Public Attitudes about Population Issues: A Survey in Santa Barbara County
Abstract
Registered voters (N=751) from Santa Barbara County were surveyed by mail on their opinions and knowledge of population issues. The survey assessed attitudes concerning social, economic, and environmental causes and consequences of population growth, including some questions about the desirability of various population policies. In addition, respondents completed a test of their knowledge of certain population facts. Half the respondents took the test first and were provided with the correct answers before completing the rest of the survey; the other half took the knowledge test after they completed the rest of the survey. Results indicated a consensus of concern for population issues; however, the consensus was weaker when specific policy issues were mentioned. A factor analysis summarized responses to the attitude statements as varying along five dimensions we interpret as "Faith in Government", "Immigration", "Faith in Technology or God", "Environment", and "Pressing Need". Political party and degree of religious involvement were the demographic variables that accounted for the most variance in attitudinal factor scores. Neither performance on the knowledge test nor being provided with the answers to the test was related to population attitudes. Implications for efforts to modify attitudes about population are discussed.
References
Adamek, R J. 1994. Review: Public Opinion and Roe V. Wade: Measurement Difficulties. Public Opinion Quarterly 58:409-418.
Arcury; T. A., Johnson, T. P., & Scollay, S. ]. 1986. Ecological Worldview and Environmental Knowledge: The "New Environmental Paradigm." The Journal. of Environmental Education 17:35-40.
Belden, & Russonello 1994. Pew Global. Stewardship Survty, Belden & Russonello Research and Communications, Feb 2-15.
Blendon, R J., J. M. Benson and K. Donelan. 1993. The Public and the Controversy Over Abortion. Journal. of the American Medical Association 270:2871-2875.
Bretherton, R 1995. Personal communication. May.
Brown, N. R, & Siegler, R. S. 1993. Metrics and Mappings: A Framework for Understanding Real-world Quantitative Estimation. Psychological Review 100:511-534.
Catton, W. R. and R. E. Dunlap. 1978. Environmental Sociology: A New Paradigm. American Behavioral Scientist 24:41-49.
Coward, H. 1997. Religious Responses to the Population Sustainability Problematic: Implications for Law. Population Law and Polio/ Conference: From Malthus to the Millennium. Portland, OR: Lewis and Clark College.
Culen, G. R., Hungerford, H. R., Tomera, A. N., Sivek, D. ]., Harrington, M., and M. Squillo. 1986. A Comparison of Environmental Perceptions and Behaviors of Five Discrete Populations. The Journal. of Environmental Education 17:24-32.
Dunlap, R E. 1980. Paradigmatic Changes in the Social Sciences: From Human Exemptions to Ecological Paradigm. American Behavioral Scientist 24:5-14.
Dunlap, R E. and K Van Liere. 1978. The New Environmental Paradigm: A Proposed Measuring Instrument and Preliminary Results. Journal of Environmental Education 9:10-19.
The Continental Group 1982. The Continental Group Report: Toward Responsible Growth, Economic and Environmental Concern in the Balance. Stamford, CT: The Continental Group Inc.
Gutfield, E. S. 1991. Eight of 10 Americans are Environmentalists, At Least So They Say. Wall Street journal 218:Al-A4.
Johnson, G.D., and Lee, R.D. 1987. Population Growth and Economic Development: Issues and Evidence. Madison, WI: The National Research Council.
Lipsey, M. W 1977. The Personal Antecedents and Consequences of Ecologically Responsible Behavior: A Review. JSAS Catalog of Selected Documents in Psychology 7:70-71.
Maloney; M. P. and M.P Ward. 1973. Ecology: Let's Hear it From the American People. American Psychologist 28:583-586.
Milbrath, L. W 1985. Environmental Beliefs and Values. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Moors, H. G. 1990. Attitudes Towards Demographic Trends and Population Policy: Italy and the Netherlands in a Comparative Perspective. Population Research and Policy Review 9:180-194.
Morrison, D. E. 1980. The Soft Cutting Edge of Environmentalism: Why and How the Appropriate Technology Notion is Changing the Movement. Natural Resources Journal 20.
The National Research Council. 1992. Global. Environmental Change: Understanding the Human Dimensions. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.
Public Opinion Strategies. 1992. Public Opinion Strategies Poll. Storrs, CT: Roper Center.
Sommers, G. L. 1994. A Call to Engagement for People of Faith Concerning the 1994 United Nations International. Conference on Population and Development. The Center for Development and Population Activities.
Stief, T. and S. Kalish. 1994. Americans Concerned about Population Issues as World Conference Gets Underway. Population Today 22:1-2.
Stycos, J. M. 1996. Population and the Environment: Polls, Policies, and Public Opinion. Population and Environment 18:37-64.
Thompson, ]. C. and E. L. Gasteiger. 1985. Environmental Attitude Survey of University Students: 1971 vs. 1981. The Journal of Environmental Education 17:13-22.
Thompson, S. and M. Barton. 1994. Ecocentric and Anthropocentric Attitudes Toward the Environment. Journal of Environmental. Psychology 14:149-157.
Waak, P. 1994. Faith, Justice, and a Healthy World: A Guide on Population and Environment for People of Faith. New York: The Audubon Society.
Wikle, T. A. 1995. Geographical Patterns of Membership in U.S. Environmental Organizations. The Professional Geographer 47:41-48.
Wilmouth, J. R and P. Ball. 1992. The Population Debate in American Popular Magazines, 1946-90. Population and Development Review 18:631-668.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:
- Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (See The Effect of Open Access).
