ENERGY STAR
NATIONAL AWARENESS
OF ENERGY STAR® FOR 2007
ANALYSIS OF CEE HOUSEHOLD SURVEY
.
-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Acknowledgements ii
Executive Summary 1
Introduction 1
Methodology Overview 2
Key Findings 5
Recognition 5
Understanding 11
Influence 17
Information Sources 22
Appendix A: Detailed Methodology A-1
1 Questionnaire Design A-1
2 Sampling A-7
3 Data Collection A-12
4 National Analysis A-12
Appendix B: Demographics B-1
Appendix C: Additional Questions From 2007 Survey C-1
1 ENERGY STAR Designation C-1
2 ENERGY STAR Product Satisfaction C-3
3 Consumer Perceptions C-5
4 Purchasing Decisions C-10
Appendix D: 2007 Survey Questions and Flow Chart D-1
-------
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency would like to thank the Consortium for
Energy Efficiency (GEE) and its members for making its survey data available for
this analysis. The following GEE member organizations sponsored the 2007 survey:
• Bonneville Power Administration
• Cape Light Compact
• Entergy
• KeySpan Energy Delivery New England
• Long Island Power Authority
• National Grid
• New Jersey Board of Public Utilities
• Northeast Utilities (WMECO)
• Northwest Energy Efficiency Alliance
• NSTAR Electric
• Pacific Gas & Electric
• Sacramento Municipal Utility District
• San Diego Gas & Electric
• Southern California Edison
• Unitil Corporation
• Vectren
In addition, EPA would like to acknowledge Monica Nevius for her oversight of GEE
data collection efforts; and Miriam Goldberg and Ryan Barry of KEMA Inc., and
Jocelyn Spielman and Grant Halloran of The Cadmus Group, Inc. for data analysis
and report preparation.
Recommended citation:
EPA Office of Air and Radiation, Climate Protection Partnerships Division.
National Awareness of ENERGY STAR® for 2007: Analysis of 2007 CEE
Household Survey. U.S. EPA, 2008.
11
-------
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
In the fall of 2007, members of the Consortium for Energy Efficiency (GEE) sponsored
the eighth national household survey of consumer awareness of ENERGY STAR. Each
year, the survey objectives have largely been the same: to collect national data on
consumer recognition, understanding, and purchasing influence of the ENERGY STAR
label, as well as data on messaging and product purchases. GEE members may choose
to supplement the national sample in order to assess label awareness in their local
service territories. In 2007, additional surveys were conducted in Entergy's service
territory in parts of Arkansas, Louisiana, Mississippi, and Texas. As in the seven
previous years, GEE and sponsoring members made the survey data publicly available.
This report discusses the results of the GEE 2007 ENERGY STAR Household Survey,
building on prior years' survey results and focusing on the extent to which consumers
recognize the ENERGY STAR label, understand its intended messages, and utilize (or
are influenced by) the label in their energy-related purchase decisions. Research
questions of interest included:
• Where do consumers see or hear about the ENERGY STAR label?
• How does increased publicity affect recognition, understanding, and influence of the
ENERGY STAR label?
• Which key messages about the ENERGY STAR label are consumers retaining?
• Do consumers demonstrate loyalty to the ENERGY STAR label?
Key Findings at the National Level
• Seventy-four percent of households recognized the ENERGY STAR label when
shown the label.
• Seventy-six percent of households had a high or general understanding of the
label's purpose. Furthermore, the proportion of households that demonstrated a
general understanding was small compared with the proportion that demonstrated a
high understanding (11 percent versus 65 percent).
• Sixty-two percent of households associated the ENERGY STAR label with
"efficiency or energy savings."
• Of households that recognized the ENERGY STAR label and purchased a product in
a relevant product category within the past 12 months, 68 percent purchased an
ENERGY STAR-labeled product.
• Among all households, 37 percent knowingly purchased an ENERGY STAR-labeled
product in the past 12 months.
ES-1
-------
• For 73 percent of the households that knowingly purchased an ENERGY STAR-
labeled product, the label influenced at least one of their purchase decisions "very
much" or "somewhat." For another 12 percent of these households, the label
influenced their purchase decisions "slightly."
• Twenty-one percent of households that knowingly purchased an ENERGY STAR-
labeled product received a financial incentive for doing so. Seventy-seven percent of
these households would have been "very likely" (44 percent) or "somewhat likely"
(33 percent) to purchase the labeled product without the financial incentive.
• Eighty percent of households that recognized the label and purchased a product in a
category where ENERGY STAR-specified products are an option were likely to
recommend ENERGY STAR-labeled products to a friend; 29 percent of these
households reported that they were "extremely" likely to recommend ENERGY
STAR-labeled products.
Key Findings from Publicity-Level Analyses
• A larger proportion of households in high- than in low-publicity areas recognized the
ENERGY STAR label, both with and without being shown the label. With a visual
aid, 79 percent of households in high-publicity areas recognized the label versus 65
percent in low-publicity areas. (High-publicity areas are areas with an active local
ENERGY STAR program that has been sponsored by a utility, state agency, or other
organization for two or more continuous years.)
• Among households that recognized the ENERGY STAR label (with a visual aid), a
larger proportion in high- than in low-publicity areas associated the label with most of
the appliances that have historically been heavily promoted by regional program
sponsors.
• A larger proportion of households in high- than in low-publicity areas had at least a
general understanding of the label.
• Among households that knowingly purchased an ENERGY STAR-labeled product, a
larger proportion in high- than in low-publicity areas reported that their purchase
decisions were influenced "very much" or "somewhat" by the ENERGY STAR label.
• Considering only households that recognized the label (with a visual aid), a larger
proportion of households in high- than in low-publicity areas heard or saw something
about ENERGY STAR via TV and radio commercials, newspaper or magazine
advertisements, the internet, or billboards.
ES-2
-------
Conclusions
This eighth national study of household awareness of the ENERGY STAR label
confirms key findings from the previous years' surveys:
• Substantial portions of U.S. households in the surveyed population recognize,
understand, and are influenced by the ENERGY STAR label.
• The proportion of households that exhibit only a general understanding of the label is
small (11 percent) compared with the proportion of households that exhibit a high
understanding (65 percent).
• Publicity efforts of active regional/local energy efficiency program sponsors increase
recognition, understanding, and influence of the label.
ES-3
-------
INTRODUCTION
In the fall of 2007, members of the Consortium for Energy Efficiency (GEE)
sponsored the eighth national household survey of consumer awareness of
ENERGY STAR. Each year, the survey objectives have largely been the same: to
collect national data on consumer recognition, understanding, and purchasing
influence of the ENERGY STAR label, as well as data on messaging and product
purchases. GEE members may choose to supplement the national sample in order
to assess label awareness in their local service territories. To this end, in 2007
additional surveys were conducted in the Entergy service territory in parts of
Arkansas, Louisiana, Mississippi, and Texas. As in the seven previous years, GEE
and sponsoring members made the survey data publicly available.
This report discusses the results of the GEE 2007 ENERGY STAR Household
Survey, building on prior years' survey results and focusing on the extent to which
consumers recognize the ENERGY STAR label, understand its intended messages,
and utilize (or are influenced by) the label in their energy-related purchase decisions.
Research questions of interest included the following:
• Where do consumers see or hear about the ENERGY STAR label?
• How does increased publicity affect recognition, understanding, and influence of
the ENERGY STAR label?
• Which key messages about the ENERGY STAR label are consumers retaining?
• Do consumers demonstrate loyalty to the ENERGY STAR label?
The remainder of this report summarizes the survey and analysis methodology;
provides key findings regarding ENERGY STAR label recognition, understanding,
influence, and information sources; and contains appendices presenting detailed
survey methodology (Appendix A), demographic information (Appendix B), additional
questions from the 2007 survey (Appendix C), and a copy of the 2007 questionnaire
(Appendix D). The results presented in this report were in all cases weighted to
obtain results applicable at the national level (please refer to Appendix A for details
on the weighting methodology).
-------
METHODOLOGY OVERVIEW
During September 2007, GEE fielded a questionnaire to obtain information at the
national level on consumer awareness of the ENERGY STAR label (please refer to
Appendix A for a more detailed outline of the survey methodology). A random
sample of households that are members of an Internet/WebTV panel was surveyed.
Both the Internet/WebTV panel as a whole and the sample of households
completing the survey were selected by random digit dial and recruited by
telephone. The panel is designed to be representative of the U.S. population.
The questionnaire was similar to the questionnaires GEE fielded in previous years.
As in previous years, GEE and its sponsoring members made the survey data
publicly available.
The survey was a national survey. The sampling frame for this national survey
included all households in the largest Nielsen Designated Market Areas® (DMAs)
that together accounted for about 70 percent of U.S. television households. In 2007,
this encompassed the 57 largest DMAs. In addition, GEE members may choose to
sponsor more intensive sampling (i.e., an oversample) in selected localities, referred
to here as sponsor areas. In 2007, Entergy sponsored additional surveys in its
service territory in parts of Arkansas, Louisiana, Mississippi, and Texas.
Sponsor areas are not limited to the 57 largest DMAs. Thus, the complete frame for
the study was the combination of the largest DMAs and any portion of the sponsor
areas that fell outside the 57 largest DMAs.
To facilitate comparisons across years, the national results were based only on data
collected from respondents from the 57 largest DMAs. Data collected from
respondents not in the 57 largest DMAs, but in a sponsor area, are not included in
this analysis. Some of the 57 largest DMAs are also included in the sponsor areas
and therefore were oversampled. The data from these respondents (as well as from
the other respondents in the 57 largest DMAs) received an appropriate weight in the
analysis in order to generate valid national results and facilitate comparison with
data from other years.
As in previous years' studies, the DMAs in the sampling frame were classified by
publicity category, so that the effect of local energy efficiency program publicity on
national awareness could be considered. The same publicity classification procedure
used in the past 6 years was used this year.1 A DMA was classified as high publicity,
low publicity, or overusing the following criteria:
• High publicity: Active local ENERGY STAR program recently sponsored by a
utility, state agency, or other organization for two or more continuous years. The
1 Between September 2006 and 2007, 4 of the 57 largest DMAs changed publicity category: Chicago, Louisville,
Salt Lake City, and Washington DC. All four changed from "Other" to "High".
-------
activities must include sustained promotions and publicity from non-federal
sources.
• Low publicity: Federal campaign activities only and no significant regional
program sponsor activities.
• Other: All other DMAs.
This classification was designed to provide clear and verifiable definitions. The key
working definitions are below:
• Recent: The two years of activity must include the time period during which the
survey was in the field.
• Sustained: The two years of activity must be continuous.
• Significant: In addition to any direct federal publicity efforts, publicity efforts
must include a deliberate and multifaceted regional program sponsor investment
in ENERGY STAR programming, such as direct marketing efforts or the creation
and distribution of promotional material.
These definitions were constructed to be sufficiently operational to be applicable to
future survey efforts; they can be modified by simply increasing the duration of
sustained high publicity.
The sample was stratified by publicity category and sponsor area. The sample
consisted of the following four strata:
1. High Publicity Category within the 57 Largest DMAs;
2. Low Publicity Category within the 57 Largest DMAs;
3. Other Publicity Category within the 57 Largest DMAs; and
4. Entergy Service Territory within All DMAs.
Entergy requested a simple random sample across all DMAs in its sponsor area.
GEE members who fund oversamples for a sponsor area determine the total number
of sampling points allocated to the sponsor area as a whole. One hundred sample
points were allocated to the Entergy service territory stratum. Among the top 57
DMAs, for areas located outside the sponsor area, each publicity category was
allocated approximately 333 sampling points.
This report presents the 2007 survey results at the national level and by publicity
category. The publicity category results provide evidence of the effectiveness of
EPA's model for increasing awareness, understanding, and use of ENERGY STAR
by supporting regional energy efficiency program sponsors. Results are presented
on consumer recognition and understanding, and purchasing influence of the
ENERGY STAR label, as well as on messaging, product purchases, and information
sources consumers use in their purchasing decisions.
-------
In this report, the following terminology is used in comparing results across years or
sub-categories: (1) The term "significant" implies statistical significance. In other
words, differences between proportions that are described as "significant" are at
least statistically different at the 10-percent level of significance. In some cases, the
p-values are given to provide the exact level of statistical significance. (2) Unless
stated otherwise, terms such as "smaller," "larger," "increase," or "decrease" refer to
changes that are statistically significant at the 10-percent level or better. (3) The
term "similar" implies that there is no statistical difference between the results being
compared at the 10-percent level of significance. In other words, the difference
between the results is within the bounds that would be expected from chance
variation in a random sample.
-------
KEY FINDINGS
RECOGNITION
In 2007, 74 percent of households recognized the ENERGY STAR label when
shown the label (i.e., aided recognition). Fifty-eight percent of households recalled
seeing or hearing of the ENERGY STAR label without first being shown the label
(i.e., unaided recognition).
For purposes of this analysis, respondents were said to recognize the ENERGY
STAR label if they had seen or heard of the label before the survey. Recognition of
the label was explored in two ways. Unaided recognition was measured by asking if
the respondent had seen or heard of the ENERGY STAR label without showing the
label. Delivery of the survey by Internet/WebTV made it possible to measure
unaided recognition. Aided recognition was measured by showing respondents the
ENERGY STAR label and then asking if they had seen or heard of the label. Both
methods are useful measurements of label recognition, although unaided recognition
is the more conservative of the two.
Recognition results for both the 2007 and 2006 surveys are summarized in the
following table. Both aided and unaided recognition of the ENERGY STAR label in
2007 were greater than in 2006. For aided recognition, the 2007 and 2006
proportions are statistically different from each other at the 5-percent level of
significance (p-value = 0.024). For unaided recognition, results for the two years
were also significantly different at the 5-percent level (p-value = 0.014).
Recognition of the ENERGY STAR Label
[Base = All respondents]
Recognize
ENERGY
STAR Label
Yes
Standard error
2007
Aided
(n=995)
74%
1 .7%
Unaided
(n=892)
58%
2.1%
2006
Aided
(n=2,176)
68%
1 .7%
Unaided
(n=1,900)
51%
1 .9%
Note: The unaided recognition results for both 2006 and 2007 are based on the question ES1:
"Have you ever seen or heard of the ENERGY STAR label?" The sequence and numbering of
questions on which the aided recognition results are based, however, was slightly different in 2007
than it was in 2006. A more detailed explanation of the differences between the 2007 and 2006
question sequence and numbering is located Appendix A, Section 1.3.4-Effects on Aided
Recognition and Understanding.
-------
Recognition by Publicity Category
Both aided and unaided recognition were higher in high-publicity areas than in low-
publicity areas. After being shown the ENERGY STAR label, 79 percent of
households in high-publicity areas recognized the label versus 65 percent in low-
publicity areas. Unaided recognition was 69 percent in high-publicity areas
compared with 49 percent in low-publicity areas.
Recognition of the ENERGY STAR Label by Publicity Category
[Base = All respondents]
100% -,
90% -
80% -
70% -
60% -
50% -
40% -
30% -
20% -
10% -
no/.
79%
65%
69%
• High Publicity
D Low Publicity
49%
***Aided (n=995)
***Unaided (n=892)
*** High- and low-publicity area proportions are statistically different from each other at the 1-percent level of
significance (p-value<0.01).
-------
Product Associations
Households who recognized the ENERGY STAR label (aided) indicate strong
association between products historically supported by regional energy efficiency
programs (refrigerators, washing machines, dishwashers, compact fluorescent light
bulbs, etc.) and the ENERGY STAR label.
Survey respondents that recognized the ENERGY STAR label (aided) were asked,
"What types of products, goods, and services do you think of when you think of the
ENERGY STAR label?" (survey question QA). The figure on the next page presents
the results for this question, which indicate unprompted product associations.
Unprompted, appliances, washing machines and refrigerators showed the strongest
association with the label at 34 to 39 percent. Clothes dryers followed at 27 percent.
The next most strongly associated unprompted products were air conditioners and
dishwashers at 19 and 20 percent, respectively.
Most products that showed a strong association with the ENERGY STAR label
unprompted also showed a strong association with the label when prompted.
However, the list of products mentioned by households without being prompted also
includes several products that do not have an ENERGY STAR specification: clothes
dryers, water heaters, microwave ovens, and stoves or ovens.
When prompted, eighty percent of households had seen the label on refrigerators. At
about 70 percent, washing machines and dishwashers were the next products most
commonly associated with the ENERGY STAR label. Windows, room and central air
conditioners followed at 49 percent. However, 39 percent of households associated
microwave ovens with the ENERGY STAR label, although they do not in fact have
an ENERGY STAR specification. (Nevertheless, of all appliances, microwave ovens
were the least often associated with the label). Seven products showed a significant
increase in prompted association with the ENERGY STAR label from 2006 to 2007:
refrigerators, washing machines, dishwashers, windows, com pact fluorescent light
bulbs, doors, and insulation.
-------
Product Association with the ENERGY STAR Label Unprompted
[Base = Recognize label (aided), n = 540]
'Appliance
"Washing machine
Refrigerator
Dryer
*"Dishwasher
Air conditioner
Computeror monitor
Stove/oven
Water heater
Lighting
Television
Electronics
Other
Don't know
*No product
Heater
Furnace
Window
Electric things
Freezer
"Insulation
"Microwave oven
Computer printer
Fan
Vacuum cleaner
Boiler
Dehumidifier
VCR/DVD
Stereo/radio
Thermostat
H39%
[]35%
]34%
]27%
]20%
n 19%
] 14%
13%
1 6%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
Note: QA: "What types of products, goods, or services do you think of when you think of the ENERGY STAR label?
Please write your answers below."
*** 2007 and 2006 proportions are statistically different from each other at the 1-percent level of significance
(p-value<0.01). The proportion of households in 2007 is larger than in 2006.
** 2007 and 2006 proportions are statistically different from each other at the 5-percent level of significance
(p-value<0.05). The proportion of households in 2007 is larger than in 2006 for Washing Machines and
Insulation. The proportion of households in 2007 is smaller than in 2006 for Microwave Oven.
* 2007 and 2006 proportions are statistically different from each other at the 10-percent level of significance
(p-value<0.10). The proportion of households in 2007 is larger than in 2006 for Appliance. The proportion of
households in 2007 is smaller than in 2006 for No Product.
-------
Prompted Product Association with the ENERGY STAR Label
**Refrigerator
***Washing machine
***Dishwasher
***Window
Room air conditioner
Central A/C
Microw ave oven
Furnace/boiler
Computer or monitor
*Compact fluorescent light bulb
***Door
Television
New ly built home
"•Insulation
Lighting fixture
Thermostat
Heat pump
Skylight
VCR
Computer printer
Roofing material
Copying machine
Audio product
Fax machine
Scanner
[Base = Recognize label (aided) ]
U 80%
73%
70%
I 49%
I 49%
H 49%
39%
I 36%
U 34%
33%
U 31 %
29%
| 26%
I 26%
H 21 %
1 7%
16%
U 14%
U 13%
] 12%
] 12%
| 12%
I 12%
I 7%
0%
10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Note: Q5 (a, b, and c): "Now we're going to ask you about several groups of products. As you review the list, please
select each of the products, product literature, or packaging on which you have seen the ENERGY STAR label."
*** 2007 and 2006 proportions are statistically different from each other at the 1-percent level of significance
(p-value<0.01). The proportion of households in 2007 is larger than in 2006.
** 2007 and 2006 proportions are statistically different from each other at the 5-percent level of significance
(p-value<0.05). The proportion of households in 2007 is larger than in 2006.
Respondents were asked about three sets of product groupings: (1) Heating and Cooling Products
and Home Office Equipment, (2) Home Appliances/Lighting and Home Electronics, and (3) Building
Materials and Buildings. The sample size, n, for each of these sets of product groupings is 559; 554;
and 528; respectively.
-------
Product Associations by Publicity Category
For refrigerators, washing machines, doors, furnace/boilers, and insulation, a larger
proportion of households in high- than low-publicity areas associated these products
with the ENERGY STAR label when prompted. Regional energy efficiency program
sponsors promoted refrigerators, washing machines, and room air conditioners
heavily. A significantly smaller proportion of households associated heat pumps in
high- than in low-publicity areas in 2007. This result was seen for heat pumps in
each of the previous three years.
Prompted Product Association with the ENERGY STAR Label by Publicity Category
[Base = Recognize label (aided)3]
***Washing machine
Dishwasher
Window
Room air conditioner
Central A/C
Microwave oven
**Door
Computer or monitor
***Furnace/boiler
Compact fluorescent light bulb
***lnsulation
Television
Lighting fixture
Newly built home
Thermostat
Skylight
Computer printer
VCR
Audio product
Roofing material
**Heat pump
Copying machine
Fax machine
Scanner
1 fi7%
| fifi%
1 47%
| *vw.
| -vw.
^1 Wo
| ?n
-------
UNDERSTANDING
In 2007, 76 percent of households had at least a general understanding of the
ENERGY STAR label. Furthermore, the proportion of households that exhibited only
a general understanding (11 percent) was small compared with the proportion that
exhibited a high understanding (65 percent). The level of understanding was
investigated by asking respondents what messages came to mind when they saw
the ENERGY STAR label. Based on the reported messages, a respondent's
understanding was classified as high, general, or no understanding.
The 2007 and 2006 survey results on the level of understanding of the ENERGY
STAR label are provided in the following table. Due to changes in the survey skip
patterns in 2006, the base of respondents who were asked questions related to their
level of understanding was different than in previous years. In 2007, the survey
reverted back to the skip patterns used prior to 2006; therefore the 2007 results can
only be directly compared to results from years prior to 2006.
Level of Understanding of the ENERGY STAR Label
[Base = All respondents]
Level of Understanding
of the Label
High understanding
General understanding
No understanding
Total
2007
(n=1,051)
65%
11%
24%
100%
2006
(n=1,755)
61%
12%
27%
100%
Note: The Level of Understanding of the ENERGY STAR Label is
determined using the open-ended responses to two questions (1) ES2:
"What does the ENERGY STAR label mean to you?", and (2) ES4A1:
"Please look at the ENERGY STAR labels on the left. Type the
messages that come to mind when you see the ENERGY STAR labels."
In 2007 and years prior to 2006, all respondents were asked either ES2
orES4A1, depending on their answers to ES1. Respondents that
answered "Yes" to ES1 were then asked ES2, while all other
respondents were asked ES4A1. In the 2006 survey, respondents that
answered "No" or "Don't Know" to ES1 and "Yes" to either of the "shown
label" questions that followed (ES3B or ES3C in 2006) were not asked
ES4A1.
11
-------
Understanding by Publicity Category
The level of understanding of the ENERGY STAR label was greater in high- than in
low-publicity areas. Seventy-eight percent of households in high-publicity areas had
at least a general understanding of the label compared with 71 percent of
households in low-publicity areas. This difference is statistically significant at the 10-
percent level (p-value = 0.075). Among those households with at least a general
understanding of the ENERGY STAR label, more households exhibited a high
degree of understanding in both publicity categories.
Understanding of the ENERGY STAR Label by Publicity Category
[Base = All res
Publicity Category
High
Low
Difference (High
minus Low)
p-value
pondents]
At Least General
Understanding of Label
78%
71%
7%
0.075
12
-------
Understanding of the ENERGY STAR Label by Publicity Category
[Base = All respondents]
100%
90% H
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
D High Understanding
D General Understanding
157% |
High Publicity
Low Publicity
13
-------
Label Messaging
Open-ended responses to the questions on the level of understanding of the
ENERGY STAR label are an indicator of how effectively EPA communicates its
messages through the label. These responses are used in the analysis of
understanding in the previous section. By far, the most common message
associated with the label was "energy efficiency or energy savings," which is
considered high understanding of the label. Sixty-two percent of households
surveyed associated the ENERGY STAR label with this message. The second most
common response was "associating specific products with the ENERGY STAR
label," at 16 percent of households, which classified as general understanding of the
label.4
Messages of the ENERGY STAR Label
[Base = All respondents]
Energy efficiency/savings
Environmental benefit
Save money on operation
Energy/environmental product standards
Energy conservation
Savings (not linked to operation)
H 62%
High Understanding
Mentions specific products 116%
Energy no link to efficiency I 16%
Environmental no link to benefit I 14%
Confuses with EnergyGuide H|3%
Government backing H 2%
Product standards no environmental link ] 2%
Electricity ]1%
Quality
Save money on purchase
General Understanding
I
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
4 A discussion of differences in the label messaging results across years is not included here. Due to
changes in the 2006 survey, the base of respondents who were asked questions related to their level
of understanding was different than in previous years. Therefore the 2007 and 2006 results related to
a household's understanding of the ENERGY STAR label are not directly comparable.
14
-------
Messaging by Publicity Category
For most messages, the proportion of households that associated the message with
the ENERGY STAR label was similar for high- and low-publicity areas. However, for
the "Energy efficiency/savings" message, a significantly larger proportion of
households in high- than in low-publicity areas associated the message with the
label. A larger proportion of households in the low- than in high-publicity areas
associated the "Environmental benefit" message with the label.
Messages of the ENERGY STAR Label by Publicity Category
[Base = All respondents]
'"Energy
efficiency/savings
Save money on operation
•"Environmental benefit
Energy/environmental
product standards
Energy conservation
Savings (not linked to
operation)
-^52%
^\66%
1 8%
116%
- 1 6%
4%
High Understanding
Mentions specific products
Energy no link to efficiency
Environmental no link to
benefit
Confuses with
EnergyGuide
Government backing
Product standards no
environmental link
Electricity
Quality
Save moneyon purchase
~~118%
Jl4%
General Understanding
I
13%
]3%
13%
12%
[2%
J<1%
f<1%
• High Publicity
D Low Publicity
10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
High- and low-publicity area proportions are statistically different from each other at the 1-percent level of
significance (p-value<0.01).
15
-------
Understanding by Aided Recognition
Households that recognized the ENERGY STAR label when shown the label were
more likely to have at least a general understanding of the label than those that did
not recognize the label. In 2007, 82 percent of households that recognized the
ENERGY STAR label had at least a general understanding of it, while among
households that did not recognize the label, 59 percent had at least a general
understanding of it. Although the table below also provides the 2006 results, a direct
comparison of the 2007 and 2006 findings is not appropriate due to differences in
the survey across these years.5
Understanding of the ENERGY STAR Label by Aided Recognition of the Label
[Base = All respondents]
Recognize ENERGY STAR Label
Aided
Yes
No
Difference (Yes minus No)
p-value
At Least General Understanding of
Label
2007
82%
58%
24%
<0.0001
2006
86%
56%
30%
<0.0001
A discussion of differences in the label messaging results across years is not included here. Due to
changes in the 2006 survey, the base of respondents who were asked questions related to their level
of understanding was different than in previous years. Therefore the 2007 and 2006 results related to
a household's understanding of the ENERGY STAR label are not directly comparable.
16
-------
INFLUENCE
The survey provided some insight into consumers' decisions to purchase ENERGY
STAR-labeled products, including the following:
• The proportion of households nationwide that recognized the ENERGY STAR
label and knowingly purchased an ENERGY STAR-labeled product
• The influence of the label on purchase decisions
• The role of rebates or financing in decisions to buy ENERGY STAR products
• The loyalty of purchasers to ENERGY STAR products
Purchases of ENERGY STAR Products
In order to estimate the proportion of all households that knowingly purchased an
ENERGY STAR product, the following three proportions were multiplied:
• The proportion of all households that recognized the ENERGY STAR label
(aided)
• Of the households that recognized the label (aided), the proportion that
purchased a product in a product category that has an ENERGY STAR
specification
• Of the households that recognized the label (aided) and purchased a product in a
relevant category, the proportion that knowingly purchased an ENERGY STAR
product
The result is that 37 percent of all households knowingly purchased an ENERGY
STAR product in the past twelve months. This proportion is 6 percentage points
higher than it was in 2006, at 37 versus 31 percent. This difference is statistically
significant at the 10-percent level (p-value = 0.070).
Purchased ENERGY STAR
(Base = All respondents)
Purchased
ENERGY STAR product
Estimate (yes)
Standard Error
2007
(n=995)
37%
2.6%
2006
(n=2,176)
31%
2.0%
An increase in the proportion of all households that knowingly purchased an
ENERGY STAR product could be due to an increase in any of the three proportions
listed above between 2006 and 2007. A close look at the survey results shows that
two of the three proportions increased from 2006 and 2007: (1) the proportion of all
17
-------
households that recognized the ENERGY STAR label (aided), and (2) of the
households that recognized the label (aided), the proportion that purchased a
product in a product category that has an ENERGY STAR specification. The
increase in these two proportions was significant at the 10-percent level.
In 2007, considering only households that recognized the label and purchased a
product in a relevant category, 68 percent knowingly purchased an ENERGY STAR
product in the past twelve months. This proportion is similar to the 66 percent
measured in 2006.
Purchased ENERGY STAR
[Base = Recognize label (aided) and purchaser]
Purchased
ENERGY STAR product
Estimate (yes)
Standard error
2007
(n=376)
68%
3.1%
2006
(n=808)
66%
2.9%
Note: Q7: "For any of the products you purchased, did you see the
ENERGY STAR label (on the product itself, on the packaging, or on the
instructions)?"
Purchases of ENERGY STAR by Publicity Category
A significantly greater proportion (p = .019) of all households knowingly purchased
an ENERGY STAR product in high- versus low-publicity areas, 43 and 29 percent,
respectively.
National Household Market Penetration of ENERGY STAR
Products by Publicity Category
[Base = All respondents]
Publicity Category
High
Low
Difference (High
minus Low)
p-value
% Households
43%
29%
13%
0.019
Influence of the ENERGY STAR Label
In 2007, for 73 percent of households that knowingly purchased an ENERGY STAR-
labeled product, the label influenced at least one of their purchase decisions "very
much" or "somewhat." This is a significant increase compared to the 2006 result of
63 percent (p-value = 0.097).
For 12 percent of households, the label influenced their purchase decisions
"slightly." Sixteen percent of households said the presence of the ENERGY STAR
label had no influence on their purchase. These findings are not significantly
different from those of 2006.
18
-------
Influence of the ENERGY STAR Label on Purchase Decisions
[Base = Recognize label (aided) and ENERGY STAR purchasers]
Influence of the Label on
Purchasing Decisions
Very much
Somewhat
Slightly
Not at all
Total
2007
(n=234)
Maximum
40%
32%
12%
16%
100%
2006
(n=524)
Maximum
34%
30%
16%
20%
100%
Note: Q8: "For each ENERGY STAR-labeled product you purchased,
how much did the ENERGY STAR label influence your purchase
decision?"
Influence of the ENERGY STAR Label by Publicity Category
The purchase decisions of 39 percent of households in high-publicity areas were
influenced "very much" by the ENERGY STAR label, compared to 28 percent in low-
publicity areas. Similarly, when these proportions are added to the proportions of
households for which the ENERGY STAR label was "somewhat" influential in their
purchasing decisions, the high- to low-publicity comparison is 75 to 67 percent,
respectively. None of these proportions, however, are statistically different from
each other at the 10-percent level of significance.
Maximum Influence of the ENERGY STAR Label on Purchase Decisions
by Publicity Category
[Base = Recognize label (aided) and ENERGY STAR purchasers, n = 234]
Publicity Category
High
Low
Difference (High minus Low)
p-value
Very much
39%
28%
11%
0.192
Very much
or somewhat
75%
67%
8%
0.358
19
-------
Rebate and Financing Influence
Twenty-one percent of households that knowingly purchased an ENERGY STAR-
labeled product received rebates or reduced-rate financing. This is not a significant
decline from the 26 percent of households that received rebates or reduced-rate
financing in 2006 (p-value = 0.315). Of these households in 2007, 44 percent would
have been "very likely" to purchase the ENERGY STAR product if financial
incentives had not been available. Another 33 percent would have been "somewhat
likely." This leaves 23 percent that would have been "slightly likely" and 0 percent
"not at all likely". These results are not statistically different at the 10-percent level
from the results reported in 2006.
Received Financial Incentive for an ENERGY STAR Product Purchased
[Base = Recognize label (aided) and ENERGY STAR purchaser]
Received Financial Incentive for
an ENERGY STAR Product
Puchased
Yes
No
Total
% Households
2007
(n=220)
21%
79%
100%
2006
(n=483)
26%
74%
100%
Note: Q9: "Did you receive rebates or reduced-rate financing for
any ENERGY STAR-labeled product(s) you purchased?"
Influence of Rebates and Financing on Purchasing Decisions
[Base = Recognize label (aided), ENERGY STAR purchaser, and received an incentive, n = 39]
Likelihood Purchase ENERGY STAR
Product Without Financial Incentive
Very likely
Somewhat likely
Slightly likely
Not at all likely
Total
% Households
44%
33%
23%
0%
100%
Note: Q10: "If rebates or reduced-rate financing had not been
available, how likely is it that you would have purchased the
ENERGY STAR-labeled product?"
20
-------
Loyalty to ENERGY STAR
Loyalty to ENERGY STAR is investigated by asking respondents who knowingly
purchased an ENERGY STAR-labeled product how likely they would be to
recommend ENERGY STAR products to a friend. Respondents were asked to report
this likelihood on a scale of 0 to 10, where 0 means "extremely unlikely" and 10
means "extremely likely." As can be seen in the table below, 29 percent of
households who knowingly purchased an ENERGY STAR-labeled product reported
they would be "extremely likely" to recommend ENERGY STAR products to a friend.
The likelihood of recommending ENERGY STAR products to a friend is greater than
"6" for 80 percent of these households. This is 9 percentage points greater than the
result for 2006. The difference between years is significant at the 10-percent level
(p-value = 0.051).
Loyalty to ENERGY STAR
[Base = Recognize label (aided) and purchasers]
Likelihood Recommend
ENERGY STAR Products
10 - Extremely likely
9
8
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
0 - Extremely unlikely
Total
% Households
2007
(n=247)
29%
19%
21%
11%
4%
9%
1%
1%
<1%
1%
3%
100%
2006
(n=554)
29%
17%
14%
11%
6%
17%
1%
1%
1%
<1%
2%
100%
Notes: Q11: "How likely are you to recommend ENERGY
STAR-labeled products to a friend?"] is measured on an 11-
point scale, where 0 -'Extremely unlikely" and 10 -'Extremely
likely."
21
-------
INFORMATION SOURCES
Sources Seen
Seventy percent of households have seen something about ENERGY STAR on
appliance or electronic equipment labels, followed by store displays at 54 percent.
Forty-three percent of households heard or saw something about ENERGY STAR
on TV commercials. Between 25 and 28 percent of households saw something
about ENERGY STAR on or in utility mailings or bill inserts, EnergyGuide labels, or
in newspaper or magazine advertisements. A larger proportion of households in
2007 than in 2006 heard something about ENERGY STAR from TV (p-value =
0.007) and radio (p-value = 0.091) commercials, and from homebuilders (p-value =
0.028). The proportion of households that heard something about the label from a
realtor (p-value = 0.090) or lender (p-value = 0.069) decreased since 2006.
Sources Saw or Heard Something About ENERGY STAR
[Base = Recognize label (aided), n = 520]
Labels on appliances or electronic equipment
Displays in stores
***TV commercial
Utility mailing or bill insert
Yellow EnergyGuide label
Newspaper or magazine advertisement
Newspaper or magazine article
Internet
*Radio commercial
Direct mail or circular advertisement
**Homebuilder
Salesperson
Billboard
TV news feature story
Contractor
J 54%
J 43%
J 27%
] 25%
14%
Friend, neighbor, relative, or co-worker H 3%
•Realtor 11%
•Lender <1%
10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Note: SO1: "Where did you see or hear something about ENERGY STAR? Please mark all that apply."
*** 2007 and 2006 proportions are statistically different from each other at the 1-percent level of significance
(p-value<0.01). The proportion of households in 2007 is larger than in 2006.
** 2007 and 2006 proportions are statistically different from each other at the 5-percent level of significance
(p-value<0.05). The proportion of households in 2007 is larger than in 2006.
* 2007 and 2006 proportions are statistically different from each other at the 10-percent level of significance
(p-value<0.10). The proportion of households in 2007 is larger than in 2006 for radio commercials. The
proportion of households in 2007 is smaller than in 2006 for realtor and lender.
22
-------
Sources Seen by Publicity Category
For several sources, the proportion of households that heard or saw something
about ENERGY STAR was significantly larger in high- than in low-publicity areas.
This was the case for TV and radio commercials, newspaper or magazine
advertisement, the internet, and billboards. All of these sources involve means of
mass communication.
Sources Saw or Heard Something About ENERGY STAR by Publicity Category
[Base = Recognize label (aided), n = 520]
Labels on appliances or electronic equipment
Displays in stores
**TV commercial
Utility mailing or bill insert
"Newspaper or magazine advertisement
Yellow EnergyGuide label
•Internet
"'Radio commercial
Direct mail or circular advertisement
Newspaper or magazine article
'Billboard
Homebuilder
Salesperson
Contractor
TV news feature story
Friend, neighbor, relative, or co-worker
Realtor
Lender
J51%
J32%
J21%
M7%
28%
• High Publicity
D Low Publicity
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
High- and low-publicity area proportions are statistically different from each other at the 1-percent level of
significance (p-value < 0.01).
High- and low-publicity area proportions are statistically different from each other at the 5-percent level of
significance (p-value < 0.05).
High- and low-publicity area proportions are statistically different from each other at the 10-percent level of
significance (p-value < 0.10).
23
-------
APPENDIX A: DETAILED METHODOLOGY
During September and October 2007, the Consortium for Energy Efficiency (GEE)
fielded a questionnaire to obtain information at the national level on consumer
awareness and understanding of the ENERGY STAR label, the value accrued to the
label in the eyes of consumers, satisfaction with labeled products, and other
ENERGY STAR-related items. The questionnaire was similar to the Internet/WebTV-
based questionnaires fielded in previous years (2001 through 2006). As in the 7
previous years, GEE and its members sponsoring the survey made the survey data
publicly available. In 2001, a rigorous comparative analysis of the results obtained
via a mail survey versus an Internet/WebTV survey was conducted. The results from
the two survey methods were comparable for most major indicators.6 Results from
that time frame were also analogous to telephone surveys for aided recognition.7
This report discusses the results of the 2007 GEE ENERGY STAR Household
Survey, building on prior years' survey results and focusing on the extent to which
consumers recognized the ENERGY STAR label, understood its intended
messages, and utilized (or were influenced by) the label in their energy-related
purchase decisions. Research questions of interest included:
• Where do consumers see or hear about the ENERGY STAR label?
• How does increased publicity impact consumer ENERGY STAR label
recognition, understanding, and influence?
• Which key messages about the ENERGY STAR label are consumers retaining?
• Do consumers demonstrate loyalty to the ENERGY STAR label?
The survey was fielded from September 19 through October 2, 2007.
The remainder of Appendix A discusses the questionnaire design, sampling and
weighting methodologies, data collection, and the national analysis. See Appendix D
for survey questions.
1 QUESTIONNAIRE DESIGN
In 2007, GEE conducted the ENERGY STAR survey using a questionnaire designed
to be delivered by Internet/WebTV. The survey was conducted via an interactive
Internet/WebTV format with a random sample of households that are members of an
Internet/WebTV panel. Households were selected to participate in the panel by
random digit dial and recruited by telephone. Participants in this survey were then
randomly selected from the panel. Only one member per household in the random
6 National Analysis of GEE 2001 ENERGY STAR Household Surveys. U.S. EPA, 2002.
7 Tannenbaum, Bobbi and Shel Feldman. "ENERGY STAR Awareness as a Function of Survey
Method." IEPEC, 2001.
A-1
-------
sample was contacted. Households selected for previous years' surveys were not
eligible to participate in the 2007 survey.
The panel is designed to be representative of the U.S. population. Panel members
are provided with an Internet appliance (WebTV) and an Internet service connection.
Households that already have Internet service receive other incentives to participate
in the panel. Panel members respond to questionnaires administered to them via the
Internet and WebTV. They receive no more than three to four short questionnaires
each month, and are expected to respond to a certain percentage of them.
Data collected using the 2007 Internet/WebTV questionnaire may in most cases be
compared with data collected using the Internet/WebTV questionnaires fielded in
previous years, for which GEE was also responsible.
1.1 Survey Objectives
GEE had several broad objectives in designing the 2007 questionnaire, including:
• To maintain consistency with the GEE 2000 and 2001 mail questionnaires and
the Internet/WebTV questionnaires fielded in 2001 and subsequent years
• To fine-tune the questionnaire based on lessons learned from prior years'
analyses of the GEE survey while maintaining the ability to analyze the results of
the 2007 survey against those from the 2006 GEE survey
The 2007 Internet/WebTV questionnaire addressed the following:
• Respondent recognition of the ENERGY STAR label
• Understanding of and key messages communicated by the ENERGY STAR label
• Products on which respondents have seen the label
• Products that respondents have shopped for or purchased in the past year
• Products that respondents have purchased on which they have seen the label (or
on whose packaging or instructions they have seen the label)
• Influence of the presence or absence of the label on the purchase decision
• Whether purchases of ENERGY STAR-labeled products involved rebates or
reduced-rate financing
• Likelihood of having purchased ENERGY STAR-labeled products in the absence
of rebates or reduced-rate financing
A-2
-------
Likelihood of recommending ENERGY STAR-labeled products to a friend and
other measures of loyalty to the ENERGY STAR label
Satisfaction with ENERGY STAR-labeled products versus products without the
ENERGY STAR label
Demographic questions (most of the demographic questions were not asked in
the Internet/WebTV survey as the demographic characteristics of the
respondents were already on file.)
Recognition and understanding of the yellow Energy Guide labels
1.2 Internet/WebTV Questionnaire
The interactive format of an Internet/WebTV questionnaire allows questions to be
asked in a way that is not possible with a printed questionnaire. On printed
questionnaires respondents can see questions in advance and may be tempted to
read the entire questionnaire before completing it, potentially educating themselves
in a limited way about the subject and affecting their responses.
The Internet/WebTV questionnaires (after questions about the yellow Energy Guide
label) ask respondents—without showing the ENERGY STAR label—whether they
have ever seen or heard of the ENERGY STAR label. Responses to this question
should thus be comparable to those obtained through a telephone survey. The
Internet/WebTV questionnaires then show the ENERGY STAR label(s) (which is
obviously not possible with a telephone survey) and ask again about recognition and
understanding. Responses to these questions should thus be comparable to those
obtained through a mail survey where respondents are shown the label.
Another difference between a mail questionnaire and an Internet/WebTV
questionnaire is that the latter—like a telephone questionnaire using computer-
assisted telephone interviewing (CATI)—can program lines of questions based on
responses to earlier questions. For example, respondents to an Internet/WebTV
questionnaire who say they have bought a given product in the past year can then
be asked whether that specific product (or its packaging or instructions) had the
ENERGY STAR label.
Thus, the Internet/Web TV survey is able to combine some of the attributes of both
print and telephone surveys.
1.3 Changes to 2007 Questionnaire
The 2007 Internet/WebTV questionnaire was very similar to the 2006 questionnaire.
One change to the 2007 survey is discussed below in detail.
A-3
-------
As noted following the Recognition of the ENERGY STAR Label table on page 5 of
the report, the sequence and numbering of questions on which the aided recognition
results are based changed slightly in 2007. Changes to the sequence and
numbering of these questions were made in 2006 that resulted in a subset of
respondents not being asked the questions used in the determination of the Level of
Understanding of the ENERGY STAR Label (page eleven of the report). The 2007
survey reverts back to the sequence and numbering of questions used in the 2005
survey so that all respondents are asked the questions that determine understanding
results.
This section provides further explanation of these changes. Although there is no
effect on the determination of aided recognition, the changes to this sequence do
have an effect on the determination of the Level of Understanding of the ENERGY
STAR Label.
1.3.1. 2007 (2005) Survey Method
In the 2007 analysis the determination of aided recognition was based on the
responses to five questions. This is the same sequence and numbering used in the
2005 survey. Specifically:
ES3A: Is this the label you have seen or heard of before? (Respondents were
randomly shown either the old or new ENERGY STAR label. This question was
asked to respondents who said they had seen or heard of the ENERGY STAR
label.)
ES3B: Have you seen or heard of this version of the ENERGY STAR label? (In this
question, asked after ES3A, respondents were shown the label not shown in the
previous question.)
ES3C: Please look at the ENERGY STAR label on the left. Have you ever seen or
heard of this label? (Respondents were randomly shown either the old or new
ENERGY STAR label. This question was asked to respondents who said they had
not seen or heard of or didn't know whether they had seen or heard of ENERGY
STAR.)
ES3D: Have you seen or heard of this version of the ENERGY STAR label? (In this
question, asked after ES3C, respondents were shown the label not shown in the
previous question.)
ESS: Now that you had the opportunity to see the ENERGY STAR label, do you
recall seeing or hearing anything about it before this survey? (This question was
asked to respondents who answered "no" or "don't know" to ES3A and ES3B. It was
also asked to all respondents who answered ES3C and ES3D.)
A-4
-------
• Respondents who answered ES3A, ES3B, ES3C, ES3D, or ESS "yes" were
categorized as recognizing the ENERGY STAR label (aided).
• Respondents who did not answer ES3A, ES3B, ES3C, or ES3D "yes" and
answered ESS "no," were categorized as not recognizing the label (aided).
• Respondents who did not answer ES3A, ES3B, ES3C, or ES3D "yes" and
answered ESS "don't know" or refused to answer ESS were not included in the
analysis of aided recognition. (Their data were set to missing.)
1.3.2. 2006 Survey Method
In the 2006 analysis, the determination of aided recognition was based on the
responses to four questions. Specifically:
ES3C: Please look at the ENERGY STAR label on the left. Have you ever seen or
heard of this label? (Respondents were randomly shown either the old or new
ENERGY STAR label. This question was asked to respondents who said they had
not seen or heard of or didn't know whether they had seen or heard of ENERGY
STAR.)
ES3A: Is this the label you have seen or heard of before? (Respondents were
randomly shown either the old or new ENERGY STAR label. This question was
asked to respondents who said they had seen or heard of the ENERGY STAR
label.)
ES3B: Have you seen or heard of this version of the ENERGY STAR label? (In this
question, asked after ES3C or ES3A, respondents were shown the label not shown
in the previous question.)
ESS: Now that you had the opportunity to see the ENERGY STAR label, do you
recall seeing or hearing anything about it before this survey? (This question was
asked to respondents who answered "no" or "don't know" to ES3A and ES3B or to
ES3C and ES3B.)
• Respondents who answered ES3A, ES3B, ES3C, or ESS "yes," were
categorized as recognizing the ENERGY STAR label (aided).
• Respondents who did not answer ES3A, ES3B, or ES3C "yes" and answered
ESS "no," were categorized as not recognizing the label (aided).
• Respondents who did not answer ES3A, ES3B, or ES3C "yes" and answered
ESS "don't know" or refused to answer ESS were not included in the analysis of
aided recognition. (Their data were set to missing.)
1.3.3. Sequence and Numbering Changes
In 2007(2005), survey respondents who answered "yes" to question ES1: "Have you
ever seen or heard of the ENERGY STAR label?" were asked the same series of
A-5
-------
questions as in 2006. After being asked ES1, these respondents were subsequently
asked ES3A and ES3B, where they were shown each of the versions of the label
and specifically asked if they had ever seen or heard of either of them ("Is this the
label you have seen or heard of before" and "Have you seen or heard of this version
of the ENERGY STAR label?", respectively).8 If, after being shown both versions of
the label, these individuals responded that they had seen or heard of at least one of
them, they were considered to recognize the ENERGY STAR label (aided). If,
however, these individuals responded that they had not seen or heard of either of
the two versions of the ENERGY STAR label,9 they were asked ESS: "Now that you
have had the opportunity to see the ENERGY STAR label, do you recall seeing or
hearing anything about it before this survey?" If they answered yes, they were
categorized as recognizing the ENERGY STAR (aided).
The series of questions asked of survey respondents who answered "no" to question
ES1 in 2007(2005) was different than that asked of respondents who answered "no"
in 2006. In 2007(2005), respondents who answered "no" to question ES1: "Have you
ever seen or heard of the ENERGY STAR label?"10 were asked the corresponding
questions ES3C and ES3D ("Please look at the label on the left. Have you ever seen
or heard of this label?" and "Have you seen or heard of this version of the ENERGY
STAR label?," respectively).11 Regardless of their responses to these questions, all
of the respondents that did not answer "yes" to ES1 were subsequently asked ESS:
"Now that you have had the opportunity to see the ENERGY STAR label, do you
recall seeing or hearing anything about it before this survey?" In 2006, those
answering "no" to ES1 were subsequently asked questions ES3C and ES3B
("Please look at the label on the left; have you ever seen or heard of this label?" and
"Have you seen or heard of this version of the ENERGY STAR label?," respectively).
Unlike the 2007(2005) survey, the 2006 survey required these respondents to
answer "no" or "don't know" to both ES3C and ES3B in order to be asked ES6: "Now
that you have had the opportunity to see the ENERGY STAR label, do you recall
seeing or hearing anything about it before this survey?"
ES3A and ES3B were asked such that each respondent was asked about each of the two versions
of the ENERGY STAR label, but in random order.
9 Or if they did not know or refused to answer whether they had seen or heard of the either of the
labels.
10 In this discussion, references to a "no" response to question ES1 also includes responses of "don't
know" or refused to answer.
11 As with ES3A and ES3B, ES3C and ES3D were asked such that each respondent was asked
about each of the two versions of the ENERGY STAR label, but in random order.
A-6
-------
1.3.4. Effects on Aided Recognition and Understanding
The question numbering and sequence changes described in the previous section
have no substantive effect on the determination of aided recognition. Despite
changes to the numbering and sequence, the 2007 survey collects the same
information collected with the 2006 survey to determine aided recognition.
The question numbering and sequence changes described in the previous section
do affect the base of respondents used to determine understanding of the ENERGY
STAR label. More specifically, the base of respondents who were asked questions
related to their Level of Understanding of the ENERGY STAR label is different than
in 2006, but consistent with the 2005 and previous years.
The following two questions are used to determine a participant's level of
understanding of the label.
ES4a1: "Please look at the ENERGY STAR labels on the left. Type the messages
that come to mind when you see the ENERGY STAR labels. [SHOW LABELS]"
ES2: "What does the ENERGY STAR label mean to you?"
In 2007 all respondents were asked either ES4a1 or ES2. With the exception of
2006 this is consistent with previous years. In 2006 respondents who answered "no"
to ES1 and "yes" to either ES3C or ES3B were not asked either of the two
understanding questions.
2 SAMPLING
2.1 Designated Marketing Areas' Publicity Categories
The same publicity classification procedure used in the past 7 years was used in
2007. A Nielsen Designated Marketing Area® (DMA) was classified as high publicity,
low publicity, or overusing the following criteria:
• High publicity: Active local ENERGY STAR program recently sponsored by a
utility, state agency, or other organization for 2 or more continuous years. The
activities must include sustained promotions and publicity from non-federal
sources.
• Low publicity: Federal campaign activities only and no significant regional
program sponsor activities.
• Other: All other DMAs.
This classification procedure was designed to identify three publicity categories and
provide clear and verifiable definitions. The key working definitions are:
A-7
-------
• Recent: The 2 years of activity must include the time period during which the
survey was in the field.
• Sustained: The 2 years of activity must be continuous.
• Significant: In addition to any direct federal publicity efforts, publicity efforts
must include a deliberate and multifaceted regional program sponsor investment
in ENERGY STAR programming, such as direct marketing efforts or the creation
and distribution of promotional material.
These definitions were constructed to be applicable to future survey efforts; they can
be modified by simply increasing the duration of sustained high publicity.
2.2 Sample Design
The sample was a national sample. The sampling frame included all households in
the largest DMAs, which together accounted for about 70 percent of U.S. television
households. In 2007, this encompassed the 57 largest DMAs. In addition, GEE
members may sponsor more intensive sampling (i.e., an over sample) in selected
localities, which are referred to here as sponsor areas. In 2007, one GEE member
elected to fund a sponsor area. The sponsor area is the Entergy service territory in
parts of Arkansas, Louisiana, Mississippi, and Texas.
Sponsor areas are not limited to the 57 largest DMAs. Thus, the complete frame for
the study was the combination of the largest DMAs and any portion of the sponsor
areas that fell outside those DMAs. The sample consisted of the following four
strata:
1. High Publicity Category within the 57 Largest DMAs;
2. Low Publicity Category within the 57 Largest DMAs; and
3. Other Publicity Category within the 57 Largest DMAs;
4. Entergy Service Territory within All DMAs.
The GEE member sponsoring the over sample requested a simple random sample
across all DMAs in its sponsor area. The GEE members who fund the oversample
for a sponsor area determine the total number of sampling points allocated to the
sponsor area as a whole. One hundred sample points were allocated to the Entergy
Service Territory stratum.
Among the top 57 DMAs located outside the sponsor areas, each publicity category
was allocated approximately 333 sampling points. In order to achieve the target
number of sampling points, a larger sample was selected to receive the survey to
allow for non-response.
A-8
-------
A list of the large DMAs and their publicity category assignments is provided in the
table below.12 A list of the DMAs included in the sponsor area and their publicity
category assignments follows. Lastly, the large DMAs and the DMAs in the sponsor
areas are shown on a map along with their publicity categories.
Large (Top 57) DMAs
Rank
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
29
30
31
32
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
41
42
43
44
45
45
47
48
49
50
51
52
53
54
55
56
57
DMA
New York
Los Angeles
Chicago
Philadelphia
San Francisco-Oak-San Jose
Dallas-Ft. Worth
Boston (Manchester)
Washington, DC (Hagrstwn)
Atlanta
Houston
Detroit
Tampa-St. Pete (Sarasota)
Phoenix (Prescott)
Seattle-Tacoma
M in neapolis-St. Paul
Miami-Ft. Lauderdale
Cleveland-Akron (Canton)
Denver
Orlando-Daytona Bch-Melbrn
Sac ram nto-Stkton-M odesto
St. Louis
Pittsburgh
Portland, OR
Baltimore
Indianapolis
Charlotte
San Diego
Hartford & New Haven
Raleigh-Durham (Fayetvlle)
Nashville
Kansas City
Columbus, OH
Cincinnati
M ilwau kee
Salt Lake City
Greenvll-Spart-Ashevll-And
San Antonio
West Palm Beach-Ft. Pierce
Grand Rapids-Kalmzoo-B.Crk
Birmingham (Ann, Tusc)
Harrisburg-Lncstr-Leb-York
Norfolk-Portsmth-Newpt Nws
Las Vegas
Memphis
Oklahoma City
Albuquerque-Santa Fe
Greensboro-H.Point-W.Salem
Louisville
Buffalo
Jacksonville
Providence-New Bedford
Austin
Wilkes Barre-Scranton
New Orleans
Fresno-Visalia
Albany-Schenectady-Troy
Little Rock-Pine Bluff
Total
TV Households
2006-2007
Number
7,366,950
5,611,110
3,455,020
2,941,450
2,383,570
2,378,660
2,372,030
2,272,120
2,205,510
1,982,120
1,938,320
1,755,750
1,725,000
1,724,450
1,678,430
1,538,620
1,537,500
1,431,910
1,395,830
1,368,680
1,228,980
1,163,150
1,1 17,990
1,097,290
1,060,550
1 ,045,240
1,030,020
1,014,630
1,006,330
944,100
913,280
898,030
886,910
882,990
839,170
826,290
774,470
772,140
734,670
723,210
713,960
712,790
671,630
664,290
662,380
662,380
660,570
648,190
639,990
639,110
633,950
602,340
590,170
566,960
557,380
554,970
539,900
78,743,430
% of US
6.616
5.039
3.103
2.642
2.141
2.136
2.130
2.041
1.981
1.780
1.741
1.577
1.549
1.549
1.507
1.382
1.381
1.286
1.254
1.229
1.104
1.045
1.004
0.985
0.952
0.939
0.925
0.911
0.904
0.848
0.820
0.807
0.797
0.793
0.754
0.742
0.696
0.693
0.660
0.650
0.641
0.640
0.603
0.597
0.595
0.595
0.593
0.582
0.575
0.574
0.569
0.541
0.530
0.509
0.501
0.498
0.485
70.721
Pu blicity
Category
High
High
High
Other
High
Other
High
High
Other
Other
Other
Low
Other
High
High
Other
Other
Other
Other
High
Other
Other
High
Other
Other
Low
High
High
Low
Low
Other
Other
Low
High
High
Low
Low
Low
Other
Low
Other
Low
High
Low
Low
Other
Low
High
High
Low
High
High
Low
Other
High
High
Low
12
Between September 2006 and 2007, 4 of the 57 largest DMAs changed publicity category: Chicago, Louisville,
Salt Lake City, and Washington DC. All four changed from "Other" to "High".
A-9
-------
Sponsor Areas
Sponsor Area
Publicity
Category
DMA (Large and Small)
Other
Entergy Service Territory
Low
Large: parts of
"Houston DMA (Rank 10)
New Orleans DMA (Rank 54)
Large: parts of
"Memphis DMA (Rank 44)
"Little Rock-Pine Bluff DMA (Rank 57)
Small: parts of
"Springfield, MO DMA (Rank 76)
Shreveport DMA (Rank 81)
"Jackson, MS DMA (Rank 87)
Baton Rouge DMA (Rank 93)
"Waco-Temple-Bryan DMA (Rank 95)
Ft. Smith-Fay-Sprngdl-Rgrs DMA (Rank 102)
Tyler-Longview(lfkn&Ncgd) DMA (Rank 111)
"Lafayette, LA DMA (Rank 123)
Columbus-Tulepo-West Point DMA (Rank 132)
"Monroe-El Dorado DMA (Rank 135)
Beaumont-Port Arthur DMA (Rank 140)
"Hattiesburg-Laurel DMA (Rank 165)
Lake Charles DMA (Rank 175)
"Alexandria, LA DMA (Rank 179)
Jonesboro DMA (Rank 180)
"Greenwood-Greenville DMA (Rank 184)
A-10
-------
Large (Top 57) DMAs and Sponsor Areas by Publicity Category
13
H "High" publicity
L "Low" publicity category
O "Other" publicity category
I | CEE sponsor area ranking in Top 57 DMAs
I I CEE sponsor area not ranking in Top 57 DMAs
2.3 Weighting Procedures
Knowledge Networks, the company that provided the Internet/WebTV survey
service, developed the weights used in the analysis. Knowledge Networks first
adjusted its panel members for known disproportions due to the panel's original
selection and recruitment design and then proceeded with a post-stratification
weighting that accounted for differences between the Internet/WebTV panel and the
U.S. population. The adjustment to this typical sampling weight approach was based
on geographic and demographic characteristics known for both the panel and the
population (refer to Appendix B). It effectively scales up under-represented
population dimensions in the panel and scales down dimensions that are over-
represented in the panel. This more closely aligned the panel with the basic
demographic characteristics of the U.S. population.
After the field data are collected, Knowledge Networks further adjusted the sampling
weight to account for survey non-response. The correction for survey non-response
is analogous to the adjustment for differences in the Internet/WebTV panel from the
U.S. population. It was based on geographic and demographic characteristics known
for both the sample of panel survey completes and the entire sampling frame for the
study. The weighting scaled up under-represented population dimensions and
scaled down over-represented dimensions in the sample of survey completes. This
more closely aligned the sample of survey completes with the basic demographic
characteristics of the entire sampling frame for the study.
13
There were no large DMAs or sponsor areas in either Alaska or Hawaii.
A-11
-------
3 DATA COLLECTION
3.1 Survey Fielding Period
The survey began on September 19 and closed on October 2, 2007.
3.2 Response Rate
The overall response rate was 17 percent for the GEE 2007 ENERGY STAR
Household Survey. This level of response is typical for Knowledge Networks'
surveys.
For an Internet/WebTV survey, the response rate is defined as the product of the
return rate, which is survey-specific, and the recruitment rate. The return rate is the
ratio of the number of questionnaires completed to the number of panel members
asked to complete the questionnaire. For the GEE 2007 ENERGY STAR Household
Survey, the return rate was 65 percent. While this number is quite high, it must be
adjusted by the recruitment rate, which is the number of households that agreed to
participate in the Internet/WebTV panel as a proportion of the number of households
asked to participate. The recruitment rate was 25 percent. Thus, the response rate
for the GEE 2007 ENERGY STAR Household survey was the product of the survey-
specific return rate of 65 percent and the recruitment rate of 25 percent. This product
is equivalent to the ratio of the number of questionnaires completed to the number of
households that were offered the opportunity to be in the study.
Survey Response Rate
Sendout/requested
Completed
Return rate
Recruitment rate
Response rate
1,609
1,051
65%
25%
17%
4 NATIONAL ANALYSIS
4.1 DMAs Included
To facilitate comparisons across years, the national results were based only on data
collected from respondents from the 57 largest DMAs. Data collected from
respondents not in the 57 largest DMAs, but in a sponsor area, are not included in
this analysis. Some of the 57 largest DMAs are also included in the sponsor areas
and therefore were oversampled. The data from these respondents, as well as from
the other respondents in the 57 largest DMAs, received an appropriate weight in the
analysis in order to generate valid national results and comparison with data from
other years.
A-12
-------
4.2 Treatment of "Don't Know" Responses and Refusals
For most questions, how "don't know" responses or refusals are handled has a
negligible effect on the results. Still, it is necessary to make a decision as to how
they should be handled. The results presented in this report for a given question do
not include "don't know" responses or refusal to answer (i.e., the results for a given
question were calculated after any "don't know" responses to that question or
refusals to answer that question were set to missing).
A-13
-------
APPENDIX B: DEMOGRAPHICS
This appendix presents the relationship between the demographic characteristics
found in the weighted survey data and the corresponding characteristics in the study
population of all U.S. households. Professional survey and data collection firms
make significant efforts to ensure the rigor of their methods and to produce the
highest quality results. Each year, Knowledge Networks—the company that
maintains the Internet/WebTV survey panel used in this analysis—strives to create a
panel that is representative of the U.S. population. However, as in any survey effort,
those who respond to surveys tend to be different from those who do not. In this
case, the panel used for the ENERGY STAR survey may contain subjects that are
receptive to the Internet/WebTV incentive-for-service tradeoff and introduce
associated biases.
Weighting used in the analyses of this report are applied to account for differences
between the Internet/WebTV panel and the U.S. population. If weighting was
accomplished perfectly, the distribution of various demographic characteristics in the
weighted survey data would be the same as the distribution of those characteristics
in national Census data. For most demographic characteristics, the two distributions
are quite similar. This suggests the weighted survey results are a reasonable
representation of the study population. A summary of the comparisons of
demographic characteristics is provided in the table below. Detailed comparisons
are provided in tables presented at the end of this appendix.
Summary of Distribution Comparisons
Demographic Characteristic
Number of persons in household
Householder/respondent age
Householder/respondent gender
Dwelling type
Own/rent
Household annual income
Largest Difference (Absolute Value):
Survey Estimate Less Census %
Three
65 or older
Gender
Single-family, attached
Own/rent
$75,000 and over
5.7%
-5.9%
+/- 0.7%
2.7%
+/- 4.9%
-6.1%
The largest differences (in absolute value) between the weighted survey data and
national Census data, at around six percentage points, are in the proportions of
number of households with three persons per household, households with annual
income of $75,000 or more, and the proportion of householders 65 years of age or
older. The difference in the proportion of households that own or rent is next largest,
at about five percentage points. The combined under-representation of households
with three persons per household, householders 65 years or older and households
with annual incomes of $75,000 or more, as well as the somewhat inaccurate mix of
those who own versus rent, are not expected to bias the survey results in any
particular direction. Differences between the weighted survey data and Census data
for other demographic characteristics of the population—gender and dwelling type—
are all quite small, at less than about three percentage points.
B-1
-------
Household Size Distribution
Number of Persons
in Household
One
Two
Three
Four
Five or more
Total (%)
Total (1,000s)
Census
% Dwelling Units3
27%
33%
16%
15%
10%
100%
108,871
Survey Estimate
Minus Census
% Dwelling Units
-4.2%
0.3%
4.3%
1 .2%
-1 .6%
'U.S. Census Bureau, American Housing Survey, 2005, Table 2-9.
Age Distribution
Householder/
Respondent Age
18-24b
25-34
35-44
45-54
55-64
65 or older
Total (%)
Total (1,000s)
Census
% Householders3
6%
17%
21%
21%
16%
20%
100%
108,871
Survey Estimate
Minus Census
% Householders
4.2%
0.3%
2.2%
-2.2%
1 .4%
-5.9%
'U.S. Census Bureau, American Housing Survey, 2005, Table 2-9.
'Census, Under 25 years; WebTV/Internet, 18-24 years.
Gender Distribution
Householder/
Respondent
Gender
Female
Male
Total (%)
Census
% Population3
51%
49%
100%
Survey Estimate
Minus Census
% Population
0.7%
-0.7%
a U.S. Census Bureau, The Population Profile of the United States:
Dynamic Version, Part I: Population Dynamics, Age and Sex Distribution
in 2005.
B-2
-------
Dwelling Type Distribution
Dwelling Type
Single-family, unattached
Single-family, attached
Apt. bldg. (>=2 units)
Mobile home
Other
Total (%)
Total (1 ,000s)
Census
% Dwelling Units3
61%
5%
23%
6%
5%
100%
114,505
Survey Estimate
Minus Census
% Dwelling Units
0.4%
2.7%
-2.0%
1.1%
-2.1%
' U.S. Census Bureau, American Housing Survey, 2005, Table 2-1.
Own/Rent Distribution
Own/Rent
Own
Rent
Total (%)
Total (1,000s)
Census
% Households3
69%
31%
100%
108,871
Survey Estimate
Minus Census
% Households
-4.9%
4.9%
a U.S. Census Bureau, American Housing Survey, 2005,
Table 2-1.
Income Distribution
Total Household
Annual Income
(before taxes)
Less than $15,000
$15,000-$24,999
$25,000-$49,999
$50,000-$74,999
$75,000 and over
Total (%)
Total (1,000s)
Census
% Households3
13%
11%
26%
18%
30%
99%
113,146
Survey Estimate
Minus Census
% Households
0.6%
-0.2%
3.5%
3.0%
-6.1%
a CPS Annual Demographic Survey March Supplement, Table
HINC-01 Selected Characteristics of Households, by Total
Money Income in 2006
B-3
-------
APPENDIX C: ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS FROM 2007 SURVEY
This appendix presents the results of additional ENERGY STAR-related questions
that were added by GEE in 2005 and were not discussed in the main body of the
report.
1 ENERGY STAR DESIGNATION
Thirty-four percent of households that recognized the ENERGY STAR label (aided)
thought that the U.S. government decides if a product deserves the label. This is
seven percentage points larger than the proportion noted in 2006. The difference is
significant at the 10-percent level (p-value = 0.095). Twenty-seven percent of
households thought the Underwriters Laboratories makes this decision, while 19
percent thought product manufacturers make the decision.
Designates ENERGY STAR Product
(Base = Recognize label (aided), n=355)
*US government
Underwriters Laboratories
Product manufacturer
Electric and gas utility
Other
Retailer/store
] 27%
34%
0%
20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Note: QB: "As far as you know, who decides if a product deserves the ENERGY STAR label?
2007 and 2006 proportions are statistically different from each other at the 10-percent level of significance
(p-value<0.10). The proportion of households in 2007 is larger than in 2006.
C-1
-------
ENERGY STAR Designation by Publicity Category
Similar to the 2006 results, a significantly larger proportion of households in high-
than in low-publicity areas thought that electric and gas utilities make this decision,
20 percent compared with 9 percent. This difference is significant at the 5-percent
level (p-value = 0.027). This result is not surprising given the role electric and gas
utilities often play in promoting ENERGY STAR products in high-publicity areas.
Thirty-one percent of households in high- and 38 percent of households in low-
publicity areas thought that the U.S. Government decides if a product deserves the
ENERGY STAR label. This difference is not statistically significant at the 10-percent
level.
Designates ENERGY STAR Product by Publicity Category
(Base = Recognize label (aided), n=355)
US government
Underwriters Laboratories
"""Electric and gas utility
Product manufacturer
Other
Retailer/store
131%
38%
[27%
33%
• High Publicity
D Low Publicity
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
High- and low-publicity areas proportions are statistically different from each other at the 5-percent level of
significance (p-value<0.05).
C-2
-------
2 ENERGY STAR PRODUCT SATISFACTION
Household satisfaction with a given product in a product category that has an
ENERGY STAR specification does not appear to vary based on whether or not the
product had an ENERGY STAR label. On a scale of 1 to 5, where 1 means "very
dissatisfied" and 5 means "very satisfied," products with and without the ENERGY
STAR label had an average satisfaction rating between 4.2 and 4.3. At the 10-
percent level of significance, no product with the ENERGY STAR label received a
higher satisfaction rating compared with products without the label. Households that
purchased a microwave oven without the label were more satisfied than their
counterparts that knowingly purchased models with the label. As mentioned
previously in this report, microwave ovens do not in fact have an ENERGY STAR
specification.
There were no significant (p-value < 0.10) changes in product satisfaction between
2006 and 2007 for households that knowingly purchased a product with the
ENERGY STAR label. There were many significant changes in product satisfaction
between years for households that knowingly purchased a product without the
ENERGY STAR label. These include: refrigerator (p-value = 0.099), washing
machine (p-value = 0.037), microwave oven (p-value = 0.056), furnace/boiler (p-
value = 0.061), window (p-value = 0.071), skylight (p-value = 0.020), insulation (p-
value = 0.031), and room air conditioner (p-value = 0.086).
c-3
-------
ENERGY STAR vs. Non-ENERGY STAR Product Satisfaction
(Bases = Recognize label (aided) and purchased specified product14)
Average Satisfaction (1=very dissatisfied, 5=very satisfied)
1
Overall (ne=247, nO=267)
Newly built home (ne=14, nO=4)
Window (ne=14, nO=21)
Door (ne=34, nO=14)
Insulation (ne=22, nO=13)
Thermostat (ne=27, nO=12)
Refrigerator (ne=38, nO=24)
Television (ne=58, nO=67)
Roofing material (ne=22, nO=14)
Computer or monitor (ne=84, nO=76)
Lighting fixture (ne=52, nO=32)
Compact fluorescent light bulb (ne=111, nO=75)
Heat pump (ne=6, nO=3)
Audio product (ne=33, nO=21)
VCR (ne=18, nO=16)
Computer printer (ne=51, nO=52)
Fax machine (ne=17, nO=14)
Central A/C (ne=20, nO=13)
Room air conditioner (ne=38, nO=20)
Dishwasher (ne=37, nO=13)
'"Microwave oven (ne=37, nO=21)
Copying machine (ne=14, nO=13)
Washing machine (ne=40, nO=22)
Scanner (ne=22, nO=16)
Furnace/boiler (ne=13, nO=11)
Skylight (ne=6, nO=3)
I4-5
d-5
±I4.6
14.4
H4.4
^4.5
^4.8
143
^4.5
14.3
J4.0
14.2
4.2
14.2
34.4
4.2
14.2
5.0
-]4.2
T41
14.1
1.0
• 4.1
f4.i
I4-1
±4.2
• 4.1
H4.8
i 4.0
I 3.9
i 3.9
34.9
34.2
—,3.9
33.8
= 3.9
H4.5
5.0
012345
Average Satisfaction (1=very dissatisfied, 5=very satisfied)
D Non-ENERGY STAR product • ENERGY STAR product
ENERGY STAR and Non-ENERGY STAR product proportions are statistically different from each other at
the 1-percent level of significance (p-value<0.01). However, microwave ovens are not a product category
that is eligible for the ENERGY STAR label.
14 ne = number of respondents that recognized the label (aided) and purchased this product with an
ENERGY STAR label
nO = number of respondents that recognized the label (aided) and purchased this product without an
ENERGY STAR label
C-4
-------
3 CONSUMER PERCEPTIONS
Survey respondents that recognized the ENERGY STAR label (aided) were asked to
indicate how strongly they agree or disagree with a number of attitudinal statements
about ENERGY STAR-labeled products.15 The statements were shown to
respondents in random order.
For purposes of discussion the statements are grouped into three categories:
• Environmental and social responsibility messaging
• Purchasing preference
• Product attributes and performance
The 2007 survey results indicate that households generally agree with positive
statements about the ENERGY STAR label and disagree with negative statements
about the label.16 Similar to the 2006 results, few statements elicit strong agreement
or strong disagreement among substantial proportions of households; in contrast, a
number of statements generated neutral responses from a sizeable proportion of
households. A more detailed discussion of the findings regarding the attitudinal
statements is provided below.
15 These statements are numbered Q16a through Q16p in the survey.
16 In this discussion, the term "agree" is used to correspond to survey responses of "strongly agree" or
"somewhat agree." Similarly, the term "disagree" corresponds to survey responses of "strongly
disagree" or "somewhat disagree."
C-5
-------
Response to Categorical Statements Regarding Messaging, Purchasing, and Product
Attributes (Base = Recognize label (aided))
E3 Strongly disagree • Somewhat disagree D Somewhat agree 0 Strongly agree
-firw, -firw, -drw,, _9n°/,, n
ENVIRONMENTAL/ SOCIAL RESPONSIBILITY MESSAGING
Buying ENERGY STAR labeled products makes me feel like I'm helping to protect the k
environment for future generations (n=694) 28% Neutral K
Buying ENERGY STAR labeled products makes me feel like I'm contributing to society (n=694) „„, N 1 r
PURCHASING PREFERENCE
If 1 cannot find the kind of product 1 am looking for w ith an ENERGY STAR label, 1 w ill shop ^0/ Neutrg| X%
elsew here rather than buy a product that does not qualify for the label (n=693) ° 'VV
PRODUCT ATTRIBUTES/PERFORMANCE
ENERGY STAR labeled products provide me w ith more benefits than products w ithout the „„„,.,., I
ENERGY STAR label (n=690) 44%NeU'ra'
ENERGY STAR labeled products offer better value than products w ithout the label (n=694) 48o/Neutra| f
fn 9no/n ^n
-------
3.1 Environmental and Social Responsibility Messaging
The development of the environmental and social responsibility messaging of the
ENERGY STAR label has been a strong focus of the national ENERGY STAR
education campaign. In the 2007 survey, two statements addressed the label's
messaging in these areas: "Buying ENERGY STAR labeled products makes me feel
like I'm helping to protect the environment for future generations" and "Buying
ENERGY STAR labeled products makes me feel like I'm contributing to society."
Of the ten statements that explore consumer attitudes toward the ENERGY STAR
label and products, these two ranked second and third in terms of the proportion of
households who agree with the statements. These two statements had the same
ranking in 2006. Of households that recognize the ENERGY STAR label, 65 percent
either strongly or somewhat agree with the statement that by buying ENERGY STAR
labeled products they feel they are helping protect the environment. Fifty six percent
of ENERGY STAR aware households strongly or somewhat agree that by
purchasing ENERGY STAR products they feel they are contributing to society. Both
of these proportions are significantly larger than the 2006 findings at the 1-percent
level (p-value = 0.001 and <0.001, respectively).
3.2 Purchasing Preferences
Increasing consumers' preferences for purchasing ENERGY STAR-labeled products
is also an intended outcome of the national campaign. In the 2007 survey, two
separate statements were included to investigate households' views of their
purchasing preferences with respect to ENERGY STAR-labeled products. Twenty-
five percent of households either strongly or somewhat agree with the statement "If I
cannot find the kind of product I am looking for with an ENERGY STAR label, I will
shop elsewhere rather than buy a product that does not qualify for the label." This
proportion is larger than the 2006 result of 17 percent (p-value = <0.001). More
households (30 percent) either strongly or somewhat disagree. However, the largest
proportion of households—45 percent—are neutral in their level of agreement or
disagreement with this statement of their purchasing behavior.
In 2007, 31 percent of households agree with the second statement addressing
households' views of their purchasing preferences: "I consider myself loyal to
ENERGY STAR products." This is nine percentage points larger than the portion of
households that agreed with the statement in 2006. The difference is significant at
the 1-percent level (p-value = <0.001).
3.3 Product Attributes and Performance
A third goal of the national ENERGY STAR education campaign has been to inform
consumers that ENERGY STAR qualifying products are more energy efficient than
non-qualifying models. The degree to which this goal is being accomplished is
addressed in the 2007 survey by asking respondents their level of agreement or
c-7
-------
disagreement with the statement "If I see the ENERGY STAR label, I know I'm
getting a much more energy-efficient product." Nearly 75 percent of respondents
either strongly or somewhat agree with this statement. This indicates a high
perception among consumers that the ENERGY-STAR label indicates superior
performance with respect to energy efficiency relative to products without the label.
The proportion of households that agree with the statement increased significantly at
the 5-percent level (p-value = 0.029).
The survey addressed perceptions of product quality. Survey respondents were
asked the level at which they agreed or disagreed with the statement "When I buy a
product with the ENERGY STAR label, I can always be sure it's high quality." The
results show that 38 percent of households either strongly or somewhat agree with
this statement—three times as many as those who strongly or somewhat disagree—
49 percent are neutral. The proportion of households that agree with this statement
is seven percentage points greater than the 2006 survey results. This difference is
significant at the 5-percent level (p-value = 0.014).
A number of attitudinal statements were included in the survey to measure
consumers' perceptions of ENERGY STAR product value. Two such statements are
"ENERGY STAR products provide me with more benefits than products without the
ENERGY STAR label" and "ENERGY STAR-labeled products offer better value than
products without the label." The results show that almost half of households
(49 percent and 44 percent, respectively) either strongly or somewhat agree with
these statements. The remaining of households were for the most part neutral (44
percent and 48 percent, respectively). The 2006 to 2007 increase in the proportion
of households that agreed with these statement were significant at the 1-percent
level (p-value = <0.001 and p-value = 0.008, respectively). These results indicate
increasing consumers' perceptions of the value of ENERGY STAR products relative
to products without the label.
The results related to the statement "Buying ENERGY STAR-labeled products
makes me feel like I'm spending extra money for nothing" provide additional
information on perceptions of product value. Here, over half (52 percent) of all
households who recognize the ENERGY STAR label strongly or somewhat disagree
with the statement, while 38 percent of households are neutral. Only 10 percent
agree with this statement. The proportions of households that agree and disagree
with this statement in 2007 are similar to the 2006 results.
3.4 Consumer Perceptions by Publicity Category
The 2007 results also suggest that local and regional efforts to publicize ENERGY
STAR have been successful in affecting consumer perception of the label. For most
of the attitudinal statements, the level of consumers' agreement or disagreement is
significantly different in high- and low-publicity areas in the expected direction. For
example, with respect to the environmental and social messaging of the ENERGY
STAR label, a significantly higher proportion of consumers in high- than in low-
c-8
-------
publicity areas strongly or somewhat agree with the statement that buying ENERGY
STAR-labeled products makes them feel like they are contributing to society (p-value
= 0.034). With regards to purchasing preference, a larger proportion in high- than
low-publicity areas agree with the statements that they will shop elsewhere if they
cannot find a product with the label (p-value = 0.055) and that they consider
themselves loyal to ENERGY STAR-labeled products (p-value = 0.011). Lastly with
respect to the product attributes and performance statements, a larger proportion of
high- than low-publicity area consumers agree that ENERGY-STAR-labeled
products offer better value than products without the label (p-value = 0.028).
Similarly, a significantly higher proportion of households in high- than in low-publicity
areas strongly or somewhat disagree with the statements that buying ENERGY
STAR-labeled products makes them feel like they are spending extra money for
nothing (p-value = 0.079) and that it seems like most products have the ENERGY
STAR label (p-value = 0.011).
The level of consumers' agreement, disagreement, and neutrality is similar in high-
and low-publicity areas for the following statements:
• "Buying ENERGY STAR labeled products makes me feel like I'm helping to
protect the environment for future generations."
• "ENERGY STAR products provide me with more benefits than products
without the ENERGY STAR label."
• "When I buy a product with the ENERGY STAR label, I can always be sure
it's high quality."
• "If I see the ENERGY STAR label, I know I'm getting a much more energy-
efficient product."
c-9
-------
4 PURCHASING DECISIONS
At the end of the survey each respondent was asked to characterize their role in the
household purchasing decisions. The results indicate that the vast majority of those
represented are primary decision makers, meaning they usually make household
purchasing decisions alone or share equally in these decisions. As can be seen
below, this varies little across product categories. Eighty percent of individuals were
primary decision makers for their household's home appliances/lighting purchases,
whereas this was true for 66 percent for purchases of building materials.
Role in Household Purchasing Decisions
(Base = All respondents)
Building Materials
(n=994)
Home Electronics
(n=1,013)
Home Appliances /
Lighting (n=1,019)
Home Office
Equipment (n=991)
Heating & Cooling
Products (n=1,012)
77%
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
• Usually make decisions or share decisions equally
n Give input to decisions
B3 Have no input in decisions
C-10
-------
APPENDIX D: 2007 SURVEY QUESTIONS AND FLOW CHART
2007 ENERGY STAR SURVEY
Final Survey Instrument
EG1. Have you ever seen
or heard of yellow stickers
called EnergyGuide
labels?
EG2.
What information does the Energy
Guide label provide?
ES1. Have you ever
seen or heard of the
ENERGY STAR label?
ES2.
What does the ENERGY STAR label
mean to you?
ES3A.
Is this the label you have seen or
heard of before? [SHOW OLD OR
NEW LABEL, IN RANDOM
ORDER]
ES3C (old ES4a1)
Please look at the ENERGY
STAR label on the left. Have
you ever seen or heard of this
label? [SHOW OLD OR NEW
LABEL, IN RANDOM ORDER]
Yes
No
Don't know
D-1
-------
ES3B.
Have you seen or heard of
this version of the
ENERGY STAR label?
[SHOW LABEL NOT
PREVIOUSLY SEEN]
ES3D.
Have you seen or heard of this
version of the ENERGY STAR
label? [SHOW LABEL NOT
PREVIOUSLY SEEN]
Yes
No
Don't Know
New QA: What types of products,
goods, or services do you think of
when you think of the ENERGY
STAR label? Please write your
answers below.
S01.
Where did you see or hear something about ENERGY
STAR? Please mark all that apply.
[checkbox]
Newspaper or magazine advertisement
Newspaper or magazine article
TV commercial
TV news feature story
Radio commercial
Billboard
Utility mailing or bill inserts
Direct mail or circular advertisement
Labels on appliances or electronic equipment
Yellow EnergyGuide label
Displays in stores
Internet
Salesperson
Contractor
Realtor
Lender
Homebuilder
Friend, neighbor, relative, or co-worker
Other (please specify) [text box]
Don't know
ES4a1.
Please look at the ENERGY STAR
labels on the left. Type the messages
that come to mind when you see the
ENERGY STAR labels.
[SHOW LABEL]
ES6.
Now that you have had the opportunity
to see the ENERGY STAR label, do
you recall seeing or hearing anything
about it before this survey?
D-2
-------
SO2.
What did you see or hear about
ENERGY STAR? Please be
specific.
New QB: As far as you know, who decides
if a product deserves the ENERGY STAR
label? Select one answer only.
Product manufacturers
Retailers/stores
US Government
Underwriters Laboratories
Electric & gas utilities
Other:
Don't know
Q5(a). Now we're going to ask you about several groups of
products. As you review the list, please select each of the
products, product literature, or packaging on which you have seen
the ENERGY STAR label.
Heating and Cooling Products
Central air conditioner
Furnace or boiler
Heat pump
Thermostat
Room air conditioner
None of these products
Home Office Equipment
Computer or monitor
Computer printer
Copying machine
Fax machine
Scanner
Q5(b). Please continue reviewing the lists of products below, and
select each of the products, product literature, or packaging on
which you have seen the ENERGY STAR label.
Home Appliances/Lighting
Dishwasher
Refrigerator
Lighting fixture
Washing machine
Compact fluorescent light bulb
Microwave oven
None of these products
Home Electronics
Television
VCR
Audio product
Q5(c). Finally, please review the last of the product lists below
and select each of the products, product literature, or packaging
on which you have seen the ENERGY STAR label.
Building Materials
Window
Door
Skylight
Insulation
Roofing material
Buildings
Newly built home
Q6a
Have you or someone else in your
household been shopping in a store in the
last 12 months for any of the products listed
below?
Yes
No
Don't know
Heating and Cooling Products
Thermostat
Room air conditioner
Home Office Equipment
Computer or monitor
Computer printer
Copying machine
Fax machine
Scanner
Home Appliances/Lighting
Dishwasher
Refrigerator
Lighting fixture
Washing machine
Compact fluorescent light bulb
Microwave oven
Home Electronics
Television
VCR
Audio product
Building Materials
Window
Door
Skylight
Insulation
Roofing material
Q6b
Have you or someone else in your
household been shopping for a central air
conditioner, furnace or boiler, heat pump or
newly built home in the last 12 months?
Yes
No
Don't know
D-3
-------
1
r
Q12(a). Please look at each of the groups of products again.
Which of these products have you purchased in the last 12
months? Please check all that apply.
Heatina and Coolina Products Home Office Equipment
Central air conditioner
Furnace or boiler
Heat pump
Thermostat
Room air conditioner
None of these products
i
Computer or monitor
Computer printer
Copying machine
Fax machine
Scanner
r
Q12(b). Please continue reviewing the lists of products below.
Which of these products have you purchased in the last 12
months? Please check all that apply.
Home AoDliances/Liahtina Home Electronics
Dishwasher
Refrigerator
Lighting fixture
Washing machine
Compact fluorescent light bulb
Microwave oven
None of these products
i
Q12(c). Finally, please review the
Which of these products have yo
months? Please check all that ap
Buildinci Materials
Window
Door
Skylight
Insulation
Roofing material
None of these products
Television
VCR
Audio product
r
last of the product lists below.
j purchased in the last 12
ply.
Buildings
Newly built home
ES3A not=1 and
ES3B not=1 and
ES3C not=1 and
ES3D not=1 and
ES6 not=1
ES3A=1 orES3B=1 or
ES3C=1 orES3D=1 or
ES6=1
Any products
purchased
No products
purchased
GotoKN'sQ16a
(purchasing role)
D-4
-------
Q7: For any of the products you
purchased, did you see the ENERGY
STAR label (on the product itself, on
the packaging, or on the instructions)?
Q7a_1 thru Q7a_3: On which products
did you see the ENERGY STAR label?
(show only the products they checked
off in Q12, in grid pattern, with the
following options to check for each:
"Saw label" "Did not see label" "Don't
know")
Skip to New QC, and then
go to Q11.
New QC. In general, how satisfied are you with each of the following products you
purchased?
(Show each product they purchased—both ES and not-in grid format in random order.)
Response scale:
Very Dissatisfied
Somewhat Dissatisfied
Neither Satisfied nor Dissatisfied
Somewhat Satisfied
Very Satisfied
Don't Know
Q8. For each ENERGY STAR-labeled product(s) you
purchased, how much did the ENERGY STAR label influence
your purchase decision?
(Show each ES product they purchased in a grid pattern.
Response scale is below, and is unchanged from previous
years.)
Very much / Somewhat / Slightly / Not at all / Don't know
Q9. Did you receive rebates or
reduced-rate financing for any
ENERGY STAR-labeled produces) you
purchased?
SkiptoQ.11
D-5
-------
Q10. If rebates or reduced-rate financing had not been available,
how likely is it that you would have purchased the ENERGY
STAR-labeled product?
Very likely
Somewhat likely
Slightly likely
Not at all likely
Don't know
Q11. How likely are you to recommend ENERGY STAR-labeled
products to a friend?
Sliding 11-point horizontal scale, with only endpoints marked.
Endpoints:
0=Extremely Unlikely
10=Extremely Likely
On the scale by each statement, please indicate how strongly you agree or disagree with the statement.
(Note to programmer: present q16a through p in random order for each respondent.)
Strongly
Disagree
Somewhat
Disagree
Neither
Agree nor
Disagree
Somewhat
Agree
Strongly
Agree
Q16a. ENERGY STAR-labeled products provide me with more benefits than products without the ENERGY STAR label.
12345
Q16c. ENERGY STAR-labeled products offer better value than products without the label.
12345
Q16d. If I cannot find the kind of product I am looking for with an ENERGY STAR label, I will shop elsewhere rather than buy a product
that does not qualify for the label.
12345
Q16f. Buying ENERGY STAR-labeled products makes me feel like I'm helping to protect the environment for future generations.
12345
Q16h. Buying ENERGY STAR-labeled products makes me feel like I'm contributing to society.
12345
Q16i Buying ENERGY STAR-labeled products makes me feel like I'm spending extra money for nothing.
12345
Q16I. I consider myself loyal to ENERGY STAR-labeled products.
12345
Q16n. It seems like most products have the ENERGY STAR label these days.
12345
Q16o. If I see the ENERGY STAR label, I know I'm getting a more energy-efficient product.
12345
Q16p. When I buy a product with the ENERGY STAR label, I can always be sure it's high quality.
12345
D-6
-------
Q16a. Please tell us about your role in your household's purchasing decisions. For each of the product groups listed below, do you usually
make the purchasing decisions, do you share the decision-making equally with another household member, does someone else usually make
the decisions but you have some input, or do you have no input in the decision-making?
I usually make
the decisions
I share the
decision-making
equally
Heating and Cooling Products
Home Office Equipment
Home Appliances/Lighting
Home Electronics
Building Materials
Someone else
usually makes
the decisions, but
I have some input
I have no
input in
decision-
making
I'm not sure
/ Go to demographic \
I questions and closing j
D-7
------- |