Although stalking legislation differs in each Australian jurisdiction, in most jurisdictions the element that distinguishes stalking from non-stalking behavior is intent; i.e., a person is only criminally liable if he/she engaged in the behavior with the intent to cause fear, apprehension, mental harm, or physical harm to the victim. It is, therefore, important to establish how members of the community understand and interpret intent to cause such harm. It was with this aim that a study was conducted to determine how 1,080 participants (383 males and 685 females) would label 36 scenarios as "stalking" or "not stalking." The independent variables in the study were explicit evidence of intent (present, absent); consequences to the target (extreme fear, moderate fear, no fear); relationship between the accused and target (stranger, ex-intimate, acquaintance); and persistence (moderate, low). Participants completed a questionnaire on their perceptions of the events in the scenario. The findings showed that a number of elements were taken into account when the community assessed whether or not behavior constituted stalking. Although some participants in the study identified stalking in a broad manner, the element of intent was particularly influential in perceptions of stalking when the conduct consisted of moderate or low persistence. These preliminary findings show that laws which require that the offender intended to cause fear or harm to the target are not necessarily out of touch with community concerns. Further research is necessary to explore community perceptions of stalking in a variety of other contexts, using other behaviors that might be construed as harassing, intrusive, or a nuisance to the target. 4 tables and 3 references