Embedded Files
We're glad you're interested in the results of the project! If you jumped directly to the Results page, we encourage you to read about the project and survey prior to digging into the results. Also, be sure to check out the Annual Context pages where you will find a slew of contextual factors that may have influenced participants' responses.
Useful tips for browsing:
The entire site, but especially the Results section, are best viewed on a full laptop or desktop screen. Formatting and visibility will be compromised on smaller screens and phones.
Within the dropdown menu, survey results are organized by topic and within each topic identified specifically by question. We encourage you to browse through all of the topics, as you may find questions within a topic that address the topic in a way that unexpectedly piques your interest. Demographic information of respondents is included as the last menu item.
Once you select a topic from the menu, be sure to scroll fully down the page to see all questions relevant to the topic.
All results are reported in percentages (%).
Hover your cursor over the bars within the charts to activate "compare mode," which will allow you to more clearly see the numerical comparisons. This option takes place of a cumbersome data table.
Some questions were worded differently across the years, and we had additional language to draw attention to for some questions. We made note of such distinctions with asterisks (*).
Please be patient if some charts take a little time to load.
We currently have basic frequencies posted from the 2019, 2020, 2021 and 2022 surveys, and are working on posting the 2023 results as well as the next level of analysis that will indicate how people of different demographic categories responded to certain questions.
We purposefully did not include our own interpretations of the data; however, we think it may be fruitful to point out some topics or questions that we see as particularly ripe for further research based on the survey results:
Ability to Lead: Over 50% of respondents believe that people aged 25 and younger are not being equipped to lead. Further research as to why this perception exists and if it is indeed true would be helpful. This result could also be construed as a call to action for more robust and accessible leadership education and development!
Activism as Leadership: A large majority of respondents considered activism as leadership if it entailed armed, violent/destructive protesting, followed closely behind with unarmed, violent/destructive protesting and then armed, non-violent/peaceful protesting. Unarmed, non-violent/peaceful protesting was much less likely to be seen as leadership. Note our caveat that the results may be biased by including a definition of "activism," but given the contemporary sociopolitical landscape this topic would benefit from further research.
Social Climate and Social Media: There is indication that the social climate within the United States and reactions on social media make people hesitant to lead. Further research on the impact of the social climate and social media on leadership engagement is warranted.
Leader Value for Natural Environment: 60-70% of respondents feel it is important or very important for leaders at the national and local levels to care for the natural environment, with another 15-20% indicating it is somewhat important. Further research on leaders and leadership that align with caring for the natural environment would be useful.
Leader Effectiveness: Respondents indicated that the best leaders understand the experiences of ordinary, everyday people, yet in contrast they indicated that leaders today seem to be removed from the experiences of ordinary, everyday people. Further research on why this perception exists, how true it is in practice, and how any gap can be mitigated would be helpful.
If you are a researcher interested in additional data or building upon our study, please visit the Request Data page.
Page updated
Report abuse