35,291 rated or chosen profiles from 1,788 respondents, in up to 10 tasks of 2 profiles varying on 7 attributes.
| Description | 1,788 US MTurk respondents (2021) each rated 10 pairs of hypothetical gubernatorial candidates varying age, gender, background, party, two policy positions and a democratic or undemocratic statement (aggressive vs non-aggressive behaviours); each respondent rated one randomly assigned trait: dominance, warmth, competence or vote likelihood (7-point, stored rescaled 0-1). |
|---|---|
| Reference | Frederiksen, K. V. S., & Laustsen, L. (2025). Interstate conflict increases the appeal of undemocratic candidates. British Journal of Political Science. |
| DOI | 10.1017/S0007123425101014 |
| Licence | CC0 1.0 |
| Source data | https://doi.org/10.7910/DVN/MQBORA |
These notes describe the source data, which the IRW reproduces as released. All notes are listed on the Data Notes page.
| Respondents | 1,788 |
|---|---|
| Rows (one per respondent, task and profile) | 35,291 |
| Tasks per respondent (most) | 10 |
| Profiles per task | 2 |
| Attributes | 7 |
| Topic | candidate choice |
|---|---|
| A profile represents | person |
| Country | US |
| Language shown | en |
| Language of stored levels | en |
| Task order | recorded in the deposit |
| Profile position | recorded in the deposit |
Outcomes:
| rating_competence | How much do you agree that Candidate 1 (2) is competent, knowledgeable, and skillful? (paraphrase; seven-point, stored as (k-1)/6) [rating, 0 (Strongly disagree) to 1 (Strongly agree)] |
|---|---|
| rating_dominance | How much do you agree that Candidate 1 (2) is aggressive, threatening, and intimidating? (paraphrase; seven-point Strongly disagree (1) to Strongly agree (7), stored as (k-1)/6) [rating, 0 (Strongly disagree) to 1 (Strongly agree)] |
| rating_vote | How likely is it that you would vote for candidate 1 (2)? [rating, 0 (unknown) to 1 (unknown)] |
| rating_warmth | How much do you agree that Candidate 1 (2) is warm, reliable, and friendly? (paraphrase; seven-point, stored as (k-1)/6) [rating, 0 (Strongly disagree) to 1 (Strongly agree)] |
attr_ageattr_backgroundattr_behaviorattr_economic_positionattr_genderattr_partyattr_social_positioncov_agecov_duration_seccov_educationcov_gendercov_incomecov_party_id7cov_stateidprofilerating_competencerating_dominancerating_voterating_warmthtask
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("frederiksen_2025_undemocratic_dominance", source = "conj")
# Python
pip install irw
import irw
df = irw.fetch("frederiksen_2025_undemocratic_dominance", source="conj")
@article{Frederiksen_2025, title={Interstate Conflict Increases the Appeal of Undemocratic Candidates}, volume={55}, ISSN={1469-2112}, url={http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S0007123425101014}, DOI={10.1017/s0007123425101014}, journal={British Journal of Political Science}, publisher={Cambridge University Press (CUP)}, author={Frederiksen, Kristian and Laustsen, Lasse}, year={2025} }
| 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 |