10,474 rated or chosen profiles from 1,350 respondents, in up to 4 tasks of 2 profiles varying on 6 attributes.

One of 2 tables from the same source; this one is the us table. The others are listed under Related tables.

About this table

Description	US respondents (online survey, December 2020; 1,350 of the 1,360 respondents) compared two climate-policy packages in four rounds, packages varying government support, public investment, producer standards, CO2 tax, restrictions and the proposing body (federal government, expert commission, citizens' assembly). Outcomes: forced choice and a 1-7 rating of each package.
Reference	Fesenfeld, L. P., Freudlsperger, C., Kuntze, L., & Ingold, K. (2023). Replication data for: Legitimizing climate action in democracies [Data set]. Harvard Dataverse.
Licence	CC0 1.0
Source data	https://doi.org/10.7910/DVN/WQW6EK

Notes

Conjoint table (irw_conjoint). choice: forced choice between two climate-policy packages ('Which policy package do you prefer?', choose the one you oppose less if you support neither), no opt-out; rating: 1-7 per package, wording and anchors not deposited, stored raw. 4 rounds x 2 packages, 6 attributes; 'No restrictions' appears twice as often as each specific restriction. 93 incomplete single-package tasks dropped (1,350 of 1,360 respondents kept). No weight.

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	1,350
Rows (one per respondent, task and profile)	10,474
Tasks per respondent (most)	4
Profiles per task	2
Attributes	6
Tasks with no profile chosen	0

Design

Topic	climate energy environment
A profile represents	policy
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	Which policy package do you prefer? [choice, forced]
rating	unknown [rating, 1 (unknown) to 7 (unknown)]

Columns

attr_investmentsattr_proposerattr_restrictionsattr_standardsattr_supportattr_taxchoicecov_agecov_education_codecov_gender_codecov_left_rightidprofileratingtask

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("fesenfeld_2023_climate_legit_us", source = "conj")

# Python
pip install irw

import irw
df = irw.fetch("fesenfeld_2023_climate_legit_us", source="conj")

How to cite

@misc{https://doi.org/10.7910/dvn/wqw6ek,
  doi = {10.7910/DVN/WQW6EK},
  url = {https://dataverse.harvard.edu/citation?persistentId=doi:10.7910/DVN/WQW6EK},
  author = {Fesenfeld, Lukas Paul and Freudlsperger, Christian and Kuntze, Lennart and Ingold, Karin},
  keywords = {Social Sciences, Conjoint Experiment, Perceived Legitimacy},
  title = {Replication Data for: Legitimizing climate action in democracies},
  publisher = {Harvard Dataverse},
  year = {2023}
}

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