. (1990). Validity and utility of traditional and computer-generated psychological reports in an adolescent inpatient setting: Dissertation Abstracts International.
  • Russell, E. W. (2000). The application of computerized scoring programs to neuropsychological assessment. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers.
  • Russell, M., Goldberg, A., & O'Connor, K. (2003). Computer-based Testing and Validity: A look back into the future: Assessment in Education: Principles, Policy & Practice Vol 10(3) Nov 2003, 279-293.
  • Saldana, N., Herrin, G. D., Armstrong, T. J., & Franzblau, A. (1994). A computerized method for assessment of musculoskeletal discomfort in the workforce: A tool for surveillance: Ergonomics Vol 37(6) Jun 1994, 1097-1112.
  • Sale, R. (2006). International Guidelines on Computer-Based and Internet-Delivered Testing: A Practitioner's Perspective: International Journal of Testing Vol 6(2) 2006, 181-188.
  • Saletu, B., Prause, W., Anderer, P., Mandl, M., Aigner, M., Mikova, O., et al. (2005). Insomnia in Somatoform Pain Disorder: Sleep Laboratory Studies on Differences to Controls and Acute Effects of Trazodone, Evaluated by the Somnolyzer 24 x 7 and the Siesta Database: Neuropsychobiology Vol 51(3) May 2005, 148-163.
  • Salthouse, T. A., & Fristoe, N. M. (1995). Process analysis of adult age effects on a computer-administered Trail Making Test: Neuropsychology Vol 9(4) Oct 1995, 518-528.
  • Sampson, J. P., Jr. (1990). Computer applications and issues in using tests in counseling. Hillsdale, NJ, England: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
  • Sampson, J. P. (1990). Computer-assisted testing and the goals of counseling psychology: Counseling Psychologist Vol 18(2) Apr 1990, 227-239.
  • Sampson, J. P., Jr. (2000). Computer applications. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers.
  • Sampson, J. P., Jr., & Lumsden, J. A. (2000). Ethical issues in the design and use of internet-based career assessment: Journal of Career Assessment Vol 8(1) Win 2000, 21-35.
  • Sampson, J. P., Jr., Purgar, M. P., & Shy, J. D. (2003). Computer-based test interpretation in career assessment: Ethical and professional issues: Journal of Career Assessment Vol 11(1) Feb 2003, 22-39.
  • Sampson, J. P., Jr., Reardon, R. C., Wilde, C. K., Norris, D. S., Peterson, G. W., Strausberger, S. J., et al. (1994). A comparison of the assessment components of fifteen computer-assisted career guidance systems. Columbus, OH: National Career Development Association.
  • Sanchez Valdes, M. (1991). Computerized adaptive implementation of the Raven Progressive Matrices: Dissertation Abstracts International.
  • Sands, W. A., Gade, P. A., & Knapp, D. J. (1997). The Computerized Adaptive-Screening Test. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
  • Sands, W. A., & Waters, B. K. (1997). Introduction to ASVAB and CAT. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
  • Sanitioso, R., & Reynolds, J. H. (1992). Comparability of standard and computerized administration of two personality questionnaires: Personality and Individual Differences Vol 13(8) Aug 1992, 899-907.
  • Santacreu Mas, J., & Garcia-Leal, O. (2000). The use of computerized behavioural tests in personality research: The assessment of persistence: Psicothema Vol 12(1) Feb 2000, 93-98.
  • Santucci, A. C. (1995). An affordable computer-aided method for conducting Morris water maze testing: Behavior Research Methods, Instruments & Computers Vol 27(1) Feb 1995, 60-64.
  • Sawyer, M. G., Sarris, A., & Baghurst, P. (1991). The use of a computer-assisted interview to administer the Child Behavior Checklist in a child psychiatry service: Journal of the American Academy of Child & Adolescent Psychiatry Vol 30(4) Jul 1991, 674-681.
  • Scalise, K., & Wilson, M. (2006). Analysis and Comparison of Automated Scoring Approaches: Addressing Evidence-Based Assessment Principles. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers.
  • Schacter, J., Herl, H. E., Chung, G. K. W. K., Dennis, R. A., & O'Neil, H. F., Jr. (1999). Computer-based performance assessments: A solution to the narrow measurement and reporting of problem-solving: Computers in Human Behavior Vol 15(3-4) May-Jul 1999, 403-418.
  • Schatz, A. M., Ballantyne, A. O., & Trauner, D. A. (2001). Sensitivity and specificity of a computerized test of attention in the diagnosis of attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder: Assessment Vol 8(4) Dec 2001, 357-365.
  • Schatz, P., & Browndyke, J. (2002). Applications of computer-based neuropsychological assessment: Journal of Head Trauma Rehabilitation Vol 17(5) Oct 2002, 395-410.
  • Schlegel, R. E., & Gilliland, K. (2007). Development and quality assurance of computer-based assessment batteries: Archives of Clinical Neuropsychology Vol 22(S) Feb 2007, S49-S61.
  • Schloss, P. J., Sindelar, P. T., Cartwright, G. P., & Schloss, C. N. (1986). Efficacy of higher cognitive and factual questions in computer assisted instruction modules: Journal of Computer-Based Instruction Vol 13(3) Sum 1986, 75-79.
  • Schmitz, N., Hartkamp, N., Brinschwitz, C., & Michalek, S. (1999). Computerized administration of the Symptom Checklist (SCL-90-R) and the Inventory of Interpersonal Problems (IIP-C) in psychosomatic outpatients: Psychiatry Research Vol 87(2-3) Oct 1999, 217-221.
  • 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 Vol 11(2-3) Jun-Sep 2003, 237-246.
  • Schnipke, D. L. (1996). Assessing speededness in computer-based tests using item response times. Dissertation Abstracts International: Section B: The Sciences and Engineering.
  • Schnipke, D. L., & Scrams, D. J. (2002). Exploring issues of examinee behavior: Insights gained from response-time analyses. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers.
  • Schoech, D. (2001). Using video clips as test questions: The development and use of a multimedia exam: Journal of Technology in Human Services Vol 18(3-4) 2001, 117-131.
  • Schoenfeldt, L. (1994). Computer-assisted testing in organizational psychology: European Journal of Psychological Assessment Vol 10(1) 1994, 71-85.
  • Schoenfeldt, L. F. (1989). Guidelines for computer-based psychological tests and interpretations: Computers in Human Behavior Vol 5(1) 1989, 13-21.
  • Schoonman, W. (1989). An applied study on computerized adaptive testing. Lisse, Netherlands: Swets & Zeitlinger Publishers.
  • Schuldberg, D. (1988). The MMPI is less sensitive to the automated testing format than it is to repeated testing: Item and scale effects: Computers in Human Behavior Vol 4(4) 1988, 285-298.
  • Schuldberg, D. (1990). Varieties of inconsistency across test occasions: Effects of computerized test administration and repeated testing: Journal of Personality Assessment Vol 55(1-2) Fal 1990, 168-182.
  • Schuldberg, D., & Nichols, W. G. (1990). Using HyperCard to administer a figural test on the Apple Macintosh: Behavior Research Methods, Instruments & Computers Vol 22(4) Aug 1990, 417-420.
  • Schulenberg, S. E., & Yutrzenka, B. A. (1999). The equivalence of computerized and paper-and-pencil psychological instruments: Implications for measures of negative affect: Behavior Research Methods, Instruments & Computers Vol 31(2) May 1999, 315-321.
  • Schulenberg, S. E., & Yutrzenka, B. A. (2004). Ethical issues in the use of computerized assessment: Computers in Human Behavior Vol 20(4) Jul 2004, 477-490.
  • Schult, C. A., & McIntosh, J. L. (2004). Employing computer-administered exams in general psychology: Student anxiety and expectations: Teaching of Psychology Vol 31(3) Sum 2004, 209-211.
  • Schultheis, M. T., Hillary, F., & Chute, D. L. (2003). The Neurocognitive Driving Test: Applying Technology to the Assessment of Driving Ability Following Brain Injury: Rehabilitation Psychology Vol 48(4) Nov 2003, 275-280.
  • Schuwirth, L., Gorter, S., Van der Heijde, D., Rethans, J. J., Brauer, J., Houben, H., et al. (2005). The Role of a Computerised Case-based Testing Procedure in Practice Performance Assessment: Advances in Health Sciences Education Vol 10(2) Jun 2005, 145-155.
  • Schuwirth, L. W. T., van der Vleuten, C. P. M., Stoffers, H. E. J. H., & Peperkamp, A. G. W. (1996). Computerized long-menu questions as an alternative to open-ended questions in computerized assessment: Medical Education Vol 30(1) Jan 1996, 50-55.
  • Schwartz, S. J., Mullis, R. L., & Dunham, R. M. (1998). Effects of authoritative structure in the measurement of identity formation: Individual computer-managed versus group paper-and-pencil testing: Computers in Human Behavior Vol 14(2) May 1998, 239-248.
  • Schwenkmezger, P., & Hank, P. (1993). Paper-and-pencil versus computer-assisted presentation of state-trait inventories: An equivalence test: Diagnostica Vol 39(3) 1993, 189-210.
  • Scott, D. D. (1988). A study of a computerized diagnostic inventory of basic mathematics skills: Dissertation Abstracts International.
  • Seebo, E. K. (1992). Comparative effectiveness of paired versus individual learning of cognitive skills using computer-based instruction: Dissertation Abstracts International.
  • Segall, D. O. (1997). Equating the CAT-ASVAB. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
  • Segall, D. O. (1997). The psychometric comparability of computer hardware. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
  • Segall, D. O., & Moreno, K. E. (1997). Current and future challenges. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
  • Segall, D. O., & Moreno, K. E. (1999). Development of the Computerized Adaptive Testing version of the Armed Services Vocational Aptitude Battery. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers.
  • Segall, D. O., Moreno, K. E., Bloxom, B. M., & Hetter, R. D. (1997). Psychometric procedures for administering CAT-ASVAB. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
  • Segall, D. O., Moreno, K. E., & Hetter, R. D. (1997). Item pool development and evaluation. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
  • Segall, D. O., Moreno, K. E., Kieckhaefer, W. F., Vicino, F. L., & McBride, J. R. (1997). Validation of the experimental CAT-ASVAB system. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
  • Seidel, W. T., & Joschko, M. (1991). Assessment of attention in children: Clinical Neuropsychologist Vol 5(1) Jan 1991, 53-66.
  • Semb, G. B. (1995). The Personalized System of Instruction (PSI): A quarter century report: Revista Mexicana de Psicologia Vol 12(2) Dec 1995, 161-175.
  • Senior, C., Phillips, M. L., Barnes, J., & David, A. S. (1999). An investigation into the perception of dominance from schematic faces: A study using the World-Wide Web: Behavior Research Methods, Instruments & Computers Vol 31(2) May 1999, 341-346.
  • Shakeshaft, A. P., Bowman, J. A., & Sanson-Fisher, R. W. (1998). Computers in community-based drug and alcohol clinical settings: Are they acceptable to respondents? : Drug and Alcohol Dependence Vol 50(2) Apr 1998, 177-180.
  • Shear, B. M. (1989). Experimental guidelines for evaluating the reliability, validity and professional utility of WISC-R Computer Based Test Interpretations (CBTI): Dissertation Abstracts International.
  • Shedler, J., Beck, A., & Bensen, S. (2000). Practical mental health assessment in primary care: The Journal of Family Practice Vol 49(7) Jul 2000, 614-621.
  • Sheehan, K. M., & Lewis, C. (1992). Computerized mastery testing with nonequivalent testlets: Applied Psychological Measurement Vol 16(1) Mar 1992, 65-76.
  • Shelton, J. R., Weinrich, M., McCall, D., & Cox, D. M. (1996). Differentiating globally aphasic patients: Data from in-depth language assessments and production training using C-VIC: Aphasiology Vol 10(4) May-Jun 1996, 319-342.
  • Shephard, K., Warburton, B., Maier, P., & Warren, A. (2006). Development and evaluation of computer-assisted assessment in higher education in relation to BS7988: Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education Vol 31(5) Oct 2006, 583-595.
  • Shermis, M. D., & Lombard, D. (1998). Effects of computer-based test administrations on test anxiety and performance: Computers in Human Behavior Vol 14(1) Jan 1998, 111-123.
  • Shermis, M. D., Mzumara, H. R., & Bublitz, S. T. (2001). On test and computer anxiety: Test performance under CAT and SAT conditions: Journal of Educational Computing Research Vol 24(1) 2001, 57-75.
  • Shibayama, T., Noguchi, H., Shiba, S., & Kambara, M. (1987). An adaptive testing procedure for measuring verbal ability: Japanese Journal of Educational Psychology Vol 35(4) Dec 1987, 363-367.
  • Shmelyov, A. G. (1996). TESTAN: An integrated modular system for personality assessment and test development on MS-DOS personal computers: Behavior Research Methods, Instruments & Computers Vol 28(1) Feb 1996, 89-92.
  • Shores, E. A., & Carstairs, J. R. (1998). Accuracy of the MMPI-2 computerized Minnesota Report in identifying fake-good and fake-bad response sets: Clinical Neuropsychologist Vol 12(1) Feb 1998, 101-106.
  • Shotland, A., Alliger, G. M., & Sales, T. (1998). Face validity in the context of personnel selection: A multimedia approach: International Journal of Selection and Assessment Vol 6(2) Apr 1998, 124-130.
  • Sieppert, J. D., & Krysik, J. (1996). Computer-based testing in social work education: A preliminary exploration: Computers in Human Services Vol 13(1) 1996, 43-61.
  • Silberstein, R. B., Ciorciari, J., & Pipingas, A. (1995). Steady-state visually evoked potential topography during the Wisconsin card sorting test: Electroencephalography & Clinical Neurophysiology: Evoked Potentials Vol 96(1) Jan 1995, 24-35.
  • Sim, G., Holifield, P., & Brown, M. (2004). Implementation of computer assisted assessment: Lessons from the literature: ALT-J Research in Learning Technology Vol 12(3) Sep 2004, 215-229.
  • Simms, L. J. (2003). Development, reliability, and validity of a computerized adaptive version of the schedule for nonadaptive and adaptive personality. Dissertation Abstracts International: Section B: The Sciences and Engineering.
  • Simms, L. J., & Clark, L. A. (2005). Validation of a Computerized Adaptive Version of the Schedule for Nonadaptive and Adaptive Personality (SNAP): Psychological Assessment Vol 17(1) Mar 2005, 28-43.
  • Simola, S. K., & Holden, R. R. (1992). Equivalence of computerized and standard administration of the Piers-Harris Children's Self-Concept Scale: Journal of Personality Assessment Vol 58(2) Apr 1992, 287-294.
  • Sinar, E. F., Reynolds, D. H., & Paquet, S. L. (2003). Nothing but 'Net? Corporate image and web-based testing: International Journal of Selection and Assessment Vol 11(2-3) Jun-Sep 2003, 150-157.
  • Sinatra, G. M. (1990). Implementation and initial validation of a computer-based system for the assessment of reading competencies: Dissertation Abstracts International.
  • Singh, J., Rhoads, G. K., & Howell, R. D. (1992). Adapting marketing surveys to individual respondents: Journal of the Market Research Society Vol 34(2) Apr 1992, 125-147.
  • Singleton, C., Thomas, K., & Horne, J. (2000). Computer-based cognitive assessment and the development of reading: Journal of Research in Reading Vol 23(2) Jun 2000, 158-180.
  • Singleton, C. H., Horne, J., & Thomas, K. (1999). Computerised baseline assessment of literacy: Journal of Research in Reading Vol 22(1) Feb 1999, 67-80.
  • Sireci, S. G., & Clauser, B. E. (2001). Practical issues in setting standards on computerized adaptive tests. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers.
  • Sireci, S. G., & Zenisky, A. L. (2006). Innovative Item Formats in Computer-Based Testing: In Pursuit of Improved Construct Representation. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers.
  • Sloan, K. A., Eldridge, K., & Evenson, R. (1992). An automated screening schedule for mental health centers: Computers in Human Services Vol 8(3-4) 1992, 55-61.
  • Smith, M. C., Smith, J. M., & George, D. I. (1988). Improving practitioner access through a software design for the Weighted Application Form: Journal of Occupational Psychology Vol 61(3) Sep 1988, 257-264.
  • Snyder, D. K. (2000). Computer-assisted judgement: Defining strengths and liabilities: Psychological Assessment Vol 12(1) Mar 2000, 52-60.
  • Solomon, D. J., Osuch, J. R., Anderson, K., Babel, J., & et al. (1992). A pilot study of the relationship between experts' ratings and scores generated by the NBME's Computer-Based Examination system: Academic Medicine Vol 67(2) Feb 1992, 130-132.
  • Sorbi, M., Honkoop, P. C., & Godaert, G. L. R. (1996). A signal-contingent computer diary for the assessment of psychological precedents of the migraine attack. Ashland, OH: Hogrefe & Huber Publishers.
  • Spinelli, S., Pennanen, L., Dettling, A. C., Feldon, J., Higgins, G. A., & Pryce, C. R. (2004). Performance of the marmoset monkey on computerized tasks of attention and working memory: Cognitive Brain Research Vol 19(2) Apr 2004, 123-137.
  • Spinhoven, P., Labbe, M. R., & Rombouts, R. (1993). Feasibility of computerized psychological testing with psychiatric outpatients: Journal of Clinical Psychology Vol 49(3) May 1993, 440-447.
  • 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 and Behavioral Statistics Vol 21(4) Win 1996, 405-414.
  • Sprenger-Charolles, L., Cole, P., Bechennec, D., & Kipffer-Piquard, A. (2005). Lecture et competences reliees: Donnees normatives pour la fin de la 1-super(re), 2-super(nde), 3-super(e) et 4-super(e) annee du primaire issues d'une nouvelle batterie de tests, EVALEC: European Review of Applied Psychology/Revue Europeenne de Psychologie Appliquee Vol 55(3) Sep 2005, 157-186.
  • St. Martin, S. R. (2004). Validity of the computerized assessment system for psychotherapy evaluation and research (CASPER) in a psychiatric outpatient population. Dissertation Abstracts International: Section B: The Sciences and Engineering.
  • Stahl, J., Bergstrom, B., & Gershon, R. (2000). CAT administration of language placement examinations: Journal of Applied Measurement Vol 1(3) 2000, 292-302.
  • Standing, L. G., & Keays, G. (1986). Computer assessment of personality: A demonstration of gullibility: Social Behavior and Personality Vol 14(2) 1986, 197-202.
  • Stark, S., & Chernyshenko, O. S. (2006). Multistage Testing: Widely or Narrowly Applicable? : Applied Measurement in Education Vol 19(3) 2006, 257-260.
  • Steadman, M. F. (1998). The effects of ability to change answers on computer-based test performance of associate degree nursing students. Dissertation Abstracts International Section A: Humanities and Social Sciences.
  • Steck, P. (1996). Testing sustained concentration with a computer-assisted version of the Pauli Test: Diagnostica Vol 42(4) 1996, 332-351.
  • Steer, R. A., Rissmiller, D. J., Ranieri, W. F., & Beck, A. T. (1994). Use of the computer-administered Beck Depression Inventory and Hopelessness Scale with psychiatric inpatients: Computers in Human Behavior Vol 10(2) Sum 1994, 223-229.
  • Steinberg, L., Thissen, D., & Wainer, H. (2000). Validity. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers.
  • Steinkamp, F. (1998). Psychology, psi, and the web: an exploratory study: Journal of the American Society for Psychical Research Vol 92(3) Jul 1998, 256-278.
  • Sternberger, C. S. (1999). An examination of state anxiety and computer attitudes related to achievement on paper-and-pencil and computer-based mathematics testing of nursing students. Dissertation Abstracts International Section A: Humanities and Social Sciences.
  • Stevens, R., Ikeda, J., Casillas, A., Palacio-Cayetano, J., & Clyman, S. (1999). Artificial neural network-based performance assessments: Computers in Human Behavior Vol 15(3-4) May-Jul 1999, 295-313.
  • Stevens, R. H. (1991). Search path mapping: A versatile approach for visualizing problem-solving behavior: Academic Medicine Vol 66(9, Suppl) Sep 1991, 73-75.
  • Stevens, R. H., & Casillas, A. (2006). Artificial Neural Networks. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers.
  • Stewart, J. B. (1998). Possible confounding variables of computer-administered neuropsychological assessment: A study of the influence of visual scanning ability, verbal and reading ability, depression, and anxiety on testing performance on the microcog: An assessment of cognitive functioning. Dissertation Abstracts International: Section B: The Sciences and Engineering.
  • Stocking, M. L. (1997). Revising item responses in computerized adaptive tests: A comparison of three models: Applied Psychological Measurement Vol 21(2) Jun 1997, 129-142.
  • Stocking, M. L., & Lewis, C. (1998). Controlling item exposure conditional on ability in computerized adaptive testing: Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics Vol 23(1) Spr 1998, 57-75.
  • Stocking, M. L., & Swanson, L. (1998). Optimal design of item banks for computerized adaptive tests: Applied Psychological Measurement Vol 22(3) Sep 1998, 271-279.
  • Stocking, M. L., Ward, W. C., & Potenza, M. T. (1998). Simulating the use of disclosed items in computerized adaptive testing: Journal of Educational Measurement Vol 35(1) Spr 1998, 48-68.
  • Stocks, J. T. (1991). Validation of a computer-administered instrument for the repeated measurement of depression: Dissertation Abstracts International.
  • Stolarchuk, E., & Fisher, D. (2001). An investigation of teacher-student interepersonal behavior in science classrooms using laptop computers: Journal of Educational Computing Research Vol 24(1) 2001, 41-55.
  • Stone, A. A., Schwartz, J. E., Neale, J. M., Shiffman, S., Marco, C. A., Hickcox, M., et al. (1998). A comparison of coping assessed by ecological momentary assessment and retrospective recall: Journal of Personality and Social Psychology Vol 74(6) Jun 1998, 1670-1680.
  • Stone, G. E., & Lunz, M. E. (1994). The effect of review on the psychometric characterstics of computerized adaptive tests: Applied Measurement in Education Vol 7(3) 1994, 211-222.
  • Stones, M. J., & Kozma, A. (1989). Multidimensional assessment of the elderly via a microcomputer: The SENOTS program and battery: Psychology and Aging Vol 4(1) Mar 1989, 113-118.
  • Stoskopf, C., & Horn, S. D. (1991). The Computerized Psychiatric Severity Index as a predictor of inpatient length of stay for psychoses: Medical Care Vol 29(3) Mar 1991, 179-195.
  • Stricker, L. J. (2004). The performance of native speakers of English and ESL speakers on the computer-based TOEFL and GRE General Test: Language Testing Vol 21(2) Apr 2004, 146-173.
  • Stricker, L. J., Wilder, G. Z., & Rock, D. A. (2004). Attitudes about the computer-based Test of English as a Foreign Language: Computers in Human Behavior Vol 20(1) Jan 2004, 37-54.
  • Strong, S. D. (2000). The development of a computerized version of Vandenberg's mental rotation test and the effect of visuo-spatial working memory loading. Dissertation Abstracts International Section A: Humanities and Social Sciences.
  • Styles, I. (1991). Clinical assessment and computerized testing: International Journal of Man-Machine Studies Vol 35(2) Aug 1991, 133-150.
  • Sukigara, M. (1996). Equivalence between computer and booklet administrations of the new Japanese version of the MMPI: Educational and Psychological Measurement Vol 56(4) Aug 1996, 570-584.
  • Sweeney, M. (1999). The accuracy and utility of information collected via computer-administered and clinician-conducted interviews. Dissertation Abstracts International: Section B: The Sciences and Engineering.
  • Switzer, D. M., & Connell, M. L. (1990). Practical applications of student response analysis: Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice Vol 9(2) Sum 1990, 15-18.
  • Syang, A. A. (1992). A quantitative student model for intelligent tutoring systems: Student programming ability: Dissertation Abstracts International.
  • Szafraniec, H. (1988). The problems and principles of the computer test examination: Przeglad Psychologiczny Vol 31(3) 1988, 809-826.
  • Talleur, D. A., Taylor, H. L., Emanuel, T. W., Jr., Rantanen, E., & Bradshaw, G. L. (2003). Personal computer aviation training devices: Their effectiveness for maintaining instrument currency: International Journal of Aviation Psychology Vol 13(4) Oct 2003, 387-399.
  • Tanner, B. A. (2007). A Windows program to aid in MMPI-2 interpretation: Computers in Human Behavior Vol 23(1) Jan 2007, 52-57.
  • Tatsuoka, K. K. (1995). Architecture of knowledge structures and cognitive diagnosis: A statistical pattern recognition and classification approach. Hillsdale, NJ, England: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
  • Tatsuoka, K. K., & Tatsuoka, M. M. (1997). Computerized cognitive diagnostic adaptive testing: Effect on remedial instruction as empirical validation: Journal of Educational Measurement Vol 34(1) Spr 1997, 3-20.
  • Taylor, C., Kirsch, I., Eignor, D., & Jamieson, J. (1999). Examining the relationship between computer familiarity and performance on computer-based language tasks: Language Learning Vol 49(2) Jun 1999, 219-274.
  • Temple, D. E. (1993). Response latency to computer-administered personality inventory items as a measure of perceived evocativeness: Dissertation Abstracts International.
  • Temple, D. E., & Geisinger, K. F. (1990). Response latency to computer-administered inventory items as an indicator of emotional arousal: Journal of Personality Assessment Vol 54(1-2) Spr 1990, 289-297.
  • Terelak, J., Cieciura, M., & Terelak, H. (1991). The PC Warsaw Test System "PSYCHCOMP": psychological and informative assumptions: Przeglad Psychologiczny Vol 34(4) 1991, 647-656.
  • Terelak, J., Kobos, Z., Tarnowski, A., & Truszcynski, O. (1994). A comparative analysis of psychometric features of paper and pencil versus computerized version of psychological tests: Przeglad Psychologiczny Vol 37(3) 1994, 379-386.
  • Tetrick, L. E. (1989). An exploratory investigation of response latency in computerized administrations of the Marlowe-Crowne Social Desirability Scale: Personality and Individual Differences Vol 10(12) 1989, 1281-1287.
  • Thelwall, M. (2001). Understanding and assessment methodology in an introductory statistics course: Journal of Computers in Mathematics and Science Teaching Vol 20(3) 2001, 251-263.
  • Thissen, D. (2000). Reliability and measurement precision. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers.
  • Thomas, P., Price, B., Paine, C., & Richards, M. (2002). Remote electronic examinations: Student experiences: British Journal of Educational Technology Vol 33(5) Nov 2002, 537-549.
  • Thomas, T. J. (1990). Item-presentation controls for multidimensional item pools in computerized adaptive testing: Behavior Research Methods, Instruments & Computers Vol 22(2) Apr 1990, 247-252.
  • Thomas, T. J. (1991). Computer-based adaptive mastery testing in multiple content areas: New procedures for mastery testing: Dissertation Abstracts International.
  • Thompson, L. F., Surface, E. A., Martin, D. L., & Sanders, M. G. (2003). From paper to pixels: Moving personnel surveys to the Web: Personnel Psychology Vol 56(1) Spr 2003, 197-227.
  • Thompson, N. A. (2007). A comparison of two methods of polytomous computerized classification testing for multiple cutscores. Dissertation Abstracts International: Section B: The Sciences and Engineering.
  • Tikhomirov, O. K., Sobchik, L. N., Gur'yeva, L. P., & Garber, I. Y. (1991). Attitudes toward computerized testing among social groups: Voprosy Psychologii No 5 1991, 114-123.
  • Timminga, E. (1998). Solving infeasibility problems in computerized test assembly: Applied Psychological Measurement Vol 22(3) Sep 1998, 280-291.
  • Tippins, N. T., Beaty, J., Drasgow, F., Gibson, W. M., Pearlman, K., Segall, D. O., et al. (2006). Unproctored internet testing in employment settings: Personnel Psychology Vol 59(1) Spr 2006, 189-225.
  • Tomaz, A., Borges, F. N., Gananca, C. F., de Campos, C. A. H., & Tilbery, C. P. (2005). Signs and symptoms associated to otoneurologic alterations diagnosed on computerized vestibular exam of patients with multiple sclerosis: Arquivos de Neuro-Psiquiatria Vol 63(3-B) Sep 2005, 837-842.
  • Tonidandel, S., Quinones, M. A., & Adams, A. A. (2002). Computer-adaptive testing: The impact of test characteristics on perceived performance and test takers' reactions: Journal of Applied Psychology Vol 87(2) Apr 2002, 320-332.
  • Toobert, D. J., Glasgow, R. E., Desalvo, M. A., & Strycker, L. A. (1998). Computerized touchscreen video vs. paper-and-pencil assessment of dietary behavior: CyberPsychology & Behavior Vol 1(3) Fal 1998, 257-261.
  • Torjussen, T. M., & Hansen, I. (1999). The Norwegian Defense, best in test? The use of aptitude tests in the Defense, with emphasis on pilot selection: Tidsskrift for Norsk Psykologforening Vol 36(8) Aug 1999, 772-779.
  • Tornatore, J. B., Hill, E., Laboff, J. A., & McGann, M. E. (2005). Self-Administered Screening for Mild Cognitive Impairment: Initial Validation of a Computerized Test Battery: Journal of Neuropsychiatry & Clinical Neurosciences Vol 17(1) Win 2005, 98-105.
  • Tourangeau, R., & Smith, T. W. (1996). Asking sensitive questions: The impact of data collection mode, question format, and question context: Public Opinion Quarterly Vol 60(2) Sum 1996, 275-304.
  • Trapl, E. S., Borawski, E. A., Stork, P. P., Lovegreen, L. D., Colabianchi, N., Cole, M. L., et al. (2005). Use of audio-enhanced personal digital assistants for school-based data collection: Journal of Adolescent Health Vol 37(4) Oct 2005, 296-305.
  • Troche, S., Rammstedt, B., & Rammsayer, T. (2002). Comparison of paper-and-pencil vs. computerized administration of the Leistungsprufsystem (LPS): Diagnostica Vol 48(3) 2002, 115-120.
  • Truman, J., Robinson, K., Evans, A. L., Smith, D., Cunningham, L., Millward, R., et al. (2003). The Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire: A pilot study of a new computer version of the self-report scale: European Child & Adolescent Psychiatry Vol 12(1) Mar 2003, 9-14.
  • Tsai, C. C., Lin, S. S. J., & Yuan, S. M. (2001). Students' use of web-based concept map testing and strategies for learning: Journal of Computer Assisted Learning Vol 17(1) Mar 2001, 72-84.
  • Tsai, C.-C., & Chou, C. (2002). Diagnosing students' alternative conceptions in science: Journal of Computer Assisted Learning Vol 18(2) Jun 2002, 157-165.
  • Tsemberis, S., Miller, A. C., & Gartner, D. (1996). Expert judgments of computer-based and clinician-written reports: Computers in Human Behavior Vol 12(1) Spr 1996, 167-175.
  • Turnage, J. J., Kennedy, R. S., Smith, M. G., Baltzley, D. R., & et al. (1992). Development of microcomputer-based mental acuity tests: Ergonomics Vol 35(10) Oct 1992, 1271-1295.
  • Turner, C. F., Ku, L., Rogers, S. M., Lindberg, L. D., & Pleck, J. H. (1998). Adolescent sexual behavior, drug use, and violence: Increased reporting with computer survey technology: Science Vol 280(5365) May 1998, 867-873.
  • Turner, G. M. (2005). The role of cognitive schemas in a web-based student evaluation of teaching system: Usability issues of design and implementation. Dissertation Abstracts International Section A: Humanities and Social Sciences.
  • Turner, G. M., Sweany, N. W., & Husman, J. (2000). Development of the Computer Interface Literacy Measure: Journal of Educational Computing Research Vol 22(1) 2000, 37-54.
  • Turner, S. L. (2001). Native American adolescent career development: Initial validation of a computerized career exploration and assessment instrument. Dissertation Abstracts International Section A: Humanities and Social Sciences.
  • Unpingco, V., Hom, I., & Rafacz, B. (1997). Development of a system for nationwide implementation. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
  • Vale, C. D. (1990). The Minnesota Clerical Assessment Battery: An application of computerized testing to business: Measurement and Evaluation in Counseling and Development Vol 23(1) Apr 1990, 11-19.
  • Vale, C. D. (2006). Computerized Item Banking. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers.
  • Valero, P. M. (1994). A Macintosh computer program for application of NASA-TLX Questionnaire: Psicologica International Journal of Methodology and Experimental Psychology Vol 15(3) 1994, 403-409.
  • Van de Vijver, F. J. R., & Harsveldt, M. (1994). The incomplete equivalence of the paper-and-pencil and computerized versions of the General Aptitude Test Battery: Journal of Applied Psychology Vol 79(6) Dec 1994, 852-859.
  • van de Vijver, F. J. R., & Willemse, G. R. (1991). Are reaction time tasks better suited for cultural minorities than paper-and-pencil tests? Lisse, Netherlands: Swets & Zeitlinger Publishers.
  • van den Branden, K., Depauw, V., & Gysen, S. (2002). A computerized task-based test of second language Dutch for vocational training purposes: Language Testing Vol 19(4) Oct 2002, 438-452.
  • van der Linden, W. J. (1995). Advances in computer applications. New York, NY: Kluwer Academic/Plenum Publishers.
  • van der Linden, W. J. (1998). Bayesian item selection criteria for adaptive testing: Psychometrika Vol 63(2) Jun 1998, 201-216.
  • van der Linden, W. J. (2003). Some Alternatives to Sympson-Hetter Item-Exposure Control in Computerized Adaptive Testing: Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics Vol 28(3) Fal 2003, 249-265.
  • van der Linden, W. J. (2006). Equating Scores From Adaptive to Linear Tests: Applied Psychological Measurement Vol 30(6) Nov 2006, 493-508.
  • van der Linden, W. J. (2006). Model-Based Innovations in Computer-Based Testing. New York, NY: John Wiley & Sons Ltd.
  • Van Der Linden, W. J., & Chang, H.-H. (2003). Implementing content constraints in alpha-stratified adaptive testing using a shadow trust approach: Applied Psychological Measurement Vol 27(2) Mar 2003, 107-120.
  • van der Linden, W. J., & Reese, L. M. (1998). A model for optimal constrained adaptive testing: Applied Psychological Measurement Vol 22(3) Sep 1998, 259-270.
  • 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 Vol 23(3) Sep 1999, 195-210.
  • 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 Vol 68(2) Jun 2003, 251-265.
  • van der Linden, W. J., & Veldkamp, B. P. (2004). Constraining Item Exposure in Computerized Adaptive Testing With Shadow Tests: Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics Vol 29(3) Fal 2004, 273-291.
  • van Hattum, M. J. C., & Kef, S. (1999). Computer Assisted Data Collection in case of pupils in primary education and visually impaired adolescents: Pedagogische Studien Vol 76(2) 1999, 104-116.
  • van Krimpen-Stoop, E. M. L. A., & Meijer, R. R. (2002). Detection of person misfit in computerized adaptive tests with polytomous items: Applied Psychological Measurement Vol 26(2) Jun 2002, 164-180.
  • Van Merrienboer, J. J., & Jelsma, O. (1988). The Matching Familiar Figures Test: Computer or experimenter controlled administration? : Educational and Psychological Measurement Vol 48(1) Spr 1988, 161-164.
  • Van Merrienboer, J. J., Jelsma, O., Timmermans, J., & Sikken, J. (1989). Computerized vs. experimenter controlled administration of the Matching Familiar Figures Test: Mean test scores and reliabilities: Educational and Psychological Measurement Vol 49(4) Win 1989, 883-892.
  • van Rijn, P. W., Eggen, T. J. H. M., Hemker, B. T., & Sanders, P. F. (2002). Evaluation of selection procedures for computerized adaptive testing with polytomous items: Applied Psychological Measurement Vol 26(4) Dec 2002, 393-411.
  • Vansickle, T. R., & Kapes, J. T. (1993). Comparing paper-pencil and computer-based versions of the Strong-Campbell Interest Inventory: Computers in Human Behavior Vol 9(4) Win 1993, 441-449.
  • Vansickle, T. R., Kimmel, C., & Kapes, J. T. (1989). Testetest equivalency of the computer-based and paper-pencil versions of the Strong-Campbell Interest Inventory: Measurement and Evaluation in Counseling and Development Vol 22(2) Jul 1989, 88-93.
  • Vansickle, T. R., Kimmel, C., & Kapes, J. T. (1989). Test-retest equivalency of the computer-based and paper-pencil versions of the Strong-Campbell Interest Inventory: Measurement and Evaluation in Counseling and Development Vol 22(2) Jul 1989, 88-93.
  • Vatterott, M., Callier, J., & Hile, M. (1992). The development of the Missouri Automated Reinforcer Assessment (MARA): An update: Computers in Human Services Vol 8(3-4) 1992, 45-54.
  • Vaughan, A., & Houck, J. (1993). A "success" test of precognition and attitude toward the future: Journal of the Society for Psychical Research Vol 59(833) Oct 1993, 259-268.
  • Veerkamp, W. J. J., & Glas, C. A. W. (2000). Detection of known items in adaptative testing with a statistical quality control method: Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics Vol 25(4) Win 2000, 373-389.
  • Veldkamp, B. P., van der Linden, W. J., & Ariel, A. (2003). Mathematical-programming approaches to test item pool design. Hauppauge, NY: Nova Science Publishers.
  • Venn, M. L. (1991). An investigation of the applicability of recent advances in computer technology to the development of a computer-based, random-access audio test of common criterion-referenced objectives in elementary music: Dissertation Abstracts International.
  • Veroff, A. E., Cutler, N. R., Sramek, J. J., Prior, P. L., & et al. (1991). A new assessment tool for neuropsychopharmacologic research: The Computerized Neuropsychological Test Battery: Journal of Geriatric Psychiatry and Neurology Vol 4(4) Oct-Dec 1991, 211-217.
  • Vicino, F. L., & Moreno, K. E. (1997). Human factors in the CAT system: A pilot study. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
  • Villarroel, M. A., Turner, C. F., Eggleston, E., Al-Tayyib, A., Rogers, S. M., Roman, A. M., et al. (2006). Same-Gender Sex in the United States: Impact of T-ACASI on Prevalence Estimates: Public Opinion Quarterly Vol 70(2) Sum 2006, 166-196.
  • Vispoel, W. P. (1993). Computerized adaptive and fixed-item versions of the ITED vocabulary subtest: Educational and Psychological Measurement Vol 53(3) Fal 1993, 779-788.
  • Vispoel, W. P. (1993). The development and evaluation of a computerized adaptive test of tonal memory: Journal of Research in Music Education Vol 41(2) Sum 1993, 111-136.
  • Vispoel, W. P. (1998). Reviewing and changing answers on computer-adaptive and self-adaptive vocabulary tests: Journal of Educational Measurement Vol 35(4) Win 1998, 328-345.
  • Vispoel, W. P. (1999). Creating computerized adaptive tests of music aptitude: Problems, solutions, and future directions. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers.
  • Vispoel, W. P. (2000). Computerized versus paper-and-pencil assessment of self-concept: Score comparability and respondent preferences: Measurement and Evaluation in Counseling and Development Vol 33(3) Oct 2000, 130-143.
  • Vispoel, W. P. (2000). Reviewing and changing answers on computerized fixed-item vocabulary tests: Educational and Psychological Measurement Vol 60(3) Jun 2000, 371-384.
  • Vispoel, W. P., Boo, J., & Bleiler, T. (2001). Computerized and paper-and-pencil versions of the Rosenberg Self-Esteem Scale: A comparison of psychometric features and respondent preferences: Educational and Psychological Measurement Vol 61(3) Jun 2001, 461-474.
  • Vispoel, W. P., Clough, S. J., & Bleiler, T. (2005). A closer look at using judgments of item difficulty to change answers on computerized adaptive tests: Journal of Educational Measurement Vol 42(4) Win 2005, 331-350.
  • Vispoel, W. P., Clough, S. J., Bleiler, T., Hendrickson, A. B., & Ihrig, D. (2002). Can examinees use judgments of items difficulty to improve estimates on computerized adaptive vocabulary tests: Journal of Educational Measurement Vol 39(4) Win 2002, 311-330.
  • Vispoel, W. P., & Coffman, D. D. (1994). Computerized-adaptive and self-adapted music-listening tests: Psychometric features and motivational benefits: Applied Measurement in Education Vol 7(1) 1994, 25-51.
  • Vispoel, W. P., Hendrickson, A. B., & Bleiler, T. (2000). Limiting answer review and change on computerized adaptive vocabulary tests: Psychometric and attitudinal results: Journal of Educational Measurement Vol 37(1) Spr 2000, 21-38.
  • Vispoel, W. P., Rocklin, T. R., & Wang, T. (1994). Individual differences and test administration procedures: A comparison of fixed-item, computerized-adaptive, self-adapted testing: Applied Measurement in Education Vol 7(1) 1994, 53-79.
  • Vispoel, W. P., Rocklin, T. R., Wang, T., & Bleiler, T. (1999). Can examinees use a review option to obtain positively biased ability estimates on a computerized adaptive test? : Journal of Educational Measurement Vol 36(2) Sum 1999, 141-157.
  • Vispoel, W. P., Wang, T., & Bleiler, T. (1997). Computerized adaptive and fixed-item testing of music listening skill: A comparison of efficiency, precision, and concurrent validity: Journal of Educational Measurement Vol 34(1) Spr 1997, 43-63.
  • Vogel, L. A. (1994). Explaining performance on P&P versus computer mode of administration for the verbal section of the Graduate Record Exam: Journal of Educational Computing Research Vol 11(4) 1994, 369-383.
  • Vollands, S. R., Topping, K. J., & Evans, R. M. (1999). Computerized self-assessment of reading comprehension with the Accelerated Reader: Action research: Reading & Writing Quarterly: Overcoming Learning Difficulties Vol 15(3) Jul-Sep 1999, 197-211.
  • Voyer, D., Butler, T., Cordero, J., Brake, B., Silbersweig, D., Stern, E., et al. (2006). The Relation between Computerized and Paper-and-Pencil Mental Rotation Tasks: A Validation Study: Journal of Clinical and Experimental Neuropsychology Vol 28(6) Aug 2006, 928-939.
  • Vyrost, J. (1997). The computer version of the Kohs Block-Design Test: The Test of Squares: Psychologia a Patopsychologia Dietata Vol 32(4) 1997, 380-385.
  • Wainer, H. (1992). "A Harmless Necessary CAT." PsycCRITIQUES Vol 37 (2), Feb, 1992.
  • Wainer, H. (2000). Computerized adaptive testing: A primer (2nd ed.). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers.
  • Wainer, H. (2000). Rescuing computerized testing by breaking Zipf's law: Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics Vol 25(2) Sum 2000, 203-224.
  • Wainer, H. (2002). On the automatic generation of test items: Some whens, whys, and hows. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers.
  • Wainer, H., Dorans, N. J., Green, B. F., Steinberg, L., Flaugher, R., Mislevy, R. J., et al. (1990). Computerized adaptive testing: A primer. Hillsdale, NJ, England: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.
  • Wainer, H., & Kiely, G. L. (1987). Item clusters and computerized adaptive testing: A case for testlets: Journal of Educational Measurement Vol 24(3) Fal 1987, 185-201.
  • Wainer, H., & Mislevy, R. J. (2000). Item response theory, item calibration, and proficiency estimation. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers.
  • Wales, D. G. (1989). Process assessment in drawings: The replicative kinetic drawing technque: A computer-based drawing assessment technique: Dissertation Abstracts International.
  • Walker, C. M., Beretvas, S. N., & Ackerman, T. (2001). An examination of conditioning variables used in computer adaptive testing for DIF analyses: Applied Measurement in Education Vol 14(1) 2001, 3-16.
  • Walkstein, C.-M. (1995). Computer-based psychological testing: Format differences and methodological reflections: Le Travail Humain Vol 58(1) Mar 1995, 47-69.
  • Wall, J. E. (2000). Technology-delivered assessment: Power, problems, and promise. Alexandria, VA: American Counseling Association.
  • Waller, N. G. (1999). Searching for structure in the MMPI. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers.
  • Waller, N. G., & Reise, S. P. (1989). Computerized adaptive personality assessment: An illustration with the Absorption scale: Journal of Personality and Social Psychology Vol 57(6) Dec 1989, 1051-1058.
  • Walter, O. B., Becker, J., Fliege, H., Bjorner, J., Kosinski, M., Walter, M., et al. (2005). Developmental steps for a computer-adapted test for anxiety: Diagnostica Vol 51(2) 2005, 88-100.
  • Wang, K. (1997). Computerized adaptive testing: A comparison of item response theoretic approach and expert systems approaches in polychotomous grading. Dissertation Abstracts International Section A: Humanities and Social Sciences.
  • Wang, K.-H., Wang, T. H., Wang, W. L., & Huang, S. C. (2006). Learning styles and formative assessment strategy: enhancing student achievement in Web-based learning: Journal of Computer Assisted Learning Vol 22(3) Jun 2006, 207-217.
  • Wang, L., & Li, C.-S. (2001). Polytomous modeling of cognitive errors in computer adaptive testing: Journal of Applied Measurement Vol 2(4) 2001, 356-378.
  • Wang, S. (2000). The accuracy of ability estimation methods for computerized adaptive testing using the generalized partial credit model. Dissertation Abstracts International Section A: Humanities and Social Sciences.
  • Wang, S., & Wang, T. (2002). Precision of Warm's weighted likelihood estimation of ability for a polytomous model in CAT. Hauppauge, NY: Nova Science Publishers.
  • Wang, T., Hanson, B. A., & Lau, C.-M. A. (1999). Reducing bias in CAT trait estimation: A comparison of approaches: Applied Psychological Measurement Vol 23(3) Sep 1999, 263-278.
  • Wang, T., & Kolen, M. J. (2001). Evaluating comparability in computerized adaptive testing: Issues, criteria and an example: Journal of Educational Measurement Vol 38(1) Spr 2001, 19-49.
  • Wang, T., & Vispoel, W. P. (1998). Properties of ability estimation methods in computerized adaptive testing: Journal of Educational Measurement Vol 35(2) Sum 1998, 109-135.
  • Wang, W.-C., & Chen, P.-H. (2004). Implementation and measurement efficiency of multidimensional computerized adaptive testing: Applied Psychological Measurement Vol 28(5) Sep 2004, 295-316.
  • Wang, Y.-C., Lee, C.-M., Lew-Ting, C.-Y., Hsiao, C. K., Chen, D.-R., & Chen, W. J. (2005). Survey of substance use among high school students in Taipei: Web-based questionnaire versus paper-and-pencil questionnaire: Journal of Adolescent Health Vol 37(4) Oct 2005, 289-295.
  • Ward, T. J., Hooper, S. R., & Hannafin, K. M. (1989). The effect of computerized tests on the performance and attitudes of college students: Journal of Educational Computing Research Vol 5(3) 1989, 327-333.
  • Ware, J. E., Jr., Gandek, B., Sinclair, S. J., & Bjorner, J. B. (2005). Item Response Theory and Computerized Adaptive Testing: Implications for Outcomes Measurement in Rehabilitation: Rehabilitation Psychology Vol 50(1) Feb 2005, 71-78.
  • Waring, D. A., Farthing, C. B., & Kidder-Ashley, P. (1999). Impulsive response style affects computer-administered multiple-choice test performance: Journal of Instructional Psychology Vol 26(2) Jun 1999, 121-128.
  • Watkins, M. W., & Kush, J. C. (1988). Assessment of academic skills of learning disabled students with classroom microcomputers: School Psychology Review Vol 17(1) 1988, 81-88.
  • Watson, C. G., Manifold, V., Klett, W. G., Brown, J., Thomas, D., & Anderson, D. (1990). Comparability of computer- and booklet-administered Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventories among primarily chemically dependent patients: Psychological Assessment: A Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology Vol 2(3) Sep 1990, 276-280.
  • Watson, C. G., Thomas, D., & Anderson, P. E. (1992). Do computer-administered Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventories underestimate booklet-based scores? : Journal of Clinical Psychology Vol 48(6) Nov 1992, 744-748.
  • Waugh, R. F. (2003). On the forefront of educational psychology. Hauppauge, NY: Nova Science Publishers.
  • Way, W. D. (1998). Protecting the integrity of computerized testing item pools: Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice Vol 17(4) Win 1998, 17-27.
  • Way, W. D. (2007). Review of Computer-based testing and the Internet: Issues and advances: Journal of Educational Measurement Vol 44(2) Sum 2007, 179-185.
  • Weber, B., Fritze, J., Schneider, B., Kuhner, T., & Maurer, K. (2002). Bias in computerized neuropsychological assessment of depressive disorders caused by computer attitude: Acta Psychiatrica Scandinavica Vol 105(2) Feb 2002, 126-130.
  • Webster, J., & Compeau, D. (1996). Computer-assisted versus paper-and-pencil administration of questionnaires: Behavior Research Methods, Instruments & Computers Vol 28(4) Nov 1996, 567-576.
  • Weeter, R. D. (1987). Computer attitudes and performance: Dissertation Abstracts International.
  • Weiss, D. J. (2004). Computerized Adaptive Testing for Effective and Efficient Measurement in Counseling and Education: Measurement and Evaluation in Counseling and Development Vol 37(2) Jul 2004, 70-84.
  • Weiss, D. J., & Vale, C. D. (1987). Adaptive testing: Applied Psychology: An International Review Vol 36(3-4) Sep 1987, 249-262.
  • Weissman, A. (2006). A Feedback Control Strategy for Enhancing Item Selection Efficiency in Computerized Adaptive Testing: Applied Psychological Measurement Vol 30(2) Mar 2006, 84-99.
  • Welch, R. E., & Frick, T. W. (1993). Computerized adaptive testing in instructional settings: Educational Technology Research and Development Vol 41(3) 1993, 47-62.
  • Wellner, B., Ferro, L., Greiff, W., & Hirschman, L. (2006). Reading comprehension tests for computer-based understanding evaluation: Natural Language Engineering Vol 12(4) Dec 2006, 305-334.
  • West, P., Sweeting, H., Der, G., Barton, J., & Lucas, C. (2003). Voice-DISC Identified DSM-IV Disorders Among 15-Year-Olds in the West of Scotland: Journal of the American Academy of Child & Adolescent Psychiatry Vol 42(8) Aug 2003, 941-949.
  • Wetzler, S. (1990). Computerized psychological assessment. Philadelphia, PA: Brunner/Mazel.
  • Wetzler, S., & Marlowe, D. B. (1994). Clinical psychology by computer?: The state of the "art." European Journal of Psychological Assessment Vol 10(1) 1994, 55-61.
  • Whisman, M. A., & Snyder, D. K. (2007). Sexual infidelity in a national survey of American women: Differences in prevalence and correlates as a function of method of assessment: Journal of Family Psychology Vol 21(2) Jun 2007, 147-154.
  • White, M. J. (1988). A computer-administered examination in professional ethics: Counselor Education and Supervision Vol 28(2) Dec 1988, 116-120.
  • Whiting, H., & Kline, T. J. B. (2006). Assessment of the equivalence of conventional versus computer administration of the Test of Workplace Essential Skills: International Journal of Training and Development Vol 10(4) Dec 2006, 285-290.
  • Wiberg, M. (2003). An optimal design approach to criterion-referenced computerized testing: Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics Vol 28(2) Sum 2003, 97-110.
  • Wiberg, M. (2006). Sequential computerized mastery tests--Three simulation studies: International Journal of Testing Vol 6(1) 2006, 41-55.
  • Wiechmann, D., & Ryan, A. M. (2003). Reactions to computerized testing in selection contexts: International Journal of Selection and Assessment Vol 11(2-3) Jun-Sep 2003, 215-229.
  • Wightman, L. F. (1998). Practical issues in computerized test assembly: Applied Psychological Measurement Vol 22(3) Sep 1998, 292-302.
  • Wiig, E. S., Jones, S. S., & Wiig, E. D. (1996). Computer-based assessment of word knowledge in teens with learning disabilities: Praxis der Kinderpsychologie und Kinderpsychiatrie Vol 45(10) Dec 1996, 21-28.
  • Wildgrube, W. (1990). Computer-assisted psychological assessment in a large organization: Diagnostica Vol 36(2) 1990, 127-147.
  • Wilkerson, J. M., Nagao, D. H., & Martin, C. L. (2002). Socially desirable responding in computerized questionnaires: When questionnaire purpose matters more than the mode: Journal of Applied Social Psychology Vol 32(3) Mar 2002, 544-559.
  • Wilkinson, G., & Markus, A. C. (1989). Validation of a computerized assessment (PROQSY) of minor psychological morbidity by Relative Operating Characteristic analysis using a single GP's assessments as criterion measures: Psychological Medicine Vol 19(1) Feb 1989, 225-231.
  • Williams, J. E. (2003). The relative validity of eight computer-based interpretations for the MMPI-2. Dissertation Abstracts International: Section B: The Sciences and Engineering.
  • Williams, J. E., & McCord, D. M. (2006). Equivalence of standard and computerized versions of the Raven Progressive Matrices Test: Computers in Human Behavior Vol 22(5) Sep 2006, 791-800.
  • Williams, J. E., & Weed, N. C. (2004). Relative User Ratings of MMPI-2 Computer-Based Test Interpretations: Assessment Vol 11(4) Dec 2004, 316-329.
  • Williams, J. E., & Weed, N. C. (2004). Review of computer-based test interpretation software for the MMPI-2: Journal of Personality Assessment Vol 83(1) Aug 2004, 78-83.
  • Williams, M. L., Freeman, R. C., Bowen, A. M., Zhao, Z., Elwood, W. N., Gordon, C., et al. (2000). A comparison of the reliability of self-reported drug use and sexual behaviors using computer-assisted versus face-to-face interviewing: AIDS Education and Prevention Vol 12(3) Jun 2000, 199-213.
  • Williamson, D. M., Almond, R. G., Mislevy, R. J., & Levy, R. (2006). An Application of Bayesian Networks in Automated Scoring of Computerized Simulation Tasks. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers.
  • Williamson, D. M., Bejar, I. I., & Mislevy, R. J. (2006). Automated Scoring of Complex Tasks in Computer-Based Testing: An Introduction. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers.
  • Williamson, D. M., Mislevey, R. J., & Bejar, I. I. (2006). Automated scoring of complex tasks in computer-based testing. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers.
  • Willingham, D. B., Hollier, J., & Joseph, J. (1995). A Macintosh analogue of the rotary pursuit task: Behavior Research Methods, Instruments & Computers Vol 27(4) Nov 1995, 491-495.
  • Willis, J. A. (1990). Learning outcome testing program: Standardized classroom testing in West Virginia through item banking, test generation, and curricular management software: Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice Vol 9(2) Sum 1990, 11-14.
  • Willse, J. T. (2002). Controlling computer adaptive testing's capitalization on chance errors in item parameter estimates. Dissertation Abstracts International: Section B: The Sciences and Engineering.
  • Wilson, F. R., Genco, K. T., & Yager, G. G. (1985). Assessing the equivalence of paper-and-pencil vs. computerized tests: Demonstration of a promising methodology: Computers in Human Behavior Vol 1(3-4) 1985, 265-275.
  • Wilson, O. D. (1988). An automated diagnostic test and tutorial package for basic skills of mathematics in post secondary vocational education of Kentucky: Construction and validation: Dissertation Abstracts International.
  • Wilson, S. L. (1987). The development of an automated test of immediate memory and its evaluation on severely physically disabled adults: Applied Psychology: An International Review Vol 36(3-4) Sep 1987, 311-327.
  • Wilson, S. L. (1991). Microcomputer-based psychological assessment: An advance in helping severely physically disabled people. New York, NY: Kluwer Academic/Plenum Publishers.
  • Wingenfeld, S. A., Holdwick, D. J., Jr., Davis, J. L., & Hunter, B. B. (1999). Normative data on computerized paced auditory serial addition task performance: Clinical Neuropsychologist Vol 13(3) Aug 1999, 268-273.
  • Wise, A. (2003). Web-based puzzle program to assist students' understanding of research methods: Active Learning in Higher Education Vol 4(2) Jul 2003, 193-202.
  • Wise, L. L., Curran, L. T., & McBride, J. R. (1997). CAT-ASVAB cost and benefit analyses. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
  • Wise, S. L. (1994). Understanding self-adapted testing: The perceived control hypothesis: Applied Measurement in Education Vol 7(1) 1994, 15-24.
  • Wise, S. L. (2006). An Investigation of the Differential Effort Received by Items on a Low-Stakes Computer-Based Test: Applied Measurement in Education Vol 19(2) 2006, 95-114.
  • Wise, S. L., Finney, S. J., Enders, C. K., Freeman, S. A., & Severance, D. D. (1999). Examinee judgments of changes in item difficulty: Implications for item review in computerized adaptive testing: Applied Measurement in Education Vol 12(2) 1999, 185-198.
  • Wise, S. L., & Kong, X. (2005). Response Time Effort: A New Measure of Examinee Motivation in Computer-Based Tests: Applied Measurement in Education Vol 18(2) Apr 2005, 163-183.
  • Wise, S. L., & Plake, B. S. (1989). Research on the effects of administering tests via computers: Educational Measurement: Issues and Practice Vol 8(3) Fal 1989, 5-10.
  • Wise, S. L., & Plake, B. S. (1990). Computer-based testing in higher education: Measurement and Evaluation in Counseling and Development Vol 23(1) Apr 1990, 3-10.
  • Wise, S. L., Plake, B. S., Johnson, P. L., & Roos, L. L. (1992). A comparison of self-adapted and computerized adaptive tests: Journal of Educational Measurement Vol 29(4) Win 1992, 329-339.
  • Wise, S. L., Plake, B. S., Pozehl, B. J., Barnes, L. B., & et al. (1989). Providing item feedback in computer-based tests: Effects of initial success and failure: Educational and Psychological Measurement Vol 49(2) Sum 1989, 479-486.
  • Wise, S. L., Roos, L. L., Plake, B. S., & Nebelsick-Gullett, L. J. (1994). The relationship between examinee anxiety and preference for self-adapted testing: Applied Measurement in Education Vol 7(1) 1994, 81-91.
  • Wise, S. L., & Wise, L. A. (1987). Comparison of computer-administered and paper-administered achievement tests with elementary school children: Computers in Human Behavior Vol 3(1) 1987, 15-20.
  • Wiskoff, M. F. (1997). R&D laboratory management perspective. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
  • Wiskoff, M. F., & Schratz, M. K. (1989). Computerized adaptive testing of a vocational aptitude battery. New York, NY, England: Praeger Publishers.
  • Woehr, D. J., Miller, M. J., & Lane, J. A. S. (1998). The development and evaluation of a computer-administered measure of cognitive complexity: Personality and Individual Differences Vol 25(6) Dec 1998, 1037-1049.
  • Wolach, A. H., & McHale, M. A. (2002). Computer program to generate operant schedules: Behavior Research Methods, Instruments & Computers Vol 34(2) May 2002, 245-249.
  • Wolfe, J. H. (1986). Computerized testing technology: Advances in Reading/Language Research Vol 4 1986, 71-78.
  • Wolfe, J. H., Alderton, D. L., Larson, G. E., Bloxom, B. M., & Wise, L. L. (1997). Expanding the content of CAT-ASVAB: New tests and their validity. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
  • Wolfe, J. H., McBride, J. R., & Sympson, J. B. (1997). Development of the experimental CAT-ASVAB system. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
  • Wolfe, J. H., Moreno, K. E., & Segall, D. O. (1997). Evaluating the predictive validity of CAT-ASVAB. Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
  • Woodward, J., & Howard, L. (1994). The misconceptions of youth: Errors and their mathematical meaning: Exceptional Children Vol 61(2) Oct-Nov 1994, 126-136.
  • Xiao, B. (1993). Strategies for computerized adaptive testing: Golden section search, dichotomous search, and Z-score strategies: Dissertation Abstracts International.
  • Xiao, B. (1999). Strategies for computerized adaptive grading testing: Applied Psychological Measurement Vol 23(2) Jun 1999, 136-146.
  • Xing, D. (2001). Impact of several computer-based testing variables on the psychometric properties of credentialing examinations. Dissertation Abstracts International: Section B: The Sciences and Engineering.
  • Xing, D., & Hambleton, R. K. (2004). Impact of Test Design, Item Quality, and Item Bank Size on the Psychometric Properties of Computer-Based Credentialing Examinations: Educational and Psychological Measurement Vol 64(1) Feb 2004, 5-21.
  • Xu, X., & Douglas, J. (2006). Computerized adaptive testing under nonparametric IRT models: Psychometrika Vol 71(1) Mar 2006, 121-137.
  • Yanagimoto, T., & Maeda, T. (2003). Randomized Item Testing; Its Framework and Infrastructure: Japanese Journal of Behaviormetrics Vol 30(2) Sep 2003, 213-221.
  • Yang, T.-K. (2006). Measurement of korean efl college students' foreign language classroom speaking anxiety: Evidence of psychometric properties and accuracy of a computerized adaptive test (CAT) with dichotomously scored items using a cat simulation. Dissertation Abstracts International Section A: Humanities and Social Sciences.
  • Yang, Y., Buckendahl, C. W., Juszkiewicz, P. J., & Bhola, D. S. (2002). A review of strategies for validating computer-automated scoring: Applied Measurement in Education Vol 15(4) Oct 2002, 391-412.
  • Yaschishin, K. E. (1989). The method of identifying and estimating the level of operative thinking development of senior schoolchildren: Voprosy Psychologii No 1 Jan-Feb 1989, 128-132.
  • Yates, B. T., Wagner, J. L., & Suprenant, L. M. (1997). Recall of health-risky behaviors for the prior 2 or 4 weeks via computerized versus printed questionnaire: Computers in Human Behavior Vol 13(1) Jan 1997, 83-110.
  • Yi, Q. (1999). A comparison of three ability estimation procedures for computerized adaptive testing in the presence of nonmodel-fitting responses resulting from a compromised item. Dissertation Abstracts International Section A: Humanities and Social Sciences.
  • Yi, Q., & Chang, H.-H. (2003). a-Stratified CAT design with content blocking: British Journal of Mathematical and Statistical Psychology Vol 56(2) Nov 2003, 359-378.
  • Yi, Q., Wang, T., & Ban, J.-C. (2001). Effects of scale transformation and test-termination rule on the precision of ability estimation in computerized adaptive testing: Journal of Educational Measurement Vol 38(3) Fal 2001, 267-292.
  • Yi, Q., Zhang, J., & Chang, H.-H. (2006). Assessing CAT Test Security Severity: Applied Psychological Measurement Vol 30(1) Jan 2006, 62-63.
  • You, Y. S., Lee, H. S., Jung, I. K., & Lee, J. H. (1998). The study of the usefulness of computerized neuropsychological test (STIM) in traumatic brain-injury patients: Korean Journal of Clinical Psychology Vol 17(2) Dec 1998, 133-147.
  • Youngjohn, J. R., Larrabee, G. J., & Crook, T. H. (1991). First-Last Names and the Grocery List Selective Reminding Test: Two computerized measures of everyday verbal learning: Archives of Clinical Neuropsychology Vol 6(4) 1991, 287-300.
  • Zakrzewski, S., & Steven, C. (2003). Computer-based Assessment: Quality assurance issues, the hub of the wheel: Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education Vol 28(6) Dec 2003, 609-623.
  • Zara, A. R. (1999). Using computerized adaptive testing to evaluate nurse competence for licensure: Some history and forward look: Advances in Health Sciences Education Vol 4(1) 1999, 39-48.
  • Zarkhin, V. G., & Khmel'nitskiy, M. A. (1986). Experimental study of the features of psychological diagnosis using a computer: Novye Issledovaniya v Psikhologii Vol 35(2) 1986, 29-34.
  • Zenisky, A. L., & Sireci, S. G. (2002). Technological innovations in large-scale assessment: Applied Measurement in Education Vol 15(4) Oct 2002, 337-362.
  • Zhao, J. C. (2000). The robustness of the unidimensional 3pl IRT model when applied to two-dimensional data in computerized adaptive testing. Dissertation Abstracts International: Section B: The Sciences and Engineering.
  • Zickar, M. J., Overton, R. C., Taylor, L. R., & Harms, H. J. (1999). The development of a computerized selection system for computer programmers in a financial services company. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers.
  • Zwick, R., & Thayer, D. T. (2002). Application of an empirical Bayes enhancement of Mantel-Haenszel differential item functioning analysis to a computerized adaptive test: Applied Psychological Measurement Vol 26(1) Mar 2002, 57-76.

External linksEdit


This page uses Creative Commons Licensed content from Wikipedia (view authors).

Around Wikia's network

Random Wiki