PCC Elections Campaign Tracking Research. Report for: TNS BMRB. Controlled document - Issue 4 JN TNS /2/2013

Transcription

1 PCC Elections Campaign Tracking Research Report for: Controlled document - Issue 4 TNS BMRB TNS /2/2013 JN

2

3 Contents Executive Summary Background and objectives Methodology Context Electoral Commission campaign campaign measures Electoral Commission campaign booklet Home Office campaign campaign measures Awareness and knowledge of the PCC elections Information about the PCC Elections KPM Review TNS BMRB Point of View Appendix 1: Pre and Mid wave questionnaire Appendix 2: Post wave questionnaire i PCC Elections Tracking Research Proposal TNS 2013

4

5 Executive Summary 1.1 Background and objectives On 15 th November 2012, for the first time ever, the public across England and Wales, excluding London, elected Police and Crime Commissioners who are accountable for how crime is tackled in their police force area. The Electoral Commission ran a multi-media PCC election campaign across the relevant regions which aimed to: generate awareness that elections were happening on 15 th November 2012; direct electors to the booklet which they should have received and to the aboutmyvote website and helpline for more information; ensure electors understood that most would vote using the Supplementary Vote (SV) system and ensure that they had all the information they needed to be able to cast their vote with confidence; and generate awareness that polling stations were open from 7am to 10pm. This Electoral Commission voter information campaign ran from 22 nd October to 15 th November in England and Wales (excluding London) and comprised TV, radio and press (both regional and local) advertising. An information booklet was also door-dropped to all households in the relevant areas. The target audience for the campaign was all adults who were eligible to vote in the elections. The Home Office also ran a national PCC awareness campaign from 4 th to 25 th October 2012, although the specific aims and nature of the campaign were different from those of the Electoral Commission campaign. TNS BMRB was commissioned by the Electoral Commission to conduct tracking research among adults eligible to vote, in order to evaluate the effectiveness of the campaign across England and Wales, excluding London. The key objectives were to measure awareness, recognition, impressions and message takeout of the campaign and the booklet and to monitor changes in key knowledge and awareness measures in relation to the PCC elections over time. There was also a requirement to look at awareness and perceptions of the Home Office PCC campaign as this was the first occasion where the Electoral Commission was running a campaign at the same time as another campaign and there was a desire to assess the overlap between the two campaigns and their messages. 1.2 Method and sample To meet the research objectives, three stages of tracking were conducted in 2012: a pre-wave (21 st September - 3 rd October), prior to any activity (including prior to the Home Office campaign); a mid-wave (7 th -14 th November), towards the end of the campaign but immediately before the elections; and 1 PCC Elections Tracking Research TNS 2013

6 a post-wave (21 st November - 6 th December), immediately after the elections 1. All interviewing took place in-home, face-to-face, using the national TNS CAPI (Computer Assisted Personal Interviewing) Omnibus. Our face-to-face Omnibus utilises a random location quota sampling approach to ensure that the resulting sample is geographically and demographically representative of the population. Interviews were conducted with adults aged 18 and over who were eligible to vote in the elections. At each wave, c.700 interviews were conducted in England (excluding London) and c.200 in Wales. To ensure that the sample was fully representative of the adult population aged 18+ demographically and geographically, both overall and within each country, weighting was applied to the data at each wave. Further details are provided in Section Main findings Context At the pre-wave only 6% of eligible voters were aware at a spontaneous level that the elections were taking place, rising to 29% on prompting, with only 4% able to identify the correct date. These measures provide an initial indication of the scale of the task for the campaign. In addition, at the pre-wave only one seventh (14%) claimed they were certain to vote and although this increased significantly at the mid-wave to just under a quarter (24%), the overall total figure for those likely (certain or quite likely) to vote remained relatively low at 44%. These results can be attributed, to some extent, to the unprecedented nature of the PCC elections and the use of a new voting system but may also suggest a lack of engagement with these elections and highlight one of the challenges for the campaign. Spontaneous awareness of advertising/publicity Early in the questionnaire, all adults aged 18+ and eligible to vote were asked if they had seen or heard any advertising, publicity or other information about the PCC elections. This question was deliberately designed to be wide in order to gauge the general levels of noise around the elections. 15% at the pre-wave claimed to have seen or heard something, which increased substantially by the mid-wave to 66%, before dropping again slightly at the post-wave to 54%. These levels of awareness are very similar to those recorded in the tracking research for the Local Government elections campaign earlier in 2012, suggesting that overall there was a similar level of noise around the elections. Perhaps not surprisingly, awareness 1 Most of these interviews were conducted in the first week but bad weather and flooding resulted in the final interviews being delayed. PCC Elections Tracking Research TNS

7 fell at the post-wave to 54%, most probably due to media interest in the elections quickly dropping once they had taken place. At the pre-wave, of the small proportion who claimed to have seen or heard something about the PCC elections, 63% cited commentary sources, including TV/radio programmes/interviews and newspaper articles, as the main source of information. By the mid-wave and post-wave, however, campaign sources became much more prevalent, driven predominantly by TV advertising (42% at mid-wave, 37% at postwave), with radio advertising (8% mid and 10% post) and newspaper advertising (8% mid and 6% post) also mentioned. At both the mid-wave and post-wave, just under one sixth mentioned the pink booklet from the Electoral Commission (15% and 14% respectively). When asked who they thought was responsible for what they had seen or heard, answers remained consistent across the mid-wave and post-wave. Around a third of those who had seen or heard something (30% and 32% respectively) mentioned the Central Government/Home Office. Around a sixth mentioned each of candidates/political parties, the Local Council/Government and the Police and a much lower level, only one in twenty, mentioned the Electoral Commission. However, around three in ten were unable to give an answer, indicating that awareness of who was responsible for what had been seen or heard was quite low in general. When asked to describe what they had seen or heard, a wide variety of information about the PCC elections was mentioned, reflecting various factors including the newness of the PCC elections and the PCC role, as well as a new voting system for many, and of course two campaigns running to promote them. 31% at the mid-wave and 25% at the post-wave described something that could potentially be attributed to the Electoral Commission campaign, including that the election was taking place/date of election (23% at the mid-wave, 19% at the post-wave) and low level mentions of the pink booklet (4% spontaneously mentioning it at the midwave and 1% at the post-wave). In comparison, 40% at the mid-wave and 35% at the post-wave mentioned something that could potentially be linked to the Home Office campaign, although there was much overlap of messages between the two campaigns and these messages have been included for both campaigns. Slightly higher levels of spontaneous awareness of the Home Office campaign than the Electoral Commission campaign are also found when examined in another way. Using the verified recall question (asking those who claimed to have seen each campaign when prompted, whether this was what they described earlier), we find that 30% at the midwave told us later in the interview that they were thinking about the Electoral Commission campaign at this early question compared to 37% who were thinking about the Home Office campaign. The Home Office campaign does therefore appear to cut through at higher levels although this is not surprising as it was thought to have had higher spend and was also 3 PCC Elections Tracking Research TNS 2013

8 very different in nature to the Electoral Commission campaign. However, by the postwave, when the Home Office campaign was more distant, there was little difference between the two on this verified recall measure. In order to look more closely at the effectiveness of PR activity from different channels used by different organisations, respondents were specifically asked about individual organisations (the Electoral Commission, the Home Office, political parties and candidates, and the Police) and through what medium they had seen or heard any information about the PCC elections from that organisation. For each organisation, around half claimed to have seen or heard something at the mid-wave and post-wave from each organisation. The results were also very similar for the channels used by each organisation, with around one fifth claiming to have seen or heard something through TV, radio programmes or news, and around one tenth claiming to have seen or heard something in newspaper or magazine articles, representing the main PR channels. The similar levels of perceived channel usage across all four organisations suggest a lack of differentiation among voters about who was responsible for what. Prompted recognition of campaign In order to measure campaign recognition, respondents were prompted with the actual adverts employed in the campaign and asked if they had seen or heard these recently. At both the mid-wave and post-wave, around a third recognised the TV advertising, a quarter the radio advertising and a seventh the press advertising when prompted. Total recognition of the campaign increased to 50% by the post-wave, just meeting the KPM target of 50%-60% recognising at least one element of the Electoral Commission campaign. When compared to other campaigns conducted by the Electoral Commission, the PCC election campaign performs at a similar level to those that ran before Total campaign recognition varied little over the demographic sub-groups, although it was slightly lower among year olds, the 65+ age bracket and ABs. Overall, the media channels provided good campaign coverage, complementing each other, with no one demographic sub-group standing out with particularly low campaign recognition. Whilst the campaign to some extent has achieved limited campaign integration (with 21% mid and 17% post of eligible voters having seen 2 or more media), there have on the other hand been benefits in terms of more widespread coverage across demographic sub-groups. Having been shown and played the advertising, respondents were then asked to describe, in their own words, what they thought the main messages of the advertising were. A variety of messages about the PCC elections was communicated, reflecting the large amount of information being conveyed by the advertising. Three fifths (60% at the mid-wave, 57% at the post-wave) mentioned messages related to encouraging voting and involvement in the elections. Around one third (32% at the mid-wave, 33% at the post-wave) cited messages about the election itself, with around one fifth mentioning an election (taking place) and one tenth mentioning the date of the election. At each wave, only 1% mentioned a leaflet or booklet with more information, suggesting that the message about the pink booklet was not cutting through to the extent it might, perhaps getting lost in the myriad of other messages. PCC Elections Tracking Research TNS

9 In order to better understand attitudes towards the PCC election campaign, 7 statements about the advertising were included in the mid-wave and post-wave questionnaires and all eligible voters were asked whether they agreed or disagreed with each statement. Overall, perceptions of the campaign were relatively positive. Three fifths (61% at the mid-wave, 62% at the post-wave) agreed that the ads made it quite clear that you will be receiving/should have received a booklet explaining how to vote in the PCC elections, whilst over half (56% at the mid-wave, 60% at the post-wave) agreed that the ads were unbiased in the way they presented information about the PCC elections. Just over half agreed that the ads are aimed at people like you and that the ads made it quite clear where to go for information about how to vote in the PCC elections. A lower level of agreement was recorded for the statement the ads told you something you didn t know before, with just under half agreeing (47% mid and 46% post), and lower levels still for the other two: Agreement that the ads made you want to find out more about how to vote in the elections was at 31% mid and 25% post. Agreement that the ads stuck in your mind fell from 37% at the mid-wave to 29% at the post-wave; For both of these, the drop from mid to post is not surprising as the adverts would be less relevant and less likely to encourage action after the elections had taken place. The level for this latter statement is also substantially lower than that seen in the tracking research for the local elections earlier in 2012 suggesting that the informative nature of the chosen PCC creative is also playing a role here. For all but one statement respondents in England, excluding London, were much more likely than those in Wales to agree - especially the ads are aimed at people like you, with 55% agreeing in England and only 42% agreeing in Wales. Similarly, campaign recognisers (those who had seen the advertising before the interview) were much more likely to hold positive opinions of the advertising. Again, the statement the ads are aimed at people like you showed the biggest difference, with 63% of campaign recognisers agreeing compared to only 46% of non-recognisers, suggesting that repeat viewing of the adverts helped to improve impressions of the campaign. Amongst those who had seen or heard any element of the campaign, two fifths (40%) claimed to have done something (from a prompted list) as a result of seeing or hearing the advertising, mostly watching out for or reading the pink booklet (29%), and visiting a website, phoning a helpline or finding out more information about candidates (12%). Recalculating this among all eligible voters equates to 19% at the mid-wave, and 12% at the post-wave, claiming to have done something as a result of the advertising. Overall, therefore, the campaign did appear to bring about action. The Electoral Commission booklet As part of the PCC election campaign, every household in England and Wales, excluding London was provided with a copy of the information booklet via door-drop. 5 PCC Elections Tracking Research TNS 2013

10 All respondents were prompted with a hard copy of the pink Electoral Commission booklet, including a bilingual English/Welsh version where appropriate. At both the midwave and post-wave, one in three (32% and 29% respectively) claimed to have seen the Electoral Commission booklet on prompting, with almost all having received it at home, thus comfortably reaching the target of 25%-35% of the population recognising the door-drop booklet for the KPM. Recognition was higher among campaign recognisers (42%) and especially among those who had seen the TV adverts (50%) or those who had seen/heard all three campaign media (65%). At the mid-wave, almost a quarter had read all of the booklet and over half (54%) had read at least some of it, rising to three fifths (60%) who had read at least some by the post-wave. At the mid-wave three quarters (74%) claimed that the booklet was helpful, with one fifth (21%) saying it was very helpful. In comparison to other campaigns with a booklet element in recent years, the proportion of those who had seen the booklet or any other media from the PCC election campaign was slightly lower. Awareness and perceptions of the Home Office campaign Just over two thirds (69% mid-wave, 65% post-wave) claimed to have seen any element of the Home Office campaign, with most (68% at the mid-wave and 64% at the postwave), claiming to have seen the TV ad. 17% at the mid-wave and 13% at the postwave claimed to have seen or heard other elements of the campaign (although these were not prompted with specifically). Presumably reflecting the relative spend and the nature of the two campaigns, there was greater recognition of the Home Office advertising than the Electoral Commission advertising. Just over three quarters were aware of either campaign and just under two fifths were aware of both. There was significantly higher recognition in Wales for the Home Office campaign than in England (excluding London). Three of the statements asked about the Electoral Commission campaign were also asked about the Home Office campaign. Whereas one third (33% at mid/post combined) agreed that the Electoral Commission advertising stuck in their mind, almost twice as many (64%) agreed that this was the case for the Home Office advertising. Although not as extreme, 64% agreed that the Home Office was aimed at people like them, compared to 54% who thought this was true of the Electoral commission campaign. In contrast, there was no difference in perceptions of bias between the two campaigns. Awareness and knowledge of the PCC elections Awareness of the PCC elections increased considerably during the campaign and was higher among those who recognised the Electoral Commission campaign. There were PCC Elections Tracking Research TNS

11 high levels of spontaneous awareness by the mid-wave (68%) and the post-wave (74%), which rose to 84% and 90% respectively with prompting, representing very good levels of awareness. Knowledge also increased over time, albeit not to the same extent as awareness. However, knowledge is inherently more difficult to change so this is not overly surprising. Respondents were provided with three statements and asked to say if they were true or false. The highest levels of knowledge were recorded for the statement PCCs will oversee police in your area and be responsible for holding the police to account on behalf of the public, which 60% recognised as true at the pre-wave and 74% at the post-wave. Agreement that the PCC is a new role that will replace your local police authority rose from 32% at the pre-wave to 46% at the post-wave. However, those correctly stating that the PCC will run the police force in your local area was a false statement, increased but to a lesser extent from 22% at the pre-wave to 33% at the post-wave. Overall then, knowledge of the PCC elections did improve over the course of the campaign. Although there were evidently still a lot of misconceptions too, it is unlikely that these could have been completely overcome with such a new and unfamiliar election. Knowledge of the more basic elements of the PCC elections also increased over time. Although only 4% were able to spontaneously cite 15 th November as the date of the elections at the pre-wave, this rose to 46% at the mid-wave, thus comfortably reaching the target for the KPM of 40%-50% of the population knowing that the elections on 15th November were for Police and Crime Commissioners. When asked about polling times, knowledge of the 10pm closing time was slightly better (39% at the pre-wave rising to 47% at the post-wave) than knowledge of the 7am opening time (just under two fifths across all waves). As noted earlier in this report, for most people, the PCC elections marked the first time they were required to vote using the Supplementary Vote (SV) system as opposed to the First Past the Post (FPTP) system and raising awareness of this was a key part of the Electoral Commission campaign. However, this system was only relevant to people who were voting in areas where more than two candidates were standing. In order to see how many people were correctly aware of which voting system to use in their area, respondents were provided with a description of each and asked to choose which one was applicable to them. At the pre-wave 21% chose the SV system but at the mid-wave, just before the elections, 36% gave a correct answer, rising to 38% at the post-wave. Among those who had read the booklet, awareness of the correct voting system was much higher (60% at the mid-wave and 59% at the post-wave), thus comfortably reached the KPM target of 50%-60% of those who had read the booklet knowing that you vote using first or second choice. When asked about perceptions of their own knowledge of how to vote, at the pre-wave just over half (54%) said they knew exactly how to vote or knew a little about how to vote, which rose to 64% at the mid-wave. Positively at the mid wave, over half (53%) of those who had read the booklet felt they knew exactly how to vote. 7 PCC Elections Tracking Research TNS 2013

12 Impact of the campaign on awareness and knowledge measures Awareness and knowledge were considerably higher among respondents who recognised any part of the campaign than they were among those who didn t. For example, spontaneous awareness rises from 56% among non-recognisers to 81% for those who had seen or heard the campaign, with a similar pattern for all measures discussed above. These awareness and knowledge measures were slightly higher still among those who recognised the campaign and the booklet, with the highest levels among those had seen or heard the campaign in conjunction with reading the booklet. In this latter group, spontaneous awareness of the PCC elections was recorded at 94%. These results illustrate the large impact that the booklet and campaign had and the valuable role that the booklet played in the campaign. It is also useful to compare awareness and knowledge measures between those who recognised the Electoral Commission campaign and those who recognised the Home Office campaign. Levels among those who had not seen either campaign were especially low, showing that both campaigns had a positive impact on audiences. Although not to a large extent, levels for those who had seen or heard the Electoral Commission campaign were for the most part marginally higher than among those who had seen or heard the Home Office campaign. However, when we examine those who had only seen or heard the Electoral Commission campaign compared to those who had only seen or heard the Home office campaign, we find larger differences with many measures considerably more positive among those who had only seen or heard the Electoral Commission campaign. This suggests that the Electoral Commission campaign has been working harder than the Home Office campaign to deliver key information about the elections. Information about the PCC elections At the pre-wave, 75% disagreed that they had enough information about how to vote, which dropped to 49% at the mid-wave, before rising again slightly to 58% at the postwave. Although a substantial proportion still disagreed at the mid wave, the Electoral Commission campaign does appear to be instrumental in helping to achieve the improvement seen, as 22% of those who had not seen or heard the campaign agreed that they had enough information, compared to 37% of those who did recognise the campaign when the mid-wave and post-wave figures are combined. As has been seen in other Electoral Commission campaign research and not surprising in this day and age, by far the most common source for more information was the internet, with over half (53% at the mid-wave and 51% at the post-wave) citing this, and most saying search online/on the internet. The Police was also a relatively popular source with 19% citing this at the pre-wave, although this dropped to 10% at the post-wave as electors became more knowledgeable. The Electoral Commission was mentioned by 8% at both the mid-wave and post-wave, mostly in relation to the pink booklet. PCC Elections Tracking Research TNS

13 Overall then, online sources were a central source of information for respondents, although no specific websites particularly stood out, highlighting an opportunity for Aboutmyvote. Information about the candidates followed a similar pattern but less positive, with a high level of strong disagreement at the pre-wave (76%) that there was enough information about candidates standing in the local area, improving slightly at the mid-wave (to 62%) and then retreating back at the post-wave (to 72%). Again, the internet was the most popular source for information about the candidates, followed at much lower levels by the Police, the Electoral Commission and the Home Office. Aboutmyvote was mentioned by a very low level at a spontaneous level but prompted awareness is at a much higher level and does increase from 13% at the pre-wave to 18% at the mid-wave. However, despite this representing a good level of awareness at the mid-wave, by the post-wave, awareness had started to decline again to 14%. Only a small proportion of respondents had heard of aboutmyvote.co.uk and visited the website (3% at the mid-wave and post-wave). As before, all of the above levels were much higher among those who had seen/heard the campaign and those who had seen the booklet than they were among those who had seen neither. 54% of those who recognised the Electoral Commission campaign and had read the booklet, agreed that they enough information about how to vote. Importantly, these results also illustrate the multi-media impact of the campaign on awareness levels. For example, among those who had seen or heard 1 of the campaign media, 15% were aware of aboutmyvote.co.uk and 2% had visited the website. These figures rise to 31% being aware of the website and 9% having visited it among those who had seen 2 or 3 of the campaign media. Those who only recognised the Electoral Commission campaign recorded higher levels of knowledge about how to vote (33%), the candidates (22%) and awareness of the aboutmyvote website (29%) than those who had only seen or heard the Home Office campaign (at 24%, 13% and 11% respectively). 1.4 Overview, insights and actions Overview Given the initial lack of awareness of and engagement with the PCC elections, overall the campaign performed relatively well. In line with past Electoral Commission campaigns, it had a good campaign reach with the use of various media ensuring that a wide variety of messages were communicated across all demographic sub-groups. This created generally positive impressions of the campaign. Although only three in ten recognised the booklet, this did fulfil the Key Performance Measure (KPM) and those who had read the booklet perceived it as helpful. There is clear 9 PCC Elections Tracking Research TNS 2013

14 evidence that the campaign and booklet contributed to the positive impact on key campaign measures. However, a wide variety of activity about the elections from a number of sources has contributed to uncertainty or lack of differentiation around who was responsible, resulting in limited recognition of the Electoral Commission s role. In spite of vast improvements seen on many measures, eligible voters felt there was a lack of information about how to cast their vote and about the candidates standing in the elections. The latter was especially the case in Wales. In terms of key sources of information, online sources, specifically searches, were the most frequently cited. However, mentions of the Electoral Commission and the website aboutmyvote.co.uk were very low. Despite similar levels of awareness of the election and the campaign in England and Wales, those in Wales appeared less engaged, with lower awareness of the election date and the perception that the campaign was less relevant to them. The Home Office campaign recorded higher reach than the Electoral Commission campaign, with substantial overlap in recognition between the two. However, there was evidence to suggest that among those who had not seen or heard either, it was the Electoral Commission campaign which worked harder to deliver key messages. Insights Overall, there is evidence to show that the Electoral Commission campaign contributed to the considerable improvements seen in many key measures over the election period (although other factors will have contributed too). This was achieved in spite of a challenging environment for the campaign, with: low awareness and knowledge of the PCC elections prior to the campaign; an apparent general lack of engagement with the elections; a competing campaign run by the Home Office at a similar time; and an apparent lack of differentiation between the various bodies involved in the elections. The Home Office campaign did cut through better and achieve higher recognition than the Electoral Commission campaign, although this was presumably due to higher spend and the different creative nature of the campaign. However, in spite of this there is evidence to suggest that the Electoral Commission campaign worked harder to deliver the key messages; a task which it performed very well considering the difficult climate. Although the Electoral Commission campaign did achieve its KPMs, the campaign s relative weaknesses were its stand-out, integration of the various media and engaging the target audience in Wales albeit with good reasons for all of these. However, the media mix did successfully target all demographics and the pink booklet was a valuable addition to this mix. PCC Elections Tracking Research TNS

15 Actions The results clearly confirm the valuable role of a booklet (in conjunction with a multimedia campaign) for elections where a large amount of new information needs to be communicated. However, the advertising could have made it clearer that a booklet was to be delivered to everyone. Although the booklet performed less well than the one used in Scotland earlier in 2012 in terms of its recognition and helpfulness, this could be attributed more to the nature of the PCC elections and a general lack of interest in them rather than the booklet itself. For future campaigns both booklets can be used as positive examples, although the question remains as how to increase booklet recognition. While the Home Office campaign cut through better, the Electoral Commission campaign appeared to work harder at delivering the required messages. However, before using this campaign model again, it is worth considering how to improve both the stand-out and campaign integration (multi-media impact) without losing the factual nature or wider coverage of the campaign. There also seemed to be a lack of differentiation by voters between the various bodies involved in the PCC elections, and therefore a lack of knowledge about the Electoral Commission s role. If it is important to the Electoral Commission to become better known and better understood, it is worth considering whether stronger branding can be used in campaign materials, whether the Electoral Commission name can be built into the website address and whether there is scope for promotion of the Electoral Commission outside election periods. Considering the amount of overlap between the two campaigns, it is also worth considering the real value in running separate Home Office and Electoral Commission campaigns. Finally, with the internet and online searches being seen as a key source of information for people nowadays, there is a need to continue to maximise awareness of aboutmyvote.co.uk. It is therefore important for the Electoral Commission to continue to place the URL on any appropriate communications on an ongoing basis, and utilise paid for search at suitable times. 11 PCC Elections Tracking Research TNS 2013

16 1. Background and objectives 1.1 Background Police and Crime Commissioner elections In the 2010 general election campaign, both the Conservative Party and Liberal Democrat manifestos outlined plans to replace or reform the existing police authorities in England and Wales. Both parties raised concerns about the perceived lack of accountability of police authorities to the communities they serve. Following the election, the Coalition Government published 'Policing in the 21st Century', a consultation on the Government's vision for policing, including the introduction of Police and Crime Commissioners (PCCs), which eventually led to the Police Reform and Social Responsibility Act As part of this, each of the police authorities has been replaced by directly-elected PCCs to oversee the police force in that area (excluding those in London). On 15 th November 2012, for the first time ever, the public across England and Wales (excluding London) elected PCCs who are accountable for how crime is tackled in their police force area. The job of the PCCs is to ensure the policing needs of their communities are met as effectively as possible, bringing communities closer to the police, building confidence in the system and restoring trust. Police and Crime Commissioner (PCC) elections were held for 41 of the 43 police forces in England and Wales (including 4 in Wales), with the exceptions being the City of London Police and the Metropolitan Police. For the latter, the Mayor of London has taken on the powers of a PCC, while for the former the City of London Corporation will continue to act as a police authority. Reflecting this geography, the franchise for the PCC elections includes: all British citizens living in England and Wales (excluding London) all qualifying Commonwealth citizens living in England and Wales (excluding London) all European Union citizens living in England and Wales (excluding London). Most electors voted in the PCC elections using the Supplementary Vote (SV) system which is currently the system used to elect mayors. Under the SV system, a voter is asked to indicate first and second preferences, and if no candidate has at least 50% of the first preference votes, the two candidates with the highest number of first preference votes go forward to a second round. In the second round of counting, ballots indicating a first preference for a candidate that lost the first round are reallocated according to the second preference indicated in the ballot paper. For many electors, it was the first time they had voted using the SV system. There were, however, some areas where there were only two candidates (Dyfed-Powys in Wales, North Yorkshire and Staffordshire) and in these areas the First Past the Post system was used. PCC Elections Tracking Research TNS

17 There was, however, a need not only for increased awareness and knowledge about the new PCC elections but also about the SV system among the general population who were eligible to vote. The role of the Electoral Commission In line with the corporate objective of achieving well run elections, referendums and electoral registration, the Electoral Commission undertook a voter information public awareness campaign in the run up to the PCC elections. As part of the campaign, the Electoral Commission produced a booklet, which was delivered by door-drop to all households in England and Wales (excluding London) prior to the election. The booklet contained information on the elections, how to vote and how to register. It also pointed people towards the Home Office s website where people could find information on candidates standing in their area. Other media were used to promote the booklet and raise awareness of the elections. The objectives of the campaign were to: generate awareness among eligible electors that the PCC elections were happening on 15 th November 2012; direct electors to the booklet they had received and/or direct them to the website and helpline for further information, including where they could find information about candidates; ensure electors wishing to participate understood that they would be asked to vote using the Supplementary Vote (SV) system and ensure that they had all the information they needed to be able to cast their vote with confidence under this system; and generate awareness that polling stations were open from 7am to 10pm. The Electoral Commission voter information campaign ran from 22 nd October 15 th November in England and Wales (excluding London), and comprised TV advertising, radio advertising and press advertising (both regional and local). The target audience for the campaign was all adults in England and Wales who were eligible to vote in the elections. Further details are provided in section 4.1. It should be noted, that the Home Office was also running a national PCC awareness campaign from 4 th 25 th October 2012, although the specific aims and nature of the campaign were different from those of the Electoral Commission campaign. 13 PCC Elections Tracking Research TNS 2013

18 1.2 Research objectives Research was required to evaluate the Electoral Commission s public awareness campaign and this document contains TNS BMRB s final report on this tracking research. The key objectives were to measure awareness, recognition, impressions and message takeout of the campaign. There was also a requirement to measure and monitor over time: awareness that PCC elections were taking place in England and Wales on 15 th November 2012; awareness of what the PCC elections were for; awareness of where to go/what to do to find out information about the PCC elections, including about candidates standing in the PCC elections; knowledge that the elections were to be conducted under a new voting system different to a General Election; and whether voters had the information needed to cast a vote. In addition, the research also: measured whether the public information booklet had been received/read; assessed perceptions of the booklet (e.g. whether helpful); and measured awareness and perceptions of the Home Office PCC campaign. PCC Elections Tracking Research TNS

19 2. Methodology This chapter details the approach used to conduct the research. 2.1 Overall approach In order to meet the research objectives, three stages of tracking were conducted: a pre-wave from 21 st September to 3 rd October 2012, prior to any activity (including prior to the Home Office campaign); a mid-wave from 7 th to 14 th November 2012, towards the end of the campaign but immediately before the elections; and a post-wave from 21 st November to 6 th December, immediately after the elections. Most of these interviews were conducted in the first week but bad weather and flooding resulted in the final interviews being delayed. Details of the data collection method and sample can be found in the following paragraphs. Data collection All interviewing took place in-home, face-to-face, using the TNS CAPI (Computer Assisted Personal Interviewing) GB Omnibus. The Omnibus utilises a random location quota sampling approach. This approach (via the sampling frame, quotas, time of day at which interviewing takes place, etc) is structured to ensure that the resulting sample is geographically and demographically representative of the population. A sophisticated quota methodology is applied, which includes quotas by sex (male, female housewife, female non-housewife); within female housewife, presence of children and working status; and within men, working status. This system is effective in ensuring a balanced sample of adults within contacted addresses is achieved as well as a full spread of social grades. Each of the samples for England and Wales, excluding London, is therefore fully representative of the respective population. Sample In order to achieve the required sample size, at each wave questions were asked of: half of the sample of one wave of the omnibus in England, excluding London (c.700 adults aged 18+ across c.60 sampling points) the full sample in Wales (c adults aged 18+) across two waves (to achieve a total sample of c adults aged 18+) Interviews were conducted with adults aged 18 and over, with a question included at the start of the questionnaire to check citizenship (and by implication, voting eligibility) and non-eu/commonwealth citizens were excluded from the remainder of the survey. Full details of the fieldwork dates and sample sizes (i.e. adults aged 18+ eligible to vote) for each country at each wave can be found in Table PCC Elections Tracking Research TNS 2013

20 Table 2.1: Fieldwork dates and achieved sample sizes by country per wave Wave Country Fieldwork dates Sample size (Adults aged 18+ and eligible to vote Pre E&W 21 st Sep 3 rd Oct England (excl London) 21 st 25 th Sep Wales 21 st Sep 3 rd Oct Mid E&W 7 th 14 th Nov England (excl London) 7 th 14 th Nov Wales 7 th 14 th Nov Post E&W 21 st Nov 6 th Dec England (excl London) 21 st Nov 4 th Dec Wales 21 st Nov 6 th Dec Questionnaire The questionnaire was developed by TNS BMRB in consultation with the Electoral Commission. The majority of the questionnaire was standardised across each of the waves and across the two geographies to allow for comparisons to be made. At the post-wave, many of the questions were, however, put into the past tense to reflect the fact that the elections had already taken place. Once the questionnaires had been agreed, they were translated into Welsh and provided as a self-completion questionnaire (on CAPI) for those respondents in Wales who wanted to complete the survey in Welsh. All questionnaires are available as separate documents and a master questionnaire has been appended. It should be noted that in addition to the questions included in each questionnaire, a full set of demographic questions was asked as standard as part of the omnibus survey. Weighting To ensure that the sample was representative of the adult population aged 18+, weighting was applied to the data at each wave. In England, the standard omnibus weighting targets were applied and data was weighted on gender, age, social grade and region based on the BARB (Broadcasters Audience Research Board) Establishment Survey 2 Years Ending December 2006, to match population estimates for the profile of England, excluding London. In Wales, the data was weighted on gender, age and social grade based on the BARB (Broadcasters Audience Research Board) Establishment Survey 2 Years Ending December PCC Elections Tracking Research TNS

21 At an England and Wales level, an additional rim weight was applied based on ONS mid year population estimates 2010, to correct the over-representation of Wales. The weighting targets for this additional rim weight were: England = 93.5%; Wales = 6.5%. 2.2 Notes on this report In the data tables and in the charts included throughout this report - denotes 0 and * denotes a proportion of less than half of one %, but more than 0. Data tables for each country at each wave have been supplied in separate documents. Significance testing Although strictly speaking significance testing should not be applied to quota samples such as this, it is nowadays fairly common practice to use this. The difference in percentage required (at 95% confidence level) to denote a statistically significant change from wave to wave and across sub-groups is as shown below. Table 2.2. Difference in percentage required (at 95% confidence level) to denote statistically significant changes Sample size Confidence shift assuming a measured a percentage of 50% Confidence shift assuming a measured a percentage of 20%/80% Confidence shift assuming a measured a percentage of 10%/90% 100 +/ / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / / PCC Elections Tracking Research TNS 2013

22 3. Context 3.1 Likelihood of voting In order to gauge the likelihood of voting in the run up to the elections, all eligible adults at the pre-wave and mid-wave were asked How likely are you to vote in the Police and Crime Commissioner elections that day [15 th November 2012]? The results of this question at both waves of tracking are shown in Figure 3.1, for England and Wales, excluding London. Figure 3.1: Likelihood of voting in PCC Elections (Q13) Base: All adults aged 18 and over who are eligible to vote England and Wales, excluding London % Certain to vote Quite likely to vote Not very likely to vote Certain not to vote Don't know Pre (924) Mid (917) Total certain/quite likely (%) At the pre-wave, only one seventh (14%) claimed they were certain to vote and although this increased significantly at the mid-wave to just under a quarter (24%), the overall total figure for those likely to vote remained relatively low at 44%. These results can be attributed, to some extent, to the unprecedented nature of the PCC elections and the use of a new voting system but may also suggest a lack of engagement with these elections and highlight one of the challenges for the campaign. 3.2 Awareness of the elections However, it is also worth bearing in mind that at the pre-wave, before any advertising, only 6% of eligible voters were aware that the elections were taking place at a spontaneous level, rising to 29% on prompting, with only 4% able to identify the correct date. This awareness very much correlated with age and social grade, with the highest levels of awareness among the 55+ age bracket and ABs and the lowest among 18-24s and DEs. These measures provide an indication of the scale of the task for the campaign. PCC Elections Tracking Research TNS

23 4. Electoral Commission campaign campaign measures This section of the report covers the campaign related measures for the Electoral Commission campaign, starting with an overview of the activity. 4.1 Electoral Commission campaign overview As mentioned at the beginning of this report, the Electoral Commission ran the multimedia PCC voter information campaign across England and Wales, excluding London, between 22 nd October and 15 th November 2012, in the run-up to the PCC elections which took place on 15 th November. The campaign comprised the following media, which ran on the following dates: TV 22 nd October to 14 th November; Radio 22 nd October to 15 th November; Regional/local press 22 nd October to 11 th November. This campaign was also divided into three phases, each with a different focus: Phase 1 booklet should be arriving (22 nd October - 2 nd November) Phase 2 booklet should have arrived (3 rd November 11 th November) Phase 3 polling station opening hours and more information on voting (12 th November 15 th November) Pre-wave fieldwork was conducted before phase 1, mid-wave fieldwork during phases 2 and 3, and post-wave fieldwork after phase Spontaneous awareness of advertising/publicity Before prompting eligible adults with the campaign media, a number of questions were asked to assess spontaneous awareness of the campaign and activity around the elections more generally. This section of the report summarises the results of these questions. Early in the questionnaire, all adults aged 18+ and eligible to vote were asked if they had seen or heard any advertising, publicity or other information about the PCC elections. This question was deliberately designed to be wide in order to gauge the general levels of noise around the elections. As Figure 4.1 demonstrates, there was a large increase in the proportion claiming to have seen or heard anything from the prewave to the mid-wave. 19 PCC Elections Tracking Research TNS 2013

24 Figure 4.1: Whether seen/heard advertising, publicity or other information about forthcoming elections (Q4) Base: All adults who are aged 18 and over who are eligible to vote % England and Wales, excluding London Pre (924) 15 Mid (917) 66 Post (914) 54 As expected, at the pre-wave there was a low awareness of any activity, with 15% claiming to have seen or heard something. This increased significantly by the mid-wave, when two-thirds (66%) had seen or heard any activity. Although this increase was recorded among all ages and social grades, higher awareness among year olds and ABs was recorded in particular, with no difference at a total level between England and Wales. These levels of awareness are very similar to those recorded in the tracking research for the Local Government election campaign earlier in 2012, suggesting that overall there was a similar level of noise around the elections. Unsurprisingly, awareness falls at the post-wave to 54%, most probably due to media interest in the elections quickly dropping once they had taken place. Those who claimed to have seen or heard any advertising, publicity or other information about the PCC elections were asked where they had seen or heard it. Figure 4.2 shows the most common spontaneous responses to this question. A detailed breakdown of the results is available in the data tables. PCC Elections Tracking Research TNS

25 Figure 4.2: Where advertising, publicity or other information about forthcoming elections seen/heard (spontaneous) (Q5) Base: All who have seen or heard any advertising or publicity recently about the PCC elections Unprompted Any commentary sources (total)* - Television programme or interview - Newspaper article Any campaign sources - Television advertising - Radio advertising - Newspaper advertising (Pink) Booklet from the Electoral Commission Leaflet or flyer for a candidate/political party Leaflet or flyer from another source England and Wales, excluding London % Pre (146) Mid (603) Post (496) At the pre-wave, before any campaign activity, the most frequently cited sources of information about the PCC Elections were commentary sources; that is TV/radio programmes/interviews and newspaper articles (at 63% among the relatively small proportion who had seen or heard any advertising or publicity). Campaign sources became much more prevalent at the mid-wave and post-wave, driven predominantly by TV advertising (42% at mid-wave, 37% at post-wave). Mentions of the pink booklet from the Electoral Commission stayed consistent at both the mid-wave (15%) and postwave (14%), as did mentions of a leaflet or flyer from a candidate or political party (16% and 15%). For the latter, figures were lower than those recorded in the Local Government May 2012 election tracking research, presumably reflecting the difficulty some candidates had in funding their campaigns. Although mentions of commentary sources dropped back at the mid-wave and postwave, this was among a larger base of people and overall, among all eligible voters, the level for commentary sources actually increased at the mid-wave (from 10% of all respondents at the pre-wave to 22% at the post-wave). Those who said they had seen or heard any advertising or publicity were also asked, unprompted, who they thought was responsible for what they had seen or heard. The most common responses given to this question are shown in Figure PCC Elections Tracking Research TNS 2013