SOC 3120Final ProjectRandi Hovey

Using a subset of the General Social Survey from 2012 (n=1200), the present study explores recent opinions and attitudes on these important, and sometimes controversial, social issues. Respondents were randomly selected adults (18+) living in households throughout all areas of the United States. Nearly half (45.4%) of the sample subset reported being married, 28.1% “never married,” and 15.3% “divorced.” Participants were overwhelmingly Protestant, Catholic, or of no particular religion (42.1%, 25.4%, and 20.5%), with the remaining 12% reporting various religions such as Buddhism (.3%), Hinduism (.6%), Muslim/Islam (.8%), Christian (5.5%), etc. A large portion of the population (46.5%) report a high school diploma as the highest educational degree earned, with 20.5% holding a Bachelor’s degree (it is of note, that 13.4% reported less than a high school education at time of survey). Average family income among respondents was $53,611.20 with a median income of $34,470.00. Additionally, 64.8% report yearly income of $25,000.00 or more. Of the 1200 respondents, 62.6% report living in a 1 or 2-person household (26.8% and 35.8% respectively). The average number of children per household is 2 (27.9%), although 29.3% report having no children at all. The mean age for becoming a parent (first child) is 24.44 years (sd= 5.69), with a range between 13 and 42 years of age.

Chi-Square analyses were done to determine whether current attitudes toward various social issues were independent of respondent’s gender, educational level, or religious identification. Support for a woman’s right to an abortion for any reason was found to be independent of respondent’s gender in a chi square test for independence (x2 (1) = .000, p> .05), indicating that neither males or females appear to support abortion rights more than the other. Level of education was found to influence opinion on abortion rights (x2 (4) = 47.04, p< .01). Support for a woman’s right to abortion generally increases as education level increases. Graduate degree holders are most likely to support the right to an abortion (77.1%) and respondent’s with less than a high school diploma are least likely to support this right (32%). Religious preference was also determined to be indicative of respondent’s opinion on abortion at a significance level of .000 (x2 (12) = 68.57, p < .01) although these results require a fair amount of caution due to expected frequencies of less than 5 in multiple categories. Denominations with sufficient data suggest Jewish (86.7%), no religious preference (72.8%), and “other” (71.4%) were most likely to support the right to an abortion.

Males are more likely to support the death penalty (63.9%) than females (57.3%) x2 (1) = 5.06, p< .05. Education was also determined to have a significant impact on support of capital punishment (x2 (4) = 28.32, p < .01). Interestingly, the association appears to be curvilinear, with the majority of supporters holding a high school diploma (64.5), junior college (72.2), and bachelor’s degrees (60.6), and then decreases at the far ends of the spectrum (graduates = 43.3% and less than H.S. = 52.4%). Participant’s religious preference appears to be independent of opinion on the death penalty (x2 (12) = 19.88, p > .05).

Support for same-sex marriage was determined to be independent of gender (x2 (4) = 8.401, p > .05), however, education level and religious preference show statistical significance for influencing attitudes on this issue (x2 (16) = 63.95, p < .01; x2 (48) = 140.67, p < .01) when asked about support on an ordinal scale ranging from 1 = strongly agree to 5 = strongly disagree. Respondents with less than high school education, and those with junior college tend to answer similarly with 16.5% and 19.4% strongly

in favor of gays right to marriage. Outside of this exception, support for gay marriage tends to increase with level of education (H.S. = 26.7, bachelor = 31, and graduate = 55.2), eluding to higher education as a factor in a more accepting view of differences within society. Those with less than a high school diploma was most likely to strongly disagree (37.1%). Results on the effects of religious preference should be interpreted with caution due to multiple denominations with insufficient amounts of respondents. Those with no specified religious preference were most likely (52.6) to strongly support gay rights. Of those with sufficient data, Christians and Protestants were most likely to strongly disagree with the right to same-sex marriage (31.7% and 32.9%).

Favor of gun control laws were found to be independent of both education level (x2 (4) = 4.31, p > .05) and religious preference (x2 (12) = 12.13, p > .05). However, gender does appear to have a substantial influence on opinions toward gun control laws (x2 (1) = 10.56, p < .01) with women favoring gun control at a higher rate (83.1%) than men (73.6%). These findings may indicate women’s heightened need for security which may be accomplished by means to defend oneself.

Level of education proved to be influential in a respondent’s belief in the theory of evolution (x2 (4) = 9.74, p < .05). With the exception of a small decrease within junior college graduates (76%), participants support of evolutionary theory increased as education increased; beginning with 69.6% of respondents with less than a high school education, high school graduates (77%), Bachelor’s degrees (90.2%), and 93.1% of graduate degree holders. This seems logical since further education would produce more knowledge about the theory of evolution. Neither gender or religious preference produced significant results to show any influence on belief in the theory that humans developed from earlier species (x2 (1) = .077, p > .05; x2 (9) = 13.25, p > .05).

Gender, education level, and religion all report statistically significant findings when tested for independence of opinions on women’s role in a household. A Chi square test revealed the majority of men (39.4%) and women (46.3%) disagree that a woman’s role was to keep house while the man worked (x2 (4) = 11.73, p < .05). Overall, men were more likely to agree (21.5%) than women (14.3%) that a woman’s role was in the home. Exploration by degree type (x2 (16) = 64.43, p < .01), shows that individuals with less than a high school diploma were most likely to agree (35.4%) that women should be in the home while those with a Bachelor’s degree (10.9%) were least likely. Agreeance with this attitude increased slightly to 14.5% for graduate alumni. It is possible that those with graduate degrees are in a better financial situation to afford agreeance with this view, whereas bachelor’s degrees may not bring enough income to support the family and satisfy any costs related to their education; therefore, bringing more of a necessity to two incomes which interacts with a higher educated view of gender equality. Of those religions with sufficient data, Jewish (50%) and Christians (47.9%) were most likely to disagree with the view that women should keep house (x2 (48) = 86.88, p < .01). Other religious preferences which follow closely are “none” (43%), Catholic (44.1%), and Protestant (42%).

In terms of support for legalization of marijuana, opinion was found to be dependent upon gender (x2 (1) = 14.54, p < .01), with men more likely to favor legalization (56.6%) than women (42.7%). The study shows a linear relationship between support for legalization and education level. Support increases from less than high school (35.5%) to 58.9% for graduate degree participants. Knowledge of social policy and the effects of criminalizing marijuana likely plays a significant role in a person’s opinion of continuing to prosecute for marijuana possession and use. In terms of religious preference (x2 (12) = 49.45, p < .01), those claiming Jewish (75%), other (75%), and no religion (69%) were most likely to favor

legalization. Of those denominations with sufficient data, Catholics were least likely to support such a movement (41.8%), closely followed by Christians (42.5%) and Protestants (43.9%).

On a scale from 1 = strongly agree to 5 = strongly disagree, men are statistically more likely to feel that cohabitation is an acceptable option (53%), as opposed to 43.8% of women who feel this is acceptable (x2 (4) = 13.76, p < .01). Generally speaking, as educational level increases, individuals were more likely to accept living together as an acceptable option/alternative to marriage. Those with less than high school agreeing 41.7% and increasing in a linear pattern through junior college graduates (54%). Interestingly, the relationship then decreases with only 50% of those with bachelor’s or graduate degrees agree with cohabitation as acceptable. Religion also shows influence on one’s opinion of cohabitation. Of the denominations with sufficient data, Jewish (68.8%) and those with no religion (61%) were most likely to agree this is acceptable. Catholics, Protestants, and Christians agree less with this social view reporting 54.3%, 39.2%, and 34.7% respectively.

An independent samples t-test was done comparing the mean number of hours worked with participant gender. No statistically significant difference was found (t (726) = -.063, p > .05) with the mean of men (M= 42.37, SD= 14.28) showing no difference from the mean of women (M= 42.44, SD= 14.68). One-way ANOVA also showed non-significance of results for number of hours worked by degree (F (4,723) = .329, p > .05). ANOVA results for mean hours worked in comparison with marital status found no statistical significance (F (4,723) = 1.438, p > .05). In accordance with these results it does not appear that education level or marital status has any direct impact on number of hours worked. Pearson correlation was calculated for the relationship between number of hours worked and number of children and age of respondent. Test revealed a non-significant, weak correlation between hours and number of children (r (2) = .027, p > .05), as well as between respondent’s age and number of hours worked (r (2) = .002, p > .05).

Pearson’s correlations were calculated for the relationship between mean family income and number of hours watching TV, number of hours worked, marital status and race. Results show a statistically significant, extremely strong negative correlation between family income and marital status (r (2) = -.308, p < .01); as well as for the relationship between family income and race (r (2) = -.102, p < .01). These correlations suggest that family income is highly correlated with an individual’s race and marital status. Logically, if a person is married, they are more likely to have more than one income contributing to the family income, so it makes sense there would be a strong correlation. Additionally, the results on race and family income suggest employment still sees significant racial discrimination. Correlation between family income and number of hours per day TV watching did not present significant results (r (2) = -.025, p > .05). No significant findings were reported for the relationship between family income and number of hours worked last week (r (2) = -.044, p > .05). Calculation of linear regression for the relationship between age, number of children, and age when first child was born and family income shows significant predictive qualities for family income and age when first child is born (F (1,747) = 133.036, p < .01). No statistically significant results were found for family income in relation to age of respondent (F (1,1064) = .429, p > .05), or for family income in relation to number of children respondent has (F (1,1064) = 1.800, p > .05). Individuals who have children at younger ages are possibly less likely to continue their education, and therefore have lesser income.