SHOCK PROBATION PROVIDES FOR A CONVICTED FELON TO BE SENTENCED TO PRISON FOR A RELATIVELY SHORT PERIOD OF TIME (30 TO 180 DAYS) AND TO SERVE THE REMAINDER OF HIS PRISON TERM ON PROBATION IN THE COMMUNITY. AGENCY AFFILIATION AND ROLE FUNCTIONS SEEM TO ACCOUNT FOR THE VARIED PERCEPTION OF SHOCK PROBATION'S PURPOSE. THE JUDICIARY VIEWS IT AS A SENTENCING ALTERNATIVE WHICH ALLOWS FOR LATER REVIEW, ALTHOUGH CORRECTIONS AND PROBATION PERSONNEL SEE IT AS HAVING A FUTURE DETERRENT EFFECT ON CRIMINAL BEHAVIOR, AND LAWYERS VIEW IT AS A LEVEL IN PLEA BARGAINING. ARGUMENTS FOR SHOCK PROBATION INCLUDE ITS LOW COST, LOW RECIDIVISM RATE, VIABILITY AS A SENTENCING ALTERNATIVE, AND TENDENCY TO REDUCE THE PRISON POPULATION. CONTROVERSY EXISTS ON SEVERAL POINTS, HOWEVER; WHETHER A SHORT PRISON SENTENCE IS MORE EFFECTIVE; WHETHER IT IS A VIOLATION OF PRINCIPLES OF STRAIGHT PROBATION; IF IT IS REHABILITATIVE; AND IF IT LEADS TO ABUSE OF JUDICIAL DISCRETION. THREE TRENDS HAVE ALSO INFLUENCED ITS IMPLEMENTATION: (1) SHOCK PROBATION LEGISLATION TENDS TO LIMIT ELIGIBILITY TO NONHABITUAL, NONVIOLENT OFFENDERS, (2) JUDGES TEND TO INTERPRET SHOCK PROBATION LEGISLATION SUBJECTIVELY (OFTEN IN VIOLATION OF THE LAW) (3) THERE IS A GRADUAL ACCEPTANCE OF SHOCK PROBATION BY JUDGES AS A SENTENCING ALTERNATIVE. SEVEN STATES HAVE PASSED LAWS INSTITUTING A FORM OF SHOCK PROBATION, YET LITTLE EVALUATION HAS BEEN ATTEMPTED. HOWEVER, EVALUATIVE RESEARCH IS NECESSARY, AS SHOCK PROBATION IS LIKELY TO BECOME A VIABLE SENTENCING ALTERNATIVE. NOTES ARE CITED. (MJW)