Impurity conduction, ρ-1, of Si is analysed through the parameters ρi and εi which appear in the expression ρ-1 = 3εi=1 ρ-1exp (- εi/kT) where the i=1 term designates conductivity associated with the impurity ionization, i = 2 the activation to the A+ impurity band, and i = 3 represents hopping conduction. In the absence of stress : (a) the dependence of ρ3 upon the concentration of majority impurities yields, by percolation theory arguments, the decay constants of the impurity wave- functions; these values are : 17 Å for Al, 21 Å for B, and 20 Å for the Sb impurity; (b) The function ε3(Nmaj, T) is calculated from the position of the Fermi level in the impurity band; for T→0 the calculated values of ε3 agree very well with experiment for a finite T; ε3 varies with T and from the form of the ε3(T) function the compensation for lightly doped and lightly compensated Si samples can be established.A similar analysis was also performed for Si samples subjected to a [001] uniaxial compression; the maximum value of the stress, X, was 1·6 × 109 Pa. Following former work on Ge, the samples were classified into three categories : low concentration region I (LCR I), LCR II and intermediate concentration region (ICR). It was observed that : (a) in LCR I, ε1 decreases sublinearly with × and is reduced by about 30% at the highest ×; (b) ρ3 in the LCR I exhibits a pronounced maximum at × ∼ 3 × 108 Pa, and ε3 remains practically stress-independent; (c) in the ICR both ε2 and ε3 exhibit non-monotonic behaviour, the maximum of ε2 occurs at about 4 × 108 Fa, and the maximum of ε3 is at values of X shifting toward higher values of × with decreasing impurity concentration, from X = 5 × 108 to 8 × 108 Pa. The behaviour of ρ1 with X in LCR I is found to be consistent with the behaviour of the ionization energy of acceptor impurities reported by other workers in the low-stress limit. The behaviour of ρ3 in LCR I is explained by the effects of stress on the acceptor wavefunction, in analogy to the former work on Ge. The initial depopulation of one of the ground-state components, followed by the expansion of the populated component, is responsible for the non-monotonic variation of ρ3(X). The stress variation of the exchange interaction between the A+ states is argued to be responsible for the behaviour of the ρ3(X) function. The nonmonotonic variation of ε3 in ICR is argued to follow from the effect of stress on the electron-electron interaction, yielding correlated hopping effects. The latter two effects are related to the stress variation of the overlap of the acceptor wave-functions in the ICR.The stress effects on the band states and on the ground states of acceptors in the effective-mass approximation are discussed in detail.