To the Editor.—In his marginal comment, "Infant Intelligence" (126:143-144, 1973), Dr. David Elkind condenses a tremendous volume of controversial material that has filled volumes for decades. With most of his material, we agree. However, there are two very important issues that require comment, since they are not only untrue but self-contradictory.
Dr. Elkind states, "All previous research on infant tests is in agreement on the point that they are poor predictors of later intellectual performance." It is always dangerous for a scientist to make any dogmatic, flat statement that "all" or "always" is the case, since it is almost never true. It usually indicates that the writer does not know all the literature or is careless in his writing. For instance, our published research over three decades, and that of a number of others, indicates that infant tests are as good predictors of later intelligence as are school-age tests.