8,032 rated or chosen profiles from 1,004 respondents, in up to 4 tasks of 2 profiles varying on 7 attributes.

About this table

Description	1,004 US MTurk respondents each chose between 4 pairs of hypothetical House primary candidates in their own party's primary, described by job, office experience, polling, and four campaign-message statements (pluralism/people-centrism, moralism/anti-establishment, immigration, economy).
Reference	Dai, Y., & Kustov, A. (2024). The (in)effectiveness of populist rhetoric: A conjoint experiment of campaign messaging. Political Science Research and Methods, 12(4), 849-856.
DOI	10.1017/psrm.2023.55
Licence	CC0 1.0
Source data	https://doi.org/10.7910/DVN/QFYZSR

Notes

Conjoint table (irw_conjoint). choice = 'If you had to choose between these two candidates in the upcoming primary, who would you vote for? If neither of the two candidates appeals to you, please still indicate who you would rather vote for.' (forced choice, no opt-out). Candidates shown as prose; attributes are job, office, polls and four campaign statements drawn from lists of 12, 12, 8 and 8 (online appendix Table B1). Randomization restrictions undocumented (shares look uniform). The authors' derived populism codings and populist-attitude flags are dropped; cov_attention_pass flags the respondents who passed the attention check.

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	1,004
Rows (one per respondent, task and profile)	8,032
Tasks per respondent (most)	4
Profiles per task	2
Attributes	7
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	If you had to choose between these two candidates in the upcoming primary, who would you vote for? If neither of the two candidates appeals to you, please still indicate who you would rather vote for. [choice, forced]

Columns

attr_economyattr_immigrationattr_jobattr_moralismattr_officeattr_pluralismattr_pollschoicecov_agecov_attention_passcov_collegecov_gendercov_ideology3cov_party_idcov_whiteidprofiletask

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("dai_2024_populist_rhetoric", source = "conj")

# Python
pip install irw

import irw
df = irw.fetch("dai_2024_populist_rhetoric", source="conj")

How to cite

@article{Dai_2023, title={The (in)effectiveness of populist rhetoric: a conjoint experiment of campaign messaging}, volume={12}, ISSN={2049-8489}, url={http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/psrm.2023.55}, DOI={10.1017/psrm.2023.55}, number={4}, journal={Political Science Research and Methods}, publisher={Cambridge University Press (CUP)}, author={Dai, Yaoyao and Kustov, Alexander}, year={2023}, month=Nov, pages={849–856} }

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