The problems dealt with by the guidelines approach are briefly discussed; they focus on sentencing disparity and judicial discretion. A discussion of the evolution of guideline methods shows how the guidelines grew out of environmental situations, chance and history, and personal interaction. Some theoretical and philosophical concepts influencing the research rationale are introduced, and ways in which various value choices were resolved by the research team and their advisors are noted. The most valuable research tool available to the researchers was probably that of simulation and 'seriousness score games.' The use of simulation methods and theoretical models was important, particularly as a means of communication with the judiciary. What researchers were able to discover by the use of simulation and models could be reported to judges and thus provide an extended insight into their own decision processes. The report also discusses how researchers were involved with legal and administrative processes; some management techniques are noted for use by others contemplating similar associative research. Ethical issues in the research design, such as cost-benefit versus humanitarian values, are examined, and the philosophical underpinnings and methodological issues involved in the development of sentencing guidelines are discussed. The report emphasizes that an effort should be made to consider moral issues in the development of guidelines, since the major problems in criminal justice today seem to be in the field of moral philosophy. Tabular data and chapter notes are included.