THE HEARST CASE WAS CHOSEN BECAUSE OF THE LIKELIHOOD THAT IT WOULD BE ATTENDED WITH A GREAT DEAL OF PUBLICITY BOTH FOR AND AGAINST PATRICIA HEARST. THE FIRST QUESTIONNAIRE CONTAINED FORCED-CHOICE OPINION ITEMS ABOUT THE CASE AND THE GUILT OR INNOCENCE OF HEARST, WHETHER SHE HAD BEEN BRAINWASHED, WHETHER SHE WOULD BE CONVICTED, AND SIMILAR QUESTIONS. THE SECOND QUESTIONNAIRE ALSO PROVIDED OPEN-ENDED QUESTIONS DESIGNED TO ASSESS THE REASONS FOR THE RESPONDENT'S OPINIONS. THE FOLLOWUP QUESTIONNAIRE WAS ALSO ADMINISTERED TO 44 STUDENT CONTROLS TO CHECK FOR POSSIBLE SENSITIZING EFFECTS OF THE INITIAL QUESTIONNAIRE. ON BOTH QUESTIONNAIRES THE GREAT MAJORITY OF RESPONDENTS BELIEVED THAT HEARST WOULD BE CONVICTED (94 PERCENT ON THE FIRST QUESTIONNAIRE, 91 PERCENT ON THE SECOND); AVERAGE PREDICTED SENTENCE WAS 7.1 AND 7.2 YEARS ON THE FIRST AND SECOND QUESTIONNAIRE RESPECTIVELY; AND THE MAJORITY OF RESPONDENTS BELIEVED THAT HEARST WOULD RECEIVE A LIGHTER SENTENCE THAN THEY WOULD RECEIVE IF THEY WERE CONVICTED OF A SIMILAR OFFENSE. DESPITE THE WIDESPREAD PUBLICITY CONCERNING THE POSSIBILITY OF BRAINWASHING WHICH CAME OUT AFTER THE ARREST, ATTITUDES TOWARD THIS POSSIBILITY SHOWED LITTLE CHANGE. ON THE FIRST QUESTIONNAIRE, 57 PERCENT BELIEVED THAT THERE HAD BEEN NO BRAINWASHING, 31 PERCENT WERE UNSURE, AND 9 PERCENT BELIEVED THAT SHE HAD BEEN BRAINWASHED, AS COMPARED TO 55 PERCENT, 35 PERCENT, AND 8 PERCENT ON THE SECOND QUESTIONNAIRE. RESPONDENTS WHO BELIEVED THAT HEARST HAD BEEN BRAINWASHED OR WERE UNCERTAIN ALSO BELIEVED THAT SHE WOULD RECEIVE A LIGHTER SENTENCE THAN WAS ESTIMATED BY THOSE WHO BELIEVED THAT SHE HAD NOT BEEN BRAINWASHED. HEARST'S PARENTS' AFFLUENCE AND THEIR ABILITY TO RETAIN A GOOD LAWYER WERE THE MAJOR REASONS GIVEN FOR THE BELIEF THAT HEARST WOULD RECEIVE A LIGHTER SENTENCE THAN ANOTHER CONVICTED OF A SIMILAR CRIME. MALES REPORTED BEING MORE FAMILIAR WITH THE CASE THAN FEMALES. MALES ALSO OBTAINED MOST OF THEIR INFORMATION PRIMARILY FROM TELEVISION OR RADIO. TWO MAJOR THEMES EMERGE FROM THE FINDINGS: FIRST, PUBLIC OPINION MAY NOT BE AS SIGNIFICANTLY INFLUENCED BY PRETRIAL PUBLICITY AS IF OFTEN ASSUMED; AND SECOND, LITTLE CREDENCE APPEARS TO BE GIVEN TO THE CONCEPT OF EQUAL JUSTICE UNDER THE LAW. REFERENCES ARE INCLUDED. (JAP)