A state lottery commission has conducted a cluster analysis to gain a better understanding of public attitudes in the state toward the lottery and gambling. The commission plans to use the data to design marketing programs aimed at increasing support and participation in the weekly lottery drawings. The research identified five distinct clusters of citizens. Not surprisingly, the largest cluster (22 percent) was opposed to the lottery and had a low understanding of the economic impact the lottery had on the state. The smallest cluster (13 percent)

was made up of people who loved the lottery. This group also had the best understanding of the lottery’s impact on their state.

The other three groups fell somewhere in between in both attitude and knowledge—qualified support (25 percent), neutral

(27 percent), and nongamblers, who see some benefit for the state (13 percent).

Before the marketing team begins designing the communications strategy for each audience, the group considers issuing a news release to announce the research findings, focusing on the fact a majority of citizens are in favor of the lottery in hopes of making a positive impression on the state’s legislature. Only one of the lottery commissioners is uncomfortable with the plan because he feels they are overstating the results. What do you think? Is the marketing team misrepresenting the data to the public?