THE PHENOMENON OF UNCONSCIOUS TRANSFERENCE WAS EXHIBITED IN A CASE IN WHICH A TICKET AGENT MISTAKENLY IDENTIFIED AS THE PERSON WHO HAD ROBBED HIM AT GUNPOINT, A SAILOR TO WHOM HE HAD SOLD TICKETS THREE TIMES PREVIOUSLY. IN THE PRESENT STUDY, 50 UNIVERSITY STUDENTS HEARD A STORY AND SAW A SET OF PHOTOGRAPHS CORRESPONDING TO PEOPLE IN THAT STORY. ACCORDING TO THE STORY, ONE PERSON HAD ASSAULTED ANOTHER PERSON. THREE DAYS AFTER HEARING THE STORY, THE SUBJECTS WERE ASKED TO IDENTIFY THE CRIMINAL FROM A SET OF FIVE PHOTOGRAPHS. HALF OF THE SETS CONTAINED THE ACTUAL CRIMINAL; THE OTHER HALF CONTAINED ONE OF THE INCIDENTAL CHARACTERS IN THE STORY, AS WELL AS FOUR NEW FACES. WHEN WORKING WITH THE SET CONTAINING THE ACTUAL CRIMINAL, THE SUBJECTS CORRECTLY IDENTIFIED THE OFFENDER 84 PERCENT OF THE TIME. WHEN WORKING WITH THE SET NOT CONTAINING THE CRIMINAL, 60 PERCENT CHOSE THE INCIDENTAL CHARACTER, 16 PERCENT CHOSE A DIFFERENT BUT INCORRECT MAN, AND 24 PERCENT REFUSED TO MAKE A CHOICE. THE PERCENTAGE PICKING THE BYSTANDER WAS SIGNIFICANTLY LARGE TO RULE OUT CHANCE (P LESS THAN .05). BECAUSE BOTH THE CRIMINAL AND THE BYSTANDER IN THE IDENTIFICATION SET VARIED AMONG SUBJECTS, THE RESULTS WERE NOT DUE TO RESEMBLANCE BETWEEN THE INCIDENTAL BYSTANDER AND THE CRIMINAL. RESULTS CONFORMED TO PSYCHOLOGICAL RESEARCH INDICATING THAT HUMAN MEMORY INVOLVES AN INTEGRATIVE PROCESS IN WHICH INFORMATION FROM MANY SOURCES IS USED TO RECONSTRUCT AN EVENT, AND IN WHICH UNCONSCIOUS TRANSFERENCE MAY OCCUR. NEVERTHELESS, IN ANY GIVEN CASE IT IS ALMOST IMPOSSIBLE TO DETERMINE WHETHER UNCONSCIOUS TRANSFERENCE HAS OCCURRED. FOOTNOTES INCLUDING REFERENCES ARE INCLUDED. (CFW)