HKU POP releases the latest trust and confidence indicators Back

To facilitate academic study and rational discussion, Public Opinion Programme (POP) at The University of Hong Kong has already released for public examination some time ago via the “HKU POP Site” (http://hkupop.pori.hk) the raw data of all 68 regular rating surveys of CE CY Leung, as well as the 181 regular rating surveys of former CE Donald Tsang and 239 regular rating surveys of former CE CH Tung, along with related demographics of respondents. Please follow normal academic standards when using or citing such data.

POP interviewed 1,024 Hong Kong people between 9 and 12 March 2015 by means of a random telephone survey conducted by real interviewers. Our latest survey shows that Hong Kong people’s trust in the local and central governments have not changed much compared to three months ago, with net trusts standing at 0 and negative 9 percentage points, while their net trust in Taiwan Government goes up significantly by 10 percentage points to positive 4 percentage points, which is record high since March 1996. As for the confidence indicators, people’s net confidences in the future of China, the future of Hong Kong, and in “one country, two systems” have all gone down again, by 6 to 9 percentage points, after their rebounds three months ago. They now stand at positive 30, negative 3 and negative 9 percentage points respectively. Further analysis shows the younger the respondent, the more one distrusts the central government and the less confident in “one country, two systems”. As for the reasons affecting the ups and downs of various figures, readers are welcome to make their own judgment using the detailed records displayed in our “Opinion Daily”. The maximum sampling error of all percentages is +/-4 percentage points at 95% confidence level, while that of net values needs another calculation. The response rate of the survey is 69%.

[1] The address of the “HKU POP SITE” is http://hkupop.pori.hk, journalists can check out the details of the survey there.
[2] The sample size of the survey is 1,024 successful interviews, not 1,024 x 68.6% response rate. In the past, many media made this mistake.
[3] The maximum sampling error of all percentages is +/-4 percentage points at 95% confidence level. “95% confidence level” means that if we were to repeat a certain survey 100 times, using the same questions each time but with different random samples, we would expect 95 times getting a figure within the error margins specified. When quoting these figures, journalists can state “sampling error of percentages not more than +/-4% at 95% confidence level, sampling error of net values not more than +/-8%”. Because POP introduced “rim weighting” in 2014, during the transition period, whether changes in various figures are beyond sampling errors are based on tests using the same weighting methods. That is, to test whether the first set of figures collected in 2014 is significantly different from that of the previous survey, both sets of data are rim weighted before testing, instead of using simple computation of the published figures.
[4] Because of sampling errors in conducting the survey(s) and the rounding procedures in processing the data, the figures cannot be too precise, and the totals may not be completely accurate. Therefore, when quoting percentages of the survey(s), journalists should refrain from reporting decimal places, but when quoting the rating figures, one decimal place can be used.
[5] The data of this survey is collected by means of random telephone interviews conducted by real interviewers, not by any interactive voice system (IVS). If a research organization uses “computerized random telephone survey” to camouflage its IVS operation, it should be considered unprofessional.

POP today releases on schedule via the POP Site the latest findings on people’s trust in the HKSAR, Beijing Central and Taiwan governments, and their confidence in Hong Kong’s future, China’s future and “one country, two systems”. From 2014, POP enhanced the previous simple weighting method based on age and gender distribution to “rim weighting” based on age, gender and education (highest level attended) distribution. The latest figures released today have been rim-weighted according to provisional figures obtained from the Census and Statistics Department regarding the gender-age distribution of the Hong Kong population in 2014 year-end and the educational attainment (highest level attended) distribution collected in the 2011 Census. Herewith the contact information of various surveys:

[6] Errors are calculated at 95% confidence level using full sample size. “95% confidence level” means that if we were to repeat a certain survey 100 times, using the same questions each time but with different random samples, we would expect 95 times getting a figure within the error margins specified.

Recent popularity figures of SAR, Beijing Central and Taiwan Governments and people’s confidence in the future as well as “one country, two systems” are summarized below:

[7] Starting from March 2011, these questions only use sub-samples of the tracking surveys concerned. The sub-sample sizes of the surveys range from 611 to 680, and the increased sampling errors have already been reflected in the figures tabulated. 
[8] All error figures in the table are calculated at 95% confidence level. “95% confidence level” means that if we were to repeat a certain survey 100 times, using the same questions each time but with different random samples, we would expect 95 times getting a figure within the error margins specified. Media can state “sampling error of percentages not more than +/-4% and of net values not more than +/-8% at 95% confidence level” when quoting the above figures. The error margin of previous survey can be found at the POP Site.
[9] Collapsed from a 5-point scale. The mean value is calculated by quantifying all individual responses into 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 marks according to their degree of positive level, where 1 is the lowest and 5 the highest, and then calculate the sample mean.
[10] Such changes have gone beyond the sampling errors at the 95% confidence level under the same weighting method, meaning that they are statistically significant prima facie. However, whether numerical differences are statistically significant or not is not the same as whether they are practically useful or meaningful.

Latest survey revealed that 37% of the respondents trusted the HKSAR Government, 33% trusted the Beijing Central Government, and 26% trusted the Taiwan Government. The net trust values are 0, negative 9 and positive 4 percentage points, while the mean scores of these trust indicators are 2.9, 2.8 and 3.0 respectively, meaning close to “half-half” in general. On the other hand, 45% of the respondents had confidence in Hong Kong’s future, 61% had confidence in China’s future, while 43% of the respondents were confident in “one country, two systems”. The three net confidence values are negative 3, positive 30 and negative 9 percentage points.

In the survey, we also asked respondents for their age. If they were reluctant to give their exact age, they could give us a range. According to their answers, we grouped them into 18-29, 30-49, and 50 years or older. Herewith further analysis of respondents’ trust in Beijing Central Government and confidence in “one country, two systems” by age:

[11] Differences among sub-groups are tested to be statistically significant at 95% confidence level.

[12] Differences among sub-groups are tested to be statistically significant at 95% confidence level.

In January 2007, POP opened a feature page called “Opinion Daily” at the “POP Site”, to record significant events and selected polling figures on a day-to-day basis, in order to let readers judge by themselves the reasons for the ups and downs of different opinion figures. In July 2007, POP collaborated with Wisers Information Limited whereby Wisers supplies to POP each day starting from July 24, a record of significant events of that day, according to the research method designed by POP. These daily entries would be uploaded to “Opinion Daily” as soon as they are verified by POP.

For the polling items covered in this press release, some items within the previous survey were conducted from December 15 to 18, 2014 while this survey was conducted from March 9 to 12, 2015. In between these two surveys, herewith the significant events selected from counting newspaper headlines and commentaries on a daily basis and covered by at least 25% of the local newspaper articles. Readers can make their own judgment if these significant events have any impacts to different polling figures.

Robert Ting-Yiu Chung, Director of Public Opinion Programme, observed, “Our latest survey completed in mid-March shows that Hong Kong people’s trust in the local and central governments have not changed much compared to three months ago, with net trusts standing at 0 and negative 9 percentage points, while their net trust in Taiwan Government goes up significantly by 10 percentage points to positive 4 percentage points, which is record high since March 1996. As for the confidence indicators, people’s net confidences in the future of China, the future of Hong Kong, and in ‘one country, two systems’ have all gone down again, by 6 to 9 percentage points, after their rebounds three months ago. They now stand at positive 30, negative 3 and negative 9 percentage points respectively. Further analysis shows the younger the respondent, the more one distrusts the central government and the less confident in ‘one country, two systems’. As for the reasons affecting the ups and downs of various figures, readers are welcome to make their own judgment using the detailed records displayed in our ‘Opinion Daily’.”

• March 26, 2015 (Thursday) 1pm to 2pm: Budget second follow-up survey

• March 31, 2015 (Tuesday) 1pm to 2pm: Popularity of CE and HKSAR Government