@inbook {109,
	title = {Computer-based testing},
	booktitle = {Handbook of multimethod measurement in psychology},
	volume = {xiv},
	year = {2006},
	note = {Using Smart Source ParsingHandbook of multimethod measurement in psychology. (pp. 87-100). Washington, DC : American Psychological Association, [URL:http://www.apa.org/books]. xiv, 553 pp},
	pages = {87-100},
	publisher = {American Psychological Association},
	organization = {American Psychological Association},
	address = {Washington D.C. USA},
	abstract = {(From the chapter) There has been a proliferation of research designed to explore and exploit opportunities provided by computer-based assessment. This chapter provides an overview of the diverse efforts by researchers in this area. It begins by describing how paper-and-pencil tests can be adapted for administration by computers. Computerization provides the important advantage that items can be selected so they are of appropriate difficulty for each examinee. Some of the psychometric theory needed for computerized adaptive testing is reviewed. Then research on innovative computerized assessments is summarized. These assessments go beyond multiple-choice items by using formats made possible by computerization. Then some hardware and software issues are described, and finally, directions for future work are outlined. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2006 APA )},
	keywords = {Adaptive Testing computerized adaptive testing, Computer Assisted Testing, Experimentation, Psychometrics, Theories},
	author = {F Drasgow and Chuah, S. C.}
}
@article {370,
	title = {An EM approach to parameter estimation for the Zinnes and Griggs paired comparison IRT model},
	journal = {Applied Psychological Measurement},
	volume = {26},
	number = {2},
	year = {2002},
	pages = {208-227},
	abstract = {Borman et al. recently proposed a computer adaptive performance appraisal system called CARS II that utilizes paired comparison judgments of behavioral stimuli. To implement this approach,the paired comparison ideal point model developed by Zinnes and Griggs was selected. In this article,the authors describe item response and information functions for the Zinnes and Griggs model and present procedures for estimating stimulus and person parameters. Monte carlo simulations were conducted to assess the accuracy of the parameter estimation procedures. The results indicated that at least 400 ratees (i.e.,ratings) are required to obtain reasonably accurate estimates of the stimulus parameters and their standard errors. In addition,latent trait estimation improves as test length increases. The implications of these results for test construction are also discussed. },
	keywords = {Adaptive Testing, Computer Assisted Testing, Item Response Theory, Maximum Likelihood, Personnel Evaluation, Statistical Correlation, Statistical Estimation},
	author = {Stark, S. and F Drasgow}
}
@inbook {108,
	title = {The work ahead: A psychometric infrastructure for computerized adaptive tests},
	booktitle = {Computer-based tests: Building the foundation for future assessment},
	year = {2002},
	note = {Using Smart Source ParsingComputer-based testing: Building the foundation for future assessments. (pp. 1-35). Mahwah, NJ : Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Publishers. xi, 326 pp},
	publisher = {Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.},
	organization = {Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Inc.},
	address = {Mahwah, N.J. USA},
	abstract = {(From the chapter) Considers the past and future of computerized adaptive tests and computer-based tests and looks at issues and challenges confronting a testing program as it implements and operates a computer-based test. Recommendations for testing programs from The National Council of Measurement in Education Ad Hoc Committee on Computerized Adaptive Test Disclosure are appended. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2005 APA )},
	keywords = {Adaptive Testing, Computer Assisted Testing, Educational, Measurement, Psychometrics},
	author = {F Drasgow},
	editor = {M. P. Potenza and J. J. Freemer and W. C. Ward}
}
@article {36,
	title = {An examination of the comparative reliability, validity, and accuracy of performance ratings made using computerized adaptive rating scales},
	journal = {Journal of Applied Psychology},
	volume = {86},
	number = {5},
	year = {2001},
	note = {214803450021-9010Journal ArticleValidation Studies},
	pages = {965-973},
	abstract = {This laboratory research compared the reliability, validity, and accuracy of a computerized adaptive rating scale (CARS) format and 2 relatively common and representative rating formats. The CARS is a paired-comparison rating task that uses adaptive testing principles to present pairs of scaled behavioral statements to the rater to iteratively estimate a ratee{\textquoteright}s effectiveness on 3 dimensions of contextual performance. Videotaped vignettes of 6 office workers were prepared, depicting prescripted levels of contextual performance, and 112 subjects rated these vignettes using the CARS format and one or the other competing format. Results showed 23\%-37\% lower standard errors of measurement for the CARS format. In addition, validity was significantly higher for the CARS format (d = .18), and Cronbach{\textquoteright}s accuracy coefficients showed significantly higher accuracy, with a median effect size of .08. The discussion focuses on possible reasons for the results.},
	keywords = {*Computer Simulation, *Employee Performance Appraisal, *Personnel Selection, Adult, Automatic Data Processing, Female, Human, Male, Reproducibility of Results, Sensitivity and Specificity, Support, U.S. Gov{\textquoteright}t, Non-P.H.S., Task Performance and Analysis, Video Recording},
	author = {Borman, W. C. and Buck, D. E. and Hanson, M. A. and Motowidlo, S. J. and Stark, S. and F Drasgow}
}
