16,241 rated or chosen profiles from 16,241 respondents, in up to 1 tasks of 1 profile varying on 4 attributes.
| Description | Single-vignette experiment: 16,241 respondents in seven European countries (CH, BE, DE, FR, GB, NL, PL) each saw one fictitious Tweet by an MP whose gender, board-seat type, number of seats and side-income disclosure (none, pro bono, 20% or 150% of salary) varied, and rated the MP's trustworthiness and electability (0-10). |
|---|---|
| Reference | Huwyler, O., Bailer, S., & Giger, N. (2025). Transparency matters: The positive effect of politicians' side income disclosure on voters' perceptions. European Journal of Political Research. |
| DOI | 10.1017/S1475676525100303 |
| Licence | CC0 1.0 |
| Source data | https://doi.org/10.7910/DVN/I6VM9P |
These notes describe the source data, which the IRW reproduces as released. All notes are listed on the Data Notes page.
| Respondents | 16,241 |
|---|---|
| Rows (one per respondent, task and profile) | 16,241 |
| Tasks per respondent (most) | 1 |
| Profiles per task | 1 |
| Attributes | 4 |
| Topic | candidate choice, corruption accountability |
|---|---|
| A profile represents | person |
| Country | CH, BE, DE, FR, GB, NL, PL |
| Language shown | de, fr, nl, en, pl |
| Language of stored levels | en |
| Randomization restrictions | yes (stated by the source): 12 of 16 board type x seats x income cells fielded (excluded: pro bono company seats; 5 seats with 20% of salary), each vignette shown to 1/12 of respondents, crossed with MP gender; implied income shares: no disclosure 1/3, 150% 1/3, 20% 1/6, pro bono 1/6; seats 5 = 5/12 |
| Task order | recorded in the deposit |
| 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.
Outcomes:
| rating_trust | How trustworthy is the MP? (paraphrase; 'they were asked how they assess the MP's trustworthiness on a scale from 0 to 10') [rating, 0 (unknown) to 10 (unknown)] |
|---|---|
| rating_vote | Can you imagine voting for the MP? (paraphrase; 'whether they can imagine voting for them on a scale from 0 to 10 (electability)') [rating, 0 (unknown) to 10 (unknown)] |
attr_board_seatsattr_board_typeattr_mp_genderattr_side_incomecov_agecov_birth_yearcov_countrycov_duration_seccov_gendercov_interest_in_polcov_isced11cov_left_rightcov_manicheck_seatscov_manicheck_transparentcov_survey_languagecov_tertiary_eduidprofilerating_trustrating_votetasktrial_item_order
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("huwyler_2025_side_income", source = "conj")
# Python
pip install irw
import irw
df = irw.fetch("huwyler_2025_side_income", source="conj")
@article{Huwyler_2025, title={Transparency matters: The positive effect of politicians’ side income disclosure on voters’ perceptions}, ISSN={1475-6765}, url={http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S1475676525100303}, DOI={10.1017/s1475676525100303}, journal={European Journal of Political Research}, publisher={Cambridge University Press (CUP)}, author={Huwyler, Oliver and Bailer, Stefanie and Giger, Nathalie}, year={2025}, month=Oct, pages={1–18} }
| 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 |