Qualitative Research for the UK Statistics Authority

In September 2009, Ipsos was commissioned by the UK Statistics Authority to conduct an extensive programme of research examining opinion formers' views of official statistics. This project was very similar in scope to that which we conducted in 2004 on behalf of the Statistics Commission in that we wished to ascertain levels of trust and confidence in official statistics among opinion formers. In addition, however, this project looked in close detail at opinion formers' views of the Authority - including feedback on its performance so far, and what it should prioritise for the future.

Generally, official statistics were viewed positively. This was because they provide an evidence base, and are also useful in holding both politicians and government to account. In addition, participants described they allow others, include opposition parties, to lobby for change, and are emblematic of an honest and transparent system of governance. Participants perceived them as being freely available to all, and stated that they cover all sectors and areas of public interest. However, participants felt that the public views statistics with suspicion and some felt that this was due to the increasing amount of data produced. It was felt that this could be helped by clearly distinguishing which statistics are `official' and which ones are not.

The British media was believed to be uniquely negative, persistent in its treatment of news, and was not felt to take stories at face value. Some participants stated that this presents a danger to statistics as the media tends to search for the angle which allows them to report a release in a negative light, and often to sensationalise the story. Participants also felt that politicians are guilty of selectively reporting statistics, often, in the case of the Government, in order to announce good news. However, they were also believed to be guilty of misrepresenting statistics - in particular not comparing `like with like'.

Many felt that they had a good relationship with statistical producers, and particularly the ONS. Journalists spoke of having established relationships with individual staff at the ONS, and reported being satisfied with this level of engagement.

Knowledge of the Authority was closely related to frequency of use of statistics; more casual users, such as journalists, knew very little, and many only knew the name. However, even amongst more frequent users, there was confusion about the Authority on a number of key issues: what it stands for; how it is staffed; how it regulates; how it differs from the Statistics Commission; and, what its relationship to the ONS is. Some also questioned the Authority's relationship with producers of statistics, claiming that, at times, it was too one-sided, and resulted in them feeling scrutinised by the Authority without understanding enough about its remit. This, however, was not the case across the board and some stakeholders had a very good relationship with the Authority, often driven by good individual relationships and a history of positive feedback on their production.

Many felt that the Authority needs to be more visible, and there was support for Sir Michael Scholar's censure of politicians who misrepresent statistics. It was thought that this was precisely what the organisation needs to be doing, but there were concerns that this should not happen too frequently for fear of the impact being diluted, and the spotlight turning to the Authority itself.

There was a strong feeling that the Authority needs to disentangle itself from the ONS, as the independence of the latter might be compromised by the perceived lack of distance from the former - though many had misconceptions of the Authority based on confusion about the organisation. Indeed, the independence of the Authority was seen to be the key to its success in working to establish public trust in official statistics.

Download the full Ipsos report

Technical details

MORI conducted 60 face-to-face in-depth interviews with opinion formers in the UK between October 12 and December 1 2009. Each interview lasted around an hour in length.

Download the full UKSA report on user engagement