Cited by 846Cognitive Abilities and TestingEgo Development and Educational PracticesPersonality Traits and Psychology

A theory of adult intellectual development: Process, personality, interests, and knowledge

Ackerman, Phillip L.·1996·Intelligence

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/s0160-2896(96)90016-1

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet

References 158 · Cited by 846

Authors
Ackerman, P. L.
Affiliations
University of Minnesota (US)
Corresponding author
Ackerman, Phillip L.
Venue
Intelligence
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
1996-03
Volume
22
Issue
2
Pages
227-257
ISSN
0160-2896 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2025806909
Cited by
846
References
158
Citations by year
2026: 17 · 2025: 34 · 2024: 39 · 2023: 42 · 2022: 43 · 2021: 34 · 2020: 35 · 2019: 52 · 2018: 44 · 2017: 36 · 2016: 37 · 2015: 39 · 2014: 40 · 2013: 20 · 2012: 41
FWCI
10.17
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Intelligence (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Experimental and Cognitive Psychology › Cognitive Abilities and Testing
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Ego Development and Educational Practices
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Personality Traits and Psychology
Keywords
adult intelligence, knowledge structure, spatial ability, verbal ability, Cattell, Vernon

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review