It was hypothesized that witnesses who do not look directly toward the target of their communication, such as the lawyer, would be perceived as less credible than witnesses who engaged in looking behavior. To test this hypothesis, six videotapes were prepared in which an alleged defense witness either looked steadily toward the target of his communication (gaze maintenance) or averted his gaze maintenance and gaze aversion conditions. Additionally, the six conditions in which only the audio portion of the videotapes was presented to subjects were included. The stimulus material consisted of a writtren description of a hypothetical criminal trial in addition to the audiovisual or merely audio tapes of an alibi witness' testimony. Subjects were 84 males and females ranging in age from 18 to 60. All of the volunteer subjects were randomly assigned to various treatment conditions. The subjects were informed that the purpose of the study was to determine the sources of information jury members found most useful when making decisions at criminal trials. After exposure to trial materials, subjects were asked to indicate witness credibility and recommended findings regarding the defendant's guilt. The results indicate that witnesses who averted their gaze were perceived to be less credible and, ultimately, the defendant for whom they testified was judged as more likely to be guilty. Researchers concerned with the communicative effects of looking behavior should note that while gaze aversion was an informative behavior that elicited a negative response, gaze maintenance did not appear to elicit the complementary positive response. A few tables and 11 references are included. (Author abstract modified)