The generality of ability factor structure in adulthood and old age was investigated. Data were analyzed for 198 young individuals (15-32 years), 156 younger old individuals (53-68 years), and 156 older old individuals (69-91). Variables were nine tests marking three ability factors. (Author/CTM)

A hierarchical factor solution was obtained from a psychometrized battery of Piagetian-type tasks individually administered to 660 kindergarten children. The first two levels of factors included Piagetian theoretical entities. A third level factor was identified as a g. The association of Piagetian tasks with academic achievement was through the g…

This study investigates the nature and the factor structure of infant intelligence. The Bayley Mental Scale items were administered. According to the analysis, intelligence at any age is a set of separate mental abilities at each age, and there are a variety of paths through which mental development occurs. (JAZ)

The construct of general intelligence is discussed in the context of factor models, differential validity of tests, Piagetian tasks, heritability, social class, and race. The general factor is an abstraction resulting from genes, environmental pressures, and neural structures involved in cognitive or intellectual human behavior. (Author/RD)

A reanalysis of Stephens' intercorrelations of Wechsler subtests, achievement tests, and Piagetian tasks was conducted. (EJ 055 112) Piagetian tasks contributed almost equally to the definition of the general factor in intelligence along with the Wechsler subtests and the achievement tests. Communality outweighed differences between intelligence…

Whether "psychometric" and "Piagetian" kinds of intelligence are similar is a question of whether they have similar courses of development with age. When using factor analysis to address this issue, age effects must be eliminated in order to assess relations among measured constructs. Reanalyses of previous results were…

Relationships among Piagetian reasoning assessments and standard measures of intelligence and achievement were determined in 1972 by Stephens, McLaughlin, Miller, and Glass (EJ 055 112). The data were reanalyzed by Humphreys and Parsons in 1979 (EJ 218 642). In reply, Glass and Stephens note fallacies in Humphreys' and Parsons' reasoning.…

Stephens et al. (EJ 055 112) committed a serious methodological error in holding chronological age constant in their IQ measures and allowing it to vary in their Piagetian developmental measures. This error is unrelated to differences in factor rotation methods used by these authors and was not answered in their reply. (CTM)

These authors cite their own study of the relationship between traditional measures of intelligence and Piagetian measures of cognitive development in support of Glass and Stephens' contention that there are important qualitative differences. They question Humphreys' and Parsons' conclusions on both substantive and factor theoretical grounds. (CTM)