Andrews, Mary M. "Programmed Instruction in the Elementary School: A Study of Variables Associated with Mathematics Achievement." Unpublished doctor's thesis. The University of Georgia, Athens, 1964.
2.
Goldbeck, Robert A., and Campbell, Vincent N. "The Effects of Response Mode and Response Difficulty on Programed Learning." Journal of Educational Psychology53: 110-18; June 1962 .
3.
Hosmer, Clark L., and Noland, James A. "Time Saved by a Tryout of Automatic Tutoring." Applied Programed Instruction. (Edited by Stuart Margulies and L. D. Eigen.) New York: John Wiley and Sons, 1962 .
4.
Keislar, Evan R., and McNeil, John D. "A Comparison of Two Response Modes in an Autoinstructional Program with Children in the Primary Grades ." Journal of Educational Psychology53: 127-31; June 1962 .
5.
Pressey, Sidney L. "A Simple Apparatus Which Gives Tests, and Scores—and Teaches." School and Society23: 373-76; 1926.
6.
Price, James E.A Comparison of Automated Teaching Programs with Conventional Teaching Methods As Applied to Teaching Mentally Retarded Students. U.S. Department of Health, Education and Welfare, Office of Education, NDEA Project No. 670 . Washington, D.C.: Government Printing Office, 1958.
7.
Suppes, Patrick C., and Ginshers, R.Application of a Stimulus Sampling Model to Children's Concept Forming of Binary Numbers, with and Without an Overt Correction Response. Project No. 35. Institute for Mathematical Studies in the Social Sciences, Stanford University, 1960.
8.
Wash, James A. "Experiment in the Use of Programmed Materials in Teaching High School Chemistry." Unpublished doctor's thesis, The University of Georgia, Athens, 1964 .