This dissertation is comprised of two manuscripts that resulted from a single study using verbal protocols to examine the reading processes prompted by the graphics as second graders read informational text. Verbal protocols have provided researchers with an understanding of the processes readers use as they read. Little is known, however, about the processes that are prompted by the graphics in these texts. In this study, 30 second graders designated as below-average, average, and above-average readers based on their comprehension scores on the "Gates-MacGinitie Reading Test"--read two informational texts, were prompted to share their thinking when they looked at a graphic, and completed a free retelling and 8 researcher-designed comprehension questions. These verbal protocols and comprehension scores were used to investigate the research questions: (1) What reading processes are prompted by the graphics as second graders read informational text? (2) In what ways does second graders' reading achievement relate to the processes prompted by graphics as they read informational text? and (3) What is the relationship, if any, between children's processes prompted by the graphics in informational text and their overall comprehension of the same texts according to two outcome-measures? The first and second questions are addressed in manuscript one, while the third is addressed in manuscript two. With regard to research question one, open-coding of the 60 transcripts revealed 23 reading processes. The number of times any process was prompted by the graphics for any one child across the two books ranged from 9 to 62 and the number of different processes used by any one child ranged from 1 to 16 different processes. With regard to research question two, ANOVAs indicated that: (1) there were no statistically significant differences in the sheer number of times any process was prompted among the below-average, average, and above-average readers (2) above- average readers used significantly more different processes than average readers when reading one text, but not the other; (3) the prompting of some individual processes differed by achievement level. With regard to the third research question, correlations between students' scores on the post-reading comprehension measures and reading processes suggested that: (1) the number of times any process was prompted was significantly correlated with scores on the retelling measure for one book, but not for the other book or for the comprehension question measure for either book; (2) there were no significant correlations between the number of different processes and students' scores on any comprehension measure; (3) a number of individual processes were positively correlated with retelling and/or comprehension question scores. In conclusion, the graphics in informational text prompted a number of reading processes. Students' reading achievement does appear to relate to the number and type of processes prompted, but perhaps not to the same extent as it does for written text. Furthermore, there is some correlation between processes and students' comprehension scores, but these differ by book and comprehension measure. Finally, some reading processes appear to assist students' comprehension while others do not. [The dissertation citations contained here are published with the permission of ProQuest LLC. Further reproduction is prohibited without permission. Copies of dissertations may be obtained by Telephone (800) 1-800-521-0600. Web page: http://bibliotheek.ehb.be:2222/en-US/products/dissertations/individuals.shtml.]