Selected research to date
Please refer to the following studies regarding the appropriateness of administering forced-choice assessments via computer or other electronic means.
Chuah et al (2006). Personality Assessment: Does the Medium Matter? No. Journal of Research in Personality, 40-4, 339-376.
Butcher, J., Perry, J., & Hahn, J. (2004). Computers in clinical assessment: Historical developments, present status, and future challenges. Journal of Clinical Psychology, 60, 331-345.
Pinsoneault, Terry B. (1996) Equivalency of computer-assisted and paper-and-pencil administered version of the Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory-2.Computers in Human Behavior, 12-2, 291-300.
Russell M. et al (2003). Computer-Based Testing and Validity: A Look Back and into the Future. Technology and Assessment Study Collaborative, Boston College
Studies supporting the equivalency of test scores when picture stimuli are displayed to the examinee in a printed manual versus a digital display on a computer screen (in-person administration):
Daniel, M. H., Wahlstrom, D., & Zhou, X. (2014). Equivalence of Q-interactive and paper administrations of language tasks: Selected CELF-5 tests. Q-interactive Technical Report 7. Bloomington, MN: Pearson.
Daniel, M. H. (2012a). Equivalence of Q-interactive administered cognitive tasks: WAIS–IV. Q-interactive Technical Report 1. Bloomington, MN: Pearson.
Daniel, M. H. (2012b). Equivalence of Q-interactive administered cognitive tasks: WISC–IV. Q-interactive Technical Report 2. Bloomington, MN: Pearson.