A SURVEY WAS CONDUCTED IN LUBBOCK, TEXAS, OF VOTERS AT FOUR POLLING PLACES BEFORE OR AFTER VOTING IN A GENERAL ELECTION. THE FOUR POLLING PLACES WERE SELECTED TO MAXIMIZE SOCIOECONOMIC VARIANCE IN THE SAMPLE--TWO WERE IN MINORITY DISTRICTS, ONE IN A WHITE, WORKING-CLASS DISTRICT, AND ONE IN THE MIDDLE- TO UPPER-CLASS DISTRICT. A NONRANDOM SAMPLE OF 779 VOTER-RESPONDENTS WAS INTERVIEWED ON KNOWLEDGE OF STATE-LEVEL CANDIDATES, POLITICAL ACTIVITIES, SOURCES OF POLITICAL INFORMATION AND ON DEMOGRAPHIC CHARACTERISTICS. INFORMATION ON THE FOLLOWING VARIABLES WAS ANALYZED: SALIENCE OF APPELLATE COURT CANDIDATES, SALIENCE OF LOWER COURT CANDIDATES, PSYCHOLOGICAL INVOLVEMENT IN THE ELECTION, INTENT TO VOTE IN JUDICIAL ELECTION, SOURCES OF INFORMATION ABOUT THE ELECTION, CONTROVERSY AWARENESS, PRIOR JUDICIAL EXPERIENCES, PARTY IDENTIFICATION, ATTITUDE TOWARD JUDICIAL ELECTIONS, AND SOCIOECONOMIC VARIABLES. FINDINGS INDICATE THAT IGNORANCE ABOUT JUDICIAL CANDIDATES WAS PERVASIVE. ALTHOUGH A MAJORITY OF RESPONDENTS (55 PERCENT) INDICATED THEY INTENDED TO VOTE FOR JUDICIAL CANDIDATES, MOST OF THE VOTERS WERE UNAWARE OF THE HIGHLY PUBLICIZED CONTROVERSY SURROUNDING AN IMPORTANT JUDICIAL RACE, AND AN OVERWHELMING MAJORITY (85.8 PERCENT) COULD NOT RECALL THE NAME OF EVEN ONE JUDICIAL CANDIDATE. HOWEVER, THE SALIENCE OF JUDICIAL CANDIDATES INCREASED SIGNIFICANTLY FOR THOSE VOTERS WHO WERE AWARE OF THE CONTROVERSY SURROUNDING THE STATE SUPREME COURT RACE AND WHEN VOTERS HAD RECEIVED INFORMATION FROM LEGAL SOURCES. THESE FINDINGS SUGGEST THAT IF THE STATE OR LOCAL BAR MAKES CONTACT WITH VOTERS, OF IF THE JUDICIAL RACE INVOLVES CONTROVERSY, THE GENERAL PUBLIC IS MORE INCLINED TO BE AWARE OF CANDIDATES IN THE RACE. REFERENCES ARE INCLUDED. (MJW)