Access

You are not currently logged in.

Access your personal account or get JSTOR access through your library or other institution:

login

Log in to your personal account or through your institution.

If You Use a Screen Reader

This content is available through Read Online (Free) program, which relies on page scans. Since scans are not currently available to screen readers, please contact JSTOR User Support for access. We'll provide a PDF copy for your screen reader.

Self-Monitoring of Attention: A Reply to Snider

Daniel P. Hallahan and John Wills Lloyd
Learning Disability Quarterly
Vol. 10, No. 2 (Spring, 1987), pp. 153-156
Published by: Sage Publications, Inc.
DOI: 10.2307/1510222
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/1510222
Page Count: 4
  • Read Online (Free)
  • Download ($40.00)
  • Subscribe ($19.50)
  • Cite this Item
Since scans are not currently available to screen readers, please contact JSTOR User Support for access. We'll provide a PDF copy for your screen reader.
Self-Monitoring of Attention: A Reply to Snider
Preview not available

Abstract

We appreciate Snider's willingness to allow us to respond to her critique of our self-monitoring research. Because some of her concerns have been addressed to us previously by others, we are pleased to take this opportunity to clarify our stance regarding the value of self-monitoring of attention. Specifically, we are going to respond to six areas of Snider's article: (a) the educational relevance of current theoretical conceptualizations of attention, (b) the issue of improving attentional versus academic behavior, (c) the type of student for whom self-monitoring of attention is most appropriate, (d) the educational relevance of the academic productivity effects found in our studies, (e) issues relating to use of single-subject designs, and (f) the importance of self-monitoring accuracy.

Page Thumbnails

  • Thumbnail: Page 
153
    153
  • Thumbnail: Page 
154
    154
  • Thumbnail: Page 
155
    155
  • Thumbnail: Page 
156
    156