AbstractThe usefulness of IP‐technique for different geophysical purposes is discussed on the basis of field examples. IP and resistivity results are not always correlated, and the IP‐information may be unique in prospecting for very low grade sulphide mineralizations. The IP‐technique seems to be useful sometimes in prospecting for disseminated Ni‐Cu‐ mineralizations. A massive sulphide mineralization could be localized using IP.The disturbances from different kinds of geological objects other than prospecting targets generally are smaller in IP‐work than in resistivity work. It was possible to discriminate between apparent resistivity anomalies caused by shear zones and by sulphide mineralizations by means of IP‐measurements. The influence of magnetite on IP‐ measurements is briefly discussed. The relation between ground magnetic measurements ΔZ and the IP‐parameter is in many areas weak and does not seriously influence the interpretation of the IP‐measurements. A high correlation between ΔZ and IP‐measurements has been found on a titaniferous iron ore. This ore body gives strong IP‐anomalies indicating that it is a good IP‐target. Finally, the application of small moving arrays in very detailed IP‐measurements is found useful for detailed mapping of a mineralized zone under a thin overburden and for determination of