HKU POP releases findings on people’s feeling towards different governments and peoplesBack
Press Release on July 24, 2018
| Detailed Findings (Feelings towards different Governments) |
| Detailed Findings (Feelings towards different People) |
Special Announcements
1. From July 2017, apart from sampling landline numbers to conduct opinion surveys, the Public Opinion Programme (POP) of The University of Hong Kong has also added mobile numbers to the sampling frame. After three months of testing, in October 2017, POP formalized the use of mixed samples as its standard for regular opinion surveys using a landline and mobile sample ratio of 4 to 1. Starting from April 2018, POP further increased the proportion of mobile sample, which the landline and mobile sample ratio became 2 to 1. The figures released today by POP have already incorporated landline and mobile samples.
2. In September 2017, POP started to use “effective response rate” to report surveys’ contact information. In July 2018, POP further revised the calculation of effective response rate. Thus, the response rates before and after the change cannot be directly compared.
3. To facilitate academic study and rational discussion, POP has already released for public examination some time ago via the “HKU POP SITE” (http://hkupop.pori.hk) the raw data of regular rating surveys of current CE Carrie Lam, former CEs CH Tung, Donald Tsang and CY Leung, 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 Hong Kong citizens’ feeling towards different governments and peoples in July by means of random telephone interviews conducted by real interviewers. The latest survey shows that in terms of net affinity, Hong Kong people feel more positively about all other peoples than their governments. Regarding the four cross-strait societies, the net affinity of Hong Kong people towards fellow Hongkongers is 32 percentage points higher than that towards the Hong Kong SAR Government, that towards Taiwan people is 53 percentage points higher than that towards the Taiwan Government, that towards Macau people is 32 percentage points higher than that towards the Macau Government, that towards Mainland Chinese people is 10 percentage points higher than that towards the Mainland Chinese Government. As for countries outside the cross-strait regions, Hong Kong people seem to dislike the government of the United States whereas they seem to like all peoples rather than dislike them. These findings are worth studying by various governments. Compared to last year’s figures, the net value of Hong Kong people’s affinity towards the people of Japan, the people and government of Germany, the people and government of Thailand and the people and government of France have increased beyond sampling errors and are now at record high since 2007. As for the net value of Hong Kong people’s affinity towards the governments of Macau and the United States, although the drops have not gone beyond sampling errors, the current figures are now at their lowest since the survey series started in 1997. It should be noted, however, that our survey only covers regions and countries best known to Hong Kong people. Hong Kong people may well like or dislike other places much more, but because they are not the most well-known places, they do not appear on the list by design. The maximum sampling error of all percentages is +/-4 percentage points at 95% confidence level while the sampling errors of net values need another calculation. The response rate of the second stage opinion survey is 47%.
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 is 1,001 successful interviews, not 1,001 x 49.5% response rate, while the sample size of the second stage rating survey is 502 successful interviews, not 502 x 47.4% response rate. In the past, many media made this mistake.
[3] “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 various percentages not more than +/-4% and sampling error of net values not more than +/-8% 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 the survey findings on Hong Kong people’s feeling towards different governments and peoples. These surveys on governments are conducted at least once a year since 1997, while the surveys on peoples only began in 2007, this being the twenty-second time. From July 2017, POP enhanced the previous weighting method that has been used for quite a few years. Apart from age, gender and education, economic activity group is now also taken into account when adjusting data. The latest figures released today have been rim-weighted according to figures collected in the 2016 by-census regarding the gender-age distribution of the Hong Kong population and the 2017 educational attainment (highest level attended) distribution and economic activity status distribution obtained from the Census and Statistics Department. In the past, the mobile sample would be rim-weighted according to the basic Public Sentiment Index (PSI) figures collected in the landline sample. In July 2018, POP further refined the weighting method. The landline sample and the mobile sample would no longer be processed separately. The mobile would also no longer be adjusted using the basic PSI figures collected in the landline sample. The overall effect is that the importance of the mobile sample would be increased. Herewith the contact information for the latest survey:
|
Date of surveys |
Sample size |
Effective
|
Maximum sampling error of percentages[6] |
|
3-5/7/2018 (First stage naming survey) |
1,001 |
49.5% |
+/-3% |
|
18-19/7/2018 (Second stage opinion survey) |
502 |
47.4% |
+/-4% |
[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.
The research design of our survey on “people’s feeling towards different governments and peoples” has been explained in detail under “Survey Method” in our corresponding web page. For many years, POP have selected 15 regions and countries that are best known to Hong Kong people, and conducted surveys to measure people’s feeling towards the governments of these places. Our primary objective was to map Hong Kong people’s cosmopolitan view over time. In 2007, we improved our research design. Our mid-2007 survey was divided into two stages, namely, a naming survey and an opinion survey. In the 2007 year-end survey, we further added the people module to the survey. In specific terms, in our naming survey, other than Hong Kong, Mainland China, Taiwan and Macau, respondents can name, unaided, up to ten regions or countries which they know best. The four cross-strait regions together with 12 other regions and countries most frequently mentioned in the naming stage were then shortlisted into the second stage, with their governments and peoples rated by respondents as “very positive”, “quite positive”, “half-half”, “quite negative” or “very negative”. In August 2017, as Hong Kong marks its 20th anniversary of the handover, POP again adjusted the design of this survey series, to include only the four cross-strait regions and 10 other regions and countries most frequently mentioned in the naming stage at the second stage opinion survey. For the survey this year, in our first stage survey conducted on July 3 to 5, the United States, the United Kingdom, Japan, France and South Korea were mentioned most frequently. Please refer to the relevant table in our website for the rest of the list. Our second stage survey was conducted on July 18 to 19. The following table summarizes the findings of Hong Kong people’s feeling towards the governments and peoples of the four cross-strait regions.
|
Date of survey |
14-17/11/16 |
15-18/5/17 |
16-21/8/17 |
18-19/7/18 |
|||
|
Sample base |
1,007 |
1,000 |
1,028[7] |
502 |
|||
|
Response rate* |
70.9% |
71.5% |
72.0% |
47.4% |
|||
|
Feeling towards different governments / peoples [8] |
Findings |
Findings |
Findings |
Finding & error[9] |
Latest change |
Net difference with gov’ts / peoples |
|
|
Hong Kong |
People Positive |
41%[10] |
41% |
46%[10] |
50+/-4% |
+4% |
+32% |
|
People Negative |
13% |
13% |
13% |
14+/-3% |
+1% |
||
|
Net value |
28%[10] |
28% |
34%[10] |
36+/-6% |
+3% |
||
|
Government Positive |
22% |
28%[10] |
40%[10] |
38+/-4% |
-2% |
-32% |
|
|
Government Negative |
40% |
37% |
32%[10] |
34+/-4% |
+2% |
||
|
Net value |
-17% |
-9%[10] |
9%[10] |
4+/-8% |
-4% |
||
|
Mainland |
People Positive |
33%[10] |
30% |
32% |
31+/-4% |
-- |
+10% |
|
People Negative |
25% |
29% |
27% |
29+/-4% |
+1% |
||
|
Net value |
8%[10] |
1%[10] |
4% |
2+/-7% |
-2% |
||
|
Government Positive |
28% |
30% |
32% |
31+/-4% |
-1% |
-10% |
|
|
Government Negative |
34%[10] |
37% |
35% |
39+/-4% |
+4% |
||
|
Net value |
-6%[10] |
-8% |
-3% |
-8+/-7% |
-4% |
||
|
Taiwan |
People Positive |
60%[10] |
65%[10] |
60%[10] |
67+/-4% |
+6%[10] [11] |
+53% |
|
People Negative |
4% |
4% |
4% |
5+/-2% |
+1% |
||
|
Net value |
56%[10] |
61%[10] |
56% |
62+/-5% |
+5% |
||
|
Government Positive |
29%[10] |
32% |
24%[10] |
34+/-4% |
+10%[10] |
-53% |
|
|
Government Negative |
15%[10] |
19%[10] |
22%[10] |
25+/-4% |
+4% |
||
|
Net value |
15%[10] |
12% |
2%[10] |
9+/-7% |
+6% |
||
|
Macau |
People Positive |
50% |
50% |
44%[10] |
51+/-4% |
+7%[10] |
+32% |
|
People Negative |
2% |
2% |
4%[10] |
4+/-2% |
-- |
||
|
Net value |
48% |
48% |
40%[10] |
47+/-5% |
+7%[10] |
||
|
Government Positive |
43%[10] |
36%[10] |
34% |
37+/-4% |
+3% |
-32% |
|
|
Government Negative |
11%[10] |
18%[10] |
17% |
22+/-4% |
+5%[10] [11] |
||
|
Net value |
32%[10] |
18%[10] |
18% |
15+/-7% |
-2% |
||
* “Overall response rate” was used before September 2017, thereafter, “effective response rate” was used.
[7] The mobile sample was not included when survey results were released. The figures in the table above have been updated to reflect the results based on the combined landline and mobile sample. However, whether changes have gone beyond sampling errors is still determined based on the figures in the first release.
[8] Collapsed from a 5-point scale.
[9] 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 sampling error 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.
[10] Such changes have gone beyond the sampling errors at the 95% confidence level, meaning that they are statistically significant prima facie. However, whether numerical differences are statistically significant is not the same as whether they are practically useful or meaningful, and different weighting methods could have been applied in different surveys.
[11] Such changes have gone beyond the sampling errors at the 95% confidence level because of a change in the weighting method. If the previous weighting method was used, the changes would not have gone beyond the sampling errors.
Herewith the findings of Hong Kong people’s feelings towards the governments and peoples of 10 regions and countries other than the four cross-strait regions. They are ranked according to the net values of Hong Kong people’s feelings towards their people, in descending order:
|
Date of survey |
14-17/11/16 |
15-18/5/17 |
16-21/8/17 |
18-19/7/18 |
|||
|
Sample base |
1,007 |
1,000 |
1,028[12] |
502 |
|||
|
Response rate* |
70.9% |
71.5% |
63.9% |
47.4% |
|||
|
Feeling towards different governments / peoples [13] |
Findings |
Findings |
Findings |
Finding & error[14] |
Latest change |
Net difference with gov’ts / peoples |
|
|
Japan |
People Positive |
56%[15] |
62%[15] |
59%[15] |
68+/-4% |
+10%[15] |
+61% |
|
People Negative |
10% |
9% |
7% |
6+/-2% |
-1% |
||
|
Net value |
46%[15] |
53%[15] |
52% |
63+/-5% |
+10%[15] |
||
|
Government Positive |
20%[15] |
25%[15] |
21% |
33+/-4% |
+12%[15] |
-61% |
|
|
Government Negative |
41%[15] |
39% |
39% |
31+/-4% |
-8%[15] |
||
|
Net value |
-21%[15] |
-13%[15] |
-18% |
2+/-7% |
+20%[15] |
||
|
Singapore |
People Positive |
56% |
58% |
58% |
65+/-4% |
+7%[15] |
+6% |
|
People Negative |
2% |
4% |
3%[15] |
3+/-2% |
-- |
||
|
Net value |
54% |
54% |
55% |
61+/-5% |
+6%[15] |
||
|
Government Positive |
49% |
51% |
52% |
63+/-4% |
+11%[15] |
-6% |
|
|
Government Negative |
12% |
13% |
14% |
7+/-2% |
-6%[15] |
||
|
Net value |
38% |
38% |
38% |
55+/-6% |
+17%[15] |
||
|
Australia |
People Positive |
47%[15] |
51% |
45% |
60+/-4% |
+14%[15] |
+14% |
|
People Negative |
2% |
3% |
3% |
3+/-1% |
-- |
||
|
Net value |
45%[15] |
48% |
42% |
57+/-5% |
+15%[15] |
||
|
Government Positive |
43% |
50%[15] |
39%[15] |
50+/-4% |
+10%[15] |
-14% |
|
|
Government Negative |
3% |
3% |
3% |
6+/-2% |
+3%[15] |
||
|
Net value |
40% |
47%[15] |
36%[15] |
43+/-5% |
+7%[15] [16] |
||
|
Canada |
People Positive |
51% |
58%[15] |
53% |
58+/-4% |
+5% |
+3% |
|
People Negative |
2% |
0% |
1% |
2+/-1% |
-- |
||
|
Net value |
49%[15] |
58%[15] |
52%[15] |
56+/-5% |
+5% |
||
|
Government Positive |
49% |
52% |
50% |
55+/-4% |
+5% |
-3% |
|
|
Government Negative |
2% |
1% |
2% |
2+/-1% |
-- |
||
|
Net value |
48% |
52% |
48% |
53+/-5% |
+5% |
||
|
Germany |
People Positive |
44% |
48% |
38%[15] |
52+/-4% |
+14%[15] |
+5% |
|
People Negative |
2% |
3% |
2% |
2+/-1% |
-- |
||
|
Net value |
42%[15] |
45% |
36%[15] |
50+/-5% |
+14%[15] |
||
|
Government Positive |
39%[15] |
47%[15] |
39%[15] |
48+/-4% |
+10%[15] |
-5% |
|
|
Government Negative |
5% |
4% |
4% |
3+/-1% |
-1% |
||
|
Net value |
34%[15] |
43%[15] |
34%[15] |
45+/-5% |
+11%[15] |
||
|
Thailand |
People Positive |
45% |
49% |
44%[15] |
56+/-4% |
+12%[15] |
+29% |
|
People Negative |
6% |
8% |
6% |
8+/-2% |
+2% |
||
|
Net value |
39% |
41% |
38% |
48+/-6%[17] |
+11%[15] |
||
|
Government Positive |
25%[15] |
26% |
24%[15] |
39+/-4% |
+15%[15] |
-29% |
|
|
Government Negative |
23%[15] |
23% |
21% |
19+/-4% |
-1% |
||
|
Net value |
2%[15] |
4% |
3% |
20+/-7% |
+17%[15] |
||
|
United Kingdom |
People Positive |
46%[15] |
50% |
46% |
54+/-4% |
+8%[15] |
+16% |
|
People Negative |
6% |
3%[15] |
5% |
6+/-2% |
+1% |
||
|
Net value |
39%[15] |
47%[15] |
42% |
48+/-5%[17] |
+6% |
||
|
Government Positive |
40% |
46%[15] |
38%[15] |
46+/-4% |
+8%[15] |
-16% |
|
|
Government Negative |
12% |
8%[15] |
12%[15] |
14+/-3% |
+2% |
||
|
Net value |
27% |
38%[15] |
26%[15] |
32+/-6% |
+6% |
||
|
South Korea |
People Positive |
43% |
43% |
37% |
49+/-4% |
+12%[15] |
+22% |
|
People Negative |
9% |
10% |
10% |
10+/-3% |
-- |
||
|
Net value |
34%[15] |
33% |
27% |
39+/-6% |
+12%[15] |
||
|
Government Positive |
22%[15] |
21% |
23%[15] |
34+/-4% |
+11%[15] |
-22% |
|
|
Government Negative |
31%[15] |
28% |
19%[15] |
17+/-3% |
-2% |
||
|
Net value |
-9%[15] |
-7% |
4%[15] |
17+/-6% |
+13%[15] |
||
|
France |
People Positive |
33% |
35% |
34% |
41+/-4% |
+6%[15] |
+6% |
|
People Negative |
6% |
7% |
7% |
5+/-2% |
-1% |
||
|
Net value |
27% |
27% |
28% |
35+/-5% |
+8%[15] |
||
|
Government Positive |
23%[15] |
28%[15] |
26% |
34+/-4% |
+8%[15] |
-6% |
|
|
Government Negative |
6% |
5% |
7% |
5+/-2% |
-2% |
||
|
Net value |
18% |
23%[15] |
19% |
29+/-5% |
+10%[15] |
||
|
United States |
People Positive |
33%[15] |
39%[15] |
34% |
39+/-4% |
+5% |
+65% |
|
People Negative |
10% |
12% |
11% |
15+/-3% |
+4%[15] |
||
|
Net value |
23%[15] |
27% |
23% |
24+/-6% |
+1% |
||
|
Government Positive |
20% |
19% |
14%[15] |
15+/-3% |
+1% |
-65% |
|
|
Government Negative |
29% |
35%[15] |
49%[15] |
56+/-4% |
+7%[15] |
||
|
Net value |
-9% |
-16%[15] |
-35%[15] |
-41+/-7% |
-7% |
||
* “Overall response rate” was used before September 2017, thereafter, “effective response rate” was used.
[12] The mobile sample was not included when survey results were released. The figures in the table above have been updated to reflect the results based on the combined landline and mobile sample. However, whether changes have gone beyond sampling errors is still determined based on the figures in the first release.
[13] Collapsed from a 5-point scale.
[14] 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 sampling error of net values not more than +/-7% at 95% confidence level” when quoting the above figures. The error margin of previous survey can be found at the POP Site.
[15] Such changes have gone beyond the sampling errors at the 95% confidence level, meaning that they are statistically significant prima facie. However, whether numerical differences are statistically significant is not the same as whether they are practically useful or meaningful, and different weighting methods could have been applied in different surveys.
[16] Such changes have gone beyond the sampling errors at the 95% confidence level because of a change in the weighting method. If the previous weighting method was used, the changes would not have gone beyond the sampling errors.
[17] In one decimal place, the respective net values of people’s feeling towards the people of Thailand and the UK are positive 48.5 and positive 48.2 percentage points.
Our latest findings showed that, as regards the results of people’s feeling towards different peoples, 50% felt positive towards Hong Kong people themselves while the net value was positive 36 percentage points. For the other cross-strait regions, the corresponding positive figures for the Mainland, Taiwan and Macau peoples were 31%, 67% and 51% while their net values were positive 2, positive 62 and positive 47 percentage points respectively. As for the feelings on peoples of other regions and countries, the net values for Japan and Singapore were highest, with positive 63 and positive 61 percentage points respectively, while those for Australia, Canada, Germany, Thailand and the United Kingdom were positive 57, positive 56, positive 50, positive 48 and positive 48 percentage points correspondingly. Lastly, the net values of feeling towards the peoples of South Korea, France and the United States were positive 39, positive 35 and positive 24 percentage points only.
Regarding the results of people’s feeling towards different governments, 38% felt positive towards the HKSAR government while the net value was positive 4 percentage points. For the other cross-strait governments, the corresponding positive figures for the Mainland, Taiwan and Macau governments were 31%, 34% and 37% while their net values were negative 8, positive 9 and positive 15 percentage points respectively. As for the feelings on other governments, the net values for Singapore and Canada were the highest, with positive 55 and positive 53 percentage points correspondingly, while those for Germany, Australia, the United Kingdom and France were positive 45, positive 43, positive 32 and positive 29 percentage points correspondingly. Those for Thailand and South Korea were positive 20 and positive 17 percentage points correspondingly, while those for Japan and the United States were positive 2 and negative 41 percentage points correspondingly.
Commentary
Note: The following commentary was written by Senior Data Analyst of POP, Edward Tai.
Our latest survey shows that, in terms of net affinity, Hong Kong people feel more positively about all other peoples than their governments. Regarding the four cross-strait societies, the net affinity of Hong Kong people towards fellow Hongkongers is 32 percentage points higher than that towards the Hong Kong SAR Government, that towards Taiwan people is 53 percentage points higher than that towards the Taiwan Government, that towards Macau people is 32 percentage points higher than that towards the Macau Government, that towards Mainland Chinese people is 10 percentage points higher than that towards the Mainland Chinese Government. As for countries outside the cross-strait regions, Hong Kong people seem to dislike the government of the United States whereas they seem to like all peoples rather than dislike them. These findings are worth studying by various governments. Compared to last year’s figures, the net value of Hong Kong people’s affinity towards the people of Japan, the people and government of Germany, the people and government of Thailand and the people and government of France have increased beyond sampling errors and are now at record high since 2007. As for the net value of Hong Kong people’s affinity towards the governments of Macau and the United States, although the drops have not gone beyond sampling errors, the current figures are now at their lowest since the survey series started in 1997. It should be noted, however, that our survey only covers regions and countries best known to Hong Kong people. Hong Kong people may well like or dislike other places much more, but because they are not the most well-known places, they do not appear on the list by design. As for the reasons affecting the ups and downs of these figures, we leave it to our readers to form their own judgment using detailed records displayed in our “Opinion Daily”.
Future Release (Tentative)
