Private Insight. This page is shared exclusively to provide a preview of Abacus Data's analytical capabilities. Please do not distribute.
A correspondence analysis mapping the perceptual landscape of 16 Canadian sectors revealing how trust, power, and economic value intersect in the public mind.

David Coletto
CEO & Lead Researcher, Abacus Data
1,515
Canadians Surveyed
16
Sectors Analyzed
12
Public Descriptors
April 2026
Field Dates
This analysis is just one example of what we do. We help organizations understand their sector's reputation, connect research to public policy, and turn insight into action.
Understand how your sector is perceived by Canadians and where you stand relative to competitors using advanced analytical techniques like correspondence analysis.
Navigate the intersection of public opinion and policy with research designed to inform government relations, regulatory strategy, and public affairs campaigns.
Map the perceptual landscape of your key stakeholders — from policymakers to industry partners — and identify the gaps between how you're seen and how you want to be seen.
Go beyond favourability scores with multi-dimensional brand mapping, segmentation studies, and usage & attitude research that reveals the full picture.
Focus groups, in-depth interviews, and online communities that give voice to the 'why' behind the numbers — adding depth and texture to quantitative findings.
Turn research into compelling stories that earn media coverage, drive engagement, and position your organization as a thought leader in your sector.
Traditional polling asks people to rate things on a scale. But that misses something important: the structure of how people think. Correspondence analysis reveals the hidden map of associations in the public mind showing not just what people think, but how their perceptions cluster and connect.
We asked 1,515 Canadians to associate 12 descriptors — from "trustworthy" to "environmentally harmful" — with 16 different industry sectors. Rather than forcing a single rating, respondents indicated which attributes they connected with each sector.
Correspondence analysis takes the complex matrix of sector-descriptor associations and reduces it to two meaningful dimensions. These axes emerge from the data itself. They aren't imposed by the researcher. The result is a map where distance equals difference in perception.
Industries and descriptors are plotted together on the same map. When a sector sits close to a descriptor, it means Canadians strongly associate them. Clusters reveal shared identities. Isolation reveals uniqueness. The map tells a story that no bar chart ever could.
"We designed this analysis to go beyond the typical 'favourability' question. Correspondence analysis lets us see the perceptual architecture that Canadians have built around these sectors and that architecture has real implications for how organizations should communicate, position themselves, and engage with policy."
— David Coletto, CEO, Abacus Data

Correspondence analysis reduces complex association data into an interpretable two-dimensional perceptual map
The correspondence analysis reveals four distinct clusters in how Canadians perceive industries — each telling a different story about trust, power, and value.
Farmers sit further left than almost any other sector on the map, and their position tells you a lot. They're tightly linked to "provides essential products or services" and "improves Canadians' quality of life," but they also pull toward the economic descriptors at the bottom left. Canadians seem to hold farmers in a kind of dual regard: they're seen as essential to daily life and also foundational to the broader economy. That's a rare combination. Most sectors get one or the other.
Pharmacies land close to farmers in the trust quadrant, strongly associated with acting responsibly toward society and being trustworthy. There's likely a professional dimension at work here. Pharmacists are regulated, credentialed, and embedded in communities in a way that feels personal rather than corporate.
News organizations appear in the same general neighborhood, though they sit a bit further from the trust descriptors than pharmacies or farmers. That slight distance feels meaningful. Canadians still associate news organizations with social responsibility and quality of life, but the connection is softer suggesting residual goodwill rather than active confidence.
Banks, grocery stores, and technology companies cluster in the upper-right, where "innovative and forward-looking" meets "focused mainly on profits" and "needs more government oversight or regulation." These three sectors share something important: Canadians recognize their role and even their necessity, but they don't trust them the way they trust farmers or pharmacies. The profit orientation is salient.
Online streaming services are further right than the others, closer to "too powerful or influential." Streaming platforms have become deeply embedded in daily life, but Canadians seem to view them with some suspicion about their scale and reach.
Artificial intelligence companies land furthest right on the map, pulled hard toward "too powerful or influential" and "needs more government oversight or regulation." Of all the sectors tested, AI companies generate the strongest sense of unchecked power in the public mind.
Railways, forestry companies, and food processors group together in the lower-left quadrant. The descriptors pulling them there are "creates good jobs," "important to Canada's economy," and "important for Canada's future." What's absent is equally telling: none of these sectors land close to the trust or responsibility descriptors. Canadians seem to value them instrumentally they matter because of what they produce and who they employ.
Wind energy producers land near the economic descriptors but also carry some association with "improves Canadians' quality of life." The public seems to see wind energy as economically meaningful and at least somewhat socially beneficial. What they haven't built yet is the kind of trust that farmers or pharmacies carry. They're valued but not yet beloved.
Airlines, oil producers, and mining companies sit in the lower-right, pulled toward "environmentally harmful" and "needs more government oversight or regulation." Airlines share the scrutiny of the oil and mining sectors but with a different character. Their association with oversight and profits suggests the frustration is partly economic and partly environmental.
Oil producers and mining companies are the sectors most strongly associated with environmental harm. What's notable is that "environmentally harmful" sits quite far from everything else on the map, isolated in the lower-right corner. That suggests it's a distinct perceptual category for Canadians. You can think something is important to the economy and still think it's damaging the environment. Canadians seem to hold both of those ideas at once without resolving the tension.
Canadians are making fairly sophisticated distinctions between sectors. Trust and economic value are not the same thing in the public mind, and power is viewed with wariness regardless of whether a sector is seen as beneficial. The sectors sitting in the most comfortable positions are the ones that have managed to combine perceived social value with proximity to ordinary people's lives. The ones facing the most difficult public perceptions are those seen as powerful, profit-driven, and in need of external accountability.
Select attributes from the panel to highlight which sectors share those perceptions. Hover over any sector to see its full profile. Combine attributes freely to build custom clusters.
Use the Attributes panel on the left side of the chart. Click any attribute (e.g., "Trustworthy" or "Environmentally harmful") to toggle it on. Active attributes are highlighted with a colored border. You can select multiple attributes at once.
Toggle between "Any match" and "All match" to control filtering. "Any match" highlights sectors associated with at least one selected attribute. "All match" shows only sectors linked to every selected attribute — useful for finding sectors with overlapping perceptions.
Hover over any sector dot on the map to see its full attribute profile in a tooltip. When no attributes are selected, hovering draws connection lines to all associated descriptors. The shaded hull that appears around matched sectors shows their perceptual cluster.
Proximity = association. Sectors close to a descriptor are strongly associated with it in the public mind. Distance means weaker association.
Clusters reveal shared identities. Sectors that group together share similar public perceptions — even if they operate in very different industries.
The axes are data-driven. The horizontal axis captures a trust-to-power spectrum. The vertical axis captures a positive-to-negative perception spectrum. Both emerge from the data, not from the researcher.
Isolation is meaningful. A sector sitting far from others (like AI companies) occupies a unique perceptual space that no other sector shares.
Designed and analyzed by David Coletto, CEO of Abacus Data. Survey of 1,515 Canadians, March 19–24, 2026. Margin of error: ±2.51 percentage points, 19 times out of 20.

CEO, Abacus Data
One of Canada's most recognized and influential public opinion researchers, with deep expertise in brand perception, public policy, and advanced analytical methods.
This research was conceived, designed, and analyzed by David Coletto, CEO of Abacus Data and one of Canada's most sought-after public opinion researchers. David has spent over a decade helping organizations — from Fortune 500 companies, to national associations and unions, to federal and provincial government departments — understand how they are perceived and what drives those perceptions.
The correspondence analysis presented here represents a distinctive approach to understanding industry reputation. Rather than relying on simple favourability scores, David applied dimensional reduction techniques to reveal the underlying structure of how Canadians think about different sectors uncovering relationships that traditional polling methods would miss entirely.
This kind of analytical depth is what sets Abacus Data apart. We don't just collect data. We turn it into insight that leaders trust, use, and act on. Whether you're navigating a regulatory challenge, repositioning your brand, or trying to understand where your sector stands in the public mind, David and the Abacus team bring the rigour and creativity to help you see what others miss.
"The more interesting questions are what drives those perceptions, whether they're stable or shifting, and what sectors on the wrong side of this map could do to change where they land."
— David Coletto
This analysis is just a glimpse of what Abacus Data can do. Whether you want to understand how your industry is perceived, connect reputation research to public policy strategy, or build a data-driven narrative for your stakeholders — we'd love to talk.
We can run this same correspondence analysis for your specific sector, with custom descriptors tailored to your strategic questions.
Understand how public perception connects to regulatory risk, government relations, and advocacy strategy.
We don't just deliver data — we deliver narratives that leadership teams can use to make decisions and communicate with confidence.
Tell us about your organization and we'll reach out to discuss how we can help.