THE THEORY OF LEGAL REASONING MAINTAINS THAT THE PROCESSES BY WHICH PERSONS THINK ABOUT ALTERNATIVE BEHAVIORS DIRECTLY AFFECT MANIFESTED BEHAVIOR. CHANGING THE THINKING PROCESS OF A PERSON WHO HAS BROKEN THE LAW CAN THEREFORE PRODUCE LAW ABIDING BEHAVIOR. A SECOND THEORY HOLDS THAT JUVENILES BREAKING THE LAW CONSCIOUSLY AFFIRM THE VALUES OF NORMATIVE SOCIETY, BUT NEUTRALIZE SUCH AFFIRMATIONS IN SPECIFIC INSTANCES OF DELINQUENCY THOUGH THE USE OF A BATTERY OF DEFENSE MECHANISMS. A THIRD THEORY KNOWN AS LABELING REASONS THAT JUVENILES PROCESSED BY THE JUVENILE SYSTEM PERCEIVE THEMSELVES AS REBELS AGAINST THE ESTABLISHMENT AND SUBSEQUENTLY TEND TO AFFIRM THAT IDENTITY. THE STUDY COMPARED THE EFFECTS OF TWO JUVENILE COURT INTAKE PROCEDURES ON LEGAL REASONING, THE USE OF TWO TECHNIQUES OF NEUTRALIZATION, AND THE EXTENT OF PERCEIVED NEGATIVE LABELING BY JUSTICE SYSTEM PERSONNEL. DATA WERE COLLECTED WITH A STRUCTURED INTERVIEW SCHEDULE FROM 201 YOUTHS WHO HAD JUST APPEARED IN A JUVENILE COURT INTAKE HEARING. VALIDATION OF DIFFERENCES IN THE TWO JUVENILE COURT INTAKE PROCEDURES SHOWED DIFFERENCES IN THE TYPES OF DISPOSITIONS USED, YOUTH'S PERCEPTIONS OF THE HEARING EVENTS, AND THE FREQUENCIES WITH WHICH VARIOUS OFFICIAL RATIONALES WERE USED BY THE PERSONNEL PRESIDING OVER PROCEDURES. RESULTS SHOWED THAT LEGAL REASONING WAS NOT ASSOCIATED WITH SELF-REPORTED DELINQUENCY, WHILE ALTERNATIVE EXPLANATIONS OF DELINQUENCY BASED ON NEUTRALIZATION THEORY AND LABELING THEORY WERE SUPPORTED. TABULAR DATA AND REFERENCES ARE PROVIDED, AND THE APPENDIXES INCLUDE QUESTIONNAIRE ITEMS AND CELL SIZES FOR THE CHI-SQUARE ANALYSIS OF PERCEPTIONS OF HEARING EVENTS. (RCB)