Water conservation is an important natural resource issue, and the focus of a number of educational and extension programs. Inherent in many programs is the causal link between water facts and conservation behaviors that affect water quality and/or quantity. This article interprets the results of a survey on attitudes and perceptions of water resources (n = 2226) from nine states (Alabama, Arizona, Florida, Georgia, Hawaii, Mississippi, Oklahoma, Tennessee, and Texas). The goal of the survey was to assess attitudes and perceptions of water supply, water quality, and factors affecting them. We assess the influence of attitudes and perceptions regarding the environment, water resources, governance, information sources, and demographics on water conservation behaviors. Specifically, we assess the role that these factors play in indoor and outdoor water‐conserving actions indicated by respondents. We find several statistically significant non‐knowledge factors that drive water conservation: perceived importance of water resources and their preferred use; preferred learning modes and information sources; interest in certain types of water issues; views on governance; general environmental attitudes; and demographics. For example, preferring passive learning modes (e.g., reading a newspaper article) negatively influences outdoor conservation, while preferring to learn by taking action (e.g., training) positively influences both indoor and outdoor conservation. These results highlight the importance of a number of non‐knowledge factors in water program‐related behavior change, and suggest a number of factors that could inform targeted approaches to influence differing audiences.

Stmznsary.--The study examined 103 Ss' perceptions of finger drawings on the forehead and back of the head. The purpose was to test a hypothesized sex difference and the effect of locus in the degree of congruence with the Frontal Plane Hypothesis (FPH) : "Symbols drawn upon anterior or posterior surfaces of the body are perceived as if they were drawn and viewed by S upon one common, transparent two-dimensional surface projected out in front of S" (Duke, 1966, p. 305). Four symbols (r, 1, C, 3 ) were traced on the foreheads and backs of heads of 103 Ss. The results indicate that the FPH does account for a majority of perceptions of finger drawings. No significant sex difference was obtained, but there was significantly greater congruence in the posterior locus.J. D. Duke investigated a phenomenon first described in research by Krech and Crutchfield (1958, p. 205) concerning perception of finger drawing upon the body surface. Duke described S's perception in his Frontal Plane Hypothesis (FPH) : "Symbols drawn upon anterior or posterior surfaces of the body are perceived as if they were drawn and viewed by S upon one common, transparent two-dimensional surface projected out in front of S-Duke, 1966, p. 305). His results indicated that the FPH does account for a high percentage of perceptions of finger drawings upon either anterior or posterior body surfaces. Duke found both a significant sex difference ( p < .01) in the degree of congruence with the FPH in the anterior loci (forehead and stomach) and greater congruence with the FPH in the posterior loci (back of head and lower back).There were two purposes in performing a partial replication of the original study. The primary purpose was to test the reliability of the sex difference in degree of congruence with the FPH on the forehead obtained in the original study. The other purpose was to retest the effect of locus of the stimulus drawing on degree of congruence with the FPH, suggested by Duke's findings of greater congruence in the posterior loci. In discussing his results, Duke could only speculate about the sex difference and attribute the effect of locus, in part, to procedural difficulties. The lack of related empirical evidence or theoretical basis for its findings recommend the original study to replication.Method.-The 103 Ss were chosen because they were available. Included were 62 males and 41 females ranging from 12 to 48 yr. of age.Four symbols were drawn on S's head: r, 1, C, 3. Each E used a uniform set of instructions. Questions from S were not answered directly but were answered by repeating the instructions, where appropriate. The first part of the instructions was the following: "I will trace some simple figures on your forehead. Please reproduce those figures on this surface." E then proceeded to draw the first figure. S was expected to trace his response to the stimulus on the surface indicated by E. The symbols were presented in this order: 1, C , r, 3. Next, S was read the following: "Now I will trace some simple figures on the back of your...