50,400 rated or chosen profiles from 2,100 respondents, in up to 16 tasks of 3 profiles varying on 4 attributes.

About this table

Description	Choice experiment in a representative German survey: respondents chose among the current state of a river landscape and two restoration alternatives that differ in floodplain land use, amount of deadwood, recreational usability and annual property tax, after one of three ecosystem-service information formats. N = 2,100 adults, 8 tasks, choice, no opt-out.
Reference	Gapinski, C. M., Hermes, J., & von Haaren, C. (2021). Why people like or dislike large wood in rivers: A representative survey of the general public in Germany. River Research and Applications, 37(2), 187-197.
DOI	10.1002/rra.3743
Licence	CC BY 3.0
Source data	https://doi.org/10.25835/0071779

Notes

Conjoint table (irw_conjoint_2). Choice among three river-landscape cards per task (current state, Alternative A, Alternative B), described by floodplain land use, deadwood amount, recreational usability and annual property tax change; the current state shows its own levels, so it is a profile and there is no opt-out. Level text is the German questionnaire wording; trial_info_format records which of three ecosystem-service information formats (qualitative, quantitative, monetary) the respondent saw. The article analyses the qualitative group only; this table pools all three groups as the deposit's total-sample file does. Two ecosystem-service rows that follow from deadwood are not stored.

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	2,100
Rows (one per respondent, task and profile)	50,400
Tasks per respondent (most)	16
Profiles per task	3
Attributes	4
Tasks with no profile chosen	0

Design

Topic	climate energy environment
A profile represents	scenario
Country	DE
Language shown	de
Language of stored levels	de
Randomization restrictions	unknown
Task order	recorded in the deposit
Profile position	inferred from row order

Task order or profile position was rebuilt from row order; analyses of position or task order should leave it out.

Outcomes:

choice	Wählen Sie eine Karte aus: eine der beiden Alternativen oder den heutigen Zustand (pick the card you like best) (translated) [choice, forced]

Columns

attr_deadwoodattr_land_useattr_recreation_usabilityattr_tax_per_household_yearchoicecov_age_groupcov_gendercov_income_bandcov_state_codeidprofiletasktrial_info_format

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("gapinski_2021_river_large_wood", source = "conj")

# Python
pip install irw

import irw
df = irw.fetch("gapinski_2021_river_large_wood", source="conj")

How to cite

@article{Gapinski_2020, title={Why people like or dislike large wood in rivers—a representative survey of the general public in Germany}, volume={37}, ISSN={1535-1467}, url={http://dx.doi.org/10.1002/rra.3743}, DOI={10.1002/rra.3743}, number={2}, journal={River Research and Applications}, publisher={Wiley}, author={Gapinski, Cedric Mats and Hermes, Johannes and von Haaren, Christina}, year={2020}, month=Oct, pages={187–197} }

Version and provenance

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