18,198 rated or chosen profiles from 3,033 respondents, in up to 3 tasks of 2 profiles varying on 7 attributes.
| Description | Quota samples of adults in Australia, Canada and the UK (Qualtrics, Nov-Dec 2024; n = 3,033) each compared three pairs of hypothetical societies varying the economy, crime and five dimensions of democracy (elections, media, checks and balances, accountability, free speech); forced choice plus a 0-10 rating of each society. |
|---|---|
| Reference | Bordeleau, J.-N. (2024). Are people equally willing to trade different dimensions of democracy for material and physical security? [Data set]. OSF. |
| Licence | CC BY 4.0 |
| Source data | https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/VMBR9 |
These notes describe the source data, which the IRW reproduces as released. All notes are listed on the Data Notes page.
| Respondents | 3,033 |
|---|---|
| Rows (one per respondent, task and profile) | 18,198 |
| Tasks per respondent (most) | 3 |
| Profiles per task | 2 |
| Attributes | 7 |
| Tasks with no profile chosen | 0 |
| Topic | democracy institutions |
|---|---|
| A profile represents | place |
| Country | AU, CA, GB |
| Language shown | en |
| Language of stored levels | en |
| Task order | recorded in the deposit |
| Profile position | recorded in the deposit |
Outcomes:
| choice | In the next questions, you will be shown two societies that may vary along one or several dimensions. [...] You are then tasked with choosing which of the two societies you consider to be the best one for you; that is, the society in which you would be the most content. [choice, forced] |
|---|---|
| rating | We also ask you to rate each society on a range from 0 (very bad) to 10 (very good). [rating, 0 (very bad) to 10 (very good)] |
attr_accountabilityattr_checks_balancesattr_crimeattr_economyattr_electionsattr_free_speechattr_mediachoicecov_agecov_countrycov_crime_perceptioncov_economic_conditioncov_educationcov_gendercov_ideologycov_manipcheck_3cov_manipcheck_4cov_manipcheck_5cov_manipcheck_6cov_manipcheck_7cov_party_id_codecov_pid_strength_1cov_pid_strength_2cov_pid_strength_3cov_pid_strength_4cov_pid_strength_5cov_survey_dateidprofileratingtask
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("bordeleau_2024_democracy_security", source = "conj")
# Python
pip install irw
import irw
df = irw.fetch("bordeleau_2024_democracy_security", source="conj")
@dataset{Bordeleau2024,
author = {Bordeleau, J.-N.},
year = {2024},
title = {Are people equally willing to trade different dimensions of democracy for material and physical security?},
publisher = {OSF},
doi = {10.17605/OSF.IO/VMBR9},
url = {https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/VMBR9}
}
| 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 |