Research on psychometric methods is heavily dependent on software. The quality, availability, and documentation of such software are critical to the advancement of the field. In 2000, an ad hoc committee of NCME recommended that NCME adopt policies that promote greater availability and better documentation of software. This article follows the ad hoc committee's report by examining the use of software in four top-tiered journals in recent years. The results indicated that the most frequently cited programs were those written by the articles' authors. The documentation and availability for these programs are often not clear, particularly for software used for simulations. The use of proprietary software was not widespread in the four journals, but there is still room for concern in the future. This article recommends that NCME form a permanent committee to address software issues.