In the UAE, a majority (56%) show willingness, but more than a fifth are either unsure or unwilling to take the jab (22% each). In KSA, a similar proportion (51%) are willing to take the vaccine, while 22% are against the idea.

The nationwide vaccination campaign in the UAE is picking up speed and more than 1.8 million people have already received the vaccine until now. The country aims to inoculate 70% of its population by the end of 2021. While it looks like the UAE is on track to meet its target, a large proportion remain hesitant to take the jab.

The results also show that willingness to take the COVID-19 vaccine has been improving in many countries in recent weeks. For instance, in Britain it has risen from 61% in mid-November to 80% now, and in Spain it is up from 53% in mid-December to 65% now.

In KSA, the percentage of people wanting to get vaccinated has increased from 42% in December end to 51% now. However, in the UAE, it has reduced to some extent, from 63% is mid-December to 56% now.

There has been no change in other countries, however, particularly the USA, where the current figure of 45% is little different from the 42% we recorded there when the question was first asked in July (although it has fluctuated a little over that period).

(YouGov)

January 20, 2020

Source: https://mena.yougov.com/en/news/2021/01/20/international-study-how-many-people-will-take-covi/

SUMMARY OF POLLS

ASIA

(India)

ABP CVoter Survey: What Could Change in 5 States Before Elections?

The ABP CVoter survey for the upcoming elections to four states and one union territory was released earlier this week. It has predicted reasonably decisive leads for the ruling NDA in Assam, LDF in Kerala and TMC in West Bengal while predicting a change of guard in Tamil Nadu and a close contest with a slight lead for the Opposition NDA in Puducherry. However, the elections are still about two-and-a-half to three months away and a lot could change till then. (The Quint)

January 20, 2021

AFRICA

(Uganda)

Majority of Ugandans prefer unrestricted access to Internet and social media, Afrobarometer survey shows

A majority of Ugandans want unrestricted access to the Internet and social media, Afrobarometer survey findings show. Among the six in 10 Ugandans who are aware of social media, large majorities say these platforms keep people informed and enable them to have more impact on political processes. Even though many also say social media makes people more likely to believe “fake news” and more intolerant of people with different opinions, a majority of citizens say the overall effects of social media are mostly positive. (Afrobarometer)

January 13, 2021

EUROPE

(Austria)

Working In Times Of Covid-19: When Austrians Started To Live With The Home Office

COVID-19 has turned Austria into a country of home offices. Around 42% of employees state that they worked from home last year. This was more often the case with high educational qualifications (68%) and younger employees. While 54% of those under 30 years of age worked at least partially in the home office, it was 35% of those over 50. Above all, the respondents would like more freedom in the way they organize their work in the future. (Gallup Austria)

January 19, 2021

(Russia)

Gender Representation in Company Management

As part of a global study, Romir and the international community of research companies GlobalNR studied * the attitude of residents of leading countries to the statement: "Women should be more often represented in the management of companies.” Six out of ten inhabitants of the planet (60%) agree with this position. Brazil and India became the leaders among the countries according to the agreement index - 80% of those who agreed. (Romir)

January 03, 2021

(UK)

How good are Britons at following COVID rules, compared to other countries?

A new YouGov survey of almost 19,000 people across 17 countries and regions shows that the overwhelming majority of Britons report that they have generally been following the national coronavirus rules. More than nine in ten Britons (91%) say they have been obedient – the fourth highest of the countries and regions we surveyed. (YouGov)

January 15, 2021

(UK)

What times are Britons willing to get their COVID-19 vaccine?

After initially only offering COVID-19 vaccines between 8am and 8pm, the government has announced that it will offer vaccinations around clock as soon as possible. Previously, Downing Street had said that all-night vaccinations weren’t being offered as there was “not a clamour for appointments late into the night or early in the morning”, but new YouGov research shows that, in fact, many Brits are willing to take late night and early morning slots for their jabs. (YouGov)

January 13, 2020

(UK)

COVID-19 has made children more worried, scared, and lonely

Over the past ten months, concerns have been raised about how lockdown and social distancing might impact the most vulnerable, including how sudden changes to our way of life would affect the youngest in society. Now a YouGov Children’s Omnibus survey of 1,013 UK children between the ages of 6 and 15 shows how the COVID-19 pandemic has affected children across the UK during 2020. (YouGov)

January 12, 2021

(UK)

Nine in ten British drivers don’t change their tyres over in winter and summer

In YouGov Profiles, we asked British car owners if they typically change over the tyres on their vehicle in the winter and summer. The data shows that nearly nine in ten (88%) of the sample did not see the need to switch out their tyres, with only 4% making seasonal changes to their tyres. Those who do swap out their tyres are more likely to be parents: 47% are responsible for at least one child under the age of 18 compared to a quarter (25%) of car owners overall. (YouGov)

January 13, 2021

NORTH AMERICA

(Canada)

Leger’s North American Tracker – January 19, 2021

3 out of 4 Quebecers are in favour of the night-time curfew imposed to help control the spread of the virus, but 32% doubt its effectiveness. 39% of Canadians who live outside Quebec feel that a night-time curfew would be an effective way to reduce the spread of COVID-19 in their community, 41% do not, and 20% are unsure. (Leger360)

January 19, 2021

(USA)

How lawmakers’ social media activity changed in the days after the U.S. Capitol riot

Social media activity by members of Congress changed in notable ways following the Jan. 6 rioting at the U.S. Capitol by supporters of President Donald Trump, according to a new Pew Research Center analysis of lawmakers’ Facebook and Twitter posts in the days after the breach. Below is a closer look at how members’ posts – as well as their followers’ reactions to those posts – changed between Jan. 6 and Jan. 10, 2021. (PEW)

January 15, 2021

(USA)

A record number of women are serving in the 117th Congress

Women make up just over a quarter of all members of the 117th Congress – the highest percentage in U.S. history and a considerable increase from where things stood even a decade ago. Counting both the House of Representatives and the Senate, 144 of 539 seats – or 27% – are held by women. That represents a 50% increase from the 96 women who were serving in the 112th Congress a decade ago, though it remains far below the female share of the overall U.S. population. (PEW)

January 15, 2021

(USA)

Americans say U.S. can learn a lot from other countries on handling the coronavirus outbreak, other issues

Amid some of the darkest months of the coronavirus pandemic, Americans believe that the U.S. government can learn a lot from other countries around the world about handling the outbreak and improving health care domestically. And majorities say that the U.S. can learn at least a fair amount from countries around the world about other major policy issues, such as addressing climate change and improving race relations and the economy. (PEW)

January 14, 2021

(USA)

Pandemic Could Be Recipe for More Cooking at Home

Before the global pandemic and accompanying lockdowns likely drove people back into their own kitchens, results from the latest Gallup and Cookpad study of home cooking trends show this was already happening more often in some parts of the world. When countries experience social unrest related to political and economic strife, it can lead to an increase in people staying home to cook and eat meals, rather than dining out or consuming pre-prepared foods. (Gallup USA)

January 15, 2020

(USA)

Value of Medical Messengers Seen in Arizona Poll on Vaccines

As the massive effort to distribute COVID-19 vaccines continues, state leaders face formidable hurdles -- including public hesitance to receive the vaccine. In an ethnically diverse and politically divided state like Arizona, public education campaigns must overcome widespread mistrust of government with fine-tuned messages delivered by the right messengers. (Gallup USA)

January 15, 2021

(USA)

One in Four Black Workers Report Discrimination at Work

A national conversation on racism and injustice that received renewed attention last summer has permeated virtually all areas of American society, including U.S. workplaces. As employers consider their role in the conversation and the actions they should take, the Gallup Center on Black Voices finds that about one in four Black (24%) and Hispanic employees (24%) in the U.S. report having been discriminated against at work in the past year. (Gallup USA)

January 12, 2021

SOUTH AMERICA

(Chile)

Chileans and Holidays in times of COVID19 22.2% of Chileans will go on vacation this summer

22.2% of Chileans will go on vacation this summer, a figure that represents a drop of –18.8 points in relation to what was indicated in 2019, where 41% declared that they would go on vacation. 40.1% of the high GSE (ABC1) indicates that they will go on vacation, while 18.7% of the low GSE (DE) will go on vacation. The GSE Mediums (C2 and C3) will come out at 23% and 25.8% respectively. (Activa)

December 2020

(Colombia)

49% of respondents would agree with reducing the working day to 40 hours

This is evidenced by a measurement carried out by the National Consulting Center before a proposal from the Democratic Center that is advancing in Congress. The survey was also contracted by said community. A survey carried out by the National Consulting Center (CNC), applied to 1,007 people, showed that a large part of those surveyed are familiar with Uribe's proposals to reduce working hours, which are currently 48 hours. (CNC)

December 27, 2020

AUSTRALIA

Australians support masks and border closures and are willing to be vaccinated for COVID-19

A special Roy Morgan survey into Australian attitudes towards COVID-19 shows nearly three-quarters of Australians (72%) say mask wearing should be compulsory and over two-thirds, 68%, don’t want State borders to be completely open. In addition over three-quarters of Australians (77%) say they would be willing to be vaccinated if a new Coronavirus vaccine became publicly available according to the survey conducted with an Australia-wide cross-section of 1,243 Australians aged 18+ on Thursday January 14 – Friday January 15, 2021. (Roy Morgan)

January 17, 2021

MULTICOUNTRY STUDIES

International study: How many people will take the COVID vaccine?

With COVID-19 vaccines now being rolled out across the world, YouGov’s COVID-19 trackers show that people in Thailand and the UK are the most likely to say that they will take the coronavirus vaccine when it becomes available to them, at 83% and 80% respectively. Other countries where willingness to take the drug is high include Denmark (70%), Mexico (68%), India (67%), and Spain (66%). (YouGov)

January 20, 2020

How much difference does it make to people where a COVID vaccine was developed?

Brazilian president Jair Bolsonaro has been blocking the purchase of millions of doses of a coronavirus vaccine because it comes from China. The move is seen by many as politically motivated, rather than based on scientific concerns. We know that some countries are more trusted than others on coronavirus, so it begs the question: what difference would a vaccine’s country of origin make to people’s perceptions of it?

(YouGov)

January 15, 2021

ASIA

673-43-01/Poll

ABP CVoter Survey: What Could Change in 5 States Before Elections?

However, the elections are still about two-and-a-half to three months away and a lot could change till then.

This article will look at two aspects:

1. The recent example of the Bihar elections, when a great deal changed between the first opinion poll and the final results.

2. What are the X-factors that one should look out for in the four states and one union territory.

How Things Changed in Bihar

The first ABP CVoter opinion poll for Bihar released in the last week of September, around six weeks before polling, predicted 141-161 seats for the NDA and 64-84 for the Mahagathbandhan.

In terms of vote share, it predicted 45 percent votes for NDA and 34.1 percent for the Mahagathbandhan.

In the exit poll, conducted after the last phase of polling, ABP CVoter predicted 104-128 seats for the NDA and 108-131 for the Mahagathbandhan.

In terms of vote share, it predicted 37.7 percent votes for NDA and 36.3 percent votes for the Mahagathbandhan.

The final results were within the range predicted by CVoter's exit poll.

The NDA won 125 seats with a vote share of 37.2 percent.

The Mahagathbandhan won 110 seats with a vote share of 37.2 percent.

Therefore between the first opinion poll six weeks before polling and the final results, NDA's vote share fell by close to 8 percentage points while that of the Mahagathbandhan increased by three percentage points.

Since CVoter's final exit poll proved to be right in the end, one can say that the change took place due to a genuine shift on the ground during the course of the campaign and not some sampling error.

What Could Change in The Poll Bound States?

Assam

One development that took place barely a couple of days after the opinion poll was that the Congress announced its alliance with the AIUDF, CPI, CPI(M), CPI(ML) and Anchalik Gana Morcha.

This is likely to alter equations to a great extent. While the Congress and AIUDF may gain by coming together in districts like Dhubri, Goalpara, Barpeta, Kokrajhar, Hailakandi and Karimganj, which are AIUDF's core areas, many say Congress could lose some support among Assamese Hindu voters.

Jailed leader Akhil Gogoi's newly formed Rajior Dal and All Assam Students' Union formed Assam Jatiya Parishad have formed an alliance and could emerge as an important new force among Assamese speaking voters, especially the Youth. And this new front could end up eating into the vote share of both BJP and Congress but more importantly, of the Asom Gana Parishad.

According to the CVoter poll, the vote share difference between the NDA and Congress is about eight percent. This is before the Congress' alliance with AIUDF and Left was finalised. If AIUDF's projected 8.2 percent and the Left's vote is added, the UPA could be at par with NDA.

Of course that doesn't necessarily mean a victory for UPA as it is quite possible that the Congress-AIUDF alliance wins seats in the latter's core areas with 60-70 percent votes but falls short in other areas.

Kerala

The CVoter survey has predicted that the LDF could make history by becoming the first government in several decades to be voted back to power.

It has predicted that LDF could get 41.6 percent votes and 85 seats while the UDF could get 34.6 percent votes and 53 seats. The BJP is predicted to get 15.3 percent votes and others 8.2 percent.

Now, it is not clear who he 8.2 percent 'others' are. Last time 'others' got just 2.8 percent votes in Kerala and there isn't a history of parties outside the LDF, UDF and NDA getting a sizable chunk of votes.

So it is likely that much of the 'others' vote could shift to either of the three main fronts.

Then, a few days after the opinion poll, the Congress announced that former CM Oommen Chandy will be leading its campaign in Kerala.

Chandy had been sidelined in state politics after his appointment as national general secretary. This has harmed the party's support, especially among Christians.

With Chandy leading the campaign, a chunk of the Christian voters which had drifted away from the Congress could return.

Tamil Nadu and Puducherry

Tamil Nadu is the only state where the CVoter has predicted a two-thirds majority. According to it the DMK led alliance, which includes the Congress, MDMK, VCK and IUML could win 162 out of 234 seats and a vote share of 41.1 percent, compared to 64 seats and 28.7 percent vote share of the AIADMK-BJP led alliance.

A major development that is likely to take place is the release of Sasikala Natarajan. This is a factor that could cut both ways. On one hand, it is expected that this could lead to a BJP brokered truce between the AIADMK and AMMK. The AMMK is expected to get 7.8 percent votes according to CVoter so this could shift to the AIADMK led alliance.

On the other hand, there are many who don't like Sasikala Natarajan so that could lead a section of AIADMK voters to either stay away or shift to another party.

Then, there are pinpricks in the DMK-led alliance as well, with MDMK and VCK deciding not to contest on the DMK symbol. There is also likely to be a tussle over seat sharing, with the DMK insistent of playing the big brother in the alliance.

However, it needs to be admitted that if the alliances stay the way they are, then a DMK win in Tamil Nadu is the safest prediction to make among all the poll bound states.

Puducherry, however, is a different matter. Here CVoter has predicted a defeat for the ruling Congress-DMK alliance and a win for the AIADMK-AINRC-BJP alliance.

Soon after the opinion poll, the DMK and Congress alliance has begun to unravel which could make matters difficult for the ruling Congress. But the DMK is likely to stake claim to the Vanniyar community vote which is the vote bank of Opposition AINRC leader N Rangaswamy.

So, both a split or a reunion between DMK and Congress could have uncertain consequences.

West Bengal

The most fascinating state this election season is West Bengal. As of now, CVoter has predicted 158 seats for the TMC with a vote share of 43 percent with the BJP getting 102 seats and 37.5 percent votes.

It has also predicted 11.8 percent votes and 30 seats for the Left-Congress alliance.

The day the opinion poll data was made public, West Bengal Chief Minister Mamata Banerjee announced that she will be contesting from the Nandigram seat, that is presently held by rebel TMC and now BJP leader Suvendu Adhikari. The BJP was counting on a complete sweep of the Jangalmahal region in which Nandigram lies.

Now, with Mamata Banerjee entering the electoral arena in that region, a complete BJP sweep may not be that easy.

Another X-Factor could be the Left-Congress vote. Some observers suggest that as the elections approach, this could reduce with the TMC and BJP gaining.

Then Abbas Siddiqui of Furfura Sharif, who is emerging as a new player among a section of Muslims, is yet to open his cards. He is said to be having negotiations with the Left-Congress alliance, AIMIM, TMC and even the BJP.

Staying with Muslim voters, it is possible that the prospect of BJP coming to power could compel Muslim voters to consolidate behind the TMC instead of voting for the Left-Congress alliance or AIMIM.

(The Quint)

January 20, 2021

Source: https://www.thequint.com/news/politics/abp-cvoter-opinion-poll-west-bengal-tamil-nadu-kerala-assam-puducherry-election

AFRICA

673-43-02/Poll

Majority of Ugandans prefer unrestricted access to Internet and social media, Afrobarometer survey shows

A majority of Ugandans want unrestricted access to the Internet and social media, Afrobarometer survey findings show.

Among the six in 10 Ugandans who are aware of social media, large majorities say these platforms keep people informed and enable them to have more impact on political processes. Even though many also say social media makes people more likely to believe “fake news” and more intolerant of people with different opinions, a majority of citizens say the overall effects of social media are mostly positive. Ugandans are more likely to blame politicians for knowingly sharing false information than social media users and activists.

Two days ahead of Thursday’s general elections, Uganda's Communication Commission (UCC) ordered all social media and message applications to be blocked after Facebook blocked some pro-government accounts. While the Uganda government rejects the idea that a foreign entity should decide for Ugandans who should or should not use social media, these survey results highlight the value that ordinary Ugandans attach to using social media.

(Afrobarometer)

January 13, 2021

Source: https://www.afrobarometer.org/press/majority-ugandans-prefer-unrestricted-access-internet-and-social-media-afrobarometer-survey

EUROPE

673-43-03/Poll

Working In Times Of Covid-19: When Austrians Started To Live With The Home Office

Above all, the respondents would like more freedom in the way they organize their work in the future: 79% favor more flexible working hours, 55% “hybrid” work (partly in the home office and partly at the previous place of work). Only 26% of Austrian employees want to work exclusively from home, 50% are in favor of face-to-face work. The acceptance of mobile work models is particularly high among young employees: 71% of those under 30 can imagine hybrid work, 40% pure home office.

(Gallup Austria)

January 19, 2021

Source: https://www.gallup.at/de/unternehmen/studien/2021/arbeiten-in-zeiten-von-covid-19/

673-43-04/Poll

Gender Representation in Company Management

Six out of ten inhabitants of the planet (60%) agree with this position.
Brazil and India became the leaders among the countries according to the agreement index - 80% of those who agreed.

The smallest number of those who agreed was in Russia (33%). At the same time, women more often than men approved this statement (40% vs. 23%). Among the supporters, 41% were over 55 years old and 30% were between 18 and 34 years old. Also among the consonants - 30% are married and 38% are single.

Data source: Romir / GlobalNR , January 2021

There were fewer people who agreed with the statement “Men should be more often represented in company management”:

Globally, only a third (32%) of the population supported this statement.
India again became the leader among countries on the index of consent: the majority of respondents (67%) liked this position as well.
Least of all agreed in South Korea (12%) and Germany (13%).

Among Russians, to one degree or another, 35% of respondents agree that men should be more often represented in managerial positions in companies. The largest number of those who supported this idea was in the age groups over 55 years old (37%) and 35-54 years old (33%). At the same time, men more often than women supported this position - 38% vs. 32%. Among those who agreed, 36% of Russians are childless and 32% with children. Of the total number of respondents with higher education (and above), 32% agree with this opinion, and 38% among those without higher education.

(Romir)

January 03, 2020

Source: https://romir.ru/studies/romirglobalnr-gendernaya-predstavlennost-v-rukovodstve-kompaniy

673-43-05/Poll

How good are Britons at following COVID rules, compared to other countries?

While the overwhelming majority of Britons say they’ve been following the rules, there is reason to suspect many may be exaggerating…

More than nine in ten Britons (91%) say they have been obedient – the fourth highest of the countries and regions we surveyed.

Self-reported virtue may not be a very reliable measure, however, with many people perhaps deluding themselves into thinking they’ve been good. What might be a more accurate gauge of compliance is to ask people how well they think others have been following the rules.

Britons’ answer to that question tells a very different story. Just 56% say that most people in their local community have generally been following the rules, joint-tenth overall. This 35-point discrepancy between Britons’ own integrity and that of others is the joint-fifth largest of the study.

There are similarly large differences in all the European countries surveyed. In Spain, where people are most likely to say they have followed the rules (94%), this figure falls to 56% when it comes to the belief that friends and neighbours are doing so.

The biggest disparity is in Mexico. While 84% of Mexicans say they personally have been following their country’s coronavirus rules, just 30% say most people in their community are – a whopping 54-point gap.

It is in China that people are most likely to feel they live among rule-abiding neighbours. As many as 80% of Chinese people say that most people in their community have been complying with the rules, comparatively close to the 90% who say they have been doing so themselves.

The situation is similar in Singapore, where 94% say they have been keeping to the regulations and 79% say most people in their local area are doing the same.

(YouGov)

January 15, 2021

Source: https://yougov.co.uk/topics/health/articles-reports/2021/01/15/how-good-are-britons-following-covid-rules-compare

673-43-06/Poll

What times are Britons willing to get their COVID-19 vaccine?

Many Britons would be willing to have their vaccine appointment late into the night and into the early morning

After initially only offering COVID-19 vaccines between 8am and 8pm, the government has announced that it will offer vaccinations around clock as soon as possible.

Previously, Downing Street had said that all-night vaccinations weren’t being offered as there was “not a clamour for appointments late into the night or early in the morning”, but new YouGov research shows that, in fact, many Brits are willing to take late night and early morning slots for their jabs.

Two in five Britons (43%) would be willing to have their COVID-19 vaccine appointment during the graveyard shift (between midnight and 5.59am), compared to 32% who would turn down an appointment during these early morning hours. Over half (56%) of people would be willing to have their appointment between 6am and the current appointment start time of 8am, while only 21% would be not be willing to having their shot this early.

At least seven in ten people would be willing take appointments during the rollout’s current operating hours of 8am-8pm, with the most popular times being between 12pm and 5.59pm when 77% of people would be willing to take an appointment.

Even after hours, most Britons are still willing to get their vaccine. Two thirds of people (67%) would be willing to have an appointment between 8pm and 9.59pm, compared to just 12% who would not. Another 53% would be willing to show up during the night between 10pm and 11.59pm for their vaccine, while around two in five (23%) would prefer not to have an appointment so late in the night.

Appointments at inconvenient times are more popular with men. Half of men (49%) willing to take a slot between midnight and 5.59am, as do 59% for between 10pm and 11.59pm. Among women those figures are about ten points lower, at 37% and 48% respectively.

Older Britons are also more willing than their younger counterparts to take an out-of-hours appointment for their COVID-19 vaccine. For example, 56% of the over 55s would be willing to venture out between 10pm and 11:59pm to get their vaccine compared to 48% of the 18 to 24-year olds willing to do the same.

(YouGov)

January 13, 2020

Source: https://yougov.co.uk/topics/politics/articles-reports/2021/01/13/what-times-covid-19-vaccine-midnight

673-43-07/Poll

COVID-19 has made children more worried, scared, and lonely

Two in five children reported feeling lonelier as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic

Children are feeling more worried as a result of the pandemic

Broadly speaking, this research shows an increase in negative emotions, at the same time as a decrease in positive feelings. Over half (56%) of children reported feeling more worried compared to how they were before March this year, while 36% felt no change, and only 4% said they are worrying less.

More than four in ten (42%) said they have felt more trapped since March last year, the same proportion (42%) that reported feeling more stressed. Just 6% of young people said they have felt these emotions less during this year. A further two in five (41%) felt more scared than they used to, with only 5% reporting feeling this way less than previously.

Just over a third (37%) of children said they have felt lonelier since March, while half (50%) said this feeling didn't change, and 9% feel less lonely than they used too.

Girls (42%) were also more likely than boys (33%) to have said they have felt lonelier than they normally do, and this gender split is reflected in all of the other negative emotions YouGov asked about. For example, girls are also more likely to have felt scared (46% versus 37%) and stressed (47% versus 38%) compared to boys.

(YouGov)

January 12, 2021

Source: https://yougov.co.uk/topics/health/articles-reports/2021/01/12/covid-19-has-made-children-more-worried-scared-and

673-43-08/Poll

Nine in ten British drivers don’t change their tyres over in winter and summer

Those who do swap out their tyres are more likely to be parents: 47% are responsible for at least one child under the age of 18 compared to a quarter (25%) of car owners overall. Child safety may therefore inform their decisions. They are also more likely to live in Scotland: 17% live north of the border (compared to 8% of Brits nationally). With greater levels of rain, ice and snow than in the rest of the UK, Scottish drivers may have a greater need for appropriate tyres to match these tougher conditions.

More than half of seasonal tyre switchers and car owners in general are most likely to say that “overall price” is a factor when buying new tyres – but switchers are less likely to be motivated by money. Where nearly two-thirds of car owners (64%) say overall cost is a factor, this falls to just half (51%) of tyre switchers. Switchers are more likely to prioritise durability (33% vs. 24% of car owners), tread life (33% vs. 23% of car owners), and fuel efficiency (32% vs. 21% of car owners). They’re also twice as likely to prioritise size (31% vs. 16% of car owners) and traction (30% vs. 17% of car owners).

Those who switch tyres regularly are more likely to say they don’t need a mechanic (33% vs. 10%), suggesting that this demographic is more likely to be enthusiastic about automotives. This assumption gains further traction given that 61% of this group are more likely to favour a car with a powerful engine, compared to just 41% of those who own at least one car.

Nearly half (48%) of tyre-switchers own or jointly own diesel cars, compared to 34% of car owners nationwide. Known for faster tyre wear due to heavier engines, diesel car owners may be more conscious of tyre care, which may also explain their greater inclination to make seasonal tyre changes.

(YouGov)

January 13, 2021

Source: https://yougov.co.uk/topics/transport/articles-reports/2021/01/13/nine-ten-british-drivers-dont-change-their-tyres-o

NORTH AMERICA

673-43-09/Poll

Leger’s North American Tracker – January 19, 2021

A COVID-19 CURFEW

3 out of 4 Quebecers are in favour of the night-time curfew imposed to help control the spread of the virus, but 32% doubt its effectiveness.
39% of Canadians who live outside Quebec feel that a night-time curfew would be an effective way to reduce the spread of COVID-19 in their community, 41% do not, and 20% are unsure.

AT THEIR LOWEST…

The proportion of Canadians who report that their mental health has been excellent/very good since the beginning of the COVID-19 crisis (32%) has been gradually trending downward since November 16, 2020, and has reached its lowest point.
Canadians’ overall satisfaction with the measures put in place by their federal (60%), provincial (58%) and local/municipal (57%) governments to fight the COVID-19 pandemic is at its lowest since March 23, 2020.

TRUMP AND SOCIAL MEDIA

78% of Canadians and 56% of Americans agree with the social media sites that have decided to ban Donald Trump.
86% of Canadians and 66% of Americans think social media sites should ban users who are inciting violence, promoting hatred, or sharing misinformation.

(Leger360)

January 19, 2021

Source: https://leger360.com/surveys/legers-north-american-tracker-january-19-2021/

673-43-10/Poll

How lawmakers’ social media activity changed in the days after the U.S. Capitol riot

Below is a closer look at how members’ posts – as well as their followers’ reactions to those posts – changed between Jan. 6 and Jan. 10, 2021. The analysis is part of a larger body of research that the Center has conducted in recent years into the way members of Congress use social media. This analysis is based on public posts from lawmakers’ official, campaign and personal accounts, and includes freshman members of the 117th Congress unless otherwise noted.

How we did this

Members of the two parties framed the day’s events at the Capitol using different language. The vast majority of members of Congress in both parties weighed in on the events of Jan. 6 on Twitter or Facebook. All but six lawmakers posted during this period, and 97% of Democrats and 96% of Republicans who did so mentioned the term “Capitol” in at least one post. Nearly as many (90% of Democrats and 88% of Republicans) used the words “violence” or “violent.”

But beyond these basic similarities, lawmakers from the two parties discussed the events using different language. For instance, congressional Democrats were far more likely than Republicans to use terms such as “terrorism,” “insurrection,” “mob” and “democracy.” And although 95% of Democratic lawmakers mentioned the word “Trump” in at least one social media post during this time period, just 39% of congressional Republicans did so.

Audience engagement with posts from Democratic lawmakers increased on and after the day of rioting. The median Democratic member of Congress saw a substantial boost in audience engagement on both Facebook (reactions and shares) and Twitter (favorites and retweets) in the days after the violence and destruction at the Capitol. On a day-over-day basis, the increase between Jan. 5 and Jan. 6 was the second-largest ever observed among Democrats since the Center began tracking congressional social media posts in early 2015. The largest occurred on June 22, 2016, when the party staged a “no bill, no break” sit-in to demand gun control legislation.

By contrast, the typical Republican member’s audience engagement on both platforms stayed roughly the same or declined slightly (depending on the engagement measure being used) in the period after the attack, albeit from a relatively high baseline. Notably, these declines in audience engagement were largely concentrated among Republicans who objected to the certification of Democrat Joe Biden’s Electoral College victory.

The average tweet posted by the typical Republican in this group between Jan. 6 and Jan. 10 received 60% fewer favorites and 56% fewer retweets compared with the five days prior to the attack. In contrast, favorites and retweets among the minority of Republicans who voted to proceed with certification more than doubled over this same period. The same trend also occurred on Facebook, where Republicans who voted to certify saw a modest boost in engagement while those who objected experienced a decline in reactions and shares.

The number of comments and “angry” reactions in response to Republican lawmakers’ Facebook posts surged after the riot. In the days following the attempted takeover of the Capitol, the typical member of Congress received a record-breaking volume of user comments in response to their posts on Facebook. The average number of comments per post for members of both parties reached their highest levels since at least 2015. Republican lawmakers experienced an especially substantial increase in comments during this time.

Republican lawmakers also experienced a surge in “angry” reactions to their posts on Facebook. The angry emoji accounted for 17% of all reactions to the typical Republican’s average post on the day after the attack, the second-highest level ever observed among Republican lawmakers (the all-time peak occurred just weeks earlier, when the House passed its COVID-19 relief bill on Dec. 22). Facebook posts from Democrats did not see a similar increase in angry reactions.

A majority of congressional Republicans lost Twitter followers in the wake of the Capitol riot. More than nine-in-ten (93%) of Republican members with at least one Twitter account experienced a net loss in Twitter followers between Jan. 6 and Jan. 10, with the median Republican losing 4% of their followers across all their accounts on the platform. These losses were more pronounced among Republicans who voted against Electoral College certification: These members lost an average of 5% of their followers, compared with 3% among Republicans who voted for certification. By contrast, 98% of Democratic members saw a net increase in followers over the same period.

These changes in congressional followers came during a period in which Twitter announced the removal of more than 70,000 accounts in an effort to curb the spread of “coordinated harmful activity” on the platform. However, it is unclear whether or not the drop in followers among Republican lawmakers can be directly attributed to the platform’s actions. Facebook follower counts for legislators in both parties remained relatively stable during this time.

As daily COVID-19 deaths reached new highs, lawmakers’ discussion of the coronavirus outbreak continued to decline. The United States recorded more than 1.2 million new COVID-19 cases and 15,000 new deaths in the five days following the Capitol riot. But on lawmakers’ social media accounts, discussion of the pandemic declined substantially. Lawmaker mentions of the terms “COVID” or “coronavirus” on Facebook and Twitter dropped to the second-lowest level since March 2020 (with the lowest point occurring in the days following the 2020 election). Indeed, the number of daily deaths from COVID-19 has recently surpassed the number of weekly mentions of the words “COVID” and “coronavirus” on social media by members of Congress.

In the months preceding the riot, a number of Republicans in Congress appear to have expanded their social media presence to Parler. The alternative social media platform Parler became inaccessible to the public on Jan. 11, when it was banned from the use of Amazon hosting services after being delisted by the Google and Apple app stores the week before. But prior to that point, a number of congressional Republicans had created accounts on the platform.

As of Nov. 30, 2020, Pew Research Center had identified as many as 138 accounts that appeared to belong to 108 Republican members of the House and Senate. Meanwhile, the Center identified 59 Republican legislators who mentioned the platform on Twitter or Facebook between September 2018 (when Parler first launched) and Jan. 10, often in an effort to encourage their followers to join them there. In contrast, just three Democratic legislators appeared to have registered accounts on the platform during the same period.

These numbers include some Parler accounts that appeared to belong to a legislator but had not yet been officially verified by the platform. However, because the site and its contents are now inaccessible it is impossible to determine the veracity of these accounts – and also impossible to determine how many other lawmakers joined the platform after Nov. 30.

(PEW)

January 15, 2021

Source: https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2021/01/15/how-lawmakers-social-media-activity-changed-in-the-days-after-the-u-s-capitol-riot/

673-43-11/Poll

A record number of women are serving in the 117th Congress

Women make up just over a quarter of all members of the 117th Congress – the highest percentage in U.S. history and a considerable increase from where things stood even a decade ago.

Counting both the House of Representatives and the Senate, 144 of 539 seats – or 27% – are held by women. That represents a 50% increase from the 96 women who were serving in the 112th Congress a decade ago, though it remains far below the female share of the overall U.S. population. A record 120 women are serving in the newly elected House, accounting for 27% of the total. In the Senate, women hold 24 of 100 seats, one fewer than the record number of seats they held in the last Congress.

This analysis counts voting as well as nonvoting members of Congress. Figures for the 117th Congress exclude two House seats that were vacant as of early January. It also excludes Sens. Kamala Harris, who is expected to resign her seat ahead of her inauguration as vice president on Jan. 20, and Kelly Loeffler, who lost a runoff election in Georgia earlier this month. Both are set to be replaced by men.

How we did this

Women make up a much bigger share of congressional Democrats (38%) than Republicans (14%). Across both chambers, there are 106 Democratic women and 38 Republican women in the new Congress. Women account for 40% of House Democrats and 32% of Senate Democrats, compared with 14% of House Republicans and 16% of Senate Republicans.

The 2020 general election sent just one new congresswoman to the Senate, Republican Cynthia Lummis of Wyoming, making her the first female senator to represent that state.

Republican women made significant gains in the House in the most recent election cycle. Of the 27 newly elected representatives who are women, two-thirds (18) are Republicans. Between the 115th and 116th Congresses, the number of GOP women in the House fell from 25 to 15. That number doubled this year to 30, the highest total ever.

California Rep. Nancy Pelosi, a Democrat and the first female speaker of the House, is serving her fourth term as speaker after being reelected earlier this month.

The partisan gender division hasn’t always looked this way. Until the 1929 stock market crash, most of the dozen women elected to the House were Republicans, and for several decades afterward the two parties were generally close in numbers in that chamber. But the gap widened in the 1970s and has persisted, despite a temporary narrowing during the Reagan-Bush 1980s. Of the 232 women elected to the House in 1992 or later, 157 (68%) have been Democrats, as have 27 of the 42 women (64%) who have served in the Senate since 1992.

The history of women in Congress

Women have been in Congress for more than a century. The first, Republican Jeannette Rankin of Montana, was elected to the House in 1916, two years after her state gave women the vote. But it’s only been in the past few decades that women have served in more substantial numbers. About two-thirds of the women ever elected to the House (232 of 352, including the newest members of the 117th Congress) have been elected in 1992 or later.

The pattern is similar in the Senate: 42 of the 58 women who have ever served in the Senate – including Lummis, the newest female senator – took office in 1992 or later.

The 19th Amendment, which extended the franchise to women across the nation, was ratified in 1920. That November, Alice Mary Robertson of Oklahoma became the first woman to defeat an incumbent congressman. (She lost the seat back to him two years later.) In 1922, veteran suffragist Rebecca Latimer Felton of Georgia was appointed to fill a vacant Senate seat; when Congress was unexpectedly called back into session, Felton was sworn in as the first-ever female senator, though she only served for a day.

While women remained scarce in the Senate well into the 1980s, their numbers gradually, though not consistently, increased in the House – generally paralleling the expansion of women’s roles in society more broadly. In 1928, seven women were elected to the 71st Congress, a record at the time, and two more joined them later via special election. But that trend plateaued during the Great Depression and World War II. It wasn’t until after the war that the upward trajectory of women in Congress resumed, with 18 women serving in the House in 1961-62.

Although the 1970s saw prominent figures such as Barbara Jordan, Elizabeth Holtzman and Bella Abzug enter Congress, women’s overall numbers didn’t change much until 1981, when their House caucus exceeded 20 members for the first time. The big jump, however, came in 1992 – later dubbed “The Year of the Woman” – when four new female senators and 24 new congresswomen were elected. Academics have offered various explanations for why 1992 was such a breakthrough year for women in Congress, including an unusually large number of open seats due to redistricting and backlash from the Clarence Thomas-Anita Hill hearings.

‘Widow’s succession’ in Congress

Well into the 1970s, one of the most common ways for a woman to enter Congress was by succeeding her deceased husband or father, either by election or appointment. Of the 90 women who served in the House between 1916 and 1980, 31 were initially elected to their husband’s seat after he died; three were chosen to replace their husbands on the ballot when the men died before Election Day; and one, Winnifred Mason Huck of Illinois, was elected in 1922 to fill the last four months of her late father’s term. (Another early congresswoman, Katherine Gudger Langley of Kentucky, won her husband’s seat in 1926 after he resigned following his conviction for violating Prohibition laws.)

Like Langley, most of the holders of these so-called “widow’s succession” seats stayed in Congress for only a term or two. But some went on to distinguished careers on Capitol Hill. Margaret Chase Smith of Maine, for instance, won a special election in 1940 to fill the last seven months of her husband’s term. Smith went on to win four full House terms on her own, then was elected to four terms in the Senate, thereby becoming the first woman to serve in both chambers. Lindy Boggs, who was elected to her husband’s seat in 1973 after he was presumed killed in a plane crash, served nearly 18 years. She later was named U.S. ambassador to the Holy See.

Six of the 14 women who served in the Senate before 1980 were either elected or appointed to fill their late husbands’ seats. Of those, only two (Hattie Caraway of Arkansas and Maurine Brown Neuberger of Oregon) subsequently won full terms in their own right.

(PEW)

January 15, 2021

Source: https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2021/01/15/a-record-number-of-women-are-serving-in-the-117th-congress/

673-43-12/Poll

Americans say U.S. can learn a lot from other countries on handling the coronavirus outbreak, other issues

But attitudes on the value of lessons learned from other nations about policy issues remain partisan. Democrats and those who lean toward the Democratic Party are far more willing to say the U.S. can learn from other countries than are Republicans and those who lean Republican on all five issues asked about in the survey. Young Americans, who are generally more positive in their opinions of international organizations, are also more enthusiastic in saying the U.S. government can learn from other countries.

These are among the findings of a Pew Research Center survey of 1,003 U.S. adults conducted Nov. 7 to Dec. 10, 2020.

How we did this

When asked whether the U.S. government can learn from other countries on dealing with five major issues, a majority of Americans say the U.S. can learn a great deal or fair amount on each. Around three-quarters of Americans believe the U.S. government can learn a lot on handling the coronavirus outbreak and improving health care within the U.S., with only a quarter saying the government can learn not too much or nothing at all.

On dealing with climate change, 72% of Americans think that the U.S. government can learn from other nations, including 41% who think the U.S. can learn a great deal.

Smaller majorities say lessons from other countries would have value for improving race relations (67%) and dealing with the economy (63%) in the U.S.

There are major partisan divisions on whether the U.S. could look abroad for solutions to domestic problems. In all cases, Democrats are far more likely than Republicans to say that the U.S. can learn from other countries, with the biggest differences being on addressing climate change and improving health care. For example, 92% of Democrats say the U.S. government can learn a great deal or fair amount from countries around the world on dealing with climate change, but only 44% of Republicans say the same.

This comports with previous research on partisan divisions over the value of working with other countries to address COVID-19, with Republicans generally expressing more skepticism of international cooperation than Democrats. Still, four-in-ten Republicans or more say there can be some benefit to looking at other countries for solutions across each of the policy issues examined.

There are also significant age differences on the question of whether the U.S. can learn from other countries. Overall, while a majority of Americans in all three age brackets share the view that the government has a great deal or fair amount to learn from abroad on health care, race relations, the economy, the coronavirus outbreak and climate change, younger Americans are even more likely to hold this view. On improving health care, for example, 86% of Americans ages 18 to 29 think there is usefulness in learning from other countries’ experiences compared with 67% of Americans who are 50 and older.

While large majorities among both men and women think the U.S. can learn a great deal or fair amount about handling the coronavirus outbreak, women are more likely than men to express this view (78% vs. 70%, respectively). And 50% of women think the U.S. can learn a great deal from other countries on this issue, compared with 41% of men. Earlier research shows that women are generally more likely than men to report that the pandemic has changed their lives.

American women are also more likely than men to think the U.S. can learn from other countries on how to address climate change and improve the economy.

About six-in-ten adults (63%) say the U.S. can look to other countries for lessons on improving the economy. However, people who see the current economic situation in the U.S. as bad are more likely than those who see it as good to support the U.S. learning about improving the economy from other countries. For example, 36% of those with a negative economic outlook say the U.S. can learn a great deal from other countries, compared with 21% of those who say the economic situation is good.

Those who respond that they trust the U.S. government to do what is right for the country are more likely than those who do not trust the government to say the U.S. can learn from abroad on two major issues: addressing climate change and improving health care. About three-quarters (77%) of those who trust the national government think the U.S. can learn about combatting climate change from other countries, while 67% of those who do not trust the U.S. government agree.

(PEW)

January 14, 2021

Source: https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2021/01/14/americans-say-u-s-can-learn-a-lot-from-other-countries-on-handling-the-coronavirus-outbreak-other-issues/

673-43-13/Poll

Pandemic Could Be Recipe for More Cooking at Home

In most parts of the world, the number of meals people reported cooking at home didn't change much from 2018 to 2019. Results from the second year of the first-ever global study of home cooking trends show that the number of meals personally cooked at home in the past week rose just slightly, from 6.5 meals in 2018 to 6.9 meals in 2019.

Custom graphic. The number of meals cooked at home increased between 2018 and 2019. The average number of meals cooked at home in 2018 was 6.5, globally, and in 2019 was 6.9. This is a statistically significant difference. Latin America and Asia also showed significant changes from 2018 to 2019.

The increase in the global number is largely driven by people cooking more meals at home in Latin America and in a few key countries in Asia. While most of the increase is attributable to people cooking more dinners, people in Latin America also reported cooking more lunches at home.

The results from this study are important -- particularly in the context of the current global pandemic -- because how much time people spend cooking, what resources they have and use to do so, and with whom they share a meal are all windows into people's lives. Cooking is also a reflection of the health, consumer spending and carbon footprint of a country's citizens. This, in turn, has consequences for the world's economy and affects global food supply chains.

Cooking Habits Changed in 13 Countries by at Least 15%

While cooking habits were stable across most countries between 2018 and 2019, in 13 countries, the average number of meals people were cooking increased or decreased by at least 15%. In countries such as Lebanon, Mauritius, Ivory Coast, India and Pakistan, the typical number of meals prepared in the previous week increased in 2019. Meanwhile, in places such as Montenegro, North Macedonia, Bosnia and Herzegovina, and Georgia, people reported cooking fewer meals.

Countries Where Changes in Home Cooking (Lunch and Dinner) Increased or Decreased by More Than 15% Between 2018 and 2019

	2018	2019	Year-over-year change
Lebanon	2.8	3.9	+39%
Mauritius	4.5	5.9	+31%
Ivory Coast	4.6	5.8	+26%
India	6.1	7.5	+23%
Pakistan	4.5	5.5	+22%
Jordan	2.8	3.4	+21%
Montenegro	5.7	4.5	-21%
North Macedonia	6.5	5.2	-20%
Slovenia	5.5	6.6	+20%
Gabon	4.2	5.0	+19%
Georgia	6.4	5.2	-19%
Bosnia and Herzegovina	7.4	6.1	-18%
Mozambique	6.3	7.3	+16%
It is worth noting that the question order of the survey was changed between the 2018 and 2019 fielding periods to ease respondent burden and improve the speed of the module. If analysis of the 2018 and 2019 data had shown a systematic variation in the data, this change could be attributed to this fact. However, many of the countries where personal cooking habits changed by more than 15% in 2019 also experienced serious economic or social shocks, which very well might have forced people to alter aspects of their day-to-day lives, including their cooking habits. This suggests changes to the questionnaire had a minimal impact on reported cooking habits.
GALLUP AND COOKPAD

Many of the countries where cooking habits changed substantially in 2019 also experienced a series of economic or social shocks, which may have prompted changes in people's lives, including their cooking habits.

In Lebanon, for example, the number of meals cooked at home per week rose from 2.8 meals in 2018 to 3.9 meals in 2019. The surveys in Lebanon took place amid tremendous political and economic turmoil, as reflected in people's responses about their living standards. The percentage of Lebanese who said they were satisfied with their standard of living in 2019 was nearly 30 percentage points lower than it was the previous year. It's highly likely that many Lebanese could not afford to eat out.

The effect on the service industry in Lebanon was devastating. According to an Al Jazeera article cited in the report, "Some 25,000 employees lost their jobs in the [four]-month period between October [2019] and January [2020] … in [the restaurant] sector that used to employ 150,000 people."

Women More Likely Than Men to Prepare and Eat Meals at Home

Looking at dinner in particular -- a key mealtime that brings together families or communities to not only eat, but also form connections and deepen bonds -- people fall into one of four groups: those who frequently eat and prepare home-cooked dinners, those who frequently eat home-cooked dinners but rarely prepare them, those who eat and prepare dinners less frequently, and those who rarely do either.

The largest group worldwide falls into the first group; 40% of people frequently eat and prepare home-cooked dinners. People in this group are predominantly female (72% female vs. 28% male). Worldwide, women are over twice as likely to be in this group than men, with 57% of all women being people who frequently cook and eat at home, compared with 22% of men.

This large gap is consistent across all regions of the world except Northern America, where women are only slightly more likely to be in the group that frequently cooks and eats dinner at home -- with 34% of women in this region falling in this group, compared with 23% of men.

Custom graphic. The percentage of people who stay home and cook dinner, based on gender, shows significant differences across all regions. For example, in MENA, 6% of men stay home and cook dinner, while 47% of women do.

Conversely, those in the second group -- who frequently eat home-cooked dinners but rarely prepare them -- are predominantly male (75% male vs. 25% female). This male-dominated group is particularly prevalent in societies where there are relatively large gaps between men and women in key areas of human development as defined by the International Development Association gender equality rating and the UNDP Gender Inequality Index.

More analysis is needed of the people who either don't prepare or eat home-cooked meals very frequently or do so only rarely (the third and fourth groups). They may be doing so not necessarily out of personal preference, but possibly because of food scarcity at the national level and self-reported challenges in affording food in the past year. Both issues have only been magnified during the global pandemic.

Looking Ahead

The results from the latest Gallup and Cookpad study add to the growing body of what the world knows about the role that cooking plays in people's lives. Gallup collected and is analyzing data from more than 100 countries in 2020, and we expect to learn even more this year, when we anticipate significant changes in home cooking trends.

The economic effects of the pandemic have already been proven to hit vulnerable populations the hardest. This means that many of the countries already highlighted in the first two Gallup and Cookpad reports as having significant cooking increases or decreases will no doubt also be among the most affected by food scarcity during the pandemic.

(Gallup USA)

January 15, 2020

Source: https://news.gallup.com/opinion/gallup/327860/pandemic-recipe-cooking-home.aspx

673-43-14/Poll

Value of Medical Messengers Seen in Arizona Poll on Vaccines

A recent study by Gallup for the Center for the Future of Arizona finds that Arizonans are likely to find messages about the proven safety and efficacy of the vaccine to be important or very important. They are also most likely to trust medical professionals (77%) and scientists or researchers (72%) for public health information. By contrast, Arizonans are least likely to trust social media, a common source of misinformation about the pandemic.

Arizonans' Trust of Sources of Public Health Information, by Political Affiliation

To what extent do you trust the following sources of public health information? - Percent 5 or 4 (very or somewhat trusting)

	All Arizonans	Republicans	Democrats	Independents
	%	%	%	%
Medical professionals	77	66	89	80
Scientists or researchers	73	53	88	79
Family members or friends	35	35	37	33
President Trump	29	68	2	20
My local mayor	26	24	32	22
The governor of Arizona	22	40	9	19
Religious leaders	19	26	18	15
Traditional media	19	8	38	12
Internet	13	9	17	13
Social media	4	3	7	4
CENTER FOR THE FUTURE OF ARIZONA/GALLUP, AUG 28-OCT 26, 2020

These results come from a representative survey of 3,586 Arizona adults conducted from Aug. 28-Oct. 26, 2020, which included oversamples of Black and Native American residents to ensure sufficient sample sizes of those subgroups for analysis. The full survey measuring Arizonans' views across a broad range of coronavirus issues is scheduled for release in April 2021. However, this information about vaccines is being provided now because of its current relevance to public adoption of recently approved vaccines.

Importantly, the survey was completed prior to the November announcements that vaccines by Pfizer/BioNTech and Moderna are highly effective, or approval of those vaccines by the FDA. There is some evidence these events may have raised vaccine acceptance rates at the national level. Arizonans' willingness to trust various sources of health information may also have been affected by these events, with prior studies suggesting major events can lead to modest changes in Americans' willingness to trust authorities.

Though there were significant differences in Arizonans' views about sources by political affiliation, at least two-thirds of each partisan group agreed that they trust medical professionals (by selecting 5 or 4 on a five-point agreement scale) -- including 66% of Republicans, 89% of Democrats and 80% of independents. Unsurprisingly, Republicans were far more likely than Democrats or independents to say they trust President Trump (68% vs. 2% and 20%, respectively) and Governor Doug Ducey (40% vs. 9%) -- both Republicans. Democrats were more likely than Republicans to say they trusted traditional media for public health information, but no more than 7% in any partisan group trusted social media.

In some cases, recruiting members of local communities for vaccine messaging may be particularly important in building trust. In Arizona, leveraging social networks to convey information may be particularly effective among Black and Native American residents, given their higher-than-average likelihood to say they trust friends and family members for public health information. Trust among Latino Arizonans, who represent 32% of the state's population, is similar to that of White and Asian Arizonans and similar to Arizonans overall.

20210105_CFA-TrustFriendsFamily@2x

To what extent do you trust the following sources of public health information? Friends and family members

Vaccine Hesitancy Common in Arizona, as in the U.S. Overall

In line with the Southwestern trends, Arizona's average coronavirus case tally had been climbing since early October, and the state was one of 15 to post record average case counts in early December. Vaccine distribution promises to lower the state's case counts dramatically in the coming months.

However, though vaccine acceptance rates may have risen in line with national figures in more recent months, the August-October CFA/Gallup survey found widespread hesitancy among Arizona residents. Overall, 40% of Arizonans said that when a vaccine becomes available, they would choose to get it, while 23% said they would not, and 37% said they were unsure. Similar to political and racial patterns among the U.S. population, Republicans, as well as Black and Latino adults, were among the least likely Arizona residents to say they would get the vaccine when it became available.

In a series of follow-up questions, Arizonans were asked about key factors in their decision on whether or not to be vaccinated. The safety and effectiveness of the vaccine was most commonly seen as important or very important, with 82% rating it a 5 or 4 on the five-point agreement scale. Just over half (55%) rated their doctor's recommendation as important -- though this figure rises among older Arizonans (to 63% among those age 55 and older), who are more likely to see medical providers on a regular basis.

Convenience in getting the vaccine was least commonly cited as a consideration; nonetheless, almost half of Arizonans (45%) said it was a very or somewhat important factor. Considering the logistical challenges in distributing vaccines with precise temperature requirements and two-dose administration in areas with weaker infrastructure, such as Native American tribal lands, convenience may be a substantial barrier for those who have been among the hardest hit by the virus. Lower-income Arizonans were particularly likely to say convenience was an important factor, including a majority (55%) of those with household incomes under $36,000.

20210105_CFA-COVIDVaccine_1@2x

How important will the following be to you when considering a COVID-19 vaccination?

Trust in Health Officials, Scientists Much Lower Among Vaccine Skeptics in Arizona

Arizonans who said they would be vaccinated are much more likely than those unwilling to be vaccinated to trust medical professionals (88% vs. 54%, respectively) or scientists (86% vs. 47%) for public health information. However, trust among those who said they were unsure about being vaccinated aligned more closely with those willing to get it, with about eight in 10 (79%) placing faith in medical professionals.

Arizonans unwilling to be vaccinated are generally equally or less likely than the pro-vaccination group to place trust in most of the ten sources featured in the survey, with two exceptions: Nearly half of Arizonans unwilling to be vaccinated (48%) are very or somewhat trusting of the president for public health information, compared with 29% of all Arizonans. Those unwilling to be vaccinated are also more likely than Arizonans overall to trust religious leaders for public health information, at 26% vs. 19%, respectively.

Arizonans' Trust in Sources of Public Health Information, by Their Views on COVID-19 Vaccination

Percent 5 or 4 (very or somewhat trusting)

	All Arizonans	Plan to be vaccinated	Do not plan to be vaccinated	Unsure about vaccination
	%	%	%	%
Medical professionals	77	88	54	79
Scientists or researchers	72	86	47	73
Family members or friends	35	36	36	35
The president	28	24	48	21
My local mayor	26	35	16	23
The governor of Arizona	23	23	25	21
Religious leaders	20	18	26	18
Traditional media	19	27	8	17
Internet	14	16	10	13
Social media	5	5	6	4
CENTER FOR THE FUTURE OF ARIZONA/GALLUP, AUG 28-OCT 26, 2020

Bottom Line

As in other states, Arizona public health officials must understand the factors influencing residents' decision to be vaccinated amid widespread reluctance. Arizonans are clearly most concerned about the safety and effectiveness of a vaccine, criteria that national tracking studies have also consistently highlighted as essential to all Americans. The challenge for Arizona's public health professionals is assuaging fears among those most likely to be skeptical of government-supported efforts to produce and distribute the vaccine.

The good news is that public relations efforts can use the most credible sources of information, messengers that include medical professionals and scientists, along with specific messages about vaccines' proof of safety and effectiveness to raise the percentage of Arizonans who are vaccinated. Public relations efforts would benefit from further study to identify specific messages and messengers -- including celebrities and other public figures -- that may be most effective at building trust among Arizonans.

One consideration for public health professionals wishing to increase acceptance of the vaccine is the importance placed on convenience by low-income Arizonans. This could be especially important in rural communities where the medical infrastructure is not well developed. Further, particularly among the state's Black and Native American communities, encouraging ordinary citizens who have confidence in vaccination to spread the word among friends and family could be helpful.

(Gallup USA)

January 15, 2021

Source: https://news.gallup.com/opinion/gallup/328238/value-medical-messengers-seen-arizona-poll-vaccines.aspx

673-43-15/Poll

One in Four Black Workers Report Discrimination at Work

Reports of Experiences of Discrimination at Work, by Race/Ethnicity

In the past 12 months, have you felt discriminated against at work?

	Yes
	%
U.S. employees	18
Black employees	24
Hispanic employees	24
White employees	15
GALLUP PANEL, NOV. 6-DEC. 1, 2020

These findings, derived from a large-scale Gallup web survey conducted in English Nov. 6-Dec. 1, 2020, reveal that workplace discrimination reported by Black and Hispanic workers exceeds reports of such experiences among White employees (15%) by a substantial margin. More than 8,000 respondents were surveyed, including more than 3,500 White workers, more than 2,000 Black workers and more than 2,000 Hispanic workers.

Experiences of workplace discrimination are similar between Black men (27%) and Black women (23%), as well as between Black employees in households earning less than $90,000 annually (24%) and those in households earning $90,000 or more (25%).

Age, however, is a significant factor in Black employees' experiences with workplace discrimination. Black workers younger than 40 (31%) are almost twice as likely as Black workers aged 40 and older (17%) to report having experienced discrimination at work in the past year. This conforms with the Center's previous findings that young Black adults experience microaggressions at greater rates.

Young Hispanic employees (31%) are the only other racial or ethnic subgroup to report such a high level of discrimination at work. This figure is nearly twice as high as the rate among Hispanic employees aged 40 and older (17%).

Race-Based Discrimination the Most Common Type Experienced by Black Workers

In a follow-up question among those who perceived discrimination, 75% of Black workers indicated that the discrimination they experienced was based on their race or ethnicity -- considerably higher than figures for Hispanic (61%) and White employees (42%).

The 75% figure among Black employees is constant across gender, age and income subgroups, with similar proportions of each saying the discrimination they experienced in the past 12 months was due to their race.

Reports of the Type of Discrimination Experienced at Work, by Race/Ethnicity

Still thinking about the past 12 months, were you discriminated against in any of the following ways? Race and/or ethnicity

	Yes, discriminated against because of race/ethnicity
	%
U.S. employees	52
Black employees	75
Hispanic employees	61
White employees	42
Among those who experienced discrimination at work in the past 12 months
GALLUP PANEL, NOV. 6-DEC. 1, 2020

Bottom Line

Black Americans experience various mistreatments at much higher rates than other racial or ethnic groups do. And while racial discrimination in the workplace is illegal under federal law, about one in four Black employees report having been on the receiving end of discrimination at work in the past year alone.

Gallup has previously found that employee engagement "is linked to how an employee feels their employer would respond to discrimination concerns" and that engaged employees are much more confident that their employer would "do what is right" compared with those who are less engaged. Previous research from Gallup also finds that employees are less likely to feel discriminated against at work if they have great managers who build a culture of high engagement and respect.

Among young Black employees, who are early in their careers and looking to establish a professional footing, experiences of workplace discrimination are reported at an even higher rate. Early experiences in the workplace shape employees' careers -- and negative experiences can have an impact on their trajectories and future attitudes about work, as well as their opportunities to excel and feel accepted on a team.

Gallup has found that what everyone in the world wants is a good job -- but that pursuit is made harder for Black Americans, of whom one in four say they experience discrimination on the job.

(Gallup USA)

January 12, 2021

Source: https://news.gallup.com/poll/328394/one-four-black-workers-report-discrimination-work.aspx

SOUTH AMERICA

673-43-16/Poll

Chileans and Holidays in times of COVID19 22.2% of Chileans will go on vacation this summer

22.2% of Chileans will go on vacation this summer, a figure that represents a drop of –18.8 points in relation to what was indicated in 2019, where 41% declared that they would go on vacation.

40.1% of the high GSE (ABC1) indicates that they will go on vacation, while 18.7% of the low GSE (DE) will go on vacation. The GSE Mediums (C2 and C3) will come out at 23% and 25.8% respectively.

Chileans will spend, on average, $ 387,845 on their vacations, which represents a fall of 17% compared to what was declared in 2019, where they would spend $ 455,481

95.4%, of those who will take vacations, will do so within Chile and 4.6% outside the country.

37.7%, of those who will take vacations, will do so in February, with an average of 14 days of vacation.
54.7%, of those who will take vacations, will do so on the “Beach” and 39.6% will stay in “friends / family houses”.
51.8%, of those who will take vacations, will use the car as a means of transport followed by the “bus” by 46%.

(Activa)

December 2020

Source: https://www.activasite.com/estudios/los-chilenos-y-las-vacaciones-en-tiempos-de-covid19/

673-43-17/Poll

49% of respondents would agree with reducing the working day to 40 hours

A survey carried out by the National Consulting Center (CNC) , applied to 1,007 people, showed that a large part of those surveyed are familiar with Uribe's proposals to reduce working hours, which are currently 48 hours. The survey was commissioned by the Democratic Center to compare the level of acceptance of the initiatives, one of which is advancing in Congress.

On the one hand, there is that of gradually reducing the work day by eight hours. According to this measurement, 49% of those surveyed agree with working 40 hours, while 40% disagreed. Of the total number of people who responded to this question, 51% of women answered that they were in favor of the proposal, compared to 47% of men.

In age ranges, young people saw the idea of the Democratic Center with better eyes: 64% of Colombians between 18 and 25 years surveyed approved it. As age advanced, that support was reduced. Thus, those aged 56 and over only gave the go-ahead by 32%.

On the other hand, the CNC found that 53% of the research participants agree with the 4x4 proposal, also from that community, and that it consists of raising the minimum wage by 4% and reducing 4 hours of the day , leaving it 44 hours a week. In the positive responses, women also predominated.

57% of those surveyed approved it, compared to 49% of the men who gave it the green light. The same relationship between age and support for the proposal also applied to this question. Young people between the ages of 18 and 25 supported by 74%, while adults aged 56 and over did so only by 36%.

The people who responded to the survey indicated whether or not they were sympathetic to any party. The measurement revealed that of the 1,007 people who participated, 10% consider themselves from the Liberal Party, 4% from the Democratic Center, 3% from the Conservative, 2% from Colombia Humana-Decentes, and 1% from the U, Cambio Radical, Alianza Verde, MIRA, and Polo Democrático Alternativo, respectively. However, indifference prevailed, as 66% of those questioned stated that they did not consider themselves from any party.

The reduction of the working day to 40 hours is the former senator Álvaro Uribe Vélez, so that article 161 of the Substantive Labor Code is modified. If it were to successfully complete its process in the legislature, that article would read as follows: "The maximum duration of the ordinary working day is forty (40) hours a week, which may be distributed, by mutual agreement, among employer and worker, on 5 or 6 days a week, always guaranteeing the rest day ”.

In the article, the former president also supported his proposal that "working long hours is exhausting, it can increase the risk that workers make mistakes and cause physical and mental fatigue, which could lead to workers suffering health problems."

Meanwhile, the proposal called 4x4 is an idea that came from Tomás Uribe Moreno, son of the former senator. “Productivity is the solution to overcome this bad step. It requires empathy, trust and teamwork, ”he said in an interview with El Tiempo .

(CNC)

December 27, 2020

Source: https://www.centronacionaldeconsultoria.com/post/49-de-encuestados-estaria-de-acuerdo-con-reducir-jornada-laboral-a-40-horas

AUSTRALIA

673-43-18/Poll

Australians support masks and border closures and are willing to be vaccinated for COVID-19

In addition over three-quarters of Australians (77%) say they would be willing to be vaccinated if a new Coronavirus vaccine became publicly available according to the survey conducted with an Australia-wide cross-section of 1,243 Australians aged 18+ on Thursday January 14 – Friday January 15, 2021.

Women, Australians aged 65+ and people in NSW & Victoria most likely to support wearing masks

Support for the compulsory wearing masks is highest amongst women (77%), people aged 65+ (78%) and in a geographic sense it is highest in New South Wales (80%) and Victoria (77%). In contrast only 53% of people in South Australia say mask wearing should be compulsory.

Analysis by Federal voting intention shows Greens supporters (82%) are the most likely to support the compulsory wearing of masks ahead of ALP supporters (74%) and L-NP supporters (71%).

In Victoria mask wearing was wanted by 65% in November, now 77% - so up – although lower than when Roy Morgan measured in Victoria in August (89%) and September (87%) during that State’s second COVID-19 wave.

People in WA most likely to not want State borders completely open

A large majority of 85% of people in Western Australia don’t want State borders to be completely open today – a higher rate than any other State and in line with the tough border policies of the State enforced by Premier Mark McGowan.

There is also strong consensus to not completely open State borders amongst people in Tasmania (79%), South Australia (75%), Queensland (73%) and Victoria (70%).

In only one State, NSW, are opinions almost evenly split on the question with 55% of people in NSW not wanting State borders completely open, but a sizable minority of 45% does want borders completely open.

Nearly three-quarters of women (72%) don’t want State borders to be completely open compared to 65% of men. Perhaps surprisingly, it is younger people aged under 35 who are most opposed to State borders being completely open with 73% against the proposal.

Clear majorities of Greens supporters (80%), ALP supporters (72%) and L-NP supporters (63%) do not want State borders to be completely open today.

Vast majority of Australians say they’ll be vaccinated when a Coronavirus vaccine is available – unchanged on December 2020, but down on earlier in the pandemic

Over three-quarters of Australians (77%) say they will be vaccinated when a Coronavirus vaccine becomes available and this sentiment is high across a broad range of demographics including men (81%), women (73%), across all age groups and in all six States.

Interestingly, supporters of the three main political parties are in agreement on this question with 78% of L-NP supporters, 77% of ALP supporters and 81% of Greens supporters saying they would be willing to be vaccinated when a Coronavirus vaccine becomes available.

Support for being vaccinated is unchanged on November 2020 when 77% of respondents to a special Roy Morgan survey conducted in conjunction with Gallup International agreed they would be vaccinated when a vaccine became available including 41% who strongly agreed and 36% who agreed.

Earlier in the pandemic, back in March/April 2020 when the first lockdown was enforced around Australia, support for being vaccinated for COVID-19 was significantly higher with 87% of Australians in early April agreeing they would be vaccinated including 56% who strongly agreed and 31% who agreed.

Michele Levine CEO Roy Morgan, says Australians have delivered resounding responses to the questions of compulsory mask wearing (in favour), opening all state borders (against) and being willing to be vaccinated when a new coronavirus vaccine becomes publicly available (in favour):

“A clear majority of 72% of Australians support compulsory mask wearing with support highest in the two States with the highest number of COVID-19 cases – NSW (80%) and Victoria (77%). Unsurprisingly support for compulsory wearing of masks is much lower in all other States with only 53% of South Australians, 63% of West Australians and 64% of Queenslanders in support of the measure.

“There is also not such a great partisan divide on the issue as has been seen in other countries such as the United States. Large majorities of L-NP supporters (71%), ALP supporters (74%) and Greens supporters (82%) are all in favour of the compulsory wearing of masks.

“When it comes to the opening of State borders the views of Australians tend to align with their respective State Governments. NSW has had the most open border policy throughout the COVID-19 pandemic and only closed its borders’ once – when daily local cases of COVID-19 ballooned through 100 in early July. In NSW a slim majority of 55% of respondents are against all State borders being completely open today – clearly the lowest against opening the borders of any State.

“At the other end of the spectrum people in the two States with the most restrictive border policies are most in favour of keeping State borders closed. A large majority of 85% of West Australians and 79% of Tasmanians don’t want State borders completely open today. These results indicate voters tend to align their views with the policies of their respective State Governments when these policies are demonstrated to be an effective response to the threat posed by COVID-19.

“The COVID-19 vaccine is set to be rolled out across Australia starting from next month and the good news is a clear majority of 77% of Australians say they will be vaccinated when the vaccine becomes publicly available – and this support is strong across all sections of the community including both genders, people of all ages, supporters of different political parties and in every State and Territory.”

(Roy Morgan)

January 17, 2021

Source: https://www.roymorgan.com/findings/8617-roy-morgan-survey-on-masks-borders-vaccines-january-17-2021-202101170013

MULTICOUNTRY STUDIES

673-43-19/Poll

International study: How many people will take the COVID vaccine?

Thai people, Britons and Danes are the most willing to take the vaccine, in UAE and KSA more than half say so

Other countries where willingness to take the drug is high include Denmark (70%), Mexico (68%), India (67%), and Spain (66%).

At the bottom of the table are France and Poland, where just 39% and 28% respectively say they will take the vaccine.

In KSA, the percentage of people wanting to get vaccinated has increased from 42% in December end to 51% now. However, in the UAE, it has reduced to some extent, from 63% is mid-December to 56% now.

(YouGov)

January 20, 2020

Source: https://mena.yougov.com/en/news/2021/01/20/international-study-how-many-people-will-take-covi/

673-43-20/Poll

How much difference does it make to people where a COVID vaccine was developed?

People would feel most comfortable about coronavirus vaccines developed in Germany, Canada or the UK

We know that some countries are more trusted than others on coronavirus, so it begs the question: what difference would a vaccine’s country of origin make to people’s perceptions of it?

YouGov asked almost 19,000 people in 17 countries and regions whether they would think more positively or negatively about a COVID-19 vaccine if they say it had been developed in a particular country. We asked about 12 different countries, all of which are or have been involved in developing coronavirus vaccines.

Topping the list with the most well-received hypothetical vaccine is Germany, with an average score of +35. Germany is the only Western nation that receives a large positive response from Chinese people, at +20.

Next is a Canada-developed vaccine, with an average score of +29, closely followed by a British one, at +28.

An American-developed vaccine receives an average score of +16, with most countries positive but a negative response in China at -25 (as well as a mildly negative score among the Germans, at -10, and French, at -4).

Opinion is more divided on the prospect of vaccines from Singapore (+7) and South Korea (+2). Eight of the countries/regions studied were more likely to feel negative than positive about a Singapore-developed vaccine, with nine saying the same of a South Korean one.

There were four countries where the average score was negative, meaning that people were more likely to feel worried than reassured by a vaccine coming from there. Russia, who has developed its own vaccine (Sputnik V), receives a score of -16. India scores on average -19, as does China which has already introduced two vaccines from domestic firms Sinovac and Sinopharm.

The lowest score, however, is reserved for Iran. On average, an Iranian vaccine receives a score of -30. In only two countries does such a vaccine not get a negative score: India (0) and Indonesia (+1).

Perceptions of vaccine development in China are more favourable worldwide than those regarding the country’s product manufacturing

The format of our vaccine question is based on a previous study YouGov conducted in 2019 on how people would feel about products made in certain countries. Comparing results from the two surveys among countries that participated in both* allows us to see how different people’s perceptions of a nation’s manufactured goods are compared to their medicinal prowess.

Although Germany topped the tables on both surveys, the results show that people have a more favourable impression of products made there (+41) than a potential coronavirus vaccine developed there (+34).

The same is true for the US and France, while there is virtually no difference when it comes to the UK, Canada and South Korea.

When it comes to China, the results show that people are more positive (or at least, less negative) of a vaccine developed there (-21) than their impression of goods manufactured there (-33).

(YouGov)

January 15, 2021

Source: https://yougov.co.uk/topics/health/articles-reports/2021/01/15/how-much-difference-does-it-make-people-where-covi