LITTER EVALUATION
SURVEY
September, 2013
Prepared for:

TABLE OF CONTENTS
Section:

Page #:

Study Overview
Key Findings and Recommendations
Executive Summary

1
2
3

I.

Introduction

A.
B.
C.

Background and Methodology
Significance Testing and Sub-Group Analysis
Demographics

7
7
8
8

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 when Driving
Personal Experience with Specific Littering Situations

IV.

Campaign Awareness

A.
B.
C.
D.
E.
F.
G.

Awareness of Campaign
Don’t Trash Arizona Awareness
No cups cans or butts! Don’t Trash Arizona Awareness
Awareness of Litter Resources
Likelihood to Report Littering
Additional Litter Resources
Communication Preferences

26
26
29
30
33
35
37
38

V.

Profiles of Litterers

39

Questionnaire
Supplemental Results for Males aged 18 to 34

M A G

L I T T E R

S U R V E Y

–

2 0 1 3

11
11
12
13
14
19
19
21
22
23
24

Appendix A
Appendix B

1

STUDY OVERVIEW
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 online research and
targeted interviews with 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.
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. Annual surveys have been conducted in subsequent years, focusing on Maricopa
County residents. Follow up studies have been conducted in August 2008, August 2009,
August 2010, August 2011, August 2012, and August 2013.
Communication strategies are developed each year based on the survey results. These
strategies primarily target the 18 to 24 male demographic, with a secondary demographic of
male residents aged 25 to 34. Messages targeted toward both accidental and deliberate
littering are included, and a variety of strategies and tactics are employed utilizing public
relations, paid advertising, special events, school outreach, distribution of informational
materials and the development of value-added partnerships. The survey includes questions to
help evaluate the effectiveness of various tactics and campaign messaging, so that outreach
efforts can be refined each year for best results.
In 2013, the Maricopa Association of Governments (MAG), through Olson Communications,
commissioned WestGroup Research of Phoenix to conduct a telephone study with residents
aged 18 and older living in Maricopa County. Results are based on 451 fifteen-minute
telephone interviews with Maricopa County residents. The margin of error for the survey is
approximately +4.7% at a 95% confidence level. This year, however, the main study is
supplemented with an additional analysis focusing specifically on the target demographic of
male residents aged 18 to 34, which includes an oversample of those residents. A summary
of the information from this supplemental analysis is included as an attachment to this report.

2

KEY FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
•

The study once again clearly shows that an anti-littering campaign should target the
population subgroup of males between the ages of 18 and 34. This subgroup
consistently stands out from all other residents as being less concerned about littering,
along with demonstrating a higher exposure to littering behaviors:
o They are more likely than all other residents to indicate they have experienced
all of the littering scenarios presented in the past 3 months or past year.
o They are less likely than all other residents to indicate they have “not littered in
the past year.”
o They are less likely to have a trash receptacle in their vehicles.
o The majority of residents in this subgroup fall into the category of “admitted
litterers.”

•

A comparison of the data from the target subgroup oversample data to all non-target
residents from the general population survey reveals several statistically significant
indications that the current campaign is reaching the intended subpopulation of males
aged 18 to 34:
o
o
o
o

M A G

More likely to have seen/heard anti-litter advertising.
More likely to have heard Don’t Trash Arizona slogan.
More likely to have heard “No cups, cans or butts” slogan.
More likely to have heard of www.DontTrashAZ.com website.

•

In addition, the percentage of males aged 18 to 34 who indicated they believe litter is a
“big” problem doubled from 2012 to 2013.

•

Unfortunately, there were no notable positive changes in anti-littering behavior, either
within the population overall, or among the target subgroup of males aged 18 to 34.

•

It seems that it may be time for a shift in the approach to littering in Maricopa County.
While the campaign is building awareness about littering as a problem and what
constitutes littering, particularly among the worst offenders, it does not appear to be
triggering the hoped-for response of environmental responsibility and behavior change.

L I T T E R

S U R V E Y

–

2 0 1 3

3

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Results for the 2013 Litter Evaluation Survey are based on 451 fifteen-minute telephone
interviews with Maricopa County residents. The margin of error for the survey is
approximately +4.7% at a 95% confidence level. This year, the survey was again conducted
by using a supplemental cell phone database in addition to “land line” telephone calls, due to
the number of younger respondents with cell-phone-only access. This report primarily focuses
on the general population study results; however, when appropriate and meaningful, the
results from the general population study will be linked to the corresponding findings from the
supplemental analysis of the target subgroup of males aged 18 to 34.
Below are some key findings of the general population survey.
Driver Characteristics
•

In 2013, two in five (40%) residents surveyed indicated driving a 4-door sedan, while
19% reported driving sport utility vehicles and 14% indicated they drive pickup trucks.
These figures are statistically similar to 2012.

•

Approximately two thirds (64%) of residents surveyed indicated they have a litterbag or
can for use in their vehicles, which is consistent with the 66% recorded in 2012. Males
aged 18 to 34 are less likely than all other residents to indicate the use of a litterbag
(52% vs. 66%).

•

Among those who do not currently have a litter bag or can in their vehicles, seven in
ten (71%) reported they would consider using one in the future. While not a significant
increase from 2012 (64%), this is the highest figure recorded in the last several years.

•

Compared to recent years, a comparable proportion (14%) of residents indicated that
they smoke.

•

Two in five smokers (40%) reported they use an ashtray in their vehicles. While this is
a smaller proportion compared to 2012 (51%), it is not a statistically significant
decrease.

•

Types of litter reportedly deposited by pickup truck drivers into the truck bed were
generally consistent with previous years. Pickup truck drivers most commonly reported
putting soda cans/bottles (16%), unspecified non-biodegradable trash (11%), and
plastic bags or other plastic items (11%) into the bed of the truck.

•

Half (50%) of pickup truck drivers indicated they do not discard items into their truck
bed, which is consistent with previous years.

•

Over three quarters (77%) of pickup truck drivers reported, on average, they always
secure items in the back of their pickup truck. While this is statistically similar to the
71% in 2012, it is significantly higher than the 54% recorded in 2011. Truck drivers
under the age of 35 were more likely than older truck drivers to report that they always secure
their loads (100% vs. 71%; n=10).

M A G

L I T T E R

S U R V E Y

–

2 0 1 3

4

•

Approximately two thirds (66%) of residents surveyed indicated they never drive in a
vehicle that hauls items in an open-air trailer or strapped to a luggage rack, which is
consistent with the 64% recorded in 2012. One quarter (24%) claim to do so a few
times a year, and 5% report doing so at least weekly. Males aged 18 to 34 were more
likely than all other residents to indicate they haul items “a few times a year” (53% vs.
31%).

•

The large majority (87%) of residents who mentioned that they ride in a vehicle which
transports items in a trailer or luggage rack at least a few times a year indicated they
always secure the load they are hauling (similar to the 86% recorded in 2012, and now
representing the highest level reported since 2010 (77%).

Litter Awareness and Behavior

M A G

•

Approximately two thirds (67%) of residents surveyed indicated they believe litter along
Maricopa County freeways is a “big” or “moderate” problem, which is consistent with
recent years. The percentage of males aged 18 to 34 who indicated that litter is a “big
problem” doubled from 11% in 2012 to 22% in 2013.

•

The majority (61%) of residents surveyed indicated they have not littered in the past
year. While this is statistically similar to the 65% recorded in 2012, it represents the
lowest percentage recorded in recent years and it is significantly lower than values
recorded in years prior to 2012 (a range of 69% to 74%).

•

The target group, male residents aged 18 to 34, was less likely than all other residents
to indicate they have not littered in the past year (29% vs. 66%).

•

Among those who admit to littering in the past year, types of litter mentioned were
generally consistent with 2012 results. Food/organic material (mentioned by 36%),
small pieces of paper (31%) and water bottles (10%) were the most commonly
mentioned types of litter.

•

Over half (52%) of those who indicated they have littered in the past year indicated
they did so while driving or riding in a vehicle. This is similar to figures recorded in
recent years (a range of 46% to 53%). Male residents aged 18 to 34 were more likely
than all other residents to indicate they littered while walking outside (30% vs. 8%).

•

The most common reason mentioned for littering when driving continues to be lack of
convenient place to discard trash (mentioned by 15%, similar to the 13% recorded in
2012).

•

Similar to data from recent years, residents reported the most common littering
situation they have experienced in the past three months is trash falling out of a vehicle
(25%). The next most common scenario was riding in a vehicle where a beverage
container was thrown out the window (13%).

•

Male residents aged 18 to 34 were significantly more likely than all other residents to
indicate they had experienced the majority of the scenarios within the past three
months or at least within the past year.

L I T T E R

S U R V E Y

–

2 0 1 3

5

Campaign Awareness

M A G

•

Over one quarter (27%) of residents surveyed indicated they had seen advertising
related to litter or littering in the past three months, slightly reversing the significant
decrease seen between 2011 and 2012 (32% down to 25%).

•

Males aged 18 to 34 in the general population study were slightly more likely than all
other residents to report seeing or hearing ads about litter (32% vs. 26%). However,
this percentage is significantly higher when looking at the data from the total target
group oversample (36% vs. 26%).

•

Among those who indicated they had seen or heard advertising related to litter in the
past 3 months, recalled messages were generally similar to 2012. The most often
recalled message was related to “Don’t litter” or “Keep Arizona clean” (mentioned by
29%), followed by “the fines” (16%).

•

Slightly less than half (45%) of residents surveyed indicated having seen or heard the
slogan, “Don’t Trash Arizona” (aided + unaided). While statistically similar with the 48%
recorded in 2012, this is significantly lower than the 52% recorded in 2011. Although
not statistically significant, the percentage of males aged 18 to 34 within the general
population study who report having seen or heard the slogan was greater than the
percentage of all other residents reporting awareness (53% vs. 44%).

•

Among those who indicated they had seen or heard litter-related advertising in the past
three months, over half (57%) reported they did not recall the main slogan of the
advertising. This is consistent with the 55% recorded in 2012.

•

The proportion of residents who indicated they have heard the slogan “No cups, cans
or butts! Don’t Trash Arizona” remained stable from 2012 (19%). Again, although not
statistically significant, a larger proportion of males aged 18 to 34 indicated awareness
of this slogan compared to the proportion of all other residents aware of the slogan
(23% vs. 18%).

•

Residents who were familiar with “Don’t Trash Arizona” or “No cups, cans or butts!
Don’t Trash Arizona” reported seeing and/or hearing the slogan from a variety of
sources, and the most common sources mentioned were general similar to 2012.
Residents mentioned street/highway signs and billboards (25% each), as well as
television (19%) and radio (16%).

•

Approximately two thirds (68%) of residents who were aware of Don’t Trash Arizona
advertising were unable to name a sponsor for the advertisements (consistent with
recent years).

•

One in ten (10%) residents reported familiarity with the litter hotline. While comparable
to the 12% recorded in 2012, it is significantly lower than the 14% recorded in 2009.

•

Less than one in ten (7%) residents surveyed reported they were aware of
www.donttrasharizona.com. While similar to the figure recorded in 2012 (9%), it is
significantly lower than the figures recorded from 2008 to 2011 (11% to 14%).

L I T T E R

S U R V E Y

–

2 0 1 3

6

•

Male residents aged 18 to 34 were slightly more likely than all other residents to
indicate awareness of the website (11% vs. 6%).

•

This year, 10% of residents aware of the website reported they have actually visited
the site. While this figure is higher than in recent years (a range of 1% to 7%), due to
low sample sizes it is not considered significantly higher.

•

Approximately three in ten (28%) residents indicated they would be very likely to report
someone littering. This figure has fluctuated only slightly over the past several years (a
range of 23% to 27%). Males in the target age group were significantly less likely than
all residents to indicate a likelihood to report littering (12% vs. 31%).

•

The most common preferred method of gathering information about litter/littering
mentioned by residents continues to be the Internet (mentioned by 50%) and 15%
indicated they would specifically refer to the Don’t Trash AZ website. Males aged 18 to
34 in the general population study were more likely than all other residents to
specifically mention the Don’t Trash AZ website as a potential source for information
about littering (26% vs. 13%).

•

When asked about communication preferences, residents most often mentioned using
Facebook (mentioned by 36%), e-mail using a mobile device (29%), or Internet
resources such as Google/AOL/Yahoo (22%). Mentions of e-mail using a computer
dropped significantly compared to 2012 (6%, down from 15%) while mentions of e-mail
using a mobile device have increased significantly since 2011 (29%, up from 17%).

Profile of Litterers

M A G

•

The percentage of admitted litterers in the general population sample continues to
increase and it as the highest point recorded since 2006 (35%, vs. a range of 23% to
33%).

•

Those most likely to be admitted litterers are residents under the age of 35 vs. older
residents (64% vs. 25%), specifically, male residents aged 18 to 34 vs. all other
residents (70% vs. 30%).

L I T T E R

S U R V E Y

–

2 0 1 3

7

I.

INTRODUCTION

A.

Background and Methodology

The Maricopa Association of Governments (MAG), through Olson Communications,
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 December 2006 benchmark and subsequent studies, which were
conducted August 2008, August 2009, August 2010, August 2011, and August 2012.
For surveys prior to 2011, interviewing was conducted using a Random Digit Dial (RDD)
database comprised of “landline” phone numbers from targeted zip codes. In each
subsequent year, interviewing was conducted using both a Random Digit Dial (RDD) with
landline phone numbers, as well as a supplemental cell phone database. Cell phone sample
is necessary both to speak with cell-phone only residents, and to fulfill quotas among younger
residents, particularly the target demographic of male residents aged 18 to 34.
To ensure an accurate representation of Maricopa County residents, both age and gender
quotas were established.
Age

% of
sample

18 to 34 years old
35 to 54 years old
55+ years old

28%
43%
30%

Male
Female

50%
50%

Results are based on 451 fifteen-minute telephone interviews conducted with 225 male and
226 female residents. The margin of error for the survey is approximately +4.7% at the 95%
confidence level.

M A G

L I T T E R

S U R V E Y

–

2 0 1 3

8

B.

Significance Testing and Sub-Group Analysis

Throughout this report, figures in bold or underlined appear in certain charts and graphs. This
indicates that the number is significantly higher or lower, respectively, at the 95% confidence interval,
than the same figure in 2012.
For example, in the table below, the 15% in Column B for Yes means that the percentage of 2013
residents who answered “yes” is significantly lower than the percentage of 2012 residents who gave
that same answer.
In yearly tracking charts and tables, the current year’s results are only compared in this manner to the
previous year’s results for the same question.

Response
Yes

2013
n=451
15%

2012
n=602
35%

Data was analyzed by the following demographic sub-groups:
• Gender: male, female
• Age: < 35, 35-54, 55+
• Ethnicity: Caucasian, Non-Caucasian
• Education: High school or less, some college, college graduate or more
• Income: annual household incomes of < $50,000, between $50,000-$100,000, and >
$100,000
• Target demographic: males aged 18 to 34 vs. all other residents
NOTE: Throughout the report certain phrases are hyperlinked to the information from the Target
Oversample data that is available in Appendix B to provide additional detail. Information with
hyperlinks are shown in blue font.

C.

Demographics

Per established quotas, the gender composition of the survey was evenly split (50% females
and 50% males). Overall, the demographic profile of respondents was very similar to the
previous year.
The average age of residents was 44.0 years, which is comparable with the 43.8 recorded in
each of the previous two survey waves. Fifty-four percent (54%) of residents surveyed were
married and four in five (79%) residents surveyed had at least some college education.
Nearly three quarters (72%) of residents indicated they are of Caucasian ethnicity, while 14%
were of Hispanic ethnicity. Nearly three quarters (72%) of residents reported they speak only
English in their households.
Average reported household income increased slightly but not significantly to $62,303 (from
$61,989 in 2012).

M A G

L I T T E R

S U R V E Y

–

2 0 1 3

9

Table 1a: Respondent Demographics

Characteristic
Male
Female
Age**
18 to 34
35 to 54
55+
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

2013
n=451
A

2012
n=600
B

2011
n=602

2010
n=601

2009
n=637

50%
50%

50%
50%

50%
50%

50%
50%

50%
50%

28%
43%
30%
44.0 yrs

28%
43%
29%
43.8 yrs

28%
43%
29%
43.8 yrs

28%
43%
29%
45.9 yrs

36%
43%
31%
46.3 yrs

54%
33%
4%
6%
2%
1%

53%
30%
5%
7%
2%
3%

53%
30%
6%
7%
1%
3%

58%
25%
7%
7%
-3%

59%
25%
7%
6%
1%
2%

6%

5%

6%

5%

4%

15%

18%

17%

18%

19%

36%
28%
15%

34%
25%
15%

35%
24%
15%

33%
23%
18%

33%
29%
13%

72%
12%
4%
1%
3%
8%

71%
14%
5%
2%
1%
7%

76%
13%
2%
1%
2%
6%

72%
14%
5%
2%
2%
5%

68%
16%
4%
2%
2%
9%

**Age categories condensed in 2011.
Bold indicates significantly higher than in 2012 at 95% confidence interval. Underlined indicates
significantly lower than in 2012 at 95% confidence interval.

M A G

L I T T E R

S U R V E Y

–

2 0 1 3

1 0

Table 1b: Respondent Demographics
2013
n=451

2012
n=600

2011
n=602

2010
n=601

2009
n=637

8%
7%
8%
11%
7%
8%
6%
8%
22%
16%
$62,303

8%
7%
7%
9%
7%
4%
7%
12%
18%
20%
$61,989

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

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

48%
10%
9%
19%
9%
4%

51%
8%
10%
18%
6%
4%

45%
10%
12%
22%
4%
4%

48%
7%

50%
9%
8%
21%
7%
3%

Profession
White collar/mgmt
Other professional
Blue collar
Education
Trade
Self-employed
Clerical/admin

21%
25%
14%
11%
9%
11%
8%

23%
25%
11%
10%
8%
7%
10%

23%
16%
15%
8%
10%
6%
9%

23%
23%
14%
12%
5%
6%

20%
15%
7%
6%
8%
8%

72%
1%

72%
1%

72%
1%

72%
3%

74%
4%

2%

3%

1%

2%

2%

4%

3%

4%

4%

4%

11%

12%

11%

6%

8%

9%

7%

8%

9%

7%

1%

3%

3%

2%

1%

Characteristic
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

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

13%
19%
6%
4%

10%

32%

Bold indicates significantly higher than in 2012 at 95% confidence interval. Underlined indicates significantly lower
than in 2012 at 95% confidence interval.

M A G

L I T T E R

S U R V E Y

–

2 0 1 3

1 1

II.

DRIVER CHARACTERISTICS

A.

Driving Habits

In 2013, two in five (40%) residents surveyed indicated they drive a 4-door sedan, while
19% reported driving sport utility vehicles and 14% indicated they drive pickup trucks.
These figures are statistically similar to 2012.
Those more likely to drive sedans include:
• Residents aged 55 and older vs. younger residents (48% vs. 36%)

Those more likely to drive SUVs include:
• Caucasian residents vs. residents of other ethnicity (21% vs. 13%)
• Residents with at least some college education vs. residents with less education (21%

vs. 10%)

• Residents with annual household incomes of at least $100,000 vs. residents with lower

annual household incomes (27% vs. 15%)

• All other residents besides males aged 18 to 34 (20% vs. 11%)

Those more likely to drive pickup trucks include:
• Male residents vs. female residents (20% vs. 9%)
• Residents with a high school education or less vs. residents with higher education

(24% vs. 12%)
• Residents aged 35 to 54 vs. younger and older residents (20% vs. 10% and 11%,
respectively)
Table 2: Type of Vehicle

2013
n=451

2012
n=600

2011
n=602

2010
n=601

2009
n=637

Sedan (4-door)
Pickup truck
Sports utility
Van/mini-van
Coupe (2-door)
Don’t drive
Station wagon
Car (unspecified)
Motorcycle

40%
14%
19%
8%
8%
6%
1%
1%
1%

44%
16%
14%
7%
7%
5%
2%
1%
1%

36%
13%
18%
7%
4%
7%
-10%
1%

42%
16%
19%
7%
7%
6%
--1%

39%
16%
20%
11%
7%
5%
--1%

Don’t know/ refused

1%

1%

2%

1%

--

Top vehicle responses

Q7: What type of vehicle do you most often drive or ride in?
Note: Question wording modified in 2011 to 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 3

1 2

B.

Litterbag Use

Approximately two-thirds (64%) of residents surveyed indicated they have a litterbag
or can for use in their vehicles, which is consistent with the 66% recorded in 2012.
Those more likely to say “yes” include:
•
•

Female residents vs. male residents (69% vs. 59%)
All other residents vs. male residents aged 18 to 34 (66% vs. 52%)

Among those who do not currently have a litter bag or can in their vehicles, seven in
ten (71%) reported they would consider using one in the future. While not a significant
increase from 2012 (64%), this is the highest figure recorded in the last several years.
Residents younger than 55 were more likely than residents aged 55 and older to say “yes”
(76% vs. 57%).

Li#erbag	
  or	
  Trashcan	
  Use	
  in	
  Vehicle	
  
Have	
  bag/can	
  in	
  
vehicle	
  

56%	
  

64%	
  
66%	
  
65%	
  
69%	
  
66%	
  

57%	
  

If	
  no,	
  would	
  consider	
  	
  
using	
  in	
  future?	
  

Yes	
  

50%	
  

71%	
  
64%	
  
67%	
  
64%	
  
60%	
  

53%	
  

28%	
  
34%	
  
31%	
  
33%	
  
36%	
  

No	
  

2010	
  
2009	
  

45%	
  

2008	
  

1%	
  
2%	
  
2%	
  
3%	
  
4%	
  
5%	
  
4%	
  

0%	
  

2012	
  
2011	
  

43%	
  

Maybe	
  

2013	
  

2006	
  

20%	
  

40%	
  

60%	
  

80%	
  

2013	
  n=451;	
  2012	
  n=600;	
  2011	
  n=602;	
  2010	
  n=601;	
  2009	
  n=637;	
  2008	
  n=744;	
  2006	
  n=748	
  
Q19:	
  Do	
  you	
  have	
  a	
  li0er	
  bag	
  or	
  trash	
  can	
  in	
  your	
  vehicle?	
  	
  
Q20:	
  [If	
  no	
  in	
  Q19]	
  Would	
  you	
  consider	
  keeping	
  a	
  li0er	
  bag	
  or	
  trash	
  can	
  in	
  your	
  vehicle?	
  	
  

M A G

L I T T E R

S U R V E Y

–

2 0 1 3

1 3

C.

Smokers

Compared to previous recent years, a comparable proportion (14%) of residents
reported they smoke. Residents more likely to indicate that they smoke include:
•
•
•

Caucasian residents vs. residents of other ethnicity (16% vs. 9%)
Residents without a college degree vs. residents with a college degree or even higher
education (20% vs. 7%)
Residents with annual household incomes of less than $50,000 vs. those with higher
annual household incomes (20% vs. 12%)

Two in five (40%) smokers reported they use an ashtray in their vehicles. While this is
a smaller proportion compared to 2012 (51%), it is not a statistically significant
decrease. One quarter (25%) of smokers indicated they do not smoke in the car at all.
Table 3: 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.
Don’t know/refused.

2013
n=451

2012
n=600

2011
n=602

2010
n=601

2009
n=637

14%

14%

17%

18%

15%

n=65
40%
18%
25%
11%
6%

n=83
51%
18%
16%
12%
4%

n=101
43%
10%
2%
7%
13%

n=105
53%
13%
7%
9%
5%

n=97
49%
19%
13%
9%
7%

--

--

25%

12%

3%

Q9: Do you smoke?
Q10: [If yes in Q9] When you are in a vehicle, do you USUALLY dispose of cigarette butts…?
Note: Prior to 2012, “Don’t smoke in the car” was not a pre-coded response category.

M A G

L I T T E R

S U R V E Y

–

2 0 1 3

1 4

D.

Truck Drivers

As noted earlier, a comparable proportion (14%) of residents surveyed reported they
drive a pickup truck, compared to recent years.
Those more likely to report driving pickup trucks include:
• Male residents vs. female residents (20% vs. 9%).
• Residents with a high school education or less vs. residents with higher education

(24% vs. 12%).
• Residents aged 35 to 54 vs. younger and older residents (20% vs. 10% and 11%,
respectively).
Table 4: Pickup Truck Drivers

Response
Drive pickup truck

2013
n=451

2012
n=600

2011
n=602

2010
n=601

2009
n=637

14%

16%

13%

16%

16%

Q7: What type of vehicle do you most often drive or ride in?

Types of litter reportedly deposited by pickup truck drivers into the bed of the truck
were generally consistent with mentions from previous years. Pickup truck drivers
most commonly reported discarding soda cans/bottles (16%), unspecified nonbiodegradable trash (11%), and plastic bags or other plastic items (11%) into the truck
bed. A breakdown of the most common types of litter discarded is below in Table 5.
Half (50%) of pickup truck drivers indicated they do not discard items into their truck
bed, which is consistent with previous years.

M A G

L I T T E R

S U R V E Y

–

2 0 1 3

1 5

Table 5: Litter via Truck Bed – Total Responses
Among those who indicate they drive a truck

2013
n=64

2012
n=86

2011
n=59

2010
n=94

2009
n=97

Nothing
Soda cans/bottles
Trash/non biodegradable
(unspecified)
Plastic bags/other plastic
Lawn debris
Small pieces of paper
Water cans/bottles
Cardboard
Furniture
Construction debris
Cups (Styrofoam, plastic, paper)
Cigarette packs/butts
Food/organic material
Beer cans/bottles
Fast food wrappers
Glass
Paper/ newspaper/ napkins
Everything/anything/ all of it
Tires
Wood/toothpick
Car parts/ batteries
Other food wrappers
Appliances
Aluminum cans

50%
16%

52%
17%

44%
17%

48%
10%

44%
10%

11%

6%

10%

5%

7%

11%
9%
9%
6%
6%
5%
3%
3%
2%
2%
2%
2%
2%
---------

4%
11%
6%
5%
1%
-6%
-1%
1%
---5%
1%
1%
1%
-----

8%
14%
5%
7%
2%
2%
5%
2%
2%
-2%
2%
-5%
2%
---2%
2%
2%

3%
7%
5%
8%
2%
-3%
--2%
1%
1%
-2%
---1%
1%
---

5%
11%
-3%
3%
-4%
5%
-5%
4%
1%
------1%
---

Don’t know

2%

1%

2%

3%

5%

Top items reported

Q15: 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 3

1 6

Over three quarters (77%) of pickup truck drivers reported, on average, they always
secure items in the back of their pickup truck. While this is statistically similar to the
71% in 2012, it is significantly higher than the 54% recorded in 2011). Truck drivers
under the age of 35 were more likely than older truck drivers to report that they always secure
their loads (100% vs. 71%).

How	
  O6en	
  Truck	
  Drivers	
  Secure	
  Loads	
  
Always	
  

54%	
  

77%	
  
71%	
  

64%	
  
70%	
  

11%	
  
10%	
  
19%	
  
17%	
  
11%	
  
6%	
  
6%	
  
12%	
  
7%	
  
5%	
  
1%	
  
6%	
  
3%	
  
3%	
  
5%	
  
3%	
  
5%	
  
5%	
  
2%	
  
7%	
  
2%	
  
2%	
  
7%	
  
7%	
  
2%	
  

Most	
  of	
  the	
  Pme	
  
SomePmes	
  
Rarely	
  
Never	
  
Don't	
  Know	
  

2013	
  
2012	
  
2011	
  
2010	
  
2009	
  

0%	
   10%	
   20%	
   30%	
   40%	
   50%	
   60%	
   70%	
   80%	
   90%	
   100%	
  
Truck	
  Drivers:	
  2013	
  n=64;	
  2012	
  n=86;	
  2011	
  n=54;	
  2010	
  n=94;	
  2009	
  n=97	
  	
  

Table 6: How often Truck Drivers Secure Loads
2013
n=64

2012
n=86

2011
n=54

2010
n=94

2009
n=97

NET likely
(Always + Most)

88%

81%

73%

81%

81%

Always

77%

71%

54%

64%

70%

Most of the time
Sometimes
Rarely
Never
Don’t know

11%
6%
1%
3%
2%

10%
6%
6%
5%
2%

19%
12%
3%
5%
7%

17%
7%
3%
2%
7%

11%

Frequency

5%
5%
7%
2%

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.)?
Note: Question added in 2009

M A G

L I T T E R

S U R V E Y

–

2 0 1 3

1 7

Approximately two thirds (66%) of residents surveyed indicated they never drive in a
vehicle that hauls items in an open-air trailer or strapped to a luggage rack, which is
consistent with the 64% recorded in 2012. One quarter (24%) claim to do so a few
times a year, and 5% report doing so at least weekly.
The target demographic, male residents aged 18 to 34, were more likely than all other
residents to indicate traveling with trailers or luggage racks at least a few times a year (53%
vs. 31%).

Frequency	
  of	
  Traveling	
  with	
  Trailers	
  or	
  	
  
Luggage	
  Racks	
  
24%	
  
27%	
  
27%	
  
21%	
  

A	
  few	
  Pmes	
  a	
  year	
  
5%	
  
4%	
  
6%	
  
4%	
  

1	
  to	
  2	
  Pmes	
  a	
  
month	
  

2013	
  

At	
  least	
  once	
  a	
  week	
  

2%	
  
2%	
  
1%	
  
4%	
  

2011	
  

Daily	
  

3%	
  
3%	
  
2%	
  
2%	
  

2012	
  

2010	
  
66%	
  
64%	
  
64%	
  
69%	
  

Never	
  
0%	
  

20%	
  

40%	
  

60%	
  

80%	
  

100%	
  

2013	
  n=451;	
  2012	
  n=600;	
  2011	
  n=602;	
  2010	
  n=587	
  	
  	
  	
  
Q17:	
  How	
  oFen	
  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?	
  	
  
Note:	
  QuesPon	
  added	
  in	
  2010	
  

M A G

L I T T E R

S U R V E Y

–

2 0 1 3

1 8

The vast majority (87%) of residents who mentioned that they ride in a vehicle that
transports items in a trailer or luggage rack at least a few times a year indicated they
always secure the load they are hauling (similar to the 86% recorded in 2012, and now
representing a peak since 2010).
Consistent with previous years, among drivers who mentioned they rarely or never secure
their loads, the top reason mentioned for not securing loads was the item(s) is heavy enough
not to fly out (mentioned by 29%).

How	
  O6en	
  Those	
  with	
  Trailers	
  or	
  Luggage	
  Racks	
  Secure	
  
Loads	
  
87%	
  
86%	
  
84%	
  
77%	
  

Always	
  

8%	
  
9%	
  
11%	
  
17%	
  

SomePmes	
  

2013	
  

3%	
  
3%	
  
4%	
  
5%	
  

Never	
  

2012	
  
2011	
  

2%	
  
2%	
  
1%	
  
1%	
  

Don't	
  Know	
  /	
  
Refused	
  

0%	
  

2010	
  

20%	
  

40%	
  

60%	
  

80%	
  

100%	
  

Open-­‐air	
  trailer/luggage	
  rack	
  users:	
  2013	
  n=155;	
  2012	
  n=218;	
  2011	
  n=219;	
  2010	
  n=184	
  
Q18:	
  [If	
  more	
  than	
  'never'	
  in	
  Q17]	
  On	
  average,	
  how	
  oFen	
  do	
  you	
  secure	
  the	
  load	
  that	
  you	
  are	
  
hauling	
  (either	
  with	
  Nes,	
  bungees,	
  a	
  tarp,	
  etc.?)	
  
Note:	
  Data	
  is	
  not	
  completely	
  comparable	
  from	
  2010	
  to	
  2011/2012	
  –	
  in	
  2010,	
  users	
  were	
  offered	
  
‘somePmes’	
  and	
  ‘most	
  of	
  the	
  Pme’,	
  which	
  for	
  comparison	
  purposes	
  were	
  combined	
  as	
  
‘somePmes’	
  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 3

1 9

III.LITTER AWARENESS AND BEHAVIOR
A.

Perception of Litter as Problem along Freeways

Approximately two thirds (67%) of residents surveyed indicated they believe litter
along Maricopa County freeways is a “big” or “moderate” problem, which is consistent
with recent years. Interestingly, the percentage of males aged 18 to 34 who indicated
that litter is a “big problem” doubled from 11% in 2012 to 22% in 2013.
One in three (32%) residents surveyed indicates that litter along county freeways is either a
“small” problem or “not a problem at all”. Those more likely to indicate they believe litter along
freeways is “not a problem at all” include:
•
•

Non-Caucasian residents vs. Caucasian residents (10% vs. 3%)
Residents with annual household incomes of less than $50,000 per year vs. residents
with annual incomes of $100,000 or more (5% vs. 1%)

PercepEon	
  of	
  Li#er	
  along	
  Maricopa	
  County	
  Freeways	
  
21%	
  
20%	
  
21%	
  
21%	
  
20%	
  
23%	
  

Big	
  problem	
  

37%	
  
46%	
  
47%	
  
44%	
  
46%	
  
47%	
  
41%	
  
40%	
  

Moderate	
  

Small	
  problem	
  
16%	
  
5%	
  
6%	
  
8%	
  
6%	
  
6%	
  
7%	
  
4%	
  

No	
  problem	
  

1%	
  
1%	
  
2%	
  
2%	
  
2%	
  
2%	
  
4%	
  

Don't	
  Know	
  
0%	
  

27%	
  
26%	
  
25%	
  
25%	
  
25%	
  
26%	
  

2013	
  
2012	
  
2011	
  
2010	
  
2009	
  
2008	
  
2006	
  

5%	
   10%	
   15%	
   20%	
   25%	
   30%	
   35%	
   40%	
   45%	
   50%	
  

2013	
  n=451;	
  2012	
  n=600;	
  2011	
  n=602;	
  2010	
  n=601;	
  2009	
  n=637;	
  2008	
  n=744;	
  2006	
  n=748	
  

M A G

L I T T E R

S U R V E Y

–

2 0 1 3

2 0

Table 7: Freeway Litter as a Problem in Maricopa County

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

2013
n=451

2012
n=600

2011
n=602

2010
n=601

2009
n=637

21%
46%
27%
5%
1%

20%
47%
26%
6%
1%

21%
44%
25%
8%
2%

21%
46%
25%
6%
2%

20%
47%
25%
6%
2%

Q8: In your opinion, how big of a problem is litter along freeways in Maricopa County? Would you
say it is a…
Note: In 2009 question was changed to “Maricopa County” where previously it was “in your county.”

M A G

L I T T E R

S U R V E Y

–

2 0 1 3

2 1

B.

Personal Littering

Approximately three in five (61%) of residents surveyed indicated they have not littered
in the past year. While this is statistically similar to the 65% recorded in 2012, it
represents the lowest percentage recorded in recent years and it significantly lower
than values recorded in years prior to 2012 (a range of 69% to 74%). The target group,
male residents aged 18 to 34, was less likely than all other residents to indicate they have not
littered in the past year (29% vs. 66%).
Among those admit to littering in the past year, types of litter mentioned were
generally consistent with 2012 mentions. Food/organic material (mentioned by 36%),
small pieces of paper (31%) and water bottles (10%) were the most commonly
mentioned types of litter.
Table 8: Items Personally Discarded as Litter – Total Responses

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

2013
n=451

2012
n=600

2011
n=602

2010
n=601

2009
n=637

61%

65%

70%

74%

69%

(n=176)
36%
31%
10%
8%
8%
7%
3%
2%
2%
1%
1%
1%
1%
1%
-------

(n=211)
40%
31%
14%
13%
6%
5%
1%
1%
-2%
2%
1%
--1%
------

(n=181)
41%
29%
10%
10%
13%
12%
-1%
1%
---3%
--------

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

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

9%

8%

4%

2%

3%

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 3

2 2

C.

Littering Circumstances

Over half (52%) of those who indicated they have littered in the past year indicated
they did so while driving or riding in a vehicle. This is similar to figures recorded in
recent years (a range of 46% to 53%). Other common circumstances mentioned were while
walking around (mentioned by 14%) and due to the lack of an available trashcan (5%).
Male residents aged 18 to 34 were more likely than all other residents to indicate they littered
while walking outside (30% vs. 8%).
Table 9: Littering Situation – Total Responses
Among those who indicated they have littered in the past year
2013
n=176

2012
n=211

2011
n=177

2010
n=149

2009
n=195

Driving/riding/traveling in vehicle.
Walking outside
No trash can around
Cleaning out car
Opened door/window–flew out
Just threw it/anywhere I could
Eating food/chewing gum
Flew out of truck bed
Smoking/discarded cigarettes
Just being lazy
Missed the trash can
At home
Don’t consider it litter/biodegradable stuff
Wouldn’t fit in the trash
In a hurry
In a parking lot
I didn’t litter
In the desert/ middle of nowhere
Shopping
My kid/grandkid did it
At work/working
Camping/hiking
Let the animals eat it

52%
14%
5%
4%
4%
3%
2%
2%
1%
1%
1%
1%
1%
1%
----------

46%
10%
6%
8%
4%
6%
4%
1%
1%
1%
1%
1%
--2%
1%
--------

47%
11%
5%
2%
4%
6%
2%
2%
1%
---2%
1%
2%
-4%
2%
2%
2%
1%
-1%

48%
11%
6%
3%
5%
3%
------1%
---1%
1%
-1%
-1%
--

53%
8%
5%
2%
4%
3%
------2%
---3%
2%
-2%
----

Don’t know/can’t remember

10%

Top situations

15%

12%

13%

11%

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? Any other circumstances?

M A G

L I T T E R

S U R V E Y

–

2 0 1 3

2 3

D.

Reasons for Littering When Driving

The most common reason mentioned for littering when driving continues to be lack of
convenient trash receptacles (mentioned by 15%, similar to the 13% recorded in 2012).
Other common reasons mentioned were that the litter was biodegradable (12%), it was
accidental (7%) and that it was “just easy to do” (7%).
Residents with annual household incomes of less than $100,000 were more likely than
residents with higher annual household incomes to say that they do not litter when driving
(38% vs. 11%).
Table 10: Reasons for Littering when Driving – Total Responses
Among those who indicated they have littered in the past year
2013
n=176

2012
n=211

2011
n=181

2010
n=147

2009
n=195

I don’t litter when driving.
No trash receptacles are convenient.
I only litter food scraps – they are
biodegradable.
It was an accident/unintentional.
It’s easy.
I don’t want to keep it in my car.
I don’t consider throwing out gum,
small wrappers, cigarette butts litter.
Cigarettes stink up the car
I only did it once/don’t do it often
I’m lazy.
Don’t have an ashtray
Didn’t want it anymore/tired of chewing
it.
Out of habit

34%
15%

38%
13%

33%
10%

32%
14%

36%
16%

12%

11%

13%

17%

3%

7%
7%
6%

9%
4%
8%

9%
5%
8%

5%
3%
3%

5%
8%
11%

4%

3%

4%

3%

5%

2%
2%
2%
1%

1%
-1%
--

--3%
--

--3%
--

--3%
--

1%

1%

--

--

--

1%

--

--

--

--

Don’t know.

6%

9%

Top responses

Q14: Why do you litter WHEN DRIVING?

M A G

L I T T E R

S U R V E Y

–

2 0 1 3

9%

13%

10%

2 4

E.

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.
Similar to recent years, residents reported the most common littering situation they
have experienced in the past three months is trash falling out of a vehicle (25%). The
next most common scenario was riding in a vehicle where a beverage container was
thrown out the window (13%).
Male residents aged 18 to 34 were significantly more likely than all other residents to select
“past three months” for the majority of the scenarios.
Table 11a: Personal Experience with Littering Scenarios

Scenario
Someone in a vehicle you were in threw trash out in an
area that had no litter – 2013
2012
2011
2010
You or someone you were with got a ticket or warning
for littering - 2013
2012
2011
2010
Rather than keep a beverage container in the car, you,
or someone in a vehicle you were in, threw out a can
or bottle – 2013
2012
2011
2010
Someone in a vehicle you were in threw trash out in an
area that already had lots of litter – 2013
2012
2011
2010

Past 3
months

3+ months

Never

6%

12%

82%

6%
6%
N/A

10%
15%
N/A

84%
79%
N/A

8%

14%

78%

9%
8%
1%

10%
12%
-

81%
80%
99%

13%

9%

78%

14%
14%
2%

10%
9%
8%

76%
77%
90%

8%

11%

81%

7%
7%
6%

14%
14%
15%

79%
79%
79%

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 within the past 3 months,” Have experienced
over 3 months ago,” or “Have never experienced.”
Bold indicates significantly higher than in 2012 at 95% confidence interval. Underlined indicates significantly lower than
in 2012 at 95% confidence interval.

M A G

L I T T E R

S U R V E Y

–

2 0 1 3

2 5

Table 11b: Personal Experience with Littering Scenarios (Continued)

Rating
Someone in a vehicle you were in threw out a can,
bottle or litter out onto the side of the road – 2013
2012
2011
2010
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 – 2013
2012
2011
2010
You threw out a small item from your vehicle like a
candy wrapper, scrap paper, etc. – 2013
2012
2011
2010
You had problems with a vehicle and left debris like
tire, part of a tire, or other stuff on the roadside –
2013
2012
2011
2010
You noticed that some trash fell out of a pickup or
other vehicle you were driving in – 2013
2012
2011
2010

M A G

L I T T E R

S U R V E Y

–

2 0 1 3

Past 3
months

3+ months

Never

5%

12%

83%

5%
7%
6%

13%
13%
14%

82%
80%
80%

-

2%

98%

1%
1%
8%

2%
2%
15%

97%
97%
77%

2%

10%

88%

4%
3%
9%

8%
11%
12%

88%
86%
79%

5%

12%

83%

5%
7%
13%

13%
13%
8%

82%
80%
79%

25%

20%

55%

28%
24%
24%

21%
21%
21%

52%
55%
55%

2 6

IV. CAMPAIGN AWARENESS
A.

Awareness of Campaign

1.

General Awareness

Over one fourth of residents (27%) surveyed indicated they had seen advertising
related to litter or littering in the past three months, slightly reversing the significant
decrease seen between 2011 and 2012 (32% down to 25%).
No significant differences among demographic sub-groups were observed, however, males
aged 18 to 34 in the general population study were slightly more likely than all other residents
to report seeing or hearing ads about litter (32% vs. 26%). It is important to note that this
percentage is significantly higher when looking at the data from the total target group
oversample (36% vs. 26%).

Have	
  Seen	
  Ads	
  for	
  Li#er	
  
Within	
  last	
  3	
  months	
  

	
  

27%	
  
25%	
  
32%	
  
30%	
  
27%	
  
25%	
  
25%	
  

Yes	
  

70%	
  
72%	
  
64%	
  
65%	
  
69%	
  
71%	
  
73%	
  

No	
  

Don't	
  Know	
  

3%	
  
3%	
  
4%	
  
5%	
  
4%	
  
4%	
  
2%	
  

2013	
  
2012	
  
2011	
  
2010	
  
2009	
  
2008	
  
2006	
  

0%	
   10%	
   20%	
   30%	
   40%	
   50%	
   60%	
   70%	
   80%	
   90%	
   100%	
  
2013	
  n=451;	
  2012	
  n=600;	
  2011	
  n=602;	
  2010	
  n=601;	
  2009	
  n=637;	
  2008	
  n=744;	
  2006	
  n=748	
  
Q21:	
  In	
  the	
  past	
  three	
  months,	
  have	
  you	
  seen,	
  heard	
  or	
  read	
  any	
  adverNsements	
  related	
  to	
  
li0er	
  or	
  li0ering?	
  

M A G

L I T T E R

S U R V E Y

–

2 0 1 3

2 7

2.

Recalled Messages and Slogans

Among those who indicated they had seen or heard advertising related to litter in the
past 3 months, recalled messages were generally similar to 2012. The most often
recalled message was “Don’t litter” or “Keep Arizona clean” (mentioned by 29%),
followed by “the fines” (16%).
Table 12: Recalled Messages of Litter-Related Advertising
Among those who indicated they remember seeing ads
related to litter or littering in the past 3 months

2013
n=121

2012
n=150

2011
n=194

2010
n=183

2009
n=170

Don’t litter/keep Arizona clean
The fines
It was a sign along the road/billboard
Use ashtray/cigarettes cause fires
Just because it’s a freeway doesn’t mean you
are free to litter on it
A hamburger wrapper being a 500 dollar fine/
a five hundred dollar burger
Put litter in its place/use the trash
Littering is unlawful/can get a ticket
Recycling
Saw on TV/commercial/public service
announcement
Littering is unsightly/litter is ugly
Heard on radio
Make the earth greener/go green
Litter is bad for the environment/bad for
wildlife
Tires coming apart on the road/tires along the
road way
Smokey the bear
Keep local roads clean
It’s becoming a big issue
Dumping in the desert
Cost of cleaning up/tax dollars
“No cups, cans or butts”
People littering out of their vehicle

29%
16%
13%
11%

24%
19%
15%
6%

18%
16%
12%
5%

21%
24%
6%
6%

16%
7%
15%
4%

7%

9%

7%

--

--

6%

5%

2%

9%

4%

5%
4%
4%

3%
4%
3%

-5%
4%

-4%
4%

-4%
2%

2%

3%

8%

1%

8%

2%
2%
2%

3%
1%
1%

7%
3%

1%
3%
2%

2%
4%
--

2%

1%

2%

3%

3%

2%

1%

1%

3%

--

2%
2%
2%
2%
2%
2%
2%

--1%
-1%
-1%

--------

----2%
-2%

------2%

Don’t know

8%

14%

13%

15%

10%

Top Responses

Q22: [If yes in Q21] What specifically do you remember about the ads related to litter or littering?
.

M A G

L I T T E R

S U R V E Y

–

2 0 1 3

2 8

Among those who indicated they had seen or heard litter-related advertising in the
past three months, over half (57%) reported they did not recall the main slogan of the
advertising. This is consistent with the 55% recorded in 2012.
Table 13: Main Slogan of Recalled Advertising
Among those who indicated they remember seeing ads
related to litter or littering in the past 3 months

2013
n=121

2012
n=150

2011
n=194

2010
n=183

2009
n=170

Do not litter
Don’t Trash Arizona
Recycle, reduce, reuse
You will be fined
Littering is unlawful
Keep our freeways clean
Keep Arizona Beautiful
Give a hoot, don’t pollute
Smokey the bear
Litter (unspecified)
No cups cans or butts
Don’t throw cigarette butts out the
window
$500 fine for throwing out hamburger
wrapper
It is your environment
If you pack it in, pack it out
Don’t be a litterbug

12%
3%
3%
2%
2%
2%
2%
2%
2%
2%
2%

15%
3%
2%
5%
5%
5%
2%
1%
--1%

22%
2%
1%
3%
3%
3%
------

5%
4%
-4%
3%
3%
2%
-----

9%
2%
-6%
4%
1%
1%
-----

1%

2%

--

--

--

1%

1%

1%

2%

1%

1%
1%
1%

1%
1%
--

1%
---

--1%

--3%

Don’t know

57%

55%

56%

70%

65%

Top Responses

Q23: [If yes in Q21] 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.

M A G

L I T T E R

S U R V E Y

–

2 0 1 3

2 9

B.

“Don’t Trash Arizona” Awareness

Less than half (45%) of residents surveyed indicated having seen or heard the slogan,
“Don’t Trash Arizona” (aided + unaided). While statistically similar to the 48% recorded
in 2012, this is significantly lower than the 52% recorded in 2011. Although not
statistically significant, the percentage of males aged 18 to 34 who report having seen or
heard the slogan was greater than percentage of all other residents reporting awareness
(53% vs. 44%).
Those more likely to report awareness of the slogan include:
•
•

Male residents vs. female residents (51% vs. 39%)
Residents with annual household incomes of between $50,000 and $100,000 vs. those
with lower or higher incomes (60% vs. 44% and 43%, respectively)

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

	
   45%	
  
	
  

2013	
  
2012	
  

48%	
  

2011	
  

52%	
  

2010	
  

51%	
  

2009	
  

50%	
  

2008	
  

56%	
  
43%	
  

2006	
  
0%	
  

10%	
   20%	
   30%	
   40%	
   50%	
   60%	
   70%	
   80%	
   90%	
   100%	
  

2013	
  n=451;	
  2012	
  n=600;	
  2011	
  n=602;	
  2010	
  n=601;	
  2009	
  n=637;	
  2008	
  n=744;	
  2006	
  n=748	
  
Q23:	
  [If	
  yes	
  in	
  Q21]	
  What	
  was	
  the	
  main	
  slogan	
  used	
  in	
  the	
  ads?	
  	
  
Q24:	
  [if	
  not	
  menNoned	
  in	
  Q23]	
  Have	
  you	
  seen	
  or	
  heard	
  the	
  slogan,	
  “Don’t	
  Trash	
  Arizona?”	
  	
  

M A G

L I T T E R

S U R V E Y

–

2 0 1 3

3 0

C.

“No cups, cans or butts! Don’t Trash Arizona” Awareness

The proportion of residents who indicated they have heard the slogan “No cups, cans
or butts! Don’t Trash Arizona” remained stable from 2012 (19%). Again, although not
statistically significant, a larger proportion of males aged 18 to 34 indicated awareness of this
slogan compared to the proportion of all other residents aware of the slogan (23% vs. 18%).
Those more likely to report having heard the slogan include:
•
•
•

Male residents vs. female residents (24% vs. 14%)
Non-Caucasian residents vs. Caucasian residents (27% vs. 16%)
Residents with a high school education or less vs. residents with more education (32%
vs. 15%)

Total	
  Awareness	
  	
  
Have	
  Heard	
  Slogan:	
  	
  
“No	
  cups,	
  cans	
  or	
  bu#s!	
  	
  Don’t	
  Trash	
  Arizona”	
  
Aided	
  +	
  Unaided	
  

2013	
  

19%	
  

2012	
  

19%	
  
0%	
  

10%	
  

20%	
  

30%	
  

40%	
  

50%	
  

60%	
  

70%	
  

80%	
  

90%	
   100%	
  

2013	
  n=451;	
  2012	
  n=600	
  
Q23:	
  [If	
  yes	
  in	
  Q21]	
  What	
  was	
  the	
  main	
  slogan	
  used	
  in	
  the	
  ads?	
  	
  
Q25:	
  [if	
  not	
  menNoned	
  in	
  Q23]	
  Have	
  you	
  seen	
  or	
  heard	
  the	
  slogan,	
  “No	
  cups,	
  cans	
  or	
  bu0s!	
  
Don’t	
  Trash	
  Arizona?”	
  
	
  

M A G

L I T T E R

S U R V E Y

–

2 0 1 3

3 1

Residents who were familiar with “Don’t Trash Arizona” or “No cups, cans or butts!
Don’t Trash Arizona” reported seeing and/or hearing the slogan from a variety of
sources, and the most common sources mentioned were general similar to 2012.
Residents mentioned street/highway signs and billboards (25% each), as well as
television (19%) and radio (16%).
Note: in years prior to 2012, source recognition was asked about only for the slogan “Don’t
Trash Arizona.”
Table 14: Where Saw Don’t Trash Arizona Slogan
Total responses among those indicating they had heard the slogan

2013
n=232

2012
n=321

2011
n=313

2010
n=308

2009
n=319

Street/highway signs
Billboards
Television
Radio
Newspaper
Mobile advertising truck
Internet

25%
25%
19%
16%
7%
2%
2%

23%
21%
25%
16%
4%
-1%

19%
21%
36%
24%
5%
---

16%
20%
31%
21%
4%
-2%

14%
18%
34%
22%
6%
-2%

Don’t know

18%

22%

18%

24%

20%

Top Media

Q26: [if mentioned in Q23, or ‘yes in Q24 or Q25] Where have you seen, heard or read the slogans, “Don’t
Trash Arizona” or “No cups, cans or butts: Don’t Trash Arizona?”

M A G

L I T T E R

S U R V E Y

–

2 0 1 3

3 2

Approximately two thirds (68%) of residents who were aware of Don’t Trash Arizona
advertising were unable to name a sponsor for the advertisements (consistent with
recent years).
Female residents were more likely to say “don’t know” than male residents (75% vs. 63%).
Table 15: Who Sponsors Don’t Trash Arizona Slogan
Among those indicating they had heard the slogan

Top mentioned sponsors
State/local government
ADOT
City of Phoenix
Maricopa Association of Governments
Sanitation department/ department of
waste
Maricopa County (unspecified)
Don’t know

2013
n=232
11%
6%
3%
3%

2012
n=321
12%
8%
2%
--

2%

1%

2%
68%

2011
n=313
13%
8%
2%
--

2010
n=308
17%
7%
2%
Na

2009
n=319
14%
9%
-Na

3%

3%

--

--

--

--

--

69%

70%

69%

70%

Q27:[If mentioned in Q23, or ‘yes’ in Q24 or Q25] Who sponsors the Don’t Trash Arizona advertisements?
Note: Although not read to respondents, the Maricopa Association of Governments was added to the pre-coded list
in 2011

M A G

L I T T E R

S U R V E Y

–

2 0 1 3

3 3

D.

Awareness of Litter Resources

One in ten (10%) residents surveyed reported familiarity with the litter hotline. While
comparable to the 12% recorded in 2012, it is now significantly lower than the 14%
recorded in 2009. No significant differences were observed in awareness of the hotline
among demographic sub-groups
Less than one in ten (7%) of residents surveyed reported they were aware of
www.donttrasharizona.com. While similar to the figure recorded in 2012 (9%), it is
significantly lower than the figures recorded from 2008 to 2011 (11% to 14%). Male
residents aged 18 to 34 were slightly more likely than all other residents to indicate
awareness of the website (11% vs. 6%). As shown in the appendix, however, the difference in
awareness reported by the total target population oversample is significantly higher than the
general population 17% vs. 6%)
Those groups more likely to be aware of the website include:
•
•

Residents under the age of 35 vs. residents aged 35 to 54 (10% vs. 4%)
Residents with annual household incomes of less than $100,000 vs. residents with
annual household incomes of $100,000 or more (7% vs. 2%)

Aided	
  Awareness	
  –	
  Li#er	
  Resources	
  
Hotline:	
  1-­‐877-­‐3-­‐Liaer	
  
2013	
   10%	
  
2012	
   12%	
  
2011	
   12%	
  
2010	
   13%	
  
2009	
   14%	
  
2008	
   9%	
  
2006	
   9%	
  

89%	
  
87%	
  
87%	
  
85%	
  
85%	
  
89%	
  
88%	
  

1%	
  
1%	
  
1%	
  
2%	
  
1%	
  
2%	
  
3%	
  

Don'tTrashArizona.com	
  
2013	
   7%	
  
2012	
   9%	
  
2011	
   11%	
  
2010	
   14%	
  
2009	
   12%	
  
2008	
   12%	
  
2006	
   10%	
  

91%	
  
89%	
  
87%	
  
84%	
  
86%	
  
85%	
  
88%	
  

2%	
  
2%	
  
2%	
  
2%	
  
2%	
  
3%	
  
2%	
  

0%	
   10%	
   20%	
   30%	
   40%	
   50%	
   60%	
   70%	
   80%	
   90%	
   100%	
  
Yes	
  

No	
  

Don't	
  Know	
  

2013	
  n=451;	
  2012	
  n=600;	
  2011	
  n=602;	
  2010	
  n=601;	
  2009	
  n=637;	
  2008	
  n=744;	
  2006	
  
n=748	
  
Q28:	
  Have	
  you	
  heard	
  of	
  www.DontTrashArizona.com?	
  
Q30:	
  Have	
  you	
  heard	
  about	
  the	
  Li0er	
  Hotline,	
  1-­‐877-­‐3-­‐Li0er,	
  where	
  you	
  can	
  report	
  
someone	
  who	
  li0ers?	
  

M A G

L I T T E R

S U R V E Y

–

2 0 1 3

3 4

This year, one in ten (10%) residents aware of the website reported they have actually
visited the site. While this figure is higher than in recent years (a range of 1% to 7%),
due to low sample sizes it is not considered significantly higher.

Don’t	
  Trash	
  Arizona	
  Website	
  VisitaEon	
  

Have	
  you	
  ever	
  visited	
  the	
  Don’t	
  Trash	
  Arizona	
  website?	
  
10%	
  
4%	
  
6%	
  
7%	
  
7%	
  
1%	
  

Yes	
  

	
  

2013	
  
2012	
  
90%	
  
96%	
  
94%	
  
93%	
  
93%	
  
99%	
  

No	
  

0%	
  

20%	
  

40%	
  

60%	
  

80%	
  

100%	
  

2013	
  n=30;	
  2012	
  n=53;	
  2011	
  n=67;	
  2010	
  n=83;	
  2009	
  n=73;	
  2008	
  n=72	
  
Q29:	
  [If	
  'yes'	
  in	
  Q28]	
  Have	
  you	
  ever	
  visited	
  the	
  "Don't	
  Trash	
  Arizona	
  Website"?	
  
	
  

M A G

L I T T E R

S U R V E Y

–

2 0 1 3

2011	
  
2010	
  
2009	
  
2008	
  

3 5

E.

Likelihood to Report Littering

Less than one third (28%) of residents indicated they would be “very likely” to report
someone littering. This figure has fluctuated only slightly over the past several years
(a range of 23% to 27%).
Those more likely to say they would be “very likely” to report someone for littering include:
•
•
•

Female residents vs. male residents (32% vs. 24%)
Residents aged 35 and older vs. younger residents (32% vs. 19%)
All other residents vs. males aged 18 to 34 (31% vs. 12%)

Likelihood	
  to	
  Report	
  Li#ering	
  
28%	
  
24%	
  
28%	
  
27%	
  
23%	
  
24%	
  
27%	
  

Very	
  likely	
  

34%	
  
35%	
  
33%	
  
35%	
  
37%	
  
29%	
  
35%	
  

Somewhat	
  likely	
  

23%	
  
26%	
  
25%	
  
22%	
  
27%	
  
26%	
  
22%	
  

Not	
  very	
  likely	
  

2010	
  
2009	
  
2008	
  

3%	
  
2%	
  
2%	
  
2%	
  
2%	
  
5%	
  
3%	
  

Don't	
  know	
  

0%	
  

5%	
  

2012	
  
2011	
  

12%	
  
12%	
  
12%	
  
14%	
  
11%	
  
16%	
  
13%	
  

Not	
  at	
  all	
  likely	
  

2013	
  

2006	
  

10%	
  

15%	
  

20%	
  

25%	
  

30%	
  

35%	
  

2013	
  n=451;	
  2012	
  n=600;	
  2011	
  n=602;	
  2010	
  n=601;	
  2009	
  n=637;	
  2008	
  n=744;	
  2006	
  n=748	
  
	
  

M A G

L I T T E R

S U R V E Y

–

2 0 1 3

40%	
  

3 6

Table 16: Likelihood to Report Littering
2013
n=451
A

2012
n=600
B

2011
n=602

2010
n=601

2009
n=637

NET likely
(Very + somewhat)

62%

59%

61%

62%

60%

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

28%
34%
23%
12%
3%

24%
35%
26%
12%
2%

28%
33%
25%
12%
2%

27%
35%
22%
14%
2%

23%
37%
27%
11%
2%

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?

M A G

L I T T E R

S U R V E Y

–

2 0 1 3

3 7

F.

Additional Litter Resources

The most commonly mentioned preferred method of gathering information about
litter/littering mentioned by residents continues to be the Internet (mentioned by 50%)
and 15% indicated they would specifically refer to the Don’t Trash AZ website. Males
aged 18 to 34 were more likely than all other residents to specifically mention the Don’t Trash
AZ website as a potential source for information about littering (26% vs. 13%). Information
sources mentioned by residents this year were generally similar to 2012.
Table 17: Source for Litter/Littering Information
2013
n=451

2012
n=600

2011
n=602

2010
n=601

2009
n=637

Internet
Don’t Trash AZ website
The “city”
Litter hotline
Police/ highway patrol/DPS
ADOT/highway dept.
Waste Management/ garbage company
Friend/ neighbor/family member/ teacher
I wouldn’t need that information/ wouldn’t
contact anyone
The state/governor

50%
15%
6%
4%
3%
3%
2%
2%

47%
18%
8%
5%
3%
2%
2%
1%

46%
18%
7%
5%
2%
2%
2%
1%

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

49%
18%
5%
5%
3%
2%
1%
2%

1%

2%

3%

3%

2%

1%

2%

2%

2%

2%

Don’t know

15%

15%

15%

19%

16%

Source

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?

M A G

L I T T E R

S U R V E Y

–

2 0 1 3

3 8

G.

Communication Preferences

When asked about communication preferences, residents most often mentioned using
Facebook (mentioned by 36%), e-mail using a mobile device (29%), or Internet
resources such as Google/AOL/Yahoo (22%). Mentions of e-mail using a computer
dropped significantly compared to 2012 (6%, down from 15%) while mentions of e-mail
using a mobile device have increased significantly since 2011 (29%, up from 17%).
Note: Instagram and Pinterest were added to the pre-code list in 2013, but less than one
percent of respondents mentioned each of these.
Residents more likely to report using Facebook include:
•

Residents under the age of 35 vs. older residents (53% vs. 29%)

Residents more likely to report using e-mail via a mobile device include:
•
•
•

Residents aged 35 and older vs. younger residents (33% vs. 17%)
Caucasian residents vs. non-Caucasian residents (33% vs. 21%)
Residents with at least some college education vs. residents with less education (33%
vs. 16%)
Table 18: Communications Preferences
2013
n=451

2012
n=600

2011
n=602

Facebook web page
E-mail using a cell phone or handheld device
Google/AOL/Yahoo/etc.
Text Messages using a cell phone or handheld device
Website
Nothing
Phone (unspecified)
E-mail using computer
Twitter
Internet
Newspaper/news website

36%
29%
22%
18%
16%
12%
10%
6%
6%
5%
2%

36%
25%
28%
15%
21%
11%
13%
15%
5%
6%
--

32%
17%
27%
6%
26%
12%
19%
20%
3%
6%
--

Don’t know/NA

1%

1%

3%

Top communication preferences

Q33: 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.
Bold indicates significantly higher than in 2012 at 95% confidence interval. Underlined indicates significantly lower
than in 2012 at 95% confidence interval.

M A G

L I T T E R

S U R V E Y

–

2 0 1 3

3 9

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 (35% of the total population). “Accidental Litterers” are defined as residents who
indicated they had never littered themselves, but reported being in a vehicle when littering
occurred (38% 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).
The percentage of admitted litterers in the general population sample continues to
increase and it as the highest point recorded since 2006 (35%, vs. a range of 23% to
33%).
Those most likely to be admitted litterers include:
•
•

Residents under the age of 35 vs. older residents (64% vs. 25%)
Specifically, male residents aged 18 to 34 vs. all other residents (70% vs. 30%)

Li#ering	
  Behavior	
  
2013	
  

35%	
  

2012	
  

33%	
  
26%	
  

2011	
  
2010	
  

23%	
  

25%	
  

46%	
  

28%	
  

50%	
  

27%	
  

28%	
  

44%	
  

28%	
  

2008	
  

30%	
  

41%	
  

29%	
  

27%	
  
0%	
  

S U R V E Y

–

39%	
  

34%	
  

10%	
   20%	
   30%	
   40%	
   50%	
   60%	
   70%	
   80%	
   90%	
   100%	
  
Admiaed	
  Liaerer	
  

L I T T E R

43%	
  

27%	
  

2009	
  

2006	
  

M A G

38%	
  

2 0 1 3

Accidental	
  Liaerer	
  

Non-­‐liaerer	
  

4 0

Table 19a and 19b below show the demographic characteristics of each of these groups.
Table 19a: Demographic Comparison Based on Littering Behavior
Admitted
Litterers
n=160
A

2013
Accidental
Litterers
n=171
B

NonLitterers
n=120
C

Admitted
Litterers
n=196
A

2012
Accidental
Litterers
n=257
B

NonLitterers
n=147
C

51%
49%

54%C
46%

42%
58%B

55%C
45%

51%
49%

42%
58%A

Age
18 to 34
35 to 54
55+

49%BC
36%
14%

16%
52%C
32%A

14%
39%
47%AB

41%BC
41%
17%

26%C
42%
33%A

14%
48%
38%A

Average

37.6

46.5A

49.1A

39.5

44.8A

47.8AB

48%
44%BC
2%
3%
2%

58%
27%
4%
8%A
3%

55%
25%
7%
8%
2%

51%
35%C
4%
5%
3%

56%
28%
4%
9%A
1%

53%
24%
10%AB
7%
1%

-

1%

2%

4%

2%

6%

4%

5%

12%AB

2%

6%

7%A

13%

19%

12%

20%

18%

14%

41%
28%
14%

30%
30%
16%

38%
23%
15%

38%
24%
13%

33%
25%
16%

31%
24%
15%

Characteristic
Gender
Male
Female

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

Bold indicates significantly higher than in 2012 at 95% confidence interval. Underlined indicates significantly
lower than in 2012 at 95% confidence interval.
ABC
indicates significantly higher than corresponding sub-group in the same year

M A G

L I T T E R

S U R V E Y

–

2 0 1 3

4 1

Table 19b: Demographic Comparison Based on Littering Behavior
Admitted
Litterers
n=160
A

2013
Accidental
Litterers
n=171
B

NonLitterers
n=120
C

Admitted
Litterers
n=196
A

2012
Accidental
Litterers
n=257
B

NonLitterers
n=147
C

Ethnicity
White
Hispanic
African-American
Asian
Native American
Other
Refused

69%
11%
6%
4%
4%
4%
2%

75%
16%
4%
1%
1%
2%
1%

70%
17%
5%
1%
1%
3%
3%

67%
15%
6%
1%
2%
4%
5%

72%C
14%
4%
2%
3%
2%
3%

62%
19%
3%
1%
1%
4%
11%B

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

9%
8%
8%
11%
8%
6%
7%
7%
22%
14%

6%
7%
7%
15%C
5%
11%
6%
9%
24%
10%

8%
6%
10%
7%
9%
7%
3%
7%
18%
25%AB

8%
6%
8%
11%C
8%
2%
11%
12%
19%
15%

9%
9%
6%
11%C
8%
4%
6%
14%C
16%
17%

6%
7%
8%
4%
4%
7%A
5%
7%
19%
33%AB

51%
17%BC
6%
8%
8%B
8%

49%
8%
25%A
8%
1%
8%

43%
3%
27%A
12%
3%
8%

53%
14%BC
8%
6%
7%
11%

52%
5%
20%A
6%
4%
10%

46%
5%
26%A
5%
3%
10%

74%
-

72%
-

68%
4%

74%
--

74%C
<1%

65%
3%

2%

2%

3%

3%

2%

4%

5%

4%

3%

3%

4%

3%

9%

15%

8%

11%

12%

11%

9%
1%

6%
1%

11%
2%

7%
2%

6%
2%

7%
7%AB

Characteristic

Employment
Full-time
Part-time
Retired
Housespouse
Student
Unemployed
Household
Language*
English only
Spanish only
Mostly Spanish +
some English
Equally in Spanish
and English
Mostly English +
some Spanish
English + Other
Refused

Bold indicates significantly higher than in 2012 at 95% confidence interval. Underlined indicates significantly
lower than in 2012 at 95% confidence interval.
ABC
indicates significantly higher than corresponding sub-group in the same year

M A G

L I T T E R

S U R V E Y

–

2 0 1 3

APPENDIX A
QUESTIONNAIRE

M A G

L I T T E R

S U R V E Y

–

2 0 1 3

Client:
Subject:
Date:

Maricopa Association of Governments
Litter Survey 2013
July 2013

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.

Under 18 TERMINATE
18 to 34
35 to 54
55+
Refused TERMINATE

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.
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 3

7. What type of vehicle do you most often drive or ride in..? DO NOT READ LIST
a. Sedan
b. Pick-up truck
c. Sports utility vehicle
d. Coupe
e. Van / Minivan
f. Motorcycle
g. Other
h. Don’t drive
i. 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 3

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.”
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 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.

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 – TRUCK DRIVERS SKIP TO Q15, ALL OTHERS
SKIP TO: Q17
g. Don’t know

M A G

L I T T E R

S U R V E Y

–

2 0 1 3

13. To the best of your knowledge, what were the general circumstances in terms of where
and what you were doing when you discard 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, cig 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. Dk/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

M A G

L I T T E R

S U R V E Y

–

2 0 1 3

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
b. Most of the time
c. Only sometimes
d. Rarely
e. Never
f. DK/Refused
g. 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. Sometimes
c. Never
18a: If sometimes or never – Why don’t you secure your loads all of the time?
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 litterbag or trash can in your vehicle?
a. Yes
b. No
c. Don’t know / Refused
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

M A G

L I T T E R

S U R V E Y

–

2 0 1 3

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.
a.
b.
c.
d.
e.
f.
g.
h.
i.
j.
k.
l.
m.
n.

Don’t Trash Arizona
No cups cans or butts
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 NOT MENTIONED IN Q23 “b”: Have you seen or heard the slogan, “No cups, cans
or butts! Don’t Trash Arizona?”
a. Yes
b. No
c. Don’t know / Refused
26. IF mentioned in Q23a or Q23b or YES IN Q24 or Q25: Where have you seen, heard or
read the slogans, “Don’t Trash Arizona” or “No cups, cans or butts: Don’t Trash
Arizona?” PROBE: Where else? DO NOT READ LIST. MULTIPLE RESPONSES
ALLOWED.
a. Television
b. Radio
c. Billboards
d. Convenience stores
e. Mobile advertising truck
f. Movie theaters
g. Events around the valley/materials given away at events
h. Street or highway signs
i. Newspaper
j. Online
k. Other
l. Don’t know / Refused

M A G

L I T T E R

S U R V E Y

–

2 0 1 3

27. IF mentioned in Q23a or Q23b or YES IN Q24 or Q25: Who sponsors the “Don’t Trash
Arizona” advertisements? DO NOT READ LIST. ONE RESPONSE ONLY.
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

28. Have you heard of www.DontTrashArizona.com?
a. Yes
b. No
c. Not sure/DK
29. If YES IN Q28 “a”: Have you ever visited the “Don’t Trash Arizona Website?
a. Yes
b. No
c. Don’t know
28a. IF YES: What were you looking for when you went to the Don’t Trash Arizona
website?
30. Have you heard about the Litter Hotline, 1-877-3-Litter, where you can report someone
who litters? NOTE: QUESTION MOVED WITHIN SURVEY
a. Yes
b. No
c. Don’t know / Refused
31. If you were to see someone litter, how likely are you to report this behavior to the Litter
Hotline or the Web site in the future?
a.
b.
c.
d.
e.

M A G

L I T T E R

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

S U R V E Y

–

2 0 1 3

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. Waste Management/ garbage company
j. That state/governor
k. Other
l. Don’t know/refused
33. 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
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/NA

M A G

L I T T E R

S U R V E Y

–

2 0 1 3

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? 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

M A G

L I T T E R

S U R V E Y

–

2 0 1 3

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
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 3

APPENDIX B
SUPPLEMENTAL RESULTS FOR
MALES AGED 18 TO 34

M A G

L I T T E R

S U R V E Y

–

2 0 1 3

TARGET POPULATION OVERVIEW
This appendix is supplementary in nature to the 2013 MAG litter general population
survey, a full analysis of this information is provided under separate cover.
This year, supplementary interviews were conducted with the campaign target audience
of male residents aged 18 to 34. Responses from a total of n=200 target audience
members are presented. This sample size provides a margin of error of +7.1% at the
95% confidence interval. During the course of data collection for the general population
survey, a total of n=66 surveys with this audience were completed via telephone. An
additional n=87 surveys were completed utilizing age and gender targeted cell phone
sample with the target audience. Finally, n=47 web surveys were completed with target
audience members who were identified through the WestGroup Research participant
panel.
To accommodate a web survey, certain questions from the telephone survey were
modified slightly to fit the web environment. For example, a question which is read to a
respondent over the phone may appear differently when they are reading it on a screen:
•
•

Phone: For classification purposes, may I have the Zip Code in which you live? 	
  
Web: What zip code do you live in?

Further, if a question in the telephone survey had pre-coded responses which are not
voiced to the respondent, the pre-code list was shown to the respondent in the web
setting. For this reason, comparisons between web and phone data may not be
appropriate from a statistical perspective given the different methodology.
Phone:

Web:

7. What type of vehicle do you most
often drive or ride in..? DO NOT
READ LIST
a. Sedan
b. Pick-up truck
c. Sports utility vehicle
d. Coupe
e. Van / Minivan
f. Motorcycle
g. Other
h. Don’t drive
i. Don’t know/Refused

M A G

L I T T E R

S U R V E Y

–

2 0 1 3

7. What type of vehicle do you most
often drive or ride in..?
a. Sedan
b. Pick-up truck
c. Sports utility vehicle
d. Coupe
e. Van / Minivan
f. Motorcycle
g. Other
h. Don’t drive
i. Don’t know

When appropriate, data from supplemental survey is shown next to two other subgroups: the non-target audience surveyed in 2013, and the target audience surveyed in
2012. This provides a view of how target audience responses compare with non-target
audience responses in 2013, and how they have changed, if at all, in comparison to
target audience responses in the previous year. An example chart is below:

Answer
Example

2013
Non-Target
n=385

2013
Target
n=200

2012
Target
n=100

40%

42%

48%

It is important to note that, for many questions, a full statistical comparison of the 2013
target sub-group oversample data to data from these other populations is not
appropriate due to question format differences in the web methodology used in 2013 for
the target sample supplemental survey, which allowed web respondents to see
response choice options when telephone respondents responded in an unaided
manner.
Data is also broken out for the 2013 target oversample by methodology. This provides a
view of how web responses compared with phone responses. An example chart is
below:

Answer
Example

M A G

L I T T E R

S U R V E Y

–

2 0 1 3

2013
Target
n=200

Phone
n=153

Web
n=47

31%

25%

50%

DRIVER CHARACTERISTICS
Table 2a: Type of Vehicle – Target vs. Non-Target
2013
Non-Target
n=385

2013
Target
n=200

2012
Target
n=100

Sedan (4-door)
Pickup truck
Sports utility
Van/mini-van
Coupe (2-door)
Don’t drive
Station wagon
Car (unspecified)
Motorcycle

40%
14%
20%
8%
7%
6%
1%
1%
1%

42%
16%
14%
4%
13%
4%
1%
1%
2%

48%
19%
9%
10%
8%
3%
1%
1%

Don’t know/ refused

1%

2%

-

Top vehicle types
mentioned

Q7: What type of vehicle do you most often drive or ride in?
Note: Data-to-data statistical comparisons of the 2013 target subgroup to
other populations are not appropriate, due to question format differences
between the telephone and web surveys. For example, the target sample
supplemental survey allowed web respondents to see choice options,
while telephone respondents responded in unaided manner.

Table 2b: Type of Vehicle –
2013 Target by Methodology
2013
Target
n=200

Phone
n=153

Web
n=47

Sedan (4-door)
Pickup truck
Sports utility
Van/mini-van
Coupe (2-door)
Don’t drive
Station wagon
Car (unspecified)
Motorcycle

42%
16%
14%
4%
13%
4%
1%
1%
2%

44%
15%
12%
4%
14%
5%
1%
1%
1%

38%
17%
23%
2%
11%
2%
4%

Don’t know/ refused

2%

2%

-

Top vehicle types mentioned

M A G

L I T T E R

S U R V E Y

–

2 0 1 3

Li#erbag	
  or	
  Trashcan	
  Use	
  in	
  Vehicle	
  
Have	
  bag/can	
  in	
  
vehicle	
  
If	
  no,	
  would	
  consider	
  	
  
using	
  in	
  future?	
  

53%	
  
53%	
  

66%	
  
Non-­‐target	
  2013	
  
68%	
  
77%	
  
74%	
  

Yes	
  

Target	
  2013	
  
Target	
  2012	
  

31%	
  
22%	
  
26%	
  

No	
  
1%	
  
1%	
  

Maybe	
  
0%	
  

20%	
  

40%	
  

60%	
  

80%	
  

100%	
  

2013	
  non-­‐target	
  total:	
  n=385;	
  2013	
  target	
  total:	
  n=200;	
  2012	
  target	
  total:	
  n=100	
  
Q19:	
  Do	
  you	
  have	
  a	
  li0er	
  bag	
  or	
  trash	
  can	
  in	
  your	
  vehicle?	
  	
  
Q20:	
  [If	
  no	
  in	
  Q19]	
  Would	
  you	
  consider	
  keeping	
  a	
  li0er	
  bag	
  or	
  trash	
  can	
  in	
  your	
  vehicle?	
  	
  
	
  

Table 3: Litterbag Usage in Vehicle - 2013 Target by Methodology

Response
Have bag/can in Vehicle
If no, would consider using in
future?
Yes
No
Maybe

M A G

L I T T E R

S U R V E Y

–

2 0 1 3

2013
Target
n=200

Phone
n=153

Web
n=47

53%

55%

47%

n=94

n=69

n=25

77%
22%
1%

78%
20%
2%

72%
28%
-

Table 4a: Smoking Habits and Disposing of Cigarette Butts Target vs. Non-Target
2013
Non-Target
n=385

2013
Target
n=200

2012
Target
n=100

Smoker

14%

13%

16%

Ashtray in vehicle
Something else in vehicle
Don’t smoke in the car.
It varies
Throwing out window

n=55
42%
20%
27%
9%
2%

n=26
27%
19%
12%
23%
19%

n=16
44%
19%
12%
6%
19%

-

-

-

Response

Don’t know/refused

Q9: Do you smoke?
Q10: [If yes in Q9] When you are in a vehicle, do you USUALLY dispose of cigarette
butts…?

Table 4b: Smoking Habits and Disposing of Cigarette Butts 2013 Target by Methodology
Among those indicating they smoke
2013
Target
n=200

Phone
n=153

Web
n=47

Smoker

13%

12%

15%

Ashtray in vehicle
Something else in vehicle
Don’t smoke in the car.
It varies
Throwing out window

n=26
27%
19%
12%
23%
19%

n=19
16%
21%
16%
26%
21%

n=7
58%
14%
14%
14%

-

-

-

Response

Don’t know/refused

M A G

L I T T E R

S U R V E Y

–

2 0 1 3

Table 5a: Pickup Truck Drivers – Target vs. Non-Target

Response

2013
Non-Target
n=385

2013
Target
n=200

2012
Target
n=100

14%

16%

19%

Drive pickup truck

Q7: What type of vehicle do you most often drive or ride in?

Table 5b: Pickup Truck Drivers – 2013 Target by Methodology

Response
Drive pickup truck

2013
Target
n=200

Phone
n=153

Web
n=47

16%

15%

17%

Table 6a: Litter via Truck Bed – Target vs. Non-Target
Among those who indicate they drive a truck

Top items mentioned
Soda cans/bottles
Lawn debris
Construction debris
Nothing
Plastic bags/other plastic
Water cans/bottles
Small pieces of paper
Cardboard
Paper/ newspaper/ napkins
Tires
Fast food wrappers
Furniture
Glass
Cups (Styrofoam, plastic, paper)

2013
Non-Target
n=54

2013
Target
n=31

2012
Target
n=18

13%
9%
2%
56%
7%
4%
9%
4%
4%
2%

39%
26%
26%
23%
19%
16%
10%
10%
6%
3%
3%
3%
3%
3%

33%
6%
50%
6%
11%
6%
-

Q15: What types of items do you ever put into your truck bed that you consider to be
litter or trash? What else?
Note: Data-to-data statistical comparisons of the 2013 target subgroup to other
populations are not appropriate, due to question format differences between the
telephone and web surveys. For example, the target sample supplemental survey
allowed web respondents to see choice options, while telephone respondents
responded in unaided manner.

M A G

L I T T E R

S U R V E Y

–

2 0 1 3

Table 6b: Litter via Truck Bed – 2013 Target by Methodology
Among those who indicate they drive a truck

Top items mentioned
Soda cans/bottles
Lawn debris
Construction debris
Nothing
Plastic bags/other plastic
Water cans/bottles
Small pieces of paper
Cardboard
Paper/ newspaper/ napkins
Tires
Fast food wrappers
Furniture
Glass
Cups (Styrofoam, plastic, paper)

M A G

L I T T E R

S U R V E Y

–

2 0 1 3

2013
Target
n=31

Phone
n=23

Web
n=8

39%
26%
26%
23%
19%
16%
10%
10%
6%
3%
3%
3%
3%
3%

30%
26%
13%
30%
17%
13%
9%
13%
9%
4%
4%
4%
4%
4%

62%
25%
62%
25%
25%
12%
-

Table 7a: How often Truck Drivers Secure Loads – Target vs. Non-Target
2013
Non-Target
n=54

2013
Target
n=31

2012
Target
n=18

85%

87%

78%

Always

72%

68%

61%

Most of the time
Sometimes
Rarely
Never
Don’t Know

13%
7%
2%
4%
2%

19%
13%
-

17%
11%
6%
6%
-

Frequency
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.)?

Table 7b: How often Truck Drivers Secure Loads – 2013 Target by Methodology
2013
Target
n=31

Phone
n=23

Web
n=8

NET likely
(Always + Most)

87%

91%

76%

Always

68%

78%

38%

Most of the time
Sometimes
Rarely
Never
Don’t Know

19%
13%
-

13%
9%
-

38%
25%
-

Frequency

M A G

L I T T E R

S U R V E Y

–

2 0 1 3

Frequency	
  of	
  Traveling	
  with	
  Trailers	
  or	
  	
  
Luggage	
  Racks	
  
22%	
  

A	
  few	
  Pmes	
  a	
  year	
  

44%	
  

29%	
  
5%	
  
8%	
  
8%	
  

1	
  to	
  2	
  Pmes	
  a	
  
month	
  
At	
  least	
  once	
  a	
  week	
  

1%	
  
4%	
  
4%	
  

Non-­‐target	
  2013	
  

2%	
  
4%	
  
6%	
  

Target	
  2012	
  

Daily	
  

Target	
  2013	
  

Never	
  

40%	
  

0%	
  

20%	
  

40%	
  

69%	
  
53%	
  

60%	
  

80%	
  

100%	
  

2013	
  non-­‐target	
  total:	
  n=385;	
  2013	
  target	
  total:	
  n=200;	
  2012	
  target	
  total:	
  n=100	
  
Q17:	
  How	
  oFen	
  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?	
  	
  
	
  

Table 8: Frequency of Traveling with Trailers or Luggage Racks –
2013 Target by Methodology

Frequency
A few times a year
1-2 times a month
At least once a week
Daily
Never

M A G

L I T T E R

S U R V E Y

–

2 0 1 3

2013
Target
n=200

Phone
n=153

Web
n=47

44%
8%
4%
4%
40%

42%
8%
4%
2%
44%

51%
4%
6%
11%
28%

How	
  O6en	
  Those	
  with	
  Trailers	
  or	
  Luggage	
  Racks	
  Secure	
  
Loads	
  
85%	
  
86%	
  
79%	
  

Always	
  
8%	
  
12%	
  
19%	
  

SomePmes	
  

Non-­‐target	
  2013	
  

4%	
  
2%	
  
2%	
  

Never	
  

Target	
  2013	
  
Target	
  2012	
  

3%	
  

Don't	
  Know	
  /	
  
Refused	
  
0%	
  

20%	
  

40%	
  

60%	
  

80%	
  

100%	
  

Open-­‐air	
  trailer/luggage	
  rack	
  users:	
  2013	
  non-­‐target	
  total:	
  n=120;	
  2013	
  target	
  total:	
  
n=120;	
  2012	
  target	
  total:	
  n=47	
  
Q18:	
  [If	
  more	
  than	
  'never'	
  in	
  Q17]	
  On	
  average,	
  how	
  oFen	
  do	
  you	
  secure	
  the	
  load	
  
that	
  you	
  are	
  hauling	
  (either	
  with	
  Nes,	
  bungees,	
  a	
  tarp,	
  etc.?)	
  
	
  

Table 9: How Often Those with Luggage Racks Secure Loads –
2013 Target by Methodology

Frequency
Always
Sometimes
Never
Don’t know/Refused

M A G

L I T T E R

S U R V E Y

–

2 0 1 3

2013
Target
n=120

Phone
n=86

Web
n=34

86%
12%
2%
-

92%
6%
2%
-

74%
26%
-

LITTER AWARENESS AND BEHAVIOR

PercepEon	
  of	
  Li#er	
  along	
  Maricopa	
  County	
  Freeways	
  
Big	
  problem	
  

11%	
  

20%	
  
22%	
  
48%	
  
45%	
  
49%	
  

Moderate	
  
25%	
  
28%	
  

Small	
  problem	
  

34%	
  

Non-­‐target	
  2013	
  

6%	
  
4%	
  
6%	
  

No	
  problem	
  

Target	
  2013	
  
Target	
  2012	
  

1%	
  
1%	
  

Don't	
  Know	
  
0%	
  

10%	
  

20%	
  

30%	
  

40%	
  

50%	
  

60%	
  

2013	
  non-­‐target	
  total:	
  n=385;	
  2013	
  target	
  total:	
  n=200;	
  2012	
  target	
  total:	
  n=100	
  
Q8:	
  In	
  your	
  opinion,	
  how	
  big	
  of	
  a	
  problem	
  is	
  li0er	
  along	
  freeways	
  in	
  Maricopa	
  County?	
  
Would	
  you	
  say	
  it	
  is	
  a…	
  
	
  

Table 10: Perception of Litter among Maricopa County Freeways –
2013 Target by Methodology
2013
Target
n=200

Phone
n=153

Web
n=47

Big Problem
Moderate Problem
Small problem
No Problem

22%
45%
28%
4%

20%
43%
31%
5%

26%
53%
19%
2%

Don’t know

1%

1%

-

Frequency

.

M A G

L I T T E R

S U R V E Y

–

2 0 1 3

Table 11a: Items Personally Discarded as Litter – Target vs. Non-Target
2013
Non-Target
n=385

2013
Target
n=200

2012
Target
n=100

Have not littered in
past year.

66%

32%

46%

Small pieces of paper
Food/organic material
Water bottles
Other food wrappers
Soda cans/bottles
Cigarette butts
Cups (Styrofoam, plastic,
paper)
Plastic bags/other plastic
Wood/toothpick
Paper/newspaper/napkins
Don’t know

10%
13%
3%
3%
2%
2%

26%
24%
12%
12%
9%
8%

21%
15%
12%
12%
6%
5%

1%

2%

-

1%
4%

2%
1%
1%
2%

-

Items

5%

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?
Note: Data-to-data statistical comparisons of the 2013 target subgroup to other
populations are not appropriate, due to question format differences between the
telephone and web surveys. For example, the target sample supplemental survey
allowed web respondents to see choice options, while telephone respondents
responded in unaided manner.

Table 11b: Items Personally Discarded as Litter – 2013 Target by Methodology
2013
Target
n=200

Phone
n=153

Web
n=47

Have not littered in
past year.

32%

32%

30%

Small pieces of paper
Food/organic material
Water bottles
Other food wrappers
Soda cans/bottles
Cigarette butts
Cups (Styrofoam, plastic, paper)
Plastic bags/other plastic
Wood/toothpick
Paper/newspaper/napkins

26%
24%
12%
12%
9%
8%
2%
2%
1%
1%

22%
21%
10%
9%
8%
7%
3%
1%
1%
1%

40%
36%
19%
19%
12%
12%
-

Don’t know

2%

3%

Items

M A G

L I T T E R

S U R V E Y

–

2 0 1 3

Table 12a: Littering Situation – Target vs. Non-Target
Among those who indicated they have littered in the past year

Top situations
Driving/riding/traveling in vehicle
Walking outside
Opened door/window–flew out
No trash can around
Cleaning out car
Just threw it/anywhere I could
Missed the trash can
Partying/drinking
At home
Eating food/chewing gum
Just being lazy
Flew out of truck bed
Smoking/discarded cigarettes
Don’t know/can’t remember

2013
Non-Target
n=129
54%
8%
3%
7%
5%
3%
2%
2%
1%
11%

2013
Target
n=137
59%
18%
4%
3%
2%
2%
2%
1%
1%
1%
1%
1%
1%
8%

2012
Target
n=54
41%
17%
4%
11%
4%
7%
2%
2%
6%
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? Any other circumstances?
Note: Data-to-data statistical comparisons of the 2013 target subgroup to other populations are
not appropriate, due to question format differences between the telephone and web surveys.
For example, the target sample supplemental survey allowed web respondents to see choice
options, while telephone respondents responded in unaided manner.

Table 12b: Littering Situation – 2013 Target by Methodology
Among those who indicated they have littered in the past year

Top situations
Driving/riding/traveling in vehicle
Walking outside
Opened door/window–flew out
No trash can around
Cleaning out car
Just threw it/anywhere I could
Missed the trash can
Partying/drinking
At home
Eating food/chewing gum
Just being lazy
Flew out of truck bed
Smoking/discarded cigarettes
Don’t know/can’t remember

M A G

L I T T E R

S U R V E Y

–

2 0 1 3

2013
Target
n=137

Phone
n=104

59%
18%
4%
3%
2%
2%
2%
1%
1%
1%
1%
1%
1%
8%

62%
17%
5%
4%
3%
2%
2%
1%
1%
1%
1%
1%
1%
11%

Web
n=33
52%
21%
-

Table 13a: Reasons for Littering when Driving – 2013 Target vs. Non-Target
Among those who indicated they have littered in the past year

Top Responses
I don’t litter when driving
I only litter food scraps / they are biodegradable
It was an accident/unintentional
No trash receptacles are convenient
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
Cigarettes stink up car
I’m lazy
Don’t have an ashtray
Out of habit
Don’t know

2013
Non-Target
n=129
35%
12%
7%
13%
7%
5%

2013
Target
n=137
23%
20%
15%
14%
12%
10%

2012
Target
n=54
32%
9%
9%
11%
11%
-

4%

7%

2%

2%
2%
1%
1%
7%

3%
2%
2%
2%
6%

2%
15%

Q14: Why do you litter WHEN DRIVING?
Note: Data-to-data statistical comparisons of the 2013 target subgroup to other populations are not
appropriate, due to question format differences between the telephone and web surveys. For example,
the target sample supplemental survey allowed web respondents to see choice options, while
telephone respondents responded in unaided manner.

Table 13b: Reasons for Littering when Driving – 2013 Target by Methodology
Among those who indicated they have littered in the past year

Top Responses
I don’t litter when driving
I only litter food scraps / they are biodegradable
It was an accident/unintentional
No trash receptacles are convenient
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
Cigarettes stink up car
I’m lazy
Don’t have an ashtray
Out of habit
Don’t know

M A G

L I T T E R

S U R V E Y

–

2 0 1 3

2013
Target
n=137

Phone
n=104

Web
n=33

23%
20%
15%
14%
12%
10%

21%
14%
8%
15%
10%
12%

27%
39%
39%
9%
18%
6%

7%

6%

12%

3%
2%
2%
2%
6%

1%
2%
2%
2%
8%

9%
3%
-

Table 14a: Personal Experience with Littering Scenarios – Target vs. Non-Target

Scenario
Someone in a vehicle you were in threw trash out in an
area that had no litter – Non-target 2013
Target 2013
Target 2012
You or someone you were with got a ticket or warning
for littering - Non-target 2013
Target 2013
Target 2012
Rather than keep a beverage container in the car, you,
or someone in a vehicle you were in, threw out a
can or bottle – Non-target 2013
Target 2013
Target 2012
Someone in a vehicle you were in threw trash out in an
area that already had lots of litter – Non-target 2013
Target 2013
Target 2012
Someone in a vehicle you were in threw out a can,
bottle or litter out onto the side of the road – Nontarget 2013
Target 2013
Target 2012
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 – Non-target 2013
Target 2013
Target 2012
You threw out a small item from your vehicle like a
candy wrapper, scrap paper, etc. – Non-target 2013
Target 2013
Target 2012
You had problems with a vehicle and left debris like
tire, part of a tire, or other stuff on the roadside –
Non-target 2013
Target 2013
Target 2012
You noticed that some trash fell out of a pickup or other
vehicle you were driving in – Non-target 2013
Target 2013
Target 2012

Past 3
months

3+ months

Never

4%

9%

87%

14%
13%

30%
14%

56%
73%

6%

13%

81%

20%
23%

24%
9%

56%
68%

12%

8%

80%

16%
20%

13%
13%

71%
67%

7%

8%

85%

12%
12%

28%
18%

60%
69%

4%

9%

86%

14%
9%

31%
20%

55%
71%

-

1%

99%

-

6%
3%

94%
97%

1%

8%

91%

8%
11%

28%
11%

64%
78%

4%

9%

87%

14%
9%

30%
20%

57%
71%

23%

20%

56%

39%
30%

23%
22%

38%
48%

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 within the past 3 months,” Have
experienced over 3 months ago,” or “Have never experienced.”

M A G

L I T T E R

S U R V E Y

–

2 0 1 3

Table 14b: Personal Experience with Littering Scenarios –
2013 Target by Methodology

Scenario
Someone in a vehicle you were in threw trash out in an
area that had no litter – 2013
Phone
Web
You or someone you were with got a ticket or warning
for littering - 2013
Phone
Web
Rather than keep a beverage container in the car, you,
or someone in a vehicle you were in, threw out a can
or bottle – 2013
Phone
Web
Someone in a vehicle you were in threw trash out in an
area that already had lots of litter – 2013
Phone
Web
Someone in a vehicle you were in threw out a can,
bottle or litter out onto the side of the road – 2013
Phone
Web
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 – 2013
Phone
Web
You threw out a small item from your vehicle like a
candy wrapper, scrap paper, etc. – 2013
Phone
Web
You had problems with a vehicle and left debris like
tire, part of a tire, or other stuff on the roadside –
2013
Phone
Web
You noticed that some trash fell out of a pickup or other
vehicle you were driving in – 2013
Phone
Web

M A G

L I T T E R

S U R V E Y

–

2 0 1 3

Past 3
months

3+ months

Never

14%

30%

56%

13%
15%

30%
30%

57%
55%

20%

24%

56%

19%
23%

25%
19%

56%
58%

16%

13%

71%

16%
17%

13%
11%

71%
72%

12%

28%

60%

12%
10%

28%
30%

60%
60%

14%

31%

55%

14%
13%

30%
34%

56%
53%

-

6%

94%

-

1%
2%

99%
98%

8%

28%

64%

7%
10%

28%
28%

65%
62%

14%

30%

56%

14%
13%

30%
34%

56%
53%

39%

23%

38%

37%
47%

21%
30%

42%
23%

CAMPAIGN AWARENESS

Have	
  Seen	
  Ads	
  for	
  Li#er	
  
Within	
  last	
  3	
  months	
  

	
  

26%	
  

Yes	
  

36%	
  
32%	
  

Non-­‐target	
  2013	
  

70%	
   Target	
  2013	
  
61%	
  
65%	
  
Target	
  2012	
  

No	
  
4%	
  
3%	
  
3%	
  

Don't	
  Know	
  
0%	
  

20%	
  

40%	
  

60%	
  

80%	
  

100%	
  

2013	
  non-­‐target	
  total:	
  n=385;	
  2013	
  target	
  total:	
  n=200;	
  2012	
  target	
  total:	
  n=100	
  
Q21:	
  In	
  the	
  past	
  three	
  months,	
  have	
  you	
  seen,	
  heard	
  or	
  read	
  any	
  adverNsements	
  related	
  
to	
  li0er	
  or	
  li0ering?	
  
	
  

Table 15: Have Seen Ads for Litter – 2013 Target by Methodology

M A G

L I T T E R

S U R V E Y

Frequency

2013
Target
n=200

Phone
n=153

Web
n=47

Yes
No
Don’t know

36%
61%
3%

35%
64%
1%

40%
51%
9%

–

2 0 1 3

Table 16a: Recalled Messages of Litter-Related Advertising –
Target vs. Non-Target
Among those who indicated they remember seeing ads
related to litter or littering in the past 3 months
2013
Non-target
n=100

2013
Target
n=73

2012
Target
n=32

Don’t litter/keep Arizona clean
The fines
Use ashtray/cigarettes cause fires
It was a sign along the road/billboard
Just because it’s a freeway doesn’t mean you are free to litter
on it
Don’t Trash Arizona
Heard on radio
Littering is unlawful/can get a ticket
A hamburger wrapper being a 500 dollar fine/ a five hundred
dollar burger
No cups, cans or butts
Recycling
Saw on TV/commercial/public service announcement
Diamond-backs player PSA
Put litter in its place/use the trash
Signs on the bus/light rail
“Don’t mess with Texas” ad
Litter is bad for the environment/bad for wildlife
Keep local roads/streets clean

28%
17%
10%
13%

25%
15%
15%
12%

25%
9%
3%
16%

4%

12%

12%

2%
4%

8%
8%
6%

3%
3%

5%

4%

9%

2%
4%
2%
5%
3%
2%

4%
4%
3%
3%
1%
1%
1%
1%
1%

6%
3%
9%
-

Don’t know

10%

3%

12%

Top Responses

Q22: [If yes in Q21] What specifically do you remember about the ads related to litter or littering?
Note: Data-to-data statistical comparisons of the 2013 target subgroup to other populations are not appropriate, due to
question format differences between the telephone and web surveys. For example, the target sample supplemental
survey allowed web respondents to see choice options, while telephone respondents responded in unaided manner.

M A G

L I T T E R

S U R V E Y

–

2 0 1 3

Table 16b: Recalled Messages of Litter-Related Advertising –
2013 Target by Methodology
Among those who indicated they remember seeing ads
related to litter or littering in the past 3 months
2013
Target
n=73

Phone
n=54

Web
n=19

Don’t litter/keep Arizona clean
The fines
Use ashtray/cigarettes cause fires
It was a sign along the road/billboard
Just because it’s a freeway doesn’t mean you are free to litter on it
Don’t Trash Arizona
Heard on radio
Littering is unlawful/can get a ticket
A hamburger wrapper being a 500 dollar fine/ a five hundred dollar
burger
No cups, cans or butts
Recycling
Saw on TV/commercial/public service announcement
Diamond-backs player PSA
Put litter in its place/use the trash
Signs on the bus/light rail
“Don’t mess with Texas” ad
Litter is bad for the environment/bad for wildlife
Keep local roads/streets clean

25%
15%
15%
12%
12%
8%
8%
6%

22%
15%
18%
15%
15%
7%
7%
7%

32%
16%
5%
5%
5%
10%
10%
-

4%

4%

5%

4%
4%
3%
3%
1%
1%
1%
1%
1%

4%
6%
4%
2%
2%
2%
2%
2%
-

5%
5%
5%

Don’t know

3%

2%

5%

Top Responses

M A G

L I T T E R

S U R V E Y

–

2 0 1 3

Table 17a: Main Slogan of Recalled Advertising – Target vs. Non-Target
Among those who indicated they remember seeing ads
related to litter or littering in the past 3 months
2013
Non-target
n=100

2013
Target
n=73

2012
Target
n=32

Don’t Trash Arizona
Keep Arizona Beautiful
Do not litter
Littering is unlawful
No cups cans or butts
Keep our freeways clean
Adopt a highway
You will be fined
Arizona Clean and Beautiful
Recycle, reduce, reuse
Give a hoot, don’t pollute
Smokey the Bear
It is your environment
Go Green

3%
2%
12%
2%
2%
2%
3%
2%
2%
1%
-

23%
15%
14%
10%
10%
7%
7%
6%
3%
1%
1%
1%
1%
1%

3%
3%
12%
9%
3%
3%
6%
6%
-

Don’t know

59%

41%

59%

Top Responses

Q23: [If yes in Q21] What was the main slogan used in the ads?
Note: Data-to-data statistical comparisons of the 2013 target subgroup to other
populations are not appropriate, due to question format differences between the
telephone and web surveys. For example, the target sample supplemental
survey allowed web respondents to see choice options, while telephone
respondents responded in unaided manner.

M A G

L I T T E R

S U R V E Y

–

2 0 1 3

Table 17b: Main Slogan of Recalled Advertising – 2013 Target by Methodology
Among those who indicated they remember seeing ads
related to litter or littering in the past 3 months
2013
Target
n=73

Phone
n=54

Web
n=19

Don’t Trash Arizona
Keep Arizona Beautiful
Do not litter
Littering is unlawful
No cups cans or butts
Keep our freeways clean
Adopt a highway
You will be fined
Arizona Clean and Beautiful
Recycle, reduce, reuse
Give a hoot, don’t pollute
Smokey the Bear
It is your environment
Go Green

23%
15%
14%
10%
10%
7%
7%
6%
3%
1%
1%
1%
1%
1%

9%
2%
15%
6%
4%
4%
4%
4%
2%
2%
2%
-

63%
53%
10%
21%
26%
16%
26%
10%
5%
5%

Don’t know

41%

56%

-

Top Responses

M A G

L I T T E R

S U R V E Y

–

2 0 1 3

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

	
  
44%	
  
	
  

Non-­‐target	
  2013	
  

60%	
  

Target	
  2012	
  

57%	
  
0%	
  

10%	
  

20%	
  

30%	
  

40%	
  

50%	
  

60%	
  

Target	
  2013	
  

70%	
  

80%	
  

90%	
   100%	
  

2013	
  non-­‐target	
  total:	
  n=385;	
  2013	
  target	
  total:	
  n=200;	
  2012	
  target	
  total:	
  n=100	
  
Q23:	
  [If	
  yes	
  in	
  Q21]	
  What	
  was	
  the	
  main	
  slogan	
  used	
  in	
  the	
  ads?	
  	
  
Q24:	
  [if	
  not	
  menNoned	
  in	
  Q23]	
  Have	
  you	
  seen	
  or	
  heard	
  the	
  slogan,	
  “Don’t	
  Trash	
  Arizona?”	
  
Note:	
  Data-­‐to-­‐data	
  staPsPcal	
  comparisons	
  of	
  the	
  2013	
  target	
  subgroup	
  to	
  other	
  populaPons	
  are	
  
not	
  appropriate,	
  due	
  to	
  quesPon	
  format	
  differences	
  between	
  the	
  telephone	
  and	
  web	
  surveys.	
  
For	
  example,	
  the	
  target	
  sample	
  supplemental	
  survey	
  allowed	
  web	
  respondents	
  to	
  see	
  choice	
  
opPons,	
  while	
  telephone	
  respondents	
  responded	
  in	
  unaided	
  manner.	
  

Table 18: Have Heard Slogan “Don’t Trash Arizona”– 2013 Target by Methodology
Aided + unaided

Total Awareness
“Don’t Trash Arizona”

	
  

M A G

L I T T E R

S U R V E Y

–

2 0 1 3

2013
Target
n=200

Phone
n=153

Web
n=47

60%

57%

70%

Total	
  Awareness	
  	
  
Have	
  Heard	
  Slogan:	
  	
  
“No	
  cups,	
  cans	
  or	
  bu#s!	
  	
  Don’t	
  Trash	
  Arizona”	
  
Aided	
  +	
  Unaided	
  

Non-­‐target	
  2013	
  

18%	
  

Target	
  2013	
  

26%	
  
29%	
  
0%	
  

20%	
  

40%	
  

Target	
  2012	
  
60%	
  

80%	
  

100%	
  

2013	
  non-­‐target	
  total:	
  n=385;	
  2013	
  target	
  total:	
  n=200;	
  2012	
  target	
  total:	
  n=100	
  
Q23:	
  [If	
  yes	
  in	
  Q21]	
  What	
  was	
  the	
  main	
  slogan	
  used	
  in	
  the	
  ads?	
  	
  
Q25:	
  [if	
  not	
  menNoned	
  in	
  Q23]	
  Have	
  you	
  seen	
  or	
  heard	
  the	
  slogan,	
  “No	
  cups,	
  cans	
  or	
  bu0s!	
  
Don’t	
  Trash	
  Arizona?”	
  
Note:	
  Data-­‐to-­‐data	
  staPsPcal	
  comparisons	
  of	
  the	
  2013	
  target	
  subgroup	
  to	
  other	
  populaPons	
  
are	
  not	
  appropriate,	
  due	
  to	
  quesPon	
  format	
  differences	
  between	
  the	
  telephone	
  and	
  web	
  
surveys.	
  For	
  example,	
  the	
  target	
  sample	
  supplemental	
  survey	
  allowed	
  web	
  respondents	
  to	
  
see	
  choice	
  opPons,	
  while	
  telephone	
  respondents	
  responded	
  in	
  unaided	
  manner.	
  
	
  
	
  

Table 19: Have Heard Slogan “No cups, cans or butts! Don’t Trash Arizona” –
2013 Target by Methodology
Aided + unaided

Total Awareness
“No cups, cans or butts! Don’t Trash Arizona”

M A G

L I T T E R

S U R V E Y

–

2 0 1 3

2013
Target
n=200

Phone
n=153

Web
n=47

26%

27%

23%

Table 20a: Where Saw Don’t Trash Arizona Slogan – Target vs. Non-Target
Total responses among those indicating they had heard the slogan

Top media sources
Billboards
Television
Radio
Street/highway signs
Movie theaters
Mobile advertising truck
Newspaper
Events around the valley
Convenience stores
Online
Don’t know

2013
Non-target
n=192
22%
18%
14%
27%
1%
1%
7%
1%
1%
2%
20%

2013
Target
n=127
40%
36%
32%
21%
7%
3%
2%
2%
2%
2%
12%

2012
Target
n=66
18%
20%
21%
21%
3%
3%
21%

Q26: [if mentioned in Q23, or ‘yes in Q24 or Q25] Where have you seen, heard
or read the slogans, “Don’t Trash Arizona” or “No cups, cans or butts: Don’t
Trash Arizona?”
Note: Data-to-data statistical comparisons of the 2013 target subgroup to other
populations are not appropriate, due to question format differences between the
telephone and web surveys. For example, the target sample supplemental
survey allowed web respondents to see choice options, while telephone
respondents responded in unaided manner.

Table 20b: Where Saw Don’t Trash Arizona Slogan – 2013 Target by Methodology
Total responses among those indicating they had heard the slogan
2013
Target
n=127

Phone
n=94

Web
n=33

Billboards
Television
Radio
Street/highway signs
Movie theaters
Mobile advertising truck
Newspaper
Events around the valley
Convenience stores
Online

40%
36%
32%
21%
7%
3%
2%
2%
2%
2%

39%
37%
32%
16%
2%
3%
1%
1%

42%
33%
33%
36%
21%
6%
6%
9%
3%

Don’t know

12%

12%

12%

Top media sources

M A G

L I T T E R

S U R V E Y

–

2 0 1 3

Table 21a: Who Sponsors Don’t Trash Arizona Slogan –
2013 Target vs. Non-Target
Among those indicating they had heard the slogan
2013
Non-target
n=192

2013
Target
n=127

2012
Target
n=66

ADOT
State/local government
City of Phoenix
Sanitation department/ department of
waste
Maricopa Association of Governments

5%
11%
4%

18%
10%
3%

9%
8%
2%

2%

5%

3%

3%

2%

-

Don’t know

71%

56%

70%

Top perceived sponsors

Q27: [If mentioned in Q23, or ‘yes’ in Q24 or Q25] Who sponsors the Don’t Trash Arizona
advertisements?
Note: Data-to-data statistical comparisons of the 2013 target subgroup to other populations
are not appropriate, due to question format differences between the telephone and web
surveys. For example, the target sample supplemental survey allowed web respondents to
see choice options, while telephone respondents responded in unaided manner.

Table 21b: Who Sponsors Don’t Trash Arizona Slogan –
2013 Target by Methodology
Among those indicating they had heard the slogan
2013
Target
n=127

Phone
n=94

Web
n=33

ADOT
State/local government
City of Phoenix
Sanitation department/ department of waste
Maricopa Association of Governments

18%
10%
3%
5%
2%

13%
6%
3%
5%
2%

33%
21%
3%
3%
-

Don’t know

56%

62%

39%

Top perceived sponsors

M A G

L I T T E R

S U R V E Y

–

2 0 1 3

Table 22a: Awareness of Litter Resources – Target vs. Non-Target
2013
Non-target
n=385

2013
Target
n=200

2012
Target
n=100

Litter Hotline, 1-877-3-Litter
Yes
No
Don’t know / No answer

10%
89%
2%

12%
87%
1%

10%
90%
-

www.donttrasharizona.com
Yes
No
Don’t know / No answer

6%
92%
2%

17%
81%
2%

11%
89%
-

Aided awareness

Q28: Have you heard of www.DontTrashArizona.com?
Q30: Have you heard about the Litter Hotline, 1-877-3-Litter, where you can report someone
who litters?

Table 22b: Awareness of Litter Resources – 2013 Target by Methodology
2013
Target
n=200

Phone
n=153

Web
n=47

Litter Hotline, 1-877-3-Litter
Yes
No
Don’t know / No answer

12%
87%
1%

12%
87%
1%

9%
87%
4%

www.donttrasharizona.com
Yes
No
Don’t know / No answer

17%
81%
2%

15%
83%
2%

21%
75%
4%

Aided awareness

M A G

L I T T E R

S U R V E Y

–

2 0 1 3

Don’t	
  Trash	
  Arizona	
  Website	
  VisitaEon	
  

Have	
  you	
  ever	
  visited	
  the	
  Don’t	
  Trash	
  Arizona	
  website?	
  

	
  

9%	
  
6%	
  
0%	
  

Yes	
  

2013	
  Non-­‐target	
  
2013	
  Target	
  
2012	
  Target	
  

91%	
  
94%	
  
100%	
  

No	
  
0%	
  

20%	
  

40%	
  

60%	
  

80%	
  

100%	
  

Among	
  those	
  aware	
  of	
  website:	
  2013	
  non-­‐target	
  total:	
  n=23;	
  2013	
  target	
  total:	
  
n=33;	
  2012	
  target	
  total:	
  n=11	
  
Q29:	
  [If	
  'yes'	
  in	
  Q28]	
  Have	
  you	
  ever	
  visited	
  the	
  "Don't	
  Trash	
  Arizona	
  Website"?	
  
	
  

Table 23: Don’t Trash Arizona Website Visitation – 2013 Target by Methodology

Vistation
Yes
No

M A G

L I T T E R

S U R V E Y

–

2 0 1 3

2013
Target
n=200

Phone
n=153

Web
n=47

6%
94%

4%
96%

10%
90%

Table 24a: Likelihood to Report Littering – Target vs. Non-Target
2013
Non-target
n=385

2013
Target
n=200

2012
Target
n=100

NET likely
(Very + somewhat)

64%

49%

46%

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

31%
33%
22%
11%
3%

13%
36%
32%
16%
3%

11%
35%
34%
18%
2%

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?

Table 24b: Likelihood to Report Littering – 2013 Target by Methodology
2013
Target
n=200

Phone
n=153

Web
n=47

NET likely
(Very + somewhat)

49%

47%

53%

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

13%
36%
32%
16%
3%

10%
37%
33%
18%
2%

19%
34%
30%
11%
6%

Likelihood

M A G

L I T T E R

S U R V E Y

–

2 0 1 3

Table 25a: Source for Litter/Littering Information – 2013 Target vs. Non-Target

Top sources mentioned
Internet
Don’t Trash AZ website
ADOT/highway dept.
Litter hotline
The “city”
Waste Management/ garbage
company
Police/ highway patrol/DPS
I wouldn’t need that information/
wouldn’t contact anyone
The state/governor
Phonebook/ yellow pages
Don’t know

2013
Non-target
n=385
49%
13%
3%
3%
7%

2013
Target
n=200
62%
27%
7%
6%
4%

2012
Target
n=100
46%
26%
1%
6%
5%

2%

4%

1%

3%

2%

3%

1%

2%

2%

2%
16%

1%
1%
6%

2%
1%
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?
Note: Data-to-data statistical comparisons of the 2013 target subgroup to other
populations are not appropriate, due to question format differences between the
telephone and web surveys. For example, the target sample supplemental survey
allowed web respondents to see choice options, while telephone respondents
responded in unaided manner.

Table 25b: Source for Litter/Littering Information – 2013 Target by Methodology

Top sources mentioned
Internet
Don’t Trash AZ website
ADOT/highway dept.
Litter hotline
The “city”
Waste Management/ garbage company
Police/ highway patrol/DPS
I wouldn’t need that information/
wouldn’t contact anyone
The state/governor
Phonebook/ yellow pages
Don’t know

M A G

L I T T E R

S U R V E Y

–

2 0 1 3

2013
Target
n=200

Phone
n=153

Web
n=47

62%
27%
7%
6%
4%
4%
2%

60%
25%
4%
3%
1%
1%
2%

68%
34%
17%
15%
15%
15%
2%

2%

1%

2%

1%
1%
6%

1%
7%

2%
4%
4%

Table 26a: Electronic Communications Preferences –
Target vs. Non-Target

Top communication preferences mentioned
Facebook
Text Messages using a cell phone or handheld device
E-mail using a cell phone or handheld device
Google/AOL/Yahoo/etc.
Website
Myspace
Twitter
E-mail using computer
Phone (unspecified)
Nothing
Internet
Reddit

2013
Non-target
n=385
33%
17%
31%
23%
17%
1%
3%
6%
11%
13%
5%
-

2013
Target
n=200
48%
36%
33%
26%
16%
15%
14%
5%
4%
4%
2%
2%

2012
Target
n=100
56%
15%
22%
34%
37%
13%
9%
6%
4%
2%
-

Q33: 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: Data-to-data statistical comparisons of the 2013 target subgroup to other populations
are not appropriate, due to question format differences between the telephone and web
surveys. For example, the target sample supplemental survey allowed web respondents to
see choice options, while telephone respondents responded in unaided manner.

Table 26b: Electronic Communications Preferences –
2013 Target by Methodology

Top communication preferences mentioned
Facebook
Text Messages using a cell phone or handheld device
E-mail using a cell phone or handheld device
Google/AOL/Yahoo/etc.
Website
Myspace
Twitter
E-mail using computer
Phone (unspecified)
Nothing
Internet
Reddit

M A G

L I T T E R

S U R V E Y

–

2 0 1 3

2013
Target
n=200
48%
36%
33%
26%
16%
15%
14%
5%
4%
4%
2%
2%

Phone
n=153
57%
20%
20%
33%
16%
18%
6%
6%
6%
3%
3%

Web
n=47
21%
85%
74%
4%
17%
64%
2%
-

PROFILES OF LITTERERS

Li#ering	
  Behavior	
  
Non-­‐target	
  2013	
  

30%	
  

Target	
  2013	
  

41%	
  

29%	
  

62%	
  

Target	
  2012	
  

30%	
  

50%	
  

38%	
  

8%	
  
12%	
  

0%	
   10%	
   20%	
   30%	
   40%	
   50%	
   60%	
   70%	
   80%	
   90%	
   100%	
  
Admiaed	
  Liaerer	
   Accidental	
  Liaerer	
   Non-­‐liaerer	
  

Table 27: Littering Behavior – 2013 Target by Methodology

Likelihood
Admitted litterer
Accidental litterer
Non-litterer

M A G

L I T T E R

S U R V E Y

–

2 0 1 3

2013
Target
n=200

Phone
n=153

Web
n=47

62%
30%
8%

65%
28%
7%

49%
38%
13%