香港大學民意研究計劃今日如期在《港大民意網站》(http://hkupop.hku.hk)發放市民身份認同感的最新調查結果。雖然有關調查過往曾經在《民意快訊》月刊發放，但在《民意網站》發放則尚屬首次。《民意網站》一般逢星期二下午二時於網上公佈定期調查結果，公眾假期除外，並同時預告來週的發放項目。《民意網站》會定期對該等安排作出檢討及調整。

按照計劃，《民意網站》下次發放數據的日期及時間為九月二十四日星期二下午二時，屆時將會公佈市民對特首董建華的最新評分、市民對特區政府及立法會議員整體表現滿意程度、市民最關注的問題及對現時政治、經濟及社會環境滿意程度的最新調查結果。

根據《民意網站》今日發佈的最新（九月二至五日）調查結果，當被訪市民可在「香港人」、「中國的香港人」、「香港的中國人」、及「中國人」四者中選擇自己認同的身份時，三成三稱自己為「中國人」，二成九自稱為「香港人」，二成二自稱為「中國的香港人」，而一成半則自稱為「香港的中國人」。換言之，五成一認為自己是廣義的「香港人」（即回答「香港人」或「中國的香港人」），而四成八認為自己是廣義的「中國人」（即回答「中國人」或「香港的中國人」）。綜觀回歸後的走勢（可參考按次計算圖表），認為自己是廣義「香港人」的比率反覆下降，而會認為自己是廣義「中國人」的比率則反覆上升，五年來的變化約有十個百分比，當中自稱為「中國人」者更上升十四個百分比。

由於「香港人」、「中國的香港人」、「香港的中國人」、及「中國人」四者可能意識重疊，四擇其一未必能夠反映各項身份認同的強弱，民意研究計劃一早便同時就市民的身份認同感進行單項測試，以零至十分評價其對「香港人」及「中國人」的認同程度。六月初的數字顯示，被訪巿民對「香港人」的認同感為7.97分，對「中國人」的認同感則為7.82分。綜觀回歸後的走勢（可參考按次計算圖表），巿民對「香港人」及「中國人」的身份認同感雖然不停波動，但兩者的差距已經明顯收窄，對「中國人」的認同程度更有上升的趨勢。

《民意網站》今日所載的最新調查，屬於訪員執行的隨機抽樣電話訪問，目標對象為十八歲或以上之操粵語的香港市民，受訪人數超過一千人。在九成半置信水平下，市民對香港人及中國人的身份認同感評分之抽樣誤差均為正負0.14分；而各個百分比的抽樣誤差則少於正負三個百分比。所謂「九成半置信水平」，是指倘若以不同隨機樣本重複進行有關調查100次，則95次的結果會在正負誤差之內。各界人士如對《民意網站》所載調查的方法有任何疑問，研究組的成員會樂於解答，但不會在現階段就調查結果作出評述。此等安排將會在人手充裕後再作檢討。《民意網站》由民意研究計劃主任鍾庭耀博士負責，與香港大學立場無關。

The Public Opinion Programme (POP) at the University of Hong Kong today releases on schedule via the "HKU POP SITE" (http://hkupop.hku.hk) the latest results on people's ethnic identity. Although this topic had been carried in our previous monthly newsletter "POP Express", it is released on-line for the first time. POP's normal practice is to release the results of our regular surveys every Tuesday at 2 pm via our POP Site, except during public holidays, each time with a forecast of the items to be released in the forthcoming week. We will review and adjust this operation regularly.

According to this schedule, the date and time of our next release will be September 24, 2002, Tuesday, at 2 pm, the latest rating of CE Tung Chee-hwa, people's appraisal of the HKSAR Government and members of the Legislative Council in general will be released. We will also release the latest results on people's most concerned problems and their satisfaction with the current political, economic and social conditions.

As regards the latest figures (September 2-5) released today, when asked to make a choice among four given identities, namely, "Hong Kong Citizen", "Chinese Hong Kong Citizen", "Hong Kong Chinese Citizen" and "Chinese Citizen", 33% of the respondents interviewed identified themselves as "Chinese Citizens", 29% as "Hong Kong Citizens", 22% as "Chinese Hong Kong Citizens", while 15% identified themselves as "Hong Kong Chinese Citizens". In other words, 51% of the respondents identified themselves as "Hong Kong People" in the broader sense (i.e. either as "Hong Kong Citizens" or "Chinese Hong Kong Citizens"), whereas 48% identified themselves as "Chinese People" in the broader sense (i.e. either as "Chinese Citizens" or "Hong Kong Chinese Citizens"). On a macro level, the proportion of respondents who identified themselves as "Hong Kong People" in the broader sense has dropped about 10 percentage points in five years (please see the chart with per-poll figures), while the corresponding figure of "Chinese People" in the broader sense has increased by the same amount. As for those who identified themselves specifically as "Chinese Citizens", there was a significant increase of 14 percentage points.

Because concepts of "Hong Kong Citizen", "Chinese Hong Kong Citizen", "Hong Kong Chinese Citizen" and "Chinese Citizen" may overlap each other, making a choice out of the four given options may not reflect the actual strengths of one's ethnic identities. POP has therefore conducted parallel tests on the strengths of people's separate identities as "Hong Kong Citizens" and "Chinese Citizens" for a long time, using a scale of 0-10. The latest figure registered in early June this year was 7.97 marks for "Hong Kong Citizens", and 7.82 marks for "Chinese Citizens". On a macro level (please see the chart with per-poll figures), although people's strengths of identities as "Hong Kong Citizens" and "Chinese Citizens" have been fluctuating since the handover, the difference between the two has significantly narrowed. An upward trend is observed for the Chinese identity.

The new survey reported in the POP Site today is a random telephone survey conducted by interviewers, targeting at Cantonese speakers in Hong Kong of age 18 or above. The sample size of the survey is over 1,000 respondents. At 95% confidence level, the sampling error of people's ratings towards their strengths of identities as "Hong Kong citizens" and "Chinese citizens" is plus/minus 0.14 mark, while that of all percentages is less than plus/minus 3 percentage points. That means 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. Shall anyone have any question regarding the research design of the surveys published in the POP Site, members of the POP Team will be happy to answer them, but we will not comment on the findings at this stage. Such an arrangement would be reviewed when more resources are available. Please note that Dr CHUNG Ting-yiu Robert, Director of Public Opinion Programme, is solely responsible for the work published in the POP Site, which does not represent the stand of the University of Hong Kong.