American Educational Research Association, American Psychological Association, & National Council on Measurement in Education. (2014). Standards for Educational and Psychological Testing. Washington, DC: Author.Google Scholar

Association of Test Publishers. (2002). Guidelines for Computer-Based Testing. Author.Google Scholar

Bartram, D. (2006). Testing on the Internet: Issues, challenges and opportunities in the field of occupational assessment. In Bartram, D. & Hambleton, R. K. (Eds.), Computer-Based Testing and the Internet: Issues and Advances (pp. 13–37). Chichester, UK: John Wiley and Sons.Google Scholar

Bartram, D. (2011). International issues, standards and guidelines. In Tippins, N. T. & Adler, S. (Eds.), Technology-Enhanced Assessment of Talent (pp. 224–250). San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar

Bartram, D., & Coyne, I. (1998). Variations in national patterns of testing and test use. European Journal of Psychological Assessment, 14(3), 249–260.Google Scholar

Beaty, J. C., Nye, C. D., Borneman, M. J., Kantrowitz, T. M., Drasgow, F., & Grauer, E. (2011). Proctored versus unproctored Internet tests: Are unproctored noncognitive tests as predictive of job performance? International Journal of Selection and Assessment, 19(1), 1–10.Google Scholar

British Psychological Society. (2015). Standards in the Design and Delivery of Assessment Centres. Retrieved from www.bps.org.uk/system/files/user-files/Division%20of%20Occupational%20Psychology/public/inf234_assess_centres_final.pdf (accessed June 2, 2015).Google Scholar

Clark, L. A., & Roberts, S. J. (2010). Employer’s use of social networking sites: A socially irresponsible practice. Journal of Business Ethics, 95, 507–525.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Davison, H. K., Maraist, C., & Bing, M. N. (2011). Friend or foe? The promise and pitfalls of using social networking sites for HR decisions. Journal of Business and Psychology, 26(2), 153–159.Google Scholar

Drasgow, F., & Mattern, K. (2006). New tests and new items: Opportunities and issues. In Bartram, D. & Hambleton, R. K. (Eds.), Computer-Based Testing and the Internet: Issues and Advances (pp. 59–75). Chichester, UK: John Wiley and Sons.Google Scholar

Gilliland, S. W. (1993). The perceived fairness of selection systems: An organizational justice perspective. Academy of Management Review, 18 (4), 694–734.Google Scholar

Harris, M. M. (2006). Internet testing: The examinee perspective. In Bartram, D. & Hambleton, R. K. (Eds.), Computer-Based Testing and the Internet: Issues and Advances (pp. 115–133). Chichester, UK: John Wiley and Sons.Google Scholar

International Task Force on Assessment Center Guidelines. (2015). Guidelines and ethical considerations for assessment center operations. Journal of Management, 41(4), 1244–1273.Google Scholar

International Test Commission. (2001). International guidelines on test use. International Journal of Testing, 1(2), 95–114.Google Scholar

International Test Commission. (2006). International guidelines on computer-based and Internet-delivered testing. International Journal of Testing, 6(2), 143–171.Google Scholar

International Test Commission. (2010). Test-Takers Guide to Technology-Based Testing. Retrieved from www.intestcom.org/page/21 (accessed).Google Scholar

International Test Commission. (2014). Guidelines on Test Security. Retrieved from www.intestcom.org/page/20 (accessed).Google Scholar

Ion, A., Iliescu, D., Ilie, A., & Ispas, D. (2015, May). Online, Tablet-Based vs. Paper-and-Pencil Administration. In D. Bartram (Chair), Advances in Technology-Based Testing: Implications for Revising the ITC Guidelines. Symposium conducted at the European Association of Work and Organizational Psychology Conference, Oslo.Google Scholar

ISO 10667. (2011). Assessment Service Delivery – Procedures and Methods to Assess People in Work and Organizational Settings. Geneva: Author.Google Scholar

ISO/IEC 23988. (2007). Information Technology – A Code of Practice for the Use of Information Technology (IT) in the Delivery of Assessments. Geneva: Author.Google Scholar

Kluemper, D. H., & Rosen, P. A. (2009). Future employment selection methods: Evaluating social networking web sites. Journal of Managerial Psychology, 24(6), 567–580..Google Scholar

Landers, R. N., & Sackett, P. R. (2012). Offsetting performance losses due to cheating in unproctored Internet-based testing by increasing the applicant pool. International Journal of Selection and Assessment, 20(2), 220–228.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Laumer, S., Eckhard, A., & Weitzel, T. (2012). Online gaming to find a new job – Examining job seekers’ intention to use serious games as a self-assessment tool. Zeitschrift für Personalforschung, German Journal of Research in Human Resource Management, 26(3), 218–240.Google Scholar

Lievens, F. (2006). The ITC Guidelines on Computer-based and Internet-delivered Testing: Where do we go from here? International Journal of Testing, 6(2), 189–194.Google Scholar

Malheiros, M., Jennett, C., Seager, W., & Sasse, M. A. (2011). Trusting to learn: Trust and privacy issues in serious games. In McCune, J. M., Balacheff, B., Perrig, A., Sadeghi, A.-R, Sasse, A., & Beres, Y. (Eds.), Trust and Trustworthy Computing. Proceedings of the 4th International Conference, TRUST 2011 (pp. 116–130). Pittsburgh: Springer.Google Scholar

McDonnell, A. (2016). 60% of employers are peeking into candidates’ social media profiles. Retrieved from http://advice.careerbuilder.com/posts/60-of-employers-are-peeking-into-candidates-social-media-profiles (accessed May 16, 2016).Google Scholar

Melanthiou, Y., Pavlou, F., & Constantinou, E. (2015). The use of social network sites as an e-recruitment tool. Journal of Transnational Management, 20(1), 31–49.Google Scholar

Morelli, N. A., Mahan, R. P., & Illingworth, A. J. (2014). Establishing the measurement equivalence of online selection assessments delivered on mobile versus nonmobile devices. International Journal of Selection and Assessment, 22(2), 124–138.Google Scholar

Naglieri, J. A., Drasgow, F., Schmit, M., Handler, L., Prifitera, A., Margolis, A., & Velasquez, R. (2004). Psychological testing on the Internet: New problems, old issues. American Psychologist, 59(3), 150–162.Google Scholar

Oakland, T. (2006). Introduction: The International Test Commission and its role in advancing measurement practices and international guidelines. In Bartram, D. & Hambleton, R. K. (Eds.), Computer-Based Testing and the Internet: Issues and Advances (pp. 1–11). Chichester, UK: John Wiley and Sons.Google Scholar

Park, G., Schwartz, H. A., Eichstaedt, J. C., Kern, M. L., Kosinski, M., Stillwell, D. J., Ungar, L. H., & Seligman, M. E. P. (2014). Automatic personality assessment through social media language. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 108(6), 934–952.Google Scholar

Preuss, A., & Lochner, K. (2015). Behind the scores psychometric paradata generated by new technologies and its implications for the ITC Guidelines. In D. Bartram (Chair), Advances in technology-based testing: implications for revising the ITC Guidelines. Symposium conducted at the European Association of Work and Organizational Psychology Conference, Oslo.Google Scholar

Rodchua, S., Yiadom-Boakye, G., & Woolsey, R. (2011). Student verification system for online assessments: Bolstering quality and integrity of distance learning. Journal of Industrial Technology, 27(3), 2–8.Google Scholar

Simpson, P., & Jenkins, P. (2015). Gamification and human resources: An overview. Retrieved from www.brighton.ac.uk/_pdf/research/crome/gamification-and-hr-overview-january-2015.pdf (accessed November 30, 2015).Google Scholar

Slovensky, R., & Ross, W. H. (2012). Should human resource managers use social media to screen job applicants? Managerial and legal issues in the USA. info, 14(1), 55–69.Google Scholar

Society for Industrial and Organizational Psychology. (2003). Principles for the Validation and Use of Personnel Selection Procedures (4th Edition). Retrieved from www.siop.org/_Principles/principlesdefault.aspx (accessed November 5, 2015).Google Scholar

Tippins, N. (2009). Internet alternatives to traditional proctored testing: Where are we now? Industrial and Organizational Psychology, 2 (1), 2–10.Google Scholar

Tippins, N. T., Beaty, J., Drasgow, F., Gibson, W. M., Pearlman, K., Segal, D. O., & Shepherd, W. (2006). Unproctored Internet testing in employment settings. Personnel Psychology, 59, 189–225.Google Scholar

Tomasi, L. F., Figiel, V. L., & Widener, M. (2009). I’ve got my virtual eye on you: Remote proctors and academic integrity. Contemporary Issues in Education Research, 2(1), 31–35.Google Scholar

Wearesocial.com. (2015). Digital, Social and Mobile in 2015. Retrieved from http://wearesocial.net/blog/2015/01/digital-social-mobile-worldwide-2015/ (accessed May 16, 2016).Google Scholar

Youyou, W., Kosinski, M., & Stillwell, D. (2015). Computer-based personality judgments are more accurate than those made by humans. PNAS, 112(4), 1036–1040.Google Scholar

Zickar, M. J., & Lake, C. J. (2011). Practice agenda: Innovative uses of technology- enhanced assessment. In Tippins, N. T. & Adler, S. (Eds.), Technology-Enhanced Assessment of Talent (pp. 394–417). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.Google Scholar