By implementing indirect cross-modality matching techniques with a quota sample of the Boston, Massachusetts, area, researchers obtained satisfactory scales for both dimensions with most items in both scales concentrated toward the serious/severe end of the scales, as intended. Further, specific case vignettes in which experimental variations were embedded were also developed. Psychophysical lines production judgments for these specific cases indicated that quite complex social stimuli can be successfully judged psychophysically. Results indicated that capital and noncapital offenses are thoroughly intermingled in seriousness ratings. The death penalty is not rated as significantly more severe than life imprisonment without parole. In addition, respondents assign the death penalty somewhat rarely even for serious offenses, and then in a manner not in line with capital statutes. Finally, respondents' weighing of extra-legal and legally relevant aspects of capital cases is inconsistent with current statutes. Findings suggest that the public's willingness and ability to consider aggravating and mitigating circumstances deserve more careful scrutiny. Findings also suggest the multiple ways in which captital punishment could be defined as 'cruel.' Footnotes, 26 references, and tables are included in the article. (Author abstract modified)