1,761 rated or chosen profiles from 1,761 respondents, in up to 1 tasks of 1 profile varying on 2 attributes.
| Description | 1,761 US MTurk respondents read one hypothetical US-China crisis scenario varying US military capability (inferior/superior) and a recent air incident (attack, collision, non-collision, accident, or none) and said how far the US should go to assert its claims (military force, economic cost, military deaths, risk of war). |
|---|---|
| Reference | Dafoe, A., Hatz, S., & Zhang, B. (2021). Coercion and provocation. Journal of Conflict Resolution, 65(2-3), 372-402. |
| DOI | 10.1177/0022002720957078 |
| Licence | CC0 1.0 |
| Source data | https://doi.org/10.7910/DVN/0BFI9L |
These notes describe the source data, which the IRW reproduces as released. All notes are listed on the Data Notes page.
| Respondents | 1,761 |
|---|---|
| Rows (one per respondent, task and profile) | 1,761 |
| Tasks per respondent (most) | 1 |
| Profiles per task | 1 |
| Attributes | 2 |
| Topic | foreign policy security |
|---|---|
| A profile represents | scenario |
| Country | US |
| Language shown | en |
| Language of stored levels | en |
| Task order | recorded in the deposit |
| Profile position | recorded in the deposit |
Outcomes:
| rating | In terms of using military force, how far should the US go to assert its claims in this dispute? Please select the maximum level of military force the US should use. [rating, 0 (The US should not assert its claims) to 3 (The US should assert its claims, using military force if necessary, even if this risks war)] |
|---|---|
| rating_economic_cost | In terms of future economic costs, how far should the US go to assert its claims in this dispute? Please select the maximum level of economic cost that you think the US should be willing to sustain. [rating, 0 (The US should not assert its claims) to 9 (The US should assert its claims no matter the economic cost)] |
| rating_military_deaths | In terms of future US military fatalities, how far should the US go to assert its claims in this dispute? [rating, 0 (The US should not assert its claims) to 7 (The US should assert its claims no matter the number of military fatalities)] |
| rating_risk_of_war | In terms of risking war with China, how far should the US go to assert its claims in this dispute? [rating, 0 (The US should not assert its claims) to 6 (The US should assert its claims no matter the risk of war with China)] |
attr_incidentattr_military_capabilitycov_agecov_educationcov_gendercov_ideology_codecov_party_ididprofileratingrating_economic_costrating_military_deathsrating_risk_of_wartask
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("dafoe_2021_coercion_provocation", source = "conj")
# Python
pip install irw
import irw
df = irw.fetch("dafoe_2021_coercion_provocation", source="conj")
@article{Dafoe_2020, title={Coercion and Provocation}, volume={65}, ISSN={1552-8766}, url={http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0022002720957078}, DOI={10.1177/0022002720957078}, number={2-3}, journal={Journal of Conflict Resolution}, publisher={SAGE Publications}, author={Dafoe, Allan and Hatz, Sophia and Zhang, Baobao}, year={2020}, month=Sept, pages={372–402} }
| IRW version | v584 |
|---|---|
| Redivis dataset | irw_conjoint_2 v1.4 |
| Redivis dataset DOI | 10.57761/hk97-wv30 |
| Manifest pin for this IRW version | v1.4 |
| Metadata source | irw_meta v44.0 |