probability panel
Ipsos
New York Times/Ipsos Survey · Jan 2–10, 2025 · US national
Methodology
- Pollster
- Ipsos independent
- Sponsor
- The New York Times
- Commissioned by
- The New York Times
- Fielded
- Jan 2–10, 2025
- Population
- adults
- Sample size
- 2,128
- Sample frame
- probability panel
- Panel
- Ipsos KnowledgePanel
- Mode
- online self-administered web survey via Ipsos KnowledgePanel; respondents without internet provided a tablet and connection; two reminders sent
- Margin of error
- +/- 2.6 percentage points at the 95% confidence level for all respondents
- Weighting
- weighted to adjust for gender by age, race/ethnicity, education, Census region by metropolitan status, household income, language dominance and 2024 presidential vote choice; demographic benchmarks from 2024 March Supplement of the CPS; language dominance from 2023 ACS; 2024 presidential vote choice benchmarks from certified 2024 election results
- Geography
- US national
- Base notes
- Party subgroups as published: Republican/Lean Republican N=1,022; Democrat/Lean Democrat N=1,025; Independent/Something else N=81 (very small independent base - treat that column with caution)
Sources
Verification note. Full topline PDF retrieved and text-extracted; wording, response options, totals and party columns copied directly from the Ipsos annotated questionnaire (Q8, Q32, Q33). || Full 25-page Ipsos topline & methodology PDF retrieved and text-extracted directly. All wording, response options, percentages and party breaks below are transcribed from that PDF. This is the survey that drove the January 2025 commentary wave ('79% oppose trans athletes in women's sports, including 67% of Democrats'). NOTE ON FRAME: this is the probability-based KnowledgePanel, NOT an Ipsos online opt-in sample - it is one of the higher-quality instruments in this corpus and reports a true margin of sampling error. Q13-Q16 were marked 'held for future release' in this topline and are not available here. || Toplines and party breaks retrieved from multiple secondary reports quoting the NYT/Ipsos release; the Ipsos topline PDF could not be located at ipsos.com in this session (404s). Panel name and MOE not confirmed. || WORDING RECOVERY SWEEP. Q33 and Q8 stems, response sets and party columns read directly from the Ipsos-published NYT/Ipsos topline PDF. The database previously carried a paraphrase from secondary reporting for Q33. || Topline PDF downloaded and text-extracted in session; Q33 wording, response options and Total/party columns read directly off the annotated questionnaire.
Figures below are transcribed from these documents. Where they disagree with the source, the source governs.
Questions asked (3)
society gone too far / not far enough in accommodating transgender people
Which statement comes closest to your feelings about the way our society deals with transgender people - that is, someone who does not identify with their sex at birth, like a person born male who now identifies as female.
Society has gone too far in accommodating transgender people
49%
Society has reached a reasonable balance when it comes to accommodating transgender people
28%
Society has not gone far enough in accommodating transgender people
21%
Refused
3%
Wording notes: supplies a definition of 'transgender' inside the question stem | definition example is male-to-female only | offers an explicit middle option ('reasonable balance')
neutral — Three-way balanced construction with symmetric 'too far'/'not far enough' poles and an explicit middle; the embedded definition is descriptive rather than evaluative, though using only a male-to-female example may prime sports/facilities associations.
Subgroup figures (12)
transgender women competing in women's sports
Thinking about transgender female athletes - meaning athletes who were male at birth but who currently identify as female - do you think they should or should not be allowed to compete in women's sports?
Should be allowed 18%79% Should not be allowed
Wording notes: no level of competition specified (youth vs. college vs. elite) | no middle or 'depends' option offered | 'who were male at birth' framing
neutral — Both alternatives are explicitly stated and the definition is descriptive; the absence of any level-of-competition qualifier and of a middle option tends to maximize the restrictive share, but the wording itself is not loaded.
Subgroup figures (12)
puberty blockers / hormone therapy for minors, by age band
Thinking about medications used for transgender care, do you think doctors should be able to prescribe puberty-blocking drugs or hormone therapy to minors between the ages of 10 and 18?
No one under age 18 should have access
71%
Yes, but only minors ages 15 to 18 should have access
16%
Yes, minors ages 10 to 18 should have access
10%
Refused
4%
Wording notes: response set splits the permissive side into two options while the restrictive side is a single option | does not mention parental consent or clinical assessment
unclear — The stem is descriptive, but the asymmetric response set (two 'yes' variants vs. one 'no') splits supporters across two rows and produces a single large restrictive number; it also omits the parental-consent and medical-supervision context that other pollsters include, which typically moves results.
Subgroup figures (12)