The general British population, who fly more than American general populace, are more fed up of kids on flights, on aggregate, and willing to pay more.
The perennial battle of kids-on-flights versus those-who-hate-them-on-flights keeps cropping up again and again. An Expedia survey released yesterday pointed out that inattentive parents and crying children are the most annoying kind of passengers on airlines.
And earlier this year, when there was talk about some airlines considering charging for child-free zones for passengers who wanted more peace and quiet, we conducted a survey of U.S. public and asked them whether or not they would pay to avoid children on airplanes. And the answer was that, mostly, U.S. flyers don’t have much of a problem with children.
This time we decided to turn the question over to British public. We used Google Consumer Surveys to ask the general U.K. internet adult population, “Would you pay an additional fee to sit in a child-free zone on a flight?”
The key takeaway: Compared to the U.S. population, UK public is relatively more open to paying for child-free zones, turns out. Almost 23 percent of UK population is open to it, compared to only around 15 percent of U.S. population. That and other breakdown of results, below:
This single-question survey — not served to Skift users — was administered to the U.K. internet population from Oct. 22-24, 2013 through Google Consumer Surveys, with 1,003 responses. The methodology is explained here. See previous Skift Asks here.
Have a confidential tip for Skift? Get in touch
Photo credit: Baby on a plane... gregglesworth / Flickr