CSES Integrated Module Dataset (IMD) Errata

CSES Integrated Module Dataset Phase II Release: Errata

Posted: October 17, 2019

Updates made to Phase II Release of October 17, 2019 since Phase I Release of December 4, 2018

 

Phase II of the CSES Integrated Module Dataset (IMD) of October 17, 2019, contains additions, updates, and improvements on the Phase I release of December 4, 2018. We advise users not to use files from the previous release with files from the current release. Variable names and attributes, as well as the data, have sometimes been changed.

Overall, CSES IMD sees a set of 40+ variables being added to the dataset. The new variables added to IMD Phase II from IMD Phase I are listed below in the data changes section.

In addition to the extensive set of new variables, we provide users with a list of other changes and corrections made to CSES IMD Phase II compared to CSES IMD Phase I. We have divided this into data changes (prefix D), codebook changes (prefix C), and explanations concerning deviations between the CSES IMD and the Standalone CSES Modules (prefix S). Users are advised that this list is not comprehensive but instead highlights the main changes since CSES IMD Phase I, which was released on December 4, 2018.

 

DATA CHANGES

  1. The following survey level variables have been added to the dataset:
        • IMD3014 GOVERNMENT PERFORMANCE: GENERAL: This variable is available for election studies included in CSES Module 2 and CSES Module 3.
        • IMD3015_1-IMD3015_4 DICHOTOMIZED POLITICAL INFORMATION ITEMS.
        • IMD3015_A-IMD3015_D POLITICAL INFORMATION SCALES BY MODULE: Scales indicate the number of correct answers each respondent provided to the political information items included in the Standalone CSES Modules.
  2. Several macro-level variables have been added to the dataset. These are:
        • IMD5001_A-IMD5001_I Percent Vote Lower House ELECTION: Parties A-I.
        • IMD5002_A-IMD5002_I Percent Seats Lower House ELECTION: Parties A-I.
        • IMD5003_A-IMD5003_I Percent Vote Upper House ELECTION: Parties A-I.
        • IMD5004_A-IMD5004_I Percent Seats Upper House ELECTION: Parties A-I.
        • IMD5005_A-IMD5005_I Percent Vote, President: Parties A-I.
        • IMD5008_1-IMD5008_2 Party of the Prime Minister before and AFTER.
        • IMD5009_1-IMD5009_2 Party of the President before and AFTER
        • IMD5011_A-IMD5011_I Ideological Family: Parties A-I.
        • IMD5016_1-IMD5016_4 Votes Cast: across multiple tiers for the lower and upper house elections.
        • IMD5017_1-IMD5017_4 Voting procedure: across multiple tiers for the lower and upper house elections.
        • IMD5018_1-IMD5018_4 Voting rounds: across multiple tiers for the lower and upper house elections.
        • IMD5021_1-IMD5021_4 is there party threshold: across multiple tiers in the lower and upper house elections. This variable is available for election studies included in CSES Module 3 and CSES Module 4.
        • IMD5022_1-IMD5022_4 party threshold: across multiple tiers, in the lower and upper house This variable is available for election studies included in CSES Module 3 and CSES Module 4.
        • IMD5024_1-IMD5024_3 DATE election scheduleD.
        • IMD5025_1-IMD5015_3 DATE election HELD.
        • IMD5026_1 Number of legislative chambers.
        • IMD5026_2 Number of elected legislative chambers.
        • IMD5027 Size of the lower house.
        • IMD5028 Size of Cabinet Before: This variable is available for election studies included in CSES Module 2, CSES Module 3, and CSES Module 4.
        • IMD5029_A-IMD5029_I Number of Portfolios before: Parties A-I. This variable is available for election studies included in CSES Module 2, CSES Module 3, and CSES Module 4.
        • IMD5030 Size of Cabinet After: This variable is available for election studies included in CSES Module 2, CSES Module 3, and CSES Module 4.
        • IMD5031_A-IMD5031_I Number of Portfolios After: Parties A-I. This variable is available for election studies included in CSES Module 2, CSES Module 3, and CSES Module 4.
        • IMD5049 Age of the current regime.
        • IMD5052_1-IMD5052_3 GDP Growth: data for the election year and the two preceding years.
        • IMD5053_1-IMD5053_3 GDP per capita: data for the election year and the two preceding years.
        • IMD5054_1-IMD5054_3 Unemployment, total: data for the election year and the two preceding years.
        • IMD5055_1-IMD5055_3 Human development index: data for the election year and the two preceding years.
        • IMD5056_1-IMD5056_3 Inflation, GDP deflator: data for the election year and the two preceding years.
        • IMD5057_1-IMD5057_3 Population, total: data for the election year and the two preceding years.
        • IMD5058_1 Effective number of electoral parties.
        • IMD5058_2 Corrected effective number of electoral parties: This variable is available for election studies included in CSES Module 3 and CSES Module 4.
        • IMD5059_1 Effective number of parliamentary parties.
        • IMD5059_2 Corrected effective number of parliamentary parties: This variable is available for election studies included in CSES Module 3 and CSES Module 4.
  3. IMD3009_A (Like/Dislike Leader A) was previously coded as missing for Israel 2013 due to an issue in the CSES Module 4 dataset. The variable was recoded, using the correct data for IMD3009_A.
  4. IMD3002_UH_DC_1 (Current Upper House Election: Vote Choice – District Candidate 1) was previously coded as missing for Mexico (2006) in the CSES IMD Dataset. However, there was data available for this variable in the CSES Module 3 dataset, which was added for CSES IMD Phase 2.
  5. Data for variable IMD3009_H (Like-Dislike Leader H) was added for Taiwan (2008).
  6. For the Czech Republic (2010), data at the survey level for the party “2030003. Christian D. Union – Czech People’s Party (KDU-CDL)” was previously coded in variables IMD3007_G (Left-Right – Party G), IMD3008_G (Like-Dislike – Party G), and IMD3009_G (Like-Dislike – Leader G). For IMD Phase 2, the KDU-CDL has been assigned the alphabetical code F, however. Thus, data for the KDU-CDL is now coded in IMD3007_F, IMD3008_F, and IMD3009_F.
  7. The Hungarian Party “Hungarian Democratic Forum (MDF)” was previously assigned the numerical code 3490007 and was recoded to the correct numerical code 3480007 in variables IMD3002_LH_DC (Current Lower House Election: Vote Choice – District Candidate), IMD3002_LH_PL (Current Lower House Election: Vote Choice – Party List), IMD3005_3 (Party Identification: Who), and IMD5000_G (Party G Identifier – Numerical).
  8. The Bulgarian Party “Euroleft” was previously assigned two different numerical party codes, 1000040 and 1000041. The codes were harmonized to 1000040, and variable IMD3004_LH_PL (Previous Election Lower House: Vote Choice – Party List) for Bulgaria (2001) was recoded accordingly.
  9. The Philippine Party “Let Life Prosper” was previously assigned two different numerical party codes, 6080144 and 6080145. The codes were harmonized to 6080144, and variable IMD3004_LH_PL (Previous Election Lower House: Vote Choice – Party List) for the Philippines (2016) was recoded accordingly.
  10. IMD5000_H (Party H Identifier – Numerical) was previously coded as “9999999. MISSING” and has been recoded to “6430039. Peace and Democratic Party (BDP)” for Turkey (2011).
  11. IMD5000_G (Party H Identifier – Numerical) and IMD5000_H (Party H Identifier – Numerical) were previously coded as “9999999. MISSING” and have been recoded to “6430039. Agrarian Party” (Party G) and “6430005. Pensioners Party” (Party H) for Russia (2004).
  12. IMD5000_A (Party A Identifier – Numerical) and IMD5000_B (Party B Identifier – Numerical) were previously coded as “9999999. MISSING” and have been recoded to “4400101. A. Paulauskas (Independent)” (Party A) and “4400102. V. Adamkus (Independent)” (Party B) for Lithuania (1997).
  13. IMD5000_H (Party H Identifier – Numerical) and IMD5000_I (Party I Identifier – Numerical) were previously coded as “9999999. MISSING” and have been recoded to “2500020. New Center (NC)” (Party H) and “2500018. Radical Party of the Left (RPG)” (Party I) for France (2007).
  14. IMD5000_D (Party D Identifier – Numerical) was previously coded as “9999999. MISSING” and has been recoded to “64220300. Calin-Constantin-Anton Popescu-Tariceanu (Independent Candidate).”
  15. IMD5000_F (Party F Identifier – Numerical) was previously coded as “9999999. MISSING” and has been recoded to “2030074. SNK European Democrats (SNK ED)” for the Czech Republic (2006).
  16. IMD5000_G (Party G Identifier – Numerical) was previously coded as “9999999. MISSING” and has been recoded to “7050008. Slovenian National Party (SNP)” for Slovenia (1996).
  17. IMD5000_I (Party I Identifier – Numerical) was previously coded as “9999999. MISSING” and has been recoded to “2760009. National Democratic Party (NDP)” for Germany (2013).
  18. IMD5000_D (Party D Identifier – Numerical) was previously coded as “9999999. MISSING” and has been recoded to “1580007. Non-Partisan Solidarity Union (NPSU)” for Taiwan (2012).
  19. Data for variables IMD5000-A-IMD5000_I (Party A-I Identifier – Numerical) were added for Albania (2005), Montenegro (2012), New Zealand (2008), and Sweden (2002).
  20. Data for all macro variables related to the alphabetical CSES party codes A-I were added for Party H (People’s Monarchist Party, PPM) and Party I (Humanist Party, PH) for Portugal (2002).
  21. Data for Variables IMD5012_A-IMD5012_E (Left-Right Expert Placement – Party A-E) was added for Iceland (1999).
  22. Data for Variables IMD5012_A-IMD5012_E (Left-Right Expert Placement – Party A-E) was added for Russia (2000).
  23. IMD1014_2 (Interview Timing – Number of Days Between Interview and First Second Round of Election), a number of cases were coded as “9999. MISSING” even though no second round took place. These cases were recoded to “9996. NOT APPLICABLE: NO SECOND ROUND.”
  24. Variables IMD5000_C, IMD5000_E, and IMD5000_F (Party C, E, and F Identifier – Numerical) were recoded to missing for Belarus (2001).
  25. Variable IMD5000_I (Party I Identifier – Numerical) was recoded to missing for Brazil (2006).
  26. Variable IMD5000_I (Party I Identifier – Numerical) was recoded to missing for Slovakia (2010).
  27. Variable IMD5000_G (Party G Identifier – Numerical) was recoded to missing for Latvia (2010).
  28. Variable IMD3001_UH (Turnout – Current Upper House Election) was recoded from “9999996. NOT APPLICABLE: NO UPPER HOUSE ELECTION” to “999999. MISSING.”

CODEBOOK CHANGES

  1. The CSES IMD Codebook now consists of four separate sections (previously three). Part 3 documents the harmonized numerical party and coalition codes. Part 4 documents the alphabetical party/coalition codes and the alphabetical leader codes.
  2. The CSES IMD Codebook now contains a Bibliography detailing data sources (see part 1).
  3. Parts 3 and 4 of the Codebook (Harmonized Numerical Party Codes and Alphabetical Party and Leader Codes) have been updated. More parties, for which information was previously not listed have been added, and parties or leaders for which there is no data included in CSES IMD Phase 2 have been deleted.
  4. Variable names in the Codebook have been updated to correct for small inconsistencies in the names between the dataset and the Codebook.
  5. For Romania (2014), the numerical party code 6420300 (Calin-Constantin-Anton Popescu-Tariceanu) was added to the CSES IMD Codebook Part 3.
  6. The Hungarian Party “Hungarian Democratic Forum (MDF)” was previously assigned the numerical code 3490007 and was reassigned to the correct numerical code 3480007 in Part 3 of the codebook.
  7. The Philippine Party “Let Life Prosper” was previously assigned two different numerical party codes, 6080144 and 6080145. The codes were harmonized to 6080144 listed accordingly in Part 3 of the codebook.
  8. The Portuguese party Earth Party (MPT) was added to Codebook Part 4 (Party G, Portugal 2002).
  9. For Russia (2004), two additional parties were assigned alphabetical codes, which were documented in the CSES IMD Codebook Part 4. The Agrarian Party was assigned the alphabetical code G, the Pensioners Party was assigned the alphabetical code H.
  10. For Slovenia (1996), the Slovenian National Party was assigned the alphabetical code PARTY G and was added to CSES IMD Codebook Part 4.
  11. For Chile (1999), the independent candidate Sara Larrain was assigned the alphabetical party code PARTY E and added to the CSES IMD Codebook Part 4. An election study note was also added to explain that relational data is only available for IMD5005_E (Percent Vote – President – Party E).
  12. Lithuania (1997), the independent candidate A. Paulauskas was assigned alphabetical party code PARTY A, and the independent candidate V. Adamkus was assigned alphabetical party code B. Both were added to the CSES IMD Codebook Part 4. An election study note was also added to explain that relational data is only available for IMD5005_A (Percent Vote – President – Party A) and IMD5005_B (Percent Vote – President – Party B).
  13. For France (2007), the alphabetical party codes PARTY H (New Center, NC) and PARTY I (Radical Party of the Left, RPG) were added to the CSES IMD Codebook Part 4.
  14. For Germany (2013), the alphabetical party code PARTY I (National Democratic Party, NDP) was added to the CSES IMD Codebook Part 4.
  15. For Taiwan (2012), the alphabetical party code PARTY D (Non-Partisan Solidarity Union, NPSU) was added to the CSES IMD Codebook Part 4.
  16. For Belarus (2001), the alphabetical party codes C, E, and F were removed from the CSES IMD Codebook Part 3 as there is no relational data available in the dataset for any of the three respective parties (Republican Party of Labor and Justice, Belarusian Social-Democratic Assembly, Belarusian Socialist Sporting Party).
  17. For Brazil (2006), the alphabetical party code for PARTY I was removed from the CSES IMD Codebook Part 3 as there is no relational data available in the dataset for the respective party (Socialism and Freedom Party, PSOL).
  18. For Latvia (2010), the alphabetical party code for PARTY G was removed from the CSES IMD Codebook Part 3 as there is no relational data available in the dataset for the respective party (Made in Lativa).
  19. For Mexico (2000), the alphabetical party codes for PARTY G and PARTY H were removed from the CSES IMD Codebook Part 3 as there is no relational data available in the dataset for these parties (National Action Party and Democratic Revolution Party).
  20. For the Czech Republic (2006), PARTY F (SNK European Democrats, SNK ED) was added to the CSES IMD Codebook Part 4.
  21. For Austria (2008), the documentation of alphabetical leader codes was removed since there is no data available for the relevant variables (IMD3009_A-IMD3009_I)
  22. For Brazil (2010), Leader F (Circo Gomes, PSB) was added to the table “ALPHABETICAL LEADER CODES BY CSES MODULE: BRAZIL” in Part 4 of the CSES IMD Codebook
  23. For Slovenia (1996), Leader G (Zmago Jelincic, SNS) was added to the table “ALPHABETICAL LEADER CODES BY CSES MODULE: SLOVENIA” in Part 4 of the CSES IMD Codebook.
  24. For Taiwan (2008), Leader I (Su Tseng-Chang, DPP) was added to the table “ALPHABETICAL LEADER CODES BY CSES MODULE: TAIWAN” in Part 4 of the CSES IMD Codebook and Vincent Siew (KMT) was assigned Leader H.
  25. For Portugal (2002), Leader E (Franciso Louca, BE) and Leader F (Garcia Pereira, PCTP/MRPP) were added to the table “ALPHABETICAL LEADER CODES BY CSES MODULE: PORTUGAL” in Part 4 of the CSES IMD Codebook.
  26. The following leader entries in the CSES IMD Codebook Part 4 were removed because there is no corresponding data in the dataset (IMD Variables IMD3009_A-IMD3009_I): Leader C (Romania 1996, USA 1996), Leader D (Australia 2013, Kenya 2013, South Korea 2000, Ukraine 1998), Leader F (Peru 2011, Slovenia 1996), Leader G (Germany 2009, Netherlands 1998), Leader H (Peru 2016, Serbia 2012, Sweden 2006) and Leader I (Slovakia 2016).
  27. For Turkey (2011), the Peoples’ Democratic Party (HDP) had erroneously been documented as PARTY D in the CSES IMD Codebook Part 4. In the data, PARTY D refers to the Peace and Democratic Party (BDP), and this was updated accordingly.

DEVIATIONS BETWEEN CSES IMD AND STANDALONE CSES MODULES

Despite question wordings being virtually identical across modules, CSES IMD harmonizes variables to be consistent over time. Consequently, variables in CSES IMD sometimes deviate in their coding from how they appear in Standalone CSES Modules. These deviations can occur because of coding errors in the Standalone CSES dataset or codebook. In these circumstances, appropriate errata are listed on the Standalone CSES Module page. Deviations may also legitimately arise because of different coding schemes applied in CSES, derivative variables created that are unique to CSES IMD, lack of data at the time of processing of Standalone CSES Modules which has since become available, or that data for certain variables were not collected in original Standalone CSES Modules but have become eligible for inclusion in the CSES IMD as it meets the “3 and 1” eligibility criteria (see CSES IMD Stimulus Paper).

Below, we detail the primary deviations between Standalone CSES Modules and CSES IMD Phase II. CSES makes every effort to ensure that these deviations are minimal and that where they occur that details concerning them are listed in the CSES IMD Codebook and also here.

  1. The following variables are not available in Standalone CSES Modules 1 and 2 but are available in CSES IMD. They are:
      • IMD5008_ Party of the Prime Minister Before and After
      • IMD5009_ Party of the President Before and After
      • IMD5018_ Voting rounds
      • IMD5025_ Date Election Held
      • IMD5027_ Size of the Lower House
      • IMD5049_Age of Current Regime
      • IMD5052_GDP Growth – Annual % – time t; time t-1; time t-2
      • IMD5053_GDP Per Capita, PPP- time t; time t-1; time t-2
      • IMD5054_Unemployment, Total – time t; time t-1; time t-2
      • IMD5055_Human Development Index – time t; time t-1; time t-2
      • IMD5056_Inflation, GDP Deflator (Annual %) – time t; time t-1; time t-2
      • IMD5057_Population, Total – time t; time t-1; time t-2
      • IMD5058_1 Effective Number of Electoral Parties
      • IMD5059_1 Effective Number of Parliamentary Parties
  2. IMD5052_1 (GDP Growth Annual – time t) data were not available at the time of the Standalone CSES Module Full Release for Finland (2011) and thus were classified as “Missing.” However, this data has since become available and is coded in CSES IMD.
  3. IMD5053_1 (GDP per capita – time t) data were not available at the time of the Standalone CSES Module Full Release for Finland (2011) and thus were classified as “Missing.” However, this data has since become available and is coded in CSES IMD.
  4. IMD5054_ (Unemployment – time t; time t-1; time t-2) data were not available at the time of the Standalone CSES Module Full Release for specific studies and thus were classified as “Missing.” However, this data has since become available and is coded in CSES IMD. These studies are Brazil (2010), Finland (2011), Latvia (2010), Netherlands (2010), Peru (2011), Philippines (2010), Portugal (2009), Slovakia (2010), and Turkey (2011).
  5. IMD5055_ (Human Development Index) data were not available at the time of the Standalone CSES Module Full Release for specific studies and thus were classified as “Missing.” However, this data has since become available and is coded in CSES IMD. For IMD5055_1 (Human Development Index – time t) these studies are Peru (2016), Philippines (2016), and Slovakia (2016). For IMD5055_2 (Human Development Index – time t-1) these are Norway (2005), Peru (2011), Poland (2005), and Turkey (2011). For IMD5055_3 (Human Development Index – time t-2) these are Brazil (2006), Czech Republic (2006), Mexico (2006), Norway (2005), Poland (2005), and Sweden (2006).
  6. IMD5056_1 (Inflation, GDP Deflator (Annual %) – time t) data were not available at the time of the Standalone CSES Module Full Release for Finland (2011) and thus were classified as “Missing.” However, this data has since become available and is coded in CSES IMD.
  7. IMD5057_ (Population, total – time t; time t-1, time t-2) data were not available at the time of the Standalone CSES Module Full Release for specific studies and thus were classified as “Missing.” However, this data has since become available and is coded in CSES IMD.  These studies are Austria (2013), Finland (2011), Slovakia (2010), and Peru (2016).
  8. IMD5001_A-I (Percent Vote – Lower House – Party A – I), IMD5002_A-I (Percent Seats – Lower House – Party A – I), IMD5003_A-I (Percent Vote – Upper House – Party A – I), IMD5004_A-I (Percent Seats – Upper House – Party A – I) and IMD5005_A-I (Percent Vote – President – Party A – I): CSES Module 1 and CSES Module 2 include a category “ALLIANCE MEMBER (NO INDIVIDUAL TALLY)” (Coded 997 in Module 1 and 996 in Module 2).  This category was recoded to “999. MISSING” in CSES IMD.
  9. IMD5001_D (Percent Vote – Lower House – Party D) has been coded to “997. NOT APPLICABLE” because the study refers to the Russian 2000 Presidential election. In the CSES Module 1, this variable is coded “0.”
  10. IMD5003_F (Percent Vote – Upper House – Party F) and IMD5004_F (Percent Seats – Upper House – Party F) have been coded to “996. NOT APPLICABLE – UNICAMERAL SYSTEM” for Hong Kong (1998), because Hong Kong is a unicameral system. In CSES Module 1, these variables are coded “0” for Hong Kong (1998).
  11. IMD5003_F (Percent Vote – Upper House – Party F) has been coded missing (999) for Spain (2000) because there is no PARTY F for Spain (2000). This variable is coded “997. NOT APPLICABLE” in CSES Module 1.
  12. IMD5004_F (Percent Seats – Upper House – Party A – I) has been coded to missing (999) for Spain (2000) because Upper house election was held, but there is no PARTY F for Spain (2000). In CSES Module 1 this variable is coded  “997. not applicable.”
  13. IMD5003_D, E and F (Percent Vote – Upper House – Parties D, E and F), IMD5004_D, E and F (Percent Seats – Upper House – Parties D, E and F) and IMD5005_D, E and F (Percent Vote – President – Party D-F) have been coded to missing (999) for United States (1996) because there were no PARTY D, E, and F in the U.S. 1996 dataset. In CSES Module 1, these variables are coded “997. NOT APPLICABLE.”
  14. IMD5004_F-I (Percent Seats – Upper House – Parties F-I) have been coded to missing (999) for Switzerland (2003), because there were no PARTY F, G, H and I in the Swiss 2003 dataset. In CSES Module 2, these variables are coded “997. not applicable.”
  15. IMD5005_F (Percent Vote – President – Party F) has been coded to “996. not applicable – no role of President” because Hong Kong does not have a President. In CSES Module 1, this variable is coded “0” for Hong Kong (1998).
  16. IMD5005_D, E, and F (Percent Vote – President – Parties D, E, and F) have been coded to missing (999) because there are no PARTY D, E, and F in the Taiwan 1996 dataset. In CSES Module 1, these variables are coded “997. NOT APPLICABLE.”
  17. IMD5008_1 (Party of the Prime Minister before) and IMD5008_1 (Party of the Prime Minister after) for Belarus (2008) have been coded to “9999989. INDEPENDENT CANDIDATE” because Sergei Sidorsky (independent) was Prime Minister before and after the 2008 Belarusian election. In CSES Module 3, these variables are coded missing (99) for Belarus (2008).
  18. IMD5008_1 (Party of the Prime Minister before) and IMD5008_1 (Party of the Prime Minister after) for France (2007) have been coded to “2500001. Union for a Popular Movement (UMP)” because Dominique de Villepin (UMP) was Prime Minister before the 2007 French Presidential election and François Fillon (UMP) was Prime Minister after the 2007 French Presidential election. In CSES Module 3, these variables are coded “1”, the numerical party code for the Green Party (Les Verts) for France (2007).
  19. IMD5008_1 (Party of the Prime Minister before) and IMD5008_2 (Party of the Prime Minister after) for Hong Kong (2008) study has been coded to “9999997. NOT APPLICABLE” because there is no such post as the Prime Minister in Hong Kong.  In CSES Module 3, these variables are coded missing (99) for Hong Kong.
  20. IMD5008_1 (Party of the Prime Minister before) for Peru (2011) has been coded to “6040026.  Peruvian Aprista Party (PAP)” because Rosario Fernandez (PAP) was Prime Minister before the 2011 Peruvian general election. In CSES Module 3, this variable is coded not applicable (97) for Peru (2011).
  21. IMD5008_1 (Party of the Prime Minister before) and IMD5008_2 (Party of the Prime Minister after) for the Philippines (2010) has been coded to “9999997. NOT APPLICABLE” because there is no Prime Minister in the Philippines, with the President being both the head of government and the head of state. In CSES Module 3, these variables are coded missing (99) for the Philippines (2010).
  22. IMD5008_1 (Party of the Prime Minister before) and IMD5008_2 (Party of the Prime Minister after) for South Korea (2008) have been coded to “4100001. New Frontier Party (NFP)” (known as Grand National Party until 2012) because Han Seung-soo (Grand National Party) was Prime Minister before and after the 2008 South Korean election. In CSES Module 3, these variables are coded “97. not applicable” for South Korea (2008).
  23. IMD5008_1 (Party of the Prime Minister before) for Poland (2007) has been coded to “6160002. Law and Justice (PiS)” as Jaroslaw Kaczynski (PiS) was Prime Minister before the Polish 2007 election. In CSES Module 3, this variable is coded “6”, the numerical party code for Civic Platform (PO) for Poland (2007).
  24. IMD5008_1 (Party of the Prime Minister before) for Slovenia (2008) has been coded to “7050001. Slovenian Democratic Party (SDS)” because Janez Jansa (SDS) was Prime Minister before the 2008 Slovenian election. In CSES Module 3, this variable is coded “2”, the numerical party code for Liberal Democracy of Slovenia (LDS) for Slovenia (2008).
  25. IMD5008_2 (Party of the Prime Minister after) for Peru (2011) has been coded to “6040050. Peru Wins (UPP)” because Salomón Lerner Ghitis, the former campaign manager of the 2011 Peru Wins alliance, became Prime Minister after the 2011 Peruvian general election. In CSES Module 3, this variable is coded “97. NOT applicable” for Peru (2011).
  26. IMD5008_2 (Party of the Prime Minister after) for Poland (2007) has been coded to “6160001. Civic Platform” as Donald Tusk (PO) became Prime Minister after the Polish 2007 election. In CSES Module 3, this variable is coded “8”, the numerical party code for the Polish Peasant Party (PSL) for Poland (2007).
  27. IMD5008_2 (Party of the Prime Minister after) for Slovenia (2008) has been coded to “7050002. Social Democrats (SD)” because Borut Pahor (SD) became Prime Minister after the 2008 Slovenian election. In CSES Module 3, this variable is coded “1”, the numerical party code for the Democratic Party of Pensioners (DeSUS) for Slovenia (2008).
  28. IMD5009_1 (Party of the President before) and IMD5009_2 (Party of the President after) for Belarus (2008) has been coded to “1120101. Alexander Lukashenko (Independent)” because Lukashenko became President of Belarus in 1994. Even though he runs in elections under an independent banner, he was assigned a separate numerical code in the CSES IMD because of his special role in the Belarusian political system. In CSES Module 3, these variables are coded missing (99) for Belarus (2008).
  29. IMD5009_1 (Party of the President before) and IMD5009_2 (Party of the President after) for Croatia (2007) have been coded to “1910003. Croatian People’s Party – Liberal Democrats (HNS)” because Stjepan Mesic, endorsed by the HNS, was President before and after the 2007 Croatian election. In CSES Module 3, these variables are coded “97. not applicable” for Croatia (2007).
  30. IMD5009_1 (Party of the President before) and IMD5009_2 (Party of the President after) for Czech Republic (2006 and 2010) have been coded to “2030002. Civic Democratic Party (ODS)” because for both studies, Vaclav Klaus (ODS) was President before and after the respective elections. In CSES Module 3, these variables are coded “97. not applicable” for Czech Republic (2006) and (2010).
  31. IMD5009_1 (Party of the President before) and IMD5009_2 (Party of the President after) because for Estonia (2011) has been coded to “2330003. Social Democratic Party (SDE)”  because Toomas Hendrik Ilves was President before and after the Estonian 2011 election. In CSES Module 3, these variables are coded “97. not applicable” for Estonia (2011).
  32. IMD5009_1 (Party of the President before) and IMD5009_2 (Party of the President after) for France (2007) have been coded to “2500001. Union for a Popular Movement (UMP)”  because Jacques Chirac (UMP) was President before the French 2007 Presidential election and Nicolas Sarkozy (UMP) was President after the French 2007 Presidential election. In CSES Module 3, these variables are coded “1”, the numerical party code for the Green Party (Les Verts) for France (2007).
  33. IMD5009_1 (Party of the President before) and IMD5009_2 (Party of the President after) for Germany (2005) has been coded to “2760002. Christian Democratic Union (CDU)”  because Horst Koehler (CDU) was President before and after the German 2005 election. In CSES Module 3, these variables are coded “97. not applicable” for Germany (2005).
  34. IMD5009_1 (Party of the President before) and IMD5009_2 (Party of the President after) for Greece (2009) has been coded to “3000001. Pan-Hellenic Socialist Movement (PASOK)” because Karolos Papoulias (PASOK) was President before and after the 2009 Greek election. In CSES Module 3, these variables are coded “97. not applicable” for Greece (2009).
  35. IMD5009_1 (Party of the President before) and IMD5009_2 (Party of the President after) for Hong Kong (2008) has been coded to “9999997. NOT APPLICABLE” because there is no such post as the President in Hong Kong. In CSES Module 3, these variables are coded “99. MISSING” for Hong Kong (2008).
  36. IMD5009_1 (Party of the President before) and IMD5009_2 (Party of the President after). That is for Iceland (2007, 2009 and 2013) have been coded to “9999989. INDEPENDENT CANDIDATE” because Olafur Ragnar Grimsson (independent) was President of Iceland from 1996 to 2016. For the respective Icelandic studies, these variables are coded “97. not applicable” in the Standalone CSES Module datasets.
  37. IMD5009_1 (Party of the President before) and IMD5009_2 (Party of the President after) for Israel (2006) has been coded to “3760001. Likud – The Consolidation (L)” because Moshe Katsav (Likud) was President before and after the 2006 Israeli election. In CSES Module 3, these variables are coded “97. not applicable” for Israel (2006).
  38. IMD5009_1 (Party of the President before) and IMD5009_2 (Party of the President after) for Latvia (2010) study has been coded to “9999989. INDEPENDENT CANDIDATE” because Valdis Zatlers, independent before founding the Reform Party in 2011, was President of Latvia from 2007 to 2011. In CSES Module 3, these variables are coded “99. MISSING” for Latvia (2010).
  39. IMD5009_1 (Party of the President before) and IMD5009_2 (Party of the President after) for Portugal (2009) has been coded to “6200001. Social Democratic Party (PSD)” because Anibal Cavaco Silva (PSD) was President before and after the 2009 Portuguese election. In CSES Module 3, these variables are coded “99. MISSING” for Portugal (2009).
  40. IMD5009_1 (Party of the President before) and IMD5009_2 (Party of the President after) for Slovenia (2008) has been coded to “9999989. INDEPENDENT CANDIDATE” because Danilo Türk (independent) was President before and after the 2008 Slovenian election. In CSES Module 3, these variables are coded “97. not applicable” for Slovenia (2008).
  41. IMD5009_1 (Party of the President before) and IMD5009_2 (Party of the President after) for Turkey (2011) has been recoded to “7920001. Justice and Development Party (AKP)” because Abdullah Gul (AKP) was President before and after the 2011 Turkish election. In CSES Module 3, these variables are coded “97. not applicable” for Turkey (2011).
  42. IMD5011_F (Ideological Party Families – Party F) and IMD5011_G (Ideological Party Families – Party G)  for Finland (2007), referring to Swedish People’s Party in Finland – RKP (party F) and Christian Democrats – KD (party G) have been recoded. In CSES IMD party F is coded to “12. ETHNIC PARTIES”, while party G is coded to “08. CHRISTIAN DEMOCRATIC PARTIES.” This is in accordance with the Finish 2007 Macro Report. In the CSES Module 3, party F is coded to “8. Christian Democratic Parties” while party G is coded to “12. Ethnic Parties”  for Finland (2007).
  43. IMD5016_1 (Votes cast, Lower House – 1st segment (tier)) and IMD5016_3 (Votes cast, Upper House – 1st segment (tier)) for Australia (1996 and 2004) have been coded to “91. OTHER (SEE ELECTION STUDY NOTES)” because Australia uses the Alternative Vote system (for Lower House) and single-transferable vote form of proportional representation (for Upper House). Hence, voters vote for as many candidates as there are on the ballot. Thus, the total number of votes varies across electoral districts. These studies are coded “1” for these variables in CSES Standalone Module datasets.
  44. IMD5016_2 (Votes cast, Lower House – 2nd segment (tier)) for Mexico (1997 and 2000) have been coded “97. NOT APPLICABLE” because voters in Mexico cast a single vote, which is further used to determine both state and national seat allocations. These studies are coded “1” for the variable “Votes cast Lower house – 2nd segment (tier)” in CSES Standalone Module datasets.
  45. IMD5016_2 (Votes cast, Lower House – 2nd segment (tier)) for Norway (1997, 2001, 2005 and 2009) have been coded “91. OTHER (SEE ELECTION STUDY NOTES)” because Norwegian Parliament comprises 169 seats in two tiers. These studies are coded “97. NOT APPLICABLE” in CSES Standalone Module datasets.
  46. IMD5016_2 (Votes cast, Lower House – 2nd segment (tier)) for Slovenia (1996 and 2004) have been coded “97. NOT APPLICABLE” because voters in Slovenia cast a single vote in the open-list proportional system (one-tier system). These studies are coded “1” for the variable “Votes cast  Lower house – 2nd segment (tier)” in CSES Standalone Module datasets.
  47. IMD5016_2 (Votes cast, Lower House – 2nd segment (tier)), IMD5016_3 (Votes cast, Upper House – 1st segment (tier)), and IMD5016_4 (Votes cast, Upper House – 2nd segment (tier)) for Taiwan (1996) have been coded “97. NOT APPLICABLE” because this study refers to 1996 Presidential election, where voters cast single vote. The coding in CSES Module 1 dataset refers to the National assembly in Taiwan.
  48. IMD5016_3 (Votes cast, Upper House – 1st segment (tier)) for Czech Republic (1996 and 2002) have been coded “97. NOT APPLICABLE” because these studies do not refer to Upper House elections. These studies are coded “1” in CSES Standalone Module datasets.
  49. IMD5016_3 (Votes cast, Upper House – 1st segment (tier)) for France (2002) has been coded “97. NOT APPLICABLE” because members of the Senate (French Upper House) are indirectly elected. This study is coded “1” in CSES Module 2 dataset.
  50. IMD5016_3 (Votes cast, Upper House – 1st segment (tier)) for Germany (1998) has been coded “97. NOT APPLICABLE” because members of Bundesrat (German Upper House) are indirectly elected. This study is coded “3” in CSES Module 1 dataset.
  51. IMD5016_3 (Votes cast, Upper House – 1st segment (tier)) for Netherlands (1998 and 2002) have been coded “97. NOT APPLICABLE” because members of Senate (Dutch Upper House) are indirectly elected. Netherlands (1998) is coded “3” and Netherlands (2002) is coded “91” CSES Standalone Module datasets.
  52. IMD5016_3 (Votes cast, Upper House – 1st segment (tier)) for Philippines (2004) has been coded “12” because, in the Senate election, voters have one vote per candidate to be elected. This is in total 12 votes because half of the Senate is renewed at the single election. This study is coded “1” in CSES Module 2 dataset.
  53. IMD5016_3 (Votes cast, Upper House – 1st segment (tier)) for Poland (1997, 2005, 2007, and 2011) have been coded “91. OTHER (SEE ELECTION STUDY NOTES)” because voters in Senate election have as many votes as there are candidates to be elected in a district (between 1 and 4). These studies are coded “1” in CSES Standalone Module datasets.
  54. IMD5016_3 (Votes cast, Upper House – 1st segment (tier)) for Spain (1996, 2000, and 2004) have been coded “3” because each voter has three votes in 52 multi-member constituencies in Senate election in Spain. These studies are coded “1” in CSES Standalone Module datasets.
  55. IMD5016_4 (Votes cast, Upper House – 2nd segment (tier)) Belgium (1999 (Flanders and Wallonia) and 2003) have been coded “97. NOT APPLICABLE” because Senate elections at the time were held in a one-tier system. Since 2014, Senators in Belgium are not directly elected. Belgium (1999) study for Flanders is coded “99”, Belgium (1999) study for Wallonia is coded “9” and Belgium (2003) is coded “91” in CSES Standalone Module datasets.
  56. IMD5017_1 (Voting procedure, Lower House – 1st segment (tier)) for Brazil (2002) has been coded “4. OTHER (SEE ELECTION STUDY NOTES)” because in Brazil each political party presents a list of candidates, and voters can cast a vote either for a candidate, or for a party. This study is coded “2. PARTY LISTS” in CSES Module 2 dataset.
  57. IMD5017_1 (Voting procedure, Lower House – 1st segment (tier)) and IMD5017_3 (Voting procedure, Upper House – 1st segment (tier)) for Chile (1999) has been coded “2. PARTY LISTS”  because coalitions in Chile present a list of two candidates, normally from different parties, and voters cast a vote for one candidate from the list. This study is coded “1. CANDIDATES” in CSES Module 1 dataset.
  58. IMD5017_1 (Voting procedure, Lower House – 1st segment (tier)) for Denmark (1998) has been coded “4. OTHER (SEE ELECTION STUDY NOTES)” because voters choose to endorse a party, a candidate on a party list, or an independent candidate. This study is coded “2. PARTY LISTS” in CSES Module 1 dataset.
  59. IMD5017_1 (Voting procedure, Lower House – 1st segment (tier)) for Netherlands (1998 and 2002) have been coded “4. OTHER (SEE ELECTION STUDY NOTES)” because voters in the Netherlands cast one vote for the list and a candidate at the same time (matrix). These studies are coded “2. PARTY LISTS” in CSES Standalone Module datasets.
  60. IMD5017_1 (Voting procedure, Lower House – 1st segment (tier)) for Peru (2011) has been coded “2. PARTY LISTS” because voters cast one vote for a party list, but they can also express a preferential vote for some specific candidate optionally, though not many voters do that. This study is coded “1. CANDIDATES” in CSES Module 3 dataset.
  61. IMD5017_1 (Voting procedure, Lower House – 1st segment (tier)) for Switzerland (1999 and 2003) have been coded “4. OTHER (SEE ELECTION STUDY NOTES)” because Swiss voters can vote for a party list; endorse specific candidate from a list; add candidates from other parties instead of a candidate of the list; delete candidates or vote twice for the same candidate. These studies are coded “2. PARTY LISTS” in CSES Standalone Module datasets.
  62. IMD5017_2 (Voting procedure, Lower House – 2nd segment (tier)) for Mexico (2003) has been coded “2. PARTY LISTS” because, in Mexico, each voters’ vote is counted twice; once for the single-member district contest, and a second time for the regional PR contest. This study is coded “7. NOT APPLICABLE” in CSES Module 2 dataset.
  63. IMD5017_2 (Voting procedure, Lower House – 2nd segment (tier)) for Norway (1997, 2001, 2005 and 2009) have been coded “2. PARTY LISTS” because voters in Norway cast one single vote based on party lists. These studies are coded “7. NOT APPLICABLE” in CSES Standalone Module datasets.
  64. IMD5017_2 (Voting procedure, Lower House – 2nd segment (tier)) for Slovenia (1996 and 2004) have been coded “7. NOT APPLICABLE” because Slovenia is a one-tier system. These studies are coded “1. CANDIDATES” in CSES Standalone Module datasets because members of Italian and Hungarian indigenous ethnic communities are entitled to 2 deputy seats, one for each community, and were considered as the second tier.
  65. IMD5017_2 (Voting procedure, Lower House – 2nd segment (tier)) for Taiwan (1996) has been coded “7. NOT APPLICABLE” because before 2008 reform, Taiwan was a one-tier system. This study is coded “2. PARTY LISTS” in CSES Module 1 dataset.
  66. IMD5017_3 (Voting procedure, Upper House – 1st segment (tier)) for Czech Republic (1996 and 2002) have been coded “7. NOT APPLICABLE” because they do not refer to Upper house election. These studies are coded “1. CANDIDATES” in CSES Standalone Module datasets.
  67. IMD5017_3 (Voting procedure, Upper House – 1st segment (tier)) for France (2002) has been coded “7. NOT APPLICABLE” because Senators in France are indirectly elected. This study is coded “4. OTHER (SEE ELECTION STUDY NOTES)” in CSES Module 2 dataset.
  68. IMD5017_3 (Voting procedure, Upper House – 1st segment (tier)) for Germany (1998) has been coded “7. NOT APPLICABLE” because members of Bundesrat (Upper house) in Germany are indirectly elected. This study is coded “4. OTHER (SEE ELECTION STUDY NOTES)” in CSES Module 1 dataset.
  69. IMD5017_3 (Voting procedure, Upper House – 1st segment (tier)) and IMD5017_4 (Voting procedure, Upper House – 2nd segment (tier)) for Mexico (1997, 2000 and 2003) have been coded “1. CANDIDATES” because in Mexico each vote in Upper house election is counted twice: once for the 3-seat multi-member districts contest, and a second time for the national PR contest. These studies are coded as “2. PARTY LISTS” for the first segment (tier) and “7. NOT APPLICABLE” for second segment (tier) of upper house election in CSES Standalone Module datasets.
  70. IMD5017_3 (Voting procedure, Upper House – 1st segment (tier)) for Netherlands (1998 and 2002) have been coded “7. NOT APPLICABLE” because members of the Upper house in Netherlands are indirectly elected. These studies are coded “4. OTHER (SEE ELECTION STUDY NOTES)” in CSES Standalone Module datasets.
  71. IMD5017_3 (Voting procedure, Upper House – 1st segment (tier)) for Romania (2009 and 2014) have been coded “7. NOT APPLICABLE” because these studies do not concern the Upper house election. These studies are coded “1. CANDIDATES” in CSES Standalone Module datasets.
  72. IMD5017_3 (Voting procedure, Upper House – 1st segment (tier)) for Romania (2012) has been coded “4. OTHER (SEE ELECTION STUDY NOTES),” which differs from Romania (1996 and 2004) studies. This is because the law changed, and from 2008 to 2016 Romania used mixed member proportional system. This study is coded “1. CANDIDATES” in CSES Module 4 dataset.
  73. IMD5017_3 (Voting procedure, Upper House – 1st segment (tier)) for Spain (1996, 2000 and 2008) have been coded to “4. OTHER (SEE ELECTION STUDY NOTES)” because for Upper house election in Spain parties present list of three candidates, voters mark up to three candidates, from any party. In total, 4 candidates are elected who won the most votes in district. These studies are coded “1. CANDIDATES” in CSES Standalone Module datasets.
  74. IMD5018_1 (Voting rounds, Lower House – 1st segment (tier)) for Belarus (2008) has been coded “1” because all 110 deputies were elected in the first round of the election. This study is coded “2” in CSES Module 3 dataset.
  75. IMD5018_1 (Voting rounds, Lower House – 1st segment (tier)) and IMD5018_2 (Voting rounds, Lower House – 2nd segment (tier)) for Japan (2007 and 2013) have been coded to “97. NOT APPLICABLE” because the studies do not concern the lower house election. These studies are coded “1” in CSES Standalone Module datasets.
  76. IMD5018_2 (Voting rounds, Lower House – 2nd segment (tier)) for Hong Kong (2008) has been coded “1” because, in geographical constituency elections, there is only one round of voting. This study is coded “2” in CSES Module 3 dataset.
  77. IMD5018_2 (Voting rounds, Lower House – 2nd segment (tier)) for Norway (2005 and 2009) have been coded “1” because voters cast only single ballot, even though their vote directly impacts the selection of 150 members from 19 multi-member districts using proportional representation, but also influences the dispersion of the 19 “member at large seats.” These studies are coded “97. NOT APPLICABLE” in CSES Module 3 dataset.
  78. IMD5018_3 (Voting rounds, Upper House – 1st segment (tier)) for Czech Republic (2006 and 2010) have been coded “2” because the study covers upper house elections which were held in two rounds. These studies are coded “97. NOT APPLICABLE” in CSES Module 3 datasets.
  79. IMD5021_2 (Is there party threshold, Lower House – 2nd segment (tier)) and IMD5021_4 (Is there party threshold, Upper House – 2nd segment (tier)) for Romania (2009) has been coded “7. NOT APPLICABLE” because the study concerns the Presidential election. This study is coded “1” in CSES Module 3 dataset and that coding refers to 2008 Parliamentary election in Romania.
  80. IMD5021_4 (Is there party threshold, Upper House – 2nd segment (tier)) for Czech Republic (2013) has been coded to “7. NOT APPLICABLE” because the study does not refer to upper house election. This study is coded “5” in CSES Module 4 datasets.
  81. IMD5022_1 (Party threshold, Lower House – 1st segment (tier)) for South Africa (2009 and 2014) have been coded “0” because South Africa is one national district with a magnitude of four hundred, and there is no legal threshold for gaining representation. These studies are coded “5” for 2009, and “0.25” for 2014 in CSES Standalone Module datasets.
  82. IMD5022_2 (Party threshold, Lower House – 2nd segment (tier)) and IMD5022_3 (Party threshold, Upper House – 1st segment (tier)) for Canada (2008) have been coded to “97. NOT APPLICABLE” because Canada is using the “first-past-the-post” system, which is a one-tier system, and the 2008 study does not concern Upper house election. This study is coded “7” in CSES Module 3 dataset.
  83. IMD5022_2 (Party threshold, Lower House – 2nd segment (tier)) for New Zealand (2008) has been coded “96. OTHER THRESHOLD (SEE ELECTION STUDY NOTES)” because New Zealand has an alternative threshold, parties can obtain seats by winning 5% of total votes nationally, or by winning one of the 70 constituency seats. This study is coded “5” in CSES Module 3 dataset.
  84. IMD5022_2 (Party threshold, Lower House – 2nd segment (tier)) for South Korea (2008) has been coded “96. OTHER THRESHOLD (SEE ELECTION STUDY NOTES)” because South Korea has an alternative threshold, parties can obtain seats by winning 3% of total votes nationally, or by winning at least 5 primary district seats. This study is coded “3” in CSES Module 3 dataset.
  85. IMD5022_2 (Party threshold, Lower House – 2nd segment (tier)) and IMD5022_4 (Party threshold, Upper House – 2nd segment (tier)) for Romania (2009) has been coded “97. NOT APPLICABLE” because the study concerns Presidential election. The study is coded “96. OTHER THRESHOLD (SEE ELECTION STUDY NOTES)” for 2008 Parliamentary election in CSES Module 3 dataset.
  86. IMD5022_2 (Party threshold, Lower House – 2nd segment (tier)), IMD5022_3 (Party threshold, Upper House – 1st segment (tier)) and IMD5022_4 (Party threshold, Upper House – 2nd segment (tier)) for South Africa (2009) has been coded “97. NOT APPLICABLE” because the study does not concern the Upper house election, and South Africa is a one-tier system. The study is coded “7” in CSES Module 3 dataset.
  87. IMD5022_2 (Party threshold, Lower House – 2nd segment (tier)), IMD5022_3 (Party threshold, Upper House – 1st segment (tier)), and IMD5022_4 (Party threshold, Upper House – 2nd segment (tier)) for Latvia (2010) has been coded “97. NOT APPLICABLE” because Latvia is a single-tier system for Lower house election and 2010 study does not concern the Upper house election. The study is coded “7” in CSES Module 3 dataset.
  88. IMD5022_3 (Party threshold, Upper House – 1st segment (tier)) for Czech Republic (2013) has been coded “97. NOT APPLICABLE” because the study does not concern the Upper house election. This study is coded “0” in CSES Module 4 dataset.
  89. IMD5022_3 (Party threshold, Upper House – 1st segment (tier)) for Ireland (2007) has been coded “97. NOT APPLICABLE” because members of the Upper house in Ireland are indirectly elected. This study is coded “0” in CSES Module 3 dataset.
  90. IMD5022_3 (Party threshold, Upper House – 1st segment (tier)) and IMD5022_4 (Party threshold, Upper House – 2nd segment (tier)) for Peru (2011) has been coded “97. NOT APPLICABLE” because Peru has a unicameral parliament. This study is coded “7” in CSES Module 3 dataset.
  91. IMD5029_A (Government Composition Before – Party A) and IMD5029_H (Government Composition Before – Party H) for Portugal (2015) have been coded “8” (for party A – Social Democratic Party) and “4” (for party H – People’s Party). These two parties contested the 2015 election as an electoral coalition, but they are assigned separate alphabetical codes. Independents held the remaining 3 seats. This study is coded as 12 portfolios for party A, 4 portfolios for party E, and 4 portfolios for party G in CSES Module 4 dataset.
  92. IMD5031_D (Government Composition After – Party D) for Canada (2011 and 2015) have been coded “0” because that party did not hold any ministry after the 2011 or 2015 election. This variable is coded “6” in CSES Module 4 dataset.
  93. IMD5031_A (Government Composition After – Party A) for Great Britain (2015) has been coded “22” because 22 is the size of the cabinet, and the Conservative party (party A) held all ministries after the 2015 election. This variable is coded “23” in CSES Module 4 dataset.
  94. IMD5049 (Age of the Current Regime) in CSES IMD reflects the latest version of PolityIV. Using this latest version, we discovered the following deviations between Standalone CSES Modules and CSES IMD, namely:
      • For Czech Republic (2010) CSES IMD codes this variable “17,” reflecting the last regime change in the Czech Republic noted by PolityIV in 1993. In CSES Module 3, this variable is coded “16” for the Czech Republic (2010).
      • For Denmark (2007) CSES IMD codes this variable “62,” reflecting the last regime change in Denmark noted by PolityIV in 1945. In CSES Module 3, this variable is coded “61” for Denmark (2007);
      • For New Zealand (2011) CSES IMD codes this variable “134,” reflecting the last regime change in New Zealand noted by PolityIV in 1877. In CSES Module 3, this variable is coded “135” for New Zealand (2011);
      • For Netherlands (2006) CSES IMD codes this variable “61,” reflecting the last regime change in the Netherlands noted by PolityIV in 1945. In CSES Module 3, this variable is coded “60” for the Netherlands (2006);
      • For Netherlands (2010) CSES IMD codes this variable to “65,” reflecting the last regime change in the Netherlands noted by PolityIV in 1945. In CSES Module 3, this variable coded “64” for the Netherlands (2010).