Singaporeans are generally a happy lot, especially when compared to people in countries such as China, Vietnam, Korea and Japan. … While Singaporeans are generally a happy lot, this survey was done in 2006…
Channelnewsasia. (Why would CNA report on a survey done 3 years ago?)
HELP keep the voice of TOC alive!
If you like this article, please consider a small donation to help theonlinecitizen.com stay alive. Please note that we can only accept donations from Singaporeans. Thank you for your assistance.Do you have a flair for writing? Volunteer with us. Email us your full name and contact details to theonlinecitizen@gmail.com
Let’s see how true this is with the coming election.
No need to question the validity about this results.
Anyway, with the current policies and living conditions, I know that I am not a happy Singaporean and so are many people around me. At least, I am not happy living along side so many new migrants who knows nothing about what it takes to be a Singaporean.
Mmm, are they trying to lighten the gloom? as there are no god news from their side…
“Why would CNA report on a survey done 3 years ago?”
Because CNA and the establishment cannot handle the TRUTH if the same survey were to be done now. What a difference these 3 years!
Yamamoto,
No “god” news? I tot “god” just spoke about “highfalutin ideas”??
Kekeke..
Besides the time lag of 3 years, why compare only with China, Vietnam, Korea and Japan? Why not compare with the 1st world nations (e.g. Australia, Norway, Sweden, Denmark, USA, Canada, UK, etc) or even the G8 nations? Afterall, our PM’s salary is more than sum of the G8 leaders, shouldn’t we expect him to lead the citizens to the world’s highest level of happiness?
LOL! Tongue-in-cheek.
Hey, Typo, that was a typo, TOC….I miss a O in good…lol
the title should have read…
“Singaporeans WERE a happy lot.”
only then, people will realise the disregard sgreans have with PAPpies.
the things they report about is simply amazing.
Hi folks,
The way Channelnewsasia report the survey is highly unscientific, and doesn’t give us much clue on how valid, or to what extent the survey findings can be extrapolated to the rest of the Singapore population. Their intent for publishing this survey is highly suspect.
While statistics is seldom a sexy subject and perhaps not warrant much printing space, reporters need to know that when reporting surveys, they have to reveal certain key information so that readers can decide for themselves if they should believe the results. It is their professional journalistic duty to do so. It is not a matter of personal preference.
Sadly, reporters in Singapore tend not to report such pertinent details. To compare, American reporters are more aware of such details, and seldom you see reporting on statistics that is not accompanied with relevant information for readers to make an informed judgment. I am not saying American reporters are inherently better. But with regards to reporting numbers, reporters in Singapore mainstream papers really need to do better.
I will only touch on two aspects of statistics which I feel must be reported in a news article.
First, the sampling method. There is no indicate if the sampling is random. By random I don’t mean haphazard, or “anyhow.” The random here means that if done properly, everyone in the target population (e.g., Singaporeans) stands the same chance to be surveyed or interviewed. A random sampling will ensure that your sample is truly representative of your population. The CNA article does not give the slightest clue of how it is conducted. In fact, many “informal” surveys, street polls or straw polls done by newspapers are skewed (or in statistical-speak, biased). They do not, cannot and will not reflect what the population truly think about an issue at a certain point in time. Any claim of that is bogus and tantamount to lying.
Next, the margin of error, which typically improves with larger sample size. However, there is a limit. The decrease in the margin of error is, for lack of a better word, is marginal (only from about 3% to 2%) when you raise large samples from about 1,000 to 2,000. Most studies, for practical reasons such as budget and time constraint, choose about 600-700 for a margin of error of plus or minus 5%. The correspondence of margin of error and sample size remains the same, regardless of the population size (even if it’s in the millions), as long as it is conducted according to true random sampling. That is the beauty of statistics. A small sample, when collected correctly, can give you reliable ideas of what the larger population think about an issue, within a particular margin of mistake.
The margin of error gives readers some idea of what the deviation is like. For example, if the margin of error is plus or minus 5%, and the difference between two groups of people in the sample is less than that (say, 3%), we cannot confidently say there is a true difference between them. The difference could easily be due to error that arises simply by chance or luck alone, regardless how rigorous the survey is conducted.
Without details on sampling method, sample size and margin of error, what is reported in this article can only remain at best suggestive of what the sample (not Singaporeans in general) think in 2006. I’m not sure how useful is this piece of information, even to the political leaders. At best it serves other purposes that most of us here in this forum know just too well.
Eric
Now i understand……
not long ago, there was a event asking people to vote for the happiest people around them.
then, a bunch was shown on the news.
then, tv showing how laughing can help people.
so, if people are happy, or make themselves happy, less dissent?
Can i say that this is survey is just 1 survey from 1 organization?
What about the rest of the surveys by all the rest of the world?
See my drift?
To #3 and TOC:
The survey is part of the Asia Barometer annual survey, which covers many countries and touches on many topics. Obviously, it takes time for the number crunchers to process the survey findings. And the reason why we are getting the news now is because some NUS prof have analysed the survey results and are publishing a book.
To #9:
Nobody reads articles on CNA website for a full story- for obvious reasons, it breaks news with the minimal of details. You want more info about the methodology? I suggest you wait and read tomorrow’s newspapers before giving us a lecture on statistics.
Sometimes, the ignorance around this place astounds me.
Truthfully, I was much happier in 2006 then now. Now I just need a Canadian to remind me that I should be grateful and happy.
Did the survey asked me?
Did it consulted my opinions?
I am happy when i see the bad people get punished.
But for sure, i am not happy with many things.
Is 100 000 unemployed happy? Happy when unemployed?
6% unemployment . these happy?
those who migrated. Were they happy here?
correct me if i wrong on the unemployment figure. I heard it in invest fair over the weekend.
But I must say Singaporeans are generally quite gullible, that’s why the government resort to this kind of tactic.
Nothing we can do. Sigh…
“I AM A VIRGIN!”
“this is a very old t-shirt”
they’re reminding us that we used to be happy.
“MIW are a happy lot”, distant enough from financial woes….
i think many will agree!! :)
As usual they are just referring to themselves, more good years, golden period etc, all of these they are just referring to themselves.
i would have thought only when the end of the year draws near MSM does a series flashback like Straits Times did when National Day approaches.
or is someone’s end coming? :)
I know I know
This is the standard of Singapore’s
newspaper journalism. To them
it doesn’t matter as long as the
people just read and swallow in
whatever they say as the truth!
No competition is the best for them!)?:
what does it show about the credibility of Channel newasia? Oh goodness, I’ll discount 50% of whatever they say in the future.
why need to report this if its 3 years old? i was already pondering this when i heard this on the news/… absolutely no relevance at all… do they relly think we are idiots? perhaps the next GE will show them what we really think, then and now..
Hi Anonymous,
Thank you for fleshing out the context of the study, I appreciate it.
Being somewhat familiar with journalistic craft, I agree with you that there is only so much space available for news. I also agree with you that no one should expect boring and tedious elaboration on technical details when reporting a research study. After all, news business is still… a business.
I also did not intend my posting to be a lecture, though I confess I have ranted quite a bit.
I’m just a concerned citizen who wants to point out some salient points many journalists omit when filing scientific reports, especially when the news concern figures and surveys.
If the aim of journalists is not only to entertain but also to inform and educate, adding two more sentences on sampling, sample size and margin of error, at least to me, does not seem too laborious.
I look forward to a more in-depth chronicle in Today.
Thank you,
Eric
Propaganda lor..
there was an article about another study that showed singaporeans to be among the least happy. there shld be some comparison between these two conflicting reports.
3 years ago, cost of living is not as high as now, a lot of people can hardly breathe, can they be happy?
And today, Straits Times publishing: Inflation hits poorest 20% twice as hard. http://business.asiaone.com/Business/News/Story/A1Story20090825-163124.html
and who are these happy lots? the imported lots? these lots were unhappy in their own land that and they come here to be happy…..three years ago. see if these lots are still happy now.
This is called self-serving bias ie attributing success to internal factors and failure to external factors, when in fact they are hopeless and useless.
aiyoyo
is it to say we read cna news; it’s 3 years ago?
think go cnn better hor
aiyoyo
Happiness is such a subjective thing; as an example, I am pretty sure 70% of Germany in 1939 were pretty happy while no one asked the opinions of the Jews.
Hi folks,
I have read the article on pages 1 and 2 of Today…today (24 Aug 2009). It does mention the study is a representative sample, and has a respectable size of 1, 038. If you visit Asia Barometer’s site (https://www.asiabarometer.org/en/data), you can download and analyze the data yourself.
If you check data collection for the fieldwork done in Singapore 2006 (https://www.asiabarometer.org/files/AB2006_FieldworkReport_Singapore.xls), you’ll realize it’s done between late Jun and early Aug. The respondents could have been susceptible to a very local and prominent effect – the country’s propaganda machinery goes into overdrive every year during that period to prepare the populace for NDP. It is there not unreasonable to suspect that the sample might experience and express more pride, compared to if they are surveyed in other months of the year.
The 90.8% reported in Today also lumps some figures together – 52% felt “very proud” and 38.8% felt “somewhat proud.” This is a common practice in reporting. I have no issue with that, but it’s equally important to point this out.
Also, Singapore’s rating was not the highest in the countries surveyed. For the Vietnam study, 89.9% of respondents felt “very proud” to be Vietnamese. The fieldwork in Vietnam was conducted three weeks in July 2006. It doesn’t seem to be affected by a plausible “independence day” effect as their national day is 2 September. I may be wrong here.
I want to stress that I’m not trying to disparage the findings; my intent is to propose alternative explanations that may account for the level of pride reported, than to readily and happily assume the national pride felt is not artificially inflated by other factors.
Eric
2 years ago it was also “surveyed” and confirmed that S’pore has the most exciting night life in the WORLD (yes, not SE Asia, not Asia,but THE WHOLE FKG WORLD). But then, it was later exposed that the surveying agency was commissioned by STPB……..Cant the PAP and all the related stoogies give us a break? What a laughing stock time and again.
CNA can’t even present the local news without bias and partiality,
and they want to claim to be leading news channel in Asia with that
misleading name? What a big joke.
Just look their presenters when interviewing our leaders and compare
that to BBC or the American newscasters where no questions is taboo,
or under OB markers to be asked, and you will see the difference.
However we cannot fault them as the local MSMs are all under the
employed of you-know-who
take so long conduct this research this finding. the war is over.
12) Annonymous on August 24th, 2009 11.42 pm
Nobody reads articles on CNA website for a full story- for obvious reasons, it breaks news with the minimal of details. You want more info about the methodology? I suggest you wait and read tomorrow’s newspapers before giving us a lecture on statistics.
Wow.. so you expect us to trust the Straits Times when it comes to promoting the Singapore Government’s viewpoint.
Actually I can safely say that this news about Singaporeans is not written for the interest of Singaporeans but as propaganda feel good news for foreign investors and the outside world.
We are the real natural resources of the economy and it would be a downer news if they wrote about the sorry plight of Singaporeans. Everyone knows PAP is getting rockier by the day. Would MSM risk rocking the platform of Singapore?
MSM credibility moves down to another low. This disconnectivity with the news will only fan the fumes of anger more. Such is the curse of being the mouth piece of the government.
Even MM Lee is reading news from his own propaganda machine. Just before he rebutted NMP Viswa, he said he was reading the newspaper. I didn’t even know whether to laugh or cry.
The question is, who were the participants?? where do they come from ? Could it be from a group or several groups who are from the community centres, or from a seminar organised by some government statutory boards? What about thier age group, gender and occupation?
“Singaporeans WERE a happy lot.” not until when they found out alot of dark things hidden away from them by those papees govt.
After the second World War. The Japanese were on stree, They have forgotten how to laugh, They have to go back to school where there is lesson teach U how to laugh. Singaporean are facing this problem very soon. If U’re still rule by a “Devil” Take Care
Only a small % of S’porean are “Happy”. They fetch Big Fat Salary anually. They talk “Crab & Prawn ” story 2 U in Paliament. Make sure U die of “Heart Attack”
3 years ago when i was proud to be a Singaporean unaware of the tyranny of the famiLee.
3 yrs ago ONLY mah….the survey was probably conducted for LONG-TERM purpose
Today in the forum, an american converted to Singapore citizen and he was very happy. And there are few more supporting news saying Singaporeans need to appreciate Singapore.
Why did not they publish some of our comments huh?
Who did the survey ? Civil servants ?
Firstly, I wonder why were the comparison made ONLY with Fareastern Region/IndoChina Countries? Singapore is in SouthEast Asia and Nothing, Not even the Strongest Genie can remove this Island away from the southern tip of the Malaysian Peninsula.
Secondly… there is a need to point out the gini coefficient of these countries… (Source:- Human Development Reports 2007/2008)
Japan 24.9
Korea (Republic of) 31.6
Viet Nam 34.4
Singapore 42.5
China 46.9
Note: 6 of the top 10 countries on the Human Development Index have Gini Index scores closer to that of Vietnam and the remaining closer to that of Japan. In the top 20, Only USA has Gini Index Scores above 40. Singapore ranks 25 on the Human Development Index.
China scored 46.9! Singapore’s gini is relatively still smaller than China! Duh! a small little dot to compare with the largest country in Asia? Double Duh!
How is it that Singaporeans are a Happy Lot? Who are these ‘Singaporeans’? Those living in Condos and the First Generation Pink IC holders?
I thought there was an earlier report saying we were quite unhappy?
Must be crazy spin again!
Phew!
After reading NUS prof (Dr Stooge, I presume?) tot maybe TOC is not a mirror of S’porean feelings. Reading TOC nothing ever works here and people are always unhappy.
Nothing wrong with Survey per se (these types of surveys are always out-of-date) but everything wrong with spin.
As I recall 2006 was “It’s gd morning S’pore”. Taz why we had election where PM goofed winning only 67% overall.
A Tan,
“After reading NUS prof (Dr Stooge, I presume?) tot maybe TOC is not a mirror of S’porean feelings. Reading TOC nothing ever works here and people are always unhappy.”
i welcome you to stick around these unhappy horde… :P
how do you change from unhappy to happy, & remain as happy as a pea here? how you stay immune to all these unhappy people?