24,096 rated or chosen profiles from 2,008 respondents, in up to 6 tasks of 2 profiles varying on 8 attributes.

About this table

Description	Brazilian online-panel respondents (June 2022; n=2,008) chose between two foreign-investment projects (firm size, origin, entry mode, sales destination, jobs, salaries, corruption and environmental record) in 6 tasks, once for the good of their state and once for themselves and their family.
Reference	Moehlecke, C., Fasolin, G. N., & Spektor, M. (2025). Beyond jobs: When citizens reject socially irresponsible foreign direct investment. International Studies Quarterly, 69(3), sqaf046.
DOI	10.1093/isq/sqaf046
Licence	CC0 1.0
Source data	https://doi.org/10.7910/DVN/JRX8YC

Notes

Conjoint table (irw_conjoint). choice_state: which firm would be better for the respondent's state (paraphrase of the authors' 'sociotropic' outcome); choice_family: which firm would be better for the respondent and their family (paraphrase, 'egotropic'); forced choice, no opt-out. Profiles come from 20 fixed design versions (trial_version), so only 223 of 960 profiles occur. Panel IDs, municipality identifiers and undocumented items dropped; N (2,008) not checked against the paywalled article.

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

Design

Topic	international economy
A profile represents	policy
Country	BR
Language shown	pt
Language of stored levels	pt
Randomization restrictions	observed in the data (not documented by the source): 20 fixed design versions each fixing all 6 pairs; respondents share pairs within a version; only 223 of 960 attribute combinations occur
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:

choice_family	Which of the two firms (Empresa A / Empresa B) would be better for you and your family? (paraphrase) [choice, forced]
choice_state	Which of the two firms (Empresa A / Empresa B) would be better for your state? (paraphrase) [choice, forced]

Columns

attr_corruptionattr_environmentattr_jobsattr_modeattr_originattr_salariesattr_salesattr_sizechoice_familychoice_statecov_agecov_chauvinism_1cov_chauvinism_2cov_chauvinism_3cov_classcov_educationcov_employedcov_employment_typecov_gendercov_incomecov_national_attachment_1cov_national_attachment_2cov_national_attachment_3cov_racecov_regioncov_sectorcov_statecov_survey_weightidprofiletasktrial_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("moehlecke_2025_fdi", source = "conj")

# Python
pip install irw

import irw
df = irw.fetch("moehlecke_2025_fdi", source="conj")

How to cite

@article{Moehlecke_2025, title={Beyond Jobs: When Citizens Reject Socially Irresponsible Foreign Direct Investment}, volume={69}, ISSN={1468-2478}, url={http://dx.doi.org/10.1093/isq/sqaf046}, DOI={10.1093/isq/sqaf046}, number={3}, journal={International Studies Quarterly}, publisher={Oxford University Press (OUP)}, author={Moehlecke, Carolina and N Fasolin, Guilherme and Spektor, Matias}, year={2025}, month=June }

Respondents	2,008
Rows (one per respondent, task and profile)	24,096
Tasks per respondent (most)	6
Profiles per task	2
Attributes	8

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

moehlecke_2025_fdi