ABSTRACT Wicklund and Gollwitzer raise a number of questions concerning the explanatory value of self-consciousness as a trait and the validity of the distinction between public and private self-consciousness These questions are based on strawperson arguments, the issues they attack are largely of their own creation and bear little relation to the original authors' own positions My response attempts to point out their false assumptions concerning the nature of self-attentional traits, to examine some of the research, much of which they have ignored or misrepresented, which supports the public-private self-consciousness distinction, and to question Wicklund and Gollwitzer's tendency to regard their own theory as some sort of standard against which others must be judged, apparently unaware of the possibility that their own conceptions may be flawed