Big Drop in Confidence in Leaders of Major Institutions

Leaders of the Military Only One of 16 Categories to Improve Since Last Year

Over the past four decades, the Harris Poll has measured the confidence, or lack of confidence, in the leaders of major institutions. This year’s survey finds that confidence has declined substantially since last year. Fifteen of the sixteen items listed show a fall in confidence and the overall Harris Interactive Confidence Index has fallen nine points this year.

The largest declines in those who have a "great deal of confidence" are for medicine (down from 37% to 28%), leadership in the White House (down from 22% last year to 15%) and for the relatively highly rated small business leaders (down from 54% to 47%).

Only one institution shows an improvement. Those who have a great deal of confidence in leaders of the military have increased from 46 percent to 51 percent. This almost certainly reflects a sense that the situation in Iraq is improving and the so-called "surge" has been somewhat successful. It may also reflect public confidence in General David Petraeus, the commander in Iraq.

These are the results of a Harris Poll of 1,010 adults surveyed by telephone between February 5 and 11, 2008.

As a result of the fall in confidence levels, the Harris Interactive Confidence Index had dropped very sharply from 53 in 2007 to 44 this year. This is the lowest it has been in eleven years.

This poll also shows significant declines in the number of people who have a great deal of confidence in:

• Wall Street, down six points from 17 percent to only 11 percent (reflecting, presumably, the decline of the stock market);
• Major Educational Institutions, down five points from 37 percent to 32 percent;
• The Courts and the Justice Systems, also down five points from 21 percent to 16 percent.

In this year’s survey the leaders of six institutions enjoy the most confidence:

• The military (51% have a great deal of confidence);
• Small business (47%);
• Major educational institutions (32%);
• Medicine (28%);
• Organized religion (25%);
• The Supreme Court (25%).

Leaders of the following institution engender the lowest levels of confidence:

• The Congress (only 8% have a great deal of confidence);
• The press (10%);
• Organized labor (11%);
• Wall Street (11%);
• Major companies (14%).

Republicans tend to have more confidence than Democrats in the leaders of:

• The military (76% vs. 37%);
• Small business (58% vs. 40%);
• Medicine (38% vs. 24%);
• The Supreme Court (37% vs. 20%);
• Organized religion (35% vs. 21%);
• The White House (30% vs. 7%);
• Major companies (21% vs. 12%);
• Wall Street (15% vs. 9%).

Democrats, on the other hand, tend to have more confidence in the leaders of:

• Major educational institutions (39% vs. 25%);
• Television news (22% vs. 13%);
• Organized labor (17% vs. 6%);
• The press (17% vs. 5%);
• Congress (11% vs. 6%).

The Harris Poll measures the changing levels of confidence from year to year but it does not explain why they change. We can provide plausible explanations for some, but not all of the changes.

We believe that al least two forces change these numbers. One is specific events (or public perception of events). These would explain the higher level of confidence in the military and the lower level of confidence in the White House (parallel to the recent decline in President Bush’s ratings).

Another explanation is the halo effect from general mood of the country that appears to raise or lower the levels of confidence in leaders generally when things seem to be going well, confidence rise – and vice versa.

However, sometimes confidence in specific institutions rises or falls for reasons we do not understand. In this year’s survey we do not offer an explanation for the sharp decline in confidence in the leaders of small business or medicine. It should be noted however that both of these still do much better than most of the institutions listed.

Public perceptions of different institutions and their leaders matter. They influence behavior. Legislators and regulators are probably more likely to take a tougher line with unpopular institutions than with popular ones. The influence of Corporate America is probably hurt by the low standing of major companies but helped by the high standing of small business. As confidence in Wall Street declines, legislators may be inclined to investigate or regulate financial markets. The unpopularity of organized labor may make it harder for unions to recruit new members. This year’s increased respect for our military leaders probably increases their influence on Capitol Hill. In a democracy, popularity and unpopularity often make a difference.

"As far as people in charge of running (READ EACH ITEM) are concerned, would you say you have a great deal of confidence, only some confidence, or hardly any confidence at all in them?"

Base: All Adults

Note: Percentages may not add up to 100% due to rounding.

* Less Than 0.5%

"As far as people in charge of running (READ EACH ITEM) are concerned, would you say you have a great deal of confidence, only some confidence, or hardly any confidence at all in them?"

Base: All Adults

X = Not asked

"As far as people in charge of running (READ EACH ITEM) are concerned, would you say you have a great deal of confidence, only some confidence, or hardly any confidence at all in them?"

Base: All Adults

X = Not asked

"As far as people in charge of running (READ EACH ITEM) are concerned, would you say you have a great deal of confidence, only some confidence, or hardly any confidence at all in them?"

Base: All Adults

X = Not asked

"As far as people in charge of running (READ EACH ITEM) are concerned, would you say you have a great deal of confidence, only some confidence, or hardly any confidence at all in them?"

Base: All Adults

X = Not asked

"As far as people in charge of running … are concerned, would you say you have a great deal of confidence, only some confidence, or hardly any confidence at all in them?"

Base: All Adults

Note: Percentages may not add up to 100% due to rounding.

The Harris Interactive Confidence in Leadership Index measures changes in the public’s confidence in various institutions. It is derived in the following manner:

1. The index is based on the mean value of the items asked.
2. All items have equal weight.
3. The year 1966, the first year the items were asked, was set as a reference year for the index and assigned a score of 100.
4. In order to yield a score of 100 in 1966, the mean value of the original 10 items was multiplied by a factor of 2.11. This same factor was then applied to the mean score in subsequent years, as long as the same items were asked.
5. Whenever a new item is added, the multiplication factor is changed so that the new item has no effect on that year’s score. The new factor is derived by calculating the index with and without the new item(s), taking the ratio of the two scores, and multiplying this ratio by the old factor. (The current factor is 2.14).
6. In years when an item included in a previous year is not asked, it is assumed for calculation purposes that no change has occurred in that item since the last time it was asked.

All sample surveys and polls, whether or not they use probability sampling are subject to ,multiple sources of error which are most often not possible to quantify or estimate, including sampling error, coverage error, error associated with nonresponse, error associated with question wording and response options, and post-survey weighting and adjustments. Therefore, Harris Interactive avoids the words "margin of error" as they are misleading. All that can be calculated are different possible sampling errors with different probabilities for pure, unweighted, random samples with 100% response rates. These are only theoretical because no published polls come close to this ideal.