HKU POP releases the latest popularity figures of Executive CouncillorsBack
Press Release on September 20, 2016
| 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 105 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 during the first half of September, by means of random telephone surveys conducted by real interviewers. The survey shows that although Regina Ip stays at the top 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, the ratings of Lam Woon-kwong and Regina Ip have increased while those of Fanny Law and Arthur Li have dropped. Among them, Lam Woon-kwong, Fanny Law and Arthur Li registered significant changes in their popularity ratings, up by 2.5, and down by 2.9 and 3.0 marks respectively. In terms of absolute ratings, only Lam Woon-kwong on the “top 5” list scores more than 50 marks while Arthur Li scores below 40. In terms of relative rankings, Lam Woon-kwong and Regina Ip continue to rank the 1st and 2nd, Cheng Yiu-tong re-enters the list since September 2014 to rank the 3rd, while Fanny Law and Arthur Li continue to rank the 4th and 5th. 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 +/-2.7 marks. The response rate of the rating survey is 70%.
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 1,001 successful interviews, not 1,001 x 73.5% response rate, while that of the second stage rating survey is 1,001 successful interviews, not 1,001 x 70.2% 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 +/-2.7 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 2016 mid-year and the educational attainment (highest level attended) distribution collected in the 2011 Census. Herewith the contact information of various surveys:
|
Date of survey |
Overall
|
Response rate |
Maximum sampling error
|
|
5-8/9/2016 (First stage naming survey) |
1,001 |
73.5% |
+/-4% |
|
12-14/9/2016 (Second stage rating survey) |
1,001 |
70.2% |
+/-2.7 |
[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 early September. 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 |
21-27/8/14 |
2-5/3/15 |
21-27/8/15 |
19-26/2/16 |
5-8/9/16 |
Latest Change in Ranking |
|
Sample base |
1,007 |
1,000 |
1,005 |
1,006 |
1,001[7] |
-- |
|
Overall response rate |
65.1% |
67.2% |
65.1% |
67.7% |
73.5% |
-- |
|
Finding / Error |
Finding |
Finding |
Finding |
Finding |
Finding & error [7] |
-- |
|
Regina Ip |
14%{1} |
25%{1} |
20%{1} |
18%{1} |
17+/-3%{1} |
-- |
|
Arthur Li |
1%{11} |
2%{7} |
6%{3} |
6%{4} |
4+/-2%{2}[9] |
↑2 |
|
Fanny Law |
8%{2} |
8%{4} |
5%{5} |
4%{5} |
4+/-2%{3}[9] |
↑2 |
|
Lam Woon-kwong |
6%{4} |
12%{2} |
5%{4} |
7%{3} |
4+/-2%{4}[9] |
↓1 |
|
Cheng Yiu-tong |
4%{6} |
2%{8} |
3%{7} |
2%{7} |
3+/-1%{5}[10] |
↑2 |
|
Bernard Chan |
5%{5} |
2%{9} |
3%{6} |
2%{8} |
3+/-1%{6}[10] |
↑2 |
|
Cheung Chi-kong |
2%{8} |
3%{5} |
2%{8} |
3%{6} |
2+/-1%{7} |
↓1 |
|
Ip Kwok-him |
--[8] |
--[8] |
--[8] |
--[8] |
1+/-1%{8}[11] |
-- |
|
Laura Cha |
2%{7} |
<1%{12} |
1%{10} |
1%{11} |
1+/-1%{9}[11] |
↑2 |
|
Cheung Hok-ming |
<1%{13} |
<1%{15} |
0%{15} |
1%{13} |
1+/-1%{10}[11] |
↑3 |
|
Anna Wu |
1%{10} |
2%{6} |
1%{11} |
1%{9} |
<1+/-1%{11}[12] |
↓2 |
|
Jeffrey Lam |
1%{9} |
<1%{14} |
2%{9} |
1%{10} |
<1+/-1%{12}[12] |
↓2 |
|
Andrew Liao |
<1%{14} |
1%{11} |
<1%{12} |
1%{12} |
<1+/-1%{13}[12] |
↓1 |
|
Chow Chung-kong |
<1%{12} |
<1%{13} |
<1%{13} |
<1%{14} |
<1+/-1%{14}[12] |
-- |
|
Starry Lee |
6%{3} |
9%{3} |
14%{2} |
8%{2} |
--[8] |
-- |
|
Nicholas Yang |
--[8] |
1%{10} |
0%{15} |
--[8] |
--[8] |
-- |
|
Wrong answer |
14% |
14% |
15% |
14% |
17+/-3% |
-- |
|
Don’t know/hard to say |
66% |
60% |
61% |
65% |
66+/-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 601.
[8] Not a non-official Executive Councillor during the survey period.
[9] The percentages of respondents who could name Arthur Li, Fanny Law and Lam Woon-kwong were 4.3%, 4.2% and 4.0%. Hence Arthur Li ranked the 2nd, Fanny Law ranked the 3rd, while Lam Woon-kwong ranked the 4th.
[10] The percentages of respondents who could name Cheng Yiu-tong and Bernard Chan were 2.8% and 2.6%, so Cheng Yiu-tong ranked the 5th, while Bernard Chan ranked the 6th.
[11] The percentages of respondents who could name Ip Kwok-him, Laura Cha and Cheung Hok-ming were 1.4%, 1.0% and 0.7%. Hence Ip Kwok-him ranked the 8th, Laura Cha ranked the 9th, while Cheung Hok-ming ranked the 10th.
[12] The percentages of respondents who could name Anna Wu, Jeffrey Lam, Andrew Liao and Chow Chung-kong were 0.41%, 0.38%, 0.3% and 0.1%. Hence Anna Wu ranked the 11th, Jeffrey Lam ranked the 12th, Andrew Liao ranked the 13th, while Chow Chung-kong ranked the 14th.
The naming survey conducted in early September showed that Regina Ip was named most frequently with a recognition rate of 17%. Arthur Li, Fanny Law, Lam Woon-kwong, Cheng Yiu-tong and Bernard Chan had recognition rates of 4%, 4%, 4%, 3% and 3%, and were ranked the 2nd to 6th. However, 17% made a wrong attempt at citing Executive Councillors (non-official) while 66% 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 mid-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 |
28/8-3/9/14 |
9-12/3/15 |
28/8-3/9/15 |
29/2-3/3/16 |
12-14/9/16 |
Latest change |
|
|
Sample base |
656-691 |
546-667 |
618-707 |
567-640 |
584-624 |
-- |
|
|
Overall response rate |
65.1% |
68.6% |
66.9% |
67.7% |
70.2% |
-- |
|
|
Finding / Recognition rate |
Finding |
Finding |
Finding |
Finding |
Finding and error [13] |
Recognition
|
-- |
|
Lam Woon-kwong |
52.8{1}[15] |
54.9{1}[15] |
54.3{1} |
53.1{1} |
55.6+/-2.0{1} |
70.8% |
+2.5[15] |
|
Regina Ip |
49.1{2}[15] |
46.3{3}[15] |
48.1{2} |
49.0{2} |
49.4+/-2.6{2} |
90.9% |
+0.4 |
|
Cheng Yiu-tong |
40.7{4} |
-- |
-- |
-- |
44.4+/-2.6{3} |
70.5% |
-- |
|
Fanny Law |
42.1{3}[15] |
41.8{5} |
39.6{4} |
43.5{4}[15] |
40.6+/-2.6{4} |
83.1% |
-2.9[15] |
|
Arthur Li |
-- |
-- |
38.8{5} |
40.3{5} |
37.3+/-2.7{5} |
79.2% |
-3.0[15] |
|
Bernard Chan |
53.1[14] |
-- |
54.9[14] |
-- |
54.6+/-2.4[14] |
56.8% |
-- |
|
Starry Lee |
40.6{5}[15] |
42.6{4} |
42.3{3} |
44.2{3} |
-- |
-- |
-- |
|
Cheung Chi-kong |
-- |
42.8[14] |
-- |
43.0[14] |
-- |
-- |
-- |
|
Anna Wu |
-- |
47.4{2} |
-- |
-- |
-- |
-- |
-- |
[13] 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 +/-2.7 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.
[14] 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.
[15] 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 mid-September showed that Lam Woon-kwong was the most popularly supported non-official Executive Councillor, attaining 55.6 marks. The 2nd went to Regina Ip with 49.4 marks. The 3rd to 5th ranks went to Cheng Yiu-tong, Fanny Law and Arthur Li with 44.4, 40.6 and 37.3 marks respectively. The mean score obtained by these top 5 non-official Executive Councillors was 45.5 marks. For this latest survey, Bernard Chan obtained a support rating of 54.6 marks, but he was dropped due to his relatively low recognition rate. The overall ratings ranked according to results obtained over the past four surveys are tabulated as follows:
|
Date of survey |
9-12/3/15 |
28/8-3/9/15 |
29/2-3/3/16 |
12-14/9/16 |
No. of times on top 5 |
Average rating [16] |
Overall ranking [17] |
|
Lam Woon-kwong |
54.9 |
54.3 |
53.1 |
55.6 |
4 |
54.5 |
1 |
|
Regina Ip |
46.3 |
48.1 |
49.0 |
49.4 |
4 |
48.2 |
2 |
|
Fanny Law |
41.8 |
39.6 |
43.5 |
40.6 |
4 |
41.4 |
3 |
|
Starry Lee |
42.6 |
42.3 |
44.2 |
--[18] |
3 |
43.0 |
4 |
|
Arthur Li |
-- |
38.8 |
40.3 |
37.3 |
3 |
38.8 |
5 |
|
Anna Wu |
47.4 |
-- |
-- |
-- |
1 |
47.4 |
6 |
|
Cheng Yiu-tong |
-- |
-- |
-- |
44.4 |
1 |
44.4 |
7 |
[16] “Average rating” is the average of all ratings obtained by Executive Councillors over the past 4 surveys.
[17] “Overall ranking” is first determined by their number of times on top 5, and then their average ratings.
[18] Not a non-official Executive Councillor during the survey period.
The overall rankings in the past four surveys showed that three non-official Executive Councillors have been on the list for four times. Lam Woon-kwong, Regina Ip and Fanny Law ranked 1st to 3rd places respectively and achieved average ratings of 54.5, 48.2 and 41.4 marks. Starry Lee and Arthur Li have been on the list for three times with average ratings of 43.0 and 38.8 marks, ranked the 4th and the 5th. Anna Wu and Cheng Yiu-tong have been on the list once with ratings of 47.4 and 44.4 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 February 29 to March 3, 2016 while the latest survey was conducted from September 12 to 14, 2016. 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.
|
8/9/16 |
Newly elected lawmaker Eddie Chu Hoi-dick claims he has received “credible death threats” towards him. |
|
4/9/16 |
More than 2 million voters cast their votes in 2016 Legislative Council election. |
|
22/8/16 |
China’s Olympic gold medal winners visit Hong Kong. |
|
19/8/16 |
Contaminated pork has been sent to the retailers. |
|
2/8/16 |
A total of seven candidates of the Legislative Council election have their nominations declared invalid. |
|
21/7/16 |
Joshua Wong Chi-fung and Alex Chow Yong-kang are found guilty of unlawful assembly while Nathan Law Kwun-chung is convicted of inciting others to take part in an unlawful assembly. |
|
14/7/16 |
All candidates of the next Legislative Council election will be required to sign the declaration that they will uphold the Basic Law. |
|
17/6/16 |
Causeway Bay bookstore’s bookseller Lam Wing-kee revealed details of his disappearance in a press conference. |
|
31/5/16 |
A report on lead-in-water scandal is released by an independent investigation panel. |
|
17/5/16 |
Zhang Dejiang visits the government headquarters, and listens to the work report by the HKSAR Government. |
Commentary
Edward Chit-Fai Tai, Senior Data Analyst of POP, observed, “The latest ‘top 5 Executive Councillors’ survey shows that although Regina Ip stays at the top 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, the ratings of Lam Woon-kwong and Regina Ip have increased while those of Fanny Law and Arthur Li have dropped. Among them, Lam Woon-kwong, Fanny Law and Arthur Li registered significant changes in their popularity ratings, up by 2.5, and down by 2.9 and 3.0 marks respectively. In terms of absolute ratings, only Lam Woon-kwong on the ‘top 5’ list scores more than 50 marks while Arthur Li scores below 40. In terms of relative rankings, Lam Woon-kwong and Regina Ip continue to rank the 1st and 2nd, Cheng Yiu-tong re-enters the list since September 2014 to rank the 3rd, while Fanny Law and Arthur Li continue to rank the 4th and 5th. 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 27, 2016 (Tuesday) 1pm to 2pm: Popularity of CE and HKSAR Government
