12,573 rated or chosen profiles from 1,326 respondents, in up to 5 tasks of 2 profiles varying on 6 attributes.

About this table

Description	Candidate choice conjoint fielded on MTurk in the US: respondents chose between two candidates in 5 tasks, with candidate party shown in one between-subject arm and hidden in the other (1,326 respondents). Outcomes: candidate choice, and in the no-party arm's last task a guess of each candidate's party.
Reference	Andersen, S. C., & Hjortskov, M. (2026). Masking or lexicographic preferences? Using conjoint experiments to distinguish between two fundamental theories of choice. Political Science Research and Methods.
Licence	CC0 1.0
Source data	https://doi.org/10.7910/DVN/NA3YBS

Notes

Conjoint table (irw_conjoint). choice: forced choice between two candidates (wording not deposited), no opt-out; rating_guess_democrat: no-party arm, task 5 only, respondent's guess of each candidate's party (1 = Democrat, 0 = Republican). Between-subject arms in trial_party_info; attr_party is (not shown) in the no-party arm. Restrictions and attribute order undocumented. 1,363 ids (arms 683/662 as in the authors' log); 37 with no answers dropped.

These notes describe the source data, which the IRW reproduces as released. All notes are listed on the Data Notes page.

Size and shape

Respondents	1,326
Rows (one per respondent, task and profile)	12,573
Tasks per respondent (most)	5
Profiles per task	2
Attributes	6
Tasks with no profile chosen	0

Design

Topic	candidate choice
A profile represents	person
Country	US
Language shown	en
Language of stored levels	en
Randomization restrictions	unknown
Task order	recorded in the deposit
Profile position	recorded in the deposit

Outcomes:

choice	Which of these two candidates would you choose? If in doubt, please choose the one that you like the most [choice, forced]
rating_guess_democrat	Which party do you think the two candidates above are from? If in doubt, please take a guess [rating, 0 (Republican) to 1 (Democrat)]

Columns

attr_ageattr_experienceattr_genderattr_jobattr_partyattr_racechoicecov_party_id7idprofilerating_guess_democrattasktrial_party_info

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.

Get the data

Download CSVno account needed Browse on Redivisexplore and query Croissant metadataHugging Face, Kaggle, OpenML

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("andersen_2026_party_masking", source = "conj")

# Python
pip install irw

import irw
df = irw.fetch("andersen_2026_party_masking", source="conj")

How to cite

@misc{https://doi.org/10.7910/dvn/na3ybs,
  doi = {10.7910/DVN/NA3YBS},
  url = {https://dataverse.harvard.edu/citation?persistentId=doi:10.7910/DVN/NA3YBS},
  author = {Andersen, Simon Calmar and Larsen, Morten Hjortskov},
  keywords = {Social Sciences, Candidate choice, conjoint, masking, lexicographic preferences, gender, race},
  title = {Replication Data for: Masking or Lexicographic Preferences? Using Conjoint Experiments to Distinguish Between Two Fundamental Theories of Choice},
  publisher = {Harvard Dataverse},
  year = {2026}
}

Version and provenance

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