CASES INVOLVED THE KILLING OF AN ATTACKER UNDER SEVERAL SETS OF CIRCUMSTANCES BY THE DEFENDANT. TEST GROUPS WERE GIVEN EITHER SUBJECTIVE ('PUT YOURSELF IN HIS SHOES AND WHAT WOULD YOU HAVE DONE?') OR OBJECTIVE ('YOU MUST ALWAYS HOLD A PERSON RESPONSIBLE FOR THE RESULTS OF HIS ACTIONS') ADVICE FROM EITHER A PRIEST OR POLICE OFFICER BEFORE CONSIDERING INSTANCES IN WHICH THE KILLING WAS ONLY QUESTIONABLY JUSTIFIABLE. THE OBJECTIVE INSTRUCTIONS HAD NO EFFECT ON THE ATTRIBUTION OF RESPONSIBILITY, REGARDLESS OF SOURCE. SUBJECTIVE INSTRUCTIONS FROM THE POLICE OFFICER LED THE JURORS TO ATTRIBUTE LESS RESPONSIBILITY. HOWEVER, THE SAME ADVICE FROM THE PRIEST HAD THE OPPOSITE EFFECT. MALE AND FEMALE SUBJECTS REACTED SIMILARLY.