Internet Public Opinion Laboratory

Department of Political Science
University of Cincinnati


By: George Bishop, PhD
Professor of Political Science                          For Release: October 10,
2002
Director
Internet Public Opinion Laboratory
Department of Political Science
University of Cincinnati
(513) 556-5078

Majority of Ohio Science Professors and Public Agree: "Intelligent Design" 
Mostly about Religion

"Intelligent Design": Is it science or religion? The idea that an intelligent 
designer or a supernatural force created the universe and guided the 
development of human life has become the center of a heated controversy among 
Ohio educators. As the State Board of Education in Ohio wrestles with the 
policy issue of whether to teach "intelligent design" in public school science 
classes the latest statewide surveys of Ohio citizens and science professors in 
Ohio indicate that the concept of "intelligent design" is viewed by the vast 
majority of scientists and a clear majority of the public as basically a 
religious explanation of human origins.

These findings are based on: (1) an Internet survey of 460 science professors 
teaching at both public and private four-year colleges and universities in 
Ohio, sponsored by the Biology Department at Case Western Reserve University in 
Cleveland and conducted by the Internet Public Opinion Laboratory at the 
University of Cincinnati between September 26 and October 9, 2002; and (2) an 
Ohio Poll of 900 adults conducted by the Institute for Policy Research at the 
University of Cincinnati between September 4 and September 15, 2002.

Public Ignorance and Public Opinion

Despite significant coverage and editorials on the ID issue in Ohio's news 
media in recent months, most Ohioans still know little or nothing about 
"intelligent design". In the most recent Ohio Poll, conducted between September 
4 and September 15, 2002, respondents were first asked: " Do you happen to know 
anything about the concept of 'intelligent design'?" The vast majority (84%) 
said "no"; 14% said "yes"; and the rest (2%) were "not sure". Not surprisingly, 
college graduates were significantly more likely to say they knew something 
about it (28% of them) than were high school graduates (7%) or those with less 
than a high school education (6%).

Whether they knew anything about it or not, respondents were then given a brief 
description of the concept of intelligent design identical to the one used in a 
statewide Cleveland Plain Dealer Poll conducted this past spring:

"The concept of 'intelligent design' is that life is too complex to have 
developed by chance and that a purposeful being or force is guiding the 
development of life."

 "What is your opinion-do you think the concept of 'intelligent design' is a 
valid scientific account of how human life developed, or is it basically a 
religious explanation of the development of human life?"

Given this description, the majority of Ohioans (54%) viewed it as basically a 
religious explanation of human origins; less than 1 out of 4 (23%) thought it 
was a valid scientific account; 7% believed it was a mix of religious and 
scientific accounts; and 17% said they were "not sure."

Views of Ohio Science Professors

Not unexpectedly, those who have the academic training and expertise (PhDs) to 
teach the basic natural and physical sciences in Ohio's public and private 
universities regarded the concept of "intelligent design" as an unscientific 
notion. More than 9 out of 10 (91%) thought it was primarily a religious view. 
The vast majority (93%) of science professors said they were not aware of "any 
scientifically valid evidence or an alternate scientific theory that challenges 
the fundamental principles of the theory of evolution." Only a tiny percentage 
of them (7%) thought that "intelligent design" was either "strongly" or 
"partly" supported by scientific evidence. Most (90%) believed there was no 
scientific evidence at all for the idea of "intelligent design". And 3% were 
"not sure". Furthermore, when asked if they ever used the ID concept in their 
research, virtually all of them (97%) said "no."

Ohio's science professors felt just as strongly about what should or should not 
be taught about the controversy in Ohio schools. Most all of them (92%) thought 
" Ohio high school students should be tested on their understanding of the 
basic principles of the theory of evolution in order to graduate." When asked, 
however, if such students should also be tested on their knowledge of the 
concept of "Intelligent Design" in order to graduate, most of them (90%) said 
"no."

Perhaps the most surprising finding in the survey is that the great majority of 
Ohio science professors (84%) thought that accepting the theory of evolution 
was "consistent with believing in God." Only 9% thought it was not; and the 
rest (7%) just weren't sure. Most critics of teaching evolution in Ohio's 
schools commonly assume it's basically inconsistent with believing in God. 
Evidently, most of Ohio's science professors-those who understand the theory of 
evolution best-do not share that widespread view.

Further statistical analysis of the data from the survey of Ohio science 
professors showed only minor differences in responses across scientific fields 
such as astronomy, biology, chemistry, geology, physics, and other natural 
sciences.

Survey Methodology


Ohio Poll

The sampling error for the Ohio Poll of 900 adults is +/-3.3%. A description of 
the methodology for the Ohio Poll conducted from September 4 through 15 can be 
found at the following website:

 http://www.ipr.uc.edu/PDF/OhioPoll/op092502.pdf



Internet Public Opinion Laboratory (IPOL): Methodology

An e-mail invitation to participate in this web-based survey was sent to all 
professors (approximately 1500) currently on the faculty in four-year, public 
and private colleges and universities in Ohio for the following fields: 
Astronomy, biology, chemistry, geology, physics, and other natural sciences. 
Their e-mail addresses were identified through a combination of listings on the 
various college and departmental websites, supplemented by further examination 
of other university information sources. Four hundred and sixty (460) 
professors responded to the e-mail invitation, a response rate of 31%.

The sampling error for a sample size of 460 cases is approximately plus or 
minus 4.5%. As in any other survey, in addition to sampling error, other 
sources of error such as non-response and the wording and context of the 
questions asked can affect the results and conclusions of the study.


The results reported here for the Internet survey of Ohio science professors 
were based on the following questions (Note: Percentages Rounded)

1.      Are you aware of any scientifically valid evidence or an alternate 
scientific theory that challenges the fundamental principles of the theory of 
evolution?

a.      Yes               4%
b.      No              93
c.      Not Sure          2





2.      The concept of "Intelligent Design" is that life and the universe are too 
complex to have developed without the intervention of a purposeful being or 
force to guide the development of life. Which of the following do you think 
best describes "Intelligent Design"?

a.      It is strongly supported by scientific evidence   2%
b.      It is partly supported by scientific evidence             5
c.      It is not supported at all by scientific evidence       90
d.      Not Sure                                                  3

3.      Do you think the concept of "Intelligent Design" is primarily a religious 
view?"

a.      Yes             91%
b.      No                5
c.      Not Sure          4

4.      Do you think Ohio high school students should be tested on their 
understanding of the basic principles of the theory of evolution in order to 
graduate?

a.      Yes             92%
b.      No                4
c.      Not Sure          3

5.      Do you think Ohio high school students should be tested on their knowledge 
of the concept of "Intelligent Design" in order to graduate?

a.      Yes               6%
b.      No              90
c.      Not Sure          4

6.      Do you use the concept of Intelligent Design in your research?

a.      Yes               2%
b.      No              97
c.      Not Sure          1


7.      Do you think accepting the theory of evolution is consistent with believing
in God?

a.      Yes             84%             
b.      No                9
c.      Not Sure          7



********************************************************************************


October 10, 2002
Contact: Carey Hoffman  (513) 556-1825 (O)      
Carey.Hoffman@UC.Edu    (513) 742-5057 (H)

NEW POLL DATA SHOWS OHIOANS SEE 'INTELLIGENT DESIGN'
AS A RELIGION-BASED CONCEPT

        Cincinnati   The controversial concept of "intelligent design" theory, now 
under consideration by the Ohio Board of Education, is seen by Ohio scientists 
and the general public as basically a religious explanation of human origins. 
That's according to a new study released today that was conducted jointly by 
researchers at the University of Cincinnati and Case Western Reserve University.
        Two surveys were analyzed to produce the findings - an Internet survey of
460 
science professors from across Ohio and an Ohio Poll of 900 adults conducted in 
September. A summary analysis of the data by UC's George Bishop accompanies 
this release.
        Bishop is a professor of political science and director of UC's Internet 
Public Opinion Laboratory. A widely-known expert on public opinion surveying, 
he has done extensive work on the topics of Americans' religious world views 
and beliefs about human origins. Bishop can be reached in his office this 
afternoon after 3 p.m. at (513) 556-5078.
        Case Western's work was led by Joseph Koonce, chair of the biology
department. 
Case Western will host a press conference in Cleveland this afternoon at 2:45 
p.m. in Room 405 of Clapp Hall to discuss the study.

Media contacts: George Bishop, University of Cincinnati, (513) 556-5078
Joseph Koonce, Case Western Reserve University, (216) 368-3557
Susan Griffiths, Case Western Reserve University Communications Office, (216) 
368-1004

110-02  -30-