The authors would like to thank the teachers of the Elk Grove School District for their participation in this study. Special thanks are extended to Lawrence Harper for his helpful comments and donation of the electrical timing devices. In addition, the time volunteered by observers Robin Hansen and Carol Berkenkotter is greatly appreciated.2 Requests for reprints should be sent to

Automaticity training, aimed at decreasing latencies to read a specific set of words, was given to an experimental group of third-graders. A control group of third-graders was not given this training. Following training, the cloze method was used to test the reading comprehension of texts composed from the training words. No evidence was found to support the hypothesized positive transfer of automaticity training to reading comprehension. Possible interpretations of this result are discussed.

Teachers rated 1337 school children to determine norms for a hyperactivity rating scale; teacher ratings of 45 hyperactive children, referred by physicians, were also obtained. Although hyperative and norm means were clearly separated, a nontrivial portion of hyperactive children had teacher ratings within the normal range. Norm data were factor-analyzed, and a hyperactivity factor was identified. Behaviors with the highest loadings on the hyperactivity factor yielded the largest differences between hyperactive and norm groups. Within the norm group, black children had the highest hyperactive ratings and oriental children had the lowest. Hyperactivity ratings were slightly higher for boys than for girls.

Female patients with bulimia or atypical eating disorder (n = 31) were compared on dimensions of psychiatric symptomatology (SCL‐90) and measures of eating problems (Eating Disorder inventory, Diagnostic Survey for Eating Disorders) with 10 similar patients who were also diagnosed as having borderline personality disorder. In addition to greater symptom severity and higher levels of distress (p < .05), the borderline subgroup scored higher on SCL‐90 scales for interpersonal sensitivity, phobic anxiety, paranoid ideation, and depression (p < .05), with no differences on the scales for bulimia and body‐related concerns. The borderline subgroup of eating disorder patients did not differ on any SCL‐90 scales from another comparison group of borderline patients without eating disorder (n = 32). The differential self‐perceptions of the borderline subgroup may have implications for the formation of a therapeutic relationship.

No abstract