LITTER EVALUATION SURVEY August 2011 Prepared by: R I E S T E R TABLE OF CONTENTS Section: Page #: Executive Summary…………………………………………………………………….. 1 Key Findings and Recommendations……………………………………………. 6 I. A. B. Introduction…………………………………………………………………… Background and Methodology………………………………………………….. Demographics……………………………………………………………………. 8 8 9 II. Driver Characteristics…………………………………………………….. A. B. C. D. Driving Habits…………………………………………………………………….. Litterbag Use……………………………………………………………………... Smokers…………………………………………………………………………… Truck Drivers……………………………………………………………………… 12 12 13 14 15 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………………………… IV. 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……………………………………………………….. 28 28 32 35 38 41 V. Profiles of Litterers………………………………………………………… 42 20 20 21 23 25 26 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 1 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. According to the Transportation Research Board, 55 percent of littering is deliberate, while 45 percent occurs “accidentally” when items blow or fall off vehicles. Littering most often takes place when drivers are alone, and many reported that they did not consider small items like cigarettes and candy wrappers to be 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 (with a secondary target of males 25-35); 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” in terms of 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. Three subsequent follow-up studies were conducted; however, these studies focused on Maricopa County residents. To accurately compare the data from the 2006 and 2008 surveys to the 2009, 2010 and 2011 1 R I E S T E R 2 data, the 2006 and 2008 data shown in this report include only responses from Maricopa County residents. The 2011 survey is the focus of this report. Evaluative Survey RIESTER, on behalf of the Maricopa Association of Governments (MAG), commissioned WestGroup Research of Phoenix to conduct a telephone study with residents aged 18 and older living in Maricopa County. The purpose of the study was to evaluate overall awareness of and attitudes toward litter issues, explore littering behavior, and compare responses to the benchmark and subsequent studies, which were conducted in December 2006, July/August 2008, August 2009, August 2010, and August 2011. Results for the 2011 Litter Evaluation Survey are based on 602 fifteen-minute telephone interviews with Maricopa County residents. The margin of error for the survey is approximately +4.1% at a 95% confidence level. One change this year included the use of a cell phone database in addition to “land line” telephone calls, due to the number of younger respondents with cell-phone-only telephone access. Below are some of the key findings of the survey. Driver Characteristics M A G  This year, Maricopa County residents were less likely to report having a litterbag or trash receptacle in their vehicle (65%, down from 69% in 2010).  Of those residents who did not have a litterbag or trash receptacle in their car, two in three (67%) indicated they would consider keeping one in their vehicle in the future, which represents a slight increase from 2010 (64%).  Similar to previous years, a little more than one in six Valley residents indicated they were smokers (17%). Less than half of smokers reported that they use an ashtray in their vehicle (43%), representing a decrease from smokers who indicated using ash trays in 2010 (53%). Only 2% of respondents indicated they do not smoke in the car at all, also representing a decrease from 2010 (7%).  One in eight Maricopa County residents indicated they drive a pickup truck (13%, down slightly from 16% in 2010). Truck drivers reported that soda cans/bottles, lawn debris, plastic bags, and water bottles were the most common types of litter that would be found in the back of their truck beds (mentioned by 17%, 14%, 8% and 7%, respectively). Small pieces of paper and construction debris were mentioned by 4% of truck drivers. More than two in five (44%) truck drivers indicated they do not believe they put any type of litter in their truck bed, representing a slight decrease from 2010 (48%). L I T T E R S U R V E Y - 2 0 1 1 R I E S T E R 3  This year, fewer truck drivers indicated that on average they “always” secure items in the back of their pickup truck (54%, down from 64% in 2010) while more truck drivers reported that they secure their load “most of the time” (19%, up from 17%) and sometimes (12%, up from 7%).  Approximately three in ten (27%) Maricopa County residents reported driving in a vehicle that hauls items in an open air trailer or strapped to a luggage rack a few times a year, and 6% stated that they do so one to two times a month or more. More than six in ten residents (64%) reported never driving a vehicle that hauls items in an open air trailer or strapped to a luggage rack in the past year (down from 67% in 2010).  More than four-fifths (84%) 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, representing an increase from 2010 (77%). Litter Awareness and Behavior M A G  The percentage of residents who rated the magnitude of the litter problem along Maricopa County freeways as a “big” or “moderate” problem decreased slightly from 2010 (65% vs. 67%).  Fewer Valley residents insisted that they had not littered at all in the past year than in 2010 (70%, down from 74%).  The percentage of the target audience, males aged 18 to 34, who indicated they “had not littered in the past year” dropped eleven percentage points from 2010 (40% vs. 51%).  Females were more likely to claim they had not littered in the past year (76% vs. 64% for males). Residents aged 55+ were also significantly more likely to claim they had not littered in the past year than residents aged 18 to 34 and aged 35 to 54 (85% vs. 52% and 72%, respectively).  Among those who indicated they had littered in the past year, food or organic material was the most common type of litter (mentioned by 41%), consistent with past years.  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 (47%).  Similar to previous years, residents reported that the most common littering situation they have experienced is “trash falling out of the vehicle” (24% within the past 3 months). L I T T E R S U R V E Y - 2 0 1 1 R I E S T E R 4 Campaign Awareness M A G  Three in ten residents (32%) indicated they had seen advertisements related to litter or littering in the past three months, representing a slight increase from 2010 (30%). Ad awareness is significantly higher for the target audience, males aged 18 to 34, than the total (48% vs. 32%).  When those aware of litter-related advertising were asked what they specifically remembered about the ads, the most recalled information surrounded the message, “Don’t litter” or “Keep Arizona clean,” and the percentage of recall for these messages was slightly lower than in 2010 (18%, down from 21%).  Approximately two in five residents (44%) who remembered seeing litter-related advertising in the past three months were able to recall some type of slogan, representing a significant increase from 2010 (30%). Two of the most commonly recalled “slogans” were actually messages. For example, “do not litter” was mentioned by 22% of the residents, a significant increase from 5% in 2010. Likewise, the number of residents who said “don’t know” dropped significantly from 2010 (56% vs.70%).  As in the past three years, more than half of Maricopa County residents (52%) recalled the Don’t Trash Arizona slogan. Although awareness was not as high as 2008 levels (56%), it still remains significantly higher than the 43% reported in 2006. Males aged 18 to 34 were more likely to recognize the slogan than the total sample (63% vs. 52%).  Overall awareness of the slogan was highest among males (61% vs. 43% for females), and residents making less than $100,000 per year in income (58% for those making less than $100,000 vs. 42% for those earning more than $100,000).  Residents who were familiar with the Don’t Trash Arizona slogan reported seeing and/or hearing the slogan from a variety of sources, the most common of which were television (36%), radio (24%), billboards (21%), and street/highway signs (19%). Less than 1% indicated seeing the slogan online.  Valley residents’ awareness decreased slightly for both the Litter Hotline (12% from 13% in 2010) and the Don’t Trash Arizona website (11% from 14% in 2010).  Six percent (6%) of Valley residents aware of the Don’t Trash Arizona website reported that they have actually visited the site, which is consistent with 2010 (7%). L I T T E R S U R V E Y - 2 0 1 1 R I E S T E R M A G 5  When Valley residents were asked how likely they would be to report littering behavior if they saw someone littering, more than three-fifths (61%) of residents indicated they would be at least “somewhat” likely to report littering (28% “very likely” and 33% “somewhat likely”). This is consistent with data from 2010 (62%).  The Internet remains the top resource for Valley residents who want more information about litter or littering (mentioned by 46%), only a slight decrease from 2010 (49%).  Approximately one in five (18%) residents specifically mentioned the Don’t Trash Arizona Website as a resource to go to if they wanted more information about littering, which is a slight increase from 2010 (14%).  Facebook is the most commonly used application used to communicate or stay in touch with others (32%), followed by the utilization of search engines such as Google/Yahoo. E-mails from desktops and from cellphones are also popular methods (20% and 17% respectively). L I T T E R S U R V E Y - 2 0 1 1 R I E S T E R 6 KEY FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS While much of the data is consistent between the 2011 and 2010 surveys, there are several key differences worth noting as MAG moves forward in its efforts to make a more meaningful impact among Maricopa County residents who are inclined to litter. Similar to 2010, this survey confirms that the target audience of males aged 18 to 34 continues to be among the most common litter offenders (only 40% of these residents indicated they did not litter last year, vs. 70% for the overall sample). This is an unfortunate decrease for this age group from 2010, when this age group reported 51% had not littered that year. The percentage of Maricopa County residents classified as “Admitted Litterers” rose to 26%, reversing some of the positive momentum from previous years (notably, between 2008 and 2010, the number of Admitted Litterers consistently decreased). Interestingly, there were a few significant differences this year regarding residents’ personal experiences with littering. For example, the percentage of residents who littered due to vehicle problems (e.g., leaving a tire behind, etc.) decreased significantly this year to 6% (vs. 13% in 2010). Also, the number of residents who experienced throwing a cigarette butt out the window decreased to just 1% (vs. 8% in 2010). The biggest (and most significant) increase in littering behavior happened when asked about whether they had experienced throwing a beverage container out of a vehicle’s window. Approximately one in six (14%) residents claimed to have experienced this in the past year, which is a significant increase from 2% in 2010. Six percent (6%) of residents indicated they had thrown out trash in “an area with no litter” in the past three months. This question was added as part of the 2011 survey and the responses were somewhat consistent with results for those who had thrown out trash in “an area with litter” (7%). Generally, advertisement awareness stayed consistent compared to 2010. More than three in ten (32%) residents indicated they had seen advertising related to litter in the past three months (vs. 30% for 2010). Encouragingly, this was even higher among the target group (48%) of younger males. Recognition of the slogan Don’t Trash Arizona maintained at 52% (vs. 51% in 2010), but is still higher than the benchmark data from 2006 (43%). Encouragingly, awareness of the slogan was significantly higher among the target audience of males, aged 18 to 34, than the overall sample with 63% stating awareness. Overall awareness of the Litter Hotline and the Don’t Trash Arizona website decreased only slightly from 2010 (12% from 13% for the hotline, and 11% from 14% for the website). M A G L I T T E R S U R V E Y - 2 0 1 1 R I E S T E R 7 While high recall of key messages, such as “don’t litter,” or the message“you will get fined,” appears to confirm that the current advertising messages are reaching the target audience, it seems that there has been little improvement over last year based on the audience’s proclaimed littering behaviors. This is despite the target audience experiencing more tickets and warnings for littering in the past three months (23% vs. 8% for the total sample). The Internet in general remains the most preferred method of finding information about littering (46% of the sample would use the Internet), and the second most mentioned method of finding litter information was visiting the Don’t Trash Arizona website specifically (18% reported that they would go online for information). This year, data also were analyzed for residents’ preferred method of communicating with one another. The most mentioned method was Facebook (32% overall, 47% among those aged 18 to 34). Given this, and that younger age groups are more likely to utilize the Internet in general, as well as that younger age groups are more likely to litter, it makes sense that online efforts could be instrumental in reaching these residents. M A G L I T T E R S U R V E Y - 2 0 1 1 R I E S T E R 8 I. INTRODUCTION A. Background and Methodology RIESTER, on behalf of the Maricopa Association of Governments (MAG), commissioned WestGroup Research of Phoenix to conduct a telephone study with residents aged 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 and subsequent studies, which were conducted in December 2006, July/August 2008, August 2009, August 2010, and August 2011. For data comparison purposes, it is important to note that the first two studies were conducted with Arizona residents. To accurately compare the data from these surveys to the 2009, 2010 and 2011 data, the 2006 and 2008 data shown in this report include only responses from Maricopa County residents. For all previous waves, interviewing was conducted using a Random Digit Dial (RDD) database comprised of “land line” phone numbers from targeted zip codes. This year, however, since cell phones have become more common among younger respondents, interviewing was conducted using both a Random Digit Dial (RDD) database comprising “land line” phone numbers from targeted zip codes, as well as a cell phone database. The database was supplemented with a cell phone sample to reach, and fulfill the quota, for respondents aged 18 to 35. To ensure an accurate representation of Maricopa County residents, both age and gender quotas were established. Age Quota 18 to 34 years old 35 to 54 years old 55+ years old 28% 43% 29% Male Female 50% 50% Results are based on 602 fifteen-minute telephone interviews conducted with 301 male and 301 female residents. The margin of error for the survey is approximately +4.1% at a 95% confidence level. M A G L I T T E R S U R V E Y - 2 0 1 1 R I E S T E R B. 9 Demographics Per established quotas, 50% of Maricopa County residents interviewed were males and 50% were females. The average age of the residents was 43.8 years old (a decrease from 45.9 years in 2010) and 52% were married. The majority had at least some college experience (74%), and more than half were employed either full or part-time (55%). Approximately one in eight (12%) was unemployed. One-fourth (26%) report a household income of more than $75,000 per year. Approximately three in four residents were Caucasian (72%), and 72% reported that “only English” is spoken in their home. One in six Maricopa County residents interviewed (17%) reported that at least some Spanish was spoken in their home, which represents a slight increase from 2010 (14%). The mean income was the lowest it has been in five years ($58,838 vs. $63,447 for 2010, $66,530 for 2009, $66,420 for 2008, and $66,620 for 2006). This may be attributable to both the stagnant economy as well as the decrease in the mean age of respondents due to utilizing a cell phone sample to target those aged 18 to 34, a group that generally earns less. Additional detail on the demographic profile of the respondents is provided in Tables 1a and 1b. M A G L I T T E R S U R V E Y - 2 0 1 1 R I E S T E R 1 0 Table 1a: Respondent Demographics 2011 2010 2009 2008 Maricopa Maricopa Maricopa Maricopa (n=602) (n=601) (n=637) (n=744) Characteristic % 50 50 % 50 50 % 50% 50 % 50 50 % 28 43 29 43.8 yrs % 28 43 29 45.9 yrs % 36 43 31 46.3 yrs % 26 45 28 46.1 yrs % 32 40 28 44.3 yrs Marital Status Married Single Widowed Divorced Separated Refused % 53 30 6 7 1 3 % 58 25 7 7 -3 % 59 25 7 6 1 2 % 56 27 7 8 --- % 61 26 6 5 1 2 Education Less than high school High school graduate Some college College graduate Graduate degree % 6 % 5 % 4 % 8 % 17 18 19 19 16 35 24 15 33 23 18 33 29 13 31 24 17 35 27 13 % 72 12 4 1 3 8 % 71 14 5 2 1 7 % 76 13 2 1 2 6 % 72 15 4 2 2 5 % 79 9 3 -2 4 Male Female Age** 18 to 34 35 to 54 55+ Average Ethnicity White Hispanic African American Native American Asian Other/Refused *Bold indicates significantly different percentages than 2010 at the 95% confidence level **Age categories condensed in 2011. M A G 2006 Maricopa (n=748) L I T T E R S U R V E Y - 2 0 1 1 % 50 50 7 R I E S T E R 1 1 Table 1b: Respondent Demographics Characteristic 2011 2010 2009 2008 2006 Maricopa Maricopa Maricopa Maricopa Maricopa (n=602) (n=601) (n=637) (n=744) (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 % 10 7 8 8 6 7 9 10 16 20 $58,838 % 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 % 45 10 12 22 4 4 % 48 7 13 19 6 4 % 50 9 8 21 7 3 % 55 8 7 20 6 3 % 51 10 4 21 8 4 Profession White collar/mgmt Other professional Blue collar Education Trade Self-employed Clerical/admin % 23 16 15 8 10 6 9 % 23 23 14 12 10 5 6 % 32 20 15 7 6 8 8 % 24 22 14 8 6 12 10 % 16 10 9 6 7 5 5 Language spoken at home English only Spanish only Mostly Spanish but some English Equally in both languages Mostly English but some Spanish English and other language Refused % 72 1 1 % 72 3 2 % 74 4 2 % 81 1 ** % 85 1 ** 4 11 4 6 4 8 11 ** 8 ** 8 9 7 3 4 3 2 1 - 2 *Bold indicates significantly different percentages than 2010 data at the 95% confidence level. M A G L I T T E R S U R V E Y - 2 0 1 1 R I E S T E R 1 2 II. DRIVER CHARACTERISTICS A. Driving Habits In 2011, slightly more than one third of Maricopa County residents (36%) reported driving or riding in a 4-door sedan. This is a slight decrease from 2010 (42%) and approaches the levels measured in 2006 (38%), however, this decrease may be attributed to the change in the question from a read-list question to an open-response question. As in the past, sports utility vehicles (SUV) and pickup trucks were the next most frequently mentioned vehicles driven by residents (18% and 13%). As expected, more males than females indicated that they drive pickup trucks (19% vs. 7%). Table 3: Type of Vehicle 2011 2010 Maricopa Maricopa (n=602) (n=601) Items Sedan (4-door) Sports utility Pickup truck Car (unspecified) Van/mini-van Coupe (2-door) Motorcycle Other Don’t drive Don’t know/ refused 36% 18 13 10 7 4 1 2 7 2 42% 19 16 -7 7 1 1 6 1 2009 Maricopa (n=637) 2008 Maricopa (n=744) 2006 Maricopa (n=748) 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 Q7: What type of vehicle do you most often drive or ride in? *Bold indicates significantly different percentages than 2010 data at the 95% confidence level. Note: Question wording modified in 2011to an open-ended question instead of a list that was read to residents. M A G L I T T E R S U R V E Y - 2 0 1 1 R I E S T E R B. 1 3 Litterbag Use This year, Maricopa County residents were less likely to report having a litterbag or trash receptacle in their vehicle (65%, down from 69% in 2010). Those most likely to report having a litterbag were females (69% vs. 60% for males) and residents over the age of 55 (76% vs. 62% for those aged 35 to 54 and 55% for those aged 18 to 34). Almost two thirds of the residents (67%) 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, which represents a slight increase from 2010 (64%). Residents aged 18 to 34 who do not currently have a litterbag were more likely than older residents to indicate willingness to keep a litterbag in their vehicle in the future (76% vs. 66% for those aged 35 to 54 and 52% for those aged 55+). Litterbag or Trashcan Use in Vehicle Have bag/can in vehicle 56% 57% 65% 69% 66% If no, would consider using in future? Yes 50% 53% 31% 33% 36% No 67% 64% 60% 2011 2010 2009 2008 2006 45% 43% 2% 3% 4% 5% 4% Maybe 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 2011 Maricopa n=602; 2010 Maricopa n=601; 2009 Maricopa n=637;008 2 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 1 R I E S T E R C. 1 4 Smokers Similar to previous years, a little more than one in six Valley residents indicated they were smokers (17%). Residents with household incomes of less than $50,000 were more likely than those with incomes over $50,000 to admit they were smokers (26% vs. 10% for those earning between $50,000-$100,000 and 10% for those earning more than $100,000). Residents without a college degree were also significantly more likely to smoke than residents with a college degree (24% for some high school or less and 23% for some college vs. 8% for college graduates). Males aged 18 to 34 were more likely to smoke than the total sample (28% vs. 17%). Less than half of smokers reported that they use an ashtray in their vehicle (43%), representing a decrease from those who indicated using ash trays in 2010 (53%). Only 2% of smokers indicated they do not smoke in the car at all, representing a decrease from 2010 (7%). Smokers aged 18 to 34 were more likely than older smokers to throw cigarette butts out the car window (28% vs. 4% for smokers aged 35 to 54 and 5% for smokers aged 55+). Table 4: Smoking Habits and Disposing of Cigarette Butts Among those indicating they smoke 2011 2010 Maricopa Maricopa (n=101) (n=105) Response Smoker Ashtray in vehicle Throwing out window Something else in vehicle It varies Don’t smoke in the car Other (<1% consensus) Don’t know/refused 2009 Maricopa (n=97) 2008 2006 Maricopa Maricopa (n=109) (n=121) 17% 18% 15% 15% 16% (n=101) 43% 13 (n=105) 53% 5 (n=97) 49% 7 (n=109) 55% 6 (n=121) 46% 5 10 13 19 11 13 7 2 9 7 9 13 6 12 12 16 -- 1 -- 2 2 25 12 3 8 5 Q10: When you are in a vehicle, do you USUALLY dispose of cigarette butts…? *Bold indicates significantly different percentages than 2010 data at the 95% confidence level. M A G L I T T E R S U R V E Y - 2 0 1 1 R I E S T E R D. 1 5 Truck Drivers One in eight Maricopa County residents indicated they drive a pickup truck (13%, down slightly from 16% in 2010). Pickup truck drivers were more likely to be male (19% vs. 7% female), most likely to be white (20% vs. 12% other ethnicities) and were also more likely to have attended at least some college or have graduated from college (17% and 23% vs. 8% high school or less). Furthermore, truck drivers are more likely to earn more than $50,000 per year (21% for those earning between $50,000 and $100,000 and 32% for those earning more than $100,000 vs. 10% for those earning less than $50,000). Table 5: Pickup Truck Drivers Response Drive pickup truck 2011 Maricopa (n=602) 2010 Maricopa (n=601) 2009 Maricopa (n=637) 2008 Maricopa (n=744) 2006 Maricopa (n=748) 13% 16% 16% 15% 15% Q7: Drive a pickup truck. Pickup truck drivers reported that soda cans/bottles, lawn debris, plastic bags, and water bottles were the most common types of litter that would be found in the back of their truck beds (mentioned by 17%, 14%, 8% and 7%, respectively). Small pieces of paper and construction debris were mentioned by 4% of truck drivers. Over two in five (44%) of truck drivers indicated they do not believe they put any type of litter in their truck bed, representing a slight decrease from 2010 (48%). M A G L I T T E R S U R V E Y - 2 0 1 1 R I E S T E R 1 6 Table 6: Litter via Truck Bed – Total Responses Among those who indicate they drive a truck 2011 2010 2009 2008 2006 Maricopa Maricopa Maricopa Maricopa Maricopa (n=59) (n=94) (n=97) (n=107) (n=97) % % % % % Items Nothing Soda cans/bottles 44 17 48 10 44 10 17 11 14 16 Lawn debris Trash/non biodegradable (unspecified) Plastic bags/other plastic Water cans/bottles Construction debris Small pieces of paper Paper/ newspaper/ napkins Beer cans/bottles Fast food wrappers Furniture Cardboard Other food wrappers Cups (Styrofoam, plastic, paper) Appliances Aluminum cans Bottles/containers (unspecified) Everything/anything/all of it Cigarette packs 14 10 7 5 11 7 9 5 9 -- 8 3 5 11 7 7 5 5 5 8 3 5 2 3 4 --- 6 9 4 2 1 9 6 4 2 2 2 2 2 1 1 -2 1 -- 4 1 -3 1 5 2 6 -5 2 -- 4 8 -2 3 -- 2 2 2 ---- ---- ---- ---- 2 -- -- -- -- 2 -- -- -- -- --2% 2 1 2 6% 3 -5 5% 5 1 4 10% 23 2 4 12% 25 Car parts/ batteries Food/organic material Other Don’t know Q15: What types of items do you ever put into your truck bed that you consider to be litter or trash? What else? *Bold indicates significantly different percentages than 2010 data at the 95% confidence level M A G L I T T E R S U R V E Y - 2 0 1 1 R I E S T E R 1 7 This year, fewer truck drivers indicated that, on average, they “always” secure items in the back of their pickup truck (54%, down from 64% in 2010) while more truck drivers report they secure their load “most of the time” (19%, up slightly from 17%) and sometimes (12% up from 7%). Less than one in ten (8%) do not frequently secure items in their truck bed, reporting that they “rarely,” or “never” secure items, which remains consistent with 2010 (9%). How Often Truck Drivers Secure Loads 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.)? 54% Always Most of the time Sometimes Rarely Never Don't know 64% 70% 19% 17% 11% 12% 7% 5% 3% 3% 5% 5% 2% 7% 7% 7% 2% 0% 20% 2011 2010 2009 40% 60% 80% 100% Truck Drivers: 2011 n=59; 2010 n=94; 2009 n=97 Note: Question added in 2009 Table 7: How often Truck Drivers Secure Loads 2011 Maricopa (n=54) Frequency 2010 Maricopa (n=94) 2009 Maricopa (n=97) % 73 % 81 % 81 Always 54 64 70 Most of the time Sometimes Rarely Never Don’t know 19 12 3 5 7 17 7 3 2 7 11 5 5 7 2 NET likely (Always + Most) Q16: 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.)? New question in 2009 *Bold indicates significantly different percentages than 2010 data at the 95% confidence level. M A G L I T T E R S U R V E Y - 2 0 1 1 R I E S T E R 1 8 Slightly less than two-thirds (64%) of Maricopa County residents do not report driving in a vehicle that hauls items in an open-air trailer or strapped to a luggage rack. Of the remainder (36%) who do report driving in a vehicle that hauls items in an open air trailer or strapped to a luggage rack, 27% claim to do so a few times a year, and 6% claim to do so one to two times a month. Only 2% of residents who haul items in an open-air trailer or strapped to a luggage rack do so on a daily basis. Those most likely to haul items include:   Males vs. females; daily (3% vs. 1%), 1-2 times a month (8% vs. 4%) and a few times a year (36% vs. 18%). Residents aged 18 to 34 and 35 to 54 vs. those aged 55+; a few times a year (29% and 35% vs. 15%). 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? 27% 21% A few times a year 6% 4% 1 to 2 times a month At least once a week 1% 4% 2% 2% Daily 2011 2010 64% 69% Never 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 2011 Maricopa n=602; 2010 Maricopa n=587 Note: Question added in 2010 M A G L I T T E R S U R V E Y - 2 0 1 1 100% R I E S T E R 1 9 More than four-fifths (84%) 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, representing an increase from 2010 (77%). About one in ten drivers (11%) report securing items “sometimes.” Only 4% report “never” securing items. Among the drivers who mentioned “rarely” or “never” securing their load, the top reason mentioned was “it’s heavy enough so it doesn’t fly out.” How Often Those With Trailers or Luggage Racks Secure Loads On average, how often do you secure the loads that you are hauling (either with ties, bungees, a tarp, etc.)? 84% Always 77% 11% Sometimes 17% 4% Never Don't know / Refused 5% 2011 2010 1% 1% 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% Open-air trailer/luggage rack users: 2011 n=219; 2010 n=184 Note: Data is not completely comparable from 2010 to 2011 - in 2010, users were offered ‘sometimes’ and ‘most of the time’, which for comparison purposes were combined as ‘sometimes’ on the chart above. Likewise, in 2010, users were offered ‘rarely’ and ‘never’, which for comparison purposes were combined as ‘never’ on the chart above. M A G L I T T E R S U R V E Y - 2 0 1 1 R I E S T E R 2 0 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 have remained steady since 2010 (65% vs. 67% rate it as a “big” or “moderate” problem). One in three (33%) Maricopa residents continue to feel that litter along county freeways is either a “small problem” or not a problem at all. Residents of other ethnicities were more likely than white residents to feel that litter along freeways was not a problem at all (14% vs. 6%). Residents earning more than $100,000 were also more likely to feel this way (14% vs. 5% for those earning between $50,000 and $100,000, and 7% for those earning less than $50,000). Perception of Litter along Maricopa County Freeways 21% 21% 20% 23% Big problem 37% 44% 46% 47% 41% Moderate 40% Small problem 16% 25% 25% 25% 26% 8% 6% 6% 7% No problem 2011 2010 2009 2008 2006 4% 2% 2% 2% 2% Don't know 4% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 2011 Maricopa n=602; 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 1 50% R I E S T E R 2 1 Table 8: Freeway Litter as a Problem in Maricopa County Rating 2011 2010 2009 2008 2006 Maricopa Maricopa Maricopa Maricopa Maricopa (n=602) (n=601) (n=637) (n=744) (n=748) Big problem Moderate problem Small problem Not a problem at all Don’t know % 21 44 % 21 46 % 20 47 % 23 41 % 37 40 25 8 25 6 25 6 26 7 16 4 2 2 2 2 4 Q8: In your opinion, how big of a problem is litter along freeways in Maricopa County? Would you say it is a… *Bold indicates significantly different percentages than 2010 data at the 95% confidence level **In 2009 question was changed to “Maricopa County” where previously it was “in your county.” B. Personal Littering Fewer Valley residents insisted that they had not littered at all in the past year than in 2010 (70%, down from 74%). A small number (4%) of residents said they “did not know” if they had littered or not. The percentage of males aged 18 to 34 who indicated they “had not littered in the past year” dropped eleven percentage points from 2010 (40% vs. 51%). Females were more likely to claim they had not littered (76% vs. 64% for males). Residents aged 55+ were also significantly more likely to claim they had not littered than residents aged 18 to 34 and aged 35 to 54 (85% vs. 52% and 72%, respectively). Among those who indicated they had littered in the past year, food or organic material was the most common type of litter mentioned (41%). This was also the most common type of litter listed in previous years (mentioned by 44% in 2010, 48% in 2009, 39% in 2008 and 41% in 2006). Small pieces of paper were the second most common items discarded (mentioned by 29%); this was also similar to 2010, 2009, 2008 and 2006 (mentioned by 23%, 22%, 26% and 21%, respectively). M A G L I T T E R S U R V E Y - 2 0 1 1 R I E S T E R 2 2 Among the total sample, those most likely to list food and organic materials as items they have personally discarded were:    Residents aged 18 to 34 and 35 to 54 (14% and 12% vs. 5% for those aged 55+). Those with some college experience or who graduated college (10% and 15% vs. 4% of those with high school diploma or less). Those with household incomes greater than $100,000 (17% vs. 12% and 7% for those with household incomes of between $50,000 and $100,000 and less than $50,000, respectively). Table 9: Items Personally Discarded as Litter – Total Responses 2011 Maricopa (n=602) 2010 Maricopa (n=601) 2009 Maricopa (n=637) 2008 Maricopa (n=744) 2006 Maricopa (n=748) % 70 % 74 % 69 % 67 % 69 (n=157) % 41 29 12 13 10 10 3 1 1 --- (n=141) % 44 23 11 4 11 1 2 4 1 2 1 (n=180) % 48 22 8 4 8 3 3 4 3 2 1 (n=209) % 39 26 10 5 8 2 6 5 --4 (n=206) % 41 21 15 7 8 2 4 1 -2 2 --- 1 1 1 2 2 2 1 -- -- 1 1 1 -- Thread, string. Cardboard, boxes. Rocks/dirt. Bottles (unspecified). ----- ----- 2 1 1 1 1 1 ----- Other (<1% consensus). Don’t know. 7 4 4 2 4 3 7 -- 12 13 Items Have not littered in past year. Food/organic material. Small pieces of paper. Cigarette butts. Soda cans/bottles. Other food wrappers. Water bottles. Paper/newspaper/napkins. Plastic bags/other plastic. Hair/dog hair. Wood. Fast food wrappers/paper bags. Beer cans and beer bottles. Cups (Styrofoam, plastic, paper). Lawn debris. Q12: 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 1 R I E S T E R 2 3 *Bold indicates significantly different percentages than the previous 2010 data at the 95% confidence level. C. Littering Circumstances Consistent with 2010 data, 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 (47%). Other admitted litterers reported they littered while walking outside or because they just “threw it anywhere they could” (11% and 6%). Those most likely to discard litter while driving and/or riding in a vehicle include:   White residents (55% vs. 31% for other ethnicities). Residents with incomes above $100,000 (64% vs. 38% for those with incomes between $50,000 to $100,000, and 50% for those with incomes below $50,000). Additional detail on the profile of residents’ littering situations is provided below in Table 10. M A G L I T T E R S U R V E Y - 2 0 1 1 R I E S T E R 2 4 Table 10: Littering Situation – Total Responses Among those who indicated they have littered in the past year 2011 2010 2009 2008 2006 Maricopa Maricopa Maricopa Maricopa Maricopa (n=181) (n=149) (n=195) (n=247) (n=231) Items Driving/riding/traveling in vehicle Walking outside Just threw it/anywhere I could No trash can around Opened door/window – flew out I didn’t litter Don’t consider it litter/biodegradable stuff Cleaning out car In the desert/ middle of nowhere Eating food/chewing gum Flew out of truck bed Shopping My kid/grandkid did it At work/working In a hurry Smoking/discarded cigarettes Let the animals eat it Wouldn’t fit in the trash Camping/hiking Other (<1% consensus) Don’t know/can’t remember % 47 % 48 % 53 % 34 % 47 11 6 11 3 8 3 12 2 16 -- 5 4 6 5 5 4 15 5 8 3 4 2 1 1 3 2 3 -- 1 -- 2 2 3 1 2 2 -1 1 1 2 2 2 2 1 1 1 -------- -------- 1 2 ------ 2 2 ------ 2 1 1 -- 2 -- --- --- -- 1 -- 2 -- 5% 12% 9% 13% 9% 11% 8% 19% 7% 15% Q13: To the best of your knowledge, what were the general circumstances in terms of where and what you were doing when you discarded litter? *Bold indicates significantly different percentages than 2010 data at the 95% confidence level. M A G L I T T E R S U R V E Y - 2 0 1 1 R I E S T E R D. 2 5 Reasons for Littering When Driving The most common reason people gave for littering when driving had to do with food scraps, because they are biodegradable. The percentage of residents who reported littering food scraps because they are biodegradable decreased from 2010 (to 13%, down from 17%); but still this remained the most common reason cited for littering when driving. “No trash receptacles were convenient” the second most common reason cited for littering when driving, as it was mentioned by 10% of residents who have littered in the past year (down from 14% in 2010). Residents who claimed they littered while driving because they simply did not want it in their car is up significantly from 2010 (8% vs. 3%). One third of those who litter claimed they do not litter when driving (32%). Those aged 35 to 54 and 55+ were more likely to not litter when driving (40% and 44% vs. 22% for those aged 18 to 34). Table 11: Reasons for Littering when Driving – Total Responses Among those who indicated they have littered in the past year 2011 Total (n=181) 2010 Total (n=147) 2009 Total (n=195) % 33 13 % 32 17 % 36 3 10 9 8 5 4 14 5 3 3 3 16 5 11 8 5 3 3 2 -3 3 -3 1 2 1 --- --- I litter when I’m in a hurry/a rush -- -- 1 Other Don’t know 4% 9 5% 13 3% 10 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 won’t get in trouble for littering so I do it I’m lazy Cigarettes stink up car, easier to throw out window Don’t have an ashtray I don’t care Q14: Why do you litter WHEN DRIVING? *Bold indicates significantly different percentages than 2010 data at the 95% confidence level. M A G L I T T E R S U R V E Y - 2 0 1 1 R I E S T E R E. 2 6 Personal Experience with Specific Littering Situations Residents were read a list of nine specific littering situations and were asked to indicate if they had personally experienced that littering situation in the past three months, more than three months ago, or had never experienced that specific situation. In 2011, a new situation was added: someone in a vehicle you were in threw out trash in an area that did not have any litter. Similar to 2010, residents reported that the most common littering situation they have experienced is “trash falling out of the vehicle” (24% within the past 3 months, consistent with 2010). Mentions for the second most common litter experience, throwing a beverage out the car window, have increased significantly since 2010 (14% within the past 3 months vs. 2% in 2010). The percentage of residents who experienced tickets/warnings for littering in 2011 increased significantly from 2010 (8% vs. 1%). Six percent (6%) of residents indicated they had thrown out trash in “an area with no litter” in the past three months. This question was added as part of the 2011 survey and the responses were somewhat consistent with results for those who had thrown out trash in “an area with litter” (7%). M A G L I T T E R S U R V E Y - 2 0 1 1 R I E S T E R 2 7 Residents most likely to experience trash falling out of the vehicle within the last three months were:   Residents aged 18 to 34 (32% vs. 23% for those aged 35-54 and 18% for those aged 55+). Males aged 18 to 34 (36% vs. 24% for total). In general, residents aged 18 to 34 were more likely than those in other age groups to report having experiences with the specific littering situations that were queried. Table 12: Personal Experience with Littering Circumstances Past 3 Months 2011 2010 Maricopa Maricopa (n=602) (n=601) Circumstance You noticed that some trash fell out of a pickup or other vehicle you were driving in. Rather than keep a beverage container in the car, you, or someone in a vehicle you were in, threw out a can or bottle. Someone in a vehicle you were in threw trash out in an area that already had lots of litter. Someone in a vehicle you were in threw trash out in an area that had no litter You had problems with a vehicle and left debris like tire, part of a tire, or other stuff on the roadside. Someone in a vehicle you were in threw out a can, bottle or litter out onto the side of the road. 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 2009 Maricopa (n=637) 2008 2006 Maricopa Maricopa (n=744) (748) 24% 24% 26% 23% 19% 14% 2% 3% 5% 4% 7% 6% 7% 6% 6% 7% -- -- -- -- 6% 13% 9% 9% 7% 6% 6% 7% 9% 6% 3% 9% 8% 8% 7% 1% 8% 8% 10% 11% Q11: 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 different percentages than 2010 data at the 95% confidence level. M A G L I T T E R S U R V E Y - 2 0 1 1 R I E S T E R 2 8 IV. CAMPAIGN AWARENESS A. Awareness of Campaign 1. General Awareness Three in ten residents (32%) indicated they had seen advertising related to litter or littering in the past three months, representing a slight increase from 2010 (30%) and a significant increase from 2008 (25%). Awareness is significantly higher for males aged 18 to 34 than the total sample (48% vs. 32%), and is also higher for males than for females (39% vs. 26%). Residents aged 55+ were less likely to be aware of litter advertising than younger residents (24% vs. 35% for those aged 35 -54 and 37% for those aged 18 to 34). Residents of other ethnicities were more likely than white residents to be aware of litter advertising (41% vs. 28%). “Don’t know” levels are significantly higher for residents aged 55+ than for those aged 18 to 34 (7% vs. 1%), and also higher for females than males (6% vs. 2%). Have Seen Ads for Litter Within last 3 months 32% 30% 27% 25% 25% Yes 64% 65% 69% 71% 73% No Don't know 2011 2010 2009 2008 2006 4% 5% 4% 4% 2% 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% 2011 Maricopa n=602; 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 1 R I E S T E R 2. 2 9 Recalled Messages and Slogans When those aware of litter-related advertising were specifically asked what they remembered about the ads, the most recalled information surrounded the message, “Don’t litter” or “Keep Arizona clean,” and this percentage was slightly lower than in 2010 (18%, down from 21%). The second most cited message was “the fines,” with 16% of residents referencing this. Those aged 35 to 54 were more likely to recall “the fines” than those aged 18 to 34 (20% vs. 8%). 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 2011 Maricopa (n=194) Responses Don’t litter/keep Arizona clean The fines It was a sign along the road/billboard About how a mother can’t pick up after you/her kids Saw on TV/commercial/public service announcement Just because it’s a freeway doesn’t mean you are free to litter on it Heard on radio Don’t Trash Arizona Use ashtray/cigarettes cause fires Littering is unlawful/can get a ticket Recycling Prisoners picking up trash Make the earth greener/go green Litter is bad for the environment/bad for wildlife A hamburger wrapper being a 500 dollar fine/ a five hundred dollar burger Clean up efforts/Adopt a highway M A G L I T T E R S U R V E Y - 2010 Maricopa (n=183) 2009 Maricopa (n=170) 2008 Maricopa (n=186) 2006 Maricopa (n=188) % 18 % 21 % 16 % 28 % 17 16 12 24 6 7 15 4 15 29 11 11 -- -- -- -- 8 1 8 4 5 7 -- -- -- -- 7 5 5 3 -6 4 -4 --2 4 --- 5 4 4 7 9 4 3 3 4 1 2 2 2 -- 4 --- 8 -- 2 3 3 4 2 2 9 4 -- -- 2 3 3 4 4 2 0 1 1 R I E S T E R 3 0 Tires coming apart on the road/tires along the road way Don’t be a litter bug Littering is unsightly/litter is ugly Littering/dumping things in desert by illegal immigrants Read article in newspaper A funny commercial where the guy is addicted to littering At the river they give out trash bags to put your trash in Strap your load down Smokey the Bear Keep highways clean Litter causes car accidents Man following man/shows litter, makes pyramid/tree/robot Call a number to report littering It’s a big problem/becoming an issue Cost of cleaning up/tax dollars People littering out of their vehicle Other (1% or less of consensus) Don’t know 1 3 -- -- -- 1 2 1 -2 --- --- 1 1 1 -- 3 1 1 1 1 3 1 -- 2 -- 1 - - - - 1 1 ---- --7 --- --4 2 1 --1 -2 ------ -- 2 1 - 2 -- 1 1 - 2 -- 2 - 2 4 -- 2 2 - - 7% 6% 15% 15% 15% 10 19 10 13 15 Q22? What specifically do you remember about the ads related to litter or littering? *Bold indicates significantly different percentages than 2010 data at the 95% confidence level. M A G L I T T E R S U R V E Y - 2 0 1 1 R I E S T E R 3 1 Approximately two in five residents (44%) who remembered seeing litterrelated advertising in the past three months were able to recall some type of slogan/message, representing a significant increase from 2010 (30%). Recognition of “Do not litter’ increased significantly from 2010 (22% vs. 5%). Likewise, the number of residents who said “don’t know” dropped significantly from 2010 (56% vs.70%). 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 Responses 2011 Maricopa (n=194) 2010 Maricopa (n=183) 2009 Maricopa (n=170) 2008 Maricopa (n=186) 2006 Maricopa (n=188) % 22 3 3 3 2 2 % 5 4 3 3 4 2 % 9 6 4 1 2 1 % 12 3 3 1 6 3 % 13 6 3 1 5 2 2 - 1 3 2 1 1 1 1 2 2 2 1 2 1 - 1 - 1 - 1 1 1 2 2 na 3 1 2 1 na 2 na 2 3 1 3 1 na 2% 70 5% 65 6% 62 3% 70 Do not litter You will be fined Littering is unlawful Keep our freeways clean Don’t Trash Arizona There was no slogan/ it was a sign/ gave information Arizona Clean and Beautiful Go Green Recycle, reduce, reuse Don’t mess with Texas $500 fine for throwing out hamburger wrapper It is your environment Don’t be a litterbug Litter hurts everyone Litter costs everyone Adopt a highway Keep Arizona Beautiful Give a hoot, don’t pollute Grow Up, Don’t Litter 7% 56% Other Don’t know Q24: What was the main slogan used in the ads? Note: Although not read to respondents, Grow Up, Don’t Litter was added to the pre-coded list in 2011. *Bold indicates significantly different percentages than 2010 data at the 95% confidence level M A G L I T T E R S U R V E Y - 2 0 1 1 R I E S T E R B. 3 2 Don’t Trash Arizona Awareness As in the past three years, more than half of Maricopa County residents (52%) recalled 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 higher among males than among females (61% vs. 43%), and among residents making less than $100,000 per year in income (56% for those earning below $50,000 and 60% for those earning between $50,000 and $100,000, compared to 42% for those earning more than $100,000). Males aged 18 to 34 were more likely to recognize the slogan than the total sample (63% vs. 52%). Total Awareness Have Heard Slogan “Don’t Trash Arizona” (Aided + Unaided) 2011 52% 2010 51% 2009 50% 2008 56% 2006 43% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 2011 Maricopa n=602; 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 1 R I E S T E R 3 3 Residents who were familiar with the Don’t Trash Arizona slogan reported seeing and/or hearing the slogan from a variety of sources, the most common of which were television (36%), radio (24%), billboards (21%), and street/highway signs (19%). Less than 1% of respondents mentioned seeing the slogan online. Females were more likely to recall seeing the slogan on television than males (43% vs. 32%). Younger residents were more likely than those over age 55 to remember hearing the slogan on the radio (26% for those aged 18 to 34 and 30% for those aged 35 to 54 vs. 10% for those aged 55+). Residents with incomes of more than $100,000 were more likely to remember hearing the slogan on the radio than residents with incomes below $50,000 (38% vs. 24%). Residents of other ethnicities were more likely to have seen the slogan on street or highway signs than white residents (32% vs. 14%). Additionally, residents with incomes below $50,000 and between $50,000 and $100,000 were more likely to have seen the slogan on street signs than residents with incomes over $100,000 (21% and 19% vs. 8%, respectively). Table 15: Where Saw Don’t Trash Arizona Slogan Total responses among those indicating they had heard the slogan 2010 2010 2009 2008 Maricopa Maricopa Maricopa Maricopa (n=313) (n=308) (n=319) (n=417) Media Television Radio Billboards Street/highway signs Newspaper Magazines Bus signs Bumper sticker Parks Light Rail Train Internet Other (1% or less of consensus) Don’t know 2006 Maricopa (n=322) % 36 24 21 19 5 1 1 1 1 1 - % 31 21 20 16 4 2 % 34 22 18 14 6 2 2 % 30 21 24 16 6 2 - % 26 14 20 12 5 - 6 7 5 5 6 18 24 20 25 25 Q25: Where have you seen, heard or read the slogan “Don’t Trash Arizona?” *Bold indicates significantly different percentages than 2010 data at the 95% confidence level. M A G L I T T E R S U R V E Y - 2 0 1 1 R I E S T E R 3 4 Seven in ten residents (70%) were unable to name a sponsor for the Don’t Trash Arizona slogan, representing consistency from 2010 (69%). This year, slightly more residents correctly identified the Arizona Department of Transportation (8% vs. 7% from 2010) and slightly fewer residents generically cited the “state” or “local” government (13% vs. 17% from 2010). Residents aged 18 to 34 and 35 to 54 were more likely to mention ADOT than residents aged 55+ (10% and 11% vs. 1%, respectively). Likewise, college graduates were more likely to mention ADOT than those who did not attend any college (14% vs. 3%). Residents with incomes between $50,000 and $100,000 were more likely than residents earning below $50,000 to mention ADOT (14% vs. 5%). Residents aged 35 to 54 were most likely to mention the state and local government as the sponsor than those aged 55+ (18% vs. 7%) Table 16: Who Sponsors Don’t Trash Arizona Slogan Among those indicating they had heard the slogan 2011 2010 2009 2008 2006 Maricopa Maricopa Maricopa Maricopa Maricopa (n=313) (n=308) (n=319) (n=417) (n=322) Sponsor State/local government ADOT Sanitation department/ department of waste City of Phoenix Department of Public Safety Maricopa Association of Governments Other (<1% consensus) Don’t know % 13 8 3 % 17 7 3 % 14 9 -- % 17 9 -- % 14 12 -- 2 1 2 -- --- --- --- -- na na na na 3 3 6 6 5 70 69 70 65 70 Q26: Who sponsors the Don’t Trash Arizona advertisements? Note: Although not read to respondents, the Maricopa Association of Governments was added to the precoded list in 2011 *Bold indicates significantly different percentages than 2010 data at the 95% confidence level. M A G L I T T E R S U R V E Y - 2 0 1 1 R I E S T E R 3 5 C. Awareness of Litter Resources Valley residents’ awareness decreased only slightly for both the Litter Hotline (to 12% from 13% in 2010) and the Don’t Trash Arizona website (11% from 14% in 2010). Among the target group of males, aged 18 to 34, awareness of the litter hotline remained steady from 2010 at 13%. Awareness of the hotline was significantly higher among:   Males than females (16% vs. 7%). Those who have seen litter advertising in the past three months than those who have not (16% vs. 7%). Awareness of the “Don’t Trash Arizona Website” was higher among:       Males than females (16% vs. 6%). Males aged 18 to 34 than the total sample (23% vs. 11%). Those aged 18 to 34 than those aged 35 to 54 and 55+ (17% vs. 9% and 9%, respectively). Residents who had not graduated from college (15% for high school-only graduates and 13% for some-college residents vs. 7% for college graduates). Those earning below $50,000 than those earning more than $100,000 (16% vs. 5%). Residents who had seen litter-related advertising in the past three months than those that had not (18% vs. 4%). Aided Awareness - Litter Resources Hotline:1-877-3-Litter 2011 % 12 87 1 13 85 2 14 1 85 % 9 89 2 9 88 3 Don’tTrashArizona.com % 11 84 14 % 12 % 12 10 0% 20% 40% Yes No L I T T E R S U R V E Y - 2 0 1 1 2 86 2 85 3 88 2 60% Don't know 2011 Maricopa n=602; 2010 Maricopa n=601; 2009 Maricopa n=637; 2 2006 Maricopa n=748 M A G 2 87 80% 100% 008 Maricopa n=744; R I E S T E R 3 6 This year, six-percent (6%) 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 website? 6% 2011 2010 2009 2008 7% Yes 7% 1% 94% 93% No 93% 99% 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% Among those aware of website: 2011 n=67; 2010 n=83; 2009 n=73; 2008 n=72 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 (61%) of residents indicated they would be at least “somewhat” likely to report littering (28% “very likely” and 33% “somewhat likely”). This is consistent with data from 2010 (62%). Those “very likely” or “somewhat likely” to report littering include those over the age of 34 (62% for those aged 55+ and 68% for those aged 35 to 54 vs. 48% for those aged 18 to 34). Males aged 18 to 34 were most likely to have indicated they were “not very likely” or “not at all likely” to report littering vs. the total sample (55% vs. 37%). M A G L I T T E R S U R V E Y - 2 0 1 1 R I E S T E R 3 7 Likelihood to Report Littering 28% 27% Very likely 23% 24% 27% Somewhat likely 29% 33% 35% 37% 35% 25% 22% 27% 26% Not very likely 22% 12% 14% 11% 16% Not at all likely 2011 2010 2009 2008 2006 13% 2% 2% 2% Don't know 5% 3% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 2011 Maricopa n=602; 2010 Maricopa n=601; 2009 Maricopa n=637; 2008 Maricopa n=744; 2006 Maricopa n=748 Table 17: Likelihood to Report Littering 2011 Maricopa (n=602) 2010 Maricopa (n=601) 2009 Maricopa (n=637) 2008 Maricopa (n=744) 2006* Maricopa (n=748) NET likely (Very + somewhat) 61% 62% 60% 53% 62% Very likely Somewhat likely Not very likely Not at all likely Don’t know 28% 33% 25% 12% 2% 27% 35 22 14 2 23% 37 27 11 2 24% 29 26 16 5 27% 35 22 13 3 Likelihood Q30: 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 different percentages than 2010 data at the 95% confidence level. M A G L I T T E R S U R V E Y - 2 0 1 1 R I E S T E R E. 3 8 Additional Litter Resources The Internet remains the top resource for Valley residents who want more information about litter or littering (mentioned by 46%), only a slight decrease from 2010 (49%). Approximately one in five (18%) residents specifically mentioned the Don’t Trash Arizona website as a resource to go to if they wanted more information about littering, which is a slight increase from 2010 (14%). Likelihood to indicate visiting www.DontTrashArizona.com was higher among:     Those below the age of 55 (24% for those aged 18 to 34 and 20% for those aged 35 to 54 vs. 8% for those aged 55+). Those who had attended at least some college (20% for those with somecollege and 20% for college graduates vs. 10% for high school-only residents). Those with incomes between $50,000 and $100,000 (27% vs. 15% for those earning below $50,000 and 16% for those earning more than $100,000). Those who had seen litter-related advertising in the past three months (24% vs. 11% for those who had not). One in six (15%) claim they do not know where they would go for additional information on litter. Only a small percentage of residents (5%) indicated they would call the litter hotline. Table 18 below contains additional information about residents’ preferred sources for litter information. M A G L I T T E R S U R V E Y - 2 0 1 1 R I E S T E R 3 9 Table 18: Source for Litter/Littering Information 2011 2010 2009 2008 2006 Maricopa Maricopa Maricopa Maricopa Maricopa (n=602) (n=601) (n=637) (n=744) (n=748) Source Internet Don’t Trash AZ website The “city” Litter hotline I wouldn’t need that information/ wouldn’t contact anyone Police/ highway patrol/DPS ADOT/highway dept. Phonebook/ yellow pages The state/governor Waste Management/ garbage company Friend/ neighbor/ family member/ teacher Newspaper City council/councilmembe rs Other (<1% consensus) Don’t know % 46 18 7 5 3 % 49 14 5 5 3 % 49 18 5 5 2 % 26 35 5 6 3 % 59 -5 4 3 2 3 3 1 4 2 2 2 2 2 2 4 2 2 4 2 2 2 2 2 1 3 1 3 2 1 1 2 2 1 1 -- --- --- --- 1 1 6 15 3 19 5 16 7 12 8 13 Q31: 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% *Bold indicates significantly different percentages than 2010 data at the 95% confidence level. M A G L I T T E R S U R V E Y - 2 0 1 1 R I E S T E R 4 0 Facebook is the most commonly used application used to communicate or stay in touch with others (32%), followed by the utilization of search engines such as Google/Yahoo. E-mails from desktops and from cell phones are also popular methods (20% and 17%, respectively). Facebook is more likely to be used by those aged 18-34 than older residents (47% vs. 36% for those aged 35-54 and 10% for those aged 55+). Table 19: Electronic Communications Preferences Electronic Communication Preferences 2011 Maricopa (n=602) Facebook web page. 32% Google/AOL/Yahoo/etc. Website. E-mail using computer. Phone (unspecified). E-mail using a cell phone or handheld device. Nothing. Text Messages using a cell phone or handheld device. Internet. Twitter. Word of mouth. Television. Other. Don’t know/NA. 27% 26 20 19 17 12 6 6 3 2 1 5 3 Q 32: People use many different resources to communicate and stay in touch with others. What applications or websites do you use to gather information or communicate with others? Note: Question added in 2011. M A G L I T T E R S U R V E Y - 2 0 1 1 R I E S T E R V. 4 1 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 (26% 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 (46% 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 (28% of the total population). This year, a slight increase occurred among Maricopa County residents who were categorized as “Admitted Litterers” (26%, up from 23% in 2010). Littering Behavior 2011 26% 2010 46% 23% 2009 50% 28% 2008 30% 2006 28% 27% 27% 44% 28% 41% 29% 39% 34% 1 0% 20% 40% Admitted Litterer 60% Accidental Litterer 80% 100% Non-litterer More than half of the males aged 18 to 34 are admitted litters (56%), representing a slight increase from 2010 (51%) matching 2006 levels. In addition, in 2011, Admitted Litterers were most likely to be:    M A G Aged 18 to 34 (49% vs. 23% for Accidental Litterers and 16% for NonLitterers). Single residents (40% vs. 29% for accidental litterers and 24% for nonlitterers). Students than non-litterers (6% vs. 1%) L I T T E R S U R V E Y - 2 0 1 1 R I E S T E R 4 2 Retired residents fall into the Accidental and Non Litterer categories significantly more than into the Admitted Litterer group (22% and 33% vs. 9%). Tables 19a and 19b show the demographic characteristics of each of these groups. Table 19a: Demographic Comparison Based on Littering Behavior Characteristic 2011 2010 Admitted Accidental NonAdmitted Accidental NonLitterers Litterers Litterers Litterers Litterers Litterers (n=157) (n=276) (n=169) (n=141) (n=298) (n=162) Gender Male Female % % % % % % 60 40 49 51 43 57 57 43 47 53 49 51 Age 18 to 34 35 to 54 55-65+ 49% 38 13 23% 47 30 16% 41 43 49% 40 11 25% 48 27 16% 36 48 Average 37.4 44.8 48.2 37.7 yrs 46.2 yrs 52.4 yrs Marital Status Married Single Widowed Divorced Separated Don’t know or Refused % 46 40 1 8 1 4 % 54 29 6 8 3 % 56 24 10 6 1 4 % 55 36 4 4 1 % 59 24 5 9 3 % 59 18 12 6 5 Education Less than high school High school graduate Some college College graduate Graduate degree % 7 % 6 % 4 % 4 % 6 % 6 14 18 18 16 19 19 36 27 38 21 28 27 40 22 31 25 31 20 13 14 20 17 16 22 *Bold indicates significantly different percentages than 2010 data at the 95% confidence level. M A G L I T T E R S U R V E Y - 2 0 1 1 R I E S T E R 4 3 Table 19b: Demographic Comparison Based on Littering Behavior Characteristic 2011 Admitted Accidental Litterers Litterers (n=157) (n=276) NonLitterers (n=169) 2010 Admitted Accidental NonLitterers Litterers Litterers (n=141) (n=298) (n=162) Ethnicity White Hispanic African-American Asian Native American Other Refused % 70 13 5 4 5 3 % 73 12 4 3 1 2 5 % 73 11 3 1 1 5 6 % 71 19 5 2 2 1 % 72 13 6 1 2 2 4 % 71 13 4 1 3 4 4 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** % 8 7 10 7 6 11 6 11 18 16 % 11 19 8 8 6 5 9 10 14 17 % 10 3 5 7 5 7 11 8 17 28 % 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 Employment Full-time Part-time Retired Homemaker Student Unemployed % 51 13 9 6 6 13 % 43 9 22 5 4 13 % 44 8 33 3 1 8 % 56 6 6 6 9 16 % 46 8 19 7 3 14 % 45 6 32 6 1 7 Household Language* English only Spanish only Mostly Spanish + some English Equally in Spanish and English Mostly English + some Spanish English + Other Refused % % % % % % 73 - 74 1 2 69 1 2 68 2 1 72 3 3 75 4 1 5 4 2 4 3 4 12 10 11 14 6 8 8 2 6 3 12 3 9 2 11 2 6 2 *Bold indicates significantly different percentages than 2010 data at the 95% confidence level. M A G L I T T E R S U R V E Y - 2 0 1 1 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 1 R I E S T E R I Benchmark Study Client: Subject: Date: Maricopa Association of Governments Litter Survey 2011 August 2011 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 (Note: age categories condensed and under 18 category added) a. b. c. d. e. Under 18 18 to 34 35 to 54 55+ Refused 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 Maricopa County? If no, ask to speak to someone who does. Note: New question. 5. RECORD GENDER (DO NOT ASK; RECORD BY OBSERVATION) a. Male b. Female 6. For classification purposes, may I have the Zip Code in which you live? _________________ M A G L I T T E R S U R V E Y – 2 0 1 1 R I E S T E R I I 7. What type of vehicle do you most often drive or ride in..? DO NOT READ LIST Note: Question wording modified a. b. c. d. e. f. g. h. i. Sedan Pickup truck Sports utility vehicle Coupe Van / Minivan Motorcycle Other Don’t drive Don’t know/Refused 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. 8. 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) 9. Do you smoke? a. Yes b. No c. Don’t know / Refused 10. 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. g. M A G L I T T E R 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 Do not smoke in car (added) Don’t know / Refused (DO NOT READ) S U R V E Y – 2 0 1 1 R I E S T E R I I I 11. 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.” Note: Situation C added a. You noticed that some trash fell out of a pickup 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 trash in an area that did not have any litter d. Someone in a vehicle you were in threw out a can, bottle, or other litter out onto the side of the road. e. You had problems with a vehicle and left debris like a tire, part of a tire, or other stuff on the roadside f. Rather than keep a beverage container in the car, you, or someone in a vehicle you were in, threw out a can or bottle. g. You threw out a small item from your vehicle, like a candy wrapper, scrap paper or something like that. h. You or someone you were with got a ticket or warning for littering. i. 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 12. 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. M A G L I T T E R Small pieces of paper (receipts, lottery tickets, gum wrappers) Cigarette butts Other food wrappers (chip bags/candy) Food / organic material, raw food Other Have not littered in past year – SKIP TO: Q17 Don’t know S U R V E Y – 2 0 1 1 R I E S T E R I V 13. 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. i. 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) Cleaning out car In parking lot Just threw it out / got rid of it anywhere I could Other Don’t know/Can’t remember / don’t recall 14. 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. I don’t care g. I don’t consider throwing out gum, small wrappers, cigarette butts litter h. It was an accident/unintentional i. I don’t want to keep it in my car j. I don’t litter when driving k. Other _________________ l. Don’t know/Refused 15. 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. Soda cans and soda bottles b. Water cans and water bottles c. Small pieces of paper (receipts, lottery tickets, gum wrappers) d. Plastic bags / other plastic e. Cigarette butts f. Construction debris g. Cardboard h. Food / organic material, raw food i. Lawn debris j. Trash / no biodegradable stuff (unspecified) k. Paper / newspaper / Kleenex / mail l. Other m. Don’t know n. Nothing 16. 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 M A G L I T T E R S U R V E Y – 2 0 1 1 R I E S T E R V b. c. d. e. f. g. Most of the time Only sometimes Rarely Never Don’t know/Refused If never – WHY NOT? * ASK ALL: 17. 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 Q19 18. (If selected a, b, c, d on question 17 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? 19. Do you have a litterbag or trash can in your vehicle? a. Yes b. No c. Don’t know / Refused 20. IF NO IN Q19: Would you consider keeping a litter bag or trash can in your vehicle? 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 1 1 R I E S T E R V I Litter Campaign Awareness 21. 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 22. IF YES in Q21: What specifically do you remember about the ads related to litter or littering? 23. IF YES IN Q21: What was the main slogan used in the ads? DO NOT READ LIST. MULTIPLE RESPONSES ALLOWED. Note: Grow Up, Don’t Litter added a. b. c. d. e. f. g. h. i. j. k. l. m. Don’t Trash Arizona Keep Arizona Beautiful Do not litter You will be fined Littering is unlawful Go green Grow up. Don’t Litter Adopt a Highway It is your environment Keep our freeways clean None Other _________________ Don’t know / Refused 24. IF NOT MENTIONED IN Q23 “a”: Have you seen or heard the slogan, “Don’t Trash Arizona?” a. Yes b. No c. Don’t know / Refused 25. IF mentioned in Q23a or YES IN Q24: Where have you seen, heard or read the slogan, “Don’t Trash Arizona?” PROBE: Where else? DO NOT READ LIST. MULTIPLE RESPONSES ALLOWED. a. Television b. Radio c. Billboards d. Light Rail Train e. Street or highway signs f. Newspaper g. Online h. Other i. Don’t know / Refused M A G L I T T E R S U R V E Y – 2 0 1 1 R I E S T E R V I I 26. IF mentioned in Q23a or YES IN Q24: Who sponsors the “Don’t Trash Arizona” advertisements? DO NOT READ LIST. ONE RESPONSE ONLY. Note: MAG added a. b. c. d. e. f. g. State / Local Government Arizona Department of Transportation Sanitation department City of Phoenix Maricopa Association of Governments Other Don’t know / Refused 27. Have you heard of www.DontTrashArizona.com? a. Yes b. No c. Not sure/Don’t Know 28. If YES IN Q27 “a”: Have you ever visited the “Don’t Trash Arizona Website? a. Yes b. No c. Don’t know 29. Have you heard about the Litter Hotline, 1-877-3-Litter, where you can report someone who litters? NOTE: Question moved within the survey. a. Yes b. No c. Don’t know / Refused 30. 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? a. b. c. d. e. Very likely Somewhat likely Not very likely Not at all likely Don’t know / Refused (DO NOT READ) 31. 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 M A G L I T T E R S U R V E Y – 2 0 1 1 R I E S T E R V I I I i. j. k. l. Waste Management/ garbage company That state/governor Other Don’t know/refused 32. People use many different resources to communicate and stay in touch with others. What applications or web sites do you use to gather information or communicate with others? DO NOT READ LIST MULTIPLE RESPONSES ALLOWED Note: New question a. b. c. d. e. f. g. h. Nothing Text messages using a cell phone or handheld device e-mail using a cell phone or hand held device MySpace web page FaceBook web page Using Twitter (also known as "tweeting") Website: Specify_______________________ Other: Specify ________________________ Demographics 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/Not applicable 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? M A G L I T T E R S U R V E Y – 2 0 1 1 R I E S T E R I X a. Full-time b. Part-time c. Retired d. Housewife e. Student f. Unemployed g. Refused/Not Applicable D4. Which of the following best classifies your profession? Read List a. White collar/management b. Blue collar c. Trade profession d. Professional (medical/legal) e. Educational f. Clerical/administrative g. Sales h. Self-employed i. Other (SPECIFY) j. Don’t know 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. Native American g. 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. English plus some other language g. Don’t know/refused M A G L I T T E R S U R V E Y – 2 0 1 1 R I E S T E R X D7. Was your annual household income before taxes last year: Read List 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 1 1