4,877 rated or chosen profiles from 510 respondents, in up to 5 tasks of 2 profiles varying on 2 attributes.
| Description | Paired candidate conjoint in Turkey: 510 respondents compared 5 pairs of hypothetical candidates varying a proposed law on judicial oversight of the government (with or without a gridlock/corruption justification, by arm) and a social-policy plan; outcomes are candidate selection, a 0-10 democracy rating and a 1-5 support rating. |
|---|---|
| Reference | Adiguzel, F. S. (2025). Checks and balances and institutional gridlock: Implications for authoritarianism. Governance, 38(2). |
| DOI | 10.1111/gove.70017 |
| Licence | CC0 1.0 |
| Source data | https://doi.org/10.7910/DVN/WABIY5 |
These notes describe the source data, which the IRW reproduces as released. All notes are listed on the Data Notes page.
| Respondents | 510 |
|---|---|
| Rows (one per respondent, task and profile) | 4,877 |
| Tasks per respondent (most) | 5 |
| Profiles per task | 2 |
| Attributes | 2 |
| Tasks with no profile chosen | 0 |
| Topic | candidate choice |
|---|---|
| A profile represents | person |
| Country | TR |
| Language shown | tr |
| Language of stored levels | tr |
| Randomization restrictions | yes (stated by the source): judicial-law texts depend on the respondent's arm: the two justified versions ('...için...') appear only in trial_version 1, the unjustified less/more-oversight texts only in arm 0; the neutral workload law appears in both (stopifnot in script) |
| Task order | recorded in the deposit |
| Profile position | recorded in the deposit |
Because the attribute levels were not randomized independently, an estimator has to account for the restriction; a plain difference in means across levels can mislead.
Outcomes:
| choice | Which of these two candidates would you select? (paraphrase) [choice, forced] |
|---|---|
| rating_democrat | How democratic is this candidate? (paraphrase) [rating, 0 (unknown) to 10 (unknown)] |
| rating_like | How much do you support this candidate? (paraphrase) [rating, 1 (unknown) to 5 (unknown)] |
attr_judiciary_lawattr_social_policychoicecov_agecov_erdogan_votercov_gendercov_ideologycov_time_minidprofilerating_democratrating_liketasktrial_version
The layout (one row per respondent, task and profile; choice/rating outcomes; attr_ columns holding each attribute level as displayed) is defined in the IRW conjoint standard. What the outcomes asked is under Design above.
Or load it directly in R or Python (both need a free Redivis account; the first call opens a browser to sign in):
# R
install.packages("remotes")
remotes::install_github("itemresponsewarehouse/Rpkg")
library(irw)
df <- irw_fetch("adiguzel_2025_checks_balances", source = "conj")
# Python
pip install irw
import irw
df = irw.fetch("adiguzel_2025_checks_balances", source="conj")
@article{Adiguzel_2025, title={Checks and Balances and Institutional Gridlock: Implications for Authoritarianism}, volume={38}, ISSN={1468-0491}, url={http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/gove.70017}, DOI={10.1111/gove.70017}, number={2}, journal={Governance}, publisher={Wiley}, author={Adiguzel, Fatih Serkant}, year={2025}, month=Apr }
| IRW version | v584 |
|---|---|
| Redivis dataset | irw_conjoint v4.2 |
| Redivis dataset DOI | 10.57761/qkye-q530 |
| Manifest pin for this IRW version | v4.2 |
| Metadata source | irw_meta v44.0 |