Raymond B. Cattell has been a prolific and tireless worker in the areas of intelligence, personality, and group analysis, and this volume represents an occasion for reviewing his general approach, particularly as relevant to social psychology. The review presented here is an attempt to describe in a very brief excursion some of the topics with which he deals and the position he takes on certain issues. It does not, however, attempt to contrast Cattell's work with that of others, nor is it a critique of the findings reported. Either of these tasks could constitute a volume in itself. Empirical research is a keynote in identifying Cattell and his position in psychology, for he does not operate with what might easily be termed the grand theories. Rather, he is rarely more than a few steps beyond a statement of a set of empirically derived generalizations. The mainstay of Cattell's approach seems to be that of identifying the important and relevant variables in the common intuitive way, attempting to construct measures inclusive of these, and then, having accumulated many measures, sorting these out according to the common expectations of the language and the field and also according to mechanical routine procedure. The emphasis is in creating an opportunity for finding order rather than imposing it by preconceptions that might limit either the scope of inclusiveness or of analysis. Cattell introduces his volume through an essay (Chapter 1) that assesses the current status of psychology in regard to personality and measurement, and more generally as a science. His phraseology must sometimes wave a red flag before the eyes of some more self-conscious professional psychologists. For example, Unfortunately, psychology, during the first fifty years of the twentieth century, has been largely a farrago of popular, philosophical, verbal punditry. The theories of many educational and learning theorists, psychoanalysts, and other followers of applied psychology, for example, are devoid both of and the possibility of measurement (p. 3). While the caricature may be correct, polite discourse requires that this be left unsaid or said more subtly. Note is taken of this occasional tendency in Cattell's writing since it would be extremely unfortunate if any reader would use it as a justification for not giving Cattell's work serious consideration. Cattell, in a similar manner, speaks of the factor analyst, thus fostering this tendency