BartonM. A.LordF. M. (1981). An upper asymptote for the three-parameter logistic item-response model (Research Bulletin 81-20). Educational Testing Service.
2.
BockR. D. (1972). Estimating item parameters and latent ability when responses are scored in two or more nominal categories. Psychometrika, 37(1), 29–51. https://doi.org/10.1007/bf02291411
3.
BockR. D.MislevyR. J. (1982). Adaptive EAP estimation of ability in a microcomputer environment. Applied Psychological Measurement, 6(4), 431–444. https://doi.org/10.1177/014662168200600405
4.
ChangH.-H.QianJ.YingZ. (2001). Alpha-stratified multistage computerized adaptive testing with b blocking. Applied Psychological Measurement, 25(4), 333–341. https://doi.org/10.1177/01466210122032181
5.
ChangH.-H.YingZ. (1996). A global information approach to computerized adaptive testing. Applied Psychological Measurement, 20(3), 213–229. https://doi.org/10.1177/014662169602000303
HanK. T. (2009). Gradual maximum information ratio approach to item selection in computerized adaptive testing (Research Report RR-09-07). Graduate Management Admission Council.
8.
HanK. T. (2007). WinGen: Windows software that generates IRT parameters and item responses. Applied Psychological Measurement, 31(5), 457–459. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146621607299271
9.
HanK. T. (2012a). An efficiency balanced information criterion for item selection in computerized adaptive testing. Journal of Educational Measurement, 49(3), 225–246. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-3984.2012.00173.x
10.
HanK. T. (2012b). SimulCAT: Windows software for simulating computerized adaptive test administration. Applied Psychological Measurement, 36(1), 64–66. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146621611414407
11.
HanK. T. (2013). MSTGen: Simulated data generator for multistage testing. Applied Psychological Measurement, 37(8), 666–668. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146621613499639
12.
HanK. T. (2016). Maximum likelihood score estimation method with fences for short-length tests and computerized adaptive tests. Applied Psychological Measurement, 40(4), 289–301. https://doi.org/10.1177/0146621616631317
13.
HanK. T. (2018). Components of the item selection algorithm in computerized adaptive testing. Journal of Educational Evaluation for Health Professions, 15(7), 7. https://doi.org/10.3352/jeehp.2018.15.7
14.
HanK. T.GuoF. (2014). A new approach to multistage testing: On-the-fly multistage testing with target test information. In YanD.von DavierA. A.LewisC. (Eds.), Computerized multistage testing: Theory and applications (pp. 382–396). CRC Press.
15.
HanK. T.LeeS.-H. (2026, April). Implementing multistage testing using existing computerized adaptive testing system with minimal changes. Paper presented at the annual conference ofNCME, Los Angeles.
16.
KingsburyG. G.ZaraA. R. (1989). Procedures for selecting items for computerized adaptive tests. Applied Measurement in Education, 2(4), 359–375. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15324818ame0204_6
17.
KingsburyG. G.ZaraA. R. (1991). A comparison of procedures for content-sensitive item selection in computerized adaptive tests. Applied Measurement in Education, 4(3), 241–261. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15324818ame0403_4
MagisD.BarradaJ. R. (2017). Computerized adaptive testing with R: Recent updates of the package catR. Journal of Statistical Software, 76(1), 1–19. https://doi.org/10.18637/jss.v076.c01
23.
MagisD.YanD.von DavierA. A. (2017). Computerized adaptive and multistage testing with R: Using packages catR and mstR. Springer.
24.
MurakiE. (1992). A generalized partial credit model: Application of an EM algorithm. Applied Psychological Measurement, 16(2), 159–176. https://doi.org/10.1177/014662169201600206
25.
RevueltaJ.PonsodaV. (1998). A comparison of item exposure control methods in computerized adaptive testing. Journal of Educational Measurement, 35(4), 311–328. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-3984.1998.tb00541.x
26.
SamejimaF. (1969). Estimation of latent ability using a response pattern of graded scores (Psychometrika Monograph Supplement No. 17).
27.
StockingM. L. (1996). An alternative method for scoring adaptive tests. Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics, 21(4), 365–389. https://doi.org/10.2307/1165340
28.
StockingM. L.LewisC. (1995). A new method of controlling item exposure in computerized adaptive testing (Research Report 95-25). Educational Testing Service.
29.
StockingM. L.LewisC. (1998). Controlling item exposure conditional on ability in computerized adaptive testing. Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics, 23(1), 57–75. https://doi.org/10.2307/1165348
30.
SympsonJ. B.HetterR. D. (1985). Controlling item-exposure rates in computerized adaptive testing [Paper presentation]. In 27th Annual Meeting of the Military Testing Association,San Diego, CA, United States.
31.
VeerkampW. J. J.BergerM. P. F. (1997). Some new item selection criteria for adaptive testing. Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics, 22(2), 203–226. https://doi.org/10.3102/10769986022002203
32.
WarmT. A. (1989). Weighted likelihood estimation of ability in item response theory. Psychometrika, 54(3), 427–450. https://doi.org/10.1007/bf02294627
33.
WeissD. J. (1982). Improving measurement quality and efficiency with adaptive testing. Applied Psychological Measurement, 6(4), 473–492. https://doi.org/10.1177/014662168200600408
34.
YuanY.HanK. T. (2025, November). Localized fade-away method for controlling item exposure across performance levels. Presentation deliveredat the conference on Test Security,Amherst, MA.