This study was undertaken to illustrate the application of a multidimensional individual-differences approach to credibility judgments as an alternative to factor analysis. Judgments of aspirants to the presidency of the United States were specifically studied. Ten stimulus-persons, varying in sex, political affiliation, and (apparent) ideology, were selected from the set of known aspirants to the presidency as of February 1972. Seventy undergraduates at the University of Illinois at Urbana participated in the study. It was found that credibility data for the group were best represented by a three-dimensional space with factors reflecting (1) the honesty of an aspirant as a function of his political ideology, (2) the seriousness of a candidate's aspirations, and (3) the candidate's television image. The competency of aspirants did not appear to be a factor in assessment. Four viewpoint factors were extracted from the subjects by a credibility ratings matrix, and credibility configurations were obtained for subjects loading highly on each viewpoint. The configurations for the subject clusters were found to vary in nature and number of dimensions. (Author/LG)