This study examined variation in transcriber disagreement as a function of transcriber's linguistic background, the transcription task, and the nature of judgment involved. Three linguistics students trained in phonetic transcription listened to the same tapes of Midwestern kindergarteners pronouncing lists of common words. Transcription task varied with order of listening; the first transcriber listened for errors of articulation and transcribed them in broad phonetic notation. The other two transcribers served as checkers of the first transcription. Disagreements between the first transcriber and first checker varied as a function of task and judgment but not as a function of the individuals' linguistic backgrounds. The first transcriber adopted the stricter criterion of correct pronunciation; the first checker appeared to expect an error in each word heard, with a consequently greater disagreement rate for sounds judged correct by the first transcriber when they appeared in words judged correct. The judgment of whether or not a sound in a word was mispronounced produced, at most, only half as many disagreements as the selection of a particular transcription for a sound thought to be in error by both transcribers. A correction procedure for transcription seems necessary for any study of articulation assessing the nature of the errors. (Author/AMM)