3,153 rated or chosen profiles from 440 respondents, in up to 8 tasks of 1 profile varying on 6 attributes.
| Description | Factorial vignette survey: 440 French education stakeholders (teachers, trainers, decision makers, researchers; online, 2022) each rated 8 text vignettes about a teacher accessing research, varying 6 binary factors (audience fit, teacher involvement, conceptual and instrumental utility, collaboration, institutional support), on how likely the teacher is to use the research (-5 to 5). |
|---|---|
| Reference | Jeune, N., Juhel, J., Dessus, P., & Atal, I. (2024). Six factors facilitating teachers' use of research: An experimental factorial survey of educational stakeholders' perspectives. Frontiers in Education, 9, 1368565. |
| DOI | 10.3389/feduc.2024.1368565 |
| Licence | CC BY 4.0 |
| Source data | https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/XC948 |
These notes describe the source data, which the IRW reproduces as released. All notes are listed on the Data Notes page.
| Respondents | 440 |
|---|---|
| Rows (one per respondent, task and profile) | 3,153 |
| Tasks per respondent (most) | 8 |
| Profiles per task | 1 |
| Attributes | 6 |
| Topic | other |
|---|---|
| A profile represents | scenario |
| Country | FR |
| Language shown | fr |
| Language of stored levels | fr |
| Randomization restrictions | yes (stated by the source): fixed blocked design: only 16 of the 64 combinations of the six binary factors were shown (D-efficient sample, vignette_structure.csv), 8 per block; each level appears in 8 of the 16 vignettes |
| 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 | À quel point vous semble-t-il probable que Mx. A utilise la recherche qui l'intéresse dans ces conditions ? [rating, -5 (Extrêmement improbable) to 5 (Extrêmement probable)] |
|---|
attr_collaborationattr_conceptual_utilityattr_institutional_supportattr_instrumental_utilityattr_target_audienceattr_teacher_involvementcov_blockcov_pilotcov_rolecov_years_experienceidprofileratingtasktrial_vignette
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("jeune_2024_research_use", source = "conj")
# Python
pip install irw
import irw
df = irw.fetch("jeune_2024_research_use", source="conj")
@article{Jeune_2024, title={Six factors facilitating teachers’ use of research. An experimental factorial survey of educational stakeholders perspectives}, volume={9}, ISSN={2504-284X}, url={http://dx.doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2024.1368565}, DOI={10.3389/feduc.2024.1368565}, journal={Frontiers in Education}, publisher={Frontiers Media SA}, author={Jeune, Nathanael and Juhel, Jacques and Dessus, Philippe and Atal, Ignacio}, year={2024}, month=May }
| 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 |