Factors affecting judgments of the ethical acceptability of research practices are investigated. The major focus is on two variables affecting information processing-labeling and salience. In addition, the effect of role on judgments is also examined. Participants were 204 introductory psychology students. Each reacted to a brief description of Asch's conformity study either from the viewpoint of a potential subject or from that of a member of a Human Subjects Committee. Each subject read either a basic description of the Asch experiment, a description with parenthetical labels inserted, or the basic version plus an addendum noting those aspects of the procedure that involved deception or stress, and specifying that debriefing would occur. Significant differences due to versions occurred on two of six questions: “Should this experiment be permitted?” and “Is the deception justified by the scientific purpose of the experiment?” As expected, judgments were less favorable in response to the label and addendum versions. The effect of labeling and salience on judgment are discussed, and the implications of the results for Human Subjects Committees are pointed out.