9,965 rated or chosen profiles from 1,993 respondents, in up to 5 tasks of 1 profile varying on 5 attributes.
| Description | 1,993 US adults (1,502 passed the authors' attention check) each rated five vignettes about an uncooperative ally, randomized on the ally's act, the US response, regime type, military power and treaty status; outcomes are agreement with the US response (0-10), alliance favorability (0-10) and desired US contribution (increase/keep/decrease). |
|---|---|
| Reference | Kiratli, O. S. (2025). The politics of alliance cohesion: Experimental evidence on American attitudes toward corrective measures in security partnerships. Perspectives on Politics. |
| DOI | 10.1017/S1537592725103071 |
| Licence | CC0 1.0 |
| Source data | https://doi.org/10.7910/DVN/NITW7O |
These notes describe the source data, which the IRW reproduces as released. All notes are listed on the Data Notes page.
| Respondents | 1,993 |
|---|---|
| Rows (one per respondent, task and profile) | 9,965 |
| Tasks per respondent (most) | 5 |
| Profiles per task | 1 |
| Attributes | 5 |
| Topic | foreign policy security |
|---|---|
| A profile represents | scenario |
| Country | US |
| Language shown | en |
| Language of stored levels | en |
| 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 | How much do you agree with the proposed action toward Country X? [rating, 0 (do not agree at all) to 10 (agree completely)] |
|---|---|
| rating_alliance_favorability | How favorable are you to having an alliance with Country X? [rating, 0 (not favorable at all) to 10 (extremely favorable)] |
| rating_contribution | Now, let's consider the American contributions to the alliance between Country X and the US. Should the government increase, maintain, or reduce its financial and military contributions to this alliance? [rating, 1 (Increase) to 3 (Decrease)] |
attr_formal_treatyattr_military_powerattr_regimeattr_uncooperative_actattr_us_responsecov_attention_passcov_educationcov_gendercov_party_id7idprofileratingrating_alliance_favorabilityrating_contributiontask
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("kiratli_2025_alliance_cohesion", source = "conj")
# Python
pip install irw
import irw
df = irw.fetch("kiratli_2025_alliance_cohesion", source="conj")
@article{Kiratli_2025, title={The Politics of Alliance Cohesion: Experimental Evidence on American Attitudes toward Corrective Measures in Security Partnerships}, ISSN={1541-0986}, url={http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S1537592725103071}, DOI={10.1017/s1537592725103071}, journal={Perspectives on Politics}, publisher={Cambridge University Press (CUP)}, author={Kiratli, Osman Sabri}, year={2025}, month=Oct, pages={1–16} }
| 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 |