HKU POP SITE releases the latest social indicatorsBack

Press Release on August 17, 2010

Abstract

The Public Opinion Programme at the University of Hong Kong interviewed 1,007 Hong Kong people between August 10 and 13 by means of a random telephone survey conducted by real interviewers. The survey finds that compared to 6 months ago, the relative ranking of the 5 core social indicators (namely, stability, prosperity, democracy, freedom, and the rule of law) has not changed much, but the rating of "freedom indicator" has gone up significantly, while that of "rule of law" has gone down significantly, probably due to the passing of the 2012 political reform proposal, and the recent dispute over a court case of assault on police officers. According to our records, the "freedom indicator" has been on the high side for years, while the "democracy indicator" has remained at the bottom in recent years. Besides, our survey shows that all freedom sub-indicators have ratings above 7 marks, meaning that people generally agree that Hong Kong is a free society. The sampling error of rating figure of various indicators is below +/-0.19 mark while that of Andrew Li is below +/-2.2 marks. The response rate of the survey is 61%.

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 this survey is 1,007 successful interviews, not 1,007 x 61.3% 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 rating of various indicators not more than +/-0.19 while that of Andrew Li not more than +/-2.2 at 95% confidence level" when quoting the above figures.
[4] When quoting the rating figures of this survey, one decimal place can be used, in order to match the precision level of the figures.
[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 social indicators, include 5 core indicators, 7 non-core indicators, 10 freedom sub-indicators, 2 rule of law sub-indicators, and the rating of Chief Justice Andrew Li Kwok-nang. All the figures have been weighted according to provisional figures obtained from the Census and Statistics Department regarding the gender-age distribution of the Hong Kong population in 2009 year-end. Herewith the contact information for the latest survey:

Date of survey	Overall sample size	Response rate	Maximum sampling error of ratings^[6]
10-13/8/2010	1,007	61.3%	+/-2.2

[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.

Herewith the latest figures of the 5 core social indicators:

Date of survey	11-14/8/08	10-12/2/09	11-16/8/09	4-9/2/10	10-13/8/10	Latest change
Total sample size	1,016	1,011	1,006	1,060	1,007	--
Overall response rate	69.8%	67.0%	70.9%	67.3%	61.3%	--
Finding	Finding	Finding	Finding	Finding	Finding & error^[7]	--
Degree of freedom	7.61	7.67	7.51^[8]	7.63^[8]	7.52+/-0.11	-0.11
Degree of prosperity	7.02^[8]	6.82	6.88	7.03^[8]	7.09+/-0.11	+0.06
Degree of stability	7.29^[8]	6.96^[8]	7.03	7.09	7.06+/-0.11	-0.03
Compliance with the rule of law	6.87^[8]	6.78	6.74	6.88^[8]	6.61+/-0.12	-0.27^[8]
Degree of democracy	6.10^[8]	6.11	6.02	5.99	6.57+/-0.12	+0.58^[8]

[7] 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 various ratings not more than +/-0.12 at 95% confidence level" when quoting the above figures.
[8] 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 or not is not the same as whether they are practically useful or meaningful.

Herewith the latest figures of the 7 non-core social indicators:

Date of survey	11-14/8/08	10-12/2/09	11-16/8/09	4-9/2/10	10-13/8/10	Latest change
Total sample size^[11]	1,016	1,011	1,006	1,060	1,007	--
Overall response rate	69.8%	67.0%	70.9%	67.3%	61.3%	--
Finding	Finding	Finding	Finding	Finding	Finding & error^[9]	--
Degree of public order	7.50	7.19^[10]	7.19	7.34^[10]	7.41+/-0.12	+0.07
Degree of civilization	7.40	7.17^[10]	7.21	7.29	7.33+/-0.13	+0.04
Degree of corruption-free practices	7.20	6.93^[10]	6.96	7.18^[10]	7.21+/-0.15	+0.03
Degree of efficiency	6.86^[10]	6.62^[10]	6.60	6.88^[10]	6.95+/-0.17	+0.07
Degree of social welfare sufficiency	6.32^[10]	6.13^[10]	6.28^[10]	6.12	6.45+/-0.16	+0.33^[10]
Degree of equality	6.29	6.09^[10]	6.14	6.17	5.97+/-0.18	-0.20^[10]
Degree of fairness	5.76	5.65	5.64	5.60	5.62+/-0.17	+0.02

[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 various ratings not more than +/-0.18 at 95% confidence level" when quoting the above figures.
[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 or not is not the same as whether they are practically useful or meaningful.
[11] Starting from August 2010, these questions only use sub-samples of the tracking surveys concerned. The sub-sample sizes of this survey range from 511 to 556, and the increased sampling errors have already been reflected in the figures tabulated.

Herewith the latest figures of the 10 freedom sub-indicators:

Date of survey	23-25/7/08	12-13/1/09	20-23/7/09	11-13/1/10	10-13/8/10	Latest change
Sample base^[14]	1,007	1,015	1,003	1,008	1,007	--
Overall response rate	67.4%	70.2%	68.7%	70.3%	61.3%	--
Finding	Finding	Finding	Finding	Finding	Finding & error^[12]	--
Degree of freedom (repeated listing)	Because the survey dates are different, please refer to the previous table.				7.52+/-0.11	-0.11
Freedom of religious belief	8.82	8.82	8.82	8.83	8.96+/-0.12	+0.13^[13]
Freedom to enter or leave Hong Kong	8.43^[13]	8.52	8.35^[13]	8.44	8.60+/-0.13	+0.16^[13]
Freedom to engage in academic research	8.15	8.12	8.07	8.20^[13]	8.14+/-0.15	-0.06
Freedom to engage in artistic and literary creation	8.01	7.93	7.95	7.99	7.71+/-0.17	-0.28^[13]
Freedom of publication	7.50^[13]	7.60	7.46^[13]	7.71^[13]	7.59+/-0.15	-0.12
Freedom of speech	7.53^[13]	7.69^[13]	7.56^[13]	7.62	7.49+/-0.16	-0.13
Freedom of procession and demonstration	7.33	7.49^[13]	7.85^[13]	7.69^[13]	7.42+/-0.16	-0.27^[13]
Freedom of press	7.40^[13]	7.66^[13]	7.35^[13]	7.60^[13]	7.40+/-0.15	-0.20^[13]
Freedom of association	7.20	7.29	7.37	7.41	7.34+/-0.17	-0.07
Freedom to strike	7.39^[13]	7.31	7.06^[13]	6.93	7.04+/-0.19	+0.11

[12] 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 various ratings not more than +/-0.19 at 95% confidence level" when quoting the above figures.
[13] 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 or not is not the same as whether they are practically useful or meaningful.
[14] Starting from August 2010, all questions of sub-indicators only use sub-samples of the tracking surveys concerned. The sub-sample sizes of this survey range from 513 to 542, and the increased sampling errors have already been reflected in the figures tabulated.

Herewith the latest figures of the 2 rule of law sub-indicators and the rating of the Chief Justice:

Date of survey	11-14/8/08	10-12/2/09	11-16/8/09	4-9/2/10	10-13/8/10	Latest change
Total sample size^[17]	1,016	1,011	1,006	1,060	1,007	--
Overall response rate	69.8%	67.0%	70.9%	67.3%	61.3%	--
Finding	Finding	Finding	Finding	Finding	Finding & error^[15]	--
Compliance with the rule of law (repeated listing)	6.87[16]	6.78	6.74	6.88^[16]	6.61+/-0.12	-0.27^[16]
Impartiality of the courts	7.01^[16]	6.84^[16]	7.10^[16]	7.40^[16]	6.16+/-0.18	-1.24^[16]
Fairness of the judicial system	6.78^[16]	6.56^[16]	6.73^[16]	7.05^[16]	6.06+/-0.18	-0.99^[16]
Support rating of Andrew Li	60.2	60.9	61.0	68.1^[16]	67.5+/-2.2	-0.6

[15] 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 various ratings not more than +/-0.18 at 95% confidence level" when quoting the above figures, and that "sampling error is not more than +/-2.2 at 95% confidence level" when citing Andrew Li's rating.
[16] 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 or not is not the same as whether they are practically useful or meaningful.
[17] Starting from August 2010, all questions of sub-indicators only use sub-samples of the tracking surveys concerned. The sub-sample sizes of this survey range from 535 to 551, and the increased sampling errors have already been reflected in the figures tabulated.

Regarding the core social indicators, latest results showed that, on a scale of 0-10, Hong Kong's degree of "freedom" scored the highest rating with 7.52 marks, followed by "prosperity" with 7.09 marks, and then "stability", "compliance with the rule of law" and "democracy", with 7.06, 6.61 and 6.57 marks respectively.

As for the non-core social indicators, "public order" has the highest score of 7.41 marks, followed by "civilization", "corruption-free practices", "efficiency", "social welfare sufficiency", "equality" and "fairness", with scores of 7.33, 7.21, 6.95, 6.45, 5.97 and 5.62 marks correspondingly.

As for the freedom sub-indicators, the freedom of "religious belief" scored the highest rating with 8.96 marks. Freedom of "entering or leaving Hong Kong" came second with 8.60 marks, followed by freedom to engage in "academic research", attaining 8.14 marks. Freedoms of "artistic and literary creation", "publication", "speech", "procession and demonstration", "press", and "association" formed the next tier, with respective scores of 7.71, 7.59, 7.49, 7.42, 7.40 and 7.34 marks. Finally, the freedom to "strike" attained 7.04 marks.

Finally, for the two rule of law sub-indicators, the impartiality of the courts scored 6.16 marks, while the rating of the fairness of the judicial system was 6.06 marks. Meanwhile, the latest popularity rating of Chief Justice Andrew Li Kwok-nang, a representative figure of the judicial system, was 67.5 marks, on a scale of 0-100.

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 provide readers with accurate information so that they can 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 since July 24 each day a record of significant events of that day, according to the research method designed by POP. These daily entries would be uploaded to the "Opinion Daily" feature page as soon as they are verified by POP.

For the polling items covered in this press release, the previous survey of some items was conducted from January 11 to 13, 2009 while the latest one was conducted from August 10 to 13, 2010. 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.

6/8/10	Bokhary's assault senetence goes to Court of Appeal.
17/7/10	Legislative Council passes minimum wage bill.
1/7/10	Many newspapers on the following day report and discuss the July 1 demonstration and also the public criticism to the Democratic party.
25/6/10	Legislative Council passes the 2012 Legislative Council election proposal.
24/6/10	Legislative Council passes the 2012 Chief Executive selection proposal.
7/6/10	Chinese Central government responds to the definition of universal suffrage and the request of political reform.
20/5/10	Chief Executive Donald Tsang invites Audrey Eu to a TV debate on political reform.
16/5/10	The tunrout rate of the Legislative Council by-election is less than 20%.
8/4/10	Geoffrey Ma Tao-li will succeed Andrew Li Kwok-nang as the new Chief Justice of the High Court in September.
11/3/10	TVB general manager Stephen Chan Chi-wan is arrested by ICAC.
24/2/10	Financial Secretary John Tsang Chun-wah delivers a budget speech.
23/2/10	A survey shows an increasing trend of the number of millionaires in Hong Kong.
2/2/10	Chan Chun-chuen was judged lost in the case of inheritance of billions from Nina Wang Kung Yu-sum.
29/1/10	Three killed, two injured and two missing in the collapse of an old building at 45 Ma Tau Wai Road.
17/1/10	Many newspapers report and discuss on the following day the anti-Express Rail Link demonstration.

Commentary

Robert Ting-Yiu Chung, Director of Public Opinion Programme, observed, "After revamping, our latest social indicator survey shows that compared to 6 months ago, the relative ranking of the 5 core social indicators (namely, stability, prosperity, democracy, freedom, and the rule of law) has not changed much, but the rating of "freedom indicator" has gone up significantly, while that of "rule of law" has gone down significantly, probably due to the passing of the 2012 political reform proposal, and the recent dispute over a court case of assault on police officers. According to our records, the "freedom indicator" has been on the high side for years, while the "democracy indicator" has remained at the bottom in recent years. Besides, our survey shows that all freedom sub-indicators have ratings above 7 marks, meaning that people generally agree that Hong Kong is a free society. As for the reasons affecting the ups and downs of various indicators, we leave it for our readers to make their own judgement after reading detailed records shown in our "Opinion Daily" feature page.」

Future Release (Tentative)

August 24, 2010 (Tuesday) 1pm to 2pm: Popularity of CE and HKSAR Government