The effect on passing scores of providing judges with pass/fail data for the various possible cut-off score levels was studied. Passing scores produced by individual judges using a modified version of the procedure of W. H. Angoff (1971) were compared with the same judges' passing scores as revised after considering information on the number of examinees who would pass and fail at various cut-score levels in several testing situations. The 7 instruments, each with a corresponding committee of experts, included: (1) 4 basic skills examinations in reading and mathematics for students in grades 6 and 8; (2) 2 tests in reading and mathematics for college underclassmen; and (3) a 51-item observation checklist that is used to assess the classroom performance of beginning public school teachers. In all, 161 judges participated. Knowledge of examinee pass/fail rates did not have a consistent effect on the average level of passing scores set by the groups of expert judges. The observed reduction in the variability of the experts' passing scores, together with the high negative correlations between initial cut scores and the magnitudes of subsequent revisions, suggested that judges with more extreme Angoff passing scores tended to shift toward more typical/moderate positions. Information about examinee pass/fail rates may serve as a reality check in the evaluation process. Five data tables are included. (SLD)