When one speaks of the psychosocial development of the child or of the adult, two areas of behavior and theory are brought to mind. The first is that great, amorphous, controversial area known as personality; the second is the conflict-ridden area of research and ideology subsumed under intelligence. Intelligence, so called, shall be considered as one of the manifestations of personality. In so doing many questions are begged, but it seems that justifications for such a grouping can certainly be made. The purpose of this section of the symposium is to present a plan for ordering data in this whole field of psychosocial development. The material in the field is so heterogeneous and often so loosely defined that an attempt so to order the data is useful and necessary. Both clinically and theoretically, personality data seem to fall into a logical three-level classification. The first level may be thought of as the most obvious. It might be called the personality layer of The easily observed phenomena of behavior lie there-miscellaneous-appearing, confused, often contradictory. The area is made up of the contents of behavior. There can be placed such phenomena as wishes, ambitions, interests, daydreams, fantasies, sociometric preferences, etc. Evaluations of such available behavior are made in the testing world from such instruments as the TAT, the Picture Frustration Test (both of course may be used to form constructs and/or to describe a deeper layer of behavior); the content of the Rorschach, the Binet or the Wechsler-Bellevue. Such available behavior is also describable in terms of sentence completion tests, play techniques-standardized or otherwise-sociometric charts or interest inventories, as well as anecdotal observations, free observations of behavior and many others. This first level of personality is actually made up of the data out of which theories of personality are built.