1,626 rated or chosen profiles from 1,626 respondents, in up to 1 tasks of 1 profile varying on 2 attributes.

One of 2 tables from the same source; this one is the qualtrics table. The others are listed under Related tables.

About this table

Description	Qualtrics panel of US adults (April 2022, race/education/gender quotas), n = 1,626, each read one bullet-point vignette about a country developing nuclear weapons with regime type and the country's racial makeup randomized (2 x 3), and rated support for a US strike on its nuclear sites (1-7).
Reference	Rathbun, B. C., Parker, C. S., & Pomeroy, C. (2024). Separate but unequal: Ethnocentrism and racialization explain the "democratic" peace in public opinion. American Political Science Review, 119(2), 621-636.
DOI	10.1017/S0003055424000509
Licence	CC0 1.0
Source data	https://doi.org/10.7910/DVN/9JWDKK

Notes

Conjoint table (irw_conjoint_2). One Tomz-Weeks style vignette per respondent (2 x 3: regime (democracy / not a democracy) x country race bullet (predominantly white / predominantly non-white / no race bullet); Fixed bullets: developing nuclear weapons (first bomb within six months), not a military ally, low trade, military half as strong as US forces in the region, predominantly Christian.) rating = support for using the US military to attack the country's nuclear sites, stored 1-7 (higher = favor) although the article describes a five-point scale. No opt-out; no respondent id (id = row number). Authors' factor/additive scales dropped; N = 1,626 as in the paper.

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

Design

Topic	foreign policy security
A profile represents	scenario
Country	US
Language shown	en
Language of stored levels	en
Task order	recorded in the deposit
Profile position	recorded in the deposit

Outcomes:

rating	By attacking the country's nuclear development sites now, the United States could prevent the country from making any nuclear weapons. Would you favor or oppose using the U.S. military to attack the country's nuclear development sites? [rating, 1 (unknown) to 7 (unknown)]

Columns

attr_raceattr_regimecov_agecov_collegecov_ethno1cov_ethno2cov_ethno3cov_gender_malecov_ideology_codecov_party_id7_codecov_race_whiteidprofileratingtask

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("rathbun_2024_nuclear_strike_qualtrics", source = "conj")

# Python
pip install irw

import irw
df = irw.fetch("rathbun_2024_nuclear_strike_qualtrics", source="conj")

How to cite

@article{RATHBUN_2024, title={Separate but Unequal: Ethnocentrism and Racialization Explain the “Democratic” Peace in Public Opinion}, volume={119}, ISSN={1537-5943}, url={http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/S0003055424000509}, DOI={10.1017/s0003055424000509}, number={2}, journal={American Political Science Review}, publisher={Cambridge University Press (CUP)}, author={RATHBUN, BRIAN C. and PARKER, CHRISTOPHER SEBASTIAN and POMEROY, CALEB}, year={2024}, month=May, pages={621–636} }

Version and provenance

IRW version	v607
Redivis dataset	irw_conjoint_2 v1.5
Redivis dataset DOI	10.57761/g2hc-zw49
Manifest pin for this IRW version	v1.4
Metadata source	irw_meta v47.0

Respondents	1,626
Rows (one per respondent, task and profile)	1,626
Tasks per respondent (most)	1
Profiles per task	1
Attributes	2

rathbun_2024_nuclear_strike_qualtrics