2,110 rated or chosen profiles from 1,055 respondents, in up to 2 tasks of 1 profile varying on 4 attributes.
One of 4 tables from the same source; this one is the exp1 table. The others are listed under Related tables.
| Description | US Lucid adults (n=1,055) each read two covert-operation vignettes (dictator, civil war) randomized in region, action (military force vs money and weapons), secrecy (informed vs kept secret) and outcome (success vs failure), and rated approval of the government's action before and after the outcome (7-point). |
|---|---|
| Reference | Myrick, R. (2020). Why so secretive? Unpacking public attitudes toward secrecy and success in US foreign policy. The Journal of Politics, 82(3), 828-843. |
| DOI | 10.1086/707308 |
| Licence | CC0 1.0 |
| Source data | https://doi.org/10.7910/DVN/JWJRME |
These notes describe the source data, which the IRW reproduces as released. All notes are listed on the Data Notes page.
| Respondents | 1,055 |
|---|---|
| Rows (one per respondent, task and profile) | 2,110 |
| Tasks per respondent (most) | 2 |
| Profiles per task | 1 |
| Attributes | 4 |
| Topic | foreign policy security |
|---|---|
| A profile represents | scenario |
| Country | US |
| Language shown | en |
| Language of stored levels | en |
| Randomization restrictions | yes (stated by the source): secrecy is a cross-over within respondent: one of the two vignettes states the operation was kept secret and the other that the public was informed (Appendix A) |
| 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:
| rating | How much do you approve or disapprove of the actions taken by the U.S. government in this situation? (asked before the outcome was shown) [rating, 1 (disapprove strongly) to 7 (approve strongly)] |
|---|---|
| rating_after | Considering this new information, how much do you approve or disapprove of the actions taken by the U.S. government? [rating, 1 (disapprove strongly) to 7 (approve strongly)] |
attr_actionattr_outcomeattr_regionattr_secrecycov_agecov_duration_seccov_educationcov_gendercov_ideologycov_incomecov_party_idcov_party_leancov_party_strengthcov_political_interestcov_racecov_stateidprofileratingrating_aftertasktrial_scenario
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("myrick_2019_covert_exp1", source = "conj")
# Python
pip install irw
import irw
df = irw.fetch("myrick_2019_covert_exp1", source="conj")
@article{Myrick_2020, title={Why So Secretive? Unpacking Public Attitudes toward Secrecy and Success in US Foreign Policy}, volume={82}, ISSN={1468-2508}, url={http://dx.doi.org/10.1086/707308}, DOI={10.1086/707308}, number={3}, journal={The Journal of Politics}, publisher={University of Chicago Press}, author={Myrick, Rachel}, year={2020}, month=July, pages={828–843} }
| 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 |