Could have impacted how respondents perceived the value of water sources in the course of data collection. three. Benefits Two distinct GYY4137 Technical Information audience segments emerged by means of the cluster analysis (see Table two). The audience segments (identified as clusters within the evaluation) were distinctively distinct in both their intent to 20(S)-Hydroxycholesterol Technical Information engage in water conservation behaviors (F = 788.86, p 0.001, two = 0.430) and preparedness to vote on a policy that impacts water scales (F = 1128.33, p 0.001, two = 0.519). Subsequently, names have been selected to represent the identified audience segments: reduce water conservation behavior (n = 269) and greater water conservation behavior (n = 780). The reduced water conservation behavior segment was, on typical, between unlikely and undecided about engaging in water conservation behaviors within the future (M = two.73, SD = 0.74) and, on average, amongst disagreed and neither agreed nor disagreed that they had been prepared to vote on a policy that impacts water (M = two.77, SD = 0.82). The higher water conservation behavior segment was, on average, between undecided and likely to engage in water conservation behaviors inside the future (M = three.90, SD = 0.52) and, on typical, above agreed that they had been ready to vote on a policy that impacts water (M = four.15, SD = 0.47).Table 2. Respondents’ level of water conservation behavior based on demographic qualities. Audience Segment 1 Reduce Water Conservation n = 269 38.7 29.7 31.six 47.two 52.7 4.1 29.0 23.eight eight.9 24.9 9.3 26.four 24.5 21.6 21.9 3.three 2.two Audience Segment two Higher Water Conservation n = 780 31.9 34.five 33.six 1.16 51.0 49.0 58.26 1.4 15.9 17.9 ten.9 26.3 27.six 37.53 14.six 22.3 20.1 25.three 11.8 5.9 X2 4.Respondents’ Demographics Age 184 years 354 years 55 years Sex Male Female education Less than 12th grade Higher school diploma Some college 2-year college degree 4-year college degree Graduate or Specialist degree Family members Earnings Much less than USD 24,999 USD 25,0009,999 USD 50,0004,999 USD 75,00049,999 USD 150,00049,999 USD 250,000 or moreWater 2021, 13,9 ofTable two. Cont. Audience Segment 1 Lower Water Conservation n = 269 7.four 14.5 44.six 21.6 11.Note: p 0.001.Respondents’ Demographics Political Ideology Pretty Liberal Liberal Moderate Conservative Quite ConservativeAudience Segment two Higher Water Conservation n = 780 16.two 21.four 33.eight 16.7 11.X2 24.80 Considerable differences had been identified among the two audience segments when segment demographics had been analyzed. The education level (X2 = 58.26, p 0.001) in the decrease water conservation behavior segment was less than the education level of the larger water conservation behavior segment. Specifically, over half from the reduce water conservation behavior segment had some college education or much less (56.9 ), whereas the majority from the larger water conservation behavior segment had at least a 2-year college degree (64.eight ). The total loved ones income (X2 = 37.53, p 0.001) from the reduced water conservation behavior segment was less than the total family members earnings on the higher water conservation behavior segment. Particularly, half of your decrease water conservation behavior segment had a family members earnings USD 49,999 or significantly less (50.9 ), whereas the majority in the larger water conservation behavior segment had a family members revenue USD 50,000 or greater (63.1 ). The political ideology (X2 = 24.80, p 0.001) with the lower water conservation behavior segment was mainly Moderate, Conservative, or Extremely Conservative (78.1 ), whereas the political ideology with the greater water conservation behav.