ATTITUDES ARE BASED ON 2- TO 4-HOUR INTERVIEWS WITH 62 JUDGES. STATISTICS SHOW THAT SUSPENDED SENTENCES ARE FAR MORE COMMON THAN PROBATION, BUT THAT PROBATION IS INCREASING IN POPULARITY (EIGHTFOLD SINCE 1961), THAT PROBATION IS MOST COMMON FOR THEFT, RECEIVING STOLEN GOODS, AND DESERTION OF FAMILIES, AND THAT PROFESSIONAL ACTIVITY IS THE OBLIGATION MOST FREQUENTLY IMPOSED ON PROBATIONERS, ALTHOUGH OTHERS ARE ALSO USUAL (E.G., FIXED RESIDENCE, ADDICTION PROGRAMS). FURTHERMORE, PARTIAL PROBATION IS BEING USED WITH INCREASING FREQUENCY, AND PROBATION IS MOST OFTEN APPLIED FOR THE FIRST OFFENSE. JUDGES ARE CLASSIFIED AS TRADITIONAL, SOCIAL (E.G., EXAMINING OR SENTENCING JUDGES WHO FAVOR INDIVIDUALIZATION OF PUNISHMENT), 'NEW' (I.E., YOUNG JUDGES WITH KNOWLEGE OF SOCIOLOGY AND MARGINALIZATION CONCEPTS), OR HUMANISTIC (I.E., JUDGES WHO ARE LIBERAL IN TEMPERAMENT, PHILOSOPHY, AND EXPERIENCE). CERTAIN JUDGES FAVOR PROBATION BECAUSE IT IS A FORM OF CONTROL AS WELL AS OF ASSISTANCE, IT ELIMINATES THE NEED FOR INCARCERATION, IT IS SUPERIOR TO A SUSPENDED SENTENCE AS IT PROVIDES SUPERVISION, IT CAN BE REVOKED FOR FAILURE OF OFFENDERS TO FULFILL OBLIGATIONS, IT PERMITS INDEMNIFICATION OF THE VICTIM, AND IT IS COMPREHENDED BY OFFENDERS BETTER THAN SUSPENDED SENTENCES. ON THE NEGATIVE SIDE, PROBATION IS NEITHER ASSISTANCE NOR CONTROL AND REINFORCES DELINQUENTS' IRRESPONSIBILITY (TRADITIONAL JUDGES), PROBATION IS INEFFICIENT AND MAY LOSE ITS MEANING SO THAT IT IS USED AS A POLITICAL INSTRUMENT (NEW JUDGES), AND PROBATION MAY BECOME INEFFECTIVE IF THE RIGHT TO REVOKE PROBATION IS NOT EXERCISED WHEN NECESSARY (SOCIAL JUDGES). MOST JUDGES AGREE THAT PROBATION COMMITTEES ARE UNDERSTAFFED AND IN NEED OF ORGANIZATIONAL IMPROVEMENT, ADDITIONAL FUNDS, AND MATERIAL ASSISTANCE. NOTES AND TABLES ARE PROVIDED. --IN FRENCH. (KMD)