24,468 rated or chosen profiles from 2,039 respondents, in up to 6 tasks of 2 profiles varying on 9 attributes.

About this table

Description	German adults (YouGov quota sample, December 2020, n = 2,039) compared 6 pairs of hypothetical deliberative citizen forums varying on 9 attributes (issue, initiative, recruitment, size, composition, output, consensus, discussion format, authorization); outcomes are a forced choice and a 1-7 liking rating of each forum.
Reference	Goldberg, S., & Bächtiger, A. (2023). Catching the 'deliberative wave'? How (disaffected) citizens assess deliberative citizen forums. British Journal of Political Science, 53(1), 239-247.
DOI	10.1017/S0007123422000059
Licence	CC0 1.0
Source data	https://doi.org/10.7910/DVN/GHHVFV

Notes

Conjoint table (irw_conjoint). choice = 'Which of the two scenarios do you prefer?' (Citizen Forum A/B; translated), forced, no opt-out; rating = 'In your view, how do you feel about Citizen Forum A/B?' 1 = I don't like it at all to 7 = I like it very much (translated). Attributes fully randomized; attribute order randomized per respondent with the issue always first (not recorded). Levels are the authors' English labels of German text; no survey weight deposited although the article reports a weighted sample.

These notes describe the source data, which the IRW reproduces as released. All notes are listed on the Data Notes page.

Design

Topic	democracy institutions
A profile represents	policy
Country	DE
Language shown	de
Language of stored levels	en
Task order	recorded in the deposit
Profile position	recorded in the deposit

Outcomes:

choice	Which of the two scenarios do you prefer? (translated) [choice, forced]
rating	In your view, how do you feel about Citizen Forum A? / In your view, how do you feel about Citizen Forum B? (translated) [rating, 1 (I don't like it at all) to 7 (I like it very much)]

Columns

attr_authorizationattr_compositionattr_consensusattr_formatattr_initiativeattr_issueattr_outputattr_recruitmentattr_sizechoicecov_external_efficacy_1cov_external_efficacy_2cov_populism_1cov_populism_2cov_populism_3cov_populism_4cov_populism_5cov_populism_6cov_populism_7cov_satisfaction_democracycov_stealth_1cov_stealth_2cov_stealth_3cov_stealth_4idprofileratingtasktrial_screen_seconds

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("goldberg_2023_citizen_forums", source = "conj")

# Python
pip install irw

import irw
df = irw.fetch("goldberg_2023_citizen_forums", source="conj")

How to cite

@article{Goldberg_2022, title={Catching the ‘Deliberative Wave’? How (Disaffected) Citizens Assess Deliberative Citizen Forums}, volume={53}, ISSN={1469-2112}, url={http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S0007123422000059}, DOI={10.1017/s0007123422000059}, number={1}, journal={British Journal of Political Science}, publisher={Cambridge University Press (CUP)}, author={Goldberg, Saskia and Bächtiger, André}, year={2022}, month=Mar, pages={239–247} }

Respondents	2,039
Rows (one per respondent, task and profile)	24,468
Tasks per respondent (most)	6
Profiles per task	2
Attributes	9
Tasks with no profile chosen	0

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

goldberg_2023_citizen_forums