The reported research was designed to investigate the impact of learner control on performance and anxiety in a computer-assisted instruction (CAI) task. The first phase entailed the development of a two-hour CAI program on the identification of edible plants. The second phase was experimentation to determine the effectiveness of learner control. Each of 162 undergraduate student subjects was placed in one of four groups: a control group who always used mnemonic devices, a control group who never used them, and two experimental groups who were given learner control over access to mnemonics, but differed in the extent of instruction on the use of that control. Responses to a state anxiety measure, learner control requests for mnemonics, and errors committed on segment and final tests were the dependent variables. Measures of individual differences were taken in the areas of task specific memory, locus of control, and achievement via independence. Providing mnemonic devices. didn't have a facilitating effect, and thus, learner control, which depended on the devices, was not successful in reducing anxiety as predicted. (Author/WH) 20. ABSTRACT (Continue on reverse side If necessary and identify by block number) The reported research was designed to investigate the import of learner control on performance and anxiety in a computer-assisted instruction task. The research was divided into three phases. Of these three phases, only Phases I and II are reported in this document. The first phase entailed the development of a two-hour computer-assisted instruction program on the identification of edible plants. The instruction was run on an IBM 1500 instructional system. The second phase was experimentation to determine the effectiveness of learner control. Four groups were used in the experimental design. The first group (Treatment Present) always received a presumably facilitating treatment (mnemonic devices relating plant names to their critical features) while the second group (Treatment Absent) never received this facilitating treatment. These two groups served as control groups. The third and fourth 49=0.1=1.7IIIM1101,