2,394 rated or chosen profiles from 2,394 respondents, in up to 1 tasks of 1 profile varying on 2 attributes.
| Description | Vignette experiment: 2,394 US online respondents (October 2019) each saw one scenario in which a president stays out of or engages in a military intervention, with the outcome (success or failure) and the adviser consulted (military or civilian) randomized (2 x 4, between-subject); outcomes are approval, trust in the president and adviser, and credit or blame. |
|---|---|
| Reference | Kenwick, M. R., & Maxey, S. R. (2022). You and whose army? How civilian leaders leverage the military's prestige to shape public opinion. The Journal of Politics, 84(3). |
| DOI | 10.1086/718355 |
| Licence | CC0 1.0 |
| Source data | https://doi.org/10.7910/DVN/2LH0BZ |
These notes describe the source data, which the IRW reproduces as released. All notes are listed on the Data Notes page.
| Respondents | 2,394 |
|---|---|
| Rows (one per respondent, task and profile) | 2,394 |
| Tasks per respondent (most) | 1 |
| Profiles per task | 1 |
| Attributes | 2 |
| Topic | foreign policy security |
|---|---|
| A profile represents | scenario |
| Country | US |
| Language shown | en |
| Language of stored levels | en |
| Randomization restrictions | unknown |
| Task order | inferred from row order |
| 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:
| rating | Approval of the president's decision (strongly disapprove to strongly approve) (paraphrase) [rating, 1 (strongly disapprove) to 4 (strongly approve)] |
|---|---|
| rating_blame | Who is to blame for the failure: adviser, both, or president (paraphrase); asked only in Failure cells [rating, -1 (adviser) to 1 (president)] |
| rating_credit | Who deserves credit for the success: adviser, both, or president (paraphrase); asked only in Success cells [rating, -1 (adviser) to 1 (president)] |
| rating_trust_adviser | Trust the adviser to do the right thing, no/yes (paraphrase) [rating, 0 (no) to 1 (yes)] |
| rating_trust_president | Trust the president to do the right thing, no/yes (paraphrase) [rating, 0 (no) to 1 (yes)] |
attr_adviserattr_outcomecov_age_groupcov_duration_seccov_educationcov_gendercov_party_ididprofileratingrating_blamerating_creditrating_trust_adviserrating_trust_presidenttask
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("kenwick_2022_military_advisers", source = "conj")
# Python
pip install irw
import irw
df = irw.fetch("kenwick_2022_military_advisers", source="conj")
@article{Kenwick_2022, title={You and Whose Army? How Civilian Leaders Leverage the Military’s Prestige to Shape Public Opinion}, volume={84}, ISSN={1468-2508}, url={http://dx.doi.org/10.1086/718355}, DOI={10.1086/718355}, number={4}, journal={The Journal of Politics}, publisher={University of Chicago Press}, author={Kenwick, Michael R. and Maxey, Sarah}, year={2022}, month=Oct, pages={1963–1978} }
| 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 |