The 100-item questionnaire tapped judges' opinions regarding educational versus correctional measures, social science findings versus commonsense wisdom, individual discretion versus consultation with social workers, and the concept of the juvenile court as a legal versus a social institution. The survey also examined judges' job satisfaction and their reactions to proposals for specialized juvenile justice training in the social sciences. The self-images gleaned from individual respondents fell into two generalizable profiles. Judges for whom the justice concept was predominant, who evidenced less cooperation and understanding of social assistance pursuits, as well as below-average job satisfaction, tended to have certain personal characteristics in common. These included being childless themselves, being Catholic, serving a rural or small town jurisdiction, having judicial responsibilities outside the juvenile court, and being assigned to juvenile court recently and without preference or training in this area of justice. The second group comprised juvenile judges who endorse and practice a social service and educational orientation in their work, interact well with social service providers, approve specialized juvenile justice training, and have high job satisfaction. These justices generally have children of their own, are Protestant or religiously unaffiliated, and work in urban areas exclusively in juvenile justice. They belong to juvenile justice professional organizations, have participated in specialized training programs, and profess interest in general juvenile problems. In addition, they have worked with juveniles outside the court situation and juvenile justice is their chosen area of specialization. Eleven footnotes are given.