BishopAccountability.org

Pope Francis’ Image Positive in Much of World

Pew Research
December 11, 2014

http://www.pewglobal.org/2014/12/11/pope-francis-image-positive-in-much-of-world/




Pope Francis, leader of the world’s nearly 1.1 billion Catholics, enjoys broad support across much of the world, according to a new survey report by the Pew Research Center. A median of 60% across 43 nations have a favorable view of the pontiff. Only 11% see the pope unfavorably, and 28% give no rating.

Francis’ strongest support comes from Europe, where a median of 84% offer a favorable rating. Latin America – the pope’s home region – also gives him high marks, with 72% saying they have a positive opinion.1 However, Francis is less well-known in other parts of the world. In Africa, 44% say they like the pope, but 40% offer no rating. Asians are similarly unfamiliar with Francis, with 41% supporting him and 45% expressing no opinion. The Middle East is the most negative toward Francis, with a quarter viewing him unfavorably. However, an equal number (25%) give a positive rating and a plurality (41%) do not rate him.

Americans are particularly fond of Pope Francis, with more than three-quarters (78%) giving him positive marks.

These are among the key findings from two surveys by the Pew Research Center, one conducted from October 30, 2013 to March 4, 2014, among 14,564 respondents in nine Latin American countries, and another from March 17 to June 5, 2014, among 36,430 respondents in 34 countries.

Catholics Big Fans of Pope Francis

In the 21 countries surveyed with sizable Catholic populations, Catholics overwhelmingly say they view Pope Francis favorably. And, in all of these countries, Catholics express more support for the pope than non-Catholics.

It is worth noting that these gaps in favorability do not necessarily mean that non-Catholics view Francis unfavorably. In fact, in most countries with sizable differences, non-Catholics are more likely to have no set opinion of the pope than a negative one.

The biggest differences among favorable views of Francis appear in Latin American countries. While the pope receives extremely positive marks from Catholics throughout the region, wide gaps exist between Catholics and non-Catholics in Mexico (-63 percentage points), Nicaragua (-58), El Salvador (-56), Venezuela (-52), Peru (-47), Colombia (-46) and Brazil (-45). However, non-Catholics in these countries generally give no rating for Pope Francis, rather than say they do not like him.

In the U.S. and Europe, the favorability gap is less substantial. Spain (-25), the U.S. (-19), Poland (-17), Germany (-17) and France (-12) show smaller differences in support for the pope across the denominational divide. Both Catholics and non-Catholics in all of these countries overwhelmingly voice favorable attitudes towards Francis.

A Popular Pope

Majorities or pluralities of the general public in 28 of the 43 countries surveyed say they have a positive view of Pope Francis. Europe and Latin America give the pope particularly high ratings – majorities in almost every country in these two regions view the pope favorably.

In his home country of Argentina, 91% have a favorable opinion of Francis, including 65% with a very favorable view. Majorities in every other Latin American country also see the pope in a positive light, including seven-in-ten or more in Colombia (83%), Mexico (74%), Brazil (74%) and Peru (72%).

Eight-in-ten or more also express support for the pope in Poland (92%), Italy (91%), France (88%), Spain (84%) and Germany (82%). A smaller portion, yet still a majority, in the United Kingdom (65%) view Francis favorably. Roughly half the Greeks (49%) agree, though nearly a quarter (24%) have an unfavorable view and about three-in-ten (28%) do not rate him.

His favorability is lower in other regions, though many say they cannot rate him, have never heard of him or do not have an opinion. In Asia, broad majorities in the Philippines (88%) and South Korea (86%) express positive views of Francis. At least four-in-ten give favorable views in Thailand (49%), Bangladesh (47%), Vietnam (41%) and Japan (40%). But majorities in Indonesia (57%), India (61%), Malaysia (76%) and Pakistan (85%) do not have an opinion of the pope at all.

A similar pattern arises in Africa. Majorities in Uganda (70%), Tanzania (70%) and Kenya (56%) – countries with the highest percentages of Catholics in the African nations surveyed – give the pope a favorable rating. However, four-in-ten or more in Ghana (40%), Nigeria (46%), South Africa (52%) and Senegal (55%), where more people tend to be Protestant or Muslim, offer no opinion.

Many in the Middle East do not offer a rating of the pope. But of those who have an opinion, there are interesting differences between countries. Francis is most popular in Lebanon (62% favorable), where more than a quarter of the population is Catholic. And half in Israel give the pope favorable marks. (Pope Francis visited Israel and the Palestinian territories about two weeks after the survey was conducted.) However, the pope receives his most negative ratings in Egypt (35% unfavorable), Jordan (34%) and Turkey (32%). Like many other countries with small Catholic populations, the pope is relatively unknown in Tunisia (71% no rating) and the Palestinian territories (63%).

Methods in Detail

About the 2014 Spring Pew Global Attitudes Survey

Results for the survey are based on telephone and face-to-face interviews conducted under the direction of Princeton Survey Research Associates International. Survey results are based on national samples. For more information about methodology in Latin American countries, see the Pew Research Religion & Public Life Project’s report, “Religion in Latin America,” released on November 13, 2014. For further details on sample designs, see below.

The descriptions below show the margin of sampling error based on all interviews conducted in that country. For results based on the full sample in a given country, one can say with 95% confidence that the error attributable to sampling and other random effects is plus or minus the margin of error. In addition to sampling error, one should bear in mind that question wording and practical difficulties in conducting surveys can introduce error or bias into the findings of opinion polls.

Country: Argentina
Sample design: Multi-stage cluster sample stratified by region, locality size and socioeconomic status
Mode: Face-to-face adults 18 plus
Languages: Spanish
Fieldwork dates: November 15, 2013 – January 8, 2014
Sample size: 1,512
Margin of error: +/-3.9 percentage points
Representative: Nationally representative of 99% of the adult population (excluding Tierra
del Fuego, inaccessible or sparsely populated areas, and villages with fewer
than 400 people)
 
Country: Bangladesh
Sample design: Multi-stage cluster sample stratified by administrative division and urbanity
Mode: Face-to-face adults 18 plus
Languages: Bengali
Fieldwork dates: April 14 – May 11, 2014
Sample size: 1,000
Margin of error: +/-3.8 percentage points
Representative: Adult population
 
Country: Brazil
Sample design: Multi-stage cluster sample stratified by region, municipality size and socioeconomic status
Mode: Face-to-face adults 18 plus
Languages: Portuguese
Fieldwork dates: November 4, 2013 – February 14, 2014
Sample size: 2,000
Margin of error: +/-3.8 percentage points
Representative: Nationally representative of 97% of the adult population (excluding remote areas in the Amazon rainforest and interior parts of the Amazonian states)
 
Country: Chile
Sample design: Multi-stage cluster sample stratified by provinces/major cities, urbanity and socioeconomic status
Mode: Face-to-face adults 18 plus
Languages: Spanish
Fieldwork dates: November 11 – December 16, 2013
Sample size: 1,504
Margin of error: +/-3.6 percentage points
Representative: Nationally representative of 99% of the adult population (excluding remote areas in the Atacama Desert, in mountainous areas, on islands and in the far South)
 
Country: Colombia
Sample design: Multi-stage cluster sample stratified by municipality and department size
Mode: Face-to-face adults 18 plus
Languages: Spanish
Fieldwork dates: November 28, 2013 – March 4, 2014
Sample size: 1,508
Margin of error: +/-3.8 percentage points
Representative: Nationally representative of 97% of the adult population (excluding remote areas in the Amazon rain forest and San Andres Island)
 
Country: Egypt
Sample design: Multi-stage cluster sample stratified by governorate and urbanity
Mode: Face-to-face adults 18 plus
Languages: Arabic
Fieldwork dates: April 10 – April 29, 2014
Sample size: 1,000
Margin of error: +/-4.3 percentage points
Representative: Adult population (excluding frontier governorates, or about 2% of the population)
 
Country: El Salvador
Sample design: Multi-stage cluster sample stratified by department and urbanity
Mode: Face-to-face adults 18 plus
Languages: Spanish
Fieldwork dates: November 9 – December 17, 2013
Sample size: 1,500
Margin of error: +/-3.7 percentage points
Representative: Adult population
 
Country: France
Sample design: Random Digit Dial (RDD) sample of landline and cell phone households with quotas for gender, age and occupation and stratified by region and urbanity
Mode: Telephone adults 18 plus
Languages: French
Fieldwork dates: March 17 – April 1, 2014
Sample size: 1,003
Margin of error: +/-4.1 percentage points
Representative: Telephone households (roughly 99% of all French households)
 
Country: Germany
Sample design: Random Digit Dial (RL(2)D) probability sample of landline households, stratified by administrative district and community size, and cell phone households
Mode: Telephone adults 18 plus
Languages: German
Fieldwork dates: March 17 – April 2, 2014
Sample size: 1,000
Margin of error: +/-4.0 percentage points
Representative: Telephone households (roughly 99% of all German households)
 
Country: Ghana
Sample design: Multi-stage cluster sample stratified by region and settlement size
Mode: Face-to-face adults 18 plus
Languages: Akan (Twi), English, Dagbani, Ewe
Fieldwork dates: May 5 – May 31, 2014
Sample size: 1,000
Margin of error: +/-3.8 percentage points
Representative: Adult population
 
Country: Greece
Sample design: Multi-stage cluster sample stratified by region and urbanity
Mode: Face-to-face adults 18 plus
Languages: Greek
Fieldwork dates: March 22 – April 9, 2014
Sample size: 1,000
Margin of error: +/-3.7 percentage points
Representative: Adult population (excluding the islands in the Aegean and Ionian Seas, or roughly 6% of the population)
 
Country: India
Sample design: Multi-stage cluster sample stratified by region and urbanity
Mode: Face-to-face adults 18 plus
Languages: Hindi, Bengali, Tamil, Telugu, Marathi, Kannada, Gujarati, Odia
Fieldwork dates: April 14 – May 1, 2014
Sample size: 2,464
Margin of error: +/-3.1 percentage points
Representative: Adult population in 15 of the 17 most populous states (Kerala and Assam were excluded) and the Union Territory of Delhi (roughly 91% of the population). Disproportionately urban. The data were weighted to reflect the actual urbanity distribution in India.
 
Country: Indonesia
Sample design: Multi-stage cluster sample stratified by province and urbanity
Mode: Face-to-face adults 18 plus
Languages: Bahasa Indonesian
Fieldwork dates: April 17 – May 23, 2014
Sample size: 1,000
Margin of error: +/-4.0 percentage points
Representative: Adult population (excluding Papua and remote areas or provinces with small populations, or 12% of the population)
 
Country: Israel
Sample design: Multi-stage cluster sample stratified by district, urbanity and socioeconomic status, with an oversample of Arabs
Mode: Face-to-face adults 18 plus
Languages: Hebrew, Arabic
Fieldwork dates: April 24 – May 11, 2014
Sample size: 1,000 (597 Jews, 388 Arabs, 15 others)
Margin of error: +/-4.3 percentage points
Representative: Adult population (The data were weighted to reflect the actual distribution of Jews, Arabs and others in Israel.)
 
Country: Italy
Sample design: Multi-stage cluster sample stratified by region and urbanity
Mode: Face-to-face adults 18 plus
Languages: Italian
Fieldwork dates: March 18 – April 7, 2014
Sample size: 1,000
Margin of error: +/-4.3 percentage points
Representative: Adult population
 
Country: Japan
Sample design: Random Digit Dial (RDD) probability sample of landline households stratified by region and population size
Mode: Telephone adults 18 plus
Languages: Japanese
Fieldwork dates: April 10 – April 27, 2014
Sample size: 1,000
Margin of error: +/-3.2 percentage points
Representative: Landline households (roughly 86% of all Japanese households)
 
Country: Jordan
Sample design: Multi-stage cluster sample stratified by governorate and urbanity
Mode: Face-to-face adults 18 plus
Languages: Arabic
Fieldwork dates: April 11 – April 29, 2014
Sample size: 1,000
Margin of error: +/-4.5 percentage points
Representative: Adult population
 
Country: Kenya
Sample design: Multi-stage cluster sample stratified by province and settlement size
Mode: Face-to-face adults 18 plus
Languages: Kiswahili, English
Fieldwork dates: April 18 – April 28, 2014
Sample size: 1,015
Margin of error: +/-4.0 percentage points
Representative: Adult population
 
Country: Lebanon
Sample design: Multi-stage cluster sample stratified by region and urbanity
Mode: Face-to-face adults 18 plus
Languages: Arabic
Fieldwork dates: April 11 – May 2, 2014
Sample size: 1,000
Margin of error: +/-4.1 percentage points
Representative: Adult population (excluding a small area in Beirut controlled by a militia group and a few villages in the south of Lebanon, which border Israel and are inaccessible to outsiders, or about 2% of the population)
 
Country: Malaysia
Sample design: Multi-stage cluster sample stratified by state and urbanity
Mode: Face-to-face adults 18 plus
Languages: Bahasa Malaysia, Mandarin Chinese, English
Fieldwork dates: April 10 – May 23, 2014
Sample size: 1,010
Margin of error: +/-3.8 percentage points
Representative: Adult population (excluding difficult to access areas in Sabah and Sarawak, or about 7% of the population)
 
Country: Mexico
Sample design: Multi-stage cluster sample stratified by region, urbanity and election results
Mode: Face-to-face adults 18 plus
Languages: Spanish
Fieldwork dates: October 30 – November 12, 2013
Sample size: 2,000
Margin of error: +/-3.7 percentage points
Representative: Adult population
Notes: The sample for Mexico includes a base sample of 1,500 interviews, plus an oversample of 500 interviews in the southern states of Chiapas, Tabasco, Campeche and Quintana Roo.
 
Country: Nicaragua
Sample design: Multi-stage cluster sample stratified by department and urbanity
Mode: Face-to-face adults 18 plus
Languages: Spanish
Fieldwork dates: November 9 – December 13, 2013
Sample size: 1,500
Margin of error: +/-2.8 percentage points
Representative: Nationally representative of 99% of the adult population (excluding residents of gated communities and multi-story residential buildings)
 
Country: Nigeria
Sample design: Multi-stage cluster sample stratified by region and urbanity
Mode: Face-to-face adults 18 plus
Languages: English, Hausa, Yoruba, Igbo
Fieldwork dates: April 11 – May 25, 2014
Sample size: 1,014
Margin of error: +/-4.3 percentage points
Representative: Adult population (excluding Adamawa, Borno, Cross River, Jigawa, Yobe, and some areas in Taraba, or roughly 12% of the population)
 
Country: Pakistan
Sample design: Multi-stage cluster sample stratified by province and urbanity
Mode: Face-to-face adults 18 plus
Languages: Urdu, Pashto, Punjabi, Saraiki, Sindhi
Fieldwork dates: April 15 – May 7, 2014
Sample size: 1,203
Margin of error: +/-4.2 percentage points
Representative: Adult population (excluding the Federally Administered Tribal Areas, Gilgit-Baltistan, Azad Jammu and Kashmir for security reasons, areas of instability in Khyber Pakhtunkhwa [formerly the North-West Frontier Province] and Baluchistan, military restricted areas and villages with less than 100 inhabitants – together, roughly 18% of the population). Disproportionately urban. The data were weighted to reflect the actual urbanity distribution in Pakistan.
 
Country: Palestinian territories
Sample design: Multi-stage cluster sample stratified by region and urban/rural/refugee camp population
Mode: Face-to-face adults 18 plus
Languages: Arabic
Fieldwork dates: April 15 – April 22, 2014
Sample size: 1,000
Margin of error: +/-4.4 percentage points
Representative: Adult population (excluding Bedouins who regularly change residence and some communities near Israeli settlements where military restrictions make access difficult, or roughly 5% of the population)
 
Country: Peru
Sample design: Multi-stage cluster sample stratified by region, locality size and urbanity
Mode: Face-to-face adults 18 plus
Languages: Spanish
Fieldwork dates: November 13 – December 16, 2013
Sample size: 1,500
Margin of error: +/-4.0 percentage points
Representative: Nationally representative of 99% of the adult population
 
Country: Philippines
Sample design: Multi-stage cluster sample stratified by region and urbanity
Mode: Face-to-face adults 18 plus
Languages: Tagalog, Cebuano, Ilonggo, Ilocano, Bicolano
Fieldwork dates: May 1 – May 21, 2014
Sample size: 1,008
Margin of error: +/-4.0 percentage points
Representative: Adult population
 
Country: Poland
Sample design: Multi-stage cluster sample stratified by province and urbanity
Mode: Face-to-face adults 18 plus
Languages: Polish
Fieldwork dates: March 17 – April 8, 2014
Sample size: 1,010
Margin of error: +/-3.6 percentage points
Representative: Adult population
 
Country: Russia
Sample design: Multi-stage cluster sample stratified by Russia’s eight geographic regions, plus the cities of Moscow and St. Petersburg, and by urban-rural status
Mode: Face-to-face adults 18 plus
Languages: Russian
Fieldwork dates: April 4 – April 20, 2014
Sample size: 1,000
Margin of error: +/-3.6 percentage points
Representative: Adult population (excludes Chechen Republic, Ingush Republic and remote territories in the Far North – together, roughly 3% of the population)
 
Country: Senegal
Sample design: Multi-stage cluster sample stratified by region and urbanity
Mode: Face-to-face adults 18 plus
Languages: Wolof, French
Fieldwork dates: April 17 – May 2, 2014
Sample size: 1,000
Margin of error: +/-3.7 percentage points
Representative: Adult population
 
Country: South Africa
Sample design: Multi-stage cluster sample stratified by metropolitan area, province and urbanity
Mode: Face-to-face adults 18 plus
Languages: English, Zulu, Xhosa, South Sotho, Afrikaans, North Sotho
Fieldwork dates: May 18 – June 5, 2014
Sample size: 1,000
Margin of error: +/-3.5 percentage points
Representative: Adult population
 
Country: South Korea
Sample design: Random Digit Dial (RDD) probability sample of adults who own a cell phone
Mode: Telephone adults 18 plus
Languages: Korean
Fieldwork dates: April 17 – April 30, 2014
Sample size: 1,009
Margin of error: +/-3.2 percentage points
Representative: Adults who own a cell phone (roughly 96% of adults age 18 and older)
 
Country: Spain
Sample design: Random Digit Dial (RDD) probability sample of landline and cell phone-only households stratified by region
Mode: Telephone adults 18 plus
Languages: Spanish/Castilian
Fieldwork dates: March 17 – March 31, 2014
Sample size: 1,009
Margin of error: +/-3.2 percentage points
Representative: Telephone households (roughly 97% of Spanish households)
 
Country: Tanzania
Sample design: Multi-stage cluster sample stratified by region and urbanity
Mode: Face-to-face adults 18 plus
Languages: Kiswahili
Fieldwork dates: April 18 – May 7, 2014
Sample size: 1,016
Margin of error: +/-4.0 percentage points
Representative: Adult population (excluding Zanzibar, or about 3% of the population)
 
Country: Thailand
Sample design: Multi-stage cluster sample stratified by region and urbanity
Mode: Face-to-face adults 18 plus
Languages: Thai
Fieldwork dates: April 23 – May 24, 2014
Sample size: 1,000
Margin of error: +/-3.9 percentage points
Representative: Adult population (excluding the provinces of Narathiwat, Pattani, and Yala, or about 3% of the population)
 
Country: Tunisia
Sample design: Multi-stage cluster sample stratified by governorate and urbanity
Mode: Face-to-face adults 18 plus
Languages: Tunisian Arabic
Fieldwork dates: April 19 – May 9, 2014
Sample size: 1,000
Margin of error: +/-4.0 percentage points
Representative: Adult population
 
Country: Turkey
Sample design: Multi-stage cluster sample stratified by region, urbanity and settlement size
Mode: Face-to-face adults 18 plus
Languages: Turkish
Fieldwork dates: April 11 – May 16, 2014
Sample size: 1,001
Margin of error: +/-4.5 percentage points
Representative: Adult population
 
Country: Uganda
Sample design: Multi-stage cluster sample stratified by region and urbanity
Mode: Face-to-face adults 18 plus
Languages: Luganda, English, Runyankole/Rukiga, Luo, Runyoro/Rutoro, Ateso, Lugbara
Fieldwork dates: April 25 – May 9, 2014
Sample size: 1,007
Margin of error: +/-3.9 percentage points
Representative: Adult population
 
Country: Ukraine
Sample design: Multi-stage cluster sample stratified by Ukraine’s six regions plus ten of the largest cities – Kyiv (Kiev), Kharkiv, Dnipropetrovsk, Odessa, Donetsk, Zaporizhia, Lviv, Kryvyi Rih, Lugansk, and Mikolayev – as well as three cities on the Crimean peninsula – Simferopol, Sevastopol, and Kerch
Mode: Face-to-face adults 18 plus
Languages: Russian, Ukrainian
Fieldwork dates: April 5 – April 23, 2014
Sample size: 1,659
Margin of error: +/-3.3 percentage points
Representative: Adult population (Survey includes oversamples of Crimea and of the South, East and Southeast regions. The data were weighted to reflect the actual regional distribution in Ukraine.)
 
Country: United Kingdom
Sample design: Random Digit Dial (RDD) probability sample of landline households, stratified by government office region, and cell phone-only households
Mode: Telephone adults 18 plus
Languages: English
Fieldwork dates: March 17 – April 8, 2014
Sample size: 1,000
Margin of error: +/-3.4 percentage points
Representative: Telephone households (roughly 98% of all households in the United Kingdom)
 
Country: United States
Sample design: Random Digit Dial (RDD) probability sample of landline and cell phone households
Mode: Telephone adults 18 plus
Languages: English, Spanish
Fieldwork dates: April 22 – May 11, 2014
Sample size: 1,002
Margin of error: +/-3.5 percentage points
Representative: Telephone households with English or Spanish speakers (roughly 96% of U.S. households)
 
Country: Venezuela
Sample design: Multi-stage cluster sample stratified by states and municipality size
Mode: Face-to-face adults 18 plus
Languages: Spanish
Fieldwork dates: November 8, 2013 – February 12, 2014
Sample size: 1,540
Margin of error: +/-3.9 percentage points
Representative: Nationally representative of 95% of the adult population (excluding regions of Delta Amacuro, Amazonas and Dependecias Federales, as well as 183 parishes deemed inaccessible based on safety conditions at the time of fieldwork)
Notes: The sample for Venezuela includes additional interviews to correct for gender imbalance detected during fieldwork. The original base sample consisted of 1,500 interviews
 
Country: Vietnam
Sample design: Multi-stage cluster sample stratified by region and urbanity
Mode: Face-to-face adults 18 plus
Languages: Vietnamese
Fieldwork dates: April 16 – May 8, 2014
Sample size: 1,000
Margin of error: +/-4.5 percentage points
Representative: Adult population

 




.


Any original material on these pages is copyright © BishopAccountability.org 2004. Reproduce freely with attribution.