8,602 rated or chosen profiles from 1,103 respondents, in up to 4 tasks of 2 profiles varying on 3 attributes.

About this table

Description	Brazilian online respondents compared pairs of municipalities described by the mayor's party (PT/PSDB), a federal-municipal daycare agreement, and who runs a homeless shelter (NGO or city hall, with or without federal funds); 1,103 respondents, up to 4 tasks, mayor choice plus 7-point ratings of each mayor and of the federal government.
Reference	Bueno, N. S. (2017). Bypassing the enemy: Distributive politics, credit claiming, and nonstate organizations in Brazil. Comparative Political Studies, 51(3), 304-340.
DOI	10.1177/0010414017710255
Licence	CC0 1.0
Source data	https://doi.org/10.7910/DVN/XAUYEM

Notes

Conjoint table (irw_conjoint). choice: 'Qual prefeito você prefere?' (forced, no opt-out); rating: performance of each mayor and rating_federal: performance of the federal government (asked once per task, repeated on both profiles), both 7-point Péssimo (1) to Ótimo (7). Attribute order randomized per respondent (attrpos_); 105 respondents have 3 tasks and 3 have 2; survey weight kept; Qualtrics ids re-keyed.

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	1,103
Rows (one per respondent, task and profile)	8,602
Tasks per respondent (most)	4
Profiles per task	2
Attributes	3
Tasks with no profile chosen	0

Design

Topic	corruption accountability, public administration
A profile represents	place
Country	BR
Language shown	pt
Language of stored levels	pt
Randomization restrictions	unknown
Task order	recorded in the deposit
Profile position	recorded in the deposit

Outcomes:

choice	Qual prefeito você prefere? Mesmo que você ache que os dois prefeitos são semelhantes, escolha o prefeito que você ache melhor. [choice, forced]
rating	Na sua opinião, como está o desempenho de cada prefeito? Mesmo que você ache difícil avaliar os prefeitos com base na informação dada, dê sua opinião. [rating, 1 (Péssimo) to 7 (Ótimo)]
rating_federal	Na sua opinião e com base na informação dada, como está o desempenho do governo federal? (asked once per task; the same value is stored on both profiles) [rating, 1 (Péssimo) to 7 (Ótimo)]

Columns

attr_federalattr_partisanshipattr_providerattrpos_federalattrpos_partisanshipattrpos_providerchoicecov_birth_yearcov_educationcov_gendercov_incomecov_party_forcedcov_religioncov_statecov_survey_weightcov_vote2014idprofileratingrating_federaltask

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("bueno_2017_credit_claiming", source = "conj")

# Python
pip install irw

import irw
df = irw.fetch("bueno_2017_credit_claiming", source="conj")

How to cite

@article{Bueno_2017, title={Bypassing the Enemy: Distributive Politics, Credit Claiming, and Nonstate Organizations in Brazil}, volume={51}, ISSN={1552-3829}, url={http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0010414017710255}, DOI={10.1177/0010414017710255}, number={3}, journal={Comparative Political Studies}, publisher={SAGE Publications}, author={Bueno, Natália S.}, year={2017}, month=Aug, pages={304–340} }

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