Two studies were conducted to clarify some problems in aptitude treatment interaction research, by concentrating on the macroprocesses in reading required by different instructional methods and the macroprocesses available to students. In the first experiment, three reading groups were used, the first receiving adjunct questions, the second also receiving feedback on the correctness of their answers to the adjunct questions, and the third reading the text without the adjunct questions. Results showed (1) that groups receiving questions scored higher on the posttest than the read-only group, (2) no differences between the adjunct question groups, (3) significant differences in the frequency of various macroprocessing option use, and (4) an "incredible" variability in students' choices of cognitive processing options. In the second study, two options--review of either an alternate or the main text--were prescribed when comprehension difficulty was evident. Four groups were involved: a read-only group, an adjunct question group, a group required to review the main text if question responses were incorrect, and a group required to review an alternate text in the same situation. Results showed that the significant differences among groups on the macroprocessing options used were attributable to the review option. (Tables of findings are included). (DF)