The Gender Gap on Public Opinion towards Genetically

Modified FoodsLaurel Elder

Department of Political ScienceHartwick College

 

Steven Greene Department of Political ScienceNorth Carolina State University

What we want to know

• Why are women more negative towards/skeptical of genetically modified foods?

• What related demographic, political, science attitudes, or other factors might account this gap?

What we already know• Pervasive and robust gender gap in

attitudes towards GM food• Race, education, region, age (?) affect

GMO attitudes• Mixed results on impact of GMO

knowledge• Risk perception has clear impact

What we think might be going on…

• Variance between women and men on various other demographic factors

• Parenthood effects?• Political effects, i.e., the

partisan/ideological gender gap• Gender differences in attitudes

towards science and business

What we did to find out more• Analysis of 2006 General Social

Survey GM Food related questions• Analysis of 2013 CBS/Vanity Fair

Survey GM Food related questions• Series of regression models adding

demographics, political, and science/GMO factors

Dependent variables• Unwillingness to eat GM foods• Number of GM food types willing to eat• Level of concern with eating GM foods• Support for labeling of GM foods

Key Independent Variables• Sex• Demographics: age, education, marital

status, race, religiosity, income, region, • Political: Party ID, ideology• Science/GMO: Confidence in science

and business; risk perceptions, knowledge of GMO’s

What we found out…

Table 1 GMO Attitude Bivariate comparisons Male Female Difference GSS Unwilling to eat GM food (1-3)

2.05 2.25 -0.19*

GM Medicine (1-5)

3.85 3.75 0.10

GM Business (1-5)

2.33 2.17 0.16*

Science knowledge (0-11)

7.05 5.90 1.15*

CBS How many GM foods R will eat (0-3)

1.40 .78 0.62*

GMO Knowledge (1-4)

2.91 2.81 0.10*

GMO Concerns (1-4)

2.84 3.23 -0.39*

GM Food Labeling (0-1)

0.91 0.97 -0.06**

* p<.05; ** p<.01 Source: 2006 General Social Survey and 2013 CBS/Vanity Fair survey

Table 2 Opposition to eating GM Foods with Gender and additional controls Female only Plus

Demographics Plus politics Plus

GMO/Science Female .57**

(.13) 0.62** (0.14)

0.58** (0.15)

0.52** (0.16)

Education -0.07** (0.03)

-0.07* (0.03)

-0.01 (0.03)

Minority 0.56** (0.17)

0.53** (0.18)

0.43** (0.19)

Parent 0.03 (0.17)

0.02 (0.17)

0.15 (0.18)

South 0.54** (0.15)

0.59** (0.15)

0.52** (0.16)

Science knowledge

-0.08* (0.03)

Confidence in science

-0.26 (0.14)

Confidence in business

-0.30* (0.13)

Medicine knows GM risks

-0.28** (0.07)

Business knows GM risks

-0.09 (0.07)

Pseudo R2 .03 .10 .10 .17 N 903 786 760 715

Additional independent variables: age, income, married, church attendance, PID, ideology * p<.05; ** p<.01 Cell entries are ordered logit coefficients. Standard errors are in parentheses. Source: 2006 General Social Survey

Table 3 Number of GMO foods will eat Female only Plus

Demographics Plus politics Plus GMO

Knowledge Female -0.62**

(.07) -0.63** (0.07)

-0.63** (0.08)

-0.63** (0.08)

College degree

0.13 (0.08)

0.13 (0.09)

0.14 (0.09)

Household Income

0.07* (0.03)

0.08** (0.03)

0.08** (0.03)

Minority -0.27** (0.10)

-0.27* (0.11)

-0.28* (0.11)

Parent -0.01 (0.10)

0.00 (0.10)

0.00 (0.10)

South 0.04 (0.08)

0.06 (0.08)

0.06 (0.08)

GMO Knowledge

-0.02 (0.04)

R2 .07 .09 .09 .09 N 1051 927 838 838

Additional Independent Variables: Age, married, Party ID, ideology * p<.05; ** p<.01 Cell entries are OLS coefficients. Standard errors are in parentheses.

Table 4 Concern with eating GM Foods Female

only Plus

Demographics Plus

politics Plus GMO Knowledge

Interaction

Female 0.81** (0.12)

0.90** (0.13)

0.89** (0.14)

0.91** (0.14)

-0.30 (0.45)

College degree -0.22 (0.14)

-0.25 (0.15)

-0.36* (0.15)

-0.39* (0.15)

Household Income

-0.02 (0.05)

-0.04 (0.05)

-0.07 (0.05)

-0.07 (0.05)

Minority 0.80** (0.17)

0.71** (0.19)

0.90** (0.19)

0.94** (0.20)

Parent -0.02 (0.16)

0.07 (0.17)

0.15 (0.18)

0.20 (0.18)

South 0.17 (0.13)

0.24 (0.14)

0.23 (0.15)

0.23 (0.15)

GMO Knowledge

0.53** (0.08)

0.29** (0.11)

Female*GMO Knowledge

0.43** (0.15)

Pseudo R2 .05 .09 .10 .15 .16 N 1039 918 834 834 834

Additional Independent Variables: Age, married, Party ID, ideology * p<.05; ** p<.01 Cell entries are ordered logit coefficients. Standard errors are in parentheses. Source: 2013 CBS/Vanity Fair survey

Additional Independent Variables: Age, married, Party ID * p<.05; ** p<.01 Cell entries are binary logit coefficients. Standard errors are in parentheses. Source: 2013 CBS/Vanity Fair survey

Table 5 Support for GMO Labeling Female only Plus

Demographics Plus politics Plus GMO

Knowledge Female 1.13**

(0.30) 1.34** (0.32)

1.78** (0.38)

1.84** (0.39)

College degree

-0.66* (0.33)

-0.80* (0.35)

-0.76* (0.36)

Minority 2.64* (1.02)

2.62* (1.05)

2.53* (1.05)

Parent -0.24 (0.37)

-0.37 (0.41)

-0.49 (0.42)

South 0.60 (0.37)

0.79 (0.41)

0.80 (0.41)

Ideology

-0.54* (0.19)

-0.57* (0.19)

GMO Knowledge

-0.47* (0.21)

Pseudo R2 .06 .14 .20 .22 N 970 915 828 828

Table 6 Average marginal effects for Female coefficient in logit/ordered logit models Base model Demographics Plus politics Plus Science/

GMO Unwillingness

to eat GM -0.073 -0.078 -0.074 -0.063

Concern with GM foods

-0.048 -0.052 -0.050 -0.051

GMO Labeling

0.070 0.064 0.075 0.074

Number of

foods (OLS) -0.62

-0.63

-0.63

-0.63

Computations based on female coefficient in tables 2, 3, 4, and 5 Source: 2006 General Social Survey and 2013 CBS/Vanity Fair survey

So, now we know…• The gender gap is robust and

pervasive even in multi-variate context• What’s not the source of this gender

gap• Similarly pervasive and unexplained

racial gap

What we still want to know…

• What is the source of this gap?• I.e., what is it about being a woman

that makes one more skeptical of GM foods (or about being a man that makes one more supportive)?

• Pew 2014 survey on Science and Society