30,400 rated or chosen profiles from 1,520 respondents, in up to 10 tasks of 2 profiles varying on 4 attributes.

About this table

Description	US adults (n = 1,520) compared 10 pairs of federal spending projects described by project type, dollar amount, administrator (state government, county government, charity) and time to completion, chose the project in each pair and rated each project 1-7.
Reference	McLaughlin, P. T. (2025). Priority projects: Constituent spending demand and the benefits of congressional credit claiming. Legislative Studies Quarterly, 50(4).
DOI	10.1111/lsq.70008
Licence	CC0 1.0
Source data	https://doi.org/10.7910/DVN/AZWKVX

Notes

Conjoint table (irw_conjoint_2). Ten forced-choice pairs of federal spending projects (project type, amount, administrator, time), US panel; choice = the project picked, rating = 1-7 rating of each project (wording and anchors not in the deposit). The block is not analysed in the paper; versions a/b (trial_version) are not explained; withdrawn respondents dropped.

These notes describe the source data, which the IRW reproduces as released. All notes are listed on the Data Notes page.

Size and shape

Respondents	1,520
Rows (one per respondent, task and profile)	30,400
Tasks per respondent (most)	10
Profiles per task	2
Attributes	4
Tasks with no profile chosen	0

Design

Topic	tax welfare economy, public administration
A profile represents	policy
Country	US
Language shown	unknown
Language of stored levels	en
Randomization restrictions	unknown
Task order	recorded in the deposit
Profile position	recorded in the deposit

Outcomes:

choice	unknown (the deposit has no question text; the answer is Project 1 or Project 2) [choice, forced]
rating	unknown (a 1-7 rating of each project; no question text in the deposit) [rating, 1 (unknown) to 7 (unknown)]

Columns

attr_administratorattr_amountattr_projectattr_timechoicecov_age_groupcov_attention_passcov_gendercov_ideology_textcov_party_id7idprofileratingtasktrial_version

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.

Get the data

Download CSVno account needed Browse on Redivisexplore and query Croissant metadataHugging Face, Kaggle, OpenML

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("mclaughlin_2025_spending_projects", source = "conj")

# Python
pip install irw

import irw
df = irw.fetch("mclaughlin_2025_spending_projects", source="conj")

How to cite

@article{McLaughlin_2025, title={Priority Projects: Constituent Spending Demand and the Benefits of Congressional Credit Claiming}, volume={50}, ISSN={1939-9162}, url={http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/lsq.70008}, DOI={10.1111/lsq.70008}, number={4}, journal={Legislative Studies Quarterly}, publisher={Wiley}, author={McLaughlin, Peter T.}, year={2025}, month=Apr }

Version and provenance

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