其他議題:項目簡介
Other Issues:A brief Description
 
   
本項目簡介會隨著社會變化和大眾需要而不斷更新
The content of this page will be updated from time to time to match societal changes and community needs.
 
民研計劃如何面對外界的批評?
How does HKUPOP face external criticisms?
 
政治團體評分調查簡介
Rating and ranking political groups
 
巿民最熟悉政治人物調查簡介
People's most familiar political figures survey
 
巿民對整體立法會議員、香港警隊及駐港解放軍表現調查簡介
People's satisfaction with the performance of Legislative Council members, Hong Kong Police Force and PLA's Hong Kong Garrison survey
 
 
民研計劃如何面對外界的批評?

以性質而論,外界的批評一般可以分為善意批評和惡意中傷兩種。善意批評一般可以透過平和的討論和資料交代慢慢解決。作為一門科學,任何民意調查總有錯誤和不足的地方,民研計劃絕對不會掩飾任何錯誤和研究動機,亦不會把失誤的責任轉嫁給任何合作機構。當然,所有委託和合作機構都要事先同意民研計劃的獨立設計和操作權利,否則免問。

至於含政治動機的惡意中傷,則是屬於百辭莫辯。舉例說,調查顯示某君在選舉中形勢佔先。要是某君選舉落敗,就算差異是在調查誤差之內,批評者會不斷攻擊調查失誤;要是某君選舉成功,批評者又會攻擊調查是為某君造勢,改寫結果。再舉一例,如果民研計劃是接受政府或大學撥款,批評者會謂民研計劃誤用公帑,但當知道民研計劃是自負盈虧時,又會質疑民研計劃不應隸屬香港大學。這些都是屬於莫須有的罪名,屢見不鮮。

民研計劃一向的做法,是不論批評是否善意,只要是批評者署上真實姓名,我們都會盡量回覆。不過,民研計劃始終是一個學術研究機構,我們沒有太多資源處理公關事務。我們只希望有一個寧靜的環境進行我們的工作。

(初版:2006年7月6日新聞公報之附加資料)

How does HKUPOP face external criticisms?

By nature, external criticisms can be categorized as of good will and cheap shots. Criticisms with good will can normally be resolved through peaceful discussion and information dissemination. As a science, all opinion surveys have their shortcomings, and possibly errors as well. POP never hides our mistakes and objectives of conducting any research, and we will not shift the responsibility of any mistake to our partners. Of course, all our partners and commissioning organizations have to give consent to POP's autonomy and independence in advance, otherwise there would not be any partnership in the first place.

As for the cheap shots with political intentions, counter-debate is meaningless. For example, a survey may show that a candidate is doing well in an election. If this candidate loses the election in the end, even if the difference falls within sampling errors, critics would constantly attack us for being inaccurate. On the other hand, if this candidate wins at the end, the same critics would attack us for campaigning for the candidate, and for reversing the result ought-to-be. Take another example, if POP receives funding from the government or the University, critics would say that POP should not use public money. However, having known that POP is self-funded, they would say that POP should not be part of the University. These accusations are tautologies which require no hard facts, and there are plenty of them.

POP's general practice is to answer all criticisms as much as possible regardless of their intentions, as long as they come along with their true names. However, we are just an academic research institute, with very little resources to handle public relation matters. All we want is a quiet environment to continue our work.

(First release: Supplementary section of our press release of 6 July 2006)

 

     
政治團體評分調查簡介

在世界各地,以民意調查監察政黨表現是非常普遍的做法,但香港沒有政黨法,當年如是,現在如是,政黨的定義非常含糊,而有關團體亦經常消長更替,要以科學或法理基礎界定政黨有一定困難。解決方法可有三種:第一,由團體自己界定,自稱政黨者便是政黨,自稱不是政黨者便不是政黨。第二,由巿民界定,公認為政黨者便是政黨。第三,以最廣義的角度針對政治團體作出研究分析,刻意迴避政黨和一般政團的分別。 
  • 民研計劃開展的政治團體評分調查,便是結合第二和第三種方法,首先篩選出香港巿民最熟悉的政治團體,然後逐個評分,再作排名。民研計劃初時以『五大政團』方式公佈調查結果,及後改以『十大政團』方式公佈,以配合香港的政治發展,詳情如下: 
  • 1991年7月至1992年11月期間,政治團體的調查以不定期方式進行,而把調查分為提名和評分兩個階段的方法於1992年11月開始正式確立。 
  • 提名調查的提問方式為「請你講出你最認識的若干個政治團體?」,乃可答多項題,而評分調查的提問方式則為「請你用0-100分評價你對某某政治團體既支持程度,0分代表絕對唔支持,100分代表絕對支持,50分代表一半半,你會俾幾多分某某政治團體呢?」 
  • 1993年3月開始,調查每兩個月進行一次,直至2000年11月,調查改為每三個月一次,迄今不變。
  • 1999年6月起,『五大政團』亦改以『十大政團』形式進行,並沿用至今。 
  • 樣本數目方面,1991年7月至2000年4月期間,所有提名和評分調查的樣本數目都稍為超過500個。在2000年5月以後,有關調查的樣本數目就增加至1,000個以上。 
  • 民研計劃開展的政治團體評分調查,早期在當年的政經刊物《東週刊》發表,及後則是透過民研計劃的傳真發表。及至1996年,民研計劃發行《民意快訊》,調查結果順利成章透過《民意快訊》發表。及至2000年6月《民意網站》成立後,所有調查數據便在同年11月開始透過網站向外公佈,而以往透過民研計劃刊物《民意快訊》發表的調查結果,亦以不同形式上載到網站之中。 

民研計劃創立的『五大政團』和『十大政團』評分調查,方法上與『十大立法會議員』、『五大行政會議成員』、『十大兩岸政治人物』等調查完全一致。篇幅所限,該等調查將留待日後再作介紹。

(初版:2006年8月24日新聞公報之附加資料)

Rating and ranking political groups

The rating and ranking of local political groups were among the earliest surveys conducted by HKUPOP. Our first exercise was conducted in July 1991, shortly after our establishment in June 1991.

Elsewhere in the world, it is very natural to monitor the performance of political parties by means of public opinion polling. However, here in Hong Kong, political parties were not, and are not, legal entities. People use vague definitions, and the so-called political groups are constantly evolving. As a result, it would be rather difficult to define political parties in a scientific or legal way. There are apparently three ways to solve this problem. First, let it be defined by the organizations themselves, meaning that those and only those who claimed themselves to be political parties would be treated as political parties. Second, let it be defined by the people, that those considered by the general public as parties would be treated as parties. Third, to avoid the problem by adopting the wider definition of political groups, instead of political parties, when conducting studies.

  • The surveys on political groups started by HKUPOP basically combine the second and third methods mentioned above. We first screen out the best known political groups recognized by the public, then rate each of them, and then rank them. We first branded our findings as "top 5 political groups" and then as "top 10 political groups" in order to keep pace with Hong Kong's political development. Herewith the details of such surveys: 
  • Between July 1991 and November 1992, our surveys of political groups were conducted on an ad hoc basis. However, we have only consolidated our research design, which comprises separate naming and rating surveys in two stages, from November 1992 onwards. 
  • In the naming stage, the wordings used in the questionnaire are "Please name up to a certain number of political groups that you are most familiar with." and multiple responses are allowed. In the rating stage, the question used is "Please use a scale of 0-100 to rate your extent of support to a certain group, with 0 indicating absolutely not supportive, 100 indicating absolutely supportive and 50 indicating half-half. How would you rate this group?" 
  • Starting from March 1993, the surveys were conducted once every two months but in November 2000, its frequency was changed to once every three months. It has remained unchanged since then. 
  • Since June 1999, the branding "top 5 political groups" was also changed to "top 10 political groups" which is still being used today. 
  • Regarding sample size, between July 1991 and April 2000, the sample size of all naming and rating surveys was set at slightly over 500. From May 2000 onwards, it was increased to at least 1,000. 
  • Our first findings of our political group surveys were published in the East Week, which was a magazine on political and economic affairs then. We later published our findings by fax. Then in 1996, HKUPOP published our newsletter POP Express, which naturally carried our findings on this topic. After our HKU POP Site was established in June 2000, we switched to an on-line mode of release after November that year, while all previous findings published in our POP Express were also uploaded on-line in various formats. 
  • In terms of research design, our "top 5 political groups", "top 10 political groups", "top 10 members of Legco", "top 5 members of Exco", "top 10 cross-strait political leaders" and so on, are all the same. In view of limited space, we will explain those surveys at another date.

(First release: Supplementary section of our press release of 24 August 2006)

 

     
巿民最熟悉政治人物調查簡介

民研計劃早於1994年4月,已經開始定期進行「十大政治人物」調查,以便了解香港巿民對本地政治人物的認識。與其他「十大」和「五大」系列一樣,民研計劃認為研究政治人物是基於民意研究者的一種社會責任,並非基於任何政治取向。以下集中介紹有關調查的發展: 
  • 民研計劃在1994年4月,首次展開「十大政治人物」的提名及評分調查,分析範圍包括香港巿民對本地政治人物的認知和支持程度。由於「十大政治人物」於後期已漸漸分拆成為不同系列的調查,包括特首及各問責制主要官員的民望調查、十大立法會議員調查、巿民最熟悉行政會議非官守議員調查、和十大特區政府籌備委員等,為了避免重覆調查內容,以及騰出更多空間及資源發展其他研究項目,由2005年10月開始至今,調查只集中紀錄和分析巿民的「提名」結果。至於評分方面,則只會針對在「提名」調查中位列前10面而又沒有在其他評分系列中出現的政治人物,再作補充評分調查。此外,跟以往「十大政治人物」調查不同,「巿民最熟悉政冶人物」每次調查都會得出第1至50的排名,又會累積分析過去10次接近5年調查的平均排名,以顯示有關政治人物在巿民心目中,比較長期的起起跌跌。
  • 「巿民最熟悉政冶人物」的前身「十大政治人物」調查,由開始至1999年12月都是每四個月進行一次,之後漸次改為每半年進行一次,以配合社會的發展。在1994年期間所進行的調查,提問方式為「請你講出最認識的十個政客」。及至1995年或以後的所有調查,提問方式變成「請你講出你最認識的十個政治人物」。
  • 樣本數目方面,由調查開始至2000年4月,樣本數目都稍為超過500個,2000年10月或以後有關調查的樣本數目就增加至1,000個以上。
  • 民研計劃於1996年9月或以後所進行的調查,結果都在由民研計劃發行的《民意快訊》中發表。及至2000年6月《民意網站》成立後,有關調查今日首次透過網站向外公佈,而以往透過民研計劃刊物《民意快訊》發表的調查結果,亦以不同形式上載到網站之中。

(初版:2006年10月24日新聞公報之附加資料)

People's most familiar political figures survey

HKUPOP conducted the first "Top 10 political figures naming survey" in April 1994, in order to study people's knowledge with political figures. Same as other "Top 10" and "Top 5" series, we take it to be part of our social responsibility to conduct such surveys, not because of any political preferences. The development of this series of surveys is as follows: 

  • In April 1994, HKUPOP began our regular naming and rating surveys of "Top 10 political figures", including Hong Kong people's recognition and extent of support towards different local political figures. Because we have gradually developed over time many rating surveys which covered the ratings of CE and Principal Officials under the accountability system, the top 10 Legislative Councillors, people's most familiar non-official members of the Executive Council, the top 10 members of the HKSARG Preparatory Committee, and so on, in order to avoid duplications and to spare more resources and manpower for other survey topics, in October 2005, we decided to concentrate only on recording and analyzing the "naming" results. As for the rating part, we decided only to conduct supplementary rating surveys on those who are listed among the top 10 most popular figures but who are not covered in our other rating surveys. Besides, as different from the other "Top 10" rating series, we also introduced rankings from 1 to 50 for "people's most familiar political figures", as well as average accumulative rankings calculated from the past 10 surveys which spanned over nearly five years, in order to indicate the ups-and-downs of these political figures in the long run.
  • From the beginning to December 1999, our "Top 10 political figures" survey, the forerunner of our "most familiar political figures" survey, was conducted once every 4 months. It was then gradually changed to once every 6 months in order to match with society's development. The question wordings used in the 1994 surveys were: "Please name up to 10 politicians that you are most familiar with." From 1995 onwards, they were changed to: "Please name up to 10 political figures that you are most familiar with." 
  • Regarding sample size, from the beginning to April 2000, the sample size was set at slightly over 500. From October 2000 onwards, it was increased to at least 1,000.
  • The findings of "Top 10 political figures" surveys since September 1996 were published in our newsletter POP Express. After our HKU POP Site was established in June 2000, this survey is released online today for the first time, while previous findings published in our POP Express have also been uploaded on-line in various formats.

(First release: Supplementary section of our press release of 24 October 2006)

 

     
巿民對整體立法會議員、香港警隊及駐港解放軍表現調查簡介

有關巿民對整體立法會議員表現調查的發展過程,我們在2006年10月3日的新聞公報中已有介紹,今日我們集中介紹關於市民對香港警隊及駐港解放軍表現調查的發展,同時亦把巿民對整體立法會議員表現調查的發展略加刪剪後並列刊登,以便讀者能夠更加全面掌握這些相關調查的發展。

(1) 巿民對整體立法會議員表現調查的發展 
  • 特區政府第一屆立法會在回歸後一年成立,民研計劃隨即在1998年7月開始調查市民對「第一屆」立法會議員表現的滿意程度。兩年之後,第二屆立法會成立,雖然調查名稱於2000年11月順理成章由「第一屆」改為「第二屆」,但調查內容沒有改變。及至2004年10月,「第三屆立法會議員」的組成再次取替「第二屆」的調查。「第一屆」調查由開始至完結都是每一個月進行一次,及至「第二屆」的調查頻率於開始至2003年7月已改為每兩個月進行一次,之後更漸次改為每三個月進行一次,頻率沿用至今,以配合社會的發展。
  • 所有「整體立法會議員」調查的提問方式為「你對特區第X屆立法會成員既整體表現滿唔滿意?」,而被訪者就整體立法會議員的整體滿意程度,選答「非常滿意」、「幾滿意」、「一半半」、「幾唔滿意」或「非常不滿」。 

(2) 巿民對香港警隊及駐港解放軍表現調查的發展 

  • 民研計劃在九七回歸後隨即開始調查市民對香港警隊及駐港解放軍表現的滿意程度。調查頻率於1997年7月開始為每月一次,至2000年9月已改為每兩個月進行一次,之後由2003年10月起更改為每三個月進行一次,頻率沿用至今,以配合社會的發展。
  • 所有「香港警隊及駐港解放軍表現」調查的提問方式為「你對香港警隊/駐港解放軍既整體表現滿唔滿意?」,而被訪者就香港警隊/駐港解放軍的整體滿意程度,選答「非常滿意」、「幾滿意」、「一半半」、「幾唔滿意」或「非常不滿」。 
    在2000年5月前,我們每次定期調查的樣本數目都稍為超過500個,以後就增加至每次起碼1,000個,上述調查亦不例外。上述所有調查數據,現已全部透過《港大民意網站》定期公佈,而以往透過民研計劃刊物《民意快訊》發表的調查結果,亦已不同形式上載到網站之中。

(初版:2007年1月2日新聞公報之附加資料)

People's satisfaction with the performance of Legislative Council members, Hong Kong Police Force and PLA's Hong Kong Garrison survey

Regarding the development of our surveys on people's satisfaction with the performance of Legislative Council members, we have explained it in our press release of October 3, 2006. Today, we introduce the development of our surveys on people's satisfaction with the Hong Kong Police Force and PLA's Hong Kong Garrison, and piece together after some nominal editing the development of surveys on people's satisfaction with the performance of Legislative Council members, in order to give readers a more comprehensive picture of such developments. 

(1) Mapping people's satisfaction with the performance of Legislative Council members 

  • The First Legislative Council of the HKSAR was formed one year after the handover of Hong Kong. In July 1998, HKUPOP began our regular surveys on people's satisfaction with the performance of Legislative Council members in general. When the Second Legislative Council was formed two years later, we simply changed the name of the survey from "First Legco" to "Second Legco", without changing the research design. In October 2004, the "Third Legco" subsequently replaced the "Second Legco". From the beginning to its end, the "First Legco" surveys were conducted once every month. For the "Second Legco" surveys, the frequency was changed to once every two months until July 2003. Thereafter, the "Third Legco" surveys are conducted once every three months to cope with the changing social conditions. 
  • The question wordings used in the questionnaire are "Are you satisfied with the overall performance of the members of HKSAR Legislative Council?". Interviewers then probed respondents' degree of satisfaction and respondents could choose a single response ranged from "very satisfied", "quite satisfied", "half-half", "not quite satisfied" to "very dissatisfied". 

(2) Mapping people's satisfaction with the performance of the Hong Kong Police Force and PLA's Hong Kong Garrison 

  • Shortly after the handover of Hong Kong in July 1997, HKUPOP began our regular surveys on people's satisfaction with the performance of the Hong Kong Police Force and PLA's Hong Kong Garrison. From the beginning, the surveys were conducted once every month. Then in September 2000 the frequency was changed to once every two months. Since October 2003, the surveys have been conducted once every three months to cope with the changing social conditions. 
  • The question wordings used in the questionnaire are "Are you satisfied with the performance of the Hong Kong Police Force / People's Liberation Army Hong Kong Garrison?" Interviewers then probed respondents' degree of satisfaction and respondents could choose a single response ranged from "very satisfied", "quite satisfied", "half-half", "not quite satisfied" to "very dissatisfied". 

Before May 2000, the sample size of our regular surveys was set at slightly over 500, we increased it to at least 1,000 after that. The above surveys are no exceptions. The findings of these surveys are now published regularly on-line at our HKU POP Site, while all previous findings published via our newsletter POP Express have also been uploaded on-line in various formats.

(First release: Supplementary section of our press release of 2 January 2007)

 

     
     


本網站內一切內容與香港大學立場無關。民意專欄內的文章及民意平台內的言論及法律責任由作者自負,其餘內容則由民意研究計劃總監鍾庭耀博士負責。網站所載資料,包括問卷提問方式及各份研究報告,除非特別註明,知識產權皆由香港大學民意研究計劃擁有後,透過本網站向外全面開放。各界人士使用有關資料時,敬請註明出處。

香港大學民意研究計劃版權所有。 本網站由[email protected] 製作。最後更新 :  30/12/2011