LITTER EVALUATION
SURVEY
August 2010

Prepared by:

R I E S T E R

TABLE OF CONTENTS
Section:

Page #:

Executive Summary…………………………………………………………………….. 1
Key Findings and Recommendations……………………………………………. 6
I.

Introduction……………………………………………………………………

A.
B.

Background and Methodology…………………………………………………..
Demographics…………………………………………………………………….

II.

Driver Characteristics……………………………………………………..

A.
B.
C.
D.

Driving Habits……………………………………………………………………..
Litterbag Use……………………………………………………………………...
Smokers……………………………………………………………………………
Truck Drivers………………………………………………………………………

III.

Litter Awareness and Behavior… ………………………………………

A.
B.
C.
D.
E.

Perception of the Problem along Freeways…………………………………….
Personal Littering…………………………………………………………………..
Littering Circumstances……………………………………………………………
Reasons for Littering……………………………………………………………….
Personal Experience with Specific Littering Situations…………………………

IVS. Campaign Awareness……………………………………………………….
A.
B.
C.
D.
E.

Awareness of Campaign…………………………………………………………
Don’t Trash Arizona Awareness………………………………………………..
Awareness of Litter Resources…………………………………………………
Likelihood to Report Littering……………………………………………………
Additional Litter Resources………………………………………………………..

VS. Profiles of Litterers…………………………………………………………

8
8
8
13
13
14
15
16
21
21
22
24
25
26
29
29
33
36
37
40
41

Questionnaire……………………………………………………………………… Appendix A
Cross Tabulations – Available under separate cover

M A G

L I T T E R

S U R V E Y

-

2 0 1 0

R I E S T E R

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Background
In August 2006, the Maricopa Association of Governments (MAG) launched a litter
prevention and education program known as Don’t Trash Arizona! The purpose of the
program is to reduce litter on the regional freeway system by developing a strategy to
increase public awareness and change behavior. The scope of work for the program
additionally mandated that an evaluative process be included to measure the success of
the program.
First, “secondary research” was conducted to review existing litter campaigns not only in
other regions and states, but globally. This was accomplished through Web research
and targeted interviews with account managers of litter campaigns in other states.
The secondary research found that litterers were predominately single males, aged 18
to 24—with a secondary tier of litterers aged 25 to 34. They tend to be smokers, eat/buy
fast food two times per week or more, frequent bars and nightclubs, and drive pickup
trucks. While 60 percent of littering is deliberate, 40 percent occurs “accidentally” when
items blow or fall off vehicles. Littering most often takes place when drivers are alone,
and small items like cigarettes and candy wrappers are not typically considered litter.
Following the secondary research, a benchmark survey was conducted in December
2006 to determine initial attitudes and awareness of litter issues in Arizona and to
evaluate littering behavior.
Based on the research results, a strategy was developed that would utilize a “pride”
message; focus on the 18 to 24 male demographic; target both deliberate and
“accidental” litter; and include a variety of strategies and tactics within the areas of
public relations, paid advertising, media outreach, school outreach, and the
development of value-added partnerships.
While the primary goal of the Don’t Trash Arizona program is to reduce freeway litter by
increasing awareness about the problems litter causes and to change littering behavior,
it was recognized early on that it would be difficult to rapidly “move the needle” when it
comes to changing behavior. The communication team outlined a strategy to achieve
results through a three-stage process: 1) increase awareness; 2) change attitudes; and
3) change behavior.
A follow-up, evaluative survey was then conducted in July 2008, at the end of the first
two years of the campaign, to determine if any changes in awareness, attitudes or
behavior were realized. Two subsequent follow-up studies were conducted; however,
these studies focused on Maricopa County residents. The 2010 survey is the focus of
this report.

1

R I E S T E R

2

Evaluative Survey
RIESTER, on behalf of its client, the Maricopa Association of Governments (MAG),
commissioned WestGroup Research of Phoenix to conduct a telephone study with
residents in Maricopa County. The purpose of the study was to evaluate overall
awareness of and attitudes toward litter issues and explore littering behavior, and
compare responses to the benchmark study, which was conducted in December 2006.
Subsequent studies were conducted in August 2008, August 2009 and July 2010. It is
important to note, however, that the first two studies were conducted with Arizona
residents. To accurately compare the data from these surveys to the 2009 and 2010
data, the 2006 and 2008 data shown in this report include only responses from
Maricopa County residents.
Results are based on 601 fifteen-minute telephone interviews with Maricopa County
residents. All respondents were randomly selected from a Random Digit Dial (RDD)
database comprising phone numbers from the targeted zip codes. The margin of error
for the survey is approximately +4.1% at a 95% confidence level.
Below are some of the key findings of the survey.
Driver Characteristics

M A G

ƒ

In 2010, slightly more than two in five Valley residents (42%) reported driving or
riding in a 4-door sedan. This is a slight increase from 2009 (three percentage
points) and approaches the levels measured in 2008 (44%). An additional 7% report
driving a two door coupe. About one in five Maricopa County residents indicated
they drive an SUV (19%) or pickup truck (16%); this is essentially the same
percentage reported since interviewing began in 2006.

ƒ

Maricopa County residents were more likely than last year to report having a
litterbag or trash receptacle in their vehicle (69%; up from 66% in 2009 and 56% in
2008). There has been a 23% increase in residents who report having a litterbag or
trash receptacle in their vehicle since 2008 (56% to 69%).

ƒ

Almost two thirds of the residents (64%) who do not currently have a litterbag or
trash receptacle in their car indicated they would consider keeping one in their
vehicle in the future (up from 50% in 2008).

ƒ

Similar to previous years, a little more than one in six Valley residents indicated they
were smokers (18%). The majority of smokers reported that they use the ashtray in
their vehicle (53%).

ƒ

Truck drivers reported that soda cans/bottles, water bottles and lawn debris were the
most common types of litter that would be found in the back of their truck (mentioned
by 10%, 8% and 7%, respectively).

L I T T E R

S U R V E Y

-

2 0 1 0

R I E S T E R

3

ƒ

Almost half (48%) of truck drivers indicated they do not believe they put any type of
litter in their truck bed; an additional 3% reported they were unsure if the items they
put in the back of their truck were considered litter.

ƒ

This year, on average, fewer truck drivers indicated that they “always” secure items
in the back of their pick-up truck (64%, down from 70% in 2009) while more truck
drivers report they secure their load “most of the time” (17%, up from 11%). Slightly
more than one in ten truck drivers (12%) do not frequently secure items in their truck
bed, reporting that they “sometimes,” “rarely,” or “never” secure items (an
improvement from 17% in 2009).

ƒ

Approximately one third (31%) of Maricopa County residents report driving in a
vehicle that hauls items in an open air trailer or strapped to a luggage rack, with 21%
of those stating they do so a few times a year, and 10% who reporting to do so more
often, one to two times a month or more.

ƒ

More than three-quarters (77%) of drivers with open-air trailers or luggage racks
indicated that on average they “always” secure items in their open air trailers or on
their luggage racks.

Litter Awareness and Behavior

M A G

ƒ

Perceptions regarding the magnitude of the litter problem along Maricopa County
freeways among residents have remained steady since 2009 (67% rate it as a “big”
or “moderate” problem).

ƒ

When asked to itemize what items they thought they had littered in the past year,
more Valley residents than in the past insisted that they had not littered this year
(74%, up from 69% in 2009).

ƒ

The percentage of males aged 18 to 34 who indicated they “had not littered in the
past year” continues to increase; from 40% in 2006, 44% in 2008, and 45% in 2009,
to 51% in 2010. This represents a 13% increase among the target population.
Despite this increase, however, males aged 18 to 23 still remain the most significant
offenders.

ƒ

Among those who indicated they had littered in the past year, food or organic
material was the most common type of litter (mentioned by 44%).

ƒ

As in prior years, the residents who indicated they had littered in the past year were
most likely to report that the littering happened while they were driving and/or riding
in a vehicle. This year, however, there was a decrease in the percentage of
residents reporting they littered while traveling in a vehicle (48% vs. 53% in 2009).

L I T T E R

S U R V E Y

-

2 0 1 0

R I E S T E R

4

ƒ

There has been a significant increase from 2009 in the percentage of residents who
report littering food scraps that are biodegradable (17%, up from 3%); making it the
most common reason cited for littering when driving. Lack of convenient trash
receptacles is now the second most common reason cited for littering when driving
(mentioned by 14% of residents who have littered in the past year).

ƒ

Similar to previous years, residents report that the first most common littering
situation they have experienced is “trash falling out of the vehicle” (24% within the
past 3 months).

Campaign Awareness

M A G

ƒ

Three in ten residents (30%) indicated they had seen advertising related to litter or
littering in the past three months. Although this level is only slightly higher than 2009
(three percentage points), it is a 20% increase compared to the awareness levels for
the 2006 benchmark wave (25% to 30%).

ƒ

Ad awareness is significantly higher for male litterers aged 18-34 than the total (42%
vs. 30%).

ƒ

When those aware of litter-related advertising were specifically asked what they
remembered about the ads, the most recalled information is about the fines (24%).

ƒ

Three in ten residents who remembered seeing litter-related advertising in the past
three months were able to recall some type of slogan/message (30%). Two of the
most commonly recalled “slogans” were actually messages – “do not litter”
(mentioned by 5%) and “you will be fined” (mentioned by 4%).

ƒ

As in 2009, more than half of Maricopa County residents (51%) recall the Don’t
Trash Arizona slogan. Although awareness is not as high as 2008 levels (56%), it
still remains significantly higher than the 43% reported in 2006. Overall awareness of
the slogan was highest among males (57% vs. 45% for females), residents under 55
(54% vs. 43% for 55+).

ƒ

Residents who were familiar with the Don’t Trash Arizona slogan reported seeing
and/or hearing the slogan from a variety of sources – television (31%), radio (21%),
billboards (20%), and street/highway signs (16%).

ƒ

Valley residents’ awareness remains essentially unchanged for both the Litter
Hotline (13%) and the “Don’t Trash Arizona Website” (14%). This year, however,
the significant increase in awareness of the Litter Hotline that occurred from 2008 to
2009 was sustained. Among the target group of males, aged 18 to 34, awareness
remains steady from 2009 at 13%.

L I T T E R

S U R V E Y

-

2 0 1 0

R I E S T E R

M A G

5

ƒ

Fourteen-percent (14%) of residents had heard of the Don’t Trash Arizona website;
this was up slightly from 2009 (12%). It is important to note that when comparing
current awareness to the 2006 benchmark study, there has been a significant
increase (from 10% to 14%). Awareness of the website among males between the
ages of 18a nd 34 is lower than the total (9% vs. 14%).

ƒ

As in 2009, seven percent (7%) of Valley residents aware of the Don’t Trash Arizona
website reported that they have visited the site.

ƒ

When Valley residents were asked how likely they would be to report littering
behavior if they saw someone littering, more than three-fifths (62%) of residents
indicated they would be at least “somewhat” likely to call (27% “very likely” and 35%
“somewhat likely”). This is a significant increase compared to 2008 (53%).

ƒ

The Internet remains the top resource for Valley residents who want more
information about litter or littering (mentioned by 49%).

ƒ

Approximately one in six residents specifically mentioned the Don’t Trash Arizona
website as a resource to go to if they wanted more information about littering (14%).
Males between the ages of 18 to 34 indicated they would specifically go to
www.DontTrashArizona.com significantly more often than the total (26% vs. 14%).

L I T T E R

S U R V E Y

-

2 0 1 0

R I E S T E R

6

KEY FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Some of the most significant findings of the survey were many positive changes in
awareness and behavior among the target demographic of males aged 18 to 34, with
additional positive changes among the overall population in several areas.
Overall, the survey continues to show success in the program’s first objective of
increasing and maintaining awareness about litter issues, with half of Arizona residents
indicating they have heard the slogan, Don’t Trash Arizona. Overall awareness of the
slogan increased from 43% in 2006 to 51% in 2010. Furthermore, awareness of the
slogan was especially high among the target demographic of younger males, with 58%
of males aged 18 to 34 stating awareness.
More than three in ten (30%) respondents indicated they had seen advertising related to
litter in the past three months. Again, this was even higher among the target group
(42%) of younger males. These findings are likely due to a strategic marketing,
education and outreach campaign targeting males aged 18-34.
Awareness of litter resources stayed steady or increased. The significant increase in
awareness of the Litter Hotline, which allows motorists to report someone littering from
a vehicle, was maintained at 13%, which is an increase of 44% compared to 2008.
Awareness of the litter Website, DontTrashArizona.com, increased significantly from
10% in the 2006 benchmark study to 14% (a 40% increase).
In a shift from prior years, it appears that the first sign of a change in littering behavior
may be evident. Almost three-fourths of Maricopa County residents (74%) reported that
they had not littered at all during the past year, which, for the first time, represents an
increase from previous years (69% in 2009). In addition, positive changes continued to
be reported among the target population, with the percentage of males aged 18 to 34
who stated they had not littered within the past year increasing for the third year in a row
(to 51% from a reported 40% in 2006).
In addition, the percentage of Maricopa County residents classified as “Admitted
Litterers” declined to 23%, the lowest recorded in the history of the tracking study.
Accidental littering remains a significant area of concern; however, there was a slight
improvement this year. Twenty-four percent of Arizonans admitted to having trash blow
out of or fall from their vehicle in 2010 in just the past three months, with another 21%
reporting that occurrence in 3+ months, for a total of 45%. This compares to a total of
49% reporting accidental littering in 2009. Another area of concern continues to be the
littering of cigarette butts, a circumstance cited by 23% of residents (8% in the past 3
months and 15% in 3+ months). A new area of concern appeared in 2010, however,
with 17% of admitted litterers indicating that they “only litter food scraps, which are
biodegradable” – apparently meaning they do not believe this is truly littering. This is up
significantly from 3% in 2009.

M A G

L I T T E R

S U R V E Y

-

2 0 1 0

R I E S T E R

7

The above findings and observations indicate several approaches for continuing litter
prevention and education efforts. The research confirms that males aged 18 to 34
continue to be among the most common litter offenders. The survey also indicates that
the current campaign focusing on this demographic is having a positive impact in
reducing littering behavior. The recall of the key messages in the ads appears to
confirm that the current advertising messages are resonating with this audience, and
may want to be pursued. The most recent messaging surrounding secure loads, Safe
Loads = Safe Roads, appears to have made a slight impact with this audience, possibly
due to its shorter time span. An opportunity exists to continue educational efforts that
roadway debris can pose serious safety hazards and to use this awareness to
encourage motorists to secure items with tarps or tie-downs when hauling vehicle loads.
Also, an opportunity exists to continue educational efforts encouraging motorists to
always carry a litter bag in their vehicle. Based on the significant account of tossing
biodegradable items out of the window of a vehicle, there is an opportunity to
communicate that nothing is to be tossed out of a window, biodegradable or not.
Another opportunity exists to continue efforts to encourage people to report littering and
find out more information about littering by visiting the website, DontTrashAZ.com.
In conclusion, there seems to be momentum in terms of increasing awareness of litter
issues and perhaps the beginning indicators of changing behaviors. There were even a
number of positive results in changing litter behavior among the targeted portion of the
population who are historically the worst offenders. These results would seem to
indicate that the current strategy of combining paid advertising efforts with public
relations efforts and other targeted messaging is appropriate.

M A G

L I T T E R

S U R V E Y

-

2 0 1 0

R I E S T E R

8

I.

INTRODUCTION

A.

Background and Methodology

RIESTER, on behalf of its client Maricopa Association of Governments (MAG),
commissioned WestGroup Research of Phoenix to conduct a telephone study with
residents age 18 and older living in Maricopa County. The purpose of the study was to
evaluate overall awareness of and attitudes toward litter issues and explore littering
behavior, and compare responses to the benchmark study, which was conducted in
December 2006, July/August 2008, and August 2009.
Results are based on 601 fifteen-minute telephone interviews conducted with 301 male
and 300 female residents. Respondents were randomly selected from a Random Digit
Dial (RDD) database comprised of phone numbers from targeted zip codes. The margin
of error for the survey is approximately +4.1% at a 95% confidence level. Seventeen
interviews (3%) were conducted in Spanish.
It is important to note that the 2006 and 2008 two telephone studies were conducted
with Arizona residents: those living in Maricopa County, Pima County, and outlying
areas. The 2009 and 2010 studies were only conducted with Maricopa County
residents. To accurately compare the data from previous studies to the current year, the
2006 and 2008 data shown in this report only includes responses from Maricopa County
residents.

B.

Demographics

Per established quotas, 50% of Maricopa County residents interviewed were males and
50% were females. The average age of the residents was 46 and 58% were married.
The majority had at least some college experience (74%), 55% were employed either
full or part-time. Almost one in seven (13%) are unemployed, which represents a
significant increase from 2009 (8%). One-third (31%) reports a household income of
more than $75,000. Fewer report being white-collar professionals than in 2009 (23%
vs. 32%) and more report being tradesmen (10% vs. 6%). Approximately three in four
residents are Caucasian (71%), while 72% report that “only English” is spoken in their
home.
Additional detail on the demographic profile of the respondents is provided in Tables 1a
and 1b while Table 2 provides a breakdown of the city of residence represented in the
sample.

M A G

L I T T E R

S U R V E Y

-

2 0 1 0

R I E S T E R

9

Table 1a: Respondent Demographics
2010
Maricopa
(n=601)

Characteristic
Male
Female
Age
18-24
25-34
35-44
45-54
55-65
66+
Average
Marital Status
Married
Single
Widowed
Divorced
Separated
Refused
Education
Less than high
school
High school
graduate
Some college
College
graduate
Graduate
degree
Ethnicity
White
Hispanic
African
American
Native American
Asian
Other/Refused

2009
2008
Maricopa Maricopa
(n=637)
(n=744)
50%
50

50%
50

50%
50

9%
19
20
23
13
16
45.9 yrs

10%
16
20
23
14
17
46.3 yrs

58%
25
7
7
3

59%
25
7
6
1
2

56%
27
7
8
-

61%
26
6
5
1
2

5%

4%

8%

7%

10%
16
20
25
12
16
46.1 yrs

L I T T E R

S U R V E Y

-

2 0 1 0

50%
50

9%
23
24
16
12
16
44.3 yrs

18

19

19

16

33
23

33
29

31
24

35
27

18

13

17

13

71%
14
5

76%
13
2

72%
15
4

79%
9
3

2
1
7

1
2
6

2
2
5

-2
4

*Bold indicates significantly higher percentages at the 95% confidence level

M A G

2006
Maricopa
(n=748)

R I E S T E R

1 0

Table 1b: Respondent Demographics
2010
Maricopa
(n=601)

2009
Maricopa
(n=637)

2008
Maricopa
(n=744)

2006
Maricopa
(n=748)

Household Income
<$10,000
$10-$20,000
$20-$30,000
$30-$40,000
$40-$50,000
$50-$60,000
$60-$75,000
$75-$100,000
$100,000+
Refused
Average

7%
7
8
7
5
6
6
13
18
23
$63,477

7%
7
6
6
7
6
8
12
20
21
$66,530

5%
5
7
7
8
8
10
12
18
21
$66,420

3%
6
8
7
8
7
9
12
18
22
$66,620

Employment Status
Full-time
Part-time
Unemployed
Retired
Homemaker
Student

48%
7
13
19
6
4

50%
9
8
21
7
3

55%
8
7
20
6
3

51%
10
4
21
8
4

23%
23

32%
20

24%
22

16%
10

14
12
10
5
6

15
7
6
8
8

14
8
6
12
10

Characteristic

Profession
White collar/mgmt
Professional
(medical/legal)
Blue collar
Education
Trade
Self-employed
Clerical/admin

*Bold indicates significantly higher percentages at the 95% confidence level

M A G

L I T T E R

S U R V E Y

-

2 0 1 0

9
6
7
5
5

R I E S T E R

1 1

Table 2: Sample Breakdown by City

City
Phoenix
Mesa
Glendale
Chandler
Peoria
Scottsdale
Gilbert
Surprise
Tempe
Sun City
Buckeye
Goodyear
Avondale
Queen Creek
Laveen
Apache Junction
Other (includes 1%
or less of consensus)
Refused

M A G

L I T T E R

S U R V E Y

-

2 0 1 0

2010
Maricopa
(n=601)

2009
Maricopa
(n=637)

2008
Maricopa
(n=744)

2006
Maricopa
(n=748)

32%
14
7
6
5
5
4
4
3
3
1
2
1
1
-

29%
15
9
8
7
6
6
3
3
2
1
-

32%
12
8
6
4
6
4
3
3
2
1
1
3
1
1

28%
14
8
7
6
7
5
4
3
3
2
-

9%

8%

11%

13%

3

2

2

2

R I E S T E R

1 2

The majority of Maricopa County residents interviewed (72%) reported speaking English
only while one in seven Maricopa County residents interviewed (14%) reported that at
least some Spanish was spoken in their home. No significant changes occurred from
2009 regarding language use in the home.

Language Use in Home
English Only

72%

Spanish Only

3%

Mostly Spanish but also some English

2%

Equally in Spanish and English

4%

Mostly English but also some Spanish

8%

English and some other language

9%

Refused

2%

0%

M A G

L I T T E R

S U R V E Y

-

2 0 1 0

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

R I E S T E R

1 3

II.

DRIVER CHARACTERISTICS

A.

Driving Habits

In 2010, slightly more than two in five Valley residents (42%) reported driving or
riding in a 4-door sedan. This is a slight increase from 2009 (three percentage
points) and approaches the levels measured in 2008 (44%). As in the past, sports
utility vehicles (SUV) and pick-up trucks were the next most frequently mentioned
vehicles driven by residents (19% and 16%).

Table 3: Type of Vehicle

Items
Sedan (4-door)
Sports utility
Pick-up truck
Van/mini-van
Coupe (2-door)
Motorcycle
Other
Don’t drive
Don’t know/
refused

2010
Maricopa
(n=601)

2009
Maricopa
(n=637)

2008
Maricopa
(n=744)

2006
Maricopa
(n=748)

42%
19
16
7
7
1
1
6
1

39%
20
16
11
7
1
1
5
--

44%
18
15
8
8
1
1
4
1

38%
21
15
12
8
-1
4
1

Q8: Which of the following best describes the type of vehicle you
drive or ride in…

M A G

L I T T E R

S U R V E Y

-

2 0 1 0

R I E S T E R

B.

1 4

Litterbag Use

This year, Maricopa County residents were more likely to report having a litterbag
or trash receptacle in their vehicle (69%; up from 66% in 2009 and 56% in 2008).
Although the increase is not significant, there has been a steady increase in residents
who report having a litterbag or trash receptacle in their vehicle since 2008 (increase
from 56% to 69%). Those most likely to report having a litterbag were women (77% vs.
62% for men) and residents over the age of 55 (80% vs. 65% for under 55).
Almost two thirds of the residents (64%) who do not currently have a litterbag or
trash receptacle in their car indicated they would consider keeping one in their
vehicle in the future. Again, this increase is not significant yet there has been an
upward trend since 2008 when 50% of Maricopa County residents were likely to
consider it. Females are more agreeable to putting a litterbag or trash receptacle in
their vehicle (75% vs. 58% for males).

Litter Bag or Trashcan Use in Vehicle
69%
66%

Have bag/can
in vehicle

56%
57%

If no, would consider
using in future?
64%
60%

Yes

50%
53%
33%
36%

No

Maybe

45%
43%

2010
2009
2008
2006

3%
4%
5%
4%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

2010 Maricopa n=601; 2009 Maricopa n=637; 2008 Maricopa n=744; 2006 Maricopa n=748

M A G

L I T T E R

S U R V E Y

-

2 0 1 0

R I E S T E R

C.

1 5

Smokers

Similar to previous years, a little more than one in six Valley residents indicated
they were smokers (18%). Residents with household incomes of less than $50,000
were more likely than those with incomes over $50,000 to admit they were smokers
(27% vs. 11%). Residents without a college degree were also significantly more likely
to smoke than residents with some exposure to college (20% for some high school or
less, 27% for some college vs. 7% for college graduates)
The majority of smokers reported that they use the ashtray in their vehicle (53%).
Significantly fewer smokers report using something else in their car (13% vs. 19%
in 2009) and not smoking in their vehicle (7% vs. 13%). Residents under the age of
35 were significantly less likely than residents older than 55 to report using an ashtray in
their car (41% vs. 69%).
Table 4: Smoking Habits and Disposing of Cigarette Butts
Among those indicating they smoke

Response
Smoker

Ashtray in vehicle
Something else in
vehicle
Don’t smoke in the car
It varies
Throwing out window
Other (<1% consensus)
Don’t know/refused

2010
Maricopa
(n=105)

2009
Maricopa
(n=97)

2008
Maricopa
(n=109)

2006
Maricopa
(n=121)

18%

15%

15%

16%

(n=105)
53%
13

(n=97)
49%
19

(n=109)
55%
11

(n=121)
46%
13

7
9
5
1
12

13
9
7
3

12
6
6
2
8

16
12
5
2
5

Q11: When you are in a vehicle, do you USUALLY dispose of cigarette butts…?
*Bold indicates significantly higher percentages at the 95% confidence level

M A G

L I T T E R

S U R V E Y

-

2 0 1 0

R I E S T E R

D.

1 6

Truck Drivers

One in six Maricopa County residents indicated they drive a pickup truck (16%);
this is essentially the same percentage reported since interviewing began in 2006.
Truck drivers are most likely to be male (25% vs. 7%) and under 55 (18% vs. 10% for
55+). Sports utility drivers are most likely to be female (23% vs. 16%) and between the
ages of 35-44 (24%).
Table 5: Pick-Up Truck Drivers

Response
Drive a pick-up truck

2010
Maricopa
(n=601)

2009
Maricopa
(n=637)

2008
Maricopa
(n=744)

2006
Maricopa
(n=748)

16%

16%

15%

15%

Q8: Drive a pick-up truck.
Truck drivers reported that soda cans/bottles, water bottles and lawn debris were
the most common types of litter that would be found in the back of their truck
(mentioned by 10%, 8% and 7%). Non-biodegradable trash and small pieces of paper
are both mentioned by 5% of truck drives.
Almost half (48%) of truck drivers indicated they do not believe they put any type
of litter in their truck bed; an additional 3% reported they were unsure if the items
they put in the back of their truck were considered litter. The combined 51% is only
slightly higher than the percentages from previous years (49% in 2009, 40% in 2008
and 39% in 2006). However, the significant increase in truck drivers who reported
putting “nothing in their truck bed” that occurred in 2009 was sustained this year (17% in
2008, 44% in 2009 and 48% in 2010).

M A G

L I T T E R

S U R V E Y

-

2 0 1 0

R I E S T E R

1 7

Table 6: Litter via Truck Bed – Total Responses
Among those who indicate they drive a truck
2010
2009
2008
2006
Maricopa Maricopa Maricopa Maricopa
(n=94)
(n=97)
(n=107)
(n=97)

Items
Nothing
Soda cans/bottles
Water bottles
Lawn debris
Trash/non biodegradable
(unspecified)
Small pieces of paper
Plastic bags/other plastic
Construction debris
Construction debris
Food/organic material
Cardboard
Paper/ newspaper/ napkins
Beer cans/bottles
Car parts/ batteries
Fast food wrappers
Other food wrappers
Cups (Styrofoam, plastic, paper)
Wood
Furniture
Litter that falls out accidentally
Tires
Other
Don’t know

48%
10
8
7
5

44%
10
3
11
7

17%
11
6
9
5

5
3
3
3
2
2
2
1
1
1
1
------

-5
4
4
5
3
-4
-1
1
5
-----

4
11
9
-4
5
2
2
1
6
2
-1
1
---

6%
3

5%
5

8%
23

14%
16
1
9
-6
7
9
9
4
2
4
4
2
8
3
-1
-2
1
8%
25

Q18: What types of items do you ever put into your truck bed that you consider to be
litter or trash? What else?

M A G

L I T T E R

S U R V E Y

-

2 0 1 0

R I E S T E R

1 8

This year, fewer truck drivers indicated that on average they “always” secure
items in the back of their pick-up truck (64%, down from 70% in 2009) while more
truck drivers report they secure their load “most of the time” (17%, up from 11%).
Conversely, slightly more than one in ten truck drivers (12%) do not frequently secure
items in their truck bed, reporting that they “sometimes,” “rarely,” or “never” secure
items. Females were more likely to indicate they always secure their load (82% vs.
60%).
Among the small number of truck drivers (7) who reported “never” or “rarely” securing
their load, reasons provided include the items are heavy enough to stay in, items are
not large enough to be tied down and they do not have a tarp to cover the items.

How Often Truck Drivers Secure Load
When putting items into the bed of your truck, how often, on average,
do you secure your load (either with ties, bungees, a tarp, etc.)?
Don't know
7%
Never
2%
Rarely
3%

Always
64%

Sometimes
7%

Most of the time
17%

Truck drivers: n=97

M A G

L I T T E R

S U R V E Y

-

2 0 1 0

R I E S T E R

1 9

More than two thirds (69%) of Maricopa Country residents do not report driving in
a vehicle that hauls items in an open-air trailer or strapped to a luggage rack. Of
the remaining one third (31%) who do report driving in a vehicle that hauls items in an
open air trailer or strapped to a luggage rack claim, 21% claim to do so a few times a
year, and 10% claim to do so one to two times a month or more.
Those most likely to haul items include:
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ

Males vs. females; 1-2 times a month (6% vs. 2%), and a few times a year (29%
vs. 14%).
Those under the age of 35 vs. those 35 and older; a few times a year (30% vs.
18%).
Male litterers between the ages of 18 and 34 vs. all respondents; 1-2 times a
month (11% vs. 4%) and a few times a year (41% vs. 22%).

Frequency of Traveling with trailers or
luggage racks
How often do you drive or ride in a vehicle that transports items that are not
carried within the vehicle or trunk, such as hauling items in an open-air trailer or
strapped to a luggage rack?

1 to 2 times a month
4%
At least once a week
4%
Daily
2%

Never
69%

2010: n=587
Note: New question added in 2010

M A G

L I T T E R

S U R V E Y

A few times a year
21%

-

2 0 1 0

R I E S T E R

2 0

More than three-quarters (77%) of drivers with open-air trailers or luggage racks
indicated that on average they “always” secure items in their open air trailers or
on their luggage racks. Less than one in six (15%) report securing items “most of the
time.” Less than one in ten (8%) report securing items “sometimes” or “never”.
Among the small number of drivers (7) who reported “never” or “rarely” securing their
load, reasons provided were mainly “don’t know” and the items are concealed.

How Often Drivers Secure Load
On average, how often do you secure the loads that you are hauling
(either with ties, bungees, a tarp, etc.)?

Never
5%Sometimes
3%

Most of the time
15%

Always
77%

Open-air trailer/luggage rack users: n=184
Note: New question added in 2010

M A G

L I T T E R

S U R V E Y

-

2 0 1 0

R I E S T E R

2 1

III.LITTER AWARENESS AND BEHAVIOR
A.

Perception of Litter as Problem along Freeways

Perceptions regarding the magnitude of the litter problem along Maricopa County
freeways among residents have remained steady since 2009 (67% rate it as a
“big” or “moderate” problem). Approximately one in three Maricopa residents
continues to feel that litter along “their county” freeways are either a “small” problem or
not a problem at all (31%).

Perception of Litter along
Maricopa County Freeways
21%
20%
23%

Big problem

37%
46%
47%

Moderate

41%
40%
25%
25%
26%

Small problem
16%
6%
6%
7%
4%

No problem

2010
2009
2008
2006

2%
2%
2%
4%

Don't know
0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

2010 Maricopa n=601; 2009 Maricopa n=637; 2008 Maricopa n=744; 2006 Maricopa n=748

M A G

L I T T E R

S U R V E Y

-

2 0 1 0

R I E S T E R

2 2

Table 7: Freeway Litter as a Problem in Maricopa County
2010
2009
Maricopa Maricopa
(n=601)
(n=637)

Rating
Big problem
Moderate problem
Small problem
Not a problem at all
Don’t know

21%
46
25
6
2

20%
47
25
6
2

2008
Maricopa
(n=744)

2006
Maricopa
(n=748)

23%
41
26
7
2

37%
40
16
4
4

Q9: In your opinion, how big of a problem is litter along freeways in Maricopa
County? Would you say it is a…
**In 2009 question was changed to “Maricopa County” where previously it was “in
your county.”

B.

Personal Littering

When asked to itemize what items they thought they had littered in the past year,
more Valley residents than in the past insisted that they had not littered this year
(74%, up from 69% in 2009). A small number (2%) of residents said they “did not
know” if they had littered or not.
The percent of males aged 18 to 34 who indicated they “had not littered in the past year
continues to increase; 40% in 2006, 44% in 2008, 45% in 2009 and 51% in 2010.
Overall, residents most likely to claim they have not littered included females (78% vs.
71% for males) and older residents (56% under 35, 77% aged 35-54 and 89% for 55+).
Among those who indicated they had littered in the past year, food or organic
material was the most common type of litter (mentioned by 44%). This was also the
most common type of litter listed in past studies (mentioned by 48% in 2009, 39% in
2008 and 41% in 2006). Small pieces of paper were the second most common items
discarded (mentioned by 23%); this was also similar to 2009, 2008 and 2006
(mentioned by 22%, 26% and 21%, respectively).

M A G

L I T T E R

S U R V E Y

-

2 0 1 0

R I E S T E R

2 3

Those most likely to list food and organic materials as items they have personally
discarded were:
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ

Residents younger than 35 (13% vs. 3% for those 55+).
Those with some college experience (12% vs. 5% of those with high school
diploma or less).
Those with household incomes of $50K+ (12% vs. 7% for those with household
incomes of <$50K).
Table 8: Items Personally Discarded as Litter – Total Responses

Items
Have not littered in
past yr.
Food/organic material
Small pieces of paper
Cigarette butts
Other food wrappers
Soda cans/bottles
Plastic bags/other plastic
Paper/newspaper/napkins
Wood
Fast food wrappers/paper
bags
Beer cans and beer bottles
Cups (Styrofoam, plastic,
paper)
Lawn debris
Water bottles
Hair/dog hair
Thread, string
Cardboard, boxes
Rocks/dirt
Bottles (unspecified)

2010
Maricopa
(n=601)

2009
Maricopa
(n=637)

2008
Maricopa
(n=744)

2006
Maricopa
(n=748)

74%

69%

67%

69%

(n=141)
44%
23
11
11
4
4
2
2
1

(n=180)
48%
22
8
8
4
4
3
2
1

(n=209)
39%
26
10
8
5
5
6
4

(n=206)
41%
21
15
8
7
1
4
2
2

1
1

1
2

2
2

1
-

1
1
1
-

1
3
3
2
1
1
1

1
2
1
1

2
-

Other (<1% consensus)
4
4
7
12
Don’t know
2%
3%
13%
Q13: Can you think of items that you yourself might have discarded as litter (by litter
we mean items you did not put in a trash receptacle) in the past year?

M A G

L I T T E R

S U R V E Y

-

2 0 1 0

R I E S T E R

C.

2 4

Littering Circumstances

As in prior years, the residents who indicated they had littered in the past year
were most likely to report that the littering happened while they were driving
and/or riding in a vehicle. This year, however, there was a decrease in the percentage
of residents reporting they littered while traveling in a vehicle (48% vs. 53% in 2009).
Other admitted litterers reported they littered while walking outside or because there
was no trashcan around (11% and 6%).

Table 9: Littering Situation – Total Responses
Among those who indicated they have littered in the past year
2010
2009
2008
2006
Maricopa Maricopa Maricopa Maricopa
(n=149)
(n=195)
(n=247) (n=231)

Items
Driving/riding/traveling in vehicle
Walking outside
No trashcan around
Opened door/window – flew out
In a parking lot
Cleaning out car
Just threw it/anywhere I could
Don’t consider it
litter/biodegradable stuff
I didn’t litter
In the desert/ middle of nowhere
Camping/hiking
Leaving it for animals
In the park
At home
Eating food/chewing gum
Flew out of truck bed

48%
11
6
5
3
3
3
1

53%
8
5
4
4
2
3
2

34%
12
15
5
2
-2
--

47%
16
8
3
-1
---

1
1
1
1
-----

3
2
-2
1
1
---

3
1
2
-2
1
1
2

1
1
---1
2
2

Other (<1% consensus)
Don’t know/can’t remember

9%
13%

9%
11%

8%
19%

7%
15%

Q14: To the best of your knowledge, what were the general circumstances in terms of
where and what you were doing when you discarded litter?

M A G

L I T T E R

S U R V E Y

-

2 0 1 0

R I E S T E R

D.

2 5

Reasons for Littering when Driving

There has been a significant increase from 2009 in the percent of residents who
report littering food scraps that are biodegradable (17%, up from 3%); making it
the most common reason cited for littering when driving. Lack of convenient trash
receptacles is now the second most common reason cited for littering when driving
(mentioned by 14% of residents who have littered in the past year).
Residents who claimed they littered while driving because they simply did not want it in
their car is down from 2009 (3% vs. 11%) while the number of people who litter because
cigarette butts stink up their cars has increased slightly (3%, up from 1% in 2009).
Others littered because they felt it was easy to do (3%), they do not consider small
wrappers or cigarette butts litter (3%), or they were lazy (3%). More than one third of
those who litter claim they do not litter when driving (32%).

Table 10: Reasons for Littering when Driving – Total Responses
Among those who indicated they have littered in the past year

Items
I don’t litter when driving
I only litter food scraps – they are
biodegradable
No trash receptacles are convenient
It was an accident/unintentional
I don’t want to keep it in my car
It’s easy
I don’t consider throwing out gum,
small wrappers, cigarette butts
litter
I’m lazy
Cigarettes stink up car, easier to
throw out window
I litter when I’m in a hurry/a rush
Other
Don’t know

2010
Total
(n=147)

2009
Total
(n=195)

32%
17

36%
3

14
5
3
3
3

16
5
11
8
5

3
3

3
1

-

1

5%
13%

3%
10%

Q15: Why do you litter WHEN DRIVING?
*Bold indicates significantly higher percentages at the 95% confidence level

M A G

L I T T E R

S U R V E Y

-

2 0 1 0

R I E S T E R

E.

2 6

Personal Experience with Specific Littering Situations

Residents were read a list of eight specific littering situations and were asked to indicate
if they personally had experienced that littering situation in the past three months, more
than three months ago, or had never experienced that specific situation.
Similar to previous years, residents report that the first most common littering
situation they have experienced is “trash falling out of the vehicle” (24% within
the past 3 months). Mentions for the second most common litter experience, problems
with a vehicle and left debris like a tire, etc, have increased significantly from 2009 (13%
within the past 3 months vs. 9% in 2009). Throwing a small item such as a candy
wrapper or a piece of scrap paper, rounds out the list for the third most frequently
experienced litter situation (9% within the past 3 months).

2010 Experience with Littering Situations
Trash fell out
while driving/riding

24%

Vehicle problems/
left roadside debrise

13%

21%

55%

8%

Threw out small
paper out window

9%

12%

Threw cigarette
butt out window

8%

15%

79%
79%
77%

Threw can/
bottle out window

6%

14%

80%

Threw out trash
in area with litter

6%

15%

78%

Threw beverage
2% 8%
container out window

90%

Ticket/warning
1%
for littering
0%

99%
20%

40%

Past 3 months

60%

80%

3+ months

Never

100%

2010 n=601

Residents most likely to experience trash falling out of the vehicle within the last three
months were:
ƒ
ƒ

M A G

Younger residents (28% for those under 55 vs. 12% for those 55+).
Male litterers aged 18-34; (35% vs. 24% for total).

L I T T E R

S U R V E Y

-

2 0 1 0

R I E S T E R

2 7

Residents most likely to experience problems with throwing a small item (i.e. candy
wrapper, scrap paper) within the last threw months were:
ƒ
Younger residents (11% for those under 55 vs. 2% for those 55+).
ƒ
Some college vs. college educated residents (12% vs. 6%).
ƒ
Non-Caucasian residents (15% vs. 7%).
Residents were least likely to have been in a vehicle where a beverage container was
thrown out (10% reported having ever experienced) or to have received a warning or
ticket for littering (only 1% reported having ever experienced over 3 months ago).
In general, residents under age 35 and those with a household income below $50,000
were more likely than those in comparative groups to report having experiences with the
specific littering situations that were queried.

M A G

L I T T E R

S U R V E Y

-

2 0 1 0

R I E S T E R

2 8

Table 11: Personal Experience with Littering Circumstances
Past 3 Months

Circumstance
You noticed that some trash fell
out of a pick-up or other vehicle
you were driving in.
You had problems with a vehicle
and left debris like tire, part of a
tire, or other stuff on the
roadside.
You threw out a small item from
your vehicle like a candy
wrapper, scrap paper, etc.
Rather than keep a cigarette butt
in the car, you or someone in
the vehicle you were in threw
the cigarette butt out the
window.
Someone in a vehicle you were in
threw out a can, bottle or litter
out onto the side of the road.
Someone in a vehicle you were in
threw trash out in an area that
already had lots of litter.
Rather than keep a beverage
container in the car, you, or
someone in a vehicle you were
in, threw out a can or bottle.

2010
Maricopa
(n=601)

2009
Maricopa
(n=637)

2008
Maricopa
(n=744)

2006
Maricopa
(748)

24%

26%

23%

19%

13%

9%

9%

7%

9%

8%

8%

7%

8%

8%

10%

11%

6%

7%

9%

6%

6%

7%

6%

6%

2%

3%

5%

4%

Q12: I am going to read you a few statements pertaining to your litter awareness. For
each of the following statements, please respond by telling me if this is something you –
“Have experienced in the past 3 months,” “Have experienced over 3 months ago,” or
“have never experienced.”
*Bold indicates significantly higher percentages at the 95% confidence level

M A G

L I T T E R

S U R V E Y

-

2 0 1 0

R I E S T E R

2 9

IV. CAMPAIGN AWARENESS
A.

Awareness of Campaign

1.

General Awareness

Three in ten residents (30%) indicated they had seen advertising related to litter
or littering in the past three months. Although this level is only slightly higher
than 2009 (three percentage points), it is significantly higher than the awareness
levels for the benchmark wave (five percentage points). Ad awareness is
significantly higher for male litterers aged 18-34 than the total (42% vs. 30%). Almost
two of five (38%) of those under the age of 35 are aware of litter advertising. “Don’t
know” levels are significantly higher for residents aged 55+ than for their younger
counterparts (10% vs. 3%).

Have Seen Ads for Litter
Within last 3 months
30%
27%
25%
25%

Yes

65%
69%
71%
73%

No

Don't
know

5%
4%
4%
2%

0%

2010
2009
2008
2006
20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

2010 Maricopa n=601; 2009 Maricopa n=637; 2008 Maricopa n=744; 2006 Maricopa n=748

M A G

L I T T E R

S U R V E Y

-

2 0 1 0

R I E S T E R

2.

3 0

Recalled Messages and Slogans

When those aware of litter-related advertising were specifically asked what they
remembered about the ads, the most recalled information is about the fines (24%;
see Table 13). Recall levels are slightly lower than those registered in 2009 (27%)
yet higher than those measured in 2006 (17%). The percentage of residents citing
the second most frequently mentioned message, “Don’t litter” or “Keep Arizona clean,”
was slightly higher than in 2009 (21%, up from 16%) but lower than 2008 levels (28%).
Recall for both of these messages is at parity.
Other messages recalled included information about hamburger wrappers being a $500
fine (9%), keeping highways clean (7%), and using ashtrays because cigarettes can
cause fires (6%).
There are no differences among subgroups except residents under the age of 35 were
more likely to recall the hamburger wrappers message (15%).

M A G

L I T T E R

S U R V E Y

-

2 0 1 0

R I E S T E R

3 1

Table 13: Recalled Messages of Litter-Related Advertising
Among those who indicated they remember seeing ads
related to litter or littering in the past 3 months
2010
Maricopa
(n=183)

2009
Maricopa
(n=170)

The fines
Don’t litter/keep Arizona clean
A hamburger wrapper being a 500
dollar fine/ a five hundred dollar
burger
Keep highways clean
It was a sign along the road/billboard
Use ashtray/cigarettes cause fires
Littering is unlawful/can get a ticket
Recycling
Litter is bad for the environment/bad
for wildlife
Heard on radio
Clean up efforts/Adopt a highway
People littering out of their vehicle
Tires coming apart on the road/tires
along the road way
Call a number to report littering
Cost of cleaning up/tax dollars
Make the earth greener/go green
Don’t be a litter bug
Littering is unsightly/litter is ugly
Littering/dumping things in desert by
illegal immigrants
Read article in newspaper
Saw on TV/commercial/public service
announcement
It’s a big problem/becoming an issue
A funny commercial where the guy is
addicted to littering
Prisoners picking up trash
Litter causes car accidents
Man following man/shows litter, makes
pyramid/tree/robot
Washes/Trash ends up in washes
Indian crying

24%
21
9

27%
16
4

24%
28
-

17%
29
-

7
6
6
4
4
3

4
15
4
4
2
3

1
15
2
7
4
4

11
9

3
3
2
3

4
3
2
-

4
-

4
4
-

2
2
2
2
1
1

1
2
1

2
-

2
4
3

1
1

1
8

1
4

2
5

1
1

1
3

-

2
-

1
-

2
2
1

2

8
-

-

1
-

2

2

Other (1% or less of consensus)
Don’t know

6%
15

14%
10

13%
19

13%
10

Responses

2008
Maricopa
(n=186)

2006
Maricopa
(n=188)

2

Q23? What specifically do you remember about the ads related to litter or littering?
*Bold indicates significantly higher percentages at the 95% confidence level

M A G

L I T T E R

S U R V E Y

-

2 0 1 0

R I E S T E R

3 2

Three in ten residents who remembered seeing litter-related advertising in the
past three months were able to recall some type of slogan/message (30%). Two of
the most commonly recalled “slogans” were actually messages – “do not litter”
(mentioned by 5%) and “you will be fined” (mentioned by 4%). Actual slogans recalled
were Don’t Trash Arizona (4%) and “Keep Arizona Beautiful” (2%). There is no longer
any recall for “Arizona Clean and Beautiful”
Table 14: Main Slogan of Recalled Advertising
Among those who indicated they remember seeing ads
related to litter or littering in the past 3 months
2010
2009
2008
2006
Maricopa Maricopa Maricopa Maricopa
(n=183)
(n=170)
(n=186) (n=188)

Responses
Do not litter
You will be fined
Don’t Trash Arizona
Littering is unlawful
Keep our freeways clean
Go Green
Adopt a highway
Keep Arizona Beautiful
There was no slogan/ it
was a sign/ gave
information
$500 fine for throwing out
hamburger wrapper
Don’t be a litterbug
Litter hurts everyone
Litter costs everyone
Recycle, reduce, reuse
Don’t mess with Texas
Arizona Clean and
Beautiful
Give a hoot, don’t pollute
Other
Don’t know

5%
4
4
3
3
2
2
2
2

9%
6
2
4
1
2
2
1
1

12%
3
6
3
1
2
3

13%
6
5
3
1
1
3
2

2

1

-

-

1
1
1
-

3
1
1

2
1
3

2
3
1
2

-

-

-

1

2%
70

5%
65

6%
62

3%
70

Q24? What was the main slogan used in the ads?

M A G

L I T T E R

S U R V E Y

-

2 0 1 0

R I E S T E R

B.

3 3

Don’t Trash Arizona Awareness

As in 2009, more than half of Maricopa County residents (51%) recall the Don’t
Trash Arizona slogan. Although awareness is not as high as 2008 levels (56%), it
still remains significantly higher than the 43% reported in 2006. Overall awareness
of the slogan was highest among males (57% vs. 45% for females), residents under 55
(54% vs. 43% for 55+) and those who have seen advertising related to littering in the
past three months (61% vs. 45%). A slight decrease occurred among males
between the ages of 18 and 34 who were aware of the Don’t Trash Arizona slogan
(58%, down from 62%).

Total Awareness
Have Heard Slogan “Don’t Trash Arizona”
(Aided + Unaided)
2010

51%

2009

50%

2008

56%

2006

43%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

2010 Maricopa n=601; 2009 Maricopa n=637; 2008 Maricopa n=744; 2006 Maricopa n=748

M A G

L I T T E R

S U R V E Y

-

2 0 1 0

R I E S T E R

3 4

Residents who were familiar with the Don’t Trash Arizona slogan reported seeing
and/or hearing the slogan from a variety of sources – television (31%), radio
(21%), billboards (20%), and street/highway signs (16%).
Females were more likely to recall seeing the slogan on TV (38% vs. 25%). Younger
residents were more likely than those over age 55 to remember seeing the slogan on
billboards (23% vs. 10% for those 55+).
Table 15: Where Saw Don’t Trash Arizona Slogan
Total responses among those indicating they had heard the slogan
2010
2009
2008
Maricopa Maricopa Maricopa
(n=308)
(n=319)
(n=417)

Media

2006
Maricopa
(n=322)

Television
Radio
Billboards
Street/highway signs
Newspaper
Magazines
Internet

31%
21
20
16
4
2

34%
22
18
14
6
2
2

30%
21
24
16
6
2
-

26%
14
20
12
5
-

Other (1% or less of
consensus)
Don’t know

7%

5%

5%

6%

24

20

25

25

Q26: Where have you seen, heard or read the slogan “Don’t Trash Arizona?”

M A G

L I T T E R

S U R V E Y

-

2 0 1 0

R I E S T E R

3 5

Seven in ten residents were unable to name a sponsor for the Don’t Trash
Arizona slogan (69%). This year, slightly fewer correctly identified the Arizona
Department of Transportation (7% vs. 9%) and slightly more generically cited the “state”
or “local” government (17% vs. 14%). Residents between the ages of 35-54 were most
likely to mention ADOT (9%) as were those with some college or a college degree (9%
vs. 1%). Residents in the 35-54 age group were also most likely to mention the state
and local government as the sponsor (25%). Females were significantly more likely to
not be able to recall a source (76% vs. 63% for males) along with those over 55 (88%
vs. 62% for <55).

Table 16: Who Sponsors Don’t Trash Arizona Slogan
Among those indicating they had heard the slogan
2010
2009
2008
2006
Maricopa Maricopa Maricopa Maricopa
(n=308)
(n=319)
(n=417) (n=322)

Sponsor
State/local government
ADOT
Sanitation department/
department of waste
City of Phoenix

17%
7
3

14%
9%
-

17%
9%
-

14%
12%
-

2

-

-

-

Other (<1% consensus)
Don’t know

3
69%

6%
70%

6%
65%

5%
70%

Q27: Who sponsors the Don’t Trash Arizona advertisements?

M A G

L I T T E R

S U R V E Y

-

2 0 1 0

R I E S T E R

C.

3 6

Awareness of Litter Resources

Valley residents’ awareness remains essentially unchanged for both the Litter
Hotline (13%) and the “Don’t Trash Arizona Website” (14%). This year, however,
the significant increase in awareness of the Litter Hotline that occurred from 2008
to 2009 was sustained. Awareness of the hotline was highest among residents
earning < $50K (16%) and those who have seen litter advertising in the past three
months (24%). Among the target group of males, aged 18 to 34, awareness remains
steady from 2009 at 13%.
Fourteen-percent (14%) of residents had heard of the Don’t Trash Arizona
Website; this was up slightly from 2009 (12%). It is important to note that when
comparing current awareness to the benchmark wave, there has been a
significant increase (from 10% to 14%). Awareness of the Website is highest among
those aware of litter advertising (28%) and Non-Caucasians (20%). Awareness of the
Website among males between the ages of 18 and 34 is lower than the total (9% vs.
14%) and down 14 percentage points from 2009 awareness levels (23%).

Aided Awareness - Litter Resources
Hotline:1-877-3-Litter
13%

%2010
%

14%

2009
2008
2006

Don’tTrashArizona.com
%
2009

% 2008
2006

2

85%

1

9%

89%

2

9%

88%

3

84%

14%

2010

%

85%

2

12%

86%

2

12%

85%

3

10%

88%

2

0%

20%

40%
Yes

60%
No

80%

100%

Don't know

2010 Maricopa n=601; 2009 Maricopa n=637; 2008 Maricopa n=744; 2006 Maricopa n=748

M A G

L I T T E R

S U R V E Y

-

2 0 1 0

R I E S T E R

3 7

As in 2009, seven-percent (7%) of Valley residents aware of the Don’t Trash
Arizona Website reported that they have visited the site.

Don’t Trash Arizona Website Visitation
Have you ever visited the “Don’t Trash Arizona” web site?

Yes
7%
No
93%

Among those aware of web site: n=83

D.

Likelihood to Report Littering

When Valley residents were asked how likely they would be to report littering
behavior, if they saw someone littering, more than three-fifths (62%) of residents
indicated they would be at least “somewhat” likely to call (27% “very likely” and
35% “somewhat likely”). This continues the upward trend from 2009 when a significant
increase occurred among those indicating they would be at least “somewhat” likely to
report it. Female residents and those between the ages of 35 and 54 were most likely
to report they were “very likely” or “somewhat likely” to report a violation (67% and 69%,
respectively). Those who have seen litter advertising in the last three months were also
more likely to report a violation (69%).

M A G

L I T T E R

S U R V E Y

-

2 0 1 0

R I E S T E R

3 8

Likelihood to Report Littering
If you were to see someone litter, how likely
would you be to report this behavior to the Litter Hotline or the Web site
in the future?
Very likely
27%
Somewhat likely
35%
Don't know
2%

Not at all likely
14%
Not very likely
22%

2010 n=601

M A G

L I T T E R

S U R V E Y

-

2 0 1 0

R I E S T E R

3 9

Table 17: Likelihood to Report Littering
2010
Maricopa
(n=601)

2009
Maricopa
(n=637)

2008
Maricopa
(n=744)

2006*
Maricopa
(n=748)

NET likely
(Very + somewhat)

62%

60%

53%

62%

Very likely
Somewhat likely
Not very likely
Not at all likely
Don’t know

27%
35
22
14
2

23%
37
27
11
2

24%
29
26
16
5

27%
35
22
13
3

Likelihood

Q31: If you were to see someone litter, how likely are you to report this behavior to
the Litter Hotline or the Website in the future?
In 2006 and 2008, the question asked how likely they would be to report littering by
calling the litter hotline.
*Bold indicates significantly higher percentages at the 95% confidence level

M A G

L I T T E R

S U R V E Y

-

2 0 1 0

R I E S T E R

E.

4 0

Additional Litter Resources

The Internet remains the top resource for Valley residents who want more
information about litter or littering (mentioned by 49%). Approximately one in six
residents specifically mentioned the Don’t Trash Arizona Website as a resource to go to
if they wanted more information about littering (14%); this is significantly lower than the
35% mentioned in 2008. However, it is important to note that in 2009 the format of the
question from the interviewer perspective changed – a pre-coded list was provided
(specifically listing “Internet” and the Don’t Trash Arizona Website – whereas in previous
years no pre-coded categories were provided and in all likelihood the response
“Internet” was probed for the specific name of the Website visited.
Males between the ages of 18 to 34 indicated they would specifically go to
www.DontTrashArizona.com significantly more than the total (26% vs. 14%).
Residents under the age of 55 were more likely than older residents to go to the Internet
to find information about littering (56% vs. 33%).
One in five (19%) claim they do not know where they would go for additional information
on litter.
Table 18: Source for Litter/Littering Information
2010
Maricopa
(n=601)

Source
Internet
Don’t Trash AZ Website
Litter hotline
The “city”
Police/ highway patrol/DPS
ADOT/highway dept.
Phonebook/ yellow pages
The state/governor
Friend/ neighbor/ family member/ teacher
Waste Management/ garbage company
I wouldn’t need that information/ wouldn’t
contact anyone
City council/councilmen
Newspaper

49%
14
5
5
3
2
2
2
1
2
3

Other (<1% consensus)
Don’t know

2009
Maricopa
(n=637)

2008
Maricopa
(n=744)

2006
Maricopa
(n=748)

49%
18
5
5
3
2
2
2
2
1

26%
35
6
5
1
4
2
3
2
1

59%
4
5
4
2
4
3
1
2
3

-

2
-

3
-

1
1

3%
19

5%
16

7%
12

8%
13

Q32: If you wanted to find out more information about litter or littering, where would you
go or who would you contact to find that information? *all mentions less than 1%

M A G

L I T T E R

S U R V E Y

-

2 0 1 0

R I E S T E R

4 1

V.

PROFILES OF LITTERERS

Residents were segmented into three categories based on their reported littering
behavior. “Admitted Litterers” are defined as those who specifically mentioned items
that they recall littering (23% of the total population). “Accidental Litterers” are defined
as residents who indicated that they had never littered themselves, but reported being in
a vehicle when littering occurred (50% of the total population). “Non-Litterers” are
those who indicated they had never littered themselves and also indicated they had
never experienced other littering situations (27% of the total population).
This year, a significant drop has occurred among Maricopa County residents who
are categorized as “Admitted Litterers” (23%, down from 28% in 2009).

Littering Behavior
2010

50%

23%

2009

28%

2008

30%

2006

44%

28%

41%

29%

39%

27%

0%

27%

20%

40%

Admitted Litterer

34%

60%

Accidental Litterer

80%

100%

Non-litterer

More than half of the males aged 18 to 34 are admitted litters (51%); however, this
number has declined from 56% in 2006.
In addition, in 2010, Admitted Litterers were most likely to be:
ƒ
ƒ
ƒ

M A G

Younger residents (average age 38 yrs. old vs. 46 and 52 for the other two
groups).
Single residents (36% vs. 24% and 18% of the other two groups).
Students (9% vs. 3% and 1% of the other two groups)

L I T T E R

S U R V E Y

-

2 0 1 0

R I E S T E R

ƒ

4 2

Those that spoke mostly English but also some Spanish (14% vs. 6% and 8% of
the other two groups).

Unemployed residents fall into the Admitted and Accidental Litterer categories
significantly more than into the Non-Litterer group (16% and 14% vs. 7%).
Interestingly, significantly more residents who have been exposed to litter advertising in
the last 3 months classify themselves as Accidental Litterers (59% vs. 46%).
Tables 19a and 19b show the demographic characteristics of each of these groups.

M A G

L I T T E R

S U R V E Y

-

2 0 1 0

R I E S T E R

4 3

Table 19a: Demographic Comparison based on Littering Behavior
2010
2009
Admitted Accidental
NonAdmitted Accidental
NonLitterers
Litterers Litterers Litterers
Litterers Litterers
Characteristic (n=141)
(n=298)
(n=162) (n=180)
(n=280)
(n=177)
Gender
Male
Female
Age
18-24
25-34
35-44
45-54
55-65
66+
Average

57%
43
18%
31
21
19
8
3
37.7 yrs

Marital
Status
Married
Single
Widowed
Divorced
Separated
Don’t know
or Refused
Education
Less than
high
school
High school
graduate
Some
college
College
graduate
Graduate
degree

47%
53
8%
17
21
27
13
14
46.2 yrs

49%
51

52%
48

3%
13
18
18
18
30
52.4 yrs

22%
21
22
20
8
7
39.3 yrs

L I T T E R

S U R V E Y

8%
15
23
25
15
14
46.5 yrs

50%
50
1%
14
15
23
17
30
53.2 yrs

55%
36
4
4
1

59%
24
5
9
3

59%
18
12
6
5

58%
31
3
5
2
1

56%
29
6
6
3

66%
10
12
7
1
4

4%

6%

6%

5%

3%

5%

16

19

19

19

19

18

40

31

31

33

34

32

22

25

20

31

29

26

17

16

22

12

12

16

*Bold indicates significantly higher percentages at the 95% confidence level

M A G

50%
50

-

2 0 1 0

R I E S T E R

4 4

Table 19b: Demographic Comparison based on Littering Behavior

Characteristic

Admitted
Litterers
(n=141)

2010
Accidental
Litterers
(n=298)

NonLitterers
(n=162)

Admitted
Litterers
(n=180)

2009
Accidental
Litterers
(n=280)

NonLitterers
(n=177)

71%
19
5
2
2
1

72%
13
6
1
2
2
4

71%
13
4
1
3
4
4

70%
18
3
2
6
1

75%
11
1
2
2
3
6

77%
11
2
3
3
4

Ethnicity
White
Hispanic
African-American
Asian
Native American
Other
Refused
Household Income
<$10,000
$10-$20,000
$20-$30,000
$30-$40,000
$40-$50,000
$50-$60,000
$60-$75,000
$75-$100,000
$100,000+
Refused**

12%
3
10
6
4
5
8
11
25
16

6%
9
7
8
5
7
6
14
16
22

5%
8
7
9
6
5
3
12
14
31

7%
6
5
9
9
6
8
12
23
14

7%
7
6
5
8
6
8
14
18
22

7%
6
8
6
5
6
8
8
22
25

Employment
Full-time
Part-time
Retired
Homemaker
Student
Unemployed

56%
6
6
6
9
16

46%
8
19
7
3
14

45%
6
32
6
1
7

52%
15
8
9
6
9

53%
8
20
6
2
10

44%
6
35
6
1
6

68%
2
1

72%
3
3

75%
4
1

69%
3
3

74%
5
2

80%
3
2

4

3

4

7

3

3

14

6

8

9

8

5

9
2

11
2

6
2

9
-

7
1

6
1

Household
Language*
English only
Spanish only
Mostly Spanish +
some English
Equally in Spanish
and English
Mostly English +
some Spanish
English + Other
Refused

*Question worded differently in 2009
** 2010 Income Mean: Admitted Litterers, $69K, Accidental Litterers, $63K,
Non Litterers, $61K
Bold indicates significantly higher percentages at the 95% confidence level

M A G

L I T T E R

S U R V E Y

-

2 0 1 0

R I E S T E R

APPENDIX A

QUESTIONNAIRE

M A G

L I T T E R

S U R V E Y

-

2 0 1 0

R I E S T E R

I

Benchmark Study
Client:
Subject:
Date:
Version:

Maricopa Association of Governments
Telephone Survey
June 2010
FINAL

Introduction
Hello, my name is ______________, and I am calling from WestGroup Research an
independent research company. We are conducting a brief survey on the topic of litter and
would appreciate your input. All information given will remain confidential. No sales calls will
result from this interview.
1. First, are you or is any member of your family currently employed in any of the
following…? READ LIST; IF YES TO ANY: THANK AND TERMINATE
a.
b.
c.
d.
e.

Advertising or marketing research
Arizona Department of Transportation
Maricopa Association of Governments
A professional waste collection or recycling company
The waste management industry

2. Please tell me which of the following age categories includes your age? Please stop
me when I read the correct category. READ LIST; ALLOW ONLY ONE RESPONSE
a.
b.
c.
d.
e.
f.
g.
h.

Under 18
18 to 24
25 to 34
35 to 44
45 to 54
55 to 65
66 or older
Refused (DO NOT READ)

3. If “Under 18” or “Refused,” continue with: May I please speak to someone in the
household who is between the ages of 18 and 65?
4. Do you live in Arizona…? READ LIST; ALLOW ONLY ONE RESPONSE
a.
b.
c.
d.

Full time, 12 months a year CONTINUE WITH Q6
Part time or seasonally, less than 12 months a year - ASK Q5
Do not live in Arizona (DO NOT READ) - ASK Q5
Refused (DO NOT READ) THANK AND TERMINATE

5. IF b or c in Q4: May I please speak to someone in the household who lives in Arizona
full-time, 12 months a year?

M A G

L I T T E R

S U R V E Y

–

2 0 0 9

R I E S T E R

I I

6. RECORD GENDER (DO NOT ASK; RECORD BY OBSERVATION
a. Male
b. Female
7. For classification purposes, may I have the Zip Code in which you live?
_________________
8. Which of the following best describes the type of vehicle you drive or ride in…?
a.
b.
c.
d.
e.
f.
g.
h.
i.

Sedan
Pick-up truck
Sports utility vehicle
Coupe
Van / Minivan
Motorcycle
Other ____________
Don’t drive
Don’t know / Refused (DO NOT READ)

Litter Awareness
Today, I would like to talk to you specifically about the topic of litter. When answering the
following questions, please be open and accurate about your opinions and actions. We are
trying to understand what people really think about litter. All of your responses will remain
confidential.
9. In your opinion, how big of a problem is litter along freeways in Maricopa County?
Would you say it is a….
a.
b.
c.
d.
e.

Big problem
Moderate problem
Small problem
Not a problem at all
Don’t know / Refused (DO NOT READ)

10. Do you smoke?
a. yes
b. No
c. Don’t know / Refused

M A G

L I T T E R

S U R V E Y

–

2 0 0 9

R I E S T E R

I I I

11. IF YES in Q10: When you are in a vehicle, do you USUALLY dispose of cigarette
butts…? READ LIST – ONE RESPONSE ONLY
a.
b.
c.
d.
e.
f.

By using an ashtray inside the vehicle
By using something else you have inside the vehicle
By throwing it out the window
Or does it vary
DO NOT READ: Other means of disposal ____________
Don’t know / Refused (DO NOT READ

12. I am going to read you a few statements pertaining to your litter awareness. For each
of the following statements, please respond by telling me if this is something you
“Have experienced within the past 3 months,” Have experienced over 3 months ago,”
or “Have never experienced.”
a. You noticed that some trash fell out of a pick-up or other vehicle you were driving
or riding in.
b. Someone in a vehicle you were in threw out trash in an area that already had lots
of litter
c. Someone in a vehicle you were in threw out a can, bottle, or other litter out onto
the side of the road.
d. You had problems with a vehicle and left debris like a tire, part of a tire, or other
stuff on the roadside
e. Rather than keep a beverage container in the car, you, or someone in a vehicle
you were in, threw out a can or bottle.
f. You threw out a small item from your vehicle, like a candy wrapper, scrap paper
or something like that.
g. You or someone you were with got a ticket or warning for littering.
h. Rather than keep a cigarette butt in the car, you or someone in the vehicle you
were in threw the cigarette butt out the window.
Littering Behavior
13. Can you think of items that you yourself might have discarded as litter (by litter we
mean items that you did not put in a trash receptacle) in the past year? MULTIPLE
RESPONSES ALLOW UP TO THREE. DO NOT READ LIST.
a.
b.
c.
d.
e.
f.
g.
h.
i.
j.
k.
l.

M A G

L I T T E R

Beer cans and beer bottles
Soda cans and soda bottles
Water cans and water bottles
Small pieces of paper (receipts, lottery tickets, gum wrappers)
Plastic bags / other plastic
Cigarette butts
Construction debris
Fast food wrappers
Other food wrappers (chip bags/candy)
Cardboard
Food / organic material, raw food
Litter that falls out of pickup trucks accidentally

S U R V E Y

–

2 0 0 9

R I E S T E R

I V

m. Other _________________
n. Have not littered in past year – SKIP TO: Q16
o. Don’t know
14. To the best of your knowledge, what were the general circumstances in terms of where
and what you were doing when you discarded litter? PROBE: Any other
circumstances? DO NOT READ. MULTIPLE RESPONSES ALLOWED UP TO
THREE.
a.
b.
c.
d.
e.
f.
g.
h.

Driving / riding in / traveling in vehicle
Walking outside
Opened door and it flew out / flew out of window / flew out of cab
No trash can around (not while in car)
Flew out of truck bed
Partying / drinking
Other __________________
Don’t know/Can’t remember / don’t recall

15. Why do you litter WHEN DRIVING? (Do not read list, mark all that apply)
a. I’m lazy
b. It’s easy
c. No trash receptacles are convenient
d. Cigarettes stink up car, easier to throw out window
e. Only litter food scraps – they are biodegradable
f. Someone else can pick it up
g. I don’t care
h. Gives someone else something to do
i. I won’t get into trouble for littering so I do it
j. I litter only in areas where there already is a lot of litter, so it does not matter
k. I don’t consider throwing out gum, small wrappers, cig butts litter
l. It was an accident/unintentional
m. I only litter when I’m alone
n. I don’t litter when driving

16. TRUCK DRIVERS ONLY: What types of items do you ever put into your truck bed that
you consider to be litter or trash? PROBE: What else? MULTIPLE RESPONSES
ALLOW UP TO THREE. DO NOT READ LIST.
a. Beer cans and beer bottles
b. Soda cans and soda bottles
c. Water cans and water bottles
d. Small pieces of paper (receipts, lottery tickets, gum wrappers)
e. Plastic bags / other plastic
f. Cigarette butts
g. Construction debris
h. Fast food wrappers
i. Other food wrappers (chip bags/candy)
j. Cardboard
k. Food / organic material, raw food

M A G

L I T T E R

S U R V E Y

–

2 0 0 9

R I E S T E R

V

l. Litter that falls out of pickup trucks accidentally
m. Other _________________
n. Don’t know
17. TRUCK DRIVERS ONLY: When putting items into the bed of your truck, how often, on
average, do you secure your load (either with ties, bungees, a tarp, etc)?
a. Always
b. Most of the time
c. Only sometimes
d. Rarely
e. Never
f. If rarely or never – WHY NOT? ______________

ASK ALL:
18. How often do you drive or ride in a vehicle that transports items that are not carried
within the vehicle or trunk, such as hauling items in an open-air trailer or strapped to a
luggage rack or trunk?
a. Daily
b. At least once a week
c. 1-2 times a Month
d. A few times a year
e. Never
SKIP TO Q20
19. (If selected a, b, c, d on question 18) On average, how often do you secure the load
that you are hauling (either with ties, bungees, a tarp, etc)?
a. Always
b. Most of the time
c. Only sometimes
d. Rarely
e. Never
f. If rarely or never – WHY NOT?______________
20. Do you have a litterbag or trashcan in your vehicle?
a. Yes
b. No
c. Don’t know / Refused
21. IF NO IN Q20: Would you consider keeping a litter bag or trash can in your vehicle?
a. Yes
b. No
c. Don’t know / Refused

Litter Campaign Awareness

M A G

L I T T E R

S U R V E Y

–

2 0 0 9

R I E S T E R

V I

22. In the past three months, have you seen, heard or read any advertisements related to
litter or littering?
a. Yes
b. No
c. Don’t know / Refused
23. IF YES in Q22: What specifically do you remember about the ads related to litter or
littering? PROBE THOROUGHLY AND RECORD VERBATIM
24. IF YES IN Q22: What was the main slogan used in the ads? DO NOT READ LIST.
MULTIPLE RESPONSES ALLOWED.
a.
b.
c.
d.
e.

Don’t Trash Arizona
Keep Arizona Beautiful
Arizona Clean and Beautiful
Other _________________
Don’t know / Refused

25. IF NOT MENTIONED IN Q24 “a””: Have you seen or heard the slogan, “Don’t Trash
Arizona?”
a. Yes
b. No
c. Don’t know / Refused
26. IF mentioned in Q24a or YES IN Q25: Where have you seen, heard or read the
slogan, “Don’t Trash Arizona?” PROBE: Where else? DO NOT READ LIST.
MULTIPLE RESPONSES ALLOWED.
a.
b.
c.
d.
e.
f.
g.
h.
i.
j.
k.

Television
Radio
Billboards
Street or highway signs
Newspaper
Bus signs
Trash cans
Litter bags
Online
Other _________________
Don’t know / Refused

27. IF mentioned in Q24a or YES IN Q25: Who sponsors the Don’t Trash Arizona
advertisements? DO NOT READ LIST. ONE RESPONSE ONLY.
a.
b.
c.
d.

M A G

L I T T E R

State / Local Government
Arizona Department of Transportation
Maricopa Association of Governments (MAG)
Other __________________

S U R V E Y

–

2 0 0 9

R I E S T E R

V I I

e. Don’t know / Refused
28. Have you heard about the Litter Hotline, 1-877-3-Litter, where you can report someone
who litters?
a. Yes
b. No
c. Don’t know / Refused
29. Have you heard of www.donttrasharizona.com?
a. Yes
b. No
c. Not sure/DK
30. If YES IN Q29 “a”: Have you ever visited the “Don’t Trash Arizona Website?
a. Yes
b. No
c. Don’t know
31. If you were to see someone litter, how likely would you be to report this behavior to the
Litter Hotline or the Website in the future?
a.
b.
c.
d.
e.

Very likely
Somewhat likely
Not very likely
Not at all likely
Don’t know / Refused (DO NOT READ)

32. If you wanted to find out more information about litter or littering, where would you go
or who would you contact to find that information? DO NOT READ LIST, SELECT ALL
THAT APPLY.
a. Don’t Trash AZ website
b. Internet
c. Litter hotline
d. The “city”
e. I wouldn’t need that information/ wouldn’t contact anyone
f. ADOT/highway dept.
g. Police/ highway patrol/DPS
h. Phonebook/ yellow pages
i. The state/governor
j. Waste Management/ garbage company
k. Friend/ neighbor/ family member/ teacher

Demographics

M A G

L I T T E R

S U R V E Y

–

2 0 0 9

R I E S T E R

V I I I

Now I have a few final questions that are for classification purposes only.
D1. What is your present marital status? (ASK AS OPEN END; ACCEPT ONE MENTION)
a. Single
b. Married
c. Divorced
d. Separated
e. Widowed
f. Don't know
g. Refused/NA
D2. What was the last year of education you have completed?
a. Grammar school (8 years or less)
b. Some high school (9-11 years)
c. Graduated high school (12 years)
d. Some post-high school training/some college
e. Graduated from four-year college (B.A./B.S.)
f. Graduate Degree
g. Don’t Know
h. Refused
D3. Are you employed full-time, employed part-time, retired, a housewife, a student or
unemployed?
a. Full-time
b. Part-time
c. Retired
d. Housewife
e. Student
f. Unemployed
g. Refused/NA
D4. Which of the following best classifies your profession?
a. White collar/management
b. Blue collar
c. Trade profession
d. Professional (medical/legal)
e. Educational
f. Clerical/administrative
g. Homemaker
h. Self-employed
i.
Retired
j.
Student
k. Unemployed
l.
Other (SPECIFY) ___________________
m. Don’t know
n. Refused

M A G

L I T T E R

S U R V E Y

–

2 0 0 9

R I E S T E R

I X

D5. How would you describe your ethnic heritage? Would you say you are... (READ CODES 15; ACCEPT ONE MENTION)
a. White
b. African-American
c. Hispanic
d. Asian, or
e. Something Else [SPECIFY]: __________
f. Refused

D6. Thinking about your personal language use including in home and away from home, would
you say you speak…? READ LIST; ALLOW ONLY ONE RESPONSE)
a. English Only
b. Only Spanish
c. Mostly Spanish, but also some English
d. Equally in Spanish and English
e. Mostly English, but also some Spanish
f. Don’t know/refused
D7. Was your annual household income before taxes last year:
a. Less than $10,000
b. $10,000 to less than $20,000
c. $20,000 to less than $30,000
d. $30,000 to less than $40,000
e. $40,000 to less than $50,000
f. $50,000 to less than $60,000
g. $60,000 to less than $75,000
h. $75,000 to less than $100,000
i. More than $100,000
j. No answer
Thank you very much – those are all my questions.

M A G

L I T T E R

S U R V E Y

–

2 0 0 9