HKU POP releases the latest trust and confidence indicators Back

 
Press Release on September 23, 2014

| Special Announcement| Abstract | Latest Figures | Indepth Analysis|
| Opinion Daily | Commentary | Future Release (Tentative) |
| Detailed Findings (People's Trust in the HKSAR Government / People's Trust in the Taiwan Government ) |
| Detailed Findings (People's Trust in the Beijing Central Government ) |
| Detailed Findings (People's Confidence in HK's Future / People's Confidence in China's Future) |
| Detailed Findings (People's Confidence in "One Country, Two Systems") |


Special Announcement

To facilitate academic study and rational discussion, Public Opinion Programme (POP) of The University of Hong Kong has already released for public examination some time ago via the “HKU POP Site” (http://hkupop.hku.hk) the raw data of all 55 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 will soon put up a “POP Education Page” to centralize all raw data and educational material as a one-stop service.



Abstract

POP interviewed 1,000 Hong Kong people between 4 and 11 September 2014 by means of a random telephone survey conducted by real interviewers. Our latest survey shows that all trust and confidence indicators have dropped, many to new lows in a number of years. Specifically, people’s latest net trust in the HKSAR and Central Governments plunge 12 and 14 percentage points respectively, to new lows since June 2003 and February 1997. They now stand at negative 7 and negative 22 percentage points. As for people’s trust in the Taiwan Government, net trust remains stable at negative 17 percentage points, not much different from that three months ago. As for the confidence indicators, although still the highest among the three, people’s confidence in the future of China plunges 12 percentage points to positive 22 percentage points, which is record low since the survey series began in 1997. Meanwhile, people’s net confidence in the future of Hong Kong and “one country, two systems” drop 11 and 20 percentage points respectively to negative 4 and negative 19 percentage points, the former at its new low since April 2003 while the latter at its historical low since the survey began in 1993. Further analysis shows the younger the respondent, the more one distrusts the Central Government and the less confident in “one country, two systems”. The latest changes in the survey figures are no doubt related to the political reform, for reasons no need to be spoken. 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 64%.


Points to note:

[1] The address of the “HKU POP SITE” is http://hkupop.hku.hk, journalists can check out the details of the survey there.
[2] The sample size of the survey is 1,000 successful interviews, not 1,000 x 63.8% 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.


Latest Figures

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 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 sample size

Response rate

Maximum sampling error of percentages[6]

4-11/9/2014

1,000

63.8%

+/-3%

[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:

Date of survey

15-17/9/13

9-12/12/13

17-20/3/14

6-12/6/14

4-11/9/2014

Latest change

Total sample size[7]

1,007

1,015

1,023

1,026

1,000

--

Overall response rate

65.3%

68.0%

67.8%

67.5%

63.8%

--

Finding

Finding

Finding

Finding

Finding

Finding & error[8]

--

Trust in HKSAR Government[9]

44%[10]

44%

45%

41%

36+/-4%

-5%[10]

Distrust in HKSAR Government[9]

31%[10]

35%

32%

36%

43+/-4%

+7%[10]

Net trust

13%[10]

9%

12%

5%

-7+/-8%

-12%[10]

Mean value[9]

3.1[10]
(Base=631)

3.1
(Base=551)

3.1
(Base=565)

3.0
(Base=620)

2.8+/-0.1
(Base=547)

-0.2[10]

Trust in Beijing Government[9]

35%[10]

37%

36%

34%

30+/-4%

-4%

Distrust in Beijing Government[9]

36%[10]

38%

36%

41%[10]

52+/-4%

+11%[10]

Net trust

-1%[10]

-1%

0%

-8%[10]

-22+/-8%

-14%[10]

Mean value[9]

2.9[10]
(Base=604)

2.9
(Base=538)

2.9
(Base=608)

2.8
(Base=575)

2.5+/-0.1
(Base=533)

-0.3[10]

Trust in Taiwan Government[9]

22%

19%

17%

19%

21+/-3%

+2%

Distrust in Taiwan Government[9]

34%

36%

35%

33%

38+/-4%

+5%[10]

Net trust

-12%

-17%

-19%

-13%

-17+/-6%

-4%

Mean value[9]

2.8
(Base=512)

2.7
(Base=399)

2.7
(Base=436)

2.7
(Base=482)

2.7+/-0.1
(Base=465)

--

Confidence in HK’s future

54%

50%

53%

49%

43+/-4%

-6%[10]

No-confidence in HK’s future

40%

43%

41%

42%

48+/-4%

+6%[10]

Net confidence

14%

7%

12%

7%

-4+/-8%

-11%[10]

Confidence in China’s future

68%

68%

67%

63%

56+/-4%

-7%[10]

No-confidence in China’s future

25%

23%

27%

29%

34+/-4%

+5%[10]

Net confidence

43%

45%

40%

34%

22+/-8%

-12%[10]

Confidence in “one country, two systems”

55%[10]

49%[10]

48%

47%

38+/-4%

-9%[10]

No-confidence in “one country, two systems”

40%[10]

42%

45%

46%

56+/-4%

+10%[10]

Net confidence

15%[10]

7%

3%

1%

-19+/-8%

-20%[10]

[7] The frequency of this series of questions is different for different questions. Comparisons, if made, should be synchronized using the same intervals. Starting from March 2011, these questions only use sub-samples of the tracking surveys concerned. The sub-sample sizes of the surveys range from 548 to 580, 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 36% of the respondents trusted the HKSAR Government, 30% trusted the Beijing Central Government, and 21% trusted the Taiwan Government. The net trust values are negative 7, negative 22 and negative 17 percentage points, while the mean scores of these trust indicators are 2.8, 2.5 and 2.7 respectively, meaning close to “half-half” in general. On the other hand, 43% of the respondents had confidence in Hong Kong’s future, 56% had confidence in China’s future, while 38% of the respondents were confident in “one country, two systems”. The three net confidence values are negative 4, positive 22 and negative 19 percentage points.



Indepth Analysis

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:

 

Date of survey:4-11/9/2014

18-29

30-49

50 or above

Overall Sample

Percentage of trust/distrust in Beijing Central Government[11]

Trust

11+/-6%
(12)

27+/-6%
(52)

40+/-6%
(99)

30+/-4%
(163)

Half-half

13+/-7%
(14)

16+/-5%
(31)

16+/-5%
(39)

15+/-3%
(83)

Distrust

75+/-8%
(79)

54+/-7%
(102)

41+/-6%
(103)

52+/-4%
(284)

Don't know/
hard to say

1+/-1%
(1)

2+/-2%
(4)

3+/-2%
(9)

3+/-1%
(14)

Total

100%
(105)

100%
(189)

100%
(250)

100%
(543)

Mean value

1.9+/-0.2
(Base=104)

2.5+/-0.2
(Base=185)

2.9+/-0.2
(Base=241)

2.5+/-0.1
(Base=530)

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

 

Date of survey:4-11/9/2014

18-29

30-49

50 or above

Overall Sample

Percentage of confidence/ no-confidence in “one country, two systems” [12]

Confidence

11+/-6%
(11)

33+/-7%
(69)

52+/-6%
(135)

38+/-4%
(216)

No-confidence

85+/-7%
(89)

59+/-7%
(124)

42+/-6%
(111)

56+/-4%
(323)

Don't know/
hard to say

4+/-4%
(4)

8+/-4%
(16)

6+/-3%
(15)

6+/-2%
(36)

Total

100%
(104)

100%
(209)

100%
(261)

100%
(575)

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


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, some items within the previous survey were conducted from June 6 to 12, 2014 while this survey was conducted from September 4 to 11, 2014. 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.


8/9/14

Students plan to boycott classes to protest against Beijing’s election reform proposal, anti-Occupy Central group unveils hotline for the public to report striking school students.

5/9/14

Taiwan’s tainted oil was sold to the market.

31/8/14

The National People’s Congress Standing Committee approves electing Hong Kong’s chief executive in 2017 proposal by vote.

20/8/14

Nelson Chow Wing-sun proposes a retirement pension scheme for the elderly funded by an old-age payroll tax.

7/8/14

Director of LOCPG Zhang Xiaoming says the implementation of universal suffrage in Hong Kong must be viewed from the perspective of national security.

29/7/14

China’s former security chief Zhou Yongkang is being investigated by CPC.

24/7/14

McDonald’s admitted that it had imported food from Shanghai Husi Food and all the food has been consumed.

15/7/14

CE CY Leung states in the report on political reform that mainstream opinion in Hong Kong holds that only a nominating committee should have the power to put up chief executive candidates.

1/7/14

Many newspapers report the news of July 1 March.

29/6/14

Over 790,000 people cast votes in “6.22 Civil Referendum”.




Commentary

Robert Ting-Yiu Chung, Director of Public Opinion Programme, observed, “Our latest survey conducted in the first half of September shows that all trust and confidence indicators have dropped, many to new lows in a number of years. Specifically, people’s latest net trust in the HKSAR and Central Governments plunge 12 and 14 percentage points respectively, to new lows since June 2003 and February 1997. They now stand at negative 7 and negative 22 percentage points. As for people’s trust in the Taiwan Government, net trust remains stable at negative 17 percentage points, not much different from that three months ago. As for the confidence indicators, although still the highest among the three, people’s confidence in the future of China plunges 12 percentage points to positive 22 percentage points, which is record low since the survey series began in 1997. Meanwhile, people’s net confidence in the future of Hong Kong and ‘one country, two systems’ drop 11 and 20 percentage points respectively to negative 4 and negative 19 percentage points, the former at its new low since April 2003 while the latter at its historical low since the survey began in 1993. Further analysis shows the younger the respondent, the more one distrusts the Central Government and the less confident in ‘one country, two systems’. The latest changes in the survey figures are no doubt related to the political reform, for reasons no need to be spoken. However, readers are welcome to make their own judgment using the detailed records displayed in our ‘Opinion Daily’.”


Future Release (Tentative)
  • September 30, 2014 (Tuesday) 1pm to 2pm: Popularity of CE and HKSAR Government


| Special Announcement| Abstract | Latest Figures | Indepth Analysis|
| Opinion Daily | Commentary | Future Release (Tentative) |
| Detailed Findings (People's Trust in the HKSAR Government / People's Trust in the Taiwan Government ) |
| Detailed Findings (People's Trust in the Beijing Central Government ) |
| Detailed Findings (People's Confidence in HK's Future / People's Confidence in China's Future) |
| Detailed Findings (People's Confidence in "One Country, Two Systems") |