This study compares the progressive-restricted standard error (PR-SE) exposure control procedure to three commonly used procedures in computerized adaptive testing, the randomesque, Sympson-Hetter (SH), and no exposure control methods. The performance of these four procedures is evaluated using the three-parameter logistic model under the manipulated conditions of item pool size (small vs. large) and stopping rules (fixed-length vs. variable-length). PR-SE provides the advantage of similar constraints to SH, without the need for a preceding simulation study to execute it. Overall for the large and small item banks, the PR-SE method administered almost all of the items from the item pool, whereas the other procedures administered about 52% or less of the large item bank and 80% or less of the small item bank. The PR-SE yielded the smallest amount of item overlap between tests across conditions and administered fewer items on average than SH. PR-SE obtained these results with similar, and acceptable, measurement precision compared to the other exposure control procedures while vastly improving on item pool usage.