1 / 45

“SIMPA Quality of Home Life Indicators” Findings Announcement September 15, 2004

“SIMPA Quality of Home Life Indicators” Findings Announcement September 15, 2004. Background. Commissioned by SIMPA, an appliance brand under Towngas Conducted by the Public Opinion Programme of the University of Hong Kong.

maisier
Download Presentation

“SIMPA Quality of Home Life Indicators” Findings Announcement September 15, 2004

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. “SIMPA Quality of Home Life Indicators” Findings Announcement September 15, 2004

  2. Background • Commissioned by SIMPA, an appliance brand under Towngas • Conducted by the Public Opinion Programme of the University of Hong Kong. • The research instrument designed entirely by the POP Team after consulting Towngas /SIMPA • Fieldwork operation and data analysis were conducted independently by the POP Team.

  3. Research Objective • Investigate the quality of Hong Kong people’s home life, particularly satisfaction levels with various materialistic and non-materialistic aspects of their home life. • Discover what are the drivers for satisfaction level and sense of well-being in home life.

  4. SIMPA Quality of Home Life Indicator • First-of-its-kind indicator to offer quantitative reading and insights into the Quality of Home Life (QoHL) led by Hong Kong people - an area seldom studied in the past. • All indicators are constructed scientifically using self-assigned ratings and weightings. • Possibility to develop into a yearly survey to keep track of any changes in QoHL in Hong Kong.

  5. Research Methodology

  6. Date of survey: August 17-21, 2004 Target population: Cantonese-speaking population of HK aged 18 or above Survey method: Telephone survey with interviewers Sample size: 515 successful cases Response rate: 62.7% Sampling error: Less than 2.2% Contact information

  7. Summary of Findings

  8. Self-Assessment on Home Life Quality

  9. Satisfaction rating with home size [N = 509] Mean: 6.35 Standard error: 0.10

  10. Satisfaction rating with Personal space at home [N = 506] Mean: 6.24 Standard error: 0.11

  11. Satisfaction rating with Home entertainment and hi-tech facilities [N = 501] Mean: 6.65 Standard error: 0.10

  12. Satisfaction rating with Kitchen and Bathroom appliances [N = 504] Mean: 6.47 Standard error: 0.09

  13. Satisfaction ratings –Mean for 4 materialistic aspects

  14. Satisfaction rating with Activities and time spent with family members [N = 484] Mean: 7.17 Standard error: 0.09

  15. Satisfaction rating with Family members’ care / attention / love [N = 488] Mean: 7.68 Standard error: 0.08

  16. Satisfaction rating with Activities within community area [N = 495] Mean: 6.03 Standard error: 0.09

  17. Satisfaction rating with neighbours [N = 499] Mean: 5.72 Standard error: 0.10

  18. Satisfaction ratings –Mean for 4 non-materialistic aspects

  19. Overall satisfaction rating with Materialistic aspect of home life [N = 504] Mean: 6.70 Standard error: 0.08

  20. Overall satisfaction rating withNon-materialistic aspect of home life [N = 493] Mean: 6.72 Standard error: 0.08

  21. Importance weight allocated toMaterialistic aspect [N = 485] Mean: 5.05 Standard error: 0.06

  22. Importance weight allocated toNon-materialistic aspect [N = 485] Mean: 4.95 Standard error: 0.06

  23. Quality of Home Life Indicator (QoHL) concepts & formula behind *Overall rating (Mean) on materialistic aspect = 6.68*Overall rating (Mean) on non-materialistic aspect = 6.68*Importance of materialistic vs. non-materialistic aspect= 5.1:4.9 [Valid base=465]Formula for calculating the Overall rating of QoHL: = (Satisfaction with materialistic aspect x weight factor A) + (Satisfaction with non-materialistic aspect x weight factor B) = 3.41+3.33 (i.e.weighted satisfaction ratings for each aspect) = 6.74

  24. SIMPA Quality of Home Life Indicators Overall Rating of QoHL Mean: 6.74 Standard error: 0.75

  25. QoHL cross-tabulation analysis • A statistically higher rating of QoHL is observed for the following demo sub-groups: Average: 6.74 • Gender: Female (6.93) • Marital status: Married people (6.91) • Occupation: Housewife (7.03) • Household income: Highest income group i.e. $30k or above (7.26)

  26. B) Home Life Related Supplementary Questions

  27. The most effective way to improve QoHL – Home Size [N = 504]

  28. The most effective way to improve QoHL – Kitchen & Bathroom appliances [N = 497]

  29. Most enjoyable moments at home [N = 511]

  30. Preferred dining at home or outside? [N = 513]

  31. Reason for preferring to dine at home [N = 412]

  32. Time spent with family members at home • On a typical weekday: 4.7 hrs/day (N=473) • On a typical weekend: 7.1 hrs/day (N=454) • Dining with family members in a week • Dine at home: 4.8 days/week (N=477) • Dine outside: 1.2 days/week (N=455)

  33. Non-materialistic satisfaction rating v.s. Frequency of dining at home Satisfaction rating Frequency of dining at home

  34. Overall QoHL v.s. most enjoyable activities at home Private Time Family Interaction

  35. C) Conclusion

  36. Home cooking and dining with family improve QoHL • HK passes the mark for overall QoHL (6.74), but more can be done. • As human beings, we all enjoy participating in personal and individualized activities • But we achieve a higher level of satisfaction when spending time interacting and bonding with family members • Home cooking and dining with family would drive a higher level of satisfaction in our home lives

  37. HKU POPResearch Team Members Project Director CHUNG Ting-yiu, Robert Project Manager PANG Ka-lai, Karie Project Executive CHAN Ka-man, Carmen Data Analyst TSOI Pui-shing, Tony

  38. Special thanks to: • Dr L K Lam Cindy, HKU • Mr Leung Kwok Fai, Q.E. Hospital * For their professional and valuable advice on the research instrument. All faults therewith, however, are entirely HKU POP’s.

  39. Survey findings soon be available at http://hkupop.hku.hk

  40. Thank you

  41. Appendix

  42. Demographics ofRespondents

  43. Gender: • Female (52%), Male (48%) • Age Group: • 18-20: 5% • 21-29: 17% • 30-39: 24% • 40-49: 23% • 50-59: 13% • 60 or above: 19% • Education Attainment: • Primary or below: 21% • Secondary: 56% • Postgraduate or above: 23%

  44. Occupation: • Executives and professionals (22%) • Clerical and service workers (19%) • Production workers (13%) • Students (7%) • Housewives (19%) • Others (19%) • Marital Status: • Married (67%) • Single (31%) • Divorced (1%) • Widowed (1%) • Monthly Household Income (HK Dollar) • Below $8,000: 22% • $8,000 -$14,999: 29% • $15,000 - $29,999: 26% • $30,000 or above: 23%

More Related