18,906 rated or chosen profiles from 2,721 respondents, in up to 4 tasks of 2 profiles varying on 6 attributes.
One of 3 tables from the same source; this one is the reforms table. The others are listed under Related tables.
| Description | US online quota sample (Respondi, Sept/Oct 2016; n=2,721) compared up to 4 pairs of policy proposals described only by their income effects (-$5,000 to +$5,000) on the US average, the respondent's own income, their sector's average, and people earning about $10,000, $85,000 and $375,000 a year; they chose one and rated each 1-10 for referendum vote. |
|---|---|
| Reference | Bechtel, M. M., & Liesch, R. (2020). Reforms and redistribution: Disentangling the egoistic and sociotropic origins of voter preferences. Public Opinion Quarterly, 84(1), 1-23. |
| DOI | 10.1093/poq/nfaa006 |
| Licence | CC0 1.0 |
| Source data | https://doi.org/10.7910/DVN/QUPGIN |
These notes describe the source data, which the IRW reproduces as released. All notes are listed on the Data Notes page.
| Respondents | 2,721 |
|---|---|
| Rows (one per respondent, task and profile) | 18,906 |
| Tasks per respondent (most) | 4 |
| Profiles per task | 2 |
| Attributes | 6 |
| Tasks with no profile chosen | 0 |
| Topic | tax welfare economy |
|---|---|
| A profile represents | policy |
| Country | US |
| Language shown | en |
| Language of stored levels | en |
| Task order | recorded in the deposit |
| Profile position | recorded in the deposit |
Outcomes:
| choice | Which policy do you prefer? [choice, forced] |
|---|---|
| rating | If you could vote on each of these policies in a referendum, how likely is it that you would vote in favor or against each of the proposals? Please give your answer on the following scale from definitely against (1) to definitely in favor (10). [rating, 1 (Vote definitely against) to 10 (Vote definitely in favor)] |
attr_income_10kattr_income_375kattr_income_85kattr_income_personalattr_income_sectorattr_income_uschoicecov_agecov_altruism_donationcov_attention_passcov_county_unemployment_ratecov_educationcov_gendercov_incomecov_income_highcov_know_defensecov_know_housecov_know_senate_termcov_leftrightcov_occupationcov_party_idcov_racecov_sectorcov_socid_classcov_socid_nationalitycov_socid_occupationcov_socid_racecov_survey_weightcov_weight_likely_voteridprofileratingtasktrial_page_submit_sec
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("bechtel_2020_income_reforms", source = "conj")
# Python
pip install irw
import irw
df = irw.fetch("bechtel_2020_income_reforms", source="conj")
@article{Bechtel_2020, title={Reforms and Redistribution: Disentangling the Egoistic and Sociotropic Origins of Voter Preferences}, volume={84}, ISSN={1537-5331}, url={http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/poq/nfaa006}, DOI={10.1093/poq/nfaa006}, number={1}, journal={Public Opinion Quarterly}, publisher={Oxford University Press (OUP)}, author={Bechtel, Michael M and Liesch, Roman}, year={2020}, pages={1–23} }
| 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 |