HKU POP releases the latest popularity figures of Executive CouncillorsBack
Press Release on September 8, 2015
| Detailed Findings (Popularity of Executive Councillors) |
Special Announcement
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 79 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.
Abstract
POP conducted a double stage survey on the ratings of Executive Councillors from late August to early September, by means of random telephone surveys conducted by real interviewers. The survey shows that although Regina Ip stays at the top of the list in the naming survey, Lam Woon-kwong continues to surpass her in the rating stage. Compared to half a year ago, among the four Councillors who remain on the “top 5” list across two surveys, only the rating of Regina Ip has increased while those of the others have all dropped. In terms of absolute ratings, only Lam Woon-kwong on the “top 5” list scores more than 50 marks, two even have scores below 40. In terms of relative rankings, Lam Woon-kwong remains at the top, Regina Ip and Starry Lee each goes up one position to occupy the second and third places respectively, Fanny Law goes up one position to rank fourth, while Arthur Li re-enters the list again since his last time in October 2012 to replace Anna Wu and ranks the fifth. It should be noted, however, that our list of “top 5” only includes non-official Councillors best known to the public, ranked according to their support ratings. Some of the other Councillors may well have very high or low support ratings, but because they are not the most well-known Councillors, they do not appear on the list by design. The maximum sampling error of all percentage figures is +/-4 percentage points at 95% confidence level, while that of rating figures is below +/-2.6 marks. The response rate of the rating survey is 67%.
Points to note:
[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 first stage naming survey on top 5 Executive Councillors is 1,005 successful interviews, not 1,005 x 65.1% response rate, while
that of the second stage rating survey is 1,010 successful interviews, not 1,010 x 66.9% response rate. In the past, many media made this mistake.
[3] The maximum sampling error of percentages is +/-4 percentage points at 95% confidence level, while the sampling error of rating figure needs another calculation. “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 rating not more than +/-2.6 and sampling error of percentages not more than +/-4% at 95% confidence level”.
[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.
Latest Figures
POP today releases on schedule via the “POP SITE” the latest popularity figures of Executive Councillors. 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:
|
Date of survey |
Overall sample size |
Response rate |
Maximum sampling error of percentages / ratings[6] |
|
21-27/8/2015 (First stage naming survey) |
1,005 |
65.1% |
+/-4% |
|
28/8-3/9/2015 (Second stage rating survey) |
1,010 |
66.9% |
+/-2.6 |
[6] 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. Sampling errors of ratings are calculated according to the distribution of the scores collected.
The research design of our “Top 5 Executive Councillors” is similar to that of our “Top 10” series, it is explained in detail under “Survey Method” in our web page. From 2015 onwards, this survey series is changed from three times per year to twice per year. The top Councillors listed in our latest survey were all those who obtained the highest unprompted mentions in our first stage naming survey conducted in late August. In that survey, respondents could name, unaided, up to 5 non-official Executive Councillors whom they knew best. Latest findings of the naming survey are as follows:
|
Date of survey |
16-19/1/14 |
5-8/5/14 |
21-27/8/14 |
2-5/3/15 |
21-27/8/15 |
Latest Change in Ranking |
|
Sample base |
1,026 |
1,005 |
1,007 |
1,000 |
1,00 5 [7] |
-- |
|
Overall response rate |
68.7% |
64.3% |
65.1% |
67.2% |
65.1% |
-- |
|
Finding / Error |
Finding |
Finding |
Finding |
Finding |
Finding & error [7] |
-- |
|
Regina Ip |
16%{1} |
14%{1} |
14%{1} |
25%{1} |
20+/-3% {1} |
-- |
|
Starry Lee |
6%{3} |
6%{2} |
6%{3}[16] |
9%{3} |
14+/-3% {2} |
↑ 1 |
|
Arthur Li |
<1%{11}[12] |
1%{9}[14] |
1%{11}[18] |
2%{7}[20] |
6+/-2% {3} |
↑ 4 |
|
Lam Woon-kwong |
9%{2} |
4%{3} |
6%{4}[16] |
12%{2} |
5 +/-2% {4}[23] |
↓ 2 |
|
Fanny Law |
3%{6}[9] |
3%{5}[13] |
8%{2} |
8%{4} |
5 +/- 2 % {5}[23] |
↓ 1 |
|
Bernard Chan |
4%{4} |
3%{6}[13] |
5%{5} |
2%{9}[20] |
3 +/- 1 % {6}[24] |
↑ 3 |
|
Cheng Yiu-tong |
2%{7}[10] |
3%{4}[13] |
4%{6} |
2%{8}[20] |
3 +/- 1 % {7}[24] |
↑ 1 |
|
Cheung Chi-kong |
3%{5}[9] |
2%{7} |
2%{8}[17] |
3%{5} |
2+/-1% {8}[25] |
↓ 3 |
|
Jeffrey Lam |
1%{9}[11] |
1%{10}[14] |
1%{9}[18] |
<1%{14}[22] |
2+/-1% {9}[25] |
↑ 5 |
|
Laura Cha |
2%{8}[10] |
1%{11}[14] |
2%{7}[17] |
<1%{12}[22] |
1+/-1% {10}[26] |
↑ 2 |
|
Anna Wu |
1%{10}[11] |
<1%{13}[15] |
1%{10}[18] |
2%{6}[20] |
1+/-1% {11}[26] |
↓ 5 |
|
Andrew Liao |
<1%{13}[12] |
<1%{12}[15] |
<1%{14}[19] |
1%{11}[21] |
<1+/-1% {12}[27] |
↓1 |
|
Chow Chung-kong |
<1%{12}[12] |
1%{8}[14] |
<1%{12}[19] |
<1%{13}[22] |
<1+/-1% {13}[27] |
-- |
|
Nicholas Yang |
--[8] |
--[8] |
--[8] |
1%{10}[21] |
0%{15} |
↓ 5 |
|
Cheung Hok-ming |
<1%{14}[12] |
<1%{14}[15] |
<1%{13}[19] |
<1%{15}[22] |
0%{15} |
-- |
|
Wrong answer |
14% |
14% |
14% |
14% |
15+/-3% |
-- |
|
Don’t know/hard to say |
66% |
71% |
66% |
60% |
61 +/-4% |
-- |
[7]All error figures in the table are calculated at 95% confidence level. “95% confidence level”, meaning 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% at 95% confidence level” when quoting the above figures. Numbers in square brackets { } indicates rankings in our naming survey. Councillors with the same recognition rate will be ranked according to the decimal place of the corresponding percentages. Please refer to the POP Site for detailed figures of the previous surveys. The error margin of previous surveys can also be found at the POP Site. The sub-sample size for this survey is 684.
[8] Not a non-official Executive Councillor during the survey period.
[9] The percentages of respondents who could name Cheung Chi-kong and Fanny Law were 3.1% and 2.9%, so Cheung Chi-kong ranked the 5th, while Fanny Law was placed at the 6th rank.
[10] The percentages of respondents who could name Cheng Yiu-tong and Laura Cha were 2.4% and 1.5%, so Cheng Yiu-tong ranked the 7th, while Laura Cha was placed at the 8th rank.
[11] The percentages of respondents who could name Jeffrey Lam and Anna Wu were 1.4% and 0.7%, so Jeffrey Lam ranked the 9th, while Anna Wu was placed at the 10th rank.
[12] The percentages of respondents who could name Arthur Li, Chow Chung-kong, Andrew Liao and Cheung Hok-ming were 0.5%, 0.2%, 0.11% and 0.08%. Hence Arthur Li ranked the 11th, Chow Chung-kong ranked the 12th, Andrew Liao ranked the 13th while Cheung Hok-ming was placed at the 14th rank.
[13] The percentages of respondents who could name Cheng Yiu-tong, Fanny Law and Bernard Chan were 3.1%, 2.9% and 2.8%. Hence Cheng Yiu-tong ranked the 4th, Fanny Law ranked the 5th while Bernard Chan was placed at the 6th rank.
[14] The percentages of respondents who could name Chow Chung-kong, Arthur Li, Jeffrey Lam and Laura Cha were 1.2%, 1.1%, 0.8% and 0.7%. Hence Chow Chung-kong ranked the 8th, Arthur Li ranked the 9th, Jeffrey Lam ranked the 10th while Laura Cha was placed at the 11th rank.
[15] The percentages of respondents who could name Andrew Liao, Anna Wu and Cheung Hok-ming were 0.14%, 0.13% and 0.09%. Hence Andrew Liao ranked the 12th, Anna Wu ranked the 13th while Cheung Hok-ming was placed at the 14th rank.
[16] The percentages of respondents who could name Starry Lee and Lam Woon-kwong were 5.8% and 5.6%, so Starry Lee ranked the 3rd, while Lam Woon-kwong was placed at the 4th rank.
[17] The percentages of respondents who could name Laura Cha and Cheung Chi-kong were 2.5% and 1.7%, so Laura Cha ranked the 7th, while Cheung Chi-kong was placed at the 8th rank.
[18] The percentages of respondents who could name Jeffrey Lam, Anna Wu and Arthur Li were 1.2%, 1.1480% and 1.1479%. Hence Jeffrey Lam ranked the 9th, Anna Wu ranked the 10th while Arthur Li was placed at the 11th rank.
[19] The percentages of respondents who could name Chow Chung-kong, Cheung Hok-ming and Andrew Liao were 0.3%, 0.10% and 0.06%. Hence Chow Chung-kong ranked the 12th, Cheung Hok-ming ranked the 13th while Andrew Liao was placed at the 14th rank.
[20] The percentages of respondents who could name Anna Wu, Arthur Li, Cheng Yiu-tong and Bernard Chan were 2.1%, 1.9%, 1.8% and 1.6%. Hence Anna Wu ranked the 6th, Arthur Li ranked the 7th, Cheng Yiu-tong ranked the 8th while Bernard Chan was placed at the 9th rank.
[21] The percentages of respondents who could name Nicholas Yang and Andrew Liao were 0.8% and 0.6%, so Nicholas Yang ranked the 10th, while Andrew Liao was placed at the 11th rank.
[22] The percentages of respondents who could name Laura Cha, Chow Chung-kong, Jeffrey Lam and Cheung Hok-ming were 0.44%, 0.36%, 0.29% and 0.27%. Hence Laura Cha ranked the 12th, Chow Chung-kong ranked the 13th, Jeffrey Lam ranked the 14th while Cheung Hok-ming was placed at the 15th rank.
[23] The percentages of respondents who could name Lam Woon-kwong and Fanny Law were 5.2% and 5.1%, so Lam Woon-kwong ranked the 4th, while Fanny Law was placed at the 5th rank.
[24] The percentages of respondents who could name Bernard Chan and Cheng Yiu-tong were 3.1% and 2.9%, so Bernard Chan ranked the 6th, while Cheng Yiu-tong was placed at the 7th rank.
[25] The percentages of respondents who could name Cheung Chi-kong and Jeffrey Lam were 2.5% and 1.7%, so Cheung Chi-kong ranked the 8th, while Jeffrey Lam was placed at the 9th rank.
[26] The percentages of respondents who could name Laura Cha and Anna Wu were 0.6% and 0.5%, so Laura Cha ranked the 10th, while Anna Wu was placed at the 11th rank.
[27] The percentages of respondents who could name Andrew Liao and Chow Chung-kong were 0.09% and 0.07%, so Andrew Liao ranked the 12th, while Chow Chung-kong was placed at the 13th rank.
The naming survey conducted in the second half of August showed that Regina Ip was named most frequently with a recognition rate of 20%. Starry Lee, Arthur Li, Lam Woon-kwong, Fanny Law and Bernard Chan with recognition rates of 14%, 6%, 5%, 5% and 3%, and ranked the 2nd to 6th. However, 15% made a wrong attempt at citing Executive Councillors (non-official) while 61% had no clue.
The 6 Councillors who were named most frequently then entered into the second stage rating survey. During the second stage rating survey conducted in late August to early September, respondents were asked to rate each short-listed Councillor in turn using a 0-100 scale. 0 indicates absolutely no support, 100 indicates absolute support, and 50 means half-half. After calculation, the bottom 1 Councillor in terms of recognition rate was dropped; the remaining 5 were then ranked according to their support ratings attained to become the top 5 Executive Councillors. Recent ratings of the top 5 members of Executive Council are summarized as follows:
|
Date of survey |
21-24/1/14 |
12-16/5/14 |
28/8-3/9/14 |
9-12/3/15 |
28/8-3/9/15 |
Latest change |
|
|
Sample base |
544-592 |
560-597 |
656-691 |
546-667 |
618-707 |
-- |
|
|
Overall response rate |
66.5% |
68.3% |
65.1% |
68.6% |
66.9% |
-- |
|
|
Finding/ Recognition rate |
Finding |
Finding |
Finding |
Finding |
Finding and error [28] |
Recognition rate |
-- |
|
Lam Woon-kwong |
51.2{2}[30] |
50.8{2} |
52.8{1}[30] |
54.9{1}[30] |
54.3+/-1.9{1} |
78.1% |
-0.6 |
|
Regina Ip |
53.2{1}[30] |
53.3{1} |
49.1{2}[30] |
46.3{3}[30] |
48.1+/-2.1{2} |
93.9% |
+1.8 |
|
Starry Lee |
45.9{4} |
43.9{4} |
40.6{5}[30] |
42.6{4} |
42.3+/-2.6{3} |
82.6% |
-0.3 |
|
Fanny Law |
45.7{5} |
47.7{3} |
42.1{3}[30] |
41.8{5} |
39.6+/-2.3{4} |
86.9% |
-2.2 |
|
Arthur Li |
-- |
-- |
-- |
-- |
38.8+/-2.4{5} |
79.1% |
-- |
|
Bernard Chan |
50.3{3}[30] |
53.9[29] |
53.1[29] |
-- |
54.9+/-2.0 [29] |
63.3% |
-- |
|
Anna Wu |
-- |
-- |
-- |
47.4{2} |
-- |
-- |
-- |
|
Cheung Chi-kong |
45.1[29] |
-- |
-- |
42.8[29] |
-- |
-- |
-- |
|
Cheng Yiu-tong |
-- |
42.3{5} |
40.7{4} |
-- |
-- |
-- |
-- |
[28] All error figures in the table are calculated at 95% confidence level. “95% confidence level”, meaning 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 various ratings not more than +/-2.6 marks at 95% confidence level” when quoting the above figures. Numbers in square brackets { } indicates rankings. The error margin of previous survey can be found at the POP Site.
[29] Recognition rate fell outside top 5 during rating stage, so per poll rating and related changes are presented only for rough reference and not counted in yearly average.
[30] 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.
The latest rating survey conducted in late August to early September showed that Lam Woon-kwong was the most popularly supported non-official Executive Councillor, attaining 54.3 marks. The 2nd and 3rd ranks went to Regina Ip and Starry Lee with 48.1 and 42.3 marks respectively. The 4th and 5th ranks went to Fanny Law and Arthur Li with 39.6 and 38.8 marks respectively. The mean score obtained by these top 5 non-official Executive Councillors was 44.6 marks. For this latest survey, Bernard Chan obtained a support rating of 54.9 marks, but he was dropped due to his relatively low recognition rate. The overall ratings ranked according to results obtained over the past year are tabulated as follows:
|
Date of survey |
12-16/5/14 |
28/8-3/9/14 |
9-12/3/15 |
28/8-3/9/15 |
No. of times on top 5 |
Average rating [31] |
Overall ranking [32] |
|
Lam Woon-kwong |
50.8 |
52.8 |
54.9 |
54.3 |
4 |
53.2 |
1 |
|
Regina Ip |
53.3 |
49.1 |
46.3 |
48.1 |
4 |
49.2 |
2 |
|
Fanny Law |
47.7 |
42.1 |
41.8 |
39.6 |
4 |
42.8 |
3 |
|
Starry Lee |
43.9 |
40.6 |
42.6 |
42.3 |
4 |
42.3 |
4 |
|
Cheng Yiu-tong |
42.3 |
40.7 |
-- |
-- |
2 |
41.5 |
5 |
|
Anna Wu |
-- |
-- |
47.4 |
-- |
1 |
47.4 |
6 |
|
Arthur Li |
-- |
-- |
-- |
38.8 |
1 |
38.8 |
7 |
[31] “Average rating” is the average of all ratings obtained by Executive Councillors over the past 4 surveys.
[32] “Overall ranking” is first determined by their number of times on top 5, and then their average ratings.
The overall rankings in the past year showed that four non-official Executive Councillors have been on the list for four times. Lam Woon-kwong, Regina Ip, Fanny Law and Starry Lee ranked 1st to 4th places respectively and achieved average ratings of 53.2, 49.2, 42.8 and 42.3 marks. Cheng Yiu-tong has been on the list for two times with an average rating of 41.5 marks, ranked the 5th. Anna Wu and Arthur Li have been on the list once with ratings of 47.4 and 38.8 marks, ranked at the 6th and 7th places respectively.
Opinion Daily
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, the previous survey was conducted from March 9 to 12, 2015 while the latest survey was conducted from August 28 to September 3, 2015. During this period, 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.
|
2/9/15 |
Events are held to commemorate the 70th anniversary of Japan’s surrender in WWII. |
|
28/7/15 |
Students of The University of Hong Kong burst into the University Council’s pro vice chancellor appointment meeting. |
|
24/7/15 |
Zhang Dejiang meets Democratic Alliance for the Betterment and Progress of Hong Kong. |
|
21/7/15 |
Secretary for the Civil Service Paul Tang Kwok Wai and Secretary for Home Affairs Tsang Tak Sing step down from their positions. |
|
10/7/15 |
Water samples from Kai Ching Estate contain excessive lead. |
|
18/6/15 |
The political reform package is vetoed. |
|
22/4/15 |
Government announces the proposal for selecting the Chief Executive in 2017. |
|
11/4/15 |
Multiple-entry permits are changed to allow only one trip per week. |
|
1/4/15 |
The Executive Council decides not to renew ATV’s free-to-air broadcasting license. |
|
17/3/15 |
The Executive Council approved the building of the third airport runway. |
Commentary
Robert Ting-Yiu Chung, Director of Public Opinion Programme, observed, “The latest ‘top 5 Executive Councillors’ survey shows that although Regina Ip stays at the top of the list in the naming survey, Lam Woon-kwong continues to surpass her in the rating stage. Compared to half a year ago, among the four Councillors who remain on the ‘top 5’ list across two surveys, only the rating of Regina Ip has increased while those of the others have all dropped. In terms of absolute ratings, only Lam Woon-kwong on the ‘top 5’ list scores more than 50 marks, two even have scores below 40. In terms of relative rankings, Lam Woon-kwong remains at the top, Regina Ip and Starry Lee each goes up one position to occupy the second and third places respectively, Fanny Law goes up one position to rank fourth, while Arthur Li re-enters the list again since his last time in October 2012 to replace Anna Wu and ranks the fifth. It should be noted, however, that our list of ‘top 5’ only includes non-official Councillors best known to the public, ranked according to their support ratings. Some of the other Councillors may well have very high or low support ratings, but because they are not the most well-known Councillors, they do not appear on the list by design. As for the reasons affecting the ups and downs of these popularity ratings, we leave it to our readers to form their own judgment using the detailed records displayed in the ‘Opinion Daily’ of our POP Site.”
Future Release (Tentative)
September 15, 2015 (Tuesday) 1pm to 2pm: Popularity of CE and Principal Officials
