- Industry specialization
- Social and Political research
- Marketing Research
- Customer satisfaction study
- Package test
- Price studies
- Segmentation, lifestyle
- Positioning, brand image
- Product test
- Advertising concept test
- Study of the Effectiveness of an Advertising Campaign
- Price and Distribution Check
- Tracking study
- Mystery Shopping
- Evaluating the effectiveness of RM programs
- Usage and Attitude ( U & A) Studies
- Product Concept Test
- Business-to-business research
- Advertising research
- Car Clinic and Test Drive
- Format of results
- Request for quotation
On September 13th another single voting day is going to have place in
We have run the representative national survey, applying to both representatives of the relevant local regions and those in areas where no elections are planned for this year. To some extent our research findings could be extrapolated to the regions, where elections to the Legislative Assembly and local self-governing authorities are to take place. It is because the competing political forces in these both elections are normally identical.
A third (33%) of our respondents are willing to give their support to the currently sitting regional leads, should those come forward as candidates for another term. The percentage of the sitting regional leads supporters is relatively greater in middle class respondents (in respondents with income level between 40 000 and 50 000 it’s by 12% greater than mean value), small towns residents (by 4 %) and our co-citizens residing in Southern federal district (by 16%).
A quarter of the interviewed (23%) have expressed their willingness to support a candidate, enjoying Russian president’s support (which is quite reasonable, considering specificities of the national federalism functioning). The percentage of such supporters in greater in the retired (by 5%) and the South federal district (by 5%). By and large respondents willing to vote for the “party of power” candidates in the elections, in the ratio of 4:6 can be split into those preferring some new face as a lead, however representing the same former political group, and those who are happy with the sitting regional or republican executive.
Every fifth of our people are not going to take part in voting in the regions. Their percentage is the biggest in the category of unemployed (by 16%) and residents of the Central federal district (by 5%). Only 5% of participants are willing to support a candidate representing opposition (provided however that the one manages to get registered for the election race). The percentage of opposition-minded voters is the greatest in the category of people with incomes of above 50 000 rubles (by 5% higher than the mean value), megacities dwellers and respondents – residents of the Central and Siberian federal districts.
In overall we have noticed the development of the two counter-trends: respondents with small incomes and volatile social status express voting willingness in favor of “party of power” candidates less often, while high income respondents residing in large cities are more often prone to support an oppositionist. In our opinion there’s no conflict about this, since our low income people are mostly depoliticized and therefore prefer absent-mannered behavior (i.e. not to attend elections). These don’t show their confidence in the authorities. Neither these have trust in the opposition. This category could make an electoral basis for the “left”, the populist party. But the CPRF has no potential of mobilizing this force, since it is not perceived as opposition even by huge number of its own supporters (46% of this party supporters are willing to support in these elections either the regional sitting executive, or someone, promoted by Russian President. Just 19% are willing to vote for a candidate from opposition).
This study was conducted in August 2015 based on all-Russia random route sample (18+) by means of face-to-face interviews in place of residence. Altogether 1500 respondents in 8 federal districts, 150 settlements, 200 sample points have been surveyed. The sample error makes ± 2,5% by C.I. of 95%.