17,976 rated or chosen profiles from 2,247 respondents, in up to 4 tasks of 2 profiles varying on 9 attributes.
| Description | US Lucid quota sample (Feb 2019, n = 2,247) rated 4 pairs of immigrant profiles (a Hainmueller & Hopkins 2015 replication) on a 1-7 admit/allow-to-stay scale, under one of three randomized framings: visa applicants abroad (flows), resident aliens renewing visas (stocks), or stocks with refusal framed as deportation. |
|---|---|
| Reference | Margalit, Y., & Solodoch, O. (2022). Against the flow: Differentiating between public opposition to the immigration stock and flow. British Journal of Political Science, 52(3), 1055-1075. |
| DOI | 10.1017/S0007123420000940 |
| Licence | CC0 1.0 |
| Source data | https://doi.org/10.7910/DVN/EGARNT |
These notes describe the source data, which the IRW reproduces as released. All notes are listed on the Data Notes page.
| Respondents | 2,247 |
|---|---|
| Rows (one per respondent, task and profile) | 17,976 |
| Tasks per respondent (most) | 4 |
| Profiles per task | 2 |
| Attributes | 9 |
| Topic | immigration asylum |
|---|---|
| A profile represents | person |
| Country | US |
| Language shown | en |
| Language of stored levels | en |
| Randomization restrictions | observed in the data (not documented by the source): doctor/computer programmer/financial analyst/research scientist only with college degree; 'escape persecution' only with Iraq/Somalia/Sudan (Hainmueller-Hopkins style); rules not documented in sources, seen as structural zeros in the table. Level shares unequal: college degree 7894 vs ~5000 for the other two; Iraq/Somalia/Sudan ~2340 vs ~1560; the four high-skill professions ~720 vs ~2160; escape persecution 2371 vs ~7800 (consistent with resampling under the restrictions) |
| 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 | On a scale from 1 to 7, where 1 indicates that the U.S. should absolutely not admit [definitely deport] the immigrant [resident alien] and 7 indicates that the United States should definitely admit [allow] the immigrant [resident alien to stay], what would you decide regarding applicant [resident alien] #1? [rating, 1 (absolutely not admit [Stocks arms: definitely deport]) to 7 (definitely admit [Stocks arms: definitely allow (to stay)])] |
|---|
attr_application_reasonattr_educationattr_experienceattr_genderattr_job_plansattr_languageattr_originattr_prior_tripsattr_professionidprofileratingtasktrial_frame
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("margalit_2022_stock_flow", source = "conj")
# Python
pip install irw
import irw
df = irw.fetch("margalit_2022_stock_flow", source="conj")
@article{Margalit_2021, title={Against the Flow: Differentiating Between Public Opposition to the Immigration Stock and Flow}, volume={52}, ISSN={1469-2112}, url={http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S0007123420000940}, DOI={10.1017/s0007123420000940}, number={3}, journal={British Journal of Political Science}, publisher={Cambridge University Press (CUP)}, author={Margalit, Yotam and Solodoch, Omer}, year={2021}, month=Apr, pages={1055–1075} }
| 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 |