306 rated or chosen profiles from 153 respondents, in up to 1 tasks of 2 profiles varying on 9 attributes.
One of 4 tables from the same source; this one is the lucid4 table. The others are listed under Related tables.
| Description | Democratic congressional primary candidate conjoint (Lucid study 4): 153 white respondents (Lucid, 2023) each chose between one Black and one White hypothetical candidate differing in race, gender, age, job, political experience, endorsement and positions on fossil fuels, healthcare and reparations. Outcomes: vote choice. |
|---|---|
| Reference | Mikkelborg, A. C. (2025). White Democrats' growing support for Black politicians in the era of the "Great Awokening." American Political Science Review. |
| DOI | 10.1017/S0003055425000097 |
| Licence | CC0 1.0 |
| Source data | https://doi.org/10.7910/DVN/LMBY8P |
These notes describe the source data, which the IRW reproduces as released. All notes are listed on the Data Notes page.
| Respondents | 153 |
|---|---|
| Rows (one per respondent, task and profile) | 306 |
| Tasks per respondent (most) | 1 |
| Profiles per task | 2 |
| Attributes | 9 |
| Tasks with no profile chosen | 0 |
| Topic | candidate choice |
|---|---|
| A profile represents | person |
| Country | US |
| Language shown | en |
| Language of stored levels | en |
| Randomization restrictions | yes (stated by the source): race: one candidate always Black and the other White; the two candidates never share an endorsement (appendix also: nor the same priority if elected); other attributes equal probability |
| Task order | inferred from row order |
| Profile position | inferred from row order |
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:
| choice | Which candidate for Congress would you support in this Democratic Primary election? [choice, forced] |
|---|
attr_ageattr_climateattr_endorsementattr_experienceattr_genderattr_healthcareattr_jobattr_raceattr_reparationschoicecov_agecov_educationcov_gendercov_hhinccov_party_id7cov_regionidprofiletask
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("mikkelborg_2025_primary_lucid4", source = "conj")
# Python
pip install irw
import irw
df = irw.fetch("mikkelborg_2025_primary_lucid4", source="conj")
@article{MIKKELBORG_2025, title={White Democrats’ Growing Support for Black Politicians in the Era of the “Great Awokening”}, volume={119}, ISSN={1537-5943}, url={http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S0003055425000097}, DOI={10.1017/s0003055425000097}, number={4}, journal={American Political Science Review}, publisher={Cambridge University Press (CUP)}, author={MIKKELBORG, ANNA CAROLINE}, year={2025}, month=Feb, pages={1902–1920} }
| 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 |