SUBJECTS FOR THE STUDY WERE 896 WHITE, ADULT VOLUNTEERS FROM A COMMUNITY WITH A POPULATION OF 50,000 WITH HALF OF THE SUBJECTS BEING FEMALE AND HALF MALE; MOST (79.7 PERCENT) WERE MARRIED. IN ADDITION, ABOUT 50 DIFFERENT OCCUPATIONS WERE REPRESENTED IN THE SAMPLE. THREE QUESTIONNAIRE MEASURES WERE USED IN THE RESEARCH: (1) ATTITUDES TOWARD RAPE QUESTIONNAIRE, DEVELOPED BY FEILD (1978) AND CONSISTING OF 32-ITEMS; (2) BACKGROUND CHARACTERISTICS, WHICH CONSISTED OF AGE, SEX, YEARS OF FORMAL EDUCATION, MARITAL STATUS, PERSONAL ACQUAINTANCE WITH A RAPE VICTIM, PREVIOUS SERVICE ON A JURY, AND OCCUPATIONAL PRESTIGE; AND (3) DECISIONS IN A MOCK RAPE CASE, ALLOWING FOR VARIATIONS IN THE CONDITIONS OF THE CASE. CORRELATIONS WERE EXAMINED BETWEEN JUROR CHARACTERISTICS AND DECISIONS UNDER VARIOUS CONDITIONS. TWO BASIC VERSIONS OF THE SIMULATED RAPE CASE WERE PRESENTED TO THE JURORS--NONPRECIPITORY AND PRECIPITORY RAPE. RESULTS SHOWED THAT OLDER AND MORE EDUCATED JURORS TENDED TO GIVE MORE LENIENT SENTENCES THAN YOUNGER OR LESS EDUCATED JURORS. INDIVIDUALS WHO HAD BEEN ACQUAINTED PREVIOUSLY WITH A RAPE VICTIM GAVE HARSHER SENTENCES TO THE DEFENDANT IN THE PRECIPITORY CASE. HOWEVER, NO ASSOCIATION BETWEEN ACQUAINTANCE WITH A RAPE VICTIM AND DEFENDANT SENTENCING WAS FOUND IN THE NONPRECIPITORY CASE. RESULTS ALSO SHOWED THAT JURORS' ATTITUDES TOWARD RAPE WERE CORRELATED WITH THEIR RECOMMENDED SENTENCES. THESE CORRELATIONS WERE, ON THE WHOLE, HIGHER THAN THOSE FOR THE BACKGROUND VARIABLES. IN THE NONPRECIPITORY CASE, THE FOLLOWING FIVE OF THE EIGHT ATTITUDE DIMENSIONS WERE RELATED TO JUROR DECISIONMAKING: (1) WOMEN SHOULD BE HELD RESPONSIBLE FOR PREVENTING THEIR OWN RAPE, (2) RAPISTS SHOULD NOT BE PUNISHED HARSHLY, (3) RAPISTS ARE NORMAL MEN, (4) A RAPED WOMAN IS NOT A DESIRABLE WOMAN, AND (5) WOMEN SHOULD NOT RESIST DURING A RAPE ATTEMPT. SIGNIFICANT CORRELATIONS WERE FOUND FOR THREE OF THE ATTITUDE DIMENSIONS IN THE PRECIPITORY CASE; JURORS LENIENTLY SENTENCING THE DEFENDANT FELT THAT WOMEN SHOULD BE HELD RESPONSIBLE FOR PREVENTING THEIR OWN RAPE, RAPISTS SHOULD NOT BE PUNISHED SEVERELY, AND RAPE VICTIMS PRECIPITATE THEIR OWN RAPE. IMPLICATIONS OF THE ROLE OF JURORS' VIEWS OF RAPE IN JURORS' DECISIONS AND THE USE OF RAPE ATTITUDES FOR SELECTING JURORS ARE DISCUSSED. TABULAR DATA AND REFERENCES ARE PROVIDED. (RCB)