Some formatting seems to have been lost when converting my LaTeX manuscript to HTML. For the record, I've listed the most important errors below.

- "as exemplified by the following crystal-clear statement by DeKeyser, one of the foremost CPH proponents". The paragraph that follows is a direct quote from [22, p. 445],

- "and inferred the presence of a critical point in adolescence on the basis thereof:". The paragraph that follows is a direct quote from [15, p. 270].

- "as exemplified by the following quote by DeKeyser [22]:". The paragraph that follows is a direct quote from [22, p. 448].

- "Indeed, the most recent overview draws a strong conclusion about the validity of the CPH's 'flattened slope' prediction on the basis of these subset correlations'. The paragraph that follows is a direct quote from [22, p. 448].

- "The authors set out to test the following hypotheses:". The following two paragraphs (i.e. 'Hypothesis 1' and 'Hypothesis 2') are direct quotations.

- In Table 2, Cell 'Young' v 'North America': -069 read -0.69 in the original.

- Table 3, column 'F-test of model fit'. F(1.74) and F(1.60) read F(1,74) and F(1,60) in the original. (The comma is not a decimal mark.)

- Equation 4. Technically, the round bracket should be a curly bracket.

- Table 4, column 'F-test of model fit'. F(2.73) and F(2.59) should read F(1,73) and F(2,59). (See Table 3)

- Table 10, Cell 'Overall' v 'North America': 0.210 should read 0.21 (was reported two meaningful digits).

- In the bibliography, the word 'influence' is always rendered as 'inuence'. This affects Refs. 23, 25, 30, 72. Similarly, in Ref. 42: 'exibility' should read 'flexibility'

- Ref. 40. 'p<05' should read 'p<0.05'

Additionally, line 373 in the R script should read "without breakpoints" rather than "with breakpoints". This is my error.