• SINGAPOREANS' PERCEPTIONS

    OF KEY SOCIETAL ISSUES

    AND HOW THIS AFFECTS THEIR

    POLITICAL CHOICES

    Quad Research believes in expanding the space for data-driven discourse and assisting in better collective decisions for Singapore’s future. We bring insight and clarity on how Singapore thinks about herself.

     

    We are a non-partisan collective of individuals acting in a personal capacity. We only publish statistically rigorous findings that are of research interest.

  • PROJECT INTRODUCTION

    In the last fifty years, Singapore's political landscape has evolved significantly. The increasing diversity of social and political actors has contributed to more vibrant community discourse on many issues that matter to Singaporeans. Research by the Institute of Policy Studies (IPS) at the National University of Singapore (NUS), Blackbox Research and other organisations have raised new lines of inquiry on how Singaporeans view key issues such as meritocracy, social mobility and social safety nets. 
     

    To this end, Quad Research designed a set of survey questions to measure Singaporeans' perceptions on the issues that matter to them and how this affects their political choices. All questions were benchmarked to international polls. The survey was conducted between 5th to 17th August. 

     

    We used online, self-administered online surveys to poll a representative sample of 1378 Singapore citizens aged 21 and above. The sample was weighted for age, race and gender to reflect the demographic composition of Singapore’s citizen population based on the 2010 Census. 

     

    We hope that this project will reflect to Singaporeans how their perceptions evolve and how these perceptions influence their political choices. We believe that answering these questions is beneficial to Singapore as it enables better decisions as a community.

  • KEY FINDINGS

    Between 5th and 17th August 2015, Quad Research conducted a survey on the upcoming General Elections to measure Singaporeans' perceptions on the issues that matter to them and how this affects their political choices. The key findings from our research are as follows:

    Pre-election polling showed strong correlation with actual vote share

    "If the election was called today, which party would you vote for?"

     

    Our findings suggest that online polling can be a reliable methodology in predicting electoral trends in Singapore

     

    Our nationally-representative online poll reflected the PAP vote share of the 2015 Singapore General Elections (GE2015) accurately. Our survey findings suggested that PAP vote share would be 70.0%, with a 2.6% margin of error, if the elections were held in early August. The actual PAP vote share of GE2015, one month later, was 69.9%.

     

    Our results suggest that pre-election online polling in Singapore, controlling for age, race, and gender, can be a reliable methodology that can yield useful insights into electoral trends. With 88% of Singapore households having access to the Internet (Infocomm Development Authority, 2014), the high level of access support the fact that online surveys can be a good gauge of median voter sentiment. Furthermore, self-administered online surveys have been proven to be better than traditional phone surveys at eliciting honest self-disclosure from respondents for sensitive topics such as community beliefs and political figures. (Pew Research, 2015).

     

    Political observers were generally unable to pick up on the magnitude of the 2015 General Election vote swing before the election

    The Straits Times termed the results at GE2015 a "surprise big swing in vote share to PAP". Political candidates, citing "poor bookie odds", were caught by surprise at the magnitude of their win. Political analysts had predicted that the Workers' Party would pick up support, and even that the PAP vote share would fall to an average of 56.5%.

     

    To our knowledge, many of these predictions were based on small samples or general observations. Individuals often find it difficult to accurately perceive national sentiment due to self-selection of social media consumption, social media algorithmic filtering of dissenting views, political polarisation of media habits and the unwillingness of people to speak publicly or on social media about policy issues when they believe that their own point of view is not widely shared.

     

    Blackbox Research, a local polling agency, identified improving popular support for Government starting from May 2014. Reports on national sentiment are available for April, May and July 2015. In post-GE coverage, they reiterated that they had observed increased support for the PAP but did not anticipate the magnitude of the vote swing.

     

    Our sampling methodology and research design yielded an accurate prediction of the prevailing electoral trend of a large vote swing towards the People's Action Party.

     

    Voting choices did not change significantly during the course of the campaigning period

     

    The results from our poll were close to the national average for PAP vote share, even though our poll was conducted before the writ of election was issued and before the campaigning period started.

     

    Future research could test these possible factors, which are neither mutually exclusive nor comprehensive

    1. Many voters had made up their mind in advance, and that events that took place during the campaigning period did not significantly affect overall citizens' voting choices (Minimal Effects Model).

    2. Campaigning is impactful, however the briefer length of the campaigning period and differences in format as compared to other countries (Bloomberg, 2015) limited the impact of campaigning.

     

    Voting preferences for opposition parties differed from actual votes due to constituency limitations

     

    Although our findings on the PAP vote share mirrored the national vote share, our data on opposition voting patterns differed significantly from the General Election results. This is due to the fact that we presented voters with a list of parties to choose from and asked them to indicate their top choice, regardless of constituency. Therefore, our results reflect voters' top party preferences (based on the list of parties contesting in GE2011) but does not take into account constituency limitations, such as the fact that opposition voters would not have been able to vote for their preferred opposition party if it did not contest in their constituency.

     

    Opposition supporters might be likely to vote for other opposition parties if their preferred party was absent

     

    Our data suggests that opposition parties might be relatively substitutable with each other. In particular, the votes of Workers' Party supporters in constituencies where the WP did not contest could have gone to other opposition parties, rather than to the PAP, thereby contributing to the vote share of the other opposition parties. While 21.5% of voters listed the Workers' Party as their top choice, only 12.5% of them actually ended up voting for the Workers' Party at GE2015, while the actual vote share of most of the other opposition parties was higher than predicted.

     

    Our poll does not take into account the emergence of new parties and independents since GE2011 or the redrawing of electoral boundaries that impacted 19% of voters (Straits Times, 2015). Nor does the poll factor in the number of people who did not vote or who spoilt their votes.

     

    Future research could include these options, and perhaps also allow voters to rank their party preferences to get a better sense of voters' orders of preferences among the different parties. This would allow us to quantify how substitutable different political parties are with each other.

    Singaporeans vote for the best local candidate, party values they trust and a more competent government

    "Here are some reasons people have given for deciding on the party they vote for. Which are the most important in your decision? Please rank them in descending priority from 1 to 7. (For example, put 1 for the most important reason, and 7 for the least important reason.)

     

    a. I would vote for who I thought was the best candidate locally regardless of their party
    b. I trust the motives and values of that party more than those of other parties
    c.  I think the senior members of the party I chose would make a more competent government
    d. I have always voted for that party
    e. I think the leader of the party I chose would make the best prime minister
    f. I prefer the promises made by the party I voted for more than the promises of the other parties
    g. I would vote to register my discontent with another party"

     

    Most Singapore voters chose to vote for the best local candidate, the party they trusted most and the party they believed would form the most competent government

     

    Our research showed that at the national level, the top 3 reasons that motivated voter choice were the best local candidate regardless of party (21%), trust in party motives and values (19%), and choosing the most competent government based on the senior members of the party (14%).

     

    'Best local candidate' mattered most in candidate choice, especially for opposition supporters

     

    21% of national respondents indicated that they would vote for who they thought was the best candidate locally regardless of party. This implies that fielding good candidates at the local level is key to influencing voter choice. Opposition voters were more likely to agree with this statement as the rationale for their choice (26%) than PAP voters (19%).

     

    PAP voters are more concerned with party loyalty and government quality 

     

    17% of PAP voters choose their vote due to party loyalty ("I have always voted for that party"), whereas only 8% of Opposition voters do so. PAP voters were also more likely than opposition voters to choose based on the perceived competency of the government ("I think the senior members of the party I chose would make a more competent government") and the Prime Minister ("I think the leader of the party I chose would make the best prime minister").

     

    A significant proportion of Opposition votes are used to register discontent with another party

     

    Only 9% of respondents at the national level would vote to register to discontent. However, opposition voters were more likely to vote to register their discontent: 20% agreed with this rationale as opposed to 4% of PAP supporters.

     

    PAP and Opposition voters are equally concerned with 'promises' and 'values'

     

    20% of Opposition voters and 19% of PAP voters would vote for the party whose motives and values they trusted most. Similarly, 10% of Opposition supporters and 11% of PAP supporters would vote for the party whose promises they preferred. This suggests that there is a "voting core", on both the PAP and Opposition sides who make their choices based on party values and ideology.

     

    PAP supporters' voting motivations tend to mirror Conservative voters, while Opposition supporters' motivations tend to mirror Labour voters

     

    Comparing our results with a similar question in the Lord Ashcroft polls after the UK General Elections in May 2015 shows that the responses of the PAP and Opposition supporters tend to mirror those of the Conservative and Labour supporters respectively, with Conservative supporters voting based on their preference for the prime minister or senior government members, and Labour supporters preferring best local candidates or voting tactically to stop another party from winning.

    A slight majority of Singaporeans think that Singapore is meritocratic

    "Which of these statements comes closest to your view, even if you don't completely agree with either of them?

     

    a) If you work hard, it is possible to be very successful in Singapore no matter what your background.

     

    b) In Singapore today, people from some backgrounds will never have a real chance to be successful no matter how hard they work."

     

    Our research shows that 57% of Singaporeans are optimistic about social mobility. This belief differs by party affiliation: 68% of PAP voters believe that Singapore is meritocratic, compared to 32% of Opposition voters.

     

    According to research conducted in 2013 by YouGov, 41% of American respondents believe that the American dream is impossible for most to achieve, while 38% believe it is still possible. In the UK, 43% agree that success is reserved for those from privileged backgrounds, while only 38% say that if they work hard, anyone can succeed.

     

    Recent research by NUS sociologist Tan Ern Ser showed that although all classes are still confident that meritocracy works in Singapore, there may be signs that social mobility is slowing for the lower and middle classes. Richer respondents are more likely to believe that having connections and a rich family are important. In contrast, less well-off respondents believe more in luck as an ingredient for success.

     

    Three in five Singaporeans are optimistic about the future

    "Which of these statements comes closest to your view, even if you don't completely agree with either of them?

     

    a. For most children growing up in Singapore today, life will be better than it was for their parents

     

    b. For most children growing up in Singapore today, life will be worse than it was for their parents"

     

    Our research shows that 60% of Singaporeans believe that life for their children will be better than for the current generation. This belief differs by party affiliation - while 69% of PAP voters are optimistic about the future, only 39% of Opposition voters were optimistic.

     

    According to a 2013 Gallup poll, Americans were evenly divided about whether it was likely (49%) or unlikely (50%) that the next generation of youth in the country would have a better life than their parents.

    In Singapore, a 2014 Mastercard survey showed that while 68% of Singaporean youths were optimistic, only 62% of people aged 30 and above were optimistic. The economy was a key concern of the older population.

    Two in three Singaporeans believe in social safety nets

    "Which of these statements comes closest to your view, even if you don't completely agree with either of them?

     

    a. People have a right to things like decent housing, healthcare, education and enough to live on, and the government should make sure everyone has them.


    b. People are too ready to talk about their rights - they have a responsibility to provide for themselves and should not expect the government to do so for them."

     

    Our research shows that 66% of Singaporeans believe that people have a right to social safety nets. This belief differs by party affiliation - 63% of PAP voters believe in social safety nets, and 73% of Opposition voters do so.

     

    The 2008 European Social Survey revealed that between 65% and 90% of respondents in 29 European countries supported wide-ranging government responsibility for various welfare measures.

     

    In contrast, according to a 2001 NPR survey, Americans are generally sceptical that government help makes things better (13%) and disagree that too little is spent (38%). Yet 57% of Americans are willing to pay more taxes for more government spending to help the poor.

     

    Recent research by Irene Ng at the National University of Singapore shows that 50% of Singaporeans agree that government help is making things better and 64% think that the amount spent is too low. However, only 41% of Singaporeans are willing to pay more taxes for additional government spending to help the poor.

    Singaporeans more accurately estimate the extent of immigration than other countries

    "Out of every 100 people in Singapore, about how many do you think are Singapore citizens?"

     

    Our research shows that Singaporeans think that 59% of Singapore's population are citizens. This differed by party affiliation - PAP supporters estimated 61% on average, while Opposition supporters estimated 54%. In fact, 61% of Singapore's population are Singapore citizens.

     

    Singaporeans' estimate was more accurate than other benchmarked countries. In a 2014 Ipsos Mori poll of 14 countries, immigration was overestimated in every country to a greater degree. For example, Americans estimated the percentage of immigrants in their country at 32% and the British at 24%. In both countries, the real figure is only 13%.

     

    An IPS survey on integration in Singapore revealed the existence of anti-immigrant anxieties, with 64% of respondents expressing the belief that immigrants treated Singapore as a 'stepping stone' to other countries.

    Singaporeans perceive unemployment to be much higher than it actually is

    "Out of every 100 Singapore citizens of working age, about how many do you think are unemployed and looking for work?"

     

    On average, Singaporeans think that 27% of Singaporean citizens of working age are unemployed. This differed by party affiliation - PAP supporters estimated 25% unemployment, while Opposition supporters estimated 32%. In fact, only 2.6% of Singapore's citizens of working are unemployed.

     

    Other countries also similarly overestimate unemployment. According to a 2014 Ipsos Mori poll of 14 countries, South Koreans estimated unemployment rates in their country at 32% and Japanese at 19%. In both countries, the actual figure is only 4%.

     

    In Singapore, although relatively low unemployment rates have given rise to the perception that Singaporeans are choosy when looking for jobs, calls have also been made for a comprehensive unemployment insurance system which would benefit unemployed workers, especially older workers who experience difficulty in finding re-employment.

    One in five Singaporeans cannot name their Member of Parliament

    "Do you know the name of your local electoral constituency's Member of Parliament (MP) or any member of your Group Representation Constituency (GRC) team?"

     

    Our research shows that before GE2015, 18% of Singaporeans could not name their Member of Parliament. This differed by party affiliation - 14% of PAP voters could not name their Member of Parliament, whereas 28% of Opposition voters could not.

     

    According to a 2013 Hansard Society survey conducted in the UK, only 22% of people could name their own MP.

     

    In Singapore, a 2011 The New Paper survey testing Singaporeans' knowledge of opposition parties showed that younger voters tended to be more ignorant about opposition parties compared to older voters.

  • SURVEY METHODOLOGY

    The research was conducted August 5-17 2015. The sample size is 1378 respondents who are Singapore citizens aged 21 and above. The survey panel was weighted for age, race and gender to reflect the demographic composition of Singapore's citizen population (Census 2010). The margin for error was plus or minus 2.6% with a 95% confidence interval. Weight factors and survey questions can be found here.

     

    To improve the accuracy of the results, surveys were delivered over the internet and all responses were anonymous. Self-administered online surveys have been proven to be better than traditional phone surveys at eliciting honest self-disclosure from respondents for sensitive topics such as community beliefs and political figures. (Pew Research, 2015).

     

    We were glad to have the support of the team at SurveyMonkey Audience. SurveyMonkey Audience allows customers to conduct research from a pool of millions of people around the world who have volunteered to participate in surveys. More information about data quality and respondent selection for SurveyMonkey Audience can be found here: https://www.surveymonkey.com/mp/audience/our-survey-respondents/. Recent polls conducted include the 2015 U.K. Election, NBC News on Donald Trump and other case studies.

     

    We acknowledge that all surveys may be subject to multiple sources of error, including, but not limited to sampling error, coverage error, and measurement error. We welcome feedback on further research to be conducted.

     

    We are thankful for the prior research contributions of the Institute of Policy Studies, Blackbox Research, local researchers as well as similar polling by Ipsos Mori and Lord Ashcroft Polls.

  • Press Mentions

    by Delfina Utomo

    "... [There is] a vast difference between the armchair critic and hard, solid facts obtained by the most honourable and also time-consuming method: actual cold hard field research — something Quad Research champions. Regular political pundits were generally unable to pick up on the vote swing and pre-election predictions were all proven wrong with the results. But it was Quad who somehow, from the skirmish, had the evidence to show that this was the expected result of the elections."

    by Delfina Utomo (Originally posted on Vulcan Post)

    "If you’re up for some lunchtime reading, power up with some factual knowledge via Quad Research. You might even find yourself somewhere in the statistics. Happy reading!"

    by Jin Yao Kwan

    "Yet beyond this prediction per se, the survey by Quad Research highlighted two related observations: first, understanding the political motivations or positions which guide the choices made by Singaporeans can be beneficial for discourse; and second, modern data collection tools can be rigorously used for these purposes. In this vein, raising data literacy of the general populace should also be an important objective in the near future."

  • TEAM

    Our Mission: Reflecting Singapore

    Quad believes in expanding the space for data-driven discourse and assisting in better collective decisions for Singapore’s future. We bring insight and clarity on how Singapore thinks about herself.

     

    We are a non-partisan collective of individuals acting in a personal capacity. We only publish statistically rigorous findings that are of research interest.

     

  • TEAM MEMBERS

    Yvonne is a PhD candidate in the Lee Kuan Yew School of Public Policy. She holds a Bachelor's Degree from Sciences Po Paris and a Dual Master's Degree in International Affairs from Sciences Po Paris and University of St. Gallen. She has prior experience in public policy research.

    Cheryl is a manager in the Lee Kuan Yew School of Public Policy. She holds a Master's Degree in Public Administration  from LKYSPP and Bachelor's Degree (Honours) in Economics from University of Melbourne. She has prior experience in the government and education sectors.

    Wally Tham produces content for social change at Big Red Button, a Singaporean creative agency. He spends his time telling stories and creating experiences that move people toward action and ownership.

    Jeremy is an MBA candidate at Harvard Business School. He holds a honors degree in Economics and Business Administration from University of California: Berkeley. He has prior experience in consulting and the social sector.

  • Find Us On Facebook 

    #quadsg

  • CONTACT US

    Suggestions? Thoughts? Let us know!

  • FREQUENTLY ASKED QUESTIONS

     

    Was the sample controlled for race, age, gender or geography?

     

    We surveyed a representative sample of 1378 Singapore citizens aged 21 and above. The sample was weighted for age, race, and gender to reflect the demographic composition of Singapore’s citizen population based on the 2010 Census. This is on par with the sampling methodology for the Post-Election 2011 Survey conducted by the Institute of Policy Studies.  Household income data was also captured.


    As fieldwork for the survey was conducted in early August 2015, one of the limitations of our results was that we were not able to take into account the changes in electoral boundaries for GE2015 and which parties ended up contesting in which GRCs/SMCs. We did collect geographical data based on the GE2011 electoral boundaries as part of our sample. While our sample is geographically representative, it has not been weighted for geography.

     

     

     

     

     

    Why online polling? Isn’t it biased?

     

    While every effort was undertaken to ensure the objectivity of the data, we also acknowledge that every survey methodology comes with its own set of biases. We chose to test a new methodology that has not, to our knowledge, been tested in a pre-election survey in the Singapore context.

     

     

    This was supported by prior research showing that self-administered online surveys have been proven to be better than traditional phone surveys at eliciting honest self-disclosure from respondents for sensitive topics such as community beliefs and political figures (Pew Research, 2015). With 88% of Singapore households having access to the Internet (Infocomm Development Authority, 2014), we hypothesised that online surveys would also be a good gauge of median voter sentiment for Singapore.


    We were glad to have the support of the team at SurveyMonkey Audience. SurveyMonkey Audience allows customers to conduct research from a pool of millions of people around the world who have volunteered to participate in surveys. More information about data quality and respondent selection for SurveyMonkey Audience can be found here: https://www.surveymonkey.com/mp/audience/our-survey-respondents/. Recent polls conducted include the 2015 U.K. Election, NBC News on Donald Trump and other case studies.

     

     

     

     

     

    Why aren’t there more polls in Singapore?


    A number of polls have been conducted prior to or just after elections, including IPS  Post-Election 2011 Survey and Blackbox Research’s work on measuring the pulse in Singapore. These previous electoral polls were mainly done either face-to-face or via telephone. We selected the online polling methodology to fill the gap in previous electoral polling research in Singapore.

     

     

     

     

    Is it illegal to publish a poll before, during, or after elections?

     

    According to the Parliamentary Elections Act (PEA), no person is allowed to publish exit polls between the time that the writ for an election is called until the close of Polling Day.

     

     

    We ran the fieldwork for our survey between 5 to 17 August 2015, and published findings on national-level beliefs on 21 August 2015. The Writ of Election was issued on 25 August 2015.  Polling was restricted till Polling Day on 11 September 2015. We published our survey results on party vote share and voter rationales on 15 September 2015, 4 days after Polling Day.

     

     

     

    Why did you only release the survey results after the election?

     

     

     

    Online political polling is a relatively new methodology. Our primary research interest was to test the validity of this methodology and understand both the strengths and limitations of the methodology. We wanted to observe the pre-election results and compare that against actual results. As an independent, non-partisan research team, we have no interest in influencing the election result.

     

     

     

    Who commissioned this project? Who funded this project?

     

     

     

    Quad Research is an independent entity. The first survey and research was funded entirely by team members acting in an individual capacity. All future profits earned from the sale of data will be reinvested for future research

     

     

     

    Why did you do this research? What was your motivation for doing this research?


    Quad Research believes in the democratic process for a better Singapore. As a collective of individuals acting in a personal capacity, we believe that there is room for the advancement of political research in Singapore and that ordinary citizens are now able to undertake some of this work independently. We observed that online political polling was becoming increasingly credible in other democracies and wanted to test the validity of online polling with a relevant, current, and testable issue. Over the longer term, we hope that the improvement of political research will inform better decision-making by society.

     

     

     

     

     

     

    Can we buy the raw data?
     

    The full set of raw data is available for sale at S$20,000. Please indicate your interest at http://www.quad.sg/#buy-data

     

  • LEGAL DISCLAIMER

    The information contained in this website is provided by Quad Research on an “as is” basis without warranties of any kind. While Quad Research has made every reasonable effort to ensure that the Contents of this website are up to date and correct, we make no representations or warranties of any kind to you or any third party, express or implied, about the completeness, accuracy, reliability, suitability or availability with respect to the website or the information, products, services, or related graphics contained on the website for any purpose.


    Quad Research hereby disclaims all express, implied and/or statutory warranties of any kind, whether arising from usage or custom or trade or by operation of law or otherwise, including but not limited to any representations or warranties. Quad Research is not responsible for any errors or omissions, or for the results obtained or consequences arising from the use of any of the Contents.


    Quad Research shall also not be liable to any party for any loss or damage including without limitation, indirect or consequential loss or damage, or any loss or damage whatsoever arising from loss of data or profits arising out of, or in connection with, the use of this website.


    Through this website you are able to link to other websites which are not under the control of Quad Research. We have no control over the nature, content and availability of those sites. The inclusion of any links does not necessarily imply a recommendation or endorse the views expressed within them.
     

    Except as otherwise provided, the Contents of this report shall not be reproduced, republished, uploaded, posted, transmitted or otherwise distributed in any way, without the prior written permission of the authors of the report.

     

    As a condition of your use of the website, you warrant to us that you will not use the website for any purpose that is unlawful or prohibited by the laws of the Republic of Singapore. By using the materials contained in this website, you agree to indemnify and hold harmless any of the individuals affiliated with the report from and against all claims, liabilities, losses, damages, and expenses (collectively “Losses”) as incurred, jointly or severally (including actions or proceedings in respect thereof) relating to or arising out of your use of the website.

     

     

    Images on the website may consist of original photos, commissioned artwork or stock photography and creative commons photos. We have done our best to attribute the creators of stock photos and creative commons photos based on the information available to us. Use of these works does not suggests that the respective authors endorse us or our use of the work.

    PRIVACY POLICY

    1. Introduction

    1.1. Quad Research. takes the privacy of your information seriously. This Privacy Policy applies to the quad.sg website (the “Website”) and governs data collection, processing and usage in compliance with the Personal Data Protection Act 2012 (No. 26 of 2012) of Singapore (“PDPA”). By using the Website, you consent to the data practices described in this statement.

    1.2. By interacting with us, submitting information to us, or signing up for any Products and Services offered by us, you agree and consent to Quad Research. (including its related corporations and business units) (collectively, the “Companies”), as well as their respective representatives and/or agents (collectively referred to herein as “Quad Research”, “us”, “we” or “our”) collecting, using, disclosing and sharing amongst themselves your personal data (“Personal Information”), and disclosing such Personal Information to the Companies’ authorised service providers and relevant third parties in the manner set forth in this Privacy Policy.

    1.3. This Privacy Policy supplements but does not supersede nor replace any other consents you may have previously provided to Quad Research in respect of your Personal Information, and your consents herein are additional to any rights which to any of the Companies may have at law to collect, use or disclose your Personal Information.

    1.4. Quad Research may from time to time update this Privacy Policy to ensure that this Privacy Policy is consistent with our future developments, industry trends and/or any changes in legal or regulatory requirements. Subject to your rights at law, you agree to be bound by the prevailing terms of the Privacy Policy as updated from time to time on our website. Please check back regularly for updated information on the handling of your Personal Information.

     

    2. Definition of Personal Information

    2.1. In this Privacy Policy, “Personal Information” refers to any data, whether true or not, about an individual who can be identified (a) from that data; or (b) from that data and other information to which we have or are likely to have access, including data in our records as may be updated from time to time.

    2.2. Examples of such Personal Information you may provide to us include (depending on the nature of your interaction with us) your name, NRIC, passport or other identification number, telephone number(s), mailing address, email address, network data and any other information relating to any individuals which you have provided us in any forms you may have submitted to us, or via other forms of interaction with you.

    2.3. If you provide us with any Personal Information relating to a third party (e.g. information of your spouse, children, parents, and/or employees), by submitting such information to us, you represent to us that you have obtained the consent of the third party to provide us with their Personal Information for the respective purposes.

    2.4. You should ensure that all Personal Information submitted to us is complete, accurate, true and correct. Failure on your part to do so may result in our inability to provide you with the Services you have requested.

    2.5. Quad Research may collect and process Personal Information, such as: (a) your e-mail address and name, when you provide such details with us, when you contact us, or when you volunteer such information to us in other manner; (b) all details contained in the relevant document that you enter when creating and editing forms and documents on our Website.

     

    3. Use of Personal Information

    3.1. Quad Research collects and uses your Personal Information to operate and deliver its mission, objects and Services provided by www.quad.sg. Personal Information you provide may be distributed internally to Quad Research Members, Directors and Volunteers. Quad Research may also use your Personal Information to inform you of other products or services available from Quad Research and its affiliates, where you have consented to be contacted for such purposes.

     

    4. Non-Disclosure of Personal Information

    4.1. Quad Research does not sell, rent, lease, or release your Personal Information to third parties, unless authorized by a subsequent agreement between you and Quad Research. All such third parties will be required to maintain the confidentiality of your Personal Information.

     

    5. Cookies

    5.1. We will obtain Personal Information about you when you visit quad.sg, including but not limited to the use of cookies and similar tracking devices to enable certain features and functions on our websites, building up a profile of how you and other users use the website and establishing usage statistics.

    5.2. Most internet browsers provide you the option of turning off the processing of cookies, but this may result in the loss of functionality, restrict your use of the website and/or delay or affect the way in which it operates.

    5.3. Quad Research is not responsible for the Personal Information policies (including Personal Information protection and cookies), content or security of any third party websites linked to this website.

     

    6. Disclosure of Personal Information

    6.1. Quad Research will disclose or share your Personal Information, without notice, only if required to do so by law or in the good faith belief that any such action is necessary to: (a) comply with any legal requirements or comply with legal process served on Quad Research or the Website; (b) protect and defend the rights or property of Quad Research; and (c) act under exigent circumstances to protect the personal safety of users of quad.sg, or the general public, or as directed by the Government of the Republic of Singapore under the Computer Misuse and Cybersecurity Act.

    6.2. We may disclose your personal information to third parties: (a) in the event that we sell or buy any business or assets, in which case we may disclose your Personal Information to the prospective seller or buyer of such business or assets; and (b) if Quad Research or substantially all of its assets are acquired by a third party, in which case Personal Information held by it about its customers will be one of the transferred assets.

     

    7.  Third-Party Authentication Services

    7.1. You may arrive to our website or sign up for our activities using your email address or through LinkedIn, Facebook or other social media’s authentication services as we may implement from time to time. In working with Personal Information collected from LinkedIn, Facebook, or other social media services, Quad Research complies with the respective social media’s API Terms of Use.

     

    8. Security of Your Personal Information

    8.1. While Quad Research will make every reasonable effort to maintain the safety of Personal Information, Quad Research assumes no liability or responsibility to any user or any third party for unauthorized access to your Personal Information.

     

    9.  Access to, Updating, and Non-Use of Your Personal Information

    9.1. Subject to the exceptions referred to in section 21(2) of the PDPA, you have the right to request a copy of the information that we hold about you. If you would like a copy of some or all of your personal information, please send an email to info@quad.sg. Quad Research reserves the right to imposes charges for this service if necessary.

    9.2. We want to ensure that your Personal Information is accurate and up to date. If any of the information that you have provided to Quad Research changes, please let us know the correct details by sending an email to info@quad.sg.

    9.3. You have the right to ask us not to collect, use, process, or disclose your Personal Information in any of the manner described herein. You can give us notice of your intention to halt the collection, use, processing, or disclosure of your Personal Information at any time by contacting us at info@quad.sg.

    9.4. If you withdraw your consent to any or all use of your Personal Information, depending on the nature of your request, Quad Research may not be in a position to continue to provide its services to you, administer any contractual relationship in place, which in turn may also result in the termination of any agreements with Quad Research, and your being in breach of your contractual obligations or undertakings. Quad Research’s legal rights and remedies in such an event are expressly reserved.

     

    10. Contacting Us – Withdrawal of Consent, Access and Correction of your Personal Information

    10.1. If you have any questions or feedback relating to your Personal Information or our Privacy Policy or would like to obtain access and make corrections to your Personal Information records, please contact our Data Protection Officer at info@quad.sg.

     

    11.  Governing Law

    11.1. This Privacy Policy and your use of this website shall be governed in all respects by the laws of the Republic of Singapore.