9,006 rated or chosen profiles from 1,501 respondents, in up to 3 tasks of 2 profiles varying on 8 attributes.
| Description | US Prolific respondents (May 2021; 1,501, recruited as White and Nonwhite samples) chose between and rated two versions of a city Community Activity Worker job in 3 pairs, varying total pay, performance bonuses, performance evaluation, community involvement, income and demographics, overtime and key job task. Forced choice plus a 1-7 ideal-job rating per job. |
|---|---|
| Reference | Pedersen, M. J., Favero, N., & Park, J. (2023). Pay-for-performance, job attraction, and the prospects of bureaucratic representation in public organizations: Evidence from a conjoint experiment. Public Management Review. |
| DOI | 10.1080/14719037.2023.2245841 |
| Licence | CC0 1.0 |
| Source data | https://doi.org/10.7910/DVN/NSHT68 |
These notes describe the source data, which the IRW reproduces as released. All notes are listed on the Data Notes page.
| Respondents | 1,501 |
|---|---|
| Rows (one per respondent, task and profile) | 9,006 |
| Tasks per respondent (most) | 3 |
| Profiles per task | 2 |
| Attributes | 8 |
| Tasks with no profile chosen | 0 |
| Topic | labour hiring, public administration |
|---|---|
| A profile represents | product service |
| Country | US |
| Language shown | en |
| Language of stored levels | en |
| Task order | recorded in the deposit |
| Profile position | recorded in the deposit |
Outcomes:
| choice | Which of the two jobs would you personally prefer? [choice, forced] |
|---|---|
| rating | To what extent do jobs A and B reflect your ideal job arrangement? [rating, 1 (Definitely not ideal) to 7 (Definitely ideal)] |
attr_community_demographicsattr_community_incomeattr_community_involvementattr_key_job_taskattr_overtime_workattr_performance_bonusesattr_performance_evaluationattr_total_paychoicecov_agecov_attention_passcov_duration_seccov_educationcov_employmentcov_gendercov_honestycov_incomecov_party_idcov_public_sectorcov_racecov_samplecov_stateidprofileratingtask
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("pedersen_2023_pay_for_performance", source = "conj")
# Python
pip install irw
import irw
df = irw.fetch("pedersen_2023_pay_for_performance", source="conj")
@article{Pedersen_2023, title={Pay-for-performance, job attraction, and the prospects of bureaucratic representation in public organizations: evidence from a conjoint experiment}, volume={27}, ISSN={1471-9045}, url={http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/14719037.2023.2245841}, DOI={10.1080/14719037.2023.2245841}, number={1}, journal={Public Management Review}, publisher={Informa UK Limited}, author={Pedersen, Mogens Jin and Favero, Nathan and Park, Joohyung}, year={2023}, month=Aug, pages={273–296} }
| 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 |