Among Americans who say they fly at least once or twice a year -- just fewer than half the public -- 58 percent support the screening machines, with 37 percent opposed; that compares to 70-27 percent among people who fly infrequently or not at all. Similarly, support for the new pat-downs, 52 percent among infrequent fliers, slips to 44 percent among those who fly at least annually.
Though the sample is small, the results indicate that opposition rises further among more-frequent fliers, those who fly at least every few months.
The poll, produced for ABC News by Langer Research Associates, also indicates a potential negative impact on air travel, but not an overwhelming one. Twenty percent of adults say the new TSA procedures will make them less likely to fly, but 10 percent instead say it makes them more likely to travel by air. There's no difference among occasional vs. infrequent fliers.
That potential net negative of 10 percent could be a problem for the airlines if it occurred. But seven in 10 say the rules won't make a difference in their future travel -- and actual effects on travel likely will depend on passenger experiences and possible TSA adjustments to the outcry over its approach.
PROFILE -- As another tool in airport security efforts, this poll finds broad support for passenger profiling -- but with that support heavily dependent on profile elements. Eighty-six percent say personal behavior should be a factor, and 78 percent say a passenger's travel history should be included in his or her security profile. Fewer, 55 percent, favor including a passenger's nationality, and half would include his or her personal appearance.
Other potential elements, however, garner majority opposition as elements to include in a security profile. Fifty-nine percent oppose using a passenger's race or religion, and 65 percent say sex should not be a factor.
There are differences among groups, with profiling generally winning more support from Republicans, conservatives, men and whites, as well as, naturally, among those who see security as a higher national priority than protecting privacy rights. But there are commonalities as well; racial profiling, for instance, is opposed by 6-in-10 whites and non-whites alike.
SECURITY/PRIVACY -- This poll finds greater opposition to the x-ray scanners than has been measured in previous surveys. The intensifying controversy may play a role; so may the descriptions provided. This survey gave pro- and con- details, including the fact that the machines produce naked images of a passenger's body. The question on pat-downs similarly gave details, noting that the new procedure involves a same-sex TSA officer placing his or her palms and fingers on the passenger's body, including sensitive areas such as the groin and breast.
It's notable that x-ray scanners get 64 percent support, and aggressive pat-downs get 48 percent support, despite their intrusiveness -- a result that reflects broader views on the question of security vs. privacy. While the public prizes both, in an either/or choice, 68 percent say it's more important for the government to investigate possible terrorist threats, even if that intrudes on privacy, than for it to avoid intruding on privacy, if that limits anti-terrorism efforts.