2019年12月6日香港民意研究所發佈會 – 傳媒參考資料
發佈會回顧
民研計劃發放香港紀律部隊及駐港解放軍民望數字
特別宣佈
- 香港民意研究計劃（香港民研）前身為香港大學民意研究計劃（港大民研）。公報內的「民研計劃」指的可以是香港民研或其前身港大民研。
- 民研計劃在每年的年中及年底前，會分別發放《特區成立週年》和《年終回顧前瞻》調查系列，供大眾參考。由於香港回歸是在7月1日舉行，因此，以半年為總結的民調數字來審視香港社會的宏觀發展，可能會比以一年為總結的數字更加合適和準確。今日發放的香港紀律部隊及駐港解放軍民望系列是本年度的最後一次。
- 2019年尚餘發放的調查項目，有關公布日期暫定如下：
- 12月10日 (星期二) 特首及官員民望
- 12月17日 (星期二) 身份認同
- 12月20日 (星期五) 特首及政府民望
- 12月23日 (星期一) 社會現況評價及民情指數
- 12月30日 (星期一) 年終回顧
公報簡要
民研計劃於十一月底由真實訪問員以隨機抽樣電話訪問方式成功訪問了1,062名香港居民。結果顯示，市民對紀律部隊的滿意度排名第一至二位是消防處和醫療輔助隊，評分分別為80.5及80.2分。位列第三至八位的是政府飛行服務隊、海關、入境事務處、民眾安全服務隊、懲教署和廉政公署。最後，警務處的評分為35.3分，繼續是九個紀律部隊當中最低，當中有40%市民給予0分，滿意淨值為負38個百分點。紀律部隊之間的相對排名沒有太大變化。另外，市民對駐港解放軍的最新滿意度評分為44.2分，滿意淨值為正3個百分點。除醫療輔助隊外，全部紀律部隊及駐港解放軍的民望數字均顯著下跌，而除消防處、醫療輔助隊和入境事務處外，其他紀律部隊及駐港解放軍的評分皆創相關題目於2012或2013年開展以來新低，警務處及駐港解放軍的滿意淨值則創相關題目於1997年開展以來新低。調查的實效回應比率為67.7%。在95%置信水平下，調查的百分比誤差不超過+/-4%，淨值誤差不超過+/-7%，評分誤差不超過+/-3.2。
樣本資料
| 調查日期 | ： | 21-26/11/2019 |
| 調查方法 | ： | 由真實訪問員進行隨機抽樣電話訪問 |
| 訪問對象 | ： | 18歲或以上操粵語的香港居民 |
| 成功樣本數目 | ： | 1,062 (包括531個固網及531個手機樣本) |
| 實效回應比率[1] | ： | 67.7% |
| 抽樣誤差[2] | ： | 在95%置信水平下，百分比誤差不超過+/-4%，淨值誤差不超過+/-7%，評分誤差不超過+/-3.2 |
| 加權方法 | ： | 按照政府統計處提供的統計數字以「反覆多重加權法」作出調整。全港人口年齡及性別分佈統計數字來自《二零一八年年中人口數字》，而教育程度（最高就讀程度）及經濟活動身分統計數字則來自《香港的女性及男性 - 主要統計數字》（2018年版）。 |
[1] 民研計劃在2017年9月前以「整體回應比率」彙報樣本資料，2017年9月開始則以「實效回應比率」彙報。2018年7月，民研計劃再調整實效回應比率的計算方法，因此改變前後的回應比率不能直接比較。
[2] 此公報中所有誤差數字均以95%置信水平計算。95%置信水平，是指倘若以不同隨機樣本重複進行有關調查100次，則95次各自計算出的誤差範圍會包含人口真實數字。由於調查數字涉及抽樣誤差，傳媒引用百分比數字時，應避免使用小數點，在引用評分數字時，則可以使用一個小數點。
最新數據
以下是巿民對紀律部隊及駐港解放軍的最新滿意度評分：
| 調查日期 | 21-25/5/18 | 15-19/11/18 | 3-6/6/19 | 1-6/8/19 | 21-26/11/19 | 最新變化 | |
| 樣本數目 | 508-576 | 538-579 | 528-656 | 1,015 | 584-650 | -- | |
| 回應比率 | 55.9% | 67.9% | 60.4% | 62.8% | 67.7% | -- | |
| 最新結果[3] | 結果 | 結果 | 結果 | 結果 | 結果及誤差 | 認知率 | -- |
| 消防處 | 84.1{1} | 82.9{1} | 83.1{1} | -- | 80.5+/-1.5{1} | 99.2% | -2.7[4] |
| 醫療輔助隊 | 79.8{3} | 79.3{2} | 77.4{3} | -- | 80.2+/-1.5{2} | 96.1% | +2.8[4] |
| 政府飛行服務隊 | 79.9{2} | 78.8{3} | 77.9{2} | -- | 69.4+/-2.1{3} | 89.7% | -8.5[4] |
| 海關 | 75.6{4}[4] | 74.1{4} | 73.4{4} | -- | 68.7+/-1.6{4} | 95.1% | -4.7[4] |
| 入境事務處 | 73.7{5} | 71.5{6}[4] [5] | 70.2{5} | -- | 66.2+/-1.9{5} | 94.1% | -4.0[4] |
| 民眾安全服務隊 | 72.3{6}[4] | 73.3{5} | 69.9{6}[4] | -- | 63.9+/-2.1{6} | 84.6% | -6.1[4] |
| 懲教署 | 68.8{8} | 67.9{8} | 66.2{8} | -- | 58.3+/-2.1{7} | 84.6% | -7.9[4] |
| 廉政公署 | 68.9{7}[4] | 68.9{7} | 67.7{7} | -- | 57.9+/-2.3{8} | 92.8% | -9.8[4] |
| 警務處 | 63.7{9}[4] | 62.5{9} | 61.0{9} | 39.4[4] | 35.3+/-3.1{9} | 99.2% | -4.1[4] |
| 駐港解放軍 | 61.0[4] | 57.8 | 56.8 | -- | 44.2+/-3.2 | 82.9% | -12.5[4] |
[3] 括弧{ }內數字為紀律部隊的排名。2018年10月至12月，民研計劃為不同量尺描述程度的字眼進行測試，表中數字為綜合結果。詳情請參閱網站。
[4] 該數字與上次調查結果的差異超過在95%置信水平的抽樣誤差，表示有關變化在統計學上表面成立。不過，變化在統計學上成立與否，並不等同有關變化是否有實際用途或意義，而不同調查的加權方法亦可能有所不同。
[5] 該數字與上次調查結果的差異超過在95%置信水平的抽樣誤差，是由於加權方法改變。如果以舊有加權方法處理數據，則變化並未超過抽樣誤差。
以下則是巿民使用五等量尺表達對香港警務處及駐港解放軍的滿意程度：
| 調查日期 | 14-16/11/17 | 21-25/5/18 | 15-19/11/18 | 3-6/6/19 | 21-26/11/19 | 最新變化 |
| 樣本數目 | 590-741 | 542-566 | 557-576 | 594-638 | 598-602 | -- |
| 回應比率 | 62.8% | 55.9% | 67.9% | 60.4% | 67.7% | -- |
| 最新結果 | 結果 | 結果 | 結果 | 結果 | 結果及誤差 | -- |
| 對警務處的滿意率[6] | 59% | 54%[7] | 51% | 50% | 27+/-4% | -23%[7] |
| 對警務處的不滿率[6] | 22% | 28%[7] | 28% | 28% | 65+/-4% | +37%[7] |
| 滿意率淨值 | 37% | 26%[7] | 23% | 22% | -38+/-7% | -60%[7] |
| 平均量值[6] | 3.5 | 3.3[7] | 3.3 | 3.2 | 2.2+/-0.1 | -1.1[7] |
| 對駐港解放軍的滿意率[6] | 52%[7] | 50% | 46% | 49% | 37+/-4% | -12%[7] |
| 對駐港解放軍的不滿率[6] | 8%[7] | 10% | 16%[7] | 14% | 33+/-4% | +19%[7] |
| 滿意率淨值 | 44%[7] | 41% | 30%[7] | 35% | 3+/-7% | -32%[7] |
| 平均量值[6] | 3.7 | 3.6 | 3.5 | 3.6 | 3.0+/-0.1 | -0.6[7] |
[6] 數字採自五等量尺。平均量值是把答案按照正面程度，以1分最低5分最高量化成為1、2、3、4、5分，再求取樣本平均數值。2018年10月至12月，民研計劃為不同量尺描述程度的字眼進行測試，表中數字為綜合結果。詳情請參閱網站。
[7] 該數字與上次調查結果的差異超過在95%置信水平的抽樣誤差，表示有關變化在統計學上表面成立。不過，變化在統計學上成立與否，並不等同有關變化是否有實際用途或意義，而不同調查的加權方法亦可能有所不同。
調查顯示，市民對紀律部隊的滿意度排名第一至二位是消防處和醫療輔助隊，評分分別為80.5及80.2分。位列第三至八位的是政府飛行服務隊、海關、入境事務處、民眾安全服務隊、懲教署和廉政公署，分別得69.4、68.7、66.2、63.9、58.3及57.9分。最後，警務處的評分為35.3分，繼續是九個紀律部隊當中最低，當中有40%市民給予0分。其滿意率為27%，不滿率為65%，滿意淨值為負38個百分點，平均量值為2.2分，即整體上接近「幾不滿」。紀律部隊之間的相對排名沒有太大變化。另外，市民對駐港解放軍的最新滿意度評分為44.2分，其滿意率為37%，不滿率為33%，滿意淨值為正3個百分點，平均量值為3.0分，即整體上接近「一半半」。除醫療輔助隊外，全部紀律部隊及駐港解放軍的民望數字均顯著下跌，而除消防處、醫療輔助隊和入境事務處外，其他紀律部隊及駐港解放軍的評分皆創相關題目於2012或2013年開展以來新低，警務處及駐港解放軍的滿意淨值則創相關題目於1997年開展以來新低。
民意日誌
民研計劃於2007年開始與慧科訊業有限公司合作，由慧科訊業按照民研計劃設計的分析方法，將每日大事記錄傳送至民研計劃，經民研計劃核實後成為「民意日誌」。
由於本新聞公報所涉及的調查項目，上次調查日期最早為3-6/6/2019，而今次調查日期則為21-26/11/2019，因此是次公報中的「民意日誌」項目便以上述日期為依歸，讓讀者作出比較。以涵蓋率不下25%本地報章每日頭條新聞和報社評論計，在上述期間發生的相關大事包括以下事件，讀者可以自行判斷有關事件有否影響各項民調數字：
| 25/11/19 | 民主派取得大部分區議會議席 |
| 20/11/19 | 美國參議院通過《香港人權與民主法案》 |
| 19/11/19 | 警察繼續圍堵理工大學 |
| 19/11/19 | 《禁蒙面法》被裁定違憲 |
| 18/11/19 | 警察繼續圍堵理工大學 |
| 17/11/19 | 警察圍堵理工大學並與示威者激烈衝突 |
| 16/11/19 | 解放軍出動清理路障 |
| 15/11/19 | 示威者於理工大學留守 |
| 12/11/19 | 中文大學出現激烈警民衝突 |
| 11/11/19 | 交通警於西灣河開三槍擊中示威者 |
| 10/11/19 | 全港多區出現示威及警民衝突 |
| 8/11/19 | 將軍澳墮樓科大學生不治 |
| 6/11/19 | 何君堯被持刀襲擊 |
| 2/11/19 | 香港島發生示威衝突 |
| 28/10/19 | 記者於警方記者會抗議警察對記者使用暴力 |
| 25/10/19 | 高等法院頒發臨時禁制令禁止非法發布警員及其家屬的個人資料 |
| 23/10/19 | 陳同佳刑滿出獄 |
| 4/10/19 | 政府正式引用《緊急法》訂立《禁蒙面法》 |
| 1/10/19 | 全港多區出現示威及警民衝突，警方在荃灣使用實彈射傷一名示威者 |
數據分析
調查顯示，市民對紀律部隊的滿意度排名第一至二位是消防處和醫療輔助隊，評分分別為80.5及80.2分。位列第三至八位的是政府飛行服務隊、海關、入境事務處、民眾安全服務隊、懲教署和廉政公署。最後，警務處的評分為35.3分，繼續是九個紀律部隊當中最低，當中有40%市民給予0分，滿意淨值為負38個百分點。紀律部隊之間的相對排名沒有太大變化。另外，市民對駐港解放軍的最新滿意度評分為44.2分，滿意淨值為正3個百分點。除醫療輔助隊外，全部紀律部隊及駐港解放軍的民望數字均顯著下跌，而除消防處、醫療輔助隊和入境事務處外，其他紀律部隊及駐港解放軍的評分皆創相關題目於2012或2013年開展以來新低，警務處及駐港解放軍的滿意淨值則創相關題目於1997年開展以來新低。
Dec 6, 2019
Hong Kong Public Opinion Research Institute Press Conference – Press Materials
Press Conference Live
POP releases popularity figures of Hong Kong disciplinary forces
and the PLA Hong Kong Garrison
Special Announcemens
- The predecessor of Hong Kong Public Opinion Program (HKPOP) was The Public Opinion Programme at The University of Hong Kong (HKUPOP). “POP” in this release can refer to HKPOP or its predecessor HKUPOP.
- POP’s usual practice is to issue releases before the middle and also the end of each year, under the names of “HKSAR anniversary” and “Year-end” survey series for public consumption. Because the handover of Hong Kong occurred on July 1, it may be more appropriate and accurate to analyze macro changes of Hong Kong society using half-yearly rather than yearly figures. The popularity figures of Hong Kong disciplinary forces and the PLA Hong Kong Garrison released today belong to the last of this survey series in 2019.
- Tentative release dates of remaining survey topics in 2019 are as follows:
- December 10 (Tuesday) Popularity of CE and Principal Officials
- December 17 (Tuesday) Ethnic identity
- December 20 (Friday) Popularity of CE and SAR Government
- December 23 (Monday) Society’s current conditions and Public Sentiment Index
- December 30 (Monday) Year-end review
Abstract
POP successfully interviewed 1,062 Hong Kong residents by random telephone survey conducted by real interviewers in late November. Results show that the 1st and 2nd places regarding people’s satisfaction with disciplinary forces go to the Fire Services Department and the Auxiliary Medical Service, with rating of 80.5 and 80.2 marks respectively. The 3rd to 8th ranks go to the Government Flying Service, the Customs and Excise Department, the Immigration Department, the Civil Aid Service, the Correctional Services Department and the Independent Commission Against Corruption. Finally, the Police Force attains a rating of 35.3 marks, with 40% of the sample giving zero mark and continues to be the lowest among nine disciplinary forces. Its net satisfaction rate stands at negative 38 percentage points. The relative positions among the disciplinary forces have not changed much. Besides, people’s latest satisfaction rating toward the PLA Hong Kong Garrison is 44.2 marks. Its net satisfaction rate is positive 3 percentage points. Other than the Auxiliary Medical Service, the popularity figures of all disciplinary forces and the PLA Hong Kong Garrison have dropped significantly. Except the Fire Services Department, the Auxiliary Medical Service and the Immigration Department, the ratings of all disciplinary forces and the PLA Hong Kong Garrison are at record lows since the relevant questions were first asked in 2012 or 2013, while the net satisfaction rates of the Police Force and the PLA Hong Kong Garrison are at record lows since the relevant questions were first asked in 1997. The effective response rate of the survey is 67.7%. The maximum sampling error of percentages is +/-4%, that of net values is +/-7% and that of ratings is +/-3.2 at 95% confidence level.
Contact Information
| Date of survey | : | 21-26/11/2019 |
| Survey method | : | Random telephone survey conducted by real interviewers |
| Target population | : | Cantonese-speaking Hong Kong residents aged 18 or above |
| Sample size | : | 1,062 (including 531 landline and 531 mobile samples) |
| Effective response rate[1] | : | 67.7% |
| Sampling error[2] | : | Sampling error of percentages not more than +/-4%, that of net values not more than +/-7% and that of ratings not more than +/-3.2 at 95% confidence level |
| Weighting method | : | Rim-weighted according to figures provided by the Census and Statistics Department. The gender-age distribution of the Hong Kong population came from “Mid-year population for 2018”, while the educational attainment (highest level attended) distribution and economic activity status distribution came from “Women and Men in Hong Kong - Key Statistics (2018 Edition)”. |
[1] Before September 2017, “overall response rate” was used to report surveys’ contact information. Starting from September 2017, “effective response rate” was used. 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.
[2] All error figures in this release are calculated at 95% confidence level. “95% confidence level” means that if we were to repeat a certain survey 100 times with different random samples, we would expect 95 times having the population parameter within the respective error margins calculated. Because of sampling errors, when quoting percentages, journalists should refrain from reporting decimal places, whereas one decimal place can be used when quoting rating figures.
Latest Figures
Latest satisfaction ratings of Hong Kong disciplinary forces and the PLA Hong Kong Garrison are summarized as follows:
| Date of survey | 21-25/5/18 | 15-19/11/18 | 3-6/6/19 | 1-6/8/19 | 21-26/11/19 | Latest change | |
| Sample size | 508-576 | 538-579 | 528-656 | 1,015 | 584-650 | -- | |
| Response rate | 55.9% | 67.9% | 60.4% | 62.8% | 67.7% | -- | |
| Latest findings[5] | Finding | Finding | Finding | Finding | Finding & error | Recog % | -- |
| Fire Services Department | 84.1{1} | 82.9{1} | 83.1{1} | -- | 80.5+/-1.5{1} | 99.2% | -2.7[4] |
| Auxiliary Medical Service | 79.8{3} | 79.3{2} | 77.4{3} | -- | 80.2+/-1.5{2} | 96.1% | +2.8[4] |
| Government Flying Service | 79.9{2} | 78.8{3} | 77.9{2} | -- | 69.4+/-2.1{3} | 89.7% | -8.5[4] |
| Customs and Excise Department | 75.6{4}[4] | 74.1{4} | 73.4{4} | -- | 68.7+/-1.6{4} | 95.1% | -4.7[4] |
| Immigration Department | 73.7{5} | 71.5{6}[4] [5] | 70.2{5} | -- | 66.2+/-1.9{5} | 94.1% | -4.0[4] |
| Civil Aid Service | 72.3{6}[4] | 73.3{5} | 69.9{6}[4] | -- | 63.9+/-2.1{6} | 84.6% | -6.1[4] |
| Correctional Services Department | 68.8{8} | 67.9{8} | 66.2{8} | -- | 58.3+/-2.1{7} | 84.6% | -7.9[4] |
| Independent Commission Against Corruption | 68.9{7}[4] | 68.9{7} | 67.7{7} | -- | 57.9+/-2.3{8} | 92.8% | -9.8[4] |
| Police Force | 63.7{9}[4] | 62.5{9} | 61.0{9} | 39.4[4] | 35.3+/-3.1{9} | 99.2% | -4.1[4] |
| PLA Hong Kong Garrison | 61.0[4] | 57.8 | 56.8 | -- | 44.2+/-3.2 | 82.9% | -12.5[4] |
[3] Numbers in curly brackets { } indicate the rankings. From October to December 2018, POP conducted tests on the wordings used in different rating scales. Figures in the table are the combined results. Please visit our website for details.
[4] The difference between the figure and the result from the previous survey has gone beyond the sampling error at 95% confidence level, meaning that the change is statistically significant prima facie. However, whether the difference is 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.
[5] The difference between the figure and the result from the previous survey has gone beyond the sampling error at 95% confidence level because of a change in the weighting method. If the previous weighting method was used, the change would not have gone beyond the sampling error.
Latest satisfaction rates of the Hong Kong Police Force and the PLA Hong Kong Garrison using the 5-point scale are summarized as follows:
| Date of survey | 14-16/11/17 | 21-25/5/18 | 15-19/11/18 | 3-6/6/19 | 21-26/11/19 | Latest change |
| Sample size | 590-741 | 542-566 | 557-576 | 594-638 | 598-602 | -- |
| Response rate | 62.8% | 55.9% | 67.9% | 60.4% | 67.7% | -- |
| Latest findings | Finding | Finding | Finding | Finding | Finding & error | -- |
| Satisfaction rate of the Police Force[6] |
59% | 54%[7] | 51% | 50% | 27+/-4% | -23%[7] |
| Dissatisfaction rate of the Police Force[6] |
22% | 28%[7] | 28% | 28% | 65+/-4% | +37%[7] |
| Net satisfaction rate | 37% | 26%[7] | 23% | 22% | -38+/-7% | -60%[7] |
| Mean value[6] | 3.5 | 3.3[7] | 3.3 | 3.2 | 2.2+/-0.1 | -1.1[7] |
| Satisfaction rate of the PLA Hong Kong Garrison[6] |
52%[7] | 50% | 46% | 49% | 37+/-4% | -12%[7] |
| Dissatisfaction rate of the PLA Hong Kong Garrison[6] |
8%[7] | 10% | 16%[7] | 14% | 33+/-4% | +19%[7] |
| Net satisfaction rate | 44%[7] | 41% | 30%[7] | 35% | 3+/-7% | -32%[7] |
| Mean value[6] | 3.7 | 3.6 | 3.5 | 3.6 | 3.0+/-0.1 | -0.6[7] |
[6] Collapsed from a 5-point scale. The mean value is calculated by quantifying 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. From October to December 2018, POP conducted tests on the wordings used in different rating scales. Figures in the table are the combined results. Please visit our website for details.
[7] The difference between the figure and the result from the previous survey has gone beyond the sampling error at 95% confidence level, meaning that the change is statistically significant prima facie. However, whether the difference is 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.
Survey shows that the 1st and 2nd places regarding people’s satisfaction with disciplinary forces go to the Fire Services Department and the Auxiliary Medical Service, with rating of 80.5 and 80.2 marks respectively. The 3rd to 8th ranks go to the Government Flying Service, the Customs and Excise Department, the Immigration Department, the Civil Aid Service, the Correctional Services Department and the Independent Commission Against Corruption, with ratings at 69.4, 68.7, 66.2, 63.9, 58.3 and 57.9 marks respectively. Finally, the Police Force attains a rating of 35.3 marks, with 40% of the sample giving zero mark and continues to be the lowest among nine disciplinary forces. Its satisfaction rate is 27%, dissatisfaction rate 65%, giving a net satisfaction rate of negative 38 percentage points and a mean score of 2.2, meaning close to “quite dissatisfied” in general. The relative positions among the disciplinary forces have not changed much. Besides, people’s latest satisfaction rating toward the PLA Hong Kong Garrison is 44.2 marks. Its satisfaction rate is 37%, dissatisfaction rate 33%, giving a net satisfaction rate of positive 3 percentage points and a mean score of 3.0, meaning close to “half-half” in general. Other than the Auxiliary Medical Service, the popularity figures of all disciplinary forces and the PLA Hong Kong Garrison have dropped significantly. Except the Fire Services Department, the Auxiliary Medical Service and the Immigration Department, the ratings of all disciplinary forces and the PLA Hong Kong Garrison are at record lows since the relevant questions were first asked in 2012 or 2013, while the net satisfaction rates of the Police Force and the PLA Hong Kong Garrison are at record lows since the relevant questions were first asked in 1997.
Opinion Daily
In 2007, POP started collaborating with Wisers Information Limited whereby Wisers supplies to POP a record of significant events of that day according to the research method designed by POP. These daily entries would then become “Opinion Daily” after they are verified by POP.
For the polling items covered in this press release, the earliest previous survey was conducted from 3 to 6 June, 2019 while this survey was conducted from 21 to 26 November, 2019. During this period, 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:
| 25/11/19 | The pro-democracy camp wins a majority of seats in the District Councils. |
| 20/11/19 | The US Senate passes the Hong Kong Human Rights and Democracy Act. |
| 19/11/19 | The police continue to surround the Hong Kong Polytechnic University. |
| 19/11/19 | The anti-mask law is ruled to be unconstitutional. |
| 18/11/19 | The police continue to surround the Hong Kong Polytechnic University. |
| 17/11/19 | The police surround the Hong Kong Polytechnic University and clash violently with protesters. |
| 16/11/19 | The People’s Liberation Army clears roadblocks. |
| 15/11/19 | Protesters stay in the Hong Kong Polytechnic University. |
| 12/11/19 | Violent conflicts between protestors and the police occur in the Chinese University of Hong Kong. |
| 11/11/19 | A traffic policeman fires three live rounds at a protester. |
| 10/11/19 | Protests and conflicts between protestors and the police occur in multiple districts in Hong Kong. |
| 8/11/19 | HKUST student who fell from height in Tseung Kwan O passes away. |
| 6/11/19 | Junius Ho is attacked with a knife. |
| 2/11/19 | Protests and conflicts break out on Hong Kong Island. |
| 28/10/19 | Journalists protest against police violence targeting journalists during police press conference. |
| 25/10/19 | The High Court grants an interim injunction to restrain unlawful publishing of the personal data of police officers and their family members. |
| 23/10/19 | Chan Tong-kai is released from prison. |
| 4/10/19 | The government officially enacts anti-mask law by invoking emergency law. |
| 1/10/19 | Protests and conflicts between protestors and the police occur in multiple districts in Hong Kong, the police shoots a protester with a live bullet in Tsuen Wan. |
Data Analysis
Results of our survey shows that the 1st and 2nd places regarding people’s satisfaction with disciplinary forces go to the Fire Services Department and the Auxiliary Medical Service, with rating of 80.5 and 80.2 marks respectively. The 3rd to 8th ranks go to the Government Flying Service, the Customs and Excise Department, the Immigration Department, the Civil Aid Service, the Correctional Services Department and the Independent Commission Against Corruption. Finally, the Police Force attains a rating of 35.3 marks, with 40% of the sample giving zero mark and continues to be the lowest among nine disciplinary forces. Its net satisfaction rate stands at negative 38 percentage points. The relative positions among the disciplinary forces have not changed much. Besides, people’s latest satisfaction rating toward the PLA Hong Kong Garrison is 44.2 marks. Its net satisfaction rate is positive 3 percentage points. Other than the Auxiliary Medical Service, the popularity figures of all disciplinary forces and the PLA Hong Kong Garrison have dropped significantly. Except the Fire Services Department, the Auxiliary Medical Service and the Immigration Department, the ratings of all disciplinary forces and the PLA Hong Kong Garrison are at record lows since the relevant questions were first asked in 2012 or 2013, while the net satisfaction rates of the Police Force and the PLA Hong Kong Garrison are at record lows since the relevant questions were first asked in 1997.
