¡@
¯Sº¥Á±æ¡G±`¨£°ÝÃD Popularity of the Chief Executive: FAQs |
¡@ | ¡@ |
¤U¦C±`¨£°Ýµª·|ÀHµÛªÀ·|ÅܤƩM¤j²³»Ýn¦Ó¤£Â_§ó·s The content of this FAQ page will be updated from time to time to match societal changes and community needs |
¡@ | ¡@ |
±`¨£°ÝÃD Frequently asked Questions | |
¡@ | ¡@ |
![]() |
°Ý¡G¡u¤ä«ù«×¡v©M¡u¤ä«ù²v¡v¦³¤°»ò¤À§O¡H
Q¡G What is the difference between "support ratings" and "support rates"? |
¡@ | ¡@ |
![]() |
°Ý¡G¬°¤°»ò¯Sº¥Á±æ½Õ¬dn¨C¤ë¶i¦æ¨â¦¸¡H
Q¡GWhy does POP measure CE's popularity twice a month? |
¡@ | ¡@ |
![]() |
°Ý¡G¦³¨S¦³³Ì²z·Qªº½Õ¬dÀW²v¡H
Q¡G Is there an ideal frequency for opinion polling? |
¡@ | ¡@ |
![]() |
°Ý¡G¬°¤°»ò¯Sº©M°Ý³d©xûªº¤ä«ù²v±Ä¥Î¤£¦P´£°Ý¤è¦¡¡H
Q¡G Why are we using different wordings to measure the support rates of CE and the principal officials? |
¡@ | ¡@ |
![]() |
°Ý¡G³Ì·s½Õ¬d¤¤¯Sºªº¤ä«ù²v¦³73%¡A¤Ï¹ï²v¦³9%¡A©â¼Ë»~®t+/-3%¡A¬O§_ªí¥Ü¥Lªº¡u¹ê½è¡v¤ä«ù²v¬O70%¦Ü76%¡A¡u¹ê½è¡v¤Ï¹ï²v¬O6%¦Ü12%¡H
Q¡G CE's support rate in the latest survey is 73%, objection rate 9%, sampling error being +/-3%, does this mean that his "real" support rate is 70% to 76%, and his "real" objection rate is 6% to 12%? |
¡@ | ¡@ |
![]() |
°Ý¡G¥i§_¶i¤@¨B»¡©ú¼Ë¥»¼Æ¥Ø¡B¦Ê¤À¤ñ¼Æ¦r©M©â¼Ë»~®tªºÃö«Y¡H
Q¡G Can you further elaborate the relationship among sample size, percentages and sampling errors? |
¡@ | ¡@ |
![]() |
°Ý¡G©â¼Ë½Õ¬d¥i¥H¦p¦óÁ×§K¨t²Î©Ê°¾®t¡H
Q¡G How can systematic biases be eliminated in sample surveys? |
¡@ | ¡@ |
![]() |
°Ý¡G¬°¤°»ò¤£¥H±M®a·N¨£¨ú¥NÉ]¥Á·N¨£¡H
Q¡G Why not interview experts and professionals instead of members of the general public? |
¡@ | ¡@ |
![]() |
°Ý¡G¦³¨S¦³¡u²z·Q¡vªº¤ä«ù²v¡H
Q¡G Is there an "ideal" support rate? |
¡@ | ¡@ |
![]() |
°Ý¡G¡u²z·Q¡v©M¡u¦¨¥\¡v¤ä«ù²vªºt±°ò·Ç¬O¤°»ò¡H
Q¡G Are there other benchmarks of popularity other than "ideal" and "successful", "depressing" and "disastrous"? |
¡@ | ¡@ |
![]() |
°Ý¡G°£¤F¡u²z·Q¡v¡B¡u¦¨¥\¡v¡B¡u¥¢±Ñ¡v©M¡u©å¦H¡v¥~¡AÁÙ¦³¤°»ò¥Á±æ°ò·Ç¡H
Q¡G Are there other benchmarks of popularity other than "ideal" and "successful", "depressing" and "disastrous"? |
¡@ | ¡@ |
![]() |
°Ý¡G¥H¥Á·N¤ä«ù²vp¡A¦b³Ì·s½Õ¬d¤¤¡A¯Sº©M¦U°Ý³d©xûªº¥Á±æ¥i¥H¥Î¤°»ò°ò·Ç¨Ó§Î®e¡H
Q¡G In HKUPOP's latest survey, judging from government officials' support rates alone, how can we describe the popularity of the CE and the principal officials using various benchmarks? |
¡@ | ¡@ |
¡@ | ¡@ |
¡@ | ¡@ |
¡@ | ¡@ |
±`¨£°ÝÃD»Pµª®× Frequently asked Questions with Answers | |
¡@ | ¡@ |
![]() |
°Ý¡G¡u¤ä«ù«×¡v©M¡u¤ä«ù²v¡v¦³¤°»ò¤À§O¡H Q¡GWhat is the difference between "support ratings" and "support rates"? µª¡G¡u¤ä«ù«×¡vªº³æ¦ì¬O0¤À¦Ü100¤À¡AÅã¥Ü¤@¯ëÉ]¥Á¹ï¤ä«ù¬Y¬Y¤H¤h©Î¹ÎÅ骺¦n·Pµ{«×¡C¡u¤ä«ù²v¡vªº³æ¦ì¬O0¢H¦Ü100¢H¡A¥Nªí´X¦hÉ]¥Á¤ä«ù¬Y¬Y¤H¤h©Î¬FÄÒ¡C¬Y¬Y¤H¤h¥i¯àªí²{¥¥¡A±o¤À¶È¶È¦X®æ¡A¦ý¦b¸¾¤¤µL¤j±Nªº±¡ªp¤U¡A¥i¯à®t¤£¦h©Ò¦³É]¥Á³£¤ä«ù¥L°õ¦æ¬YÓn¾¡C¬Û¤Ï¡A¬Y¬Y¤H¤h¥i¯à¤H«~¤£¿ù¡A±o¤À©|¥i¡A¦ý¦]¬°¤£¬O»â³S¤H§÷¡A©Ò¥HÉ]¥Á³£¤Ï¹ï¥L¥X¥ô¬YÓn¾¡C(ªìª©¡G2006¦~1¤ë10¤é·s»D¤½³ø¤§ªþ¥[¸ê®Æ) A¡G"Support ratings" are expressed on a 0-100 scale, it shows how good or bad people feel about certain public figures or organizations. "Support rates" are expressed in terms of 0% - 100%, indicating the proportion of people supporting certain public figures or political groups. A person may have a mediocre support rating, but he may be considered by most people as the best person suited to a job, simply because there is no better people around. Likewise, a person may have an acceptable rating, but because he lacks leadership, nobody wants him to take up a certain job. (First release: Supplementary section of our press release of 10 January 2006) |
¡@ | ¡@ |
![]() |
°Ý¡G¬°¤°»ò¯Sº¥Á±æ½Õ¬dn¨C¤ë¶i¦æ¨â¦¸¡H Q¡GWhy does POP measure CE's popularity twice a month? µª¡GÀôÅU¥ý¶i¥Á¥D°ê®a¡A³Ì°ª»â¾É¤Hªº¥Á±æ½Õ¬d¬O¤£¥i©Î¯Êªº¥Á½Õ¶µ¥Ø¡A¦Ó¥B¤@©w¬O¥Á½Õªº¥Dn¶µ¥Ø¡C¦³¨£¤Î¦¹¡A¥Á¬ãp¹º¤@¶}©l«K§â´ä·þ©Î¯Sºµû¤À¦C¬°¥D¶µ¡A¦b¯à¤O½d³ò¤º¥H³ÌÀW±Kªº¾Þ§@°O¿ý¤Îµoªíµ²ªG¡A¬O³d¥ô¨ÏµM¡C(ªìª©¡G2006¦~1¤ë24¤é·s»D¤½³ø¤§ªþ¥[¸ê®Æ) |
¡@ | ¡@ |
![]() |
°Ý¡G¦³¨S¦³³Ì²z·Qªº½Õ¬dÀW²v¡H Q¡GIs there an ideal frequency for opinion polling? µª¡G²z·QÀW²v·|¦]À³¥Á·N«ç¼Ëªi°Ê©M§Ú̬O§_«µø¸Óµ¥ªi°Ê¦Ó©w¡C¿ïÁ|´Á¶¡¡A¤£¤Ö°ê»Ú¯Å¼Æªº½Õ¬d¾÷ºc·|¥Hºu°Ê½Õ¬d¤£Â_´x´¤¥Á·N¡A¨C¤Ñ½·s¼Æ¾Ú¡C¥Á¬ãp¹º·|¨C¨â¬P´Á½·s¯Sºµû¤À¤@¦¸¡A¨C¤ë½·s¬F©²¥Á±æ¤@¦¸¡A¦³¨Ç¶µ¥Ø«h·|¨C¦~½·s¤@¦¸¡C(ªìª©¡G2006¦~1¤ë24¤é·s»D¤½³ø¤§ªþ¥[¸ê®Æ) A¡GIt depends on how opinion fluctuates on specific items, and how serious we take those fluctuations. For example, during elections, rolling polls are often conducted by internationally renowned organizations to measure fluctuations on a daily basis. POP now measures CE's popularity once every two weeks, the popularity of the government once every month, and some items once every year. (First release: Supplementary section of our press release of 24 January 2006) |
¡@ | ¡@ |
![]() |
°Ý¡G¬°¤°»ò¯Sº©M°Ý³d©xûªº¤ä«ù²v±Ä¥Î¤£¦P´£°Ý¤è¦¡¡H Q¡GWhy are we using different wordings to measure the support rates of CE and the principal officials? µª¡G¡u¤ä«ù²v¡v©M¡u»{³\²v¡v³£¥u¬O·§¬A¥Îµü¡AŪªÌ¾A©y°Ñ¾\ºô¯¸¤º°Ý¨÷¥þ¤å¡C¯Sº¤ä«ù²vªº´£°Ý¤è¦¡¬°¢w¢w¡u°²³]©ú¤Ñ¿ïÁ|¯Sº¡A¦Ó§A¤S¦³Åv§ë²¼¡A§A·|ø·|¿ï´¿½®Åv°µ¯Sº¡H¡v°Ý³d©xû¤ä«ù²vªº´£°Ý¤è¦¡¬°¢w¢w¡u°²³]©ú¤Ñ§A¦³Åv§ë²¼¨M©wÄò¥ô©ÎªÌ½}§K¬Y¬Y©xû¡A§A·|§ëÄò¥ô¡B½}§K¡B©w±óÅv²¼¡H¡v²¦Ó¨¥¤§¡A°Ý¨÷³]p¬OnºÉ¶q¹º¤@·§©À¦Ó¤Sn²Å¦X¹ê»Ú»Ýn¡C(ªìª©¡G2006¦~2¤ë9¤é·s»D¤½³ø¤§ªþ¥[¸ê®Æ) A¡G"Support rate", "approval rate" and "vote of confidence/dismissal" used in this release are just a general expressions. One should always look at the exact wordings used in the questionnaire. To measure the support rate of the CE, we used this question -- "If a general election of the Chief Executive were to be held tomorrow, and you had the right to vote, would you vote for Donald Tsang Yam-kuen?" To measure the support rate of the principal officials, we used this question -- "If you had the right to vote on the reappointment or dismissal of a certain official tomorrow, how would you vote?" Put it in simple terms, we have tried our best to use the same concept modified to suit different situations. (First release: Supplementary section of our press release of 9 February 2006) |
¡@ | ¡@ |
![]() |
°Ý¡G³Ì·s½Õ¬d¤¤¯Sºªº¤ä«ù²v¦³73%¡A¤Ï¹ï²v¦³9%¡A©â¼Ë»~®t+/-3%¡A¬O§_ªí¥Ü¥Lªº¡u¹ê½è¡v¤ä«ù²v¬O70%¦Ü76%¡A¡u¹ê½è¡v¤Ï¹ï²v¬O6%¦Ü12%¡H Q¡GCE's support rate in the latest survey is 73%, objection rate 9%, sampling error being +/-3%, does this mean that his "real" support rate is 70% to 76%, and his "real" objection rate is 6% to 12%? µª¡G³o¬O«D±`²¤Æªººtö¡C¥H95%¸m«H¤ô¥pºâ¡A©â¼Ë»~®t+/-3ӦʤÀ¤ñ¥u¥X²{¦b¬Y¶µ¼Æ¦rªñ¥G50%ªº®ÉÔ¡C·í¼Æ¦r°¾¦V¨â·¥¡A©â¼Ë»~®t«K·|¬Û¹ï´î¤Ö¡C¥H1,015Ӽ˥»pºâ¡AŪ¼Æ¬O73%®É¡A©â¼Ë»~®t¬O+/-2.8ӦʤÀ¤ñ¡FŪ¼Æ¬O9%®É¡A©â¼Ë»~®t¬O+/-1.8ӦʤÀ¤ñ¡C¦è¤è¶Ç´C±`¥Î¤§¡u»~®t´T«×¡v¡]margin of error¡^¡A¥u¬O¹D¥X³Ì¤j»~®tªº¬ù¼Æ¡AÀ³¥Î¨ì°¾¤j©Î°¾¤pªº¦Ê¤À¼Æ®É¡A¶·n¾A·í½Õ¾ã¡C(ªìª©¡G2006¦~4¤ë25¤é·s»D¤½³ø¤§ªþ¥[¸ê®Æ) A¡GThis is oversimplification. Using 95% as the confidence level, sampling errors of +/-3 percentage points only occur when certain figures reach about 50%. For figures near the two extremes, sampling errors are smaller. For a sample of 1,015 subjects, the sampling error for a figure at 73% is +/-2.8 percentage points, while the sampling error for a figure at 9% is +/-1.8 percentage points. The expression "margin of error" commonly used by the Western media is jus a simplified concept, it needs to be adjusted when applied to relatively large or small percentages. (First release: Supplementary section of our press release of 25 April 2006) |
¡@ | ¡@ |
![]() |
°Ý¡G¥i§_¶i¤@¨B»¡©ú¼Ë¥»¼Æ¥Ø¡B¦Ê¤À¤ñ¼Æ¦r©M©â¼Ë»~®tªºÃö«Y¡H Q¡GCan you further elaborate the relationship among sample size, percentages and sampling errors? µª¡G½Ð°Ñ¾\¡m¥Á·Nºô¯¸¡n¤¤¡u¥Á·N±MÄæ¡v©Ò¸ü¡uºu°Ê½Õ¬d¤p±`ÃÑ¡v¤@¤å¡Aµoªí©ó2004¦~9¤ë11¤é¡C(ªìª©¡G2006¦~4¤ë25¤é·s»D¤½³ø¤§ªþ¥[¸ê®Æ) A¡GPlease refer to the article "The Basics of Rolling Polls" carried in "POP Column" of the "HKU POP SITE". The article was published on September 11, 2004. (First release: Supplementary section of our press release of 25 April 2006) |
¡@ | ¡@ |
![]() |
°Ý¡G©â¼Ë½Õ¬d¥i¥H¦p¦óÁ×§K¨t²Î©Ê°¾®t¡H Q¡GHow can systematic biases be eliminated in sample surveys? µª¡G§ÚÌ¥i¯à¥Ã»·µLªkÁ×§K°¾®t¡A¦ý§ÚÌ¥i¥HºÉ¶q§â¥¦´î¨ì³Ì§C¡C¥Á¬ãp¹ºªº¹q¸Ü½Õ¬d¡A·|¥ý±q¦í¤á¹q¸Ü¸¹½X襤©â¨ú¹q¸Ü¸¹½X¡AµM«á¦A±q¥Ø¼Ð¦í¤á¤¤¥H¥X¥Í¤é´Á©â¨ú¤@¤H±µ¨ü³X°Ý¡C²z½×¤W¡A³oÓ©â¼Ë¬[¤w¸g¨ç»\¤F©Ò¦³»´ä©~¥Á¡C¤£¹L¡A´ú¸Õ¼Ë¥»¥Nªí©Êªº³Ì¦n¤èªk¡A´N¬O¤ñ¸û¼Ë¥»©M¥ÀÅ骺¤H¤f¯S©Ê¡A³q±`¥]¬A©Ê§O¡B¦~ÄÖ¡B±Ð¨|µ{«×¡B©Ð«ÎÃþ«¬¡B¾·~¡B¦a°ì¤À§Gµ¥µ¥¡C¥Á¬ãp¹º¦b©Ò¦³½Õ¬d³ø§i©Mµo©ñ¤¤¡A³£·|¥æ¥N¦³Ãö¸ê®Æ¡C(ªìª©¡G2006¦~5¤ë16¤é·s»D¤½³ø¤§ªþ¥[¸ê®Æ) A¡GWe may never be able to eliminate all biases, but we can minimize them. For HKUPOP telephone surveys, we randomly sample telephone numbers from household telephone directories, and then select one respondent from a target household using the "next birthday rule". Theoretically, our sampling frame covers everyone in Hong Kong. The best way to examine the representativeness of a sample is to compare its demographic profile with that of the target population, usually in terms of gender, age, education attainment, housing type, occupation, geographical distribution and so on. Such profiles are always given in HKUPOP survey reports and releases. (First release: Supplementary section of our press release of 16 May 2006) |
¡@ | ¡@ |
![]() |
°Ý¡G¬°¤°»ò¤£¥H±M®a·N¨£¨ú¥NÉ]¥Á·N¨£¡H Q¡GWhy not interview experts and professionals instead of members of the general public? µª¡G§Ú̦³®É¤]·|½Õ¬d±M®aªº·N¨£¡C¤£¹L¡A±M®a©MÉ]¥Áªº·N¨£©l²×Äݩ󤣦P¼h¦¸¡A¤£¯à¤¬¬Û´À¥N¡C¦b¥Á¥DªÀ·|¤¤¡A«n¨Æ±¡©¹©¹³Ì²×¬O¥Ñ¤H¥Á§ë²¼¨M©w¡C¦]¦¹¡AµL½×±M®a·N¨£¦p¦ó¡AÁ`n¤£®É±´°QÉ]¥Áªº·N¨£©M»Ýn¡C(ªìª©¡G2006¦~5¤ë16¤é·s»D¤½³ø¤§ªþ¥[¸ê®Æ) A¡GWe sometimes do. However, expert and public opinions belong to different levels and they cannot replace each other. In democratic societies where important issues are ultimately decided by the popular vote, it is important to study from time to time what the public wants, in spite of what the experts say. (First release: Supplementary section of our press release of 16 May 2006) |
¡@ | ¡@ |
![]() |
°Ý¡G¦³¨S¦³¡u²z·Q¡vªº¤ä«ù²v¡H Q¡GIs there an "ideal" support rate? µª¡G¥»Äæ±q¤µ¤Ñ¶}©l·|¦]À³½Õ¬d¼Æ¾Ú¤£®É°Q½×³oÓ°ÝÃD¡C¯Sº´¿½®Åvªº³Ì·s¥Á·N¤ä«ù²v¬O66%¡A¥¿¬O°Q½×³oÓ¸ÜÃDªº¦n®É¾÷¡C¯Sº¤£¬O´¶¿ï²£¥Í¡A¥Á±æ¤ä«ù²vªº·§©À»P¤@¯ë¥Á¥DªÀ·|¤£¦P¡C¼È¥B¤£½Í¥Á·N¤ä«ù²v»P¥Á¥D¿ïÁ|µ²ªGªºÃö«Y¡A¦pªG¥Á·N¤ä«ù²v¥i¥Hª½±µ¤Æ¦¨¿ï²¼¡A«h¤T¤À¤§¤Gµ´¹ï¤ä«ù²v¡A§Y67%¡AÀ³¥iµø¬°¤@¯ë¾Ë¨în¨Dªº³Ì°ª¼Ð·Ç¡C¯Sº´¿½®Åvªº³Ì·s¤ä«ù²vèè¶^¥X³oӼзǡA¦b¤ÀªR¤W¦³¤@©w·N¸q¡C·íµM¡A²Îp¤Wªº°¸µMµ²ªG¡B¡u±óÅv¡v·N¨£ªº§@¥Î¡B¡u¤ä«ù«×¡v»P¡u¤ä«ù²v¡vªºÃö«Yµ¥¦]¯À¡A³£·|¼vÅT¦³Ãö¤ÀªR¡A¥»Äæ¤é«á·|¸ò¶i°Q½×¡C(ªìª©¡G2006¦~7¤ë25¤é·s»D¤½³ø¤§ªþ¥[¸ê®Æ) A¡GWe will tackle this question every now and then in this section in light of survey findings. The latest support rate of CE Donald Tsang is 66%, which is opportune moment to discuss this question. To start with, our CE is not returned by universal suffrage, so our idea of support rate differs from that in normal democratic societies. Brushing aside the connection between support rate in opinion polls and actual election results, and assuming that our support rate figures can be converted to vote shares, then two-thirds majority, or 67%, can be taken as the ultimate test for all constitutional requirements. The fact that CE Donald Tsang's support rate has just dropped behind that standard has a special meaning conceptually. Of course, whether this is just a statistical coincidence, the meaning of "abstention", and the connections between "support ratings" and "support rates", are also important factors to be considered. We will discuss them here in future. (First release: Supplementary section of our press release of 25 July 2006) |
¡@ | ¡@ |
![]() |
°Ý¡G¡u²z·Q¡v©M¡u¦¨¥\¡v¤ä«ù²vªºt±°ò·Ç¬O¤°»ò¡H Q¡GAre there other benchmarks of popularity other than "ideal" and "successful", "depressing" and "disastrous"? µª¡G¥»Äæ¦b2006¦~7¤ë25¤é©M8¤ë8¤éªº¤½³ø¤¤¤À§O°Q½×¤F¡u²z·Q¡v©M¡u¦¨¥\¡v¤ä«ù²vªº°ÝÃD¡A«ü¥X¦pªG¥Á·N¤ä«ù²v¥i¥Hª½±µ¤Æ¦¨¿ï²¼¡A«h¤T¤À¤§¤Gµ´¹ï¤ä«ù²v¡A§Y67%¡AÀ³¥iµø¬°¡u²z·Q¡vªº¤ä«ù²v¡A¦Ó¥b¼Æ¥H¤Wªºµ´¹ï¤ä«ù²v¡A§Y50%¥H¤W¡A«h¥iµø¬°¡u¦¨¥\¡v¤ä«ù²v¡C¤Ï¹L¨Ó»¡¡A¦pªG¥Á·N½}§K²v¹F¨ì50¢H©Î67¢H¥H¤W¡A«h¤À§O¥i¥Hµø¬°¡u«Ü®t¡v©M¡u·¥®t¡vªº¥Á±æ°ò·Ç¡C»P¡u²z·Q¡v©M¡u¦¨¥\¡v©IÀ³¡A¥i¥H¥Î¡u©å¦H¡v©M¡u¥¢±Ñ¡v¨Ó§Î®e¡C·íµM¡A²Îp¤Wªº°¸µMµ²ªG¡B¡u±óÅv¡v·N¨£ªº§@¥Î¡B¡u¤ä«ù«×¡v»P¡u¤ä«ù²v¡vªºÃö«Yµ¥¦]¯À¡A³£·|¼vÅT¦³Ãö¤ÀªR¡A¥»Äæ¤é«á·|Ä~Äò°Q½×¡C(ªìª©¡G2006¦~8¤ë29¤é·s»D¤½³ø¤§ªþ¥[¸ê®Æ) A¡GWe discussed the concepts of these four benchmarks in our releases of July 25, August 8 and 29, 2006, so they are not repeated here. Today's discussion is how to benchmark some officials' performance if they are not known by the people over a long period of time, meaning that the summation of their popularity support and disapproval rates is lower than 50%, and none of the 4 benchmarks has ever been achieved. According to our reasoning regarding the conversion of support rate figures into real votes, in many constitutions, less than 50% turnout in a referendum would make it invalid. We therefore deduce that if the total proportion of an official's "abstention" or "don't know" rates exceeds 50% in an opinion survey, then whatever the distribution of his/her "support" versus "disapproval" rates, he/she is not seen to be a capable official. (First release: Supplementary section of our press release of 29 August 2006) |
¡@ | ¡@ |
![]() |
°Ý¡G°£¤F¡u²z·Q¡v¡B¡u¦¨¥\¡v¡B¡u¥¢±Ñ¡v©M¡u©å¦H¡v¥~¡AÁÙ¦³¤°»ò¥Á±æ°ò·Ç¡H Q¡GAre there other benchmarks of popularity other than "ideal" and "successful", "depressing" and "disastrous"? µª¡G¥»Äæ¦b2006¦~7¤ë25¤é¡B8¤ë8¤é©M8¤ë29¤éªº¤½³ø¤¤°Q½×¤F¥H¤W¥|Ó°ò·Ç¡A¦b¦¹¤£ÂØ¡C¤µ¦^°Q½×ªº¡A¬OÕY¦³©xûªø´Á¤£³QÉ]¥Á»{ÃÑ¡A¥Á·N¤ä«ù²v©M½}§K²v¦Xp°_¨Ó³£§C©ó50¢H¡A¥ç§Y¬O»¡¥H¤W¥|Ó°ò·ÇµL¤@¹F¨ì¡A¥L¬OÄÝ©ó«ç»ò¼Ëªº©xû¡C®Ú¾Ú§ÚÌ¥H¥Á·N¤ä«ù²v¤Æ¦¨¿ï²¼ªº±À²z¡A¦b¤£¤Ö¾Ë¨î¤¤¡A§C©ó50¢H§ë²¼²vªº¥þ¥Áªí¨M·|³Qµø¬°ªí¨MµL®Ä¡C¥H¦¹±À²z¡A¦b¥Á±æ½Õ¬d¤¤¡A¦pªG¬Y©xûªº¡u±óÅv¡v¡B¡u¤£ª¾¹D¡vµ¥¤ñ²v¦Xp¶W¹L50¢H¡A«h¤£½×¥Lªº¡u¤ä«ù¡v»P¡u½}§K¡v¤ñ²v¦p¦ó¤À§G¡A¥L³£¬O¤@Ó¡u¤£Åã±oºÙ¾¡vªº©xû¡C(ªìª©¡G2006¦~9¤ë12¤é·s»D¤½³ø¤§ªþ¥[¸ê®Æ) A¡GWe discussed the concepts of these four benchmarks in our releases of July 25, August 8 and 29, 2006, so they are not repeated here. Today's discussion is how to benchmark some officials' performance if they are not known by the people over a long period of time, meaning that the summation of their popularity support and disapproval rates is lower than 50%, and none of the 4 benchmarks has ever been achieved. According to our reasoning regarding the conversion of support rate figures into real votes, in many constitutions, less than 50% turnout in a referendum would make it invalid. We therefore deduce that if the total proportion of an official's "abstention" or "don't know" rates exceeds 50% in an opinion survey, then whatever the distribution of his/her "support" versus "disapproval" rates, he/she is not seen to be a capable official. (First release: Supplementary section of our press release of 12 September 2006) |
¡@ | ¡@ |
![]() |
°Ý¡G¥H¥Á·N¤ä«ù²vp¡A¦b³Ì·s½Õ¬d¤¤¡A¯Sº©M¦U°Ý³d©xûªº¥Á±æ¥i¥H¥Î¤°»ò°ò·Ç¨Ó§Î®e¡H Q¡GIn HKUPOP's latest survey, judging from government officials' support rates alone, how can we describe the popularity of the CE and the principal officials using various benchmarks? µª¡GÃö©ó©xû¥Á±æ°ò·Çªº°ÝÃD¡A¥»Äæ¦b2006¦~7¤ë25¤é¡B8¤ë8¤é¡B8¤ë29¤é¡B9¤ë12¤é©M9¤ë26¤é¤w¸g°Q½×¤F¤Ó°ò·Ç¡A¥]¬A¡u²z·Q¡v¡B¡u¦¨¥\¡v¡B¡u¥¢±Ñ¡v¡B¡u©å¦H¡v©M¡u¤£¹ü¡v¡A¦b¦¹¤£ÂØ¡C¤µ¤é°Q½×ªº¡A¬O¦p¦ó§â¥H¤W°ò·ÇÀ³¥Î¦b³Ì·sªº½Õ¬d¤W¡C¼Æ¾ÚÅã¥Ü¡A¦b10¤ëªì¡A«O¦w§½§½ªø§õ¤Ö¥úªº¤ä«ù²v¶W¹L66¢H¡AÄÝ©óªí²{¡u²z·Q¡v¡F«ß¬F¥q¥qªø¶À¤¯Às¡B¯Sº´¿½®Åv¡B°]¬F¥q¥qªøð^¦~¡B¤ÎÀô¹Ò¹B¿é¤Î¤u°È§½§½ªø¹ù¨q¥Vªº¤ä«ù²v¶W¹L50¢H¡AÄÝ©óªí²{¡u¦¨¥\¡v¡F¤½°Èû¨Æ°È§½§½ªø«\©v©É¡B¤u°Ó¤Î¬ì§Þ§½§½ªø¤ý¥Ã¥¡B¤Î¬F°È¥q¥qªø³\¥K¤¯ªº¤ä«ù©M¤Ï¹ï²v¦Xp¤£¨¬50¢H¡AÄÝ©óªí²{¡u¤£¹ü¡v¡F¨ä¾l©xûªºªí²{¤¶¥G¡u¦¨¥\¡v»P¡u¥¢±Ñ¡v¤§¶¡¡AÄÝ©óªí²{¡u¤@¯ë¡v¡A¥]¬A¸gÀÙµo®i¤Î³Ò¤u§½§½ªø¸æ@ûi¡B½Ã¥ÍºÖ§Q¤Î¹ª«§½§½ªø©P¤@À®¡B±Ð¨|²ÎÄw§½§½ªø§õ°ê³¹¡B°]¸g¨Æ°È¤Î®w°È§½§½ªø°¨®É¦ë¡B¥Á¬F¨Æ°È§½§½ªø¦ó§Ó¥¡B©Ð«Î¤Î³W¹º¦a¬F§½§½ªø®]©ú´¡B¤Î¬F¨î¨Æ°È§½§½ªøªL·çÅï¡C¥H10¤ëªìp¡A¨S¦³©xûªºªí²{ÄÝ©ó¡u¥¢±Ñ¡v©ÎªÌ¡u©å¦H¡v¡C(ªìª©¡G2006¦~10¤ë10¤é·s»D¤½³ø¤§ªþ¥[¸ê®Æ) A¡GIn our press releases of July 25, August 8 and 29, September 12 and 26, 2006, we discussed five benchmarks of popularity, namely, "ideal", "successful", "depressing", "disastrous" and "inconspicuous". We will not repeat the discussion here, but we will apply them to our latest survey findings. In early October, the support rate of Secretary for Security Ambrose Lee exceeds 66%, his performance can be labeled as "ideal". The support rates of SJ Wong Yan-lung, CE Donald Tsang, FS Henry Tang and Secretary for the Environment, Transport and Works Sarah Liao all exceed 50%, their performance can be labeled as "successful". The combined support and disapproval rates of Secretary for the Civil Service Denise Yue, Secretary for the Commerce, Industry and Technology Joseph Wong and CS Rafael Hui do not reach 50%, their performance can be labeled as "inconspicuous". The performance of all other officials range between "successful" and "depressing", they can be labeled as just "mediocre". They include Secretary for Economic Development and Labour Stephen Ip, Secretary for Health, Welfare and Food York Chow, Secretary for Education and Manpower Arthur Li, Secretary for Financial Services and the Treasury Frederick Ma, Secretary for Home Affairs Patrick Ho, Secretary for Housing, Planning and Lands Michael Suen, and Secretary for Constitutional Affairs Stephen Lam. In early October, no official falls under the categories of "depressing" or "disastrous". (First release: Supplementary section of our press release of 10 October 2006) |
¡@ | ¡@ |