12,066 rated or chosen profiles from 2,011 respondents, in up to 6 tasks of 1 profile varying on 14 attributes.
| Description | Factorial survey (vignette) experiment on farm support payments: 2,011 Scottish adults, each assigned one farm type (beef, dairy, sheep, cropping), rated six text vignettes of a farmer varying gender, experience, qualification, size, production, animal welfare or product quality, biodiversity, carbon footprint, finances and a change in support payments; outcomes are 1-11 ratings of acceptability, fairness of the payment, willingness to buy from the farmer and to lobby for the payment. |
|---|---|
| Reference | Glenk, K., Liebe, U., Burns, J., & Thomson, S. (2024). Perceived legitimacy of agricultural support schemes: An investigation using factorial survey experiments. Q Open, 4(2), qoae016. |
| DOI | 10.1093/qopen/qoae016 |
| Licence | CC BY 4.0 |
| Source data | https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.11035265 |
These notes describe the source data, which the IRW reproduces as released. All notes are listed on the Data Notes page.
| Respondents | 2,011 |
|---|---|
| Rows (one per respondent, task and profile) | 12,066 |
| Tasks per respondent (most) | 6 |
| Profiles per task | 1 |
| Attributes | 14 |
| Topic | climate energy environment |
|---|---|
| A profile represents | person |
| Country | GB |
| Language shown | en |
| Language of stored levels | en |
| Randomization restrictions | yes (stated by the source): fixed design: each respondent saw 6 of 72 vignettes (orthogonal fold-over design) drawn without replacement; attr_payment_amount is determined by farm type x size x payment change; animal welfare shown only for beef/dairy/sheep, product quality only for cropping |
| Task order | inferred from row order |
| Profile position | recorded in the deposit |
Because the attribute levels were not randomized independently, an estimator has to account for the restriction; a plain difference in means across levels can mislead. Task order or profile position was rebuilt from row order; analyses of position or task order should leave it out.
Outcomes:
| rating_accept | How acceptable are the described changes in payments to this farmer for you? [rating, 1 (Fully unacceptable) to 11 (Fully acceptable)] |
|---|---|
| rating_fair | The farmer described, [Mr./Ms. X], will obtain [amount] per year in support payments. Do you think this amount is an unfairly low level of income support, a fair level of income support, or an unfairly high level of income support? [rating, 1 (Unfairly low level of income support) to 11 (Unfairly high level of income support)] |
| rating_petition | Imagine that a government income support scheme for farmers similar to [Mr./Ms. X] would be discontinued. How willing would you be to write to your local MSP to lobby on behalf of this farmer for the continuation of their support payments? [rating, 1 (Not willing at all) to 11 (Very willing)] |
| rating_supply | How happy would you be for [Mr./Ms. X] to supply you (through a shop or market) with [beef / dairy products / lamb / potatoes]? [rating, 1 (Very unhappy) to 11 (Very happy)] |
attr_animal_welfareattr_biodiversityattr_carbon_farmattr_carbon_outputattr_financial_situationattr_genderattr_payment_amountattr_payment_changeattr_product_qualityattr_production_levelattr_production_typeattr_qualificationattr_sizeattr_started_farmingcov_agecov_educationcov_gendercov_party_idcov_settlementidprofilerating_acceptrating_fairrating_petitionrating_supplytasktrial_design_rowtrial_farm_type
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("glenk_2024_farm_support", source = "conj")
# Python
pip install irw
import irw
df = irw.fetch("glenk_2024_farm_support", source="conj")
@article{Glenk_2024, title={Perceived legitimacy of agricultural support schemes: An investigation using factorial survey experiments}, volume={4}, ISSN={2633-9048}, url={http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/qopen/qoae016}, DOI={10.1093/qopen/qoae016}, number={2}, journal={Q Open}, publisher={Oxford University Press (OUP)}, author={Glenk, Klaus and Liebe, Ulf and Burns, Jay and Thomson, Steven}, year={2024} }
| 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 |