This is, unfortunately, the weakness with many poorly designed surveys and 'market research': when there is no cost to them in doing so, the vast majority of respondents will give you a positive answer, or the answer they think you want to hear. This is a natural part of human psychology, and our nature as social animals. People also like to think of themselves as bias-free and divorced from mindless adherence to social norms, and so if you did indeed frame it as 'would you give them a chance?', fewer respondents are going to say no. Far nicer to think to oneself 'why yes, I am not subject to lazy thinking; I instead evaluate each opportunity and individual on its merits, even if that means risk taking! I am a brave free-thinker.' However, when there is a potential cost to themselves, you will find the vast majority of individuals are actually much more conservative and cautious. This is why so many products come to market by first-time inventors and entrepreneurs and utterly fail, leading to confusion because 'I ran surveys and everyone said they would totally buy my product - so why isn't anyone buying it?' In a survey, there's a social cost to saying no, or giving an answer the survey creator doesn't want to hear. In reality, there's a literal cost in buying a product/hiring a person. I think you can see where a disconnect may occur. Well designed market research attempts to account for this disparity. Poorly designed research ignores human psychology and instead takes the errant result as gospel and runs with it. Also: I spent a little bit of time in West Vlaanderen. They absolutely do not speak the same language as the Dutch. I don't care what anyone says - that was not Dutch I heard. Nevermind the Netherlands and Belgium not being the same country - Belgium isn't even the same country as Belgium. Strangest 'nation' (amalgamation might be a better word) I've ever visited.