=========================================================================== COMPARATIVE STUDY OF ELECTORAL SYSTEMS (CSES) INTEGRATED MODULE DATASET (IMD) CODEBOOK PART 2: CSES IMD - VARIABLES DESCRIPTION PHASE 2 RELEASE - OCTOBER 17, 2019 CSES Secretariat www.cses.org =========================================================================== HOW TO CITE THE STUDY: The Comparative Study of Electoral Systems (www.cses.org). CSES INTEGRATED MODULE DATASET PHASE 2 RELEASE [dataset and documentation]. October 17, 2019 version. doi:10.7804/cses.imd.2019-10-17. These materials are based on work supported by the American National Science Foundation (www.nsf.gov) under grant numbers SES-0817701, SES-1154687, SES-1420973, and SES-1760058, the GESIS - Leibniz Institute for the Social Sciences, the University of Michigan, in-kind support of participating election studies, the many organizations that sponsor planning meetings and conferences, and the numerous organizations that fund national election studies by CSES collaborators. Any opinions, findings, and conclusions, or recommendations expressed in these materials are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of the funding organizations. =========================================================================== =========================================================================== TABLE OF CONTENTS =========================================================================== ))) IMPORTANT NOTE REGARDING PHASE 2 RELEASE OF THE CSES INTEGRATED MODULE DATASET (IMD) ))) OVERVIEW OF "CODEBOOK PART 2: VARIABLES DESCRIPTION" ))) HOW TO NAVIGATE THE CSES IMD CODEBOOK ))) CSES IMD CODEBOOK: CRITICAL CRITERIA REGARDING CSES IMD AND DESCRIPTION OF VARIABLE NOTES, POLITY NOTES; & ELECTION STUDY NOTES >>> PLACEMENT OF QUESTIONS IN CSES IMD AND STANDALONE CSES MODULES >>> RECODING OF VARIABLES FOR CSES IMD >>> DEVIATIONS FROM STANDALONE CSES MODULES >>> VARIABLE NOTES >>> POLITY NOTES AND ELECTION STUDY NOTES ))) CSES CODING OF PARTY/COALITIONS AND LEADERS IN CSES IMD - A NEW DEPARTURE >>> CSES IMD NUMERICAL PARTY/COALITION CODING - HARMONIZATION >>> CSES IMD NUMERICAL PARTY/COALITION CODING - IMPORTANT NOTES >>> CSES IMD ALPHABETICAL PARTY/COALITION CODING - RELATIONAL DATA >>> CSES ALPHABETICAL LEADER CODING - RELATIONAL DATA ))) LIST OF TABLES IN CODEBOOK PART 2 ))) CSES IMD VARIABLE LIST ))) CSES IMD VARIABLES: IDENTIFICATION, WEIGHT, AND STUDY ADMINISTRATION DATA ))) CSES IMD VARIABLES: DEMOGRAPHIC DATA ))) CSES IMD VARIABLES: MICRO-LEVEL (SURVEY) DATA ))) CSES IMD VARIABLES: MACRO-LEVEL DATA =========================================================================== ))) IMPORTANT NOTE REGARDING PHASE 2 RELEASE OF THE CSES INTEGRATED MODULE DATASET (IMD) =========================================================================== This dataset and all accompanying documentation comprises the Phase 2 Release of the CSES Integrated Module Dataset (IMD). The CSES Integrated Module Dataset is being released in a phased way. Thus, this release is an advance version of the dataset, and thus lacks some of the checking, documentation, and inclusion of certain variables that are expected with the Full Release of this dataset. This Advance Release is provided as a service to the CSES user community, for those analysts who find it valuable to work with preliminary versions of the dataset. We would appreciate being notified of any errors in the dataset or documentation by email to "cses@umich.edu". Users should expect future changes and improvements to the data and documentation of variables. If users wish to re-use their programming code on a future release of the file, the code should be written in a way that is flexible and can be accommodating of these future changes. Users of the CSES Integrated Module Dataset (IMD) may wish to monitor the errata for CSES IMD on the CSES website, to check for known errors which may impact their analyses. To view errata for CSES IMD Phase 2, go to Data Download on the CSES website, navigate to the CSES IMD download page, and click on the Errata link in the white box to the right of the page. Users of the CSES Integrated Module Dataset (IMD) are also advised that while the CSES IMD Codebook is comprehensive, users are strongly advised to consult Standalone CSES Module Documentation including Standalone CSES Module Codebooks, Macro Reports, Design Reports, and Election Summaries. =========================================================================== ))) OVERVIEW OF "CODEBOOK PART 2: VARIABLES DESCRIPTION" =========================================================================== Part 2 of the CSES IMD Codebook provides users with information about the variables in CSES IMD as well as accompanying information about each polity's election study. =========================================================================== ))) HOW TO NAVIGATE THE CSES IMD CODEBOOK =========================================================================== CSES IMD Codebook is produced in .txt format to allow for easy accessibility and as such, the Codebook can be read into a variety of programs. The CSES IMD Codebook can be navigated quickly in the electronic files, with the following commands allowing for quick searching: ))) = Section Header >>> = Sub-section Header 1 <<>> = Sub-section Header 2 +++ = Tables VARIABLES NOTES = Notes for particular variables POLITY NOTES = Notes for particular polity [POLITY NOTES] = Notes for particular polity where data in CSES IMD deviates from published data in CSES Standalone Modules. ELECTION STUDY NOTES = Notes for a particular election study [ELECTION STUDY NOTES] = Notes for a particular election study where data in CSES IMD deviates from published data in CSES Standalone Modules. =========================================================================== ))) CSES IMD CODEBOOK: CRITICAL CRITERIA REGARDING CSES IMD AND DESCRIPTION OF VARIABLE NOTES, POLITY NOTES; & ELECTION STUDY NOTES =========================================================================== Here we provide a brief overview of some of the critical criteria regarding the creation of CSES IMD and some crucial things users may wish to take account of in analyzing data from CSES IMD. Users are advised to consult Part 1 of the CSES IMD Codebook for more in-depth information concerning the operating principles of CSES IMD, its coding conventions, details on identification and missing data, and overviews of the dataset including detailed summary information on the election studies included in CSES IMD. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>> PLACEMENT OF QUESTIONS IN CSES IMD AND STANDALONE CSES MODULES --------------------------------------------------------------------------- When using variables in the CSES IMD, users are advised that even when a question is worded identically in successive surveys, its placement in the survey questionnaire may be different in each Standalone CSES Module, with unknown effects. Thus, even when a question is worded identically in successive surveys, analysts may wish to examine the placement of the question in each questionnaire to ensure that changes in its placement do not contaminate analyses. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>> RECODING OF VARIABLES FOR CSES IMD --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Variables for CSES IMD have been recoded to be consistent over time. Questions (and variables) are not necessarily coded the same way in CSES IMD as they are in the Standalone CSES Modules. Users are advised to consult the CSES IMD Codebook Part 2, where possible, details have been provided in VARIABLE NOTES and ELECTION STUDY NOTES regarding harmonization schemes and specific election study deviations. Users are also advised to have to consult Standalone CSES Module Codebook for specific information on Module-specific studies. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>> DEVIATIONS FROM STANDALONE CSES MODULES --------------------------------------------------------------------------- The CSES goal is to keep deviations between Standalone CSES Modules and CSES IMD to a minimum. Nonetheless, despite question wordings being virtually identical across CSES modules, CSES IMD harmonizes variables to be consistent over time, thus necessitating some deviations to occur. These deviations may occur because of coding errors found in the Standalone CSES dataset or Standalone Codebooks. In these circumstances, these errors may result in changes being implemented in CSES IMD and the issues listed in errata on the Standalone CSES Module pages. These issues will be corrected in the Standalone CSES Modules upon re-release of these respective Standalone CSES Modules at some future date. Deviations may also legitimately arise because of different coding schemes applied in Standalone CSES Modules compared with 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 particular Standalone CSES Modules but have become eligible for inclusion in CSES IMD as it meets the “3 and 1” eligibility criteria. In line with the policy of minimizing differences between CSES IMD and Standalone CSES Modules, CSES only applies deviations between CSES IMD and Standalone CSES Modules when the above circumstances are met. In circumstances where CSES is unable to explain why coding differs between studies from the same polity over time, no changes are made to the data. Concerning deviations, Election Study Notes and Polity Notes are included under the applicable variables noting the deviations. Irregular codes discovered in Standalone CSES Modules and which could not be identified were set to missing. These are also noted in Variable Notes and Election Study Notes. Users can identify these by using the following unique search term in Part 2 of the CSES IMD Codebook: - VARIABLE NOTES - [POLITY NOTES] - [ELECTION STUDY NOTES] --------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>> VARIABLE NOTES --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Variable notes provide information on the rationale of a variable as well as source information for that variable. It also details the polities for which no data for that particular variable are available. VARIABLE NOTES are listed below the descriptive information for the said variable and can be navigated in the Codebook by searching for "VARIABLE NOTES" in Part 2 of the CSES IMD Codebook. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>> POLITY NOTES AND ELECTION STUDY NOTES --------------------------------------------------------------------------- A unique dimension of the CSES are the inclusion of POLITY NOTES and ELECTION STUDY NOTES. They are notes which are attached to each variable included in the dataset and refer to case-specific information regarding a particular variable. This information may apply to a polity consistently in the dataset (i.e.: a POLITY NOTE) or one election study in the dataset (i.e.: an ELECTION STUDY NOTE). Their purpose is to provide users with more detailed information on the case or explain essential deviations specific to cases from CSES conventions. Where applicable, POLITY NOTES and ELECTION STUDY NOTES are listed below a particular variable and any VARIABLE NOTES in Parts 2, 3, and 4 of the CSES IMD Codebook. They can be navigated in the Codebook by searching for "POLITY NOTES" or ELECTION STUDY NOTES" in Parts 2-4 of the CSES IMD Codebook. =========================================================================== ))) CSES CODING OF PARTY/COALITIONS AND LEADERS IN CSES IMD - A NEW DEPARTURE =========================================================================== --------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>> CSES IMD NUMERICAL PARTY/COALITION CODING - HARMONIZATION --------------------------------------------------------------------------- CSES IMD marks a radical new departure in the CSES approach to the coding of parties and coalitions. All parties/coalitions or presidential candidates, where applicable, participating in the election or the previous election receive a NUMERICAL code. These codes are used to identify the following in the micro-component of the CSES dataset: - who the respondent voted for in the current election (IMD3002). - who the respondent voted for in the previous election (IMD3004). - the respondent's party identification (IMD3005_3). These codes are used to identify the following in the macro-component of the CSES dataset: - Party/coalition of the prime minister before the election (IMD5008_) - Party/coalition of the president before and after the election (IMD5009_) In CSES IMD, each party/coalition receives a unique numerical identifier that is consistent across modules. This seven-digit numerical identifier contains information on the polity and a unique numerical value to distinguish the party/coalition. Hence, numerical party/coalition codes are harmonized across Modules within CSES IMD. The first three digits of the identifier consist of the three-digit UN Polity Identifier Code. The remaining four digits consist of numerical codes ranging from 0001 to 9999, with each party/coalition assigned a value that remains consistent across Modules. In assigning of the last four digits, macro data specialists have assigned codes with consistent leading vote-getters in a polity being assigned lower values. Beyond this, the allocation of the final four digits is random. The harmonized and consistent codes for parties/coalitions are detailed in Part 3 of the CSES IMD Codebook. Users can search for the following term: "CSES IMD HARMONIZED PARTY/COALITION NUMERICAL CODES" --------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>> CSES IMD NUMERICAL PARTY/COALITION CODING - IMPORTANT NOTES --------------------------------------------------------------------------- In cases of a merger between two parties, the newly created party/coalition receives a different numerical code from its previous incarnations. When parties compete in electoral alliances/coalitions, the alliance/coalition receives a different numerical code from the constituent parties that make it up. Parties/coalitions that merely undergo a name change do not receive a new unique code. Instead, a POLITY/ELECTION STUDY NOTE will note the name change. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>> CSES IMD ALPHABETICAL PARTY/COALITION CODING - RELATIONAL DATA --------------------------------------------------------------------------- CSES IMD includes relational data for parties/coalitions. In CSES IMD, as in Standalone CSES Modules, this data is coded using an ALPHABETICAL classification with parties/coalitions where data is available receiving an alphabetical code (A-I). Parties/coalition A through F are the six most popular parties/coalitions, ordered in descending order of their share of the popular vote in the said polity's election (unless otherwise stated). Thus Party A is the party/coalition that received the most votes in the election, party B the second most votes, etc... Parties/coalitions who achieve at least 1% of the vote nationally are eligible for an alphabetical A-F assignment. In polities with multiple electoral tiers and where one vote is cast, parties are ordered according to their vote share in tier 1 (the lowest tier), unless otherwise stated. In polities where voters have two votes (i.e., a constituency and a list vote) simultaneously, for example Germany, parties are ordered by the national share of the party list vote (tier 2). Parties G, H, and I are supplemental parties. They may, but do not have to, accord with how parties A-F are ordered, that is ordered on the popular share of the vote in a polity. More often, they are codified in no particular order. These parties are voluntarily provided by each polity's election study and often reflect important or notable parties within a polity. They may also include data about individual parties within a coalition, where data about the coalition and the individual parties, or some of these parties that make it up are provided. These codes are used to identify the following in the micro-component of the CSES dataset: - Respondent's left-right placement of the party/coalition (variable IMD3007_). - Respondent's likability of the party/coalition (variable IMD3008_). These alphabetical codes are used to identify the macro level information about these said parties/coalitions, namely: - Election Results: percentage of vote for each party/coalition in lower house (variable IMD5001_) - Election Results: percentage of seats for each party/coalition in lower house (variable IMD5002_) - Election Results: percentage of vote for each party/coalition in upper house (variable IMD5003_) - Election Results: percentage of seats for each party/coalition in upper house (variable IMD5004_) - Election Results: percentage of vote for each party/coalition in presidential election (variable IMD5005_) - Expert judgments by the national collaborators of the said party/ coalition's ideological family placement (variable IMD5011_). - Expert judgments by the national collaborators of the said party/ coalition's left-right placement (variable IMD5012_). - Number of cabinet portfolios held by each party/coalition before the election (variable IMD5029_). - Number of cabinet portfolios held by each party/coalition after the election (variable IMD5031_). To allow users to see what party/coalition A-I refers to in a particular election within a polity, variable IMD5000_ provides identifiers within the dataset with detailed labels. In addition, Part 4 of the CSES IMD Codebook details the alphabetical classifications for each polity by Standalone CSES Module. Users can search in Part 4 of the CSES IMD Codebook with the following term: "ALPHABETICAL PARTY CODES BY CSES MODULE" --------------------------------------------------------------------------- >>> CSES ALPHABETICAL LEADER CODING - RELATIONAL DATA --------------------------------------------------------------------------- CSES IMD includes relational data for leaders of parties/coalitions. In CSES IMD, as in Standalone CSES Modules, this data is coded using an ALPHABETICAL classification with leaders where data is available receiving an alphabetical code (A-I). Leaders A through F tends to be the leaders of the six most popular parties/coalitions or the presidential candidates of these parties. They correspond to parties A-F (i.e., Leader A will be related to Party A in some way, Leader B will be related to Party B, etc...) Leaders G, H, and I are supplemental leaders. They may be related to parties G, H, I, but they do not have to be. These leaders are voluntarily provided by each country's election study and often include data about additional personalities of interest. For example, in a parliamentary system, data about a President might be provided, even if the Presidency is not being contested. On many occasions, slots Leader G, H, and I will include additional data for parties/coalitions that have multiple leaders. These codes are used to identify the following in the micro and macro components of the CSES dataset: - Respondent's likability of the leader/personality in question (variable IMD3009). To allow users to see what Leader A-I refers to in a particular election within a polity, Part 4 of the CSES IMD Codebook details the alphabetical classifications of leaders for each polity by Standalone CSES Module. Users can search in Part 4 of the CSES IMD Codebook with the following term: "ALPHABETICAL LEADER CODES BY CSES MODULE" =========================================================================== ))) LIST OF TABLES IN CODEBOOK PART 2 =========================================================================== Below, we list the Tables located in Codebook Part 2. Tables can be accessed in the electronic version of the CSES Codebook by searching for "+++". - ELECTION STUDIES BY TYPE OF ELECTION - TYPE OF ORIGINAL WEIGHTS BY INDIVIDUAL ELECTION STUDIES - MAPPING OF EDUCATION CODES IN CSES MODULES 1-3 TO EDUCATION CODES IN CSES IMD - MAPPING OF EDUCATION CODES IN CSES MODULE 4 TO EDUCATION CODES IN CSES IMD - MAPPING OF RELIGIOUS DENOMINATION CODES IN CSES MODULES 1-4 TO RELIGIOUS DENOMINATION CODES IN CSES IMD - ELECTION STUDIES BY TYPE OF MAIN ELECTION - ELECTION STUDIES BY TYPE OF MAIN ELECTION - SUMMARY OF TYPE OF PREVIOUS ELECTION AND THE YEAR IN WHICH IT WAS HELD - SUMMARY OF TYPE OF PREVIOUS ELECTION AND THE YEAR IN WHICH IT WAS HELD - SUMMARY OF TYPE OF PREVIOUS ELECTION AND THE YEAR IN WHICH IT WAS HELD - MAPPING OF CLOSE TO PARTY CODES IN CSES MODULE 1 TO CLOSE TO PARTY CODES IN CSES IMD - MAPPING OF CLOSER TO PARTY CODES IN CSES MODULE 1 TO CLOSER TO PARTY CODES IN CSES IMD - MAPPING OF CLOSENESS TO PARTY CODES IN CSES MODULE 1 TO CLOSENESS TO PARTY CODES IN CSES IMD - PARTIES FOR WHICH IMD5011_ (IDEOLOGICAL FAMILY CODES) DIFFER ACROSS ELECTION STUDIES - MAPPING OF VOTING PROCEDURE CODES IN CSES MODULES 1 AND 2 TO VOTING PROCEDURE CODES IN CSES IMD =========================================================================== ))) CSES IMD VARIABLE LIST =========================================================================== ))) CSES IMD VARIABLES: IDENTIFICATION, WEIGHT, AND STUDY ADMINISTRATION DATA IMD1001 >>> DATASET IMD1002_VER >>> DATASET VERSION IMD1002_DOI >>> DIGITAL OBJECT IDENTIFIER IMD1003 >>> ID VARIABLE - ELECTION STUDY (NUMERIC POLITY) IMD1004 >>> ID VARIABLE - ELECTION STUDY (ALPHABETIC POLITY) IMD1005 >>> ID VARIABLE - RESPONDENT IMD1006 >>> ID COMPONENT - POLITY CSES CODE IMD1006_UN >>> ID COMPONENT - POLITY UN CODE IMD1006_NAM >>> ID COMPONENT - POLITY NAME IMD1007 >>> ID COMPONENT - SAMPLE COMPONENT IMD1008_YEAR >>> ID COMPONENT - ELECTION YEAR IMD1008_MOD_1 >>> ID COMPONENT - MODULE 1 IMD1008_MOD_2 >>> ID COMPONENT - MODULE 2 IMD1008_MOD_3 >>> ID COMPONENT - MODULE 3 IMD1008_MOD_4 >>> ID COMPONENT - MODULE 4 IMD1008_RES >>> ID COMPONENT - RESPONDENT WITHIN ELECTION STUDY IMD1009 >>> ELECTION TYPE IMD1010_1 >>> ELECTION STUDY WEIGHT: SAMPLE IMD1010_2 >>> ELECTION STUDY WEIGHT: DEMOGRAPHIC IMD1010_3 >>> ELECTION STUDY WEIGHT: POLITICAL IMD1011_M >>> DATE 1ST ROUND ELECTION BEGAN - MONTH IMD1011_D >>> DATE 1ST ROUND ELECTION BEGAN - DAY IMD1011_Y >>> DATE 1ST ROUND ELECTION BEGAN - YEAR IMD1012_M >>> DATE 2ND ROUND ELECTION BEGAN - MONTH IMD1012_D >>> DATE 2ND ROUND ELECTION BEGAN - DAY IMD1012_Y >>> DATE 2ND ROUND ELECTION BEGAN - YEAR IMD1013_M >>> DATE QUESTIONNAIRE ADMINISTERED - MONTH IMD1013_D >>> DATE QUESTIONNAIRE ADMINISTERED - DAY IMD1013_Y >>> DATE QUESTIONNAIRE ADMINISTERED - YEAR IMD1014_1 >>> INTERVIEW TIMING - NUMBER OF DAYS BETWEEN INTERVIEW AND FIRST ROUND OF ELECTION IMD1014_2 >>> INTERVIEW TIMING - NUMBER OF DAYS BETWEEN INTERVIEW AND SECOND ROUND OF ELECTION IMD1015 >>> STUDY CONTEXT IMD1016_1 >>> MODE OF INTERVIEW - STUDY FIRST IMD1016_2 >>> MODE OF INTERVIEW - STUDY SECOND IMD1016_3 >>> MODE OF INTERVIEW - STUDY THIRD ))) CSES IMD VARIABLES: DEMOGRAPHIC DATA IMD2001_1 >>> AGE OF RESPONDENT (IN YEARS) IMD2001_2 >>> AGE OF RESPONDENT (IN CATEGORIES) IMD2002 >>> GENDER IMD2003 >>> EDUCATION IMD2004 >>> MARITAL STATUS IMD2005 >>> RELIGIOUS DENOMINATION IMD2006 >>> HOUSEHOLD INCOME IMD2007 >>> RURAL OR URBAN RESIDENCE ))) CSES IMD VARIABLES: MICRO-LEVEL (SURVEY) DATA IMD3001 >>> TURNOUT - MAIN ELECTION IMD3001_PR_1 >>> TURNOUT - CURRENT PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION - ROUND 1 IMD3001_PR_2 >>> TURNOUT - CURRENT PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION - ROUND 2 IMD3001_LH >>> TURNOUT - CURRENT LOWER HOUSE ELECTION IMD3001_UH >>> TURNOUT - CURRENT UPPER HOUSE ELECTION IMD3002_PR_1 >>> CURRENT PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION: VOTE CHOICE - ROUND 1 IMD3002_PR_2 >>> CURRENT PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION: VOTE CHOICE - ROUND 2 IMD3002_LH_PL >>> CURRENT LOWER HOUSE ELECTION: VOTE CHOICE - PARTY LIST IMD3002_LH_DC >>> CURRENT LOWER HOUSE ELECTION: VOTE CHOICE - DISTRICT CANDIDATE IMD3002_UH_PL >>> CURRENT UPPER HOUSE ELECTION: VOTE CHOICE - PARTY LIST IMD3002_UH_DC_1 >>> CURRENT UPPER HOUSE ELECTION: VOTE CHOICE - DISTRICT CANDIDATE 1 IMD3002_UH_DC_2 >>> CURRENT UPPER HOUSE ELECTION: VOTE CHOICE - DISTRICT CANDIDATE 2 IMD3002_UH_DC_3 >>> CURRENT UPPER HOUSE ELECTION: VOTE CHOICE - DISTRICT CANDIDATE 3 IMD3002_UH_DC_4 >>> CURRENT UPPER HOUSE ELECTION: VOTE CHOICE - DISTRICT CANDIDATE 4 IMD3002_OUTGOV >>> CURRENT MAIN ELECTION: VOTE CHOICE - OUTGOING GOVERNMENT (INCUMBENT) IMD3003_PR_1 >>> TURNOUT - PREVIOUS PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION - ROUND 1 IMD3003_PR_2 >>> TURNOUT - PREVIOUS PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION - ROUND 2 IMD3003_LH >>> TURNOUT - PREVIOUS LOWER HOUSE ELECTION IMD3003_UH >>> TURNOUT - PREVIOUS UPPER HOUSE ELECTION IMD3004_PR_1 >>> PREVIOUS PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION: VOTE CHOICE - ROUND 1 IMD3004_PR_2 >>> PREVIOUS PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION: VOTE CHOICE - ROUND 2 IMD3004_LH_PL >>> PREVIOUS LOWER HOUSE ELECTION: VOTE CHOICE - PARTY LIST IMD3004_LH_DC >>> PREVIOUS LOWER HOUSE ELECTION: VOTE CHOICE - DISTRICT CANDIDATE IMD3004_UH_PL >>> PREVIOUS UPPER HOUSE ELECTION: VOTE CHOICE - PARTY LIST IMD3004_UH_DC_1 >>> PREVIOUS UPPER HOUSE ELECTION: VOTE CHOICE - DISTRICT CANDIDATE 1 IMD3004_UH_DC_2 >>> PREVIOUS UPPER HOUSE ELECTION: VOTE CHOICE - DISTRICT CANDIDATE 2 IMD3004_UH_DC_3 >>> PREVIOUS UPPER HOUSE ELECTION: VOTE CHOICE - DISTRICT CANDIDATE 3 IMD3005_1 >>> PARTY IDENTIFICATION: ARE YOU CLOSE TO ANY POLITICAL PARTY IMD3005_2 >>> PARTY IDENTIFICATION: DO YOU FEEL CLOSER TO ONE PARTY IMD3005_3 >>> PARTY IDENTIFICATION: WHO IMD3005_4 >>> PARTY IDENTIFICATION: HOW CLOSE IMD3006 >>> LEFT-RIGHT - SELF IMD3007_A >>> LEFT-RIGHT - PARTY A IMD3007_B >>> LEFT-RIGHT - PARTY B IMD3007_C >>> LEFT-RIGHT - PARTY C IMD3007_D >>> LEFT-RIGHT - PARTY D IMD3007_E >>> LEFT-RIGHT - PARTY E IMD3007_F >>> LEFT-RIGHT - PARTY F IMD3007_G >>> LEFT-RIGHT - PARTY G (OPTIONAL) IMD3007_H >>> LEFT-RIGHT - PARTY H (OPTIONAL) IMD3007_I >>> LEFT-RIGHT - PARTY I (OPTIONAL) IMD3008_A >>> LIKE-DISLIKE - PARTY A IMD3008_B >>> LIKE-DISLIKE - PARTY B IMD3008_C >>> LIKE-DISLIKE - PARTY C IMD3008_D >>> LIKE-DISLIKE - PARTY D IMD3008_E >>> LIKE-DISLIKE - PARTY E IMD3008_F >>> LIKE-DISLIKE - PARTY F IMD3008_G >>> LIKE-DISLIKE - PARTY G (OPTIONAL) IMD3008_H >>> LIKE-DISLIKE - PARTY H (OPTIONAL) IMD3008_I >>> LIKE-DISLIKE - PARTY I (OPTIONAL) IMD3009_A >>> LIKE-DISLIKE - LEADER A IMD3009_B >>> LIKE-DISLIKE - LEADER B IMD3009_C >>> LIKE-DISLIKE - LEADER C IMD3009_D >>> LIKE-DISLIKE - LEADER D IMD3009_E >>> LIKE-DISLIKE - LEADER E IMD3009_F >>> LIKE-DISLIKE - LEADER F IMD3009_G >>> LIKE-DISLIKE - LEADER G (OPTIONAL) IMD3009_H >>> LIKE-DISLIKE - LEADER H (OPTIONAL) IMD3009_I >>> LIKE-DISLIKE - LEADER I (OPTIONAL) IMD3010 >>> SATISFACTION WITH DEMOCRACY IMD3011 >>> EFFICACY: WHO IS IN POWER CAN MAKE A DIFFERENCE IMD3012 >>> EFFICACY: WHO PEOPLE VOTE FOR MAKES A DIFFERENCE IMD3013_1 >>> STATE OF ECONOMY (OVER PAST 12 MONTHS) IMD3013_2 >>> STATE OF ECONOMY - BETTER IMD3013_3 >>> STATE OF ECONOMY - WORSE IMD3014 >>> GOVERNMENT PERFORMANCE: GENERAL IMD3015_1 >>> DICHOTOMIZED POLITICAL INFORMATION ITEM - 1ST IMD3015_2 >>> DICHOTOMIZED POLITICAL INFORMATION ITEM - 2ND IMD3015_3 >>> DICHOTOMIZED POLITICAL INFORMATION ITEM - 3RD IMD3015_4 >>> DICHOTOMIZED POLITICAL INFORMATION ITEM - 4TH IMD3015_A >>> POLITICAL KNOWLEDGE SCALE - CSES MODULE 1 (0-3 SCALE) IMD3015_B >>> POLITICAL KNOWLEDGE SCALE - CSES MODULE 2 (0-3 SCALE) IMD3015_C >>> POLITICAL KNOWLEDGE SCALE - CSES MODULE 3 (0-3 SCALE) IMD3015_D >>> POLITICAL KNOWLEDGE SCALE - CSES MODULE 4 (0-4 SCALE) ))) CSES IMD VARIABLES: MACRO-LEVEL DATA IMD5000_A >>> PARTY A IDENTIFIER - NUMERICAL IMD5000_B >>> PARTY B IDENTIFIER - NUMERICAL IMD5000_C >>> PARTY C IDENTIFIER - NUMERICAL IMD5000_D >>> PARTY D IDENTIFIER - NUMERICAL IMD5000_E >>> PARTY E IDENTIFIER - NUMERICAL IMD5000_F >>> PARTY F IDENTIFIER - NUMERICAL IMD5000_G >>> PARTY G IDENTIFIER - NUMERICAL IMD5000_H >>> PARTY H IDENTIFIER - NUMERICAL IMD5000_I >>> PARTY I IDENTIFIER - NUMERICAL IMD5001_A >>> PERCENT VOTE - LOWER HOUSE - PARTY A IMD5001_B >>> PERCENT VOTE - LOWER HOUSE - PARTY B IMD5001_C >>> PERCENT VOTE - LOWER HOUSE - PARTY C IMD5001_D >>> PERCENT VOTE - LOWER HOUSE - PARTY D IMD5001_E >>> PERCENT VOTE - LOWER HOUSE - PARTY E IMD5001_F >>> PERCENT VOTE - LOWER HOUSE - PARTY F IMD5001_G >>> PERCENT VOTE - LOWER HOUSE - PARTY G IMD5001_H >>> PERCENT VOTE - LOWER HOUSE - PARTY H IMD5001_I >>> PERCENT VOTE - LOWER HOUSE - PARTY I IMD5002_A >>> PERCENT SEATS - LOWER HOUSE - PARTY A IMD5002_B >>> PERCENT SEATS - LOWER HOUSE - PARTY B IMD5002_C >>> PERCENT SEATS - LOWER HOUSE - PARTY C IMD5002_D >>> PERCENT SEATS - LOWER HOUSE - PARTY D IMD5002_E >>> PERCENT SEATS - LOWER HOUSE - PARTY E IMD5002_F >>> PERCENT SEATS - LOWER HOUSE - PARTY F IMD5002_G >>> PERCENT SEATS - LOWER HOUSE - PARTY G IMD5002_H >>> PERCENT SEATS - LOWER HOUSE - PARTY H IMD5002_I >>> PERCENT SEATS - LOWER HOUSE - PARTY I IMD5003_A >>> PERCENT VOTE - UPPER HOUSE - PARTY A IMD5003_B >>> PERCENT VOTE - UPPER HOUSE - PARTY B IMD5003_C >>> PERCENT VOTE - UPPER HOUSE - PARTY C IMD5003_D >>> PERCENT VOTE - UPPER HOUSE - PARTY D IMD5003_E >>> PERCENT VOTE - UPPER HOUSE - PARTY E IMD5003_F >>> PERCENT VOTE - UPPER HOUSE - PARTY F IMD5003_G >>> PERCENT VOTE - UPPER HOUSE - PARTY G IMD5003_H >>> PERCENT VOTE - UPPER HOUSE - PARTY H IMD5003_I >>> PERCENT VOTE - UPPER HOUSE - PARTY I IMD5004_A >>> PERCENT SEATS - UPPER HOUSE - PARTY A IMD5004_B >>> PERCENT SEATS - UPPER HOUSE - PARTY B IMD5004_C >>> PERCENT SEATS - UPPER HOUSE - PARTY C IMD5004_D >>> PERCENT SEATS - UPPER HOUSE - PARTY D IMD5004_E >>> PERCENT SEATS - UPPER HOUSE - PARTY E IMD5004_F >>> PERCENT SEATS - UPPER HOUSE - PARTY F IMD5004_G >>> PERCENT SEATS - UPPER HOUSE - PARTY G IMD5004_H >>> PERCENT SEATS - UPPER HOUSE - PARTY H IMD5004_I >>> PERCENT SEATS - UPPER HOUSE - PARTY I IMD5005_A >>> PERCENT VOTE - PRESIDENT - PARTY A IMD5005_B >>> PERCENT VOTE - PRESIDENT - PARTY B IMD5005_C >>> PERCENT VOTE - PRESIDENT - PARTY C IMD5005_D >>> PERCENT VOTE - PRESIDENT - PARTY D IMD5005_E >>> PERCENT VOTE - PRESIDENT - PARTY E IMD5005_F >>> PERCENT VOTE - PRESIDENT - PARTY F IMD5005_G >>> PERCENT VOTE - PRESIDENT - PARTY G IMD5005_H >>> PERCENT VOTE - PRESIDENT - PARTY H IMD5005_I >>> PERCENT VOTE - PRESIDENT - PARTY I IMD5006_1 >>> ELECTORAL TURNOUT - TURNOUT AS A PERCENTAGE OF REGISTERED VOTERS (ER) IMD5006_2 >>> ELECTORAL TURNOUT - TURNOUT AS A PERCENTAGE OF THE VOTING AGE POPULATION (VAP) IMD5007 >>> COMPULSORY VOTING IMD5008_1 >>> PARTY OF THE PRIME MINISTER BEFORE IMD5008_2 >>> PARTY OF THE PRIME MINISTER AFTER IMD5009_1 >>> PARTY OF THE PRESIDENT BEFORE IMD5009_2 >>> PARTY OF THE PRESIDENT AFTER IMD5011_A >>> IDEOLOGICAL FAMILY - PARTY A IMD5011_B >>> IDEOLOGICAL FAMILY - PARTY B IMD5011_C >>> IDEOLOGICAL FAMILY - PARTY C IMD5011_D >>> IDEOLOGICAL FAMILY - PARTY D IMD5011_E >>> IDEOLOGICAL FAMILY - PARTY E IMD5011_F >>> IDEOLOGICAL FAMILY - PARTY F IMD5011_G >>> IDEOLOGICAL FAMILY - PARTY G IMD5011_H >>> IDEOLOGICAL FAMILY - PARTY H IMD5011_I >>> IDEOLOGICAL FAMILY - PARTY I IMD5012_A >>> LEFT-RIGHT - PARTY A IMD5012_B >>> LEFT-RIGHT - PARTY B IMD5012_C >>> LEFT-RIGHT - PARTY C IMD5012_D >>> LEFT-RIGHT - PARTY D IMD5012_E >>> LEFT-RIGHT - PARTY E IMD5012_F >>> LEFT-RIGHT - PARTY F IMD5012_G >>> LEFT-RIGHT - PARTY G IMD5012_H >>> LEFT-RIGHT - PARTY H IMD5012_I >>> LEFT-RIGHT - PARTY I IMD5013 >>> ELECTORAL FORMULA IN ALL SEGMENTS: LOWER HOUSE IMD5014 >>> ELECTORAL FORMULA: PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION IMD5016_1 >>> VOTES CAST - LOWER 1ST SEGMENT (TIER) IMD5016_2 >>> VOTES CAST - LOWER 2ND SEGMENT (TIER) IMD5016_3 >>> VOTES CAST - UPPER 1ST SEGMENT (TIER) IMD5016_4 >>> VOTES CAST - UPPER 2ND SEGMENT (TIER) IMD5017_1 >>> VOTING PROCEDURE - LOWER - 1ST SEGMENT (TIER) IMD5017_2 >>> VOTING PROCEDURE - LOWER - 2ND SEGMENT (TIER) IMD5017_3 >>> VOTING PROCEDURE - UPPER - 1ST SEGMENT (TIER) IMD5017_4 >>> VOTING PROCEDURE - UPPER - 2ND SEGMENT (TIER) IMD5018_1 >>> VOTING ROUNDS - LOWER - 1ST SEGMENT (TIER) IMD5018_2 >>> VOTING ROUNDS - LOWER - 2ND SEGMENT (TIER) IMD5018_3 >>> VOTING ROUNDS - UPPER - 1ST SEGMENT (TIER) IMD5018_4 >>> VOTING ROUNDS - UPPER - 2ND SEGMENT (TIER) IMD5021_1 >>> IS THERE PARTY THRESHOLD - LOWER - 1ST SEGMENT (TIER) IMD5021_2 >>> IS THERE PARTY THRESHOLD - LOWER - 2ND SEGMENT (TIER) IMD5021_3 >>> IS THERE PARTY THRESHOLD - UPPER - 1ST SEGMENT (TIER) IMD5021_4 >>> IS THERE PARTY THRESHOLD - UPPER - 2ND SEGMENT (TIER) IMD5022_1 >>> PARTY THRESHOLD - LOWER - 1ST SEGMENT (TIER) IMD5022_2 >>> PARTY THRESHOLD - LOWER - 2ND SEGMENT (TIER) IMD5022_3 >>> PARTY THRESHOLD - UPPER - 1ST SEGMENT (TIER) IMD5022_4 >>> PARTY THRESHOLD - UPPER - 2ND SEGMENT (TIER) IMD5024_1 >>> DATE ELECTION SCHEDULED - MONTH IMD5024_2 >>> DATE ELECTION SCHEDULED - DAY IMD5024_3 >>> DATE ELECTION SCHEDULED - YEAR IMD5025_1 >>> DATE ELECTION HELD - MONTH IMD5025_2 >>> DATE ELECTION HELD - DAY IMD5025_3 >>> DATE ELECTION HELD - YEAR IMD5026_1 >>> NUMBER OF LEGISLATIVE CHAMBERS IMD5026_2 >>> NUMBER OF ELECTED LEGISLATIVE CHAMBERS IMD5027 >>> SIZE OF THE LOWER HOUSE IMD5028 >>> SIZE OF CABINET BEFORE IMD5029_A >>> NUMBER OF PORFOLIOS BEFORE - PARTY A IMD5029_B >>> NUMBER OF PORFOLIOS BEFORE - PARTY B IMD5029_C >>> NUMBER OF PORFOLIOS BEFORE - PARTY C IMD5029_D >>> NUMBER OF PORFOLIOS BEFORE - PARTY D IMD5029_E >>> NUMBER OF PORFOLIOS BEFORE - PARTY E IMD5029_F >>> NUMBER OF PORFOLIOS BEFORE - PARTY F IMD5029_G >>> NUMBER OF PORFOLIOS BEFORE - PARTY G IMD5029_H >>> NUMBER OF PORFOLIOS BEFORE - PARTY H IMD5029_I >>> NUMBER OF PORFOLIOS BEFORE - PARTY I IMD5030 >>> SIZE OF CABINET AFTER IMD5031_A >>> NUMBER OF PORFOLIOS AFTER - PARTY A IMD5031_B >>> NUMBER OF PORFOLIOS AFTER - PARTY B IMD5031_C >>> NUMBER OF PORFOLIOS AFTER - PARTY C IMD5031_D >>> NUMBER OF PORFOLIOS AFTER - PARTY D IMD5031_E >>> NUMBER OF PORFOLIOS AFTER - PARTY E IMD5031_F >>> NUMBER OF PORFOLIOS AFTER - PARTY F IMD5031_G >>> NUMBER OF PORFOLIOS AFTER - PARTY G IMD5031_H >>> NUMBER OF PORFOLIOS AFTER - PARTY H IMD5031_I >>> NUMBER OF PORFOLIOS AFTER - PARTY I IMD5049 >>> AGE OF CURRENT REGIME IMD5050_1 >>> FREEDOM HOUSE RATING - TIME T IMD5050_2 >>> FREEDOM HOUSE RATING - TIME T-1 YEAR IMD5050_3 >>> FREEDOM HOUSE RATING - TIME T-2 YEARS IMD5051_1 >>> DEMOCRACY-AUTOCRACY - POLITY IV RATING - TIME T IMD5051_2 >>> DEMOCRACY-AUTOCRACY - POLITY IV RATING - TIME T-1 YEAR IMD5051_3 >>> DEMOCRACY-AUTOCRACY - POLITY IV RATING - TIME T-2 YEARS IMD5052_1 >>> GDP GROWTH ANNUAL % (WORLD BANK) - TIME T IMD5052_2 >>> GDP GROWTH ANNUAL % (WORLD BANK) - TIME T-1 IMD5052_3 >>> GDP GROWTH ANNUAL % (WORLD BANK) - TIME T-2 IMD5053_1 >>> GDP PER CAPITA, PPP (WORLD BANK) - TIME T IMD5053_2 >>> GDP PER CAPITA, PPP (WORLD BANK) - TIME T-1 IMD5053_3 >>> GDP PER CAPITA, PPP (WORLD BANK) - TIME T-2 IMD5054_1 >>> UNEMPLOYMENT, TOTAL (WORLD BANK) - TIME T IMD5054_2 >>> UNEMPLOYMENT, TOTAL (WORLD BANK) - TIME T-1 IMD5054_3 >>> UNEMPLOYMENT, TOTAL (WORLD BANK) - TIME T-2 IMD5055_1 >>> HUMAN DEVELOPMENT INDEX (UNPD) - TIME T IMD5055_2 >>> HUMAN DEVELOPMENT INDEX (UNPD) - TIME T-1 IMD5055_3 >>> HUMAN DEVELOPMENT INDEX (UNPD) - TIME T-2 IMD5056_1 >>> INFLATION, GDP DEFLATOR (ANNUAL %) (WORLD BANK) - TIME T IMD5056_2 >>> INFLATION, GDP DEFLATOR (ANNUAL %) (WORLD BANK) - TIME T-1 IMD5056_3 >>> INFLATION, GDP DEFLATOR (ANNUAL %) (WORLD BANK) - TIME T-2 IMD5057_1 >>> POPULATION, TOTAL (WORLD BANK) - TIME T IMD5057_2 >>> POPULATION, TOTAL (WORLD BANK) - TIME T-1 IMD5057_3 >>> POPULATION, TOTAL (WORLD BANK) - TIME T-2 IMD5058_1 >>> EFFECTIVE NUMBER OF ELECTORAL PARTIES IMD5058_2 >>> CORRECTED EFFECTIVE NUMBER OF ELECTORAL PARTIES IMD5059_1 >>> EFFECTIVE NUMBER OF PARLIAMENTARY PARTIES IMD5059_2 >>> CORRECTED EFFECTIVE NUMBER OF PARLIAMENTARY PARTIES =========================================================================== ))) CSES IMD VARIABLES: IDENTIFICATION, WEIGHT, AND STUDY ADMINISTRATION DATA =========================================================================== --------------------------------------------------------------------------- IMD1001 >>> DATASET --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Dataset. .................................................................. CSES-IMD. CSES INTEGRATED MODULE DATASET | VARIABLE NOTES: IMD1001 | | This variable reports the name of the dataset. | This dataset is the first version of the CSES INTEGRATED MODULE | DATA SET (CSES IMD), integrating data from CSES MODULE 1 to | CSES MODULE 4. | | The Standalone CSES Modules were administered during the | following years (inclusive): | | CSES MODULE 1: 1996 - 2001 | CSES MODULE 2: 2001 - 2006 | CSES MODULE 3: 2006 - 2011 | CSES MODULE 4: 2011 - 2016 --------------------------------------------------------------------------- IMD1002_VER >>> DATASET VERSION --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Dataset version. .................................................................. VER2019-OCT-17. Version of dataset, released on October 17, 2019. | VARIABLE NOTES: IMD1002_VER | | The version number corresponds to the date of the datasets | release. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- IMD1002_DOI >>> DIGITAL OBJECT IDENTIFIER --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Digital Object Identifier. .................................................................. doi: 10.7804/cses.imd.2019-10-17. | VARIABLE NOTES: IMD1002_DOI | | This variable indicates the Digital Object Identifier (DOI) | which is registered for the dataset. CSES DOI registration is | conducted by the DA|RA registration agency for economic and | social science data. Each CSES dataset version | (see variable IMD1002_VER) has a unique and persistent DOI. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- IMD1003 >>> ID VARIABLE - ELECTION STUDY (NUMERIC POLITY) --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Election Study Identifier: Numeric Polity Code and Election Year. .................................................................. 00802005. ALBANIA (2005) 03202015. ARGENTINA (2015) 03601996. AUSTRALIA (1996) 03602004. AUSTRALIA (2004) 03602007. AUSTRALIA (2007) 03602013. AUSTRALIA (2013) 04002008. AUSTRIA (2008) 04002013. AUSTRIA (2013) 11202001. BELARUS (2001) 11202008. BELARUS (2008) 05611999. BELGIUM-FLANDERS (1999) 05621999. BELGIUM-WALLOONS (1999) 05602003. BELGIUM (2003) 07602002. BRAZIL (2002) 07602006. BRAZIL (2006) 07602010. BRAZIL (2010) 07602014. BRAZIL (2014) 10002001. BULGARIA (2001) 10002014. BULGARIA (2014) 12401997. CANADA (1997) 12402004. CANADA (2004) 12402008. CANADA (2008) 12402011. CANADA (2011) 12402015. CANADA (2015) 15201999. CHILE (1999) 15202005. CHILE (2005) 15202009. CHILE (2009) 19102007. CROATIA (2007) 20301996. CZECH REPUBLIC (1996) 20302002. CZECH REPUBLIC (2002) 20302006. CZECH REPUBLIC (2006) 20302010. CZECH REPUBLIC (2010) 20302013. CZECH REPUBLIC (2013) 20801998. DENMARK (1998) 20802001. DENMARK (2001) 20802007. DENMARK (2007) 23302011. ESTONIA (2011) 24602003. FINLAND (2003) 24602007. FINLAND (2007) 24602011. FINLAND (2011) 24602015. FINLAND (2015) 25002002. FRANCE (2002) 25002007. FRANCE (2007) 25002012. FRANCE (2012) 27601998. GERMANY (1998) 27612002. GERMANY (2002 Telephone) 27622002. GERMANY (2002 Mail-Back) 27602005. GERMANY (2005) 27602009. GERMANY (2009) 27602013. GERMANY (2013) 30002009. GREECE (2009) 30002012. GREECE (2012) 30002015. GREECE (2015) 34401998. HONG KONG (1998) 34402000. HONG KONG (2000) 34402004. HONG KONG (2004) 34402008. HONG KONG (2008) 34402012. HONG KONG (2012) 34801998. HUNGARY (1998) 34802002. HUNGARY (2002) 35201999. ICELAND (1999) 35202003. ICELAND (2003) 35202007. ICELAND (2007) 35202009. ICELAND (2009) 35202013. ICELAND (2013) 37202002. IRELAND (2002) 37202007. IRELAND (2007) 37202011. IRELAND (2011) 37601996. ISRAEL (1996) 37602003. ISRAEL (2003) 37602006. ISRAEL (2006) 37602013. ISRAEL (2013) 38002006. ITALY (2006) 39201996. JAPAN (1996) 39202004. JAPAN (2004) 39202007. JAPAN (2007) 39202013. JAPAN (2013) 40402013. KENYA (2013) 41702005. KYRGYZSTAN (2005) 42802010. LATVIA (2010) 42802011. LATVIA (2011) 42802014. LATVIA (2014) 44001997. LITHUANIA (1997) 48401997. MEXICO (1997) 48402000. MEXICO (2000) 48402003. MEXICO (2003) 48402006. MEXICO (2006) 48402009. MEXICO (2009) 48402012. MEXICO (2012) 48402015. MEXICO (2015) 49902012. MONTENEGRO (2012) 52801998. NETHERLANDS (1998) 52802002. NETHERLANDS (2002) 52802006. NETHERLANDS (2006) 52802010. NETHERLANDS (2010) 55401996. NEW ZEALAND (1996) 55402002. NEW ZEALAND (2002) 55402008. NEW ZEALAND (2008) 55402011. NEW ZEALAND (2011) 55402014. NEW ZEALAND (2014) 57801997. NORWAY (1997) 57802001. NORWAY (2001) 57802005. NORWAY (2005) 57802009. NORWAY (2009) 57802013. NORWAY (2013) 60402000. PERU (2000) 60402001. PERU (2001) 60402006. PERU (2006) 60402011. PERU (2011) 60402016. PERU (2016) 60802004. PHILIPPINES (2004) 60802010. PHILIPPINES (2010) 60802016. PHILIPPINES (2016) 61601997. POLAND (1997) 61602001. POLAND (2001) 61602005. POLAND (2005) 61602007. POLAND (2007) 61602011. POLAND (2011) 62002002. PORTUGAL (2002) 62002005. PORTUGAL (2005) 62002009. PORTUGAL (2009) 62002015. PORTUGAL (2015) 64201996. ROMANIA (1996) 64202004. ROMANIA (2004) 64202009. ROMANIA (2009) 64202012. ROMANIA (2012) 64202014. ROMANIA (2014) 64301999. RUSSIAN FEDERATION (1999) 64302000. RUSSIAN FEDERATION (2000) 64302004. RUSSIAN FEDERATION (2004) 68802012. SERBIA (2012) 70302010. SLOVAKIA (2010) 70302016. SLOVAKIA (2016) 70501996. SLOVENIA (1996) 70502004. SLOVENIA (2004) 70502008. SLOVENIA (2008) 70502011. SLOVENIA (2011) 71002009. SOUTH AFRICA (2009) 71002014. SOUTH AFRICA (2014) 41002000. SOUTH KOREA (2000) 41002004. SOUTH KOREA (2004) 41002008. SOUTH KOREA (2008) 41002012. SOUTH KOREA (2012) 72401996. SPAIN (1996) 72402000. SPAIN (2000) 72402004. SPAIN (2004) 72402008. SPAIN (2008) 75201998. SWEDEN (1998) 75202002. SWEDEN (2002) 75202006. SWEDEN (2006) 75202014. SWEDEN (2014) 75601999. SWITZERLAND (1999) 75602003. SWITZERLAND (2003) 75602007. SWITZERLAND (2007) 75602011. SWITZERLAND (2011) 15801996. TAIWAN (1996) 15802001. TAIWAN (2001) 15802004. TAIWAN (2004) 15802008. TAIWAN (2008) 15802012. TAIWAN (2012) 76402001. THAILAND (2001) 76402007. THAILAND (2007) 76402011. THAILAND (2011) 79202011. TURKEY (2011) 79202015. TURKEY (2015) 80401998. UKRAINE (1998) 82601997. GREAT BRITAIN (1997) 82602005. GREAT BRITAIN (2005) 82602015. GREAT BRITAIN (2015) 84001996. UNITED STATES (1996) 84002004. UNITED STATES (2004) 84002008. UNITED STATES (2008) 84022012. UNITED STATES (2012) 85802009. URUGUAY (2009) | VARIABLE NOTES: IMD1003 | | This eight-digit variable uniquely identifies an election study | within CSES IMD. | | The variable is constructed from two components, variable IMD1006 | (CSES polity code) and IMD1008_YEAR (election year). | | The first three digits are the numerical version of the polity | codes created by the United Nations Statistics Division | ("countries or areas, codes and abbreviations", revised February | 13, 2002), except for Taiwan (see Election Study Note). | | The fourth digit distinguishes between multiple studies | conducted within a single polity, for the same election. | | The fifth through eighth digits correspond to the election year | as specified in variable IMD1008_YEAR. | | The corresponding variables in the Standalone CSES Modules are: | MODULE 1: A1003 | MODULE 2: B1003 | MODULE 3: C1003 | MODULE 4: D1003 | POLITY NOTES - TAIWAN: IMD1003 | | The polity code for Taiwan is from ISO 3166-1. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- IMD1004 >>> ID VARIABLE - ELECTION STUDY (ALPHABETIC POLITY) --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Election Study Identifier: Alphabetic Polity Code and Election Year. .................................................................. ALB_2005. ALBANIA (2005) ARG_2015. ARGENTINA (2015) AUS_1996. AUSTRALIA (1996) AUS_2004. AUSTRALIA (2004) AUS_2007. AUSTRALIA (2007) AUS_2013. AUSTRALIA (2013) AUT_2008. AUSTRIA (2008) AUT_2013. AUSTRIA (2013) BLR_2001. BELARUS (2001) BLR_2008. BELARUS (2008) BELF1999. BELGIUM-FLANDERS (1999) BELW1999. BELGIUM-WALLOON (1999) BEL_2003. BELGIUM (2003) BRA_2002. BRAZIL (2002) BRA_2006. BRAZIL (2006) BRA_2010. BRAZIL (2010) BRA_2014. BRAZIL (2014) BGR_2001. BULGARIA (2001) BGR_2014. BULGARIA (2014) CAN_1997. CANADA (1997) CAN_2004. CANADA (2004) CAN_2008. CANADA (2008) CAN_2011. CANADA (2011) CAN_2015. CANADA (2015) CHL_1999. CHILE (1999) CHL_2005. CHILE (2005) CHL_2009. CHILE (2009) HRV_2007. CROATIA (2007) CZE_1996. CZECH REPUBLIC (1996) CZE_2002. CZECH REPUBLIC (2002) CZE_2006. CZECH REPUBLIC (2006) CZE_2010. CZECH REPUBLIC (2010) CZE_2013. CZECH REPUBLIC (2013) DNK_1998. DENMARK (1998) DNK_2001. DENMARK (2001) DNK_2007. DENMARK (2007) EST_2011. ESTONIA (2011) FIN_2003. FINLAND (2003) FIN_2007. FINLAND (2007) FIN_2011. FINLAND (2011) FIN_2015. FINLAND (2015) FRA_2002. FRANCE (2002) FRA_2007. FRANCE (2007) FRA_2012. FRANCE (2012) DEU_1998. GERMANY (1998) DEU12002. GERMANY (2002 Telephone) DEU22002. GERMANY (2002 Mail-Back) DEU_2005. GERMANY (2005) DEU_2009. GERMANY (2009) DEU_2013. GERMANY (2013) GRC_2009. GREECE (2009) GRC_2012. GREECE (2012) GRC_2015. GREECE (2015) HKG_1998. HONG KONG (1998) HKG_2000. HONG KONG (2000) HKG_2004. HONG KONG (2004) HKG_2008. HONG KONG (2008) HKG_2012. HONG KONG (2012) HUN_1998. HUNGARY (1998) HUN_2002. HUNGARY (2002) ISL_1999. ICELAND (1999) ISL_2003. ICELAND (2003) ISL_2007. ICELAND (2007) ISL_2009. ICELAND (2009) ISL_2013. ICELAND (2013) IRL_2002. IRELAND (2002) IRL_2007. IRELAND (2007) IRL_2011. IRELAND (2011) ISR_1996. ISRAEL (1996) ISR_2003. ISRAEL (2003) ISR_2006. ISRAEL (2006) ISR_2013. ISRAEL (2013) ITA_2006. ITALY (2006) JPN_1996. JAPAN (1996) JPN_2004. JAPAN (2004) JPN_2007. JAPAN (2007) JPN_2013. JAPAN (2013) KEN_2013. KENYA (2013) KGZ_2005. KYRGYZSTAN (2005) LVA_2010. LATVIA (2010) LVA_2011. LATVIA (2011) LVA_2014. LATVIA (2014) LTU_1997. LITHUANIA (1997) MEX_1997. MEXICO (1997) MEX_2000. MEXICO (2000) MEX_2003. MEXICO (2003) MEX_2006. MEXICO (2006) MEX_2009. MEXICO (2009) MEX_2012. MEXICO (2012) MEX_2015. MEXICO (2015) MNE_2012. MONTENEGRO (2012) NLD_1998. NETHERLANDS (1998) NLD_2002. NETHERLANDS (2002) NLD_2006. NETHERLANDS (2006) NLD_2010. NETHERLANDS (2010) NZL_1996. NEW ZEALAND (1996) NZL_2002. NEW ZEALAND (2002) NZL_2008. NEW ZEALAND (2008) NZL_2011. NEW ZEALAND (2011) NZL_2014. NEW ZEALAND (2014) NOR_1997. NORWAY (1997) NOR_2001. NORWAY (2001) NOR_2005. NORWAY (2005) NOR_2009. NORWAY (2009) NOR_2013. NORWAY (2013) PER_2000. PERU (2000) PER_2001. PERU (2001) PER_2006. PERU (2006) PER_2011. PERU (2011) PER_2016. PERU (2016) PHL_2004. PHILIPPINES (2004) PHL_2010. PHILIPPINES (2010) PHL_2016. PHILIPPINES (2016) POL_1997. POLAND (1997) POL_2001. POLAND (2001) POL_2005. POLAND (2005) POL_2007. POLAND (2007) POL_2011. POLAND (2011) PRT_2002. PORTUGAL (2002) PRT_2005. PORTUGAL (2005) PRT_2009. PORTUGAL (2009) PRT_2015. PORTUGAL (2015) ROU_1996. ROMANIA (1996) ROU_2004. ROMANIA (2004) ROU_2009. ROMANIA (2009) ROU_2012. ROMANIA (2012) ROU_2014. ROMANIA (2014) RUS_1999. RUSSIA (1999) RUS_2000. RUSSIA (2000) RUS_2004. RUSSIA (2004) SRB_2012. SERBIA (2012) SVK_2010. SLOVAKIA (2010) SVK_2016. SLOVAKIA (2016) SVN_1996. SLOVENIA (1996) SVN_2004. SLOVENIA (2004) SVN_2008. SLOVENIA (2008) SVN_2011. SLOVENIA (2011) ZAF_2009. SOUTH AFRICA (2009) ZAF_2014. SOUTH AFRICA (2014) KOR_2000. SOUTH KOREA (2000) KOR_2004. SOUTH KOREA (2004) KOR_2008. SOUTH KOREA (2008) KOR_2012. SOUTH KOREA (2012) ESP_1996. SPAIN (1996) ESP_2000. SPAIN (2000) ESP_2004. SPAIN (2004) ESP_2008. SPAIN (2008) SWE_1998. SWEDEN (1998) SWE_2002. SWEDEN (2002) SWE_2006. SWEDEN (2006) SWE_2014. SWEDEN (2014) CHE_1999. SWITZERLAND (1999) CHE_2003. SWITZERLAND (2003) CHE_2007. SWITZERLAND (2007) CHE_2011. SWITZERLAND (2011) TWN_1996. TAIWAN (1996) TWN_2001. TAIWAN (2001) TWN_2004. TAIWAN (2004) TWN_2008. TAIWAN (2008) TWN_2012. TAIWAN (2012) THA_2001. THAILAND (2001) THA_2007. THAILAND (2007) THA_2011. THAILAND (2011) TUR_2011. TURKEY (2011) TUR_2015. TURKEY (2015) UKR_1998. UKRAINE (1998) GBR_1997. GREAT BRITAIN (1997) GBR_2005. GREAT BRITAIN (2005) GBR_2015. GREAT BRITAIN (2015) USA_1996. UNITED STATES (1996) USA_2004. UNITED STATES (2004) USA_2008. UNITED STATES (2008) USA_2012. UNITED STATES (2012) URY_2009. URUGUAY (2009) | VARIABLE NOTES: IMD1004 | | This eight-character variable uniquely identifies an election | study within the CSES IMD. | | The variable is constructed from two components, alphabetic | country codes (ISO 3166, 'alpha-3') and IMD1008_YEAR | (election year). | | The first three characters are the alphabetic country codes | 'alpha-3' created by the International Organization for | Standardization in their ISO 3166 Standard and shared by the | United Nations Statistics Division ("Countries or areas, codes | and abbreviations", revised February 13, 2002). | | If appropriate, the fourth character distinguishes between | multiple studies conducted within a single country, for the same | election. If only one study is in place for the election, this | character appears as an underscore (_). | | The fifth through eighth characters correspond to the election | year as specified in variable IMD1008_YEAR. | | The corresponding variables in the Standalone CSES Modules are: | MODULE 1: A1004 | MODULE 2: B1004 | MODULE 3: C1004 | MODULE 4: D1004 --------------------------------------------------------------------------- IMD1005 >>> ID VARIABLE - RESPONDENT --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Respondent Identifier. .................................................................. | VARIABLE NOTES: IMD1005 | | This eighteen-character variable uniquely identifies a | respondent within the CSES IMD. | It equals the original respondent IDs from the Standalone CSES | Modules (A1005, B1005, C1005, D1005). Therefore, users who want | to merge additional CSES variables not covered by the present | data set may do so by using this variable as the basis for | merging. | | The variable is constructed from three components: variable | IMD1006 (CSES polity code), IMD1008_YEAR (election year), and | IMD1008_RES (respondent within election study). | | The first three characters are the numeric version of the | country codes created by the United Nations Statistics | Division ("countries or areas, codes and abbreviations", | revised February 13, 2002). | | If appropriate, the fourth character distinguishes between | multiple studies conducted within a single country, for the same | election. If only one study is in place for the election, this | character appears as a zero (0). | | The fifth through eighth characters correspond to the election | year as specified in variable IMD1008_YEAR. | | The last ten characters are the respondent identifier from | IMD1008_RES, which is unique within each election study. | | The corresponding variables in the Standalone CSES Modules are: | MODULE 1: A1005 | MODULE 2: B1005 | MODULE 3: C1005 | MODULE 4: D1005 --------------------------------------------------------------------------- IMD1006 >>> ID COMPONENT - POLITY CSES CODE --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Polity Identifier. .................................................................. 0080. ALBANIA 0320. ARGENTINA 0360. AUSTRALIA 0400. AUSTRIA 0560. BELGIUM 0561. BELGIUM-FLANDERS 0562. BELGIUM-WALLOON 0760. BRAZIL 1000. BULGARIA 1120. BELARUS 1240. CANADA 1520. CHILE 1580. TAIWAN 1910. CROATIA 2030. CZECH REPUBLIC 2080. DENMARK 2330. ESTONIA 2460. FINLAND 2500. FRANCE 2760. GERMANY 2761. GERMANY (2002 Mail-Back) 2762. GERMANY (2002 Telephone) 3000. GREECE 3440. HONG KONG 3480. HUNGARY 3520. ICELAND 3720. IRELAND 3760. ISRAEL 3800. ITALY 3920. JAPAN 4040. KENYA 4100. SOUTH KOREA 4170. KYRGYZSTAN 4280. LATVIA 4400. LITHUANIA 4840. MEXICO 4990. MONTENEGRO 5280. NETHERLANDS 5540. NEW ZEALAND 5780. NORWAY 6040. PERU 6080. PHILIPPINES 6160. POLAND 6200. PORTUGAL 6420. ROMANIA 6430. RUSSIA 6880. SERBIA 7030. SLOVAKIA 7050. SLOVENIA 7100. SOUTH AFRICA 7240. SPAIN 7520. SWEDEN 7560. SWITZERLAND 7640. THAILAND 7920. TURKEY 8040. UKRAINE 8260. GREAT BRITAIN 8400. UNITED STATES 8402. UNITED STATES (2012)* 8580. URUGUAY ------------------------------------------------------------- KEY: * = See Election Study Notes below | VARIABLE NOTES: IMD1006 | | This four-character variable uniquely identifies a polity | conducting an election study that is present in the CSES | IMD. | | The first three characters are the numerical version of | the polity codes created by the United Nations Statistics | Division ("countries or areas, codes and abbreviations", | revised February 13, 2002). | | The fourth character distinguishes between multiple studies | conducted within a single polity, for the same election. | | The corresponding variables in the Standalone CSES Modules are: | MODULE 1: A1006 | MODULE 2: B1006 | MODULE 3: C1006 | MODULE 4: D1006 | [ELECTION STUDY NOTES] - UNITED STATES (2012): IMD1006 | | The 2012 American Election Study consisted of two sample | components. The fourth digit in the Standalone CSES MODULE 4 | was used to indicate the 2 components. Hence, IMD1006 differs | from all other election studies for the United States which | are included in the CSES IMD. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- IMD1006_UN >>> ID COMPONENT - POLITY UN CODE --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Polity Identifier UN Country Code. .................................................................. 008. ALBANIA 032. ARGENTINA 036. AUSTRALIA 040. AUSTRIA 056. BELGIUM - SEE ELECTION STUDY NOTES 076. BRAZIL 100. BULGARIA 112. BELARUS 124. CANADA 152. CHILE 191. CROATIA 203. CZECH REPUBLIC 208. DENMARK 233. ESTONIA 246. FINLAND 250. FRANCE 276. GERMANY 300. GREECE 344. HONG KONG 348. HUNGARY 352. ICELAND 372. IRELAND 376. ISRAEL 380. ITALY 392. JAPAN 404. KENYA 417. KYRGYZSTAN 428. LATVIA 440. LITHUANIA 484. MEXICO 499. MONTENEGRO 528. NETHERLANDS 554. NEW ZEALAND 578. NORWAY 604. PERU 608. PHILIPPINES 616. POLAND 620. PORTUGAL 642. ROMANIA 643. RUSSIA 688. SERBIA 703. SLOVAKIA 705. SLOVENIA 710. SOUTH AFRICA 410. SOUTH KOREA 724. SPAIN 752. SWEDEN 756. SWITZERLAND 158. TAIWAN 764. THAILAND 792. TURKEY 804. UKRAINE 826. GREAT BRITAIN - SEE ELECTION STUDY NOTES 840. UNITED STATES 858. URUGUAY | VARIABLE NOTES: IMD1006_UN | | This three-character variable uniquely identifies a polity | conducting an election study that is present in the CSES | IMD. | | It consists of the numerical version of the country codes created | by the United Nations Statistics Division ("Countries or areas, | codes and abbreviations", revised February 13, 2002). | | The corresponding variables in the Standalone CSES Modules are: | MODULE 1: A1006_UN | MODULE 2: B1006_UN | MODULE 3: C1006_UN | MODULE 4: D1006_UN | POLITY NOTES - GREAT BRITAIN: IMD1006_UN | | Code 826 refers to the United Kingdom. However, British election | studies do not include respondents from Northern Ireland, instead | only including respondents from England, Scotland, and Wales. | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - BELGIUM-FLANDERS (1999): IMD1006_UN | | The Belgium-Flanders study is assigned code 056 referring to | Belgium. | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - BELGIUM-WALLONIA (1999): IMD1006_UN | | The Belgium-Wallonia study is assigned code 056 referring to | Belgium. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- IMD1006_NAM >>> ID COMPONENT - POLITY NAME --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Polity Identifier Country Name. .................................................................. Albania Argentina Australia Austria Belarus Belgium Brazil Bulgaria Canada Chile Croatia Czech Republic Denmark Estonia Finland France Germany Great Britain Greece Hong Kong Hungary Iceland Ireland Israel Italy Japan Kenya Kyrgyzstan Latvia Lithuania Mexico Montenegro Netherlands New Zealand Norway Peru Philippines Poland Portugal Republic of Korea Romania Russian Federation Serbia Slovakia Slovenia South Africa Spain Sweden Switzerland Taiwan Thailand Turkey Ukraine United States of America Uruguay | VARIABLE NOTES: IMD1006_NAM | | This variable uniquely identifies a polity conducting an | election study that is present in the CSES IMD. | | It consists of polity names based on those used by the United | Nations Statistics Division ("Countries or areas, codes and | abbreviations", revised February 13, 2002). However, in some | instances, polity names deviate from those used by the United | Nations. | | The corresponding variables in the Standalone CSES Modules are: | MODULE 1: A1006_NAM | MODULE 2: B1006_NAM | MODULE 3: C1006_NAM | MODULE 4: D1006_NAM --------------------------------------------------------------------------- IMD1007 >>> ID COMPONENT - SAMPLE COMPONENT --------------------------------------------------------------------------- In some cases, analysts may wish to consider regions of countries or other sample components units of analysis, rather than the countries themselves. We use this variable to capture information about subsets of respondents that are meaningful but that are not captured by other variables. This may, for instance, refer to different sample components or respondents from different panel components. For all other cases, this variable is coded 001. .................................................................. 001. [SEE ELECTION STUDY NOTES] 002. [SEE ELECTION STUDY NOTES] 003. [SEE ELECTION STUDY NOTES] 004. [SEE ELECTION STUDY NOTES] 005. [SEE ELECTION STUDY NOTES] 006. [SEE ELECTION STUDY NOTES] 999. MISSING | VARIABLE NOTES: IMD1007 | | The corresponding variables in the Standalone CSES Modules are: | MODULE 1: A1007 | MODULE 2: B1007 | MODULE 3: C1007 | MODULE 4: D1007 | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - ARGENTINA (2015): IMD1007 | | The Argentinian election survey was conducted in two waves. | Only the second wave of the survey is used for CSES. It | contained 780 respondents who had been sampled initially | for the first survey as well as a refresh sample of 626 | respondents. | | CSES Code Election Study Code/Category |------------------------------------------------------------------ | 001. First wave sample | 002. Refresh sample | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - BELGIUM (2003): IMD1007 | | Sample component here refers to the language of the | questionnaire. This variable is entered by interviewers and is | important because questionnaires differ most notably in their | inclusion of different sets of political parties. Election study | notes for variables in the B3037 series (Codebook Part 2, | MODULE 2) include information about which of the two | questionnaire versions a particular party was included. | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - BRAZIL (2002): IMD1007 | | This variable reports the questionnaire version. The Brazilian | survey used two versions of the questionnaire. The difference is | in the order of several sets of items, and in the direction of | some scales (see the corresponding file in the download area of | the CSES website, MODULE 2). | | CSES Code Election Study Code/Category |------------------------------------------------------------------ | 001. Questionnaire version 1 | 002. Questionnaire version 2 | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - CANADA (2008): IMD1007 | | CSES Code Election Study Code/Category |------------------------------------------------------------------ | 001. Pre-election survey, only | 002. Pre-and-post-election survey, only | 003. Pre-and-post-election-mail-back survey only | 004. Pre-and-post-election-panel survey, only | 005. Pre-and-post-election-mail-back-panel survey | | Values 4 and 5 mean that respondents also participated already | in earlier election studies. | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - CANADA (2015): IMD1007 | | The study was composed of only one sample component. However, a | study was conducted as a panel study (see Overview of Methods, | MODULE 4 - Canada (2015)). In second wave respondents were at the | end of interview asked if they want to provide their address and | participate in the third component of the study mail-back survey. | So, they voluntarily decided to opt-in from that component. To | provide users with the most comprehensive information, variable | IMD1007 distinguishes between the following three groups of | respondents: | | CSES Code Election Study Code/Category |------------------------------------------------------------------ | 001. Respondents who participated in first and second | part of the study and did not want to | participate in mail-back survey (did not provide | address) | 002. Respondents who returned the mail-back | questionnaire | 003. Respondents who opted-in for mail-back survey | but did not return a questionnaire | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - FINLAND (2011): IMD1007 | | IMD1007 reflects the language of interviewing | (see also notes on C1009, Codebook Part 2, MODULE 3). | | CSES Code Election Study Code/Category |------------------------------------------------------------------ | 001. Finnish | 002. Swedish | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - FINLAND (2015): IMD1007 | | The survey was composed of only one sample component. However, | a subset of the CSES Module 4 questions were asked in a drop-off | questionnaire (see also Election Study Note for D1023 on Survey | Mode, Codebook Part 2, MODULE 4). This drop-off questionnaire | included the questions on the following MODULE 4 variables: | D3019, D3020_, D3021_, D3022, D3023_, D3024, D3027_, and D3028_. | Of the 1,587 respondents, 684 returned the drop-off | questionnaire. To provide users with the most comprehensive | information, variable IMD1007 distinguishes between Finnish | respondents who returned the drop-off questionnaire and those who | did not. | | CSES Code Election Study Code/Category |------------------------------------------------------------------ | 001. Respondents who returned the drop-off | questionnaire | 002. Respondents who did not return the drop-off | questionnaire | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - GERMANY (1998): IMD1007 | | CSES Code Election Study Code/Category |------------------------------------------------------------------ | 001. West Germany | 002. East Germany | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - GERMANY (2002 Mail-Back): IMD1007 | | CSES Code Election Study Code/Category |------------------------------------------------------------------ | 001. East Germany (includes East Berlin) | 002. West Germany (includes West Berlin) | 999. Missing | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - GERMANY (2002 Telephone): IMD1007 | | CSES Code Election Study Code/Category |------------------------------------------------------------------ | 001. East Germany (includes East Berlin) | 002. West Germany (includes West Berlin) | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - GERMANY (2005): IMD1007 | | Germany used two different samples, dividing the German | population along the former division of the country after | the Second World War. The population of the two components | equal the population of residence in C2027 (Codebook Part 2, | MODULE 3), where values 12 to 15 refer to East Germany. | | CSES Code Election Study Code/Category |------------------------------------------------------------------ | 001. East Germany, including East Berlin | 002. West Germany, including West Berlin | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - GERMANY (2009): IMD1007 | | The German data over-sample the eastern part of Germany, the | federal states of the former German Democratic Republic. | However, the original German data do not allow to separate both | parts of Berlin, which has been over-sampled for the eastern | part, as well. | | CSES Code Election Study Code/Category |------------------------------------------------------------------ | 001. East Germany | 002. West Germany (including Berlin) | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - GERMANY (2013): IMD1007 | | East and West Germany were sampled separately with an | oversampling of East Germans. The final data contains 1,165 | respondents from West and 724 respondents from East Germany. The | sample components are coded as 1='West' and 2='East'. | Further information on weights are available in Part 6 of | CSES MODULE 4 Codebook. Additional relevant information is also | available in the election study notes for variable D1010_1 | (Codebook Part 2, MODULE 4). | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - GREECE (2015): IMD1007 | | CSES Code Election Study Code/Category |------------------------------------------------------------------ | 001. Respondents sampled for the previous (2012) | election study | 002. Respondents sampled newly for the 2015 election | study | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - NEW ZEALAND (1996): IMD1007 | | CSES Code Election Study Code/Category |------------------------------------------------------------------ | 001. Postal new sample (including Maori sample) | 002. Postal panel sample (1990 and 1993 respondents) | 006. Postal campaign | | Post-Election Study (1=postal new sample): Respondents to | the post-election survey were randomly selected from the 1996 | electoral roll and sent a self-completion questionnaire. | | Maori Sample (1=postal new sample): As part of the post-election | survey, persons on the Maori roll were oversampled allowing for | an analysis of Maori political attitudes and behavior. Persons | randomly selected from the Maori electoral rolls were mailed | self-administered questionnaires. | | Panel Study (2 = postal panel from 1993 and 1990): Each elector | survey includes a panel of respondents carried through from the | previous study, making it possible to track patterns of | individual-level change. The 1996 survey includes the final wave | of a panel of respondents who participated in the 1993 and 1990 | NZES. | | The Campaign Wave (6 = postal campaign): A pre-election survey | was conducted over the course of the campaign to track short- | term changes in voting behavior. The rolling cross-section was | conducted 5 September through 11 October, during which time | approximately 120 computer-assisted telephone interviews per | day were conducted with randomly selected New Zealanders of | voting age. Respondents' names and addresses were also requested | and those who supplied them were sent a postal questionnaire | after the election. | | The post-election wave of the campaign sample was added to the | post-election sample from the electoral rolls, the Maori sample | and the panel and these components comprise the complete post- | election data set. | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - NEW ZEALAND (2008): IMD1007 | | New Zealand respondents of Maori descent can choose to be | registered on a separate Maori roll, and cast their electorate | votes within seven constituencies that overlie the general | electorates. For its new sample, the 2008 NZES sampled | within four subsets of registered voters and over-sampled | subsets 1, 3, and 4 below, groups of particular interest to the | researchers. For the CSES release, respondents from the three | over-sampled subsets were re-sampled to bring their numbers into | the appropriate proportions among registered voters, removing | any need for sampling weights. | | In this variable you find information about a person's | registration: | | CSES Code Election Study Code/Category |------------------------------------------------------------------ | 001. Those on Maori roll 27 and over | 002. Those on General roll 27 and over | 003. Those on Maori roll 18-26 | 004. Those on General Roll 18-26 | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - NORWAY (2013): IMD1007 | | The survey was part of a rolling cross-sectional | sample. For further reference see the general notes for Norway | in Part 6 of the MODULE 4 Codebook. | | CSES Code Election Study Code/Category |------------------------------------------------------------------ | 001. Respondents who participated in the panel | already in 2009 | 002. New cross-section sample | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - ROMANIA (2012): IMD1007 | | A part of the sample consisted of a panel component in which | respondents were interviewed prior and after the election | (N=1,080). All relevant CSES questions were asked in the post- | election survey of the panel component. All other respondents | were part of a cross-sectional post-election study (N=1,203). | For further information, see the general notes for Romania 2012 | in Part 1 of the CSES MODULE 4 Codebook. | | CSES Code Election Study Code/Category |------------------------------------------------------------------ | 001. Respondents who were part of the cross-section | post-election study | 002. Respondents who were part of the pre-election/ | post-election panel study | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - SWEDEN (2006): IMD1007 | | In Sweden, some respondents did not receive the same | questionnaire in terms of length. The following codes allow | users to identify respondents by questionnaire type. 408 | respondents did not get the CSES module. | | CSES Code Election Study Code/Category |------------------------------------------------------------------ | 001. Full Questionnaire | 002. Shortened Questionnaire | 003. Very short Questionnaire (no CSES) | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - SWEDEN (2014): IMD1007 | | The survey was part of a rolling cross-sectional study (Wave 1: | 2010-2014; Wave 2: 2014-2018). In addition, respondents could | complete either a long or a short version of the questionnaire. | The latter excluded the demographic MODULE 4 variables D2021, | D2022, D2023, D2025, and D2027. To allow distinguishing between | these groups, the sample component not only reflects the two | waves but also the length of the questionnaire. Finally, 22 | respondents in the sample were first-time voters who were not | part of either panel. These respondents are coded as | "99. MISSING" for IMD1007. For further information on the sample | composition, see Part 6 of the CSES MODULE 4 Codebook. | | CSES Code Election Study Code/Category |------------------------------------------------------------------ | 001. 2010-2014 Panel; Full Questionnaire | 002. 2010-2014 Panel; Short Questionnaire | 003. 2014-2018 Panel; Full Questionnaire | 004. 2014-2018 Panel; Short Questionnaire | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - SWITZERLAND (2007): IMD1007 | | The CSES survey was applied in several stages and with different | methodologies. For details see study description in Codebook | Part 1, MODULE 3. | Variable IMD1007 accounts for the type of sample from where each | respondent was selected, as well as the type of questionnaire | employed in the follow-up stage (if applicable). | | CSES Code Election Study Code/Category |------------------------------------------------------------------ | 001. Respondents from national sample and no follow-up | participation | 002. Respondents from cantonal over-sample and no | follow-up participation | 003. Respondents from national sample and completed | mail-back questionnaire follow-up. | 004. Respondents from cantonal over-sample sample and | completed questionnaire mail-back follow-up. | 005. Respondents from national sample and completed | online questionnaire follow-up. | 006. Respondents from cantonal over-sample sample and | completed online questionnaire follow-up. | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - UNITED STATES (2012): IMD1007 | | There are two sample components in the US data distinguishing | early voters (N=115) and voters who cast a ballot on election | day. Respondents were asked in the pre-election survey whether | they had voted early. Respondents who affirmed this were still | asked the MODULE 4 questions about their voting behavior | (D3005_PR_1 - D3006_UH_DC) in the post-election survey. | | CSES Code Election Study Code/Category |------------------------------------------------------------------ | 001. Voters who cast a ballot on election day | 002. Early voters --------------------------------------------------------------------------- IMD1008_YEAR >>> ID COMPONENT - ELECTION YEAR --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Election year. .................................................................. 1996-2016. ELECTION YEAR | VARIABLE NOTES: IMD1008_YEAR | | The corresponding variables in the Standalone CSES Modules are: | MODULE 1: A1008 | MODULE 2: B1008 | MODULE 3: C1008 | MODULE 4: D1008 --------------------------------------------------------------------------- IMD1008_MOD_1 >>> ID COMPONENT - MODULE 1 IMD1008_MOD_2 >>> ID COMPONENT - MODULE 2 IMD1008_MOD_3 >>> ID COMPONENT - MODULE 3 IMD1008_MOD_4 >>> ID COMPONENT - MODULE 4 --------------------------------------------------------------------------- CSES MODULE identifier. .................................................................. 0. ELECTION STUDY NOT INCLUDED IN CSES MODULE X 1. ELECTION STUDY INCLUDED IN CSES MODULE X | VARIABLE NOTES: IMD1008_MOD | | IMD1008_MOD_ are binary variables indicating the CSES Module | which was included in the respective election study. For | example, respondents from an election study with questions from | MODULE 3 would be coded 1 for IMD1008_MOD_3, and 0 for all other | IMD1008_MOD_ variables. | | The Standalone CSES Modules were administered during the | following years (inclusive): | | CSES MODULE 1: 1996 - 2002 | CSES MODULE 2: 2001 - 2006 | CSES MODULE 3: 2006 - 2011 | CSES MODULE 4: 2011 - 2016 | | The official period covered in CSES MODULE 2 is from 1996 to | 2001. However, the Portuguese election study of 2002 included | both CSES MODULES 1 and 2 in their study. For more see ELECTION | STUDY NOTE for Portugal below. | | The official period covered in CSES MODULE 3 is from 2006 to | 2011. The questionnaire was finalized for data collection | beginning in 2006, however, there are three pilot studies from | 2005 covering MODULE 3, namely Germany (2005), Norway (2005) and | Poland (2005). | | The official period covered in CSES MODULE 4 is from 2011 to | 2016. A preliminary questionnaire was used for pretests in 2011 - | this version of the questionnaire was very similar to the final | version. The questionnaire was finalized in 2012. | | These variables are original to CSES IMD, and therefore there are | no corresponding variables in the Standalone CSES Modules. | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - PORTUGAL (2002): IMD1008_MOD_ | | The Portuguese 2002 election study was administered during the | transition phase between CSES MODULES 1 and 2. Therefore, it | covered both the MODULE 1 and the MODULE 2 questionnaire. | Respondents from the 2002 Portuguese study are thus coded | 1 in both IMD1008_MOD_1 and IMD1008_MOD_2. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- IMD1008_RES >>> ID COMPONENT - RESPONDENT WITHIN ELECTION STUDY --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Respondent identifier. .................................................................. | VARIABLE NOTES: IMD1008_RES | | This variable is ten characters in length. It is unique | for each survey respondent within an election. | | While this variable uniquely identifies a respondent within | an election study, it is not unique across the entire dataset. | | The corresponding variables in the Standalone CSES Modules are: | MODULE 1: A1009 | MODULE 2: B1009 | MODULE 3: C1009 | MODULE 4: D1009 --------------------------------------------------------------------------- IMD1009 >>> ELECTION TYPE --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Type of election. .................................................................. 10. PARLIAMENTARY/LEGISLATIVE 12. PARLIAMENTARY/LEGISLATIVE AND PRESIDENTIAL 13. PARLIAMENTARY/LEGISLATIVE AND PRIME MINISTER 20. PRESIDENTIAL 30. HEAD OF GOVERNMENT | VARIABLE NOTES: IMD1009 | | The following table gives an overview of which type of elections | are included for which country. | | +++ TABLE: ELECTION STUDIES BY TYPE OF ELECTION | | Presidential Lower House Upper House | POLITY (ELEC YEAR) Election Election Election | ------------------------------------------------------------- | ALBANIA (2005) - X - | ARGENTINA (2015) X X X | AUSTRALIA (1996) - X - | AUSTRALIA (2004) - X X | AUSTRALIA (2007) - X X | AUSTRALIA (2013) - X X | AUSTRIA (2008) - X - | AUSTRIA (2013) - X - | BELARUS (2001) X* X* - | BELARUS (2008) - X - | BELGIUM-FLANDERS (1999) - X - | BELGIUM-WALLOON (1999) - X - | BELGIUM (2003) - X X | BRAZIL (2002) X X X | BRAZIL (2006) X X - | BRAZIL (2010) X X X | BRAZIL (2014) X X X | BULGARIA (2001) - X - | BULGARIA (2014) - X - | CANADA (1997) - X - | CANADA (2004) - X - | CANADA (2008) - X - | CANADA (2011) - X - | CANADA (2015) - X - | CHILE (1999) X - - | CHILE (2005) X X - | CHILE (2009) X X - | CROATIA (2007) - X - | CZECH REPUBLIC (1996) - X - | CZECH REPUBLIC (2002) - X - | CZECH REPUBLIC (2006) - X - | CZECH REPUBLIC (2010) - X - | CZECH REPUBLIC (2013) - X - | DENMARK (1998) - X - | DENMARK (2001) - X - | DENMARK (2007) - X - | ESTONIA (2011) - X - | FINLAND (2003) - X - | FINLAND (2007) - X - | FINLAND (2011) - X - | FINLAND (2015) - X - | FRANCE (2002) X - - | FRANCE (2007) - X - | FRANCE (2012) X - - | GERMANY (1998) - X - | GERMANY (2002 Mail-Back) - X - | GERMANY (2002 Telephone) - X - | GERMANY (2005) - X - | GERMANY (2009) - X - | GERMANY (2013) - X - | GREAT BRITAIN (1997) - X - | GREAT BRITAIN (2005) - X - | GREAT BRITAIN (2015) - X - | GREECE (2009) - X - | GREECE (2012) - X - | GREECE (2015) - X - | HONG KONG (1998) - X - | HONG KONG (2000) - X - | HONG KONG (2004) - X - | HONG KONG (2008) - X - | HONG KONG (2012) - X - | HUNGARY (1998) - X - | HUNGARY (2002) - X - | ICELAND (1999) - X - | ICELAND (2003) - X - | ICELAND (2007) - X - | ICELAND (2009) - X - | ICELAND (2013) - X - | IRELAND (2002) - X - | IRELAND (2007) - X - | IRELAND (2011) - X - | ISRAEL (1996) - X* - | ISRAEL (2003) - X - | ISRAEL (2006) - X - | ISRAEL (2013) - X - | ITALY (2006) - X - | JAPAN (1996) - X - | JAPAN (2004) - - X | JAPAN (2007) - - X | JAPAN (2013) - - X | KENYA (2013) X X X | KYRGYZSTAN (2005) X - - | LATVIA (2010) - X - | LATVIA (2011) - X - | LATVIA (2014) - X - | LITHUANIA (1997) X - - | MEXICO (1997) - X - | MEXICO (2000) X X - | MEXICO (2003) - X - | MEXICO (2006) X X X | MEXICO (2009) - X - | MEXICO (2012) X X X | MEXICO (2015) - X - | MONTENEGRO (2012) - X - | NETHERLANDS (1998) - X - | NETHERLANDS (2002) - X - | NETHERLANDS (2006) - X - | NETHERLANDS (2010) - X - | NEW ZEALAND (1996) - X - | NEW ZEALAND (2002) - X - | NEW ZEALAND (2008) - X - | NEW ZEALAND (2011) - X - | NEW ZEALAND (2014) - X - | NORWAY (1997) - X - | NORWAY (2001) - X - | NORWAY (2005) - X - | NORWAY (2009) - X - | NORWAY (2013) - X - | PERU (2000) X X - | PERU (2001) X X - | PERU (2006) X X - | PERU (2011) X X - | PERU (2016) X X - | PHILIPPINES (2004) X X - | PHILIPPINES (2010) X - - | PHILIPPINES (2016) X X - | POLAND (1997) - X - | POLAND (2001) - X X | POLAND (2005) - X X | POLAND (2007) - X X | POLAND (2011) - X X | PORTUGAL (2002) - X - | PORTUGAL (2005) - X - | PORTUGAL (2009) - X - | PORTUGAL (2015) - X - | ROMANIA (1996) X X - | ROMANIA (2004) X X X | ROMANIA (2009) X - - | ROMANIA (2012) - X X | ROMANIA (2014) X - - | RUSSIA (1999) - X - | RUSSIA (2000) X - - | RUSSIA (2004) X - - | SERBIA (2012) X X - | SLOVAKIA (2010) - X - | SLOVAKIA (2016) - X - | SLOVENIA (1996) - X - | SLOVENIA (2004) - X - | SLOVENIA (2008) - X - | SLOVENIA (2011) - X - | SOUTH AFRICA (2009) - X - | SOUTH AFRICA (2014) - X - | SOUTH KOREA (2000) - X - | SOUTH KOREA (2004) - X - | SOUTH KOREA (2008) - X - | SOUTH KOREA (2012) - X - | SPAIN (1996) - X - | SPAIN (2000) - X - | SPAIN (2004) - X - | SPAIN (2008) - X - | SWEDEN (1998) - X - | SWEDEN (2002) - X - | SWEDEN (2006) - X - | SWEDEN (2014) - X - | SWITZERLAND (1999) - X - | SWITZERLAND (2003) - X - | SWITZERLAND (2007) - X X | SWITZERLAND (2011) - X - | TAIWAN (1996) X X - | TAIWAN (2001) - X - | TAIWAN (2004) X - - | TAIWAN (2008) X - - | TAIWAN (2012) X X - | THAILAND (2001) - X - | THAILAND (2007) - X - | THAILAND (2011) - X - | TURKEY (2011) - X - | TURKEY (2015) - X - | UKRAINE (1998) - X - | UNITED STATES (1996) X X - | UNITED STATES (2004) X X X | UNITED STATES (2008) X X (X) | UNITED STATES (2012) X X X | URUGUAY (2009) X X X | ------------------------------------------------------------- | KEY: X = yes; - = no.; * = See ELECTION STUDY NOTES below | | | The corresponding variables in the Standalone CSES Modules are: | MODULE 1: A1015 | MODULE 2: B1015 | MODULE 3: C1015 | MODULE 4: D1015 | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - BELARUS (2001): IMD1009 | | The 2001 Belarusian lower house election took place on March 18, | 2000. The presidential election was held on September 9, 2001. | The original election study primarily refers to the presidential | election. However, leader evaluations, party evaluations, and | macro data refer to the legislative election. | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - ISRAEL (1996): IMD1009 | | Variables referring to the presidential election in CSES IMD | refer to the direct elections in 1996 for the Israeli Prime | Ministership. During the 1992-1996 parliamentary session, the | Knesset decided to introduce a system of direct election for | the prime ministership. The move followed the so-called | "Dirty Trick" scandal of 1990 when Shimon Peres, then leader of | the Labor party (Alignment), attempted to form a minority | government made up of left-wing factions and ultra-orthodox | parties, at the expense of the national unity government formed | in 1988 and led by Likud's Yitzhak Shamir. While the national | unity government became the first government in the history of | Israel to be dismissed by a parliamentary motion of | no-confidence, Peres was unable to form a government and | Yitzak Shamir continued as prime minister, now leading a | right-wing coalition government excluding Labor. During the | attempts to form a Labor-led government, potential coalition | members publicly demanded financial inducements for their | support, prompting discussions of electoral reform. The direct | election for the prime ministership continued in the 1999 and | 2001 elections but was abandoned afterwards. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- IMD1010_1 >>> ELECTION STUDY WEIGHT: SAMPLE IMD1010_2 >>> ELECTION STUDY WEIGHT: DEMOGRAPHIC IMD1010_3 >>> ELECTION STUDY WEIGHT: POLITICAL --------------------------------------------------------------------------- | VARIABLE NOTES: IMD1010_ | | These variables contain the "Polity Weights" of the Standalone | CSES Modules, originally provided as variables A1012_, B1012_, | C1012_, and D1012_.They report standardized versions (with a | mean 1 within the polity) of the original weights provided with | the component election studies. They are the ratio of each | weighting factor to the mean weight of each type, calculated | within each polity. | | The derivative "Election Study Weights" (IMD1010_) have been | created so that for each weight (sample, demographic, political), | each respondent within the election study has a mean weight | of "1". If you are running a frequency, for instance, this weight | will work so that the N in your frequency table comes out to | approximately the same as the number of interviews in the | study. This derivative weight is created by dividing the | individual weight for each respondent within an election | study by the mean for that weight for all respondents in that | election study. | | The STATA code used to create the derivative variables in the | CSES dataset is available in the original documentation of | weighting variables, available in Codebook Parts 2 of the | Standalone CSES Modules. | | Use of weights is at the discretion of the analyst based upon | the considerations of her/his individual research question. | We recommend that analysts familiarize themselves with the | weights, their components, and their methods of creation | before applying them. For IMD1010_, users are advised to pay | special attention to the documentation of the original weights | provided by collaborators (A1010_, B1010_, C1010_, D1010_) and | the factor variables reporting the mean weight of each type | (A1011_, B1011_, C1011_, D1011_), available in Codebook Parts 2 | of the CSES MODULES. | | Additionally, analysts will want to keep in mind that these | weights are prepared to be election study weights, not country | weights. To convert the weights to country weights requires an | adjustment for those countries for which one or more polities | or election studies appear in the dataset. | | In the table below, we give an overview about what types of | weights were originally provided by collaborators. More | information on these weights is available in the Codebook Parts 2 | of the CSES MODULES and in the design reports provided by | collaborators. | In cases where a collaborator provides a single weight that | is a combination of one or more of the three weight categories | (sample, demographic, and political), the weight is duplicated | in the two or more appropriate variables. Thus, analysts using | two or more of the weights simultaneously will need to account | for this duplication. | Where a weight of a particular type is unavailable, these | variables are coded 1. | | +++ TABLE: TYPE OF ORIGINAL WEIGHTS BY INDIVIDUAL ELECTION | STUDIES | | Sample Demographic Political | POLITY (ELEC YEAR) Weight Weight Weight | ----------------------------------------------------------- | AUSTRALIA (2013) - X - | AUSTRIA (2008) - X - | AUSTRIA (2013) - X - | BELGIUM-FLANDERS (1999) - X X | BELGIUM-WALLOON (1999) - X X | BELGIUM (2003) - X X | BRAZIL (2002) X X - | BRAZIL (2006) - X - | BRAZIL (2014) X - - | BULGARIA (2001) - X - | BULGARIA (2014) - X - | CANADA (1997) X - - | CANADA (2004) X - - | CANADA (2008) X - - | CANADA (2011) X - - | CANADA (2015) X - - | CHILE (1999) - - X | CHILE (2005) - X - | CHILE (2009) - X - | CROATIA (2007) - X X | CZECH REPUBLIC (2013) - - X | DENMARK (1998) - X X | DENMARK (2007) X - - | ESTONIA (2011) - X - | FINLAND (2011) - - X | FINLAND (2015) - X X | FRANCE (2002) - X - | FRANCE (2007) X X X | FRANCE (2012) - X X | GERMANY (1998) X X X | GERMANY (2002 Mail-Back) X X - | GERMANY (2002 Telephone) X X - | GERMANY (2005) X X - | GERMANY (2009) X X - | GERMANY (2013) X X - | GREAT BRITAIN (1997) X - - | GREAT BRITAIN (2005) X X - | GREAT BRITAIN (2015) X X - | GREECE (2009) - - X | GREECE (2012) - X - | GREECE (2015) - X X | HONG KONG (2008) - X - | HONG KONG (2012) - X - | HUNGARY (1998) - X - | HUNGARY (2002) - X - | ICELAND (2007) - X - | ICELAND (2009) - X - | IRELAND (2002) X X - | IRELAND (2007) - X - | IRELAND (2011) - X X | ITALY (2006) - X - | JAPAN (1996) X - - | JAPAN (2004) X - - | JAPAN (2007) X - - | JAPAN (2013) - X - | KENYA (2013) X - - | LATVIA (2010) - X - | LATVIA (2011) X X - | LATVIA (2014) - X - | LITHUANIA (1997) - X - | MEXICO (1997) X X - | MEXICO (2000) X X - | MEXICO (2003) X X X | MEXICO (2006) X X - | MEXICO (2009) X X - | MEXICO (2012) X X - | MEXICO (2015) - X - | MONTENEGRO (2012) - X - | NETHERLANDS (1998) X X X | NETHERLANDS (2002) - X X | NETHERLANDS (2006) - X X | NETHERLANDS (2010) - X X | NEW ZEALAND (1996) X - X | NEW ZEALAND (2002) X X X | NEW ZEALAND (2008) - X X | NEW ZEALAND (2011) - X X | NEW ZEALAND (2014) - X X | NORWAY (2013) - X - | PERU (2006) - X X | PERU (2011) X X X | PERU (2016) X X X | PHILIPPINES (2004) - X - | PHILIPPINES (2010) X - - | PHILIPPINES (2016) X - - | POLAND (1997) X X - | POLAND (2001) X X - | POLAND (2005) - X - | POLAND (2007) - X - | POLAND (2011) - X - | PORTUGAL (2002) - - X | PORTUGAL (2005) - X X | PORTUGAL (2009) - X - | PORTUGAL (2015) - X - | ROMANIA (2009) - X - | ROMANIA (2012) X X X | ROMANIA (2014) X X X | RUSSIA (1999) X - - | RUSSIA (2000) X - - | RUSSIA (2004) X - - | SERBIA (2012) X X - | SLOVAKIA (2010) - X - | SLOVAKIA (2016) - X - | SOUTH AFRICA (2009) X - - | SOUTH AFRICA (2014) - X - | SPAIN (1996) - X - | SPAIN (2000) - X - | SPAIN (2004) - X - | SPAIN (2008) - X - | SWITZERLAND (1999) X - - | SWITZERLAND (2003) X - - | SWITZERLAND (2007) X - X | SWITZERLAND (2011) X - X | TAIWAN (2004) - X - | TAIWAN (2008) - X - | TAIWAN (2012) - X - | THAILAND (2011) X - - | TURKEY (2011) - X - | TURKEY (2015) - X - | UNITED STATES (1996) X X - | UNITED STATES (2004) X X - | UNITED STATES (2008) X - - | UNITED STATES (2012) X X - | URUGUAY (2009) - - X | ----------------------------------------------------------- | KEY: X = available; - = not available. | | Sample weights include those intended to correct for unequal | selection probabilities resulting from "booster" samples, | procedures for selection within the household, non-response, | as well as other features of the sample design. | | Demographic weights adjust sample distributions of socio- | demographic characteristics to more closely resemble the | characteristics of the population. | | Political weights reconcile discrepancies in the reported | electoral behavior of the survey respondents from the | official vote counts. | | The corresponding variables in the Standalone CSES Modules are: | MODULE 1: A1012_1, A1012_2, & A1012_3 | MODULE 2: B1012_1, B1012_2, & B1012_3 | MODULE 3: C1012_1, C1012_2, & C1012_3 | MODULE 4: D1012_1, D1012_2, & D1012_3 | | Weights are unavailable for ALBANIA (2005), ARGENTINA (2015), | AUSTRALIA (1996, 2004, 2007), BELARUS (2001, 2008) BRAZIL | (2010), CZECH REPUBLIC (1996, 2002, 2006, 2010), DENMARK (2001), | FINLAND (2003, 2007), HONG KONG (1998, 2000, 2004), ICELAND | (1999, 2003, 2013), ISRAEL (1996, 2003, 2006, 2013), | KYRGYZSTAN (2005), NORWAY (1997, 2001, 2005, 2009), PERU (2000, | 2001), PORTUGAL (2002), ROMANIA (1996, 2004), SLOVENIA (1996, | 2004, 2008, 2011), SOUTH KOREA (2000, 2004, 2008, 2012), SWEDEN | (1998, 2002, 2006, 2014), TAIWAN (1996, 2001), (THAILAND 2001, | 2007), and UKRAINE (1998). | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - BELGIUM-WALLONIA (1999): IMD1010_3 | | For 447 respondents, the weight is set to zero. This is the | result of missing data which was used to calculate the original | weight. Because the assignment of zero was a collaborator | decision and the weights appear this way in the original data | deposits, no change was made. | ELECTION STUDY NOTES – LITHUANIA (1997): IMD1010_2 | | The 1997 Lithuanian study was meant to be representative of | the population from ages 15 to 74. Hence, the study includes | 49 respondents who were younger than 18 and ineligible to vote | at the time of the election. The originally deposited | demographic weight was calculated based on the full sample, | including those respondents who were ineligible to vote. | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - NETHERLANDS (1998): IMD1010_2, IMD1010_3 | | For 287 respondents, the weight is set to zero. This is the | result of missing data which was used to calculate the original | weight. Because the assignment of zero was a collaborator | decision and the weights appear this way in the original data | deposits, no change was made. | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - PERU (2011): IMD1010_3 | | Because of compulsory voting in Peru, non-voters are coded as | zero in IMD1010_3 and are thus excluded from any analysis, | when the weight is applied. | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - PERU (2016): IMD1010_1-IMD1010_3 | | Political weights were not constructed for 123 respondents in | CSES Module 4. 105 of these respondents did not cast a vote in | the presidential elections (IMD3001_PR_1) and the remaining 18 | respondents did not specify their vote choice in | the presidential elections (IMD3002_PR_1). These cases were | set to zero for the political weight variable and thus, are | dropped from analyses if IMD1010_3 is applied. | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - PORTUGAL (2005): IMD1010_2 | | The demographic weight was constructed on the basis of Census | 2001 information about the distribution of 18+ years of age | residents in Continental Portugal on the basis of sex (2 | strata), age (3 strata), and education (3 strata). | | The demographic weight was initially deposited with 215 cases | having missing data. In the CSES data file, these cases are | coded "0." These are cases for which at least one relevant | demographic variable was missing for the respondent. The | collaborator preferred to assign a weight of "0" to these cases | given that the demographic information was not complete for the | case. | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - SPAIN (2000): IMD1010_2 | | For one respondent, the weight is set to zero. This is the | result of missing data which was used to calculate the original | weight. Because the assignment of zero was a collaborator | decision and the weights appear this way in the original data | deposits, no change was made. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- IMD1011_M >>> DATE 1ST ROUND ELECTION BEGAN - MONTH IMD1011_D >>> DATE 1ST ROUND ELECTION BEGAN - DAY IMD1011_Y >>> DATE 1ST ROUND ELECTION BEGAN - YEAR --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Date [first round] election began. .................................................................. MONTH 01. JANUARY 02. FEBRUARY 03. MARCH 04. APRIL 05. MAY 06. JUNE 07. JULY 08. AUGUST 09. SEPTEMBER 10. OCTOBER 11. NOVEMBER 12. DECEMBER 99. MISSING DAY 01-31. DAY OF MONTH 99. MISSING YEAR 1996-2016. YEAR 9999. MISSING | VARIABLE NOTES: IMD1011_ | | Variables IMD1011_ classify the start date of the election. | | The corresponding variables in the Standalone CSES Modules are: | MODULE 1: A1016-A1018 | MODULE 2: B1016-B1018 | MODULE 3: C1016-C1018 | MODULE 4: D1016-D1018 | [ELECTION STUDY NOTES] - GERMANY (1998): IMD1011_ | | In CSES MODULE 1, the Election Day is coded as September 28, | 1998. The election, however, took place on September 27, 1998, | which is how the data is classified in CSES IMD. | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - ITALY (2006): IMD1011_ | | The 2006 elections in Italy were held on two days, April 9 | and 10. For IMD the first date April 9, 2016, is used for | variables IMD1011_ (Date 1st Round Election Began). | [ELECTION STUDY NOTES] - SPAIN (1996): IMD1011_ | | In CSES MODULE 1, the Election Day is coded as March 11, 1996. | The election, however, took place on March 3rd, 1996, which is | how the data is classified in CSES IMD. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- IMD1012_M >>> DATE 2ND ROUND ELECTION BEGAN - MONTH IMD1012_D >>> DATE 2ND ROUND ELECTION BEGAN - DAY IMD1012_Y >>> DATE 2ND ROUND ELECTION BEGAN - YEAR --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Date [second round] election began. .................................................................. MONTH 01. JANUARY 02. FEBRUARY 03. MARCH 04. APRIL 05. MAY 06. JUNE 07. JULY 08. AUGUST 09. SEPTEMBER 10. OCTOBER 11. NOVEMBER 12. DECEMBER 99. MISSING DAY 01-31. DAY OF MONTH 99. MISSING YEAR 1996-2016. YEAR 9996. NOT APPLICABLE: NO SECOND ROUND 9999. MISSING | VARIABLE NOTES: IMD1012_ | | Variables IMD1011_ classify the start date of the election. | If the election involved a second round, variables IMD1012_ | classify the start date of the second round. | | The corresponding variables in the Standalone CSES Modules are: | MODULE 1: A1019-A1021 | MODULE 2: B1019-B1021 | MODULE 3: C1019-C1021 | MODULE 4: D1019-D1021 --------------------------------------------------------------------------- IMD1013_M >>> DATE QUESTIONNAIRE ADMINISTERED - MONTH IMD1013_D >>> DATE QUESTIONNAIRE ADMINISTERED - DAY IMD1013_Y >>> DATE QUESTIONNAIRE ADMINISTERED - YEAR --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Date questionnaire administered. .................................................................. MONTH 01. JANUARY 02. FEBRUARY 03. MARCH 04. APRIL 05. MAY 06. JUNE 07. JULY 08. AUGUST 09. SEPTEMBER 10. OCTOBER 11. NOVEMBER 12. DECEMBER 99. MISSING DAY 01-31. DAY OF MONTH 99. MISSING YEAR 1996-2016. YEAR 9999. MISSING | VARIABLE NOTES: IMD1013_ | | In some cases the current dates of interviewing, coded in | IMD1013_ differ from the field period mentioned in the Design | Reports, available at http://www.cses.org. For more details, see | ELECTION STUDY NOTES in the Codebooks Part 2, of the respective | Standalone CSES Modules. | | The corresponding variables in the Standalone CSES Modules are: | MODULE 1: A1026-A1028 | MODULE 2: B1026-B1028 | MODULE 3: C1026-C1028 | MODULE 4: D1026-D1028 | | Data for IMD1013_1 and IMD1013_2 are unavailable for PORTUGAL | (2015) and SOUTH KOREA (2012). --------------------------------------------------------------------------- IMD1014_1 >>> INTERVIEW TIMING - NUMBER OF DAYS BETWEEN INTERVIEW AND FIRST ROUND OF ELECTION --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Number of days passed between the first round of the election and the day the respondent was interviewed. .................................................................. 001.- 899. NUMBER OF DAYS 9995. NOT ASCERTAINED 9996. NOT APPLICABLE 9999. MISSING | VARIABLES NOTES: IMD1014_ | | The variable was created by subtracting the date of the first | round of election from the date of the interview. | IMD1014_1 was only calculated for respondents for whom the | exact day of the interview is known (i.e., for whom IMD1013_ is | not missing). Respondents for whom at least one variable of | IMD1013_ is set to missing are coded 9999. | | This variable is original to CSES IMD, and therefore there are | no corresponding variables in the Standalone CSES Modules. | | Data are unavailable for ALBANIA (2005), AUSTRALIA (1996), | BELARUS (2001), GERMANY (2002 Mail-Back, 2005), DENMARK (1998), | SOUTH KOREA (2008, 2012), NETHERLANDS (2010), NEW ZEALAND | (2002), PERU (2000, 2001, 2011), PORTUGAL (2002, 2009, 2015), | RUSSIA (1999, 2000), and THAILAND (2001, 2007). --------------------------------------------------------------------------- IMD1014_2 >>> INTERVIEW TIMING - NUMBER OF DAYS BETWEEN INTERVIEW AND SECOND ROUND OF ELECTION --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Number of days passed between the second round of the election and the day the respondent was interviewed. .................................................................. 001.- 899. NUMBER OF DAYS 9995. NOT ASCERTAINED 9996. NOT APPLICABLE 9999. MISSING | VARIABLES NOTES: IMD1014_2 | | The variable was created by subtracting the date of the first | round of election from the date of the interview. | IMD1014_2 was only calculated for respondents for whom the | exact day of the interview is known (i.e., for whom IMD1013_ is | not missing). Respondents for whom at least one variable of | IMD1013_ is set to missing are coded 9999. | | This variable is original to CSES IMD, and therefore there are | no corresponding variables in the Standalone CSES Modules. | | Data are unavailable for PERU (2000, 2001) and THAILAND (2001). | ELECTION STUDY NOTES – CHILE (1999): IMD1014_2 | | Even though the election in 1999 took place in two rounds, the | original study refers to the first round only. Hence, | some respondents were interviewed prior to the second | round. These cases are coded as “9995. NOT ASCERTAINED” here. | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - CHILE (2005) AND PERU (2006): IMD1014_2 | | Chile (2005) and Peru (2006) elections were decided in the | second round. However, the two studies refer only to the first | round. Hence, these two studies are coded "9996. NOT | APPLICABLE" for the variable IMD1014_2. | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - HUNGARY (1998): IMD1014_2 | | Even though the election in 1998 took place in two rounds, the | original study refers to the first round only. Hence, | a number of respondents were interviewed prior to the second | round. These cases are coded as “9995. NOT ASCERTAINED” here. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- IMD1015 >>> STUDY CONTEXT --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Timing of study relative to election. .................................................................. 1. POST-ELECTION STUDY 2. PRE-ELECTION AND POST-ELECTION STUDY 3. BETWEEN ROUNDS | VARIABLE NOTES: IMD1015 | | The corresponding variables in the Standalone CSES Modules are: | MODULE 1: A1022 | MODULE 2: B1022 | MODULE 3: C1022 | MODULE 4: D1022 --------------------------------------------------------------------------- IMD1016_1 >>> MODE OF INTERVIEW - STUDY FIRST IMD1016_2 >>> MODE OF INTERVIEW - STUDY SECOND IMD1016_3 >>> MODE OF INTERVIEW - STUDY THIRD --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Modes of interview used within the respective election study. .................................................................. 1. IN PERSON, FACE-TO-FACE 2. TELEPHONE 3. MAIL OR SELF-COMPLETION SUPPLEMENT 4. INTERNET 9. MISSING | VARIABLE NOTES: IMD1016_ | | IMD1016_ provide information about the different interview modes | used within an election study, coded on a study level and NOT | on the respondent level. For instance, if an election study used | a combination of telephone and mail-back, variable IMD1016_1 | would be coded as "2. TELEPHONE" and IMD1016_2 would be coded as | "3. MAIL OR SELF-COMPLETED SUPPLEMENT", regardless of whether | all respondents were interviewed using both modes or not. | | The corresponding variables in the Standalone CSES Modules are: | MODULE 1: A1023 | MODULE 2: B1023 | MODULE 3: C1023 | MODULE 4: D1023 =========================================================================== ))) CSES IMD VARIABLES: DEMOGRAPHIC DATA =========================================================================== | The CSES demographic questions are the prerogative of national | collaborators. Users are advised that the Standalone CSES Module | questionnaire does not include filter instructions for the | demographic segment. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- IMD2001_1 >>> AGE OF RESPONDENT (IN YEARS) --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Age of respondent (in years). .................................................................. 015-115. AGE, IN YEARS 9997. VOLUNTEERED: REFUSED 9998. VOLUNTEERED: DON'T KNOW 9999. MISSING | VARIABLE NOTES: IMD2001_1 | | The corresponding variables in the Standalone CSES Modules are: | MODULE 1: A2001_Y & D1008 | MODULE 2: B2001 | MODULE 3: C2001 | MODULE 4: D2001 | | In CSES MODULE 4, respondents were asked to provide their month | and year of birth. Hence, their age was calculated by | subtracting the year of birth from the election year in IMD. | | Data are unavailable for KYRGYZSTAN (2005), and PERU (2000, | 2001). | ELECTION STUDY NOTES – LITHUANIA (1997): IMD2001_1 | | The 1997 Lithuanian study was a representative sample of the | population from ages 15 to 74. Hence, the study includes | 49 respondents who are younger than 18 and ineligible to vote | at the time of the election. | ELECTION STUDY NOTES – NETHERLANDS (1998): IMD2001_1 | | Four respondents reported being 17 at the time of the interview | even though the eligible voting age is 18 as the original study | was a panel study with pre- and post-election interviews in which | age was collected prior to the election. | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - NORWAY (2009): IMD2001_1 | | Respondents aged 76 years and older are captured in the single | category 75, with the meaning of the code "Older than 75 | years" in the Norway 2009 study. | [ELECTION STUDY NOTES] - UNITED STATES (2008): IMD2001_1 | | The code 1 in the age variable in CSES Module 3 (C2001) for the | United States study (2008) is re-coded into 90 for the continuous | age variable in IMD (IMD2001_1). The meaning of the code is "90 | years or older." --------------------------------------------------------------------------- IMD2001_2 >>> AGE OF RESPONDENT (IN CATEGORIES) --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Age of respondent (in categories listed below). .................................................................. 01. YOUNGEST - 24 YEARS 02. 25 - 34 YEARS 03. 35 - 44 YEARS 04. 45 - 54 YEARS 05. 55 - 64 YEARS 06. 65 YEARS - OLDER 9997. VOLUNTEERED: REFUSED 9998. VOLUNTEERED: DON'T KNOW 9999. MISSING | VARIABLE NOTES: IMD2001_1 | | The youngest classification varies depending on age eligibility | to vote. | | This variable is original to CSES IMD, and therefore there are | no corresponding variables in the Standalone CSES Modules. | | Data are unavailable for KYRGYZSTAN (2005). | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - PERU (2000 & 2001): IMD2001_2 | | The original data for Peru 2000 and Peru 2001 was deposited in | age categories with slight deviations from the IMD age | categories. | | CSES Code Election Study Code/Category | 01. 18-25 Years | 02. 26-35 Years | 03. 36-45 Years | 04. 46-65 Years | | Hence category 4 for Peru on this variable contains all | respondents in the sample aged 46+. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- IMD2002 >>> GENDER --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Gender of Respondent. .................................................................. 1. MALE 2. FEMALE 3. [SEE ELECTION STUDY NOTES] 7. VOLUNTEERED: REFUSED 8. VOLUNTEERED: DON'T KNOW 9. MISSING | VARIABLE NOTES: IMD2002 | | The corresponding variables in the Standalone CSES Modules are: | MODULE 1: A2002 | MODULE 2: B2002 | MODULE 3: C2002 | MODULE 4: D2002 | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - NEW ZEALAND (2014): IMD2002 | | CSES Code Election Study Code/Category |------------------------------------------------------------------ | 03. Transsexual or Transgender --------------------------------------------------------------------------- IMD2003 >>> EDUCATION --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Education of respondent. .................................................................. 0. NONE (NO EDUCATION)/ILLITERATE 1. PRIMARY EDUCATION/LOWER SECONDARY EDUCATION 2. HIGHER SECONDARY EDUCATION 3. POST-SECONDARY (NON-UNIVERSITY) EDUCATION 4. UNIVERSITY EDUCATION 6. OTHER [SEE Standalone CSES MODULE CODEBOOK] 7. VOLUNTEERED: REFUSED 8. VOLUNTEERED: DON'T KNOW 9. MISSING | VARIABLE NOTES: IMD2003 | | Following CSES conventions, the scale for IMD2003 is | based on the highest educational attainment, rather than on | enrollment in an educational program. For example, only | respondents who have obtained a university degree would be | coded as "04. UNIVERSITY EDUCATION". | | As there was no single unique coding classification for education | across CSES Modules, harmonization is based on re-coding | education variables from previous CSES Modules according to the | newly created scale presented above. | In what follows, we list how the original categories employed in | the Standalone CSES Modules were coded in CSES IMD. | | | +++ TABLE: MAPPING OF EDUCATION CODES IN CSES MODULES 1-3 | TO EDUCATION CODES IN CSES IMD | | IMD CODE CSES MODULE 1-3 CLASSIFICATION (CSES MODULE 1-3 CODE) |----------------------------------------------------------------- | 0. None/Incomplete Primary (1/2) | 1. Primary Completed/Incomplete Secondary (3/4) | 2. Secondary completed & University Undergraduate | Degree Incomplete (5/7) | 3. Post-Secondary Trade/Vocational School (6) | 4. University Undergraduate Degree Completed (8) |----------------------------------------------------------------- | | In CSES Module 4, the ISCED scheme was introduced to measure | educational attainment which included two categories for | secondary education, lower and upper. Respondents coded as | "03. ISCED LEVEL 2 - LOWER SECONDARY" were coded into CSES IMD | code "02. PRIMARY EDUCATION/LOWER SECONDARY EDUCATION" to ensure | consistency with other CSES Modules in which the category | "SECONDARY COMPLETED" referred to respondents who had attained | the minimum level of qualifications normally required for entry | into university of other degree level higher education. | According to the ISCED coding scheme, only the completion of | an upper secondary educational program would allow for someone | to enter a degree program. Hence, the two secondary education | from CSES Module 4 were split. | | | +++ TABLE: MAPPING OF EDUCATION CODES IN CSES MODULE 4 | TO EDUCATION CODES IN CSES IMD | | IMD CODE CSES MODULE 4 CLASSIFICATION (CSES MODULE 4 CODE) |----------------------------------------------------------------- | 0. None/ISCED Level 0 - Early Childhood Education (0/96) | 1. ISCED Level 1 - Primary & ISCED Level 2 Lower | Secondary (2/3) | 2. ISCED Level 3 - Upper Secondary | 3. ISCED Level 4 - Post-Secondary Non-Tertiary | ISCED Level 5 - Short-Cycle Tertiary | 4. ISCED Level 6 - Bachelor or equivalent | ISCED Level 7 - Master or equivalent | ISCED Level 8 - Doctoral or equivalent |----------------------------------------------------------------- | | For details on how election-study-specific scales were | harmonized to CSES standards, please refer to Codebooks Part 2 | of the Standalone CSES Modules. | | The corresponding variables in the Standalone CSES Modules are: | MODULE 1: A2003 | MODULE 2: B2003 | MODULE 3: C2003 | MODULE 4: D2003 | [ELECTION STUDY NOTES] MODULE 3 - IMD2003 | | The Education variable (C2003) in CSES Module 3 contains a | category "9. SEE ELECTION STUDY NOTES", with different meanings | of the code in different studies. This had been re-coded into | following IMD categories: | | Election study CSES IMD code |------------------------------------------------------------------ | Austria (2008) 6 | Chile (2009) 0 | Czech Republic (2006 & 2010) 6 | Philippines (2010) 4 | Slovakia (2010) 4 | South Africa (2009) 4 | | For the original meaning of the code in different studies, please | have a look at CSES MODULE 3 Codebook, ELECTION STUDY NOTES for | variable C2003. | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - ROMANIA (2004): IMD2003 | | Romania (2004) study had a category in education variable | "9. More than basic University degree" which was re-coded into | "4. University Education" for CSES IMD. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- IMD2004 >>> MARITAL STATUS --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Respondent's marital or civil union status. .................................................................. 1. MARRIED OR LIVING TOGETHER AS MARRIED 2. WIDOWED 3. DIVORCED OR SEPARATED (MARRIED BUT SEPARATED/ NOT LIVING WITH LEGAL SPOUSE) 4. SINGLE, NEVER MARRIED 5. [SEE Standalone CSES MODULE CODEBOOKS] 7. VOLUNTEERED: REFUSED 8. VOLUNTEERED: DON'T KNOW 9. MISSING | VARIABLE NOTES: IMD2004 | | This variable reports the respondent's current marital | status. For instance, a person who is both divorced and | living together as married would be coded 1. | | With respect to the meaning of Code 5, users are advised to | refer to the Standalone CSES Module Codebooks Part 2. | | The corresponding variables in the Standalone CSES Modules are: | MODULE 1: A2004 | MODULE 2: B2004 | MODULE 3: C2004 | MODULE 4: D2004 | | Data are unavailable for CHILE (1999, 2005), JAPAN (1996), | KYRGYZSTAN (2005), SOUTH KOREA (2000), and THAILAND (2001). | POLITY NOTES - BELGIUM: IMD2004 | | The marital status variable was obtained from the original | question "Do you live with a (permanent) partner?" Respondents | who answered with "yes" were coded into CSES IMD category | "1. MARRIED OR LIVING TOGETHER AS MARRIED." Respondents who | answered with "no" were coded into CSES IMD category "4. SINGLE, | NEVER MARRIED." --------------------------------------------------------------------------- IMD2005 >>> RELIGIOUS DENOMINATION --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Religious denomination. .................................................................. 01. CATHOLIC 02. PROTESTANT 03. ORTHODOX/EASTERN CATHOLIC CHURCHES 04. OTHER CHRISTIAN (NO DENOMINATION GIVEN; INDEPENDENT; NON-AFFILIATED; NON-TRADITIONAL PROTESTANTS) 05. JEWISH 06. ISLAM - SUNNI 07. ISLAM - OTHER 08. BUDDHISM 09. HINDUISM 10. INDIGENOUS 11. ETHNORELIGIONS 12. NON-BELIEVERS 13. AGNOSTICS 96. OTHER: NOT SPECIFIED 97. VOLUNTEERED: REFUSED 98. VOLUNTEERED: DON'T KNOW 99. MISSING | VARIABLE NOTES: IMD2005 | | As there was no single unique coding classification for | religious denomination across CSES Modules, harmonization is | based on re-coding religious denomination variables from | Standalone CSES Modules according to the newly created scale | presented above. | | In what follows, we list how the original categories employed in | the Standalone CSES Modules were re-coded for the CSES IMD. | | +++ TABLE: MAPPING OF RELIGIOUS DENOMINATION CODES IN | CSES MODULES 1-4 TO RELIGIOUS DENOMINATION CODES | IN CSES IMD | | IMD CODE CSES MODULE 1-4 CLASSIFICATION (CSES MODULE 1-4 CODE) |----------------------------------------------------------------- | 01. Roman Catholic (1/1101) | Catholic, Other [see Election Study Notes] (1199) | 02. Protestant, no Denomination Given (2/1200) | Adventist (3/1201) | Episcopalian, Anglican, Church of England, | Church of Ireland (4/1300) | Baptist (5/1203) | Congregational (6/1204) | European Free Church (Anabaptists) (7/1205) | Holiness (8/1206) | Independent-Fundamentalist (9/1401) | Lutheran (10/1208) | Methodist (11/1209) | Pentecostal (12/1210) | Presbyterian (13/1211) | Christian Scientists (14/1501) | Unitarian; Universalist (16/1503) | Reformed Calvinist (not Presb) / Calvinist (91/1212) | Salvation Army/Salvationist (1213) | Christian Brethren (1214) | Churches of Christ (1215) | Reformed Churches (1216) | Protestant Church of The Netherlands (1217) | Protestant, Other [see Election Study Notes] | (1298/1299) | 03. Eastern Orthodox (Greek Rite Catholic) (17/1600) | Eastern Catholic Churches (e.g., Eastern Rite | Catholic, Greek Rite Cathole, Uniate) (19/1102) | Orthodox, Other [see Election Study Notes] (1699) | 04. Christian (no Denomination Given) (18/1000) | Mormons; Latter Day Saints (15/1502) | Apostolic (1410) | United Churches (1420) | Independent, Other [see Election Study Notes] (1499) | Jehovah's Witnesses (1504) | Non-traditional Protestant, Other [see Election | Study Notes] (1599) | 05. Jewish (20/2000) | 06. Sunni (33/3100) | 07. Muslim; Mohammedan; Islam (no Denomination Given) | (30/3000) | Kharijism (31) | Mu'tazilism (32) | Shi'ism (34/3200) | Isma'ilis (35/3210) | Baha'i (36/22) | Druse (37/3211) | 08. Buddhist (40/4000) | Theravada (41/4100) | Mahayana (42/4200) | Tantrism (43) | Tibetan Buddhism (44) | Shingon (45) | 09. Hindu (50/5000) | Jainism (51/5500) | Sikhism (52/5600) | Parsiism (53/5010) | Vedism (54) | Brahmanism (55) | Vaishnavism (56/5020) | Shaivism (57/5030) | Tantrism (58) | Shaktism (59/5040) | Folk Hinduism (60) | 10. Confucianism (71/6100) | Taoism (72/6200) | Shinto (73/6300) | Bahai (74) | I-Kuan-Tao (75/6401) | New Religionists (6400) | Traditional Folk Belief/Nichiren Shoshu (6500) | 11. Pagan, Heathen, Tribal Religionist, Traditional | Religionist, Animism, Shamanism (7100) | Ratana, Maori (7110) | Spiritism (7200) | Bahai (7500) | Ehtnoreligionist, Other [see Election Study Notes] | (7900/7901) | 12. Atheists (82/92/8200) | None (83/93/8300) | 13. Agnostics (81/91/8100) | 96. Other Religions (80) | Other: Not Specified (9600) | 97. Refused (97/9997) | 98. Don't Know (98/9998) | 99. Missing (99/9999) |----------------------------------------------------------------- | | In the Table above, original Module codes with two digits refer | to codes applied in CSES MODULE 1 and 2, while Module codes with | four digits were used in CSES MODULE 3 and 4. | | There is a slight inconsistency in coding regarding three | non-traditional protestant groups: Christian Scientists, | Unitarian Universalists and Independent Fundamentalists. | These three groups have been coded as 02. PROTESTANT for | Module 1, but 04. OTHER CHRISTIAN (NO DENOMINATION GIVEN; | INDEPENDENT for Modules 3 and 4 in the IMD. There are neither | Christian Scientists nor Unitarian Universalists in the Module 2 | dataset, but Independent Fundamentalists, who were likewise coded | 02. PROTESTANT. | | The corresponding variables in the Standalone CSES Modules are: | MODULE 1: A2017 | MODULE 2: B2025 | MODULE 3: C2025 | MODULE 4: D2026 | | Data are unavailable for DENMARK (1998, 2001, 2007), ICELAND | (1999, 2003, 2007, 2009), IRELAND (2011), JAPAN (1996), | LITHUANIA (1997) NORWAY (1997, 2001, 2005, 2009), PERU (2000, | 2001, 2006, 2011), SWEDEN (1998, 2002, 2006, 2014). | [ELECTION STUDY NOTES] MODULE 2 - IMD2005 | | The Religious denomination variable (B2025) in CSES Module 2 | contains six additional categories, with different meanings of | the codes in different studies. For the CSES IMD, all these codes | have been set to 96. OTHER: NOT SPECIFIED. | For the original meaning of the codes in different studies please | have a look at CSES Module 2 Codebook, election study notes for | variable B2025. | [ELECTION STUDY NOTES] MODULE 3 - IMD2005 | | The Religious denomination variable (C2025) in CSES Module 3 | contains four additional categories, with different meaning of | the code in different studies. This had been re-coded into | following IMD categories: | | Election study CSES IMD code |------------------------------------------------------------------ | Australia (2007) 96 | Chile (2009) 96 | Czech Republic (2006&2010) 96 | Hong Kong (2008) 4 | Latvia (2010) 96 | Philippines (2010) 96 | Slovenia (2008) 96 | Taiwan (2008) 96 | | For the original meaning of the code in different studies please | have a look at CSES Module 3 Codebook, election study notes for | variable C2025. | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - AUSTRALIA (2013): IMD2005 | | IMD Code MODULE 4 Category (MODULE 4 Code) |------------------------------------------------------------------ | 02. Seventh Day Adventist (9003) | 03. Armenian Apostoli (9001) | 96. Latter Day Saints (9002) | Other Non-Christian (9004) | Other, not further specified (9005) | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - CANADA (2015): IMD2005 | | IMD Code MODULE 4 Category (MODULE 4 Code) |------------------------------------------------------------------ | 96. Don't know/Agnostic (9001) | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - GERMANY (2013): IMD2005 | | IMD Code MODULE 4 Category (MODULE 4 Code) |------------------------------------------------------------------ | 96. Some other Christian (9001) | Other, non-Christian (9002) | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - HONG KONG (2012): IMD2005 | | IMD Code MODULE 4 Category (MODULE 4 Code) |------------------------------------------------------------------ | 08. Tibetan Buddhist (9001) | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - NEW ZEALAND (2011): IMD2005 | | IMD Code MODULE 4 Category (MODULE 4 Code) |------------------------------------------------------------------ | 96. Free Church of Tonga (9001) | Disciple living Mast (9002) | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - PERU (2016): IMD2005 | | IMD Code MODULE 4 Category (MODULE 4 Code) |------------------------------------------------------------------ | 04. Israelites of the New Universal Pact (9001) | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - TAIWAN (2012): IMD2005 | | IMD Code MODULE 4 Category (MODULE 4 Code) |------------------------------------------------------------------ | 08. White Lotus (9004) | Soka Gakkai (9005) | 96. Buddhism and Taoism (9001) | The Lord of Universe Church (9006) | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - UNITED STATES OF AMERICA (2012): IMD2005 | | IMD Code MODULE 4 Category (MODULE 4 Code) |------------------------------------------------------------------ | 02. Reform (9004) | 04. Religious Science; Science of Mind (not | Scientology, not Christian Science) (9002) | Conservative (9003) | 10. American Indian Religions, Native American | Religions (9006) | 96. Spiritualist (9001) | Other: More than 1 major religion (e.g., | Christian, Jewish, Muslim, etc.) (9005) | Wicca; Wiccan (9007) | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - URUGUAY (2009): IMD2005 | | The Uruguay (2009) study had multiple additional categories on | religious denomination variable in CSES Module 3 (C2025). These | categories were re-coded the following way for the IMD: | | IMD Code MODULE 4 Category (MODULE 4 Code) |------------------------------------------------------------------ | 04. Christian, none religion (9001) | 96. Pantheistic (9002) | 96. Unification Church - Rev Moon (9003) | 96. Miracles of Jesus / New Apostolic / | Assembly of God (9004) | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - SOUTH AFRICA (2014): IMD2005 | | IMD Code MODULE 4 Category (MODULE 4 Code) |------------------------------------------------------------------ | 02. Zionist Christian (9001) | Seventh Day Adventist (9002) | Dutch Reformed (e.g. NGK, NHK, GK, Mission, APK, | URC) (9003) | 96. Rastafarian (9004) | Assembly of God (9005) | St Johns Church (9006) | Twelve Apostles (9007) --------------------------------------------------------------------------- IMD2006 >>> HOUSEHOLD INCOME --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Household income quintile appropriate to the respondent. .................................................................. 1. LOWEST HOUSEHOLD INCOME QUINTILE 2. SECOND HOUSEHOLD INCOME QUINTILE 3. THIRD HOUSEHOLD INCOME QUINTILE 4. FOURTH HOUSEHOLD INCOME QUINTILE 5. HIGHEST HOUSEHOLD INCOME QUINTILE 6. [SEE ELECTION STUDY NOTES] 7. VOLUNTEERED: REFUSED 8. VOLUNTEERED: DON'T KNOW 9. MISSING | VARIABLE NOTES: IMD2006 | | Income ranges shown represent sample quintiles (not population | quintiles). | | Where data were deposited in this format, income ranges shown | are as originally reported by collaborators including gaps | between contiguous sets of ranges. | | Where deposited income data were not grouped into sample | quintiles, the data have been re-coded into quintiles, according | to sample proportions (not national statistics). For cases where | it was not possible to compute sample quintiles, the income | categories approximating sample quintiles the closest have been | used. Consequently, this variable may contain distributions that | do not really represent quintiles. | | In some polities, annual income data is collected from | respondents while in others, monthly income data is collected. | Users are advised to consult the Standalone CSES Module Codebooks | for more precise information. | | The corresponding variables in the Standalone CSES Modules are: | MODULE 1: A2012 | MODULE 2: B2020 | MODULE 3: C2020 | MODULE 4: D2020 | | Income data are unavailable for BELGIUM (2003), KYRGYZSTAN | (2005), LATVIA (2010), SOUTH AFRICA (2009) and SOUTH KOREA | (2012). | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - ALBANIA (2005): IMD2006 | | This variable was derived from original CSES MODULE 2 question | "D26. Taking everything together, with pensions, social | benefits, salaries, profit, and all other income from selling | products, money sent from abroad, and so forth, how much is the | total income of your household in a month after taxes?" | | CSES Code Election Study Category |---------------------------------------------------------------- | 01. less than 10,000 ALL | 02. 10,000 - 14,000 ALL | 03. 15,000 - 24,500 ALL | 04. 25,000 - 38,000 ALL | 05. 40,000 - 400,000 ALL | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - ARGENTINA (2015): IMD2006 | | CSES Code Election Study Category |---------------------------------------------------------------- | 01. less than 5,001 ARS | 02. 5,001 - 6,000 ARS | 03. 6,001 - 9,000 ARS | 04. 9,001 - 13,500 ARS | 05. more than 13,500 ARS | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - AUSTRALIA (1996): IMD2006 | | This variable was derived from J12, MODULE 1 (User's Guide, | pp.101-102). Respondents were asked (Questionnaire, p.26): | "What is the gross annual income, before tax or other | deductions, for you and your family living with you from all | sources? Please include any pensions and allowances, and income | from interest or dividends" (J.12). Respondents were offered a | choice of 14 income categories: | | CSES Code Election Study Category |---------------------------------------------------------------- | 01. less than 3,000 AUD | 3,001 - 5,000 AUD | 5,001 - 8,000 AUD | 8,001 - 12,000 AUD | 02. 12,001 - 16,000 AUD | 16,001 - 20,000 AUD | 20,001 - 25,000 AUD | 03. 25,001 - 30,000 AUD | 30,001 - 35,000 AUD | 35,001 - 40,000 AUD | 04. 40,001 - 50,000 AUD | 50,001 - 60,000 AUD | 05. 60,001 - 70,000 AUD | more than 70,000 AUD | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - AUSTRALIA (2004): IMD2006 | | This variable was derived from original MODULE 2 variable i18. | Respondents were asked (Questionnaire, p.26): "What is the gross | annual income, before tax or other deductions, for you and your | family living with you from all sources? Please include any | pensions and allowances, and income from interest or dividends". | | Respondents were offered a choice of 16 income categories: | | CSES Code Election Study Category |---------------------------------------------------------------- | 01. less than 5,000 AUD | 5,001 - 10,000 AUD | 10,001 - 15,000 AUD | 15,001 - 20,000 AUD | 02. 20,001 - 25,000 AUD | 25,001 - 30,000 AUD | 30,001 - 35,000 AUD | 35,001 - 40,000 AUD | 03. 40,001 - 45,000 AUD | 45,001 - 50,000 AUD | 50,001 - 60,000 AUD | 04. 60,001 - 70,000 AUD | 70,001 - 80,000 AUD | 80,001 - 90,000 AUD | 05. 90,001 - 100,000 AUD | more than 100,000 AUD | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - AUSTRALIA (2007): IMD2006 | | This variable was derived from original MODULE 3 variable H16. | Respondents were asked: "What is the gross annual income, before | tax or other deductions, for you and your family living with you | from all sources? Please include any pensions and allowances, | and income from interest or dividends". | Respondents were offered a choice of 18 income categories: | | CSES Code Election Study Category |---------------------------------------------------------------- | 01. less than 15,000 AUD | 02. 15,001 - 40,000 AUD | 03. 40,001 - 60,000 AUD | 04. 60,001 - 100,000 AUD | 05. more than 100,001 AUD | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - AUSTRALIA (2013): IMD2006 | | CSES Code Election Study Category |---------------------------------------------------------------- | 01. less than 30,000 AUD | 02. 30,001 - 60,000 AUD | 03. 60,001 - 90,000 AUD | 04. 90,001 - 140,000 AUD | 05. more than 140,000 up to 180,000 AUD | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - AUSTRIA (2008): IMD2006 | | CSES Code Election Study Category |---------------------------------------------------------------- | 01. Less than 1,350 EUR | 02. 1,350 - 1,949 EUR | 03. 1,950 - 2,399 EUR | 04. 2,400 - 3,599 EUR | 05. More than 3,600 EUR | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - AUSTRIA (2013): IMD2006 | | CSES Code Election Study Category |---------------------------------------------------------------- | 01. less than 1,200 EUR | 02. 1,200 - 2,000 EUR | 03. 2,000 - 2,800 EUR | 04. 2,800 - 3,600 EUR | 05. more than 3,600 EUR | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - BELARUS (2001): IMD2006 | | CSES Code Election Study Category: |---------------------------------------------------------------- | 01. less than 86 BYR | 02. 87 - 145 BYR | 03. 146 - 195 BYR | 04. 196 - 260 BYR | 05. more than 260 BYR | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - BELARUS (2008): IMD2006 | | For this question, respondents in Belarus were asked to rate | their income on the following non-numeric scale instead of | proposing a quintile distribution based on the sample. 56% of | respondents chose the middle category, 93% of respondents are | located between categories 1 and 3. | | CSES Code Election Study Category |---------------------------------------------------------------- | 01. Very low | 02. Rather low | 03. Medium | 04. Rather high | 05. High | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - BELGIUM-FLANDERS (1999): IMD2006 | | This variable was constructed using several different surveys | items. The resulting code set was: | | CSES Code Election Study Category |---------------------------------------------------------------- | 01. less than 49,999 BEF | 02. 50,000 - 69,999 BEF | 03. 70,000 - 89,999 BEF | 04. 90,000 - 114,999 BEF | 05. more than 115,000 BEF | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - BELGIUM-WALLOON (1999): IMD2006 | | This variable was constructed using several different survey | items. The resulting code set was: | | CSES Code Election Study Category |---------------------------------------------------------------- | 01. less than 40,000 BEF | 02. 40,000 - 65,000 BEF | 03. 65,000 - 90,000 BEF | 04. 90,000 - 115,000 BEF | 05. more than 115,000 BEF | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - BRAZIL (2002): IMD2006 | | Quintile ranges not provided. | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - BRAZIL (2006): IMD2006 | | Quintile ranges were calculated proportional to the sample. | | CSES Code Election Study Category |---------------------------------------------------------------- | 01. less than - 400 BRL | 02. 418 - 650 BRL | 03. 680 - 900 BRL | 04. 950 - 1,500 BRL | 05. more than 1,600 BRL | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - BRAZIL (2010): IMD2006 | | Quintile ranges were calculated proportional to the sample. | | CSES Code Election Study Category |---------------------------------------------------------------- | 01. less than 600 BRL | 02. 610 - 1,020 BRL | 03. 1,021 - 1,500 BRL | 04. 1,510 - 2,500 BRL | 05. more than 2,510 BRL | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - BRAZIL (2014): IMD2006 | | This variable was created based on two questions. An open- | ended question first asked respondents to report their income. | Those that did not respond were then asked if their income | fitted into one of seven income ranges that the interviewer | provided them with. Quintiles were created based on the | open-ended question. Four of the seven ranges in the second | income question fit the distribution of the quintiles and | were added to the variable. Respondents in the remaining | three categories were coded as missing. | | CSES Code Election Study Category |---------------------------------------------------------------- | 01. up to 900 BRL | 02. 920 - 1,460 BRL | 03. 1,500 - 2,000 BRL | 04. 2,008 - 3,000 BRL | 05. more than 3,000 BRL | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - BULGARIA (2001): IMD2006 | | CSES Code Election Study Category |---------------------------------------------------------------- | (Monthly Household Income) | 01. less than 120 BGN | 02. 120 - 196 BGN | 03. 197 - 285 BGN | 04. 286 - 390 BGN | 05. more than 390 BGN | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - BULGARIA (2014): IMD2006 | | CSES Code Election Study Category |---------------------------------------------------------------- | 01. less than 375 BGN | 02. 375 - 580 BGN | 03. 581 - 890 BGN | 04. 891 - 1,300 BGN | 05. more than 1,300 BGN | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - CANADA (1997): IMD2006 | | This variable was constructed from two separate items: | (1) Respondents were asked what their household income was and | if they gave the raw figure, it was recorded; and (2) if they | were reluctant, respondents were given the option of identifying | the broad categories into which their household income fits | (reported in parentheses below). Roughly, the quintile | thresholds are: | | CSES Code Election Study Category |---------------------------------------------------------------- | 01. less than 23,000 (< 20,000) CAD | 02. 23,000 - 38,000 (20,000-29,999) CAD | 03. 39,000 - 55,000 (30,000-49,999) CAD | 04. 56,000 - 78,000 (50,000-69,999) CAD | 05. more than 78,000 (>70,000) CAD | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - CANADA (2004): IMD2006 | | CSES Code Election Study Category |---------------------------------------------------------------- | 01. less than 20,000 CAD | 20,000 - 29,999 CAD | 02. 30,000 - 39,999 CAD | 40,000 - 49,999 CAD | 03. 50,000 - 59,999 CAD | 60,000 - 69,999 CAD | 04. 70,000 - 79,999 CAD | 80,000 - 89,999 CAD | 05. 90,000 - 99,999 CAD | more than 100,000 CAD | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - CANADA (2008): IMD2006 | | CSES Code Election Study Category |---------------------------------------------------------------- | 01. less than 30.000 CAD | 02. 30.000 - 49.999 CAD | 03. 50.000 - 69.999 CAD | 04. 70.000 - 99.999 CAD | 05. more than 100.000 CAD | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - CANADA (2011): IMD2006 | | The variable is from the pre-election study. Respondents were | asked to answer according to their last years household income. | | CSES Code Election Study Category |---------------------------------------------------------------- | 01. 1,000 - 34,000 CAD | 02. 35,000 - 53,000 CAD | 03. 54,000 - 76,000 CAD | 04. 77,000 - 110,000 CAD | 05. 111,000 - 900,000 CAD | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - CANADA (2015): IMD2006 | | This variable is from the pre-election survey. | Respondents were asked to answer according to their last year’s | household income. | | CSES Code Election Study Category |---------------------------------------------------------------- | 01. 1,000 – 40,000 CAD | 02. 41,000 - 70,000 CAD | 03. 71,000 - 100,000 CAD | 04. 101,000 - 140,000 CAD | 05. 141,000 - 900,000 CAD | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - CHILE (1999): IMD2006 | | The income quintiles correspond roughly to the following | categories: | | CSES Code Election Study Category |---------------------------------------------------------------- | 01. less than 120,000 CLP | 02. 121,000 - 180,000 CLP | 03. 181,000 - 290,000 CLP | 04. 291,000 - 600,000 CLP | 05. more than 601,000 CLP | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - CHILE (2005): IMD2006 | | The income quintiles correspond roughly to the specified | distribution of the 2003 Socioeconomic Characterization Survey | (CASEN) (http://www.mideplan.cl/casen/): | | CSES Code Election Study Category |---------------------------------------------------------------- | 01. less than 112,000 CLP | 02. 112,000 - 180,000 CLP | 180,001 - 250,000 CLP | 03. 250,001 - 400,000 CLP | 04. 400,001 - 800,000 CLP | 800,001 - 1,000,000 CLP | 05. 1,000,001 - 1,500,000 CLP | 1,500,001 - 2,000,000 CLP | 2,000,001 - 3,000,000 CLP | more than 3,000,000 CLP | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - CHILE (2009): IMD2006 | | CSES Code Election Study Category |---------------------------------------------------------------- | 01. less than 165,000 CLP | 02. 165,000 - 200,000 CLP | 03. 200,001 - 300,000 CLP | 04. 300,001 - 700,000 CLP | 05. 700,001 - 1,000,000 CLP | 1,500,001 - 2,000,000 CLP | 2,000,001 - 3,000,000 CLP | more than 3,000,000 CLP | | Note that quintiles could not be calculated because the income | of respondents was asked in ranges. | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - CROATIA (2007): IMD2006 | | CSES Code Election Study Category |---------------------------------------------------------------- | 01. less than 2,000 HRK | 02. 2,001 - 4,000 HRK | 03. 4,001 - 6,000 HRK | 04. 6,001 - 8,000 HRK | 05. more than 8,000 HRK | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - CZECH REPUBLIC (2002): IMD2006 | | Quintile ranges not provided. | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - CZECH REPUBLIC (2006 & 2010): IMD2006 | | Monthly income of household, in Czech Crowns (CZK): | | CSES Code Election Study Category |---------------------------------------------------------------- | 01. less than 13,999 CZK | 02. 14,000 - 22,999 CZK | 03. 23,000 - 29,999 CZK | 04. 30,000 - 39,999 CZK | 05. 40,000 or more CZK | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - CZECH REPUBLIC (2013): IMD2006 | | CSES Code Election Study Category |---------------------------------------------------------------- | 01. less than 15,999 CZK | 02. 16,000 - 29,999 CZK | 03. 30,000 - 39,999 CZK | 04. 40,000 - 59,999 CZK | 05. more than 60,000 CZK | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - DENMARK (1998): IMD2006 | | CSES Code Election Study Category |---------------------------------------------------------------- | 01. less than 75,000 DKK | 75,000 - 99,999 DKK | 100,000 - 124,999 DKK | 125,000 - 149,999 DKK | 02. 150,000 - 174,999 DKK | 175,000 - 199,999 DKK | 03. 200,000 - 249,999 DKK | 250,000 - 299,999 DKK | 300,000 - 349,999 DKK | 04. 350,000 - 399,999 DKK | 450,000 - 499,999 DKK | 05. 500,000 - 599,999 DKK | 600,000 - 699,999 DKK | 700,000 - 799,999 DKK | more than 800,000 DKK | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - DENMARK (2001): IMD2006 | | CSES Code Election Study Category |---------------------------------------------------------------- | 01. less than 75,000 DKK | 75,000 - 99,999 DKK | 100,000 - 124,999 DKK | 125,000 - 149,999 DKK | 150,000 - 174,999 DKK | 02. 175,000 - 199,999 DKK | 200,000 - 249,999 DKK | 250,000 - 299,999 DKK | 03. 300,000 - 349,999 DKK | 350,000 - 399,999 DKK | 400,000 - 449,999 DKK | 04. 450,000 - 499,999 DKK | 500,000 - 599,999 DKK | 05. 600,000 - 699,999 DKK | 700,000 - 799,999 DKK | 800,000 - 999,999 DKK | 1,000,000 or more DKK | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - DENMARK (2007): IMD2006 | | CSES Code Election Study Category |---------------------------------------------------------------- | 01. less than 349,999 DKK | 02. 350,000 - 499,999 DKK | 03. 450,000 - 599,999 DKK | 04. 600,000 - 799,999 DKK | 05. more than 800,000 DKK | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - ESTONIA (2011): IMD2006 | | CSES Code Election Study Category |---------------------------------------------------------------- | 01. less than 3,300 EUR | 02. 3,312 - 5,100 EUR | 03. 5,112 - 6,900 EUR | 04. 6,912 - 12,000 EUR | 05. more than 12,000 EUR | | The Estonian question of origin refers to the monthly household | income, which was extrapolated to the yearly income. | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - FINLAND (2003): IMD2006 | | CSES Code Election Study Category |---------------------------------------------------------------- | 01. less than 10,000 EUR | 02. 10,001 - 15,000 EUR | 15,001 - 20,000 EUR | 03. 20,001 - 25,000 EUR | 25,001 - 30,000 EUR | 04. 30,001 - 35,000 EUR | 35,001 - 40,000 EUR | 40,001 - 45,000 EUR | 05. 45,001 - 50,000 EUR | 50,001 - 55,000 EUR | 55,001 - 85,000 EUR | more than 85,000 EUR | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - FINLAND (2007): IMD2006 | | CSES Code Election Study Category |---------------------------------------------------------------- | 01. less than 15,001 EUR | 02. 15,001 - 30,000 EUR | 03. 30,001 - 40,000 EUR | 04. 40,001 - 55,000 EUR | 05. more than 55,000 EUR | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - FINLAND (2011): IMD2006 | | CSES Code Election Study Category |---------------------------------------------------------------- | 01. less than 15,001 EUR | 02. 15,001 - 25,000 EUR | 03. 25,001 - 40,000 EUR | 04. 40,001 - 60,000 EUR | 05. more than 60,000 EUR | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - FINLAND (2015): IMD2006 | | CSES Code Election Study Category |---------------------------------------------------------------- | 01. less than 11,999 EUR | 02. 12,000 - 22,999 EUR | 03. 23,000 - 39,999 EUR | 04. 40,000 - 59,999 EUR | 05. more than 60,000 EUR | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - FRANCE (2002): IMD2006 | | CSES Code Election Study Category |---------------------------------------------------------------- | 01. 2,000 or less EUR | 2,001 - 3,000 EUR | 3,001 - 5,000 EUR | 5,001 - 7,500 EUR | 02. 7,501 - 10,000 EUR | 03. 10,001 - 15,000 EUR | 04. 15,001 - 20,000 EUR | 05. 20,001 - 30,000 EUR | 30,001 - 40,000 EUR | 40,001 - 50,000 EUR | 50,001 or more EUR | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - FRANCE (2007): IMD2006 | | CSES Code Election Study Category |---------------------------------------------------------------- | 01. less than 1,500 EUR | 02. 1,501 - 2,300 EUR | 03. 2,301 - 3,000 EUR | 04. 3,001 - 4,000 EUR | 05. more than 4,000 EUR | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - FRANCE (2012): IMD2006 | | The French election study asked about 10 ranges of | household income. Those were collapsed into 5 ranges. | | CSES Code Election Study Category |---------------------------------------------------------------- | 01. less than 1,500 EUR | 02. 1,501 - 2,000 EUR | 03. 2,001 - 3,000 EUR | 04. 3,001 - 5,000 EUR | 05. more than 5,000 EUR | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - GERMANY (1998): IMD2006 | | Note provided with the re-coded deposit: Figures are based on a | recode of 20 income classes. Due to missing official figures, | quintiles are based on survey responses. | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - GERMANY (2002 Mail-Back): IMD2006 | | This variable is re-coded from a question asking respondents to | identify an income class. The income range for each quintile is | reported here: | | CSES Code Election Study Category |---------------------------------------------------------------- | 01. 1,499 or less EUR | 02. 1,500 - 1,999 EUR | 03. 2,000 - 2,999 EUR | 04. 3,000 - 3,999 EUR | 05. more than 5,000 EUR | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - GERMANY (2002 Telephone): IMD2006 | | This question was asked in two stages: Those respondents who did | not identify an income level initially were presented with | income categories from which to choose. As indicated in the | table below, both question formats were used to create the | income quintiles reported in the data (the categorical response | format is denoted in parentheses with a 'C'). | | CSES Code Election Study Category |---------------------------------------------------------------- | 01. 150 - 1,280 EUR | less than 500 EUR (C) | 500 - 499 EUR (C) | 1,000 - 1,499 EUR (C) | 02. 1,281 - 1,850 EUR | 1,500 - 1,999 EUR (C) | 03. 1,851 - 2,450 EUR | 2,000 - 2,999 EUR (C) | 04. 2,451 - 3,400 EUR | 3,000 - 3,999 EUR (C) | 05. 3,401 - 19,000 EUR | 4,000 - 4,999 EUR (C) | 5,000 or more EUR (C) | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - GERMANY (2005): IMD2006 | | CSES Code Election Study Category |---------------------------------------------------------------- | 01. less than 1,000 EUR | 02. 1,001 - 1,500 EUR | 03. 1,501 - 2,100 EUR | 04. 2,101 - 3,000 EUR | 05. more than 3,001 EUR | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - GERMANY (2009): IMD2006 | | CSES Code Election Study Category |---------------------------------------------------------------- | 01. less than 1,200 EUR | 02. 1,201 - 1,499 EUR | 03. 1,500 - 1,999 EUR | 04. 2,000 - 2,799 EUR | 05. more than 2,799 EUR | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - GERMANY (2013): IMD2006 | | The original household income variable had 13 categories. Due to | the distribution, the data does not approximate to quintiles | very well. | | CSES Code Election Study Category |---------------------------------------------------------------- | 01. less than 1,250 EUR | 02. 1,250 to less than 1,500 EUR | 03. 1,500 to less than 2,000 EUR | 04. 2,000 to less than 3,000 EUR | 05. 3,000 to less than 10,000 EUR | 10,000 EUR or more | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - GREAT BRITAIN (1997): IMD2006 | | One section of the sample (approximately half) was asked: | "Which of the letters on this card represents the total income | of your household from all sources before tax - including | benefits, saving and so on? Please just tell me the letter." | | The other section was asked: "What is the total income of your | household from all sources before tax - including benefits, | savings and so on? Please just tick one of the boxes on this | form. When you have finished, please fold the form and put it | into the envelope. RETRIEVE ENVELOPE" | | This variable is based on the combined data from these two | questions. In both cases, the answer options were: | | | CSES Code Election Study Category |---------------------------------------------------------------- | WEEKLY income ANNUAL income | BEFORE tax BEFORE tax | 01. less than 77 GBP less than 3,999 GBP | 78 - 115 GBP 4,000 - 5,999 GBP | 116 - 154 GBP 6,000 - 7,999 GBP | 02. 155 - 192 GBP 8,000 - 9,999 GBP | 193 - 230 GBP 10,000 - 11,999 GBP | 231 - 289 GBP 12,000 - 14,999 GBP | 03. 290 - 346 GBP 15,000 - 17,999 GBP | 347 - 385 GBP 18,000 - 19,999 GBP | 386 - 442 GBP 20,000 - 22,999 GBP | 04. 443 - 500 GBP 23,000 - 25,999 GBP | 501 - 558 GBP 26,000 - 28,999 GBP | 559 - 615 GBP 29,000 - 31,999 GBP | 05. 616 - 673 GBP 32,000 - 34,999 GBP | 674 - 730 GBP 35,000 - 37,999 GBP | 731 - 788 GBP 38,000 - 40,999 GBP | 789 or more GBP 41,000 or more GBP | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - GREAT BRITAIN (2005): IMD2006 | | CSES Code Election Study Category |---------------------------------------------------------------- | 01. less than 9,999 GBP | 02. 10,000 - 17,999 GBP | 03. 18,000 - 25,999 GBP | 04. 26,000 - 43,999 GBP | 05. 44,000 or more GBP | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - GREAT BRITAIN (2015): IMD2006 | | Quintiles were calculated on base of an originally | 15-scaled variable. Resulting distributions are not even. | | CSES Code Election Study Category |---------------------------------------------------------------- | 01. less than 10,399 GBP | 02. 10,400 - 20,788 GBP | 03. 20,800 - 36,399 GBP | 04. 36,400 - 59,999 GBP | 05. more than 59,999 GBP | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - GREECE (2009): IMD2006 | | CSES Code Election Study Category |---------------------------------------------------------------- | 01. less than 10,000 EUR | 02. 10,001 - 15,000 EUR | 03. 15,001 - 25,000 EUR | 04. 25,001 - 40,000 EUR | 05. more than 40,000 EUR | | Note that the distribution of respondents' income does not match | quintiles. However, the Greek questionnaire asked for the income | categories in the way mentioned above. | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - GREECE (2012 & 2015): IMD2006 | | The distribution does not approximate to quintiles as the | original questions asked respondents to place themselves | in one of the five closed categories. | | CSES Code Election Study Category |---------------------------------------------------------------- | 01. less than 10,000 EUR | 02. 10,001 - 15,000 EUR | 03. 15,001 - 25,000 EUR | 04. 25,001 - 40,000 EUR | 05. more than 40,001 EUR | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - HONG KONG (1998): IMD2006 | | CSES Code Election Study Category |---------------------------------------------------------------- | 01. no income | up to 3,999 HKD | 4,000 - 5,999 HKD | 6,000 - 7,999 HKD | 8,000 - 9,999 HKD | 02. 10,000 - 14,999 HKD | 03. 15,000 - 19,999 HKD | 20,000 - 24,999 HKD | 04. 25,000 - 29,999 HKD | 30,000 - 39,999 HKD | 05. 40,000 - 59,999 HKD | 60,000 or more HKD | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - HONG KONG (2000): IMD2006 | | CSES Code Election Study Category |---------------------------------------------------------------- | 01. no income | up to 3,999 HKD | 4,000 - 5,999 HKD | 6,000 - 7,999 HKD | 02. 8,000 - 9,999 HKD | 10,000 - 14,999 HKD | 03. 15,000 - 19,999 HKD | 04. 20,000 - 24,999 HKD | 25,000 - 29,999 HKD | 05. 30,000 - 39,999 HKD | 40,000 - 59,999 HKD | 60,000 or more HKD | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - HONG KONG (2004): IMD2006 | | The following table shows conversion of the original | categories into approximate income quintiles: | | CSES Code Election Study Category |---------------------------------------------------------------- | 01. No income | up to 3,999 HKD | 4,000 - 5,999 HKD | 02. 6,000 - 7,999 HKD | 8,000 - 9,999 HKD | 03. 10,000 - 14,999 HKD | 04. 15,000 - 19,999 HKD | 20,000 - 24,999 HKD | 05. 25,000 - 29,999 HKD | 30,000 - 39,999 HKD | 40,000 - 59,999 HKD | 60,000 or more HKD | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - HONG KONG (2008): IMD2006 | | Hong Kong implemented two additional categories (see below) | while no missing data were included. Here, the value "9 | MISSING" refers to all observations reporting "NO FIXED INCOME". | | CSES Code Election Study Category |---------------------------------------------------------------- | 01. less than 9,999 HKD | 02. 10,000 - 19,999 HKD | 03. 20,000 - 29,999 HKD | 04. 30,000 - 49,999 HKD | 05. more than 50,000 HKD | 06. No income | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - HONG KONG (2012): IMD2006 | | In the original data, there were 8 categories for ranges of | income and two further categories "no income", "no fixed | income". These were re-coded into CSES category 01. After | re-coding, the five categories do not match quintiles well. | | CSES Code Election Study Category |---------------------------------------------------------------- | 01. less than 19,999 HKD | 02. 10,000 - 19,999 HKD | 03. 20,000 - 29,999 HKD | 04. 30,000 - 49,000 HKD | 05. 50,000 or more HKD | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - HUNGARY (1998): IMD2006 | | The data come from the pre-election wave of the survey. | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - HUNGARY (2002): IMD2006 | | CSES Code Election Study Category |---------------------------------------------------------------- | 01. 12,000 - 49,800 HUF | 02. 50,000 - 75,000 HUF | 03. 75,200 - 101,800 HUF | 04. 102,000 - 142,000 HUF | 05. 142,400 - 930,000 HUF | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - ICELAND (2003): IMD2006 | | Quintile ranges not provided. | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - ICELAND (2007): IMD2006 | | Monthly household income, before tax and other deductions | | CSES Code Election Study Category |---------------------------------------------------------------- | 01. less than 200,000 ISK | 02. 201,000 - 345,000 ISK | 03. 346,000 - 490,000 ISK | 04. 491,000 - 650,000 ISK | 05. more than 650,000 ISK | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - ICELAND (2009): IMD2006 | | Monthly household income, before tax and other deductions | | CSES Code Election Study Category |---------------------------------------------------------------- | 01. less than 192,000 ISK | 02. 193,000 - 350,000 ISK | 03. 351,000 - 500,000 ISK | 04. 501,000 - 700,000 ISK | 05. more than 700,000 ISK | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - ICELAND (2013): IMD2006 | | CSES Code Election Study Category |---------------------------------------------------------------- | 01. up to 260,000 ISK | 02. 261,000 - 440,000 ISK | 03. 441,000 - 630,000 ISK | 04. 631,000 - 900,000 ISK | 05. more than 900,000 ISK | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - IRELAND (2002): IMD2006 | | This item was asked in a branched format: Respondents were asked | to identify a broad income category (denoted below), and then | were asked to identify a more narrow category from within that | broad category. | | CSES Code Election Study Category |---------------------------------------------------------------- | 01. Under 240: less than 100 EUR | Under 240: 100-150 EUR | Under 240: 151-200 EUR | Under 240: 201-240 EUR | Under 240 EUR | 241-450: 241-280 EUR | 02. 241-450: 281-350 EUR | 241-450: 351-400 EUR | 03. 241-450: 401-450 EUR | 241-450 EUR | 451-700: 451-500 EUR | 451-700: 501-570 EUR | 04. 451-700: 571-630 EUR | 451-700: 631-700 EUR | 451-700 EUR | 701 or more: 701-825 EUR | 05. 701 or more: 826-950 EUR | 701 or more: 951-1,200 EUR | 701 or more: more than 1,201 EUR | 701 or more EUR | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - IRELAND (2007): IMD2006 | | Household income per week. | | CSES Code Election Study Category |---------------------------------------------------------------- | 01. less than 240 EUR | 02. 241 - 450 EUR | 03. 451 - 700 EUR | 04. 701 - 1,000 EUR | 05. more than 1,000 EUR | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - IRELAND (2011): IMD2006 | | CSES Code Election Study Category |---------------------------------------------------------------- | 01. less than 20,000 EUR | 02. 20,000 - 29,999 EUR | 03. 30,000 - 39,999 EUR | 04. 40,000 - 49,999 EUR | 05. more than 50,000 EUR | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - ISRAEL (1996): IMD2006 | | 239 cases coded 9 in the deposited data represented 'Refused' | and have been moved to 0 missing for this release. | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - ISRAEL (2003): IMD2006 | | CSES Code Election Study Category |---------------------------------------------------------------- | 01. up to 4,300 ILS | 02. 4,301 - 6,000 ILS | 03. 6,001 - 8,000 ILS | 04. 8,001 - 11,000 ILS | 05. 11,001 or more ILS | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - ISRAEL (2006): IMD2006 | | CSES Code Election Study Category |---------------------------------------------------------------- | 01. less than 3,999 ILS | 02. 4,000 - 5,499 ILS | 03. 5,500 - 8,000 ILS | 04. 8,001 - 12,999 ILS | 05. more than 12,999 ILS | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - ISRAEL (2013): IMD2006 | | Respondents in Israel were asked to place their | household income within the five ranges below. Accordingly, | the data does not match quintiles. | | CSES Code Election Study Category |---------------------------------------------------------------- | 01. up to 4,500 ILS | 02. 4,501 - 8,000 ILS | 03. 8,001 - 12,000 ILS | 04. 12,001 - 16,000 ILS | 05. more than 16,000 ILS | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - ITALY (2006): IMD2006 | | CSES Code Election Study Category |---------------------------------------------------------------- | 01. up to 386 EUR | 387 - 645 EUR | 646 - 903 EUR | 904 - 1,161 EUR | 02. 1,162 - 1,419 EUR | 1,420 - 1,677 EUR | 03. 1,678 - 1,935 EUR | 1,936 - 2,193 EUR | 04. 2,194 - 2,452 EUR | 05. 2,453 - 3,872 EUR | 3,873 - 5,163 EUR | 5,164 or more EUR | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - JAPAN (1996): IMD2006 | | CSES Code Election Study Category |---------------------------------------------------------------- | 01. less than 2,000,000 JPY | 2,000,000 - 3,999,999 JPY | 02. 4,000,000 - 5,999,999 JPY | 03. 6,000,000 - 7,999,999 JPY | 04. 8,000,000 - 9,999,999 JPY | 05. 10,000,000 - 11,999,999 JPY | 12,000,000 - 13,999,999 JPY | more than 14,000,000 JPY | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - JAPAN (2004): IMD2006 | | CSES Code Election Study Category |---------------------------------------------------------------- | 01. less than 3,000,000 JPY | 02. 3,000,000 - 4,000,000 JPY | 03. 4,000,000 - 6,000,000 JPY | 04. 6,000,000 - 8,000,000 JPY | 05. more than 8,000,000 JPY | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - JAPAN (2007): IMD2006 | | CSES Code Election Study Category |---------------------------------------------------------------- | 01. less than 3,000,000 JPY | 02. 3,000,000 - 5,000,000 JPY | 03. 5,000,000 - 7,000,000 JPY | 04. 7,000,000 - 10,000,000 JPY | 05. more than 10,000,000 JPY | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - JAPAN (2013): IMD2006 | | The data provided does not reflect true quintiles derived from | continuous data. The national collaborators asked people about | their income using a 5 point scale. The ranges were designed to | capture an accurate image of the income distribution of people | in Japan. However, responses were underrepresented in the | sample of the lowest income category because income is a very | sensitive issue in Japan. | | CSES Code Election Study Category |---------------------------------------------------------------- | 01. less than 2,000,000 JPY | 02. 2,000,000 - 3,500,000 JPY | 03. 3,500,000 - 5,500,000 JPY | 04. 5,500,000 - 8,000,000 JPY | 05. more than 8,000,000 JPY | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - KENYA (2013): IMD2006 | | The deposited income data were not grouped into quintiles. As | the original variable consists of discrete answer categories, | quintiles could only be approximated. | | CSES Code Election Study Category |---------------------------------------------------------------- | 01. less than 2,501 KES | 02. 2,600 - 5,000 KES | 03. 5,500 - 10,000 KES | 04. 10,500 - 20,000 KES | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - LATVIA (2011): IMD2006 | | Analysts should be aware that the Latvian election study | deviates from the CSES convention. Respondents were asked for | the last months' after-tax salary per family member in the | household. | | CSES Code Election Study Category |---------------------------------------------------------------- | 01. less than 85 EUR | 02. 85 - 127 EUR | 03. 130 - 169 EUR | 04. 170 - 247 EUR | 05. more than 247 EUR | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - LATVIA (2014): IMD2006 | | The Latvian election study deviated from the CSES convention. | Respondents were asked for the last months' after-tax salary per | family member in the household. | | CSES Code Election Study Category |---------------------------------------------------------------- | 01. 0 - 150 EUR | 02. 159 - 230 EUR | 03. 234 - 300 EUR | 04. 320 - 450 EUR | 05. 460 - 3000 EUR | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - MEXICO (1997): IMD2006 | | These categories only roughly correspond to quintiles because | nearly forty percent of respondents fall into one category, as | constructed and deposited by the collaborator. | | CSES Code Election Study Category |---------------------------------------------------------------- | 01. up to 1,000 MXN | 02. 1,001 - 3,000 MXN | 03. 3,001 - 5,000 MXN | 04. 5,001 - 7,000 MXN | 05. 7,001 - 10,000 MXN | 10,000 - 30,000 MXN | more than 30,000 MXN | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - MEXICO (2000): IMD2006 | | The income variable results from the combination of variables | SE12 and SE12A. | | SE12 is the direct answer to the question, "What is your | family's monthly income?" To those who did not answer we asked, | "Is your family's monthly income between these categories?"; | this is SE12A. V99 results from the combination of both | questions grouped in quintiles. | | CSES Code Election Study Category |---------------------------------------------------------------- | 01. 0 - 1,400 MXN | 02. 1,401 - 2,300 MXN | 03. 2,301 - 3,500 MXN | 04. 3,501 - 6,000 MXN | 05. 6,001 or more MXN | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - MEXICO (2003): IMD2006 | | CSES Code Election Study Category |---------------------------------------------------------------- | 01. 200 - 1,500 MXN | 02. 1,500 - 2,400 MXN | 03. 2,500 - 3,900 MXN | 04. 4,000 - 6,000 MXN | 05. 6,200 - 100,000 MXN | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - MEXICO (2006): IMD2006 | | Ranges reflect annual family income. | Research should take care about the distribution of | observations, which are not grouped into income quintiles. | | CSES Code Election Study Category |---------------------------------------------------------------- | 01. less than 52,560 MXN | 02. 52,561 - 87,600 MXN | 03. 87,601 - 122,640 MXN | 04. 122,641 - 175,200 MXN | 05. more than 175,200 MXN | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - MEXICO (2009): IMD2006 | | Quintile ranges reflect annual family income. | | CSES Code Election Study Category |---------------------------------------------------------------- | 01. less than 29,400 MXN | 02. 29,400 - 45,600 MXN | 03. 45,600 - 70,800 MXN | 04. 70,800 - 94,800 MXN | 05. more than 94,800 MXN | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - MEXICO (2012): IMD2006 | | CSES Code Election Study Category |---------------------------------------------------------------- | 01. less than 2,000 MXN | 02. 2,000 - 3,500 MXN | 03. 3,501 - 5,000 MXN | 04. 5,001 - 7,200 MXN | 05. more than 7,200 MXN | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - MEXICO (2015): IMD2006 | | CSES Code Election Study Category |---------------------------------------------------------------- | 01. less than 3,601 MXN | 02. 3,700 - 5,000 MXN | 03. 5,200 - 6,500 MXN | 04. 6,600 - 9,000 MXN | 05. more than 9,100 MXN | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - MONTENEGRO (2012): IMD2006 | | CSES Code Election Study Category |---------------------------------------------------------------- | 01. less than 200 EUR | 02. 200 - 400 EUR | 03. 401 - 550 EUR | 04. 551 - 800 EUR | 05. more than 800 EUR | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - NETHERLANDS (1998): IMD2006 | | CSES Code Election Study Category |---------------------------------------------------------------- | 01. 0 - 28,000 NLG | 02. 28,000 - 38,000 NLG | 03. 38,000 - 52,000 NLG | 04. 52,000 - 73,000 NLG | 05. 73,000 or more NLG | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - NETHERLANDS (2002): IMD2006 | | CSES Code Election Study Category |---------------------------------------------------------------- | 01. less than 20,500 EUR | 02. 20,500 - 28,500 EUR | 03. 28,500 - 34,000 EUR | 04. 34,000 - 56,000 EUR | 05. more than 56,000 EUR | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - NETHERLANDS (2006): IMD2006 | | The original variable "V413 Disposable income of household | (after taxes)" was coded in 20 categories each containing | approximately 5% of respondents. | | CSES Code Election Study Category |---------------------------------------------------------------- | 01. less than 19,592 EUR | 02. 19,592 - 26,878 EUR | 03. 26,879 - 34,895 EUR | 04. 34,896 - 45,682 EUR | 05. more than 45,683 EUR | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - NETHERLANDS (2010): IMD2006 | | The original variable "V451 Spendable income of household" | was coded in 20 categories each containing approximately | 5% of respondents. | | CSES Code Election Study Category |---------------------------------------------------------------- | 01. less than 24,889 EUR | 02. 24,889 - 34,120 EUR | 03. 34,121 - 44,127 EUR | 04. 44,128 - 60,354 EUR | 05. more than 60,354 EUR | 08. Don't know / Not answered | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - NEW ZEALAND (1996): IMD2006 | | Earlier release of this data file classified respondents | differently. The collaborators have more recently provided an | updated version of this variable, with income quintile | corresponding to the following categories: | | CSES Code Election Study Category |---------------------------------------------------------------- | 01. less than 18,000 NZD | 02. 18,800 - 28,799 NZD | 03. 28,800 - 44,199 NZD | 04. 44,200 - 67,399 NZD | 05. 67,400 or more NZD | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - NEW ZEALAND (2002): IMD2006 | | CSES Code Election Study Category |---------------------------------------------------------------- | 01. No income | less than 14,900 NZD | 02. 14,900 - 32,399 NZD | 03. 32,400 - 51,099 NZD | 04. 51,100 - 101,099 NZD | 05. more than 101,100 NZD | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - NEW ZEALAND (2008): IMD2006 | | CSES Code Election Study Category |---------------------------------------------------------------- | 01. less than 27,000 NZD | 02. 27,000 - 45,999 NZD | 03. 46,000 - 70,999 NZD | 04. 71,000 - 108,999 NZD | 05. more than 109,000 NZD | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - NEW ZEALAND (2011): IMD2006 | | CSES Code Election Study Category |---------------------------------------------------------------- | 01. less than 28,900 NZD | 02. 28,900 - 51,399 NZD | 03. 51,400 - 76,099 NZD | 04. 76,100 - 110,799 NZD | 05. more than 110,800 NZD | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - NEW ZEALAND (2014): IMD2006 | | CSES Code Election Study Category |---------------------------------------------------------------- | 01. less than 31,000 NZD | 02. 31,001 - 55,000 NZD | 03. 55,001 - 76,100 NZD | 04. 76,001 - 110,800 NZD | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - NORWAY (1997): IMD2006 | | The CSES income quintiles correspond to the following income | levels: | | CSES Code Election Study Category |---------------------------------------------------------------- | 01. less than 139,000 NOK | 02. 140,000 - 249,000 NOK | 03. 250,000 - 349,000 NOK | 04. 350,000 - 464,000 NOK | 05. more than 465,000 NOK | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - NORWAY (2001): IMD2006 | | CSES Code Election Study Category |---------------------------------------------------------------- | 01. 0 - 190,000 NOK | 02. 191,000 - 300,000 NOK | 03. 301,000 - 450,000 NOK | 04. 451,000 - 570,000 NOK | 05. 571,000 or more NOK | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - NORWAY (2005): IMD2006 | | CSES Code Election Study Category |---------------------------------------------------------------- | 01. less than 190,999 NOK | 02. 191,000 - 300,999 NOK | 03. 301,000 - 450,999 NOK | 04. 451,000 - 570,999 NOK | 05. more than 570,999 NOK | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - NORWAY (2009): IMD2006 | | CSES Code Election Study Category |---------------------------------------------------------------- | 01. less than 340,001 NOK | 02. 340,001 - 500,000 NOK | 03. 500,001 - 700,000 NOK | 04. 700,001 - 900,000 NOK | 05. more than 900,001 NOK | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - NORWAY (2013): IMD2006 | | CSES Code Election Study Category |---------------------------------------------------------------- | 01. 0 - 385,000 NOK | 02. 390 - 580,000 NOK | 03. 600 - 800,000 NOK | 04. 805 - 1,000,000 NOK | 05. 1,001,000 - 5,000,000 NOK | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - PERU (2000 & 2001): IMD2006 | | This classification scheme only roughly corresponds to quintiles | (frequencies are reported in parentheses above). Further, there | is some concern that this classification serves to distinguish | those living in extreme poverty (Codes 1, 2 and 3), from those | living in poverty (Code 4), from everyone else (the income | groups corresponding to Code 5 include the lower middle through | upper classes). | | CSES Code Election Study Category |---------------------------------------------------------------- | 01. less than 300 PEN | 02. 300 - 600 PEN | 03. 601 - 1,000 PEN | 04. 1,001 - 1,500 PEN | 1,501 - 2,000 PEN | 05. 2,001 - 3,000 PEN | 3,001 - 5,000 PEN | 5,001 - 10,000 PEN | more than 10,000 PEN | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - PERU (2006): IMD2006 | | This variable records the average household monthly income. | | CSES Code Election Study Category |---------------------------------------------------------------- | 01. Min - 300 PEN | 02. 301 - 450 PEN | 03. 451 - 700 PEN | 04. 701 - 1,200 PEN | 05. more than 1,200 PEN | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - PERU (2011): IMD2006 | | CSES Code Election Study Category |---------------------------------------------------------------- | 01. less than 450 PEN | 02. 450 - 1,000 PEN | 03. 1,000 - 1,600 PEN | 04. 1,600 - 2,700 PEN | 05. more than 2,700 PEN | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - PERU (2016): IMD2006 | | CSES Code Election Study Category |---------------------------------------------------------------- | 01. less than 700 PEN | 02. 700 - 1,200 PEN | 03. 1,200 - 2,000 PEN | 04. 2,000 - 3,400 PEN | 05. more than 3,400 PEN | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - PHILIPPINES (2004): IMD2006 | | CSES Code Election Study Category |---------------------------------------------------------------- | 01. 0 - 2,000 PHP | 02. 2,001 - 4,000 PHP | 03. 4,001 - 6,000 PHP | 04. 6,001 - 11,400 PHP | 05. 11,401 or more PHP | 06. No fixed income | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - PHILIPPINES (2010): IMD2006 | | CSES Code Election Study Category |---------------------------------------------------------------- | 01. less than 3,999 PHP | 02. 4,000 - 5,999 PHP | 03. 6,000 - 9,999 PHP | 04. 10,000 - 14,999 PHP | 05. more than 14,999 PHP | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - PHILIPPINES (2016): IMD2006 | | CSES Code Election Study Category |---------------------------------------------------------------- | 01. less than 5,000 PHP | 02. 5,000 - 7,200 PHP | 03. 7,201 - 10,000 PHP | 04. 10,001 - 17,000 PHP | 05. more than 17,000 PHP | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - POLAND (2001): IMD2006 | | CSES Code Election Study Category |---------------------------------------------------------------- | 01. 1 - 900 PLN | 02. 901 - 1,300 PLN | 03. 1,301 - 1,800 PLN | 04. 1,801 - 2,500 PLN | 05. 2,501 - 70,000 PLN | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - POLAND (2005 & 2007): IMD2006 | | CSES Code Election Study Category |---------------------------------------------------------------- | 01. less than 849 PLN | 02. 850 - 1,200 PLN | 03. 1,201 - 1,699 PLN | 04. 1,700 - 2,299 PLN | 05. more than 2,299 PLN | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - POLAND (2011): IMD2006 | | CSES Code Election Study Category |---------------------------------------------------------------- | 01. 115 - 890 PLN | 02. 900 - 1,500 PLN | 03. 1,520 - 2,300 PLN | 04. 2,375 - 3,400 PLN | 05. 3,500 - 30,000 PLN | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - PORTUGAL (2002 & 2005): IMD2006 | | The income levels included here were adapted from those included | in other surveys, namely the ISSP (International Social Survey | Program), carried out in Portugal in 1997 for the first time. | The lowest level shown is approximately the legal minimum | monthly salary in Portugal. | | CSES Code Election Study Category |---------------------------------------------------------------- | 01. less than 300 EUR | 02. 301 - 750 EUR | 03. 751 - 1,500 EUR | 04. 1,501 - 2,500 EUR | 05. more than 2,500 EUR | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - PORTUGAL (2009): IMD2006 | | In general CSES guidelines request that income be | categorized in quintiles. However, the Portuguese questionnaire | asked for categories as mentioned below. | | CSES Code Election Study Category |---------------------------------------------------------------- | 01. less than 300 EUR | 02. 301 - 750 EUR | 03. 751 - 1,500 EUR | 04. 1,501 - 2,500 EUR | 05. more than 2,500 EUR | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - PORTUGAL (2015): IMD2006 | | In general, CSES guidelines request that income be | categorized in sample quintiles. However, to be | consistent with prior Portuguese election studies, | the Portuguese questionnaire asked for the categories | mentioned below. | | CSES Code Election Study Category |---------------------------------------------------------------- | 01. less than 300 EUR | 02. 301 - 750 EUR | 03. 751 - 1,500 EUR | 04. 1,501 - 2,500 EUR | 05. more than 2,500 EUR | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - ROMANIA (2004): IMD2006 | | CSES Code Election Study Category |---------------------------------------------------------------- | 01. less than 2,800,000 ROL | 02. 2,800,000 - 4,700,000 ROL | 03. 4,700,000 - 7,000,000 ROL | 04. 7,000,000 - 11,000,000 ROL | 05. more than 11,000,000 ROL | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - ROMANIA (2009): IMD2006 | | CSES Code Election Study Category |---------------------------------------------------------------- | 01. less than 500 RON | 02. 501 - 1,000 RON | 03. 1,001 - 1,408 RON | 04. 1,409 - 2,000 RON | 05. more than 2,001 RON | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - ROMANIA (2012): IMD2006 | | CSES Code Election Study Category |---------------------------------------------------------------- | 01. less than 600 RON | 02. 601 - 1,000 RON | 03. 1,001 - 1,450 RON | 04. 1,451 - 2,000 RON | 05. more than 2,001 RON | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - ROMANIA (2014): IMD2006 | | CSES Code Election Study Category |---------------------------------------------------------------- | 01. less than 635 RON | 02. 640 - 1,100 RON | 03. 1,118 - 1,500 RON | 04. 1,530 - 2,200 RON | 05. more than 2,300 RON | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - RUSSIA (1999 & 2000): IMD2006 | | CSES Code Election Study Category |---------------------------------------------------------------- | (Total Household Income over last 30 days) | 01. less than 540 RUB | 02. 541 - 999 RUB | 03. 1,000 - 1,500 RUB | 04. 1,501 - 2,999 RUB | 05. more than 3,000 RUB | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - RUSSIA (2004): IMD2006 | | Quintile ranges not provided. | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - SERBIA (2012): IMD2006 | | CSES Code Election Study Category |---------------------------------------------------------------- | 01. less than 19,000 RSD | 02. 20,000 - 29,999 RSD | 03. 30,000 - 49,999 RSD | 04. 50,000 - 69,999 RSD | 05. more than 70,000 RSD | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - SLOVAKIA (2010): IMD2006 | | CSES Code Election Study Category |---------------------------------------------------------------- | 01. less than 400 EUR | 02. 401 - 600 EUR | 03. 601 - 800 EUR | 04. 800 - 1,200 EUR | 05. more than 1,200 EUR | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - SLOVAKIA (2016): IMD2006 | | Respondents in the original survey could place themselves in | one of 11 different income categories. These were re-coded, as | shown below, such that the distribution within the CSES | categories approximates quintiles. | | CSES Code Election Study Category |---------------------------------------------------------------- | 01. up to 150 EUR | 151 - 300 EUR | 301 - 450 EUR | 451 - 600 EUR | 601 - 750 EUR | 02. 751 - 900 EUR | 03. 901 - 1,200 EUR | 04. 1,201 - 1,500 EUR | 05. 1,501 - 2,000 EUR | 2,001 - 3,000 EUR | more than 3,000 EUR | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - SLOVENIA (2004): IMD2006 | | CSES Code Election Study Category |---------------------------------------------------------------- | 01. 30 - 140 SIT | 02. 141 - 210 SIT | 03. 211 - 290 SIT | 04. 291 - 400 SIT | 05. 401 or more SIT | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - SLOVENIA (2008): IMD2006 | | CSES Code Election Study Category |---------------------------------------------------------------- | 01. less than 801 EUR | 02. 801 - 1,200 EUR | 03. 1,201 - 1,700 EUR | 04. 1,701 - 2,500 EUR | 05. more than 2,500 EUR | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - SLOVENIA (2011): IMD2006 | | CSES Code Election Study Category |---------------------------------------------------------------- | 01. less than 700 EUR | 02. 740 - 1,100 EUR | 03. 1,150 - 1,400 EUR | 04. 1,500 - 2,000 EUR | 05. more than 2,100 EUR | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - SOUTH AFRICA (2014): IMD2006 | | CSES Code Election Study Category |---------------------------------------------------------------- | 01. 0 - 1,500 ZAR | 02. 1,501 - 3,000 ZAR | 03. 3,001 - 5,000 ZAR | 04. 5,001 - 7,500 ZAR | 05. 7,501 - 30,001 ZAR | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - SOUTH KOREA (2000): IMD2006 | | Documentation for South Korean income ranges corresponding to | CSES categories were provided as follows: | | CSES Code Election Study Category |---------------------------------------------------------------- | 01. less than 667 KRW | 02. 667 - 1,083 KRW | 03. 1,084 - 1,833 KRW | 04. 1,834 - 2,917 KRW | 05 more than 2,917 KRW | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - SOUTH KOREA (2004): IMD2006 | | Quintile ranges not provided. | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - SOUTH KOREA (2008): IMD2006 | | Quintile ranges were not provided by the national collaborator. | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - SPAIN (2004): IMD2006 | | Note that the income ranges below are as originally reported by | the collaborator and do not correspond to sample quintiles. | | CSES Code Election Study Category |---------------------------------------------------------------- | 01. up to 450 EUR | 02. 451 - 900 EUR | 03. 901 - 1,650 EUR | 04. 1,651 - 3,000 EUR | 05. 3,001 or more EUR | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - SPAIN (2008): IMD2006 | | CSES Code Election Study Category |---------------------------------------------------------------- | 01. less than 600 EUR | 02. 601 - 900 EUR | 03. 901 - 1,200 EUR | 04. 1,201 - 2,100 EUR | 05. more than 2,101 EUR | | The Spanish questionnaire covers for total monthly income | of the household, taking all sources into account. | The coded CSES-variable does not fit income quintiles, due to | the original coding of the Spanish income-variable. | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - SWEDEN (1998): IMD2006 | | This variable reports R's income rather than R's household's | income. | | CSES Code Election Study Category |---------------------------------------------------------------- | 01. less than 74,000 SEK | 02. 75,000 - 138,000 SEK | 03. 139,000 - 181,000 SEK | 04. 182,000 - 232,000 SEK | 05. 233,000 or more SEK | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - SWEDEN (2002): IMD2006 | | This variable is divided into five portions as 15-20-30-20-15. | The lowest quintile includes the lowest 15% of incomes, the | second quintile includes the next 20% of incomes and so on and | so forth. | | CSES Code Election Study Category |---------------------------------------------------------------- | 01. 61,130 or less SEK | 02. 61,131 - 142,218 SEK | 03. 142,219 - 214,785 SEK | 04. 214,786 - 290,802 SEK | 05. 290,803 or more SEK | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - SWEDEN (2006): IMD2006 | | The income variable (D20) is divided into 20-20-20-20-20 and | includes all respondents in the dataset. | | CSES Code Election Study Category |---------------------------------------------------------------- | 01. less than 161,253 SEK | 02. 161,254 - 244,408 SEK | 03. 244,409 - 337,166 SEK | 04. 337,167 - 432,251 SEK | 05. more than 432,251 SEK | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - SWEDEN (2014): IMD2006 | | CSES Code Election Study Category |---------------------------------------------------------------- | 01. less than 261,036 SEK | 02. 261,037 - 411,247 SEK | 03. 411,248 - 608,282 SEK | 04. 608,283 - 795,813 SEK | 05. more than 795,814 SEK | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - SWITZERLAND (1999): IMD2006 | | The original categories have been re-coded in the following way | in order to roughly fit the quintiles: | | CSES Code Election Study Category |---------------------------------------------------------------- | 01. less than 2,000 CHF | 2,001 - 3,000 CHF | 3,001 - 4,000 CHF | 02. 4,001 - 5,000 CHF | 03. 5,001 - 6,000 CHF | 6,001 - 7,000 CHF | 04. 7,001 - 8,000 CHF | 8,001 - 9,000 CHF | 05. 9,001 - 10,000 CHF | 10,001 - 12,000 CHF | more than 12,000 CHF | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - SWITZERLAND (2003): IMD2006 | | Approximate categorization on the basis of the original | variable with eleven categories. | | CSES Code Election Study Category |---------------------------------------------------------------- | 01. less than 2,000 CHF - 4,000 CHF | 02. 4,001 CHF - 6,000 CHF | 03. 6,001 CHF - 8,000 CHF | 04. 8,001 CHF - 10,000 CHF | 05. 10,001 CHF - more than 12,000 CHF | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - SWITZERLAND (2007): IMD2006 | | Income in Switzerland was measured using the following question: | "Could you please tell me what is the monthly income of your | household? Please include the income of all the persons who | contribute to the household budget, taking into account not | only salaries but also all other sources of income." Respondents | were offered a choice of 11 income categories, which were then | recoded into quintiles. | | CSES Code Election Study Category |---------------------------------------------------------------- | 01. less than 4,000 CHF | 02. 4,001 - 6,000 CHF | 03. 6,001 - 8,000 CHF | 04. 8,001 - 10,000 CHF | 05. more than 10,000 CHF | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - SWITZERLAND (2011): IMD2006 | | CSES Code Election Study Category |---------------------------------------------------------------- | 01. less than 5,000 CHF | 02. 5,001 - 7,000 CHF | 03. 7,001 - 9,000 CHF | 04. 9,000 - 12,000 CHF | 05. more than 12,000 CHF | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - TAIWAN (2001): IMD2006 | | CSES Code Election Study Category |---------------------------------------------------------------- | 01. less than 38,000 TWD | 02. 38,000 - 56,000 TWD | 03. 56,000 - 75,000 TWD | 04. 75,000 - 103,000 TWD | 05. more than 103,000 TWD | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - TAIWAN (2004): IMD2006 | | CSES Code Election Study Category |---------------------------------------------------------------- | 01. less than 25,000 TWD | 02. 25,001 - 36,000 TWD | 36,001 - 45,000 TWD | 03. 45,001 - 53,000 TWD | 53,001 - 62,000 TWD | 04. 62,001 - 71,000 TWD | 71,001 - 83,000 TWD | 83,001 - 100,000 TWD | 05. 100,001 - 130,000 TWD | more than 130,000 TWD | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - TAIWAN (2008): IMD2006 | | Note that in the Taiwanese sample income was not coded into | even quintiles but was calculated to reflect the real income | distribution. The original data contained 10 value codes: | | CSES Code Election Study Category |---------------------------------------------------------------- | 01. less than 47,000 TWD | 02. 47,001 - 65,000 TWD | 03. 65,001 - 88,000 TWD | 04. 88,001 - 138,000 TWD | 05. more than 138,000 TWD | 08. Hard to say | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - TAIWAN (2012): IMD2006 | | CSES Code Election Study Category |---------------------------------------------------------------- | 01. less than 25,000 TWD | 02. 25,000 - 45,000 TWD | 03. 45,001 - 75,000 TWD | 04. 75,001 - 100,000 TWD | 05. more than 100,000 TWD | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - THAILAND (2001): IMD2006 | | This item reports quintiles based on R's "income last month". | | CSES Code Election Study Category |---------------------------------------------------------------- | 01. less than 1,000 THB | 02. 1,001 - 3,000 THB | 03. 3,001 - 6,000 THB | 04. 6,001 - 9,000 THB | 9,001 - 15,000 THB | 05. more than 15,001 THB | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - THAILAND (2007): IMD2006 | | Note that the coding of IMD2006 does not follow the CSES manner | for Thailand (2007). The variable includes a category for no | income and only four additional categories on the actual income | of respondents. Moreover, the distribution of the data does not | reflect income quintiles. | | CSES Code Election Study Category |---------------------------------------------------------------- | 01. No income | 02. less than 5,000 THB | 03. 5,001 - 10,000 THB | 04. 10,001 - 10,000 THB | 05. more than 15,000 THB | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - THAILAND (2011): IMD2006 | | The income ranges is not distributed as quintiles, | and could not be recalculated in such a manner. | | CSES Code Election Study Category |---------------------------------------------------------------- | 01. less than 5,000 THB | 02. 5,001 - 15,000 THB | 03. 15,001 - 30,000 THB | 04. 30,001 - 50,000 THB | 05. more than 50,000 THB | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - TURKEY (2011): IMD2006 | | CSES Code Election Study Category |---------------------------------------------------------------- | 01. less than 600 TRY | 02. 600 - 850 TRY | 03. 851 - 1,000 TRY | 04. 1,001 - 1,700 TRY | 05. more than 1,700 TRY | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - TURKEY (2015): IMD2006 | | CSES Code Election Study Category |---------------------------------------------------------------- | 01. less than 1,000 TRY | 02. 1,000 - 1,250 TRY | 03. 1,280 - 1,600 TRY | 04. 1,700 - 2,400 TRY | 05. more than 2,400 TRY | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - UNITED STATES (1996): IMD2006 | | CSES Code Election Study Category |---------------------------------------------------------------- | 01. up to 2,999 USD | 3,000 - 4,999 USD | 5,000 - 6,999 USD | 7,000 - 8,999 USD | 9,000 - 9,999 USD | 02. 10,000 - 10,999 USD | 11,000 - 11,999 USD | 12,000 - 12,999 USD | 13,000 - 13,999 USD | 14,000 - 14.999 USD | 03. 15,000 - 16,999 USD | 17,000 - 19,999 USD | 20,000 - 21,999 USD | 22,000 - 24,999 USD | 25,000 - 29,999 USD | 04. 30,000 - 34,999 USD | 35,000 - 39,999 USD | 40,000 - 44,999 USD | 45,000 - 49,999 USD | 50,000 - 59,999 USD | 05. 60,000 - 74,999 USD | 75,000 - 89,999 USD | 90,000 - 104,999 USD | 105,000 or more USD | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - UNITED STATES (2004): IMD2006 | | CSES Code Election Study Category |---------------------------------------------------------------- | 01. up to 2,999 USD | 3,000 - 4,999 USD | 5,000 - 6,999 USD | 7,000 - 8,999 USD | 9,000 - 10,999 USD | 11,000 - 12,999 USD | 13,000 - 14,999 USD | 15,000 - 16,999 USD | 17,000 - 19,999 USD | 02. 20,000 - 21,999 USD | 22,000 - 24,999 USD | 25,000 - 29,999 USD | 30,000 - 34,999 USD | 35,000 - 39,999 USD | 03. 40,000 - 44,999 USD | 45,000 - 49,999 USD | 50,000 - 59,999 USD | 04. 60,000 - 69,999 USD | 70,000 - 79,999 USD | 80,000 - 89,999 USD | 05. 90,000 - 104,999 USD | 105,000 - 119,000 USD | 120,000 or more USD | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - UNITED STATES (2008): IMD2006 | | The US-American questionnaire asked for the monthly household | income of married respondents. Incomes for the remaining | respondents base on the complete household, as long as all other | household members were under age 18, or on the respondents' | income, exclusively. | | CSES Code Election Study Category |---------------------------------------------------------------- | 01. less than 16,999 USD | 02. 17,000 - 34,999 USD | 03. 35,000 - 49,999 USD | 04. 50,000 - 89,999 USD | 05. more than 90,000 USD | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - UNITED STATES (2012): IMD2006 | | CSES Code Election Study Category |---------------------------------------------------------------- | 01. less than 5,000 - 12,499 USD | 02. 12,500 - 27,499 USD | 03. 27,500 - 44,999 USD | 04. 45,000 - 74,999 USD | 05. 75,000 - 250,000 or more USD | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - URUGUAY (2009): IMD2006 | | For those respondents who refused to report a household income, | IMD2006 was imputed by the Uruguayan collaborators, based on | respondents occupation and the "wage agreements that determine | the official level of pay of that occupation." | | CSES Code Election Study Category |---------------------------------------------------------------- | 01. less than 11,200 USD | 02. 11,201 - 17,400 USD | 03. 17,401 - 25,000 USD | 04. 25,001 - 38,700 USD | 05. more than 38,700 USD --------------------------------------------------------------------------- IMD2007 >>> RURAL OR URBAN RESIDENCE --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Rural/Urban Residence. .................................................................. 1. RURAL AREA OR VILLAGE 2. SMALL OR MIDDLE-SIZED TOWN 3. SUBURBS OF LARGE TOWN OR CITY 4. LARGE TOWN OR CITY 7. VOLUNTEERED: REFUSED 8. VOLUNTEERED: DON'T KNOW 9. MISSING | VARIABLE NOTES: IMD2007 | | Instead of using the CSES-schema, some countries employ the | amount of inhabitants for the size of respondent's place of | residence. These measurements do not fit the categories | generally used for IMD2007. Consequently, we advise users to | carefully read the ELECTION STUDY NOTES of the current variable, | which are available in Part 2 of the Codebooks for the respective | CSES Modules. | | The corresponding variables in the Standalone CSES Modules are: | MODULE 1: A2022 | MODULE 2: B2030 | MODULE 3: C2030 | MODULE 4: D2031 | | Data are unavailable for BELIGUM-FLANDERS (1999), BELGIUM- | WALLONIA (1999), BRAZIL (2014), CANADA (2008, 2011, 2015), CHILE | (1999, 2005, 2009), GERMANY (2002 Mail-Back), GREAT BRITAIN | (1997), HONG KONG (1998, 2000, 2004, 2008, 2012,), JAPAN (1996), | KYRGYZSTAN (2005), TAIWAN (2004, 2008, 2012), THAILAND (2001), | and the UNITED STATES (2008, 2012). =========================================================================== ))) CSES IMD VARIABLES: MICRO-LEVEL (SURVEY) DATA =========================================================================== --------------------------------------------------------------------------- IMD3001 >>> TURNOUT - MAIN ELECTION --------------------------------------------------------------------------- The wording of this item, which is to record voting in the national election, follows national standards. This item ascertains whether or not the respondent cast a ballot in the main election, regardless of whether or not it was valid. In case of a single election taking place, e.g., a lower house election only, then this variable reports the turnout decision for that particular election. In cases where multiple elections took place, e.g., a presidential and a lower house election, this variable reports the turnout decision in the main election. See variable notes for more information. .................................................................. 0. RESPONDENT DID NOT CAST A BALLOT 1. RESPONDENT CAST A BALLOT 9999993. VOLUNTEERED: RESPONDENT NOT REGISTERED ON ELECTORAL LISTS [IF APPLICABLE] 9999997. VOLUNTEERED: REFUSED 9999998. VOLUNTEERED: DON'T KNOW 9999999. MISSING | VARIABLE NOTES: IMD3001 | | +++ TABLE: ELECTION STUDIES BY TYPE OF MAIN ELECTION | | Presidential Lower House Upper House | POLITY (ELEC YEAR) Election Election Election | ------------------------------------------------------------- | ALBANIA (2005) - X - | ARGENTINA (2015) X - - | AUSTRALIA (1996) - X - | AUSTRALIA (2004) - X - | AUSTRALIA (2007) - X - | AUSTRALIA (2013) - X - | AUSTRIA (2008) - X - | AUSTRIA (2013) - X - | BELARUS (2001) X - - | BELARUS (2008) - X - | BELGIUM (2003) - X - | BELGIUM-F. (1999) - X - | BELGIUM-W. (1999) - X - | BRAZIL (2002) X - - | BRAZIL (2006) X - - | BRAZIL (2010) X - - | BRAZIL (2014) X - - | BULGARIA (2001) - X - | BULGARIA (2014) - X - | CANADA (1997) - X - | CANADA (2004) - X - | CANADA (2008) - X - | CANADA (2011) - X - | CANADA (2015) - X - | CHILE (1999) X - - | CHILE (2005) X - - | CHILE (2009) X - - | CROATIA (2007) - X - | CZECH REPUBLIC (1996) - X - | CZECH REPUBLIC (2002) - X - | CZECH REPUBLIC (2006) - X - | CZECH REPUBLIC (2010) - X - | CZECH REPUBLIC (2013) - X - | DENMARK (1998) - X - | DENMARK (2001) - X - | DENMARK (2007) - X - | ESTONIA (2011) - X - | FINLAND (2003) - X - | FINLAND (2007) - X - | FINLAND (2011) - X - | FINLAND (2015) - X - | FRANCE (2002) X - - | FRANCE (2007) - X - | FRANCE (2012) X - - | GERMANY (1998) - X - | GERMANY (2002 Mb.) - X - | GERMANY (2002 Tel.) - X - | GERMANY (2005) - X - | GERMANY (2009) - X - | GERMANY (2013) - X - | GREAT BRITAIN (1997) - X - | GREAT BRITAIN (2005) - X - | GREAT BRITAIN (2015) - X - | GREECE (2009) - X - | GREECE (2012) - X - | GREECE (2015) - X - | HONG KONG (1998) - X - | HONG KONG (2000) - X - | HONG KONG (2004) - X - | HONG KONG (2008) - X - | HONG KONG (2012) - X - | HUNGARY (1998) - X - | HUNGARY (2002) - X - | ICELAND (1999) - X - | ICELAND (2003) - X - | ICELAND (2007) - X - | ICELAND (2009) - X - | ICELAND (2013) - X - | IRELAND (2002) - X - | IRELAND (2007) - X - | IRELAND (2011) - X - | ISRAEL (1996) - X - | ISRAEL (2003) - X - | ISRAEL (2006) - X - | ISRAEL (2013) - X - | ITALY (2006) - X - | JAPAN (1996) - X - | JAPAN (2004) - - X | JAPAN (2007) - - X | JAPAN (2013) - - X | KENYA (2013) X - - | KYRGYZSTAN (2005) X - - | LATVIA (2010) - X - | LATVIA (2011) - X - | LATVIA (2014) - X - | LITHUANIA (1997) X - - | MEXICO (1997) - X - | MEXICO (2000) X - - | MEXICO (2003) - X - | MEXICO (2006) X - - | MEXICO (2009) - X - | MEXICO (2012) X - - | MEXICO (2015) - X - | MONTENEGRO (2012) - X - | NETHERLANDS (1998) - X - | NETHERLANDS (2002) - X - | NETHERLANDS (2006) - X - | NETHERLANDS (2010) - X - | NEW ZEALAND (1996) - X - | NEW ZEALAND (2002) - X - | NEW ZEALAND (2008) - X - | NEW ZEALAND (2011) - X - | NEW ZEALAND (2014) - X - | NORWAY (1997) - X - | NORWAY (2001) - X - | NORWAY (2005) - X - | NORWAY (2009) - X - | NORWAY (2013) - X - | PERU (2000) X - - | PERU (2001) X - - | PERU (2006) X - - | PERU (2011) X - - | PERU (2016) X - - | PHILIPPINES (2004) X - - | PHILIPPINES (2010) X - - | PHILIPPINES (2016) X - - | POLAND (1997) - X - | POLAND (2001) - X - | POLAND (2005) - X - | POLAND (2007) - X - | POLAND (2011) - X - | PORTUGAL (2002) - X - | PORTUGAL (2005) - X - | PORTUGAL (2009) - X - | PORTUGAL (2015) - X - | ROMANIA (1996) - X - | ROMANIA (2004) - X - | ROMANIA (2009) X - - | ROMANIA (2012) - X - | ROMANIA (2014) X - - | RUSSIA (1999) - X - | RUSSIA (2000) X - - | RUSSIA (2004) X - - | SERBIA (2012) - X - | SLOVAKIA (2010) - X - | SLOVAKIA (2016) - X - | SLOVENIA (1996) - X - | SLOVENIA (2004) - X - | SLOVENIA (2008) - X - | SLOVENIA (2011) - X - | SOUTH AFRICA (2009) - X - | SOUTH AFRICA (2014) - X - | SOUTH KOREA (2000) - X - | SOUTH KOREA (2004) - X - | SOUTH KOREA (2008) - X - | SOUTH KOREA (2012) - X - | SPAIN (1996) - X - | SPAIN (2000) - X - | SPAIN (2004) - X - | SPAIN (2008) - X - | SWEDEN (1998) - X - | SWEDEN (2002) - X - | SWEDEN (2006) - X - | SWEDEN (2014) - X - | SWITZERLAND (1999) - X - | SWITZERLAND (2003) - X - | SWITZERLAND (2007) - X - | SWITZERLAND (2011) - X - | TAIWAN (1996) X - - | TAIWAN (2001) - X - | TAIWAN (2004) X - - | TAIWAN (2008) X - - | TAIWAN (2012) X - - | THAILAND (2001) - X - | THAILAND (2007) - X - | THAILAND (2011) - X - | TURKEY (2011) - X - | TURKEY (2015) - X - | UKRAINE (1998) - X - | UNITED STATES (1996) X - - | UNITED STATES (2004) X - - | UNITED STATES (2008) X - - | UNITED STATES (2012) X - - | URUGUAY (2009) X - - | ------------------------------------------------------------- | | | This variable is original to CSES IMD and therefore there are | no corresponding variables in the Standalone CSES Modules. | | The use of invalid voting codes differs across studies. Users | are advised to consult the CSES Standalone Module Codebooks for | further details on these differences. | | Data are unavailable for THAILAND (2001). | [ELECTION STUDY NOTES] – ROMANIA (1996): IMD3001 | | Even though the 1996 presidential elections in Romania were the | main election, the lower house turnout variable is coded here. | The reason is that the presidential turnout variable which | was originally deposited refers to the second rather than the | first round of the 1996 presidential elections. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- IMD3001_PR_1 >>> TURNOUT - CURRENT PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION - ROUND 1 IMD3001_PR_2 >>> TURNOUT - CURRENT PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION - ROUND 2 --------------------------------------------------------------------------- The wording of this item, which is to record voting in the national election, follows national standards. This item ascertains whether or not the respondent cast a ballot, regardless of whether or not it was valid. If the data collection occurs between rounds in a two-round election, this item should ascertain whether or not the respondent intends to cast a ballot in the second round, regardless of whether or not it will be valid. If the data collection occurs after the second round in a two-round election, this item should ascertain whether or not the respondent cast a ballot in the second round, regardless of whether or not it was valid. .................................................................. 0. RESPONDENT DID NOT CAST A BALLOT 1. RESPONDENT CAST A BALLOT 9999993. VOLUNTEERED: RESPONDENT NOT REGISTERED ON ELECTORAL LISTS [IF APPLICABLE] 9999995. NOT APPLICABLE: NO ROLE OF PRESIDENT 9999996. NOT APPLICABLE: NO PRESIDENTIAL ELECTIONS 9999997. VOLUNTEERED: REFUSED 9999998. VOLUNTEERED: DON'T KNOW 9999999. MISSING | VARIABLE NOTES: IMD3001_PR_ | | In order to differentiate between respondents who already voted | and those who express their will to vote, please consider IMD1015 | (STUDY CONTEXT). | | Separate micro-level turnout variables referring to a distinct | type of election (presidential, lower house, upper house) were | only introduced in CSES MODULE 4. Before, turnout was captured | by one (A2028) or two (B3004_, C3021_) general variables. In | these cases, information about the type of election the turnout | variable referred to were provided in the election study notes. | | For the CSES INTEGRATED MODULE DATASET, micro-level turnout | variables were harmonized according to the standard established | in MODULE 4. | | Inconsistency response categories from CSES Module | 1 coded as "6. INCONSISTENT RESPONSE: VOTED; NO VOTE CHOICE | INDICATED" and "7. INCONSISTENT RESPONSE: DID NOT VOTE; VOTE | CHOICE INDICATED" were included in IMD as "1. RESPONDENT CAST A | BALLOT" and "0. RESPONDENT DID NOT CAST A BALLOT." The | inconsistency response category "4. INCONSISTENT RESPONSE: R | reported not casting a ballot but reported a vote choice" was | coded as "0. RESPONDENT DID NOT CAST A BALLOT" in IMD. | | Inconsistency response category from CSES Module 2 coded as | "4. INCONSISTENT RESPONSE: R reported not casting a ballot but | reported a vote choice" was coded as "0. RESPONDENT DID NOT | CAST A BALLOT" in IMD. | | For further information and restrictions, see ELECTION STUDY | NOTES for each of the variables in the original Codebooks Part 2 | of the respective CSES MODULES. | | The corresponding variables in the Standalone CSES Modules are: | MODULE 1: A2028 | MODULE 2: B3004_1 (IMD3001_PR_1) & B3004_2 (IMD3001_PR_2) | MODULE 3: C3021_1 (IMD3001_PR_1) & C3021_2 (IMD3001_PR_2) | MODULE 4: D3005_PR_1 (IMD3001_PR_1) & D3005_PR_2 (IMD3001_PR_2) | | Data for IMD3001_PR_1 are unavailable for ROMANIA (1996). | | Data for IMD3001_PR_2 are unavailable for BELARUS (2001), | BRAZIL (2006), CHILE (1999, 2005, 2009), LITHUANIA (1997), | PERU (2000, 2001, 2006, 2011, 2016), and URUGUAY (2009). | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - ISRAEL (1996): IMD3001_PR_1 | | The data refers to the 1996 Prime Ministerial election. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- IMD3001_LH >>> TURNOUT - CURRENT LOWER HOUSE ELECTION --------------------------------------------------------------------------- The wording of this item, which is to record voting in the national election, follows national standards. This item ascertains whether or not the respondent cast a ballot, regardless of whether or not it was valid. .................................................................. 0. RESPONDENT DID NOT CAST A BALLOT 1. RESPONDENT CAST A BALLOT 9999993. VOLUNTEERED: RESPONDENT NOT REGISTERED ON ELECTORAL LISTS [IF APPLICABLE] 9999996. NOT APPLICABLE: NO LOWER HOUSE ELECTION 9999997. VOLUNTEERED: REFUSED 9999998. VOLUNTEERED: DON'T KNOW 9999999. MISSING | VARIABLE NOTES: IMD3001_LH | | Inconsistency response categories from CSES MODULE 1 coded as | "6. INCONSISTENT RESPONSE: VOTED; NO VOTE CHOICE INDICATED" and | "7. INCONSISTENT RESPONSE: DID NOT VOTE; VOTE CHOICE INDICATED" | were included in IMD as "1. RESPONDENT CAST A BALLOT" and | "0. RESPONDENT DID NOT CAST A BALLOT." The inconsistency | response category "4. INCONSISTENT RESPONSE: R reported not | casting a ballot but reported a vote choice" was coded as | "0. RESPONDENT DID NOT CAST A BALLOT" in IMD. | | Inconsistency response category from CSES MODULE 2 coded as | "4. INCONSISTENT RESPONSE: R reported not casting a ballot but | reported a vote choice" was coded as "0. RESPONDENT DID NOT | CAST A BALLOT" in IMD. | | The corresponding variables in the Standalone CSES Modules are: | MODULE 1: A2028 | MODULE 2: B3004_1 | MODULE 3: C3021_1 | MODULE 4: D3005_LH | | Data are unavailable for UNITED STATES (2008). | [ELECTION STUDY NOTES] DENMARK (2001) - IMD3001_LH | | Turnout variable in CSES MODULE 2 for Denmark (2001) had a | category "Not eligible to vote." This has been coded into | "9999993. RESPONDENT NOT REGISTERED ON ELECTORAL LISTS." | [ELECTION STUDY NOTES] POLAND (2001) - IMD3001_LH | | Turnout variable in CSES MODULE 2 for POLAND (2001) had a | category "Not eligible to vote." This has been coded into | "9999993. RESPONDENT NOT REGISTERED ON ELECTORAL LISTS." | [ELECTION STUDY NOTES] PORTUGAL (2002 AND 2005) - IMD3001_LH | | Turnout variable in CSES MODULE 2 for both Portugal studies | (2002 and 2005) had a category "Not eligible to vote." This has | been coded into "9999993. RESPONDENT NOT REGISTERED ON ELECTORAL | LISTS." --------------------------------------------------------------------------- IMD3001_UH >>> TURNOUT - CURRENT UPPER HOUSE ELECTION --------------------------------------------------------------------------- The wording of this item, which is to record voting in the national election, follows national standards. This item ascertains whether or not the respondent cast a ballot, regardless of whether or not it was valid. .................................................................. 0. RESPONDENT DID NOT CAST A BALLOT 1. RESPONDENT CAST A BALLOT 9999993. VOLUNTEERED: RESPONDENT NOT REGISTERED ON ELECTORAL LISTS [IF APPLICABLE] 9999995. NOT APPLICABLE: UNICAMERAL SYSTEM 9999996. NOT APPLICABLE: NO UPPER HOUSE ELECTIONS 9999997. VOLUNTEERED: REFUSED 9999998. VOLUNTEERED: DON'T KNOW 9999999. MISSING | VARIABLE NOTES: IMD3001_UH | | In order to differentiate between respondents who already voted | and those who express their will to vote, please consider IMD1015 | (STUDY CONTEXT). | | Separate micro-level turnout variables referring to a distinct | type of election (presidential, lower house, upper house) were | only introduced in CSES MODULE 4. Before, turnout was captured | by one (A2028) or two (B3004_, C3021_) general variables. In | these cases, information about the type of election the turnout | variable referred to were provided in the election study notes. | | For the CSES IMD, micro-level turnout variables were harmonized | according to the standard established in CSES MODULE 4. | | Inconsistency response categories from CSES Module 1 coded as | "6. INCONSISTENT RESPONSE: VOTED; NO VOTE CHOICE INDICATED" and | "7. INCONSISTENT RESPONSE: DID NOT VOTE; VOTE CHOICE INDICATED" | were included in IMD as "1. RESPONDENT CAST A BALLOT" and | "0. RESPONDENT DID NOT CAST A BALLOT." The inconsistency | response category "4. INCONSISTENT RESPONSE: R reported not | casting a ballot but reported a vote choice" was coded as | "0. RESPONDENT DID NOT CAST A BALLOT" in IMD. | For further information and restrictions, researchers are | encouraged to look at the ELECTION STUDY NOTES for | each of the micro-level turnout variables in the original | Codebooks Part 2 of the respective CSES MODULES. | | Inconsistency response category from CSES MODULE 2 coded as | "4. INCONSISTENT RESPONSE: R reported not casting a ballot but | reported a vote choice" was coded as "0. RESPONDENT DID NOT | CAST A BALLOT" in IMD. | | The corresponding variables in the Standalone CSES Modules are: | MODULE 1: A2028 | MODULE 2: B3004_1 & B3004_2 | MODULE 3: C3021_1 | MODULE 4: D3005_UH | | Data are unavailable for ARGENTINA (2015), AUSTRALIA (1996, | 2007), BELGIUM-FLANDERS (1999), BELGIUM-WALLONIA (1999), BRAZIL | (2006), SPAIN (1996, 2000), MEXICO (1997, 2000), POLAND (1997, | 2005, 2007, 2011), ROMANIA (1996), SWITZERLAND (1999), and the | UNITED STATES (1996, 2008). | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - JAPAN (2004): IMD3001_UH | | The original variable in CSES MODULE 2 for Japan (2004) study, | which refers to the Upper House Election, distinguishes between | turnout in single-member constituencies (B3004_1) and turnout | in a single nation-wide constituency (B3004_2). The second one, | turnout in the single nation-wide constituency, is used for the | turnout variable in the IMD file. | [ELECTION STUDY NOTES] POLAND (2001) - IMD3001_UH | | Turnout variable in CSES MODULE 2 for POLAND (2001) had a | category "Not eligible to vote." This has been coded into | "9999993. RESPONDENT NOT REGISTERED ON ELECTORAL LISTS." --------------------------------------------------------------------------- IMD3002_PR_1 >>> CURRENT PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION: VOTE CHOICE - ROUND 1 IMD3002_PR_2 >>> CURRENT PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION: VOTE CHOICE - ROUND 2 --------------------------------------------------------------------------- If applicable and respondent cast a ballot in the presidential election: These variables report the respondent's vote choice for President in the first and/or second round of election. If the data collection occurs between rounds in a two-round election, this item should report the respondent's vote choice intention for president in the second round. If the data collection occurs after the second round in a two-round election, this item should report the respondent's vote choice for president in the second round. .................................................................. 0000001-9000000. [SEE CSES IMD CODEBOOK PART 3 FOR HARMONIZED PARTY /COALITION NUMERICAL CODES] 9999988. NONE OF THE CANDIDATES 9999989. INDEPENDENT CANDIDATE 9999990. OTHER LEFT WING CANDIDATE (NOT FURTHER SPECIFIED) 9999991. OTHER RIGHT WING CANDIDATE (NOT FURTHER SPECIFIED) 9999992. OTHER CANDIDATE (NOT FURTHER SPECIFIED) 9999993. INVALID/ BLANK BALLOT 9999995. NOT APPLICABLE: NO ROLE OF PRESIDENT 9999996. NOT APPLICABLE: NO PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION 9999997. VOLUNTEERED: REFUSED 9999998. VOLUNTEERED: DON'T KNOW 9999999. MISSING/ABSTAINED (DID NOT VOTE) | VARIABLE NOTES: D3006_PR_1 & PR_2 | | For more detailed information on how CSES codes | parties/coalitions, please see Part 3 of the CSES IMD Codebook. | | Respondents that mentioned not casting a ballot in the current | Presidential election (IMD3001_PR_) but report a vote choice | are included as it is not possible to identify why this | inconsistency occurred. Such deviations are reported in the | Standalone CSES Module ELECTION STUDY NOTES. | | The corresponding variables in the Standalone CSES Modules are: | MODULE 1: A2029 | MODULE 2: B3005_1 (IMD3002_PR_1) & B3005_2 (IMD3002_PR_2) | MODULE 3: C3023_PR_1 (IMD3002_PR_1) & C3023_PR_2 (IMD3002_PR_2) | MODULE 4: D3006_PR_1 (IMD3002_PR_1) & D3006_PR_2 (IMD3002_PR_2) | | CSES Module 1 categories "99. APPLICABLE BUT NOT ASCERTAINED - | DON'T KNOW, REFUSED" and "98 Respondent cast invalid ballot/did | not vote" were coded as "9999999. MISSING" in CSES IMD. | | CSES Module 2 category "94. INCONSISTENT RESPONSE: R reported | casting a ballot, but T did not vote." has been coded into | "9999999. MISSING" for the IMD. | | Data for IMD3002_PR_1 are unavailable for ROMANIA (1996). | | Data for IMD3002_PR_2 are unavailable for BELARUS (2001), | CHILE (1999, 2005, 2009), LITHUANIA (1997), and PERU (2000, | 2001, 2006, 2011, 2016). | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - ISRAEL (1996): IMD3002_PR_1 | | The data refers to the 1996 Prime Ministerial election. | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - KYRGYZSTAN (2005): IMD3002_PR_1 | | Kyrgyz Presidential elections are technically not party-based, | i.e., there is no straightforward connection between the | presidential candidates and political parties. Hence, they are | labeled as independent candidates in CSES IMD. | [ELECTION STUDY NOTES] - RUSSIA (2000): IMD3002_PR_1 | | In Module 1, 24 respondents are coded as "96" for this variable | and no further information about the meaning is provided. This | code refers to the original category "96. AGAINST ALL | CANDIDATES." These respondents were re-coded to "9999988. NONE OF | THE CANDIDATES/PARTIES" for IMD. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- IMD3002_LH_PL >>> CURRENT LOWER HOUSE ELECTION: VOTE CHOICE - PARTY LIST --------------------------------------------------------------------------- If applicable and respondent cast a ballot in the Lower House legislative election: This variable reports the respondent's vote choice for party list in the current Lower House elections. See Election Study Notes for more information. .................................................................. 0000001-9000000. [SEE CSES IMD CODEBOOK PART 3 FOR HARMONIZED PARTY /COALITION NUMERICAL CODES] 9999988. NONE OF THE CANDIDATES/PARTIES 9999989. INDEPENDENT CANDIDATE 9999990. OTHER LEFT WING CANDIDATE/PARTY (NOT FURTHER SPECIFIED) 9999991. OTHER RIGHT WING CANDIDATE/PARTY (NOT FURTHER SPECIFIED) 9999992. OTHER CANDIDATE/PARTY (NOT FURTHER SPECIFIED) 9999993. INVALID/ BLANK BALLOT 9999995. NOT APPLICABLE: NOT A LIST SYSTEM 9999996. NOT APPLICABLE: NO LOWER HOUSE ELECTION 9999997. VOLUNTEERED: REFUSED 9999998. VOLUNTEERED: DON'T KNOW 9999999. MISSING/ABSTAINED (DID NOT VOTE) | VARIABLE NOTES: IMD3002_LH_PL | | For more detailed information on how CSES codes | parties/coalitions, please see Part 3 of the CSES IMD Codebook. | | Respondents that mentioned not casting a ballot in the current | lower house election (IMD3001_LH) but report a vote choice | are included as it is not possible to identify why this | inconsistency occurred. For further details on these | inconsistencies, see Standalone CSES Module Codebooks. | | The corresponding variables in the Standalone CSES Modules are: | MODULE 1: A2030 | MODULE 2: B3006_1 | MODULE 3: C3023_LH_PL | MODULE 4: D3006_LH_PL | | CSES MODULE 1 categories "99. APPLICABLE BUT NOT ASCERTAINED - | DON'T KNOW, REFUSED" and "98 Respondent cast invalid ballot/did | not vote" were coded as "9999999. MISSING" in CSES IMD. | | CSES MODULE 2 category "94. INCONSISTENT RESPONSE: R reported | casting a ballot, but R did not vote." has been coded into | "9999999. MISSING" for the IMD. | | Data are unavailable for PERU (2000) and THAILAND (2001). | [ELECTION STUDY NOTES] - BELGIUM-FLANDERS (1999): IMD3002_LH_PL | | In MODULE 1, 54 respondents are coded as "12." In the absence of | information about the exact meaning, these respondents were | coded as "9999999. MISSING" in CSES IMD. | [ELECTION STUDY NOTES] - BELGIUM-WALLONIA (1999): IMD3002_LH_PL | | In MODULE 1, two respondents are coded as "30" and six | respondents are coded as "50." In the absence of information | about the exact meaning, these respondents were coded as | "9999999. MISSING" in CSES IMD. | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - GERMANY (ALL STUDIES): IMD3002_LH_PL | | Respondents indicating that they voted either for the CDU | (2760002) or the CSU (2760003) were assigned the same IMD Code, | 2760001. The latter code refers to the "CDU/CSU Union." | ELECTION STUDY NOTES – HUNGARY (1998): IMD3002_LH_PL | | This variable refers to the first round of the 1998 Hungarian | lower house elections. | [ELECTION STUDY NOTES] - HONG KONG (2000): IMD3002_LH_PL | | There are 44 respondents in MODULE 1 who are coded as "12" | without further information about the meaning of this code | provided. On the basis of the original questionnaire, these | respondents were re-coded to "9999998. DON'T KNOW" for CSES IMD. | Three additional respondents are coded as "13" in Module 1. In | the absence of further information, these respondents were | coded as "9999999. MISSING" in CSES IMD. | [ELECTION STUDY NOTES] - PERU (2001): IMD3002_LH_PL | | In MODULE 1, 65 respondents are coded as "10." In the absence of | information about the exact meaning, these respondents were | coded as "9999999. MISSING" in CSES IMD. | [ELECTION STUDY NOTES] - RUSSIA (1999): IMD3002_LH_PL | | In MODULE 1, 37 respondents are coded as "96" for this variable | and no further information about the meaning is provided. This | code refers to the original category "96. AGAINST ALL | CANDIDATES AND BLOCS." These respondents were re-coded to | "9999988. NONE OF THE CANDIDATES/PARTIES" for IMD. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- IMD3002_LH_DC >>> CURRENT LOWER HOUSE ELECTION: VOTE CHOICE - DISTRICT CANDIDATE --------------------------------------------------------------------------- If applicable and respondent cast a ballot in the Lower House legislative election: This variable reports the respondent's vote choice for district candidate in the current Lower House elections. See Election Study Notes for more information. .................................................................. 0000001-9000000. [SEE CSES IMD CODEBOOK PART 3 FOR HARMONIZED PARTY /COALITION NUMERICAL CODES] 9999988. NONE OF THE CANDIDATES/PARTIES 9999989. INDEPENDENT CANDIDATE 9999990. OTHER LEFT WING CANDIDATE/PARTY (NOT FURTHER SPECIFIED) 9999991. OTHER RIGHT WING CANDIDATE/PARTY (NOT FURTHER SPECIFIED) 9999992. OTHER CANDIDATE/PARTY (NOT FURTHER SPECIFIED) 9999993. INVALID/ BLANK BALLOT 9999995. NOT APPLICABLE: NO DISTRICT CANDIDATE VOTE 9999996. NOT APPLICABLE: NO LOWER HOUSE ELECTION 9999997. VOLUNTEERED: REFUSED 9999998. VOLUNTEERED: DON'T KNOW 9999999. MISSING/ABSTAINED (DID NOT VOTE) | VARIABLE NOTES: IMD3002_LH_DC | | For more detailed information on how CSES codes | parties/coalitions, please see Part 3 of the CSES IMD Codebook. | | Respondents that mentioned not casting a ballot in the current | lower house election (IMD3001_LH) but report a vote choice | are included as it is not possible to identify why this | inconsistency occurred. For further details on these | inconsistencies, see Standalone CSES Module Codebooks. | | The corresponding variables in the Standalone CSES Modules are: | MODULE 1: A2031 | MODULE 2: B3006_1 & B3006_2 | MODULE 3: C3023_LH_DC | MODULE 4: D3006_LH_DC | | CSES MODULE 1 categories "99. APPLICABLE BUT NOT ASCERTAINED - | DON'T KNOW, REFUSED" and "98 Respondent cast invalid ballot/did | not vote" were coded as "9999999. MISSING" in CSES IMD. | | CSES MODULE 2 category "94. INCONSISTENT RESPONSE: R reported | casting a ballot, but R did not vote." has been coded into | "9999999. MISSING" for the IMD. | | Data are unavailable for RUSSIA (1999), THAILAND (2001), and | UKRAINE (1998). | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - GERMANY (ALL STUDIES): IMD3002_LH_DC | | Respondents indicating that they voted either for the CDU | (2760002) or the CSU (2760003) were assigned the same IMD Code, | 2760001. The latter code refers to the "CDU/CSU Union." | ELECTION STUDY NOTES – HUNGARY (1998): IMD3002_LH_DC | | This variable refers to the first round of the 1998 | Hungarian lower house elections. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- IMD3002_UH_PL >>> CURRENT UPPER HOUSE ELECTION: VOTE CHOICE - PARTY LIST --------------------------------------------------------------------------- If applicable and respondent cast a ballot in the Upper House legislative election: This variable reports the respondent's vote choice for party list in the current Upper House elections. .................................................................. 0000001-9000000. [SEE CSES IMD CODEBOOK PART 3 FOR HARMONIZED PARTY /COALITION NUMERICAL CODES] 9999988. NONE OF THE CANDIDATES/PARTIES 9999989. INDEPENDENT CANDIDATE 9999990. OTHER LEFT WING CANDIDATE/PARTY (NOT FURTHER SPECIFIED) 9999991. OTHER RIGHT WING CANDIDATE/PARTY (NOT FURTHER SPECIFIED) 9999992. OTHER CANDIDATE/PARTY (NOT FURTHER SPECIFIED) 9999993. R CAST INVALID/ BLANK BALLOT 9999995. NOT APPLICABLE: UNICAMERAL SYSTEM 9999996. NOT APPLICABLE: NO UPPER HOUSE ELECTION OR LIST VOTE 9999997. VOLUNTEERED: REFUSED 9999998. VOLUNTEERED: DON'T KNOW 9999999. MISSING/ABSTAINED (DID NOT VOTE) | VARIABLE NOTES: IMD3002_UH_PL | | For more detailed information on how CSES codes | parties/coalitions, please see Part 3 of the CSES IMD Codebook. | | Respondents that mentioned not casting a ballot in the current | upper house election (IMD3001_UH) but report a vote choice are | included as it is not possible to identify why this | inconsistency occurred. Such deviations are reported in the | Standalone CSES Module ELECTION STUDY NOTES. | | CSES MODULE 2 category "94. INCONSISTENT RESPONSE: R reported | casting a ballot, but R did not vote." has been coded into | "9999999. MISSING" for the IMD. | | The corresponding variables in the Standalone CSES Modules are: | MODULE 1: A2030 | MODULE 2: B3007_1 & B3007_2 | MODULE 3: C3023_UH_PL | MODULE 4: D3006_UH_PL | | Data are unavailable for ARGENTINA (2015), BELGIUM-FLANDERS | (1999), BELGIUM-WALLONIA (1999), and ROMANIA (1996). --------------------------------------------------------------------------- IMD3002_UH_DC_1 >>> CURRENT UPPER HOUSE ELECTION: VOTE CHOICE - DISTRICT CANDIDATE 1 IMD3002_UH_DC_2 >>> CURRENT UPPER HOUSE ELECTION: VOTE CHOICE - DISTRICT CANDIDATE 2 IMD3002_UH_DC_3 >>> CURRENT UPPER HOUSE ELECTION: VOTE CHOICE - DISTRICT CANDIDATE 3 IMD3002_UH_DC_4 >>> CURRENT UPPER HOUSE ELECTION: VOTE CHOICE - DISTRICT CANDIDATE 4 --------------------------------------------------------------------------- If applicable and respondent cast a ballot in the Upper House legislative election: This variable reports the respondent's vote choice for district district candidate(s) in the current Upper House elections. .................................................................. 0000001-9000000. [SEE CSES IMD CODEBOOK PART 3 FOR HARMONIZED PARTY /COALITION NUMERICAL CODES] 9999988. NONE OF THE CANDIDATES/PARTIES 9999989. INDEPENDENT CANDIDATE 9999990. OTHER LEFT WING CANDIDATE/PARTY (NOT FURTHER SPECIFIED) 9999991. OTHER RIGHT WING CANDIDATE/PARTY (NOT FURTHER SPECIFIED) 9999992. OTHER CANDIDATE/PARTY (NOT FURTHER SPECIFIED) 9999993. R CAST INVALID/ BLANK BALLOT 9999995. NOT APPLICABLE: UNICAMERAL SYSTEM 9999996. NOT APPLICABLE: NO UPPER HOUSE ELECTION OR CANDIDATE VOTE 9999997. VOLUNTEERED: REFUSED 9999998. VOLUNTEERED: DON'T KNOW 9999999. MISSING/ABSTAINED (DID NOT VOTE) | VARIABLE NOTES: D3006_UH_DC | | For more detailed information on how CSES codes | parties/coalitions, please see Part 3 of the CSES IMD Codebook. | | Respondents that mentioned not casting a ballot in the current | upper house election (IMD3001_UH) but report a vote choice are | included as it is not possible to identify why this | inconsistency occurred. Such deviations are reported in the | Standalone CSES Module ELECTION STUDY NOTES. | | CSES MODULE 2 category "94. INCONSISTENT RESPONSE: R reported | casting a ballot, but R did not vote." has been coded into | "9999999. MISSING" for the IMD. | | The corresponding variables in the Standalone CSES Modules are: | MODULE 1: A2031 | MODULE 2: B3007_1, B3007_2, B3007_3, & B3007_4 | MODULE 3: C3023_UH_DC_1, C3023_UH_DC_2, C3023_UH_DC_3, & | C3023_UH_DC_4 | MODULE 4: C3006_UH_DC | | Data are unavailable for KENYA (2013), POLAND (2011), and the | UNITED STATES (1996). --------------------------------------------------------------------------- IMD3002_OUTGOV >>> CURRENT MAIN ELECTION: VOTE CHOICE - OUTGOING GOVERNMENT (INCUMBENT) --------------------------------------------------------------------------- This item ascertains whether or not the respondent cast a ballot for the outgoing incumbent, regardless of whether or not it was valid. In case of a single election taking place, e.g., a lower house election only, this variable reports the voting decision for that particular election. In cases where multiple elections took place, e.g., a presidential and a lower house election, this variable reports the voting decision in the main election. These are listed in the table below. In case of a presidential election, the variable refers to the incumbent president and/or the incumbent president's party. In all other cases, the variable refers to the party/parties which was/were part of the outgoing cabinet. In mixed electoral systems where voters have a list vote and a district candidate vote, the list vote was used to determine if the respondent voted for the outgoing government or not. In case of a caretaker government, the party affiliation of its members was used to code this variable. Cabinet members without a formal party affiliation were not considered for this variable. For election studies included in CSES Modules 1 and 2, the coding was based on a variety of sources. For CSES Module 3 and 4, the information in the macro variables about the party of the incumbent president and the cabinet membership was used. This variable is original to CSES IMD, and therefore there are no corresponding variables in the Standalone CSES Modules. .................................................................. 0. DID NOT VOTE FOR THE OUTGOING GOVERNMENT (INCUMBENT) 1. VOTED FOR THE OUTGOING GOVERNMENT 9999996. NOT ASCERTAINED/INCUMBENT CANDIDATE/PARTY DID NOT CONTEST 9999997. VOLUNTEERED: REFUSED 9999998. VOLUNTEERED: DON'T KNOW 9999999. MISSING / ABSTAINED (DID NOT VOTE) | VARIABLE NOTES: IMD3002_OUTGOV | | +++ TABLE: ELECTION STUDIES BY TYPE OF MAIN ELECTION | | Presidential Lower House Upper House | POLITY (ELEC YEAR) Election Election Election | ------------------------------------------------------------- | ALBANIA (2005) - X - | ARGENTINA (2015) X - - | AUSTRALIA (1996) - X - | AUSTRALIA (2004) - X - | AUSTRALIA (2007) - X - | AUSTRALIA (2013) - X - | AUSTRIA (2008) - X - | AUSTRIA (2013) - X - | BELARUS (2001) X - - | BELARUS (2008) - X - | BELGIUM (2003) - X - | BELGIUM-F. (1999) - X - | BELGIUM-W. (1999) - X - | BRAZIL (2002) X - - | BRAZIL (2006) X - - | BRAZIL (2010) X - - | BRAZIL (2014) X - - | BULGARIA (2001) - X - | BULGARIA (2014) - X - | CANADA (1997) - X - | CANADA (2004) - X - | CANADA (2008) - X - | CANADA (2011) - X - | CANADA (2015) - X - | CHILE (1999) X* - - | CHILE (2005) X - - | CHILE (2009) X* - - | CROATIA (2007) - X - | CZECH REPUBLIC (1996) - X - | CZECH REPUBLIC (2002) - X - | CZECH REPUBLIC (2006) - X - | CZECH REPUBLIC (2010) - X - | CZECH REPUBLIC (2013) - X - | DENMARK (1998) - X - | DENMARK (2001) - X - | DENMARK (2007) - X - | ESTONIA (2011) - X - | FINLAND (2003) - X - | FINLAND (2007) - X - | FINLAND (2011) - X - | FINLAND (2015) - X - | FRANCE (2002) X - - | FRANCE (2007) - X - | FRANCE (2012) X - - | GERMANY (1998) - X - | GERMANY (2002 Mb.) - X - | GERMANY (2002 Tel.) - X - | GERMANY (2005) - X - | GERMANY (2009) - X - | GERMANY (2013) - X - | GREAT BRITAIN (1997) - X - | GREAT BRITAIN (2005) - X - | GREAT BRITAIN (2015) - X - | GREECE (2009) - X - | GREECE (2012) - X* - | GREECE (2015) - X - | HONG KONG (1998) - X* - | HONG KONG (2000) - X* - | HONG KONG (2004) - X* - | HONG KONG (2008) - X* - | HONG KONG (2012) - X* - | HUNGARY (1998) - X - | HUNGARY (2002) - X - | ICELAND (1999) - X - | ICELAND (2003) - X - | ICELAND (2007) - X - | ICELAND (2009) - X - | ICELAND (2013) - X - | IRELAND (2002) - X - | IRELAND (2007) - X - | IRELAND (2011) - X - | ISRAEL (1996) - X - | ISRAEL (2003) - X - | ISRAEL (2006) - X - | ISRAEL (2013) - X - | ITALY (2006) - X - | JAPAN (1996) - X - | JAPAN (2004) - - X | JAPAN (2007) - - X | JAPAN (2013) - - X | KENYA (2013) X* - - | KYRGYZSTAN (2005) X* - - | LATVIA (2010) - X - | LATVIA (2011) - X - | LATVIA (2014) - X - | LITHUANIA (1997) X* - - | MEXICO (1997) - X - | MEXICO (2000) X - - | MEXICO (2003) - X - | MEXICO (2006) X - - | MEXICO (2009) - X - | MEXICO (2012) X - - | MEXICO (2015) - X - | MONTENEGRO (2012) - X - | NETHERLANDS (1998) - X - | NETHERLANDS (2002) - X - | NETHERLANDS (2006) - X - | NETHERLANDS (2010) - X - | NEW ZEALAND (1996) - X - | NEW ZEALAND (2002) - X - | NEW ZEALAND (2008) - X - | NEW ZEALAND (2011) - X - | NEW ZEALAND (2014) - X - | NORWAY (1997) - X - | NORWAY (2001) - X - | NORWAY (2005) - X - | NORWAY (2009) - X - | NORWAY (2013) - X - | PERU (2000) X - - | PERU (2001) X* - - | PERU (2006) X* - - | PERU (2011) X - - | PERU (2016) X* - - | PHILIPPINES (2004) X - - | PHILIPPINES (2010) X - - | PHILIPPINES (2016) X - - | POLAND (1997) - X - | POLAND (2001) - X - | POLAND (2005) - X - | POLAND (2007) - X - | POLAND (2011) - X - | PORTUGAL (2002) - X - | PORTUGAL (2005) - X - | PORTUGAL (2009) - X - | PORTUGAL (2015) - X - | ROMANIA (1996) - X - | ROMANIA (2004) - X - | ROMANIA (2009) X - - | ROMANIA (2012) - X - | ROMANIA (2014) X* - - | RUSSIA (1999) - X - | RUSSIA (2000) X* - - | RUSSIA (2004) X - - | SERBIA (2012) - X - | SLOVAKIA (2010) - X - | SLOVAKIA (2016) - X - | SLOVENIA (1996) - X - | SLOVENIA (2004) - X - | SLOVENIA (2008) - X - | SLOVENIA (2011) - X - | SOUTH AFRICA (2009) - X - | SOUTH AFRICA (2014) X - - | SOUTH KOREA (2000) - X - | SOUTH KOREA (2004) - X - | SOUTH KOREA (2008) - X - | SOUTH KOREA (2012) - X - | SPAIN (1996) - X - | SPAIN (2000) - X - | SPAIN (2004) - X - | SPAIN (2008) - X - | SWEDEN (1998) - X - | SWEDEN (2002) - X - | SWEDEN (2006) - X - | SWEDEN (2014) - X - | SWITZERLAND (1999) - X* - | SWITZERLAND (2003) - X* - | SWITZERLAND (2007) - X* - | SWITZERLAND (2011) - X* - | TAIWAN (1996) X - - | TAIWAN (2001) - X - | TAIWAN (2004) X - - | TAIWAN (2008) X - - | TAIWAN (2012) X - - | THAILAND (2001) - X - | THAILAND (2007) - X* - | THAILAND (2011) - X - | TURKEY (2011) - X - | TURKEY (2015) - X - | UKRAINE (1998) - X - | UNITED STATES (1996) X - - | UNITED STATES (2004) X - - | UNITED STATES (2008) X - - | UNITED STATES (2012) X - - | URUGUAY (2009) X - - | ------------------------------------------------------------- | * = Incumbent not identified - see ELECTION STUDY NOTES below | | The incumbent could not be identified for BELARUS (2008), | CHILE (1999, 2009), GREECE (2012), HONG KONG (1998, 2000, 2004, | 2008, 2012), KENYA (2013), KYRGYZSTAN (2005), LITHUANIA (1997), | PERU (2001, 2006, 2016), ROMANIA (2014), RUSSIA (2000), | SWITZERLAND (1999, 2003, 2007, 2011), and THAILAND (2007). | Further explanations are provided in the POLITY NOTES and | ELECTION STUDY NOTES below. | | This variable is original to CSES IMD, and therefore there are | no corresponding variables in the Standalone CSES Modules. | | Data are unavailable for THAILAND (2001). | POLITY NOTES – HONG KONG: IMD3002_OUTGOV | | The Chief Executive (CE) in Hong Kong is the highest government | official but they do not belong to any political party. Hence, | IMD3002_OUTGOV was coded as “9999996. CANNOT DECIPHER/INCUMBENT | DID NOT CONTEST.” | POLITY NOTES – SWITZERLAND: IMD3002_OUTGOV | | The Federal Council of Switzerland functions as the collective | executive in Switzerland. Because the Federal President rotates | among its members from each of the parties on a fixed, annual | basis, no incumbent was coded. | POLITY NOTES – SOUTH KOREA: IMD3002_OUTGOV | | For all South Korean Studies in the CSES IMD, IMD3002_OUTGOV is | coded based on the party affiliation of the incumbent President | at the time of the respective election. | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - BELARUS (2008): IMD3002_OUTGOV | | The incumbent president at the time of the election, Alexander | Lukashenko, was not a member officially of any party. | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - CHILE (1999): IMD3002_OUTGOV | | The incumbent president at that time, Tagle, was a member of the | Christian Democratic Party. He was elected in 1993 with the | support of the alliance, Concertation, which the Christian | Democracy Party was a member of. In the 1999 election, however, | the Concertation alliance supported Ricardo Lagos from the Party | for Democracy. Because the numerical party codes in CSES Module | 1 referred to the individual parties and not the alliance, | respondents were coded as “9999996. CANNOT DECIPHER/INCUMBENT | DID NOT CONTEST.” | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - CHILE (2005): IMD3002_OUTGOV | | The incumbent president at the time of the 2005 Chilean | Presidential Election, Ricardo Lagos, was a member of the Party | for Democracy. He was elected in 2000 with the support of the | alliance Concertation, of which the Party for Democracy was a | member. In the 2005 Presidential election, however, the | Concertation alliance supported Michelle Bachelet from the | Socialist Party of Chile. Because the numerical party codes for | vote choice in the 2005 Chilean Presidential Election | (IMD3002_PR_1) refer to the individual parties and not the | alliance, voters who stated to have voted for the Socialist Party | in IMD3002_PR_1 were coded as having voted for the party of the | incumbent. | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - CHILE (2009): IMD3002_OUTGOV | | The incumbent president, Michelle Bachelet (Socialist Party), | did not stand for election in the 2009 Chilean presidential | elections. | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - CZECH REPUBLIC (2013): IMD3002_OUTGOV | | Prior to the election, the Czech Republic was governed by a | caretaker government led by Jiri Rusnok. 14 of the 15 cabinet | members had no formal party membership. Thus, only respondents | who voted for the Christian Democratic Union - Czech People's | Party (KDU-CSL), the party of the 15th cabinet member, were | coded as "1. VOTED FOR THE OUTGOING GOVERNMENT" here. | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - GREECE (2012): IMD3002_OUTGOV | | The government at the time of the election was a caretaker | government (May 6, 2012, to June 17, 2012). All of its members | were independents. Hence, IMD3002_OUTGOV was coded as “9999996. | CANNOT DECIPHER/INCUMBENT DID NOT CONTEST.” | ELECTION STUDY NOTES – ISRAEL (1996): IMD3002_OUTGOV | | 20 respondents were coded as not applicable for the lower house | vote choice variable in MODULE 1, A2030. These respondents are | coded as missing here. | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - JAPAN (2013): IMD3002_OUTGOV | | Because the 2013 Japanese election study in Module 4 referred to | the upper house elections, the incumbent variable was coded on | the basis of the lower house and the Abe government. | ELECTION STUDY NOTES – KENYA (2013): IMD3002_OUTGOV | | The incumbent Mwai Kibaki (Party of National Unity, PNU) did not | contest in the 2013 presidential elections because of term | limitations which permitted him to run for a third term. Also | the PNU did not field a candidate of its own in 2013. | ELECTION STUDY NOTES – KYRGYZSTAN (2005): IMD3002_OUTGOV | | The presidential office was held by the interim Kurmanbek | Bakiev who had taken over the office three and a half months | prior to the election after then-President Akayev fled the | country because of protests. Hence, IMD3002_OUTGOV was coded as | “9999996. CANNOT DECIPHER/INCUMBENT DID NOT CONTEST.” | ELECTION STUDY NOTES – LITHUANIA (1997): IMD3002_OUTGOV | | The incumbent president Algirdas Brazauskas (Democratic Labour | Party of Lithuania, LDDP) did not contest for another term and | his party, the LDDP, did not field or support another candidate. | ELECTION STUDY NOTES – PERU (2001): IMD3002_OUTGOV | | The party of the incumbent president, Alberto Fujimori, Cambio | 90 did not field a candidate in the 2001 presidential elections. | ELECTION STUDY NOTES – PERU (2006): IMD3002_OUTGOV | | The party of the incumbent president Alejandro Toledo (Possible | Peru) nominated Rafael Aubry for the 2006 elections. Three | months before the elections, however, Aubry withdrew his | candidacy. | ELECTION STUDY NOTES – PERU (2016): IMD3002_OUTGOV | | The alliance Peru Wins which had supported the incumbent, | Ollanta Humala, did not field a candidate in the 2016 elections. | ELECTION STUDY NOTES – PHILIPPINES (2004): IMD3002_OUTGOV | | IMD3002_OUTGOV is coded based on the party affiliation of | Gloria Macapagal Arroyo (LAKAS-CMD) the incumbent President at | the time of the 2004 Philippine Presidential election. Arroyo | originally got elected as the Vice President in the 1998 | Presidential election on a separate ticket, but became President | of the Philippines in 2001, after an impeachment of then | President Joseph Estrada. Arroyo ran for re-election in 2004 | and won the election. | ELECTION STUDY NOTES – ROMANIA (1996): IMD3002_OUTGOV | | The lower house election was chosen as the main election for | 1996 because the data for the presidential election in Module 1 | refers to the second round. Hence, the incumbent party here was | the party of the then Prime Minister, Nicolae Vacaroiu (Romanian | Party of Social Democracy, PSD which was known then as the Party | of Social Democracy in Romania, PDSR). | ELECTION STUDY NOTES – ROMANIA (2014): IMD3002_OUTGOV | | While the incumbent President Basescu technically ran on a | Democrat Liberal Party (PDL) ticket in 2009, Romanian presidents | cannot be legally a member of a party. According to the macro | report from Module 4, Basescu was also closer to the People’s | Movement Party (PMP) during the second half of his term. Hence, | respondents were coded as “9999996. CANNOT DECIPHER/INCUMBENT | DID NOT CONTEST.” | ELECTION STUDY NOTES – RUSSIA (2000): IMD3002_OUTGOV | | The incumbent president Boris Yeltsin (Independent) did not | stand for re-election in the 2000 Russian presidential | elections. | ELECTION STUDY NOTES – RUSSIA (2004): IMD3002_OUTGOV | | Vladimir Putin formally ran as an Independent candidate in | the previous Russian presidential elections in 2000 and the | the 2004 election. Hence, he was identified as the | incumbent president. | ELECTION STUDY NOTES – SOUTH KOREA (2004): IMD3002_OUTGOV | | IMD3002_OUTGOV is coded based on the party affiliation of Goh Kun | (Millennium Democratic Party) the incumbent President at the time | of the 2004 South Korean legislative election held on April 15, | 2004. A month before the election, the National Assembly, South | Korea’s unicameral parliament, voted in favor of an impeachment | of then-President Roh Moo-hyun (Our Party). However, South | Korea’s Constitutional Court overturned the impeachment one month | after the election, such that Roh reassumed office in May 2004. | ELECTION STUDY NOTES – THAILAND (2007): IMD3002_OUTGOV | | The 2007 Thailand elections were the first after a military | junta had overthrown the previous government. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- IMD3003_PR_1 >>> TURNOUT - PREVIOUS PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION - ROUND 1 IMD3003_PR_2 >>> TURNOUT - PREVIOUS PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION - ROUND 2 --------------------------------------------------------------------------- This item ascertains whether or not the respondent cast a ballot, regardless of whether or not it was valid, in the PREVIOUS election to be considered. .................................................................. 0. RESPONDENT DID NOT CAST A BALLOT 1. RESPONDENT CAST A BALLOT 9999993. VOLUNTEERED: RESPONDENT NOT REGISTERED ON ELECTORAL LISTS [IF APPLICABLE] 9999995. NOT APPLICABLE: NO ROLE OF PRESIDENT 9999996. NOT APPLICABLE: NO PRESIDENTIAL ELECTIONS 9999997. VOLUNTEERED: REFUSED 9999998. VOLUNTEERED: DON'T KNOW 9999999. MISSING / ABSTAINED (DID NOT VOTE) | VARIABLE NOTES: IMD3003_PR_1-IMD3003_PR_2 | | +++ TABLE: SUMMARY OF TYPE OF PREVIOUS ELECTION | AND THE YEAR IN WHICH IT WAS HELD | | Presidential | POLITY (ELEC YEAR) Election | ----------------------------------------------------------- | ARGENTINA (2015) 2011 | BELARUS (2008) 2006 | BRAZIL (2002) 1998 | BRAZIL (2006) 2002 | BRAZIL (2010) 2006 | BRAZIL (2014) 2010 | CHILE (2005) 1999 | CHILE (2009) 2006 | CROATIA (2007) 2005 | FRANCE (2002) 1995 | FRANCE (2007) 2007* | FRANCE (2012) 2007 | ISRAEL (2003) 2001* | KENYA (2013) 2007 | KYRGYZSTAN (2005) 2000 | MEXICO (2009) 2006 | MEXICO (2015) 2012 | PERU (2006) 2001 | PERU (2011) 2006 | PERU (2016) 2011 | PHILIPPINES (2004) 1998 | PHILIPPINES (2010) 2004 | POLAND (2007) 2005 | ROMANIA (2004) 2000 | ROMANIA (2014) 2009 | RUSSIA (2004) 2000 | SOUTH KOREA (2008) 2007 | TAIWAN (2004) 2000 | UNITED STATES (2004) 2000 | UNITED STATES (2008) 2004 | URUGUAY (2009) 2004 | ------------------------------------------------------------- | KEY: * = See election study notes below | | Inconsistency response category from CSES Module 2 coded as | "4. INCONSISTENT RESPONSE: R reported not casting a ballot but | reported a vote choice" was coded as "0. RESPONDENT DID NOT | CAST A BALLOT" in IMD. | | The corresponding variables in the Standalone CSES Modules are: | MODULE 1: Not included | MODULE 2: B3016 | MODULE 3: C3031 | MODULE 4: D3007_PR_1 (IMD3003_PR_1) & D3007_PR_2 (IMD3003_PR_2) | | Data are unavailable for MODULE 1. | | For IMD3003_PR_1, data is also unavilable for for MEXICO (2012), | PHILIPPINES (2016), RUSSIA (2004), SERBIA (2012), and TAIWAN | (2008, 2012). | | For IMD3003_PR_2, data is unavailable for BRAZIL (2006, 2010), | CHILE (2005), CROATIA (2007), FRANCE (2007), PERU (2006, 2011), | POLAND (2007), ROMANIA (2004), SERBIA (2012), and TAIWAN (2008). | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - FRANCE (2007): IMD3003_PR_1 | | This variable refers to the 2007 French Presidential Elections | which took place on April 22 (First round) and May 6 (Second | round) 2007. | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - ISRAEL (2003): IMD3003_PR_1 | | This variable refers to the 2001 Israeli Prime Minister | election. | [ELECTION STUDY NOTES] - TAIWAN (2004): IMD3003_PR_1 | | Two categories in previous vote choice variable for Taiwan | (2004) study did not match the IMD categories and was re-coded | for IMD in the following way: | | CSES IMD code CSES Module 2 code | 9999993. 06. Disqualified at that time | 9999998. 08. Can't remember --------------------------------------------------------------------------- IMD3003_LH >>> TURNOUT - PREVIOUS LOWER HOUSE ELECTION --------------------------------------------------------------------------- This item ascertains whether or not the respondent cast a ballot, regardless of whether or not it was valid, in the PREVIOUS election to be considered. .................................................................. 0. RESPONDENT DID NOT CAST A BALLOT 1. RESPONDENT CAST A BALLOT 9999993. VOLUNTEERED: RESPONDENT NOT REGISTERED ON ELECTORAL LISTS [IF APPLICABLE] 9999996. NOT APPLICABLE: NO LOWER HOUSE ELECTIONS 9999997. VOLUNTEERED: REFUSED 9999998. VOLUNTEERED: DON'T KNOW 9999999. MISSING / ABSTAINED (DID NOT VOTE) | VARIABLE NOTES: IMD3003_LH | | +++ TABLE: SUMMARY OF TYPE OF PREVIOUS ELECTION | AND THE YEAR IN WHICH IT WAS HELD | | Lower House | POLITY (ELEC YEAR) Election | ----------------------------------------------------------- | ALBANIA (2005) 2001 | AUSTRALIA (2004) 2001 | AUSTRALIA (2013) 2010 | AUSTRIA (2013) 2008 | BELARUS (2008) 2004 | BELGIUM (2003) 1999 | BRAZIL (2006) 2002 | BRAZIL (2010) 2006 | BRAZIL (2014) 2010 | BULGARIA (2001) 1997 | BULGARIA (2014) 2013 | CANADA (2004) 2000 | CANADA (2008) 2006 | CANADA (2011) 2008 | CANADA (2015) 2011 | CROATIA (2007) 2003 | CZECH REPUBLIC (2002) 1998 | CZECH REPUBLIC (2006) 2002 | CZECH REPUBLIC (2010) 2006 | CZECH REPUBLIC (2013) 2010 | DENMARK (2007) 2005 | ESTONIA (2011) 2007 | FINLAND (2003) 1999 | FINLAND (2007) 2003 | FINLAND (2011) 2007 | FINLAND (2015) 2011 | GERMANY (2002 Telephone) 1998 | GERMANY (2002 Mail-Back) 1998 | GERMANY (2005) 2002 | GERMANY (2009) 2005 | GERMANY (2013) 2013 | GREAT BRITAIN (2005) 2001 | GREAT BRITAIN (2015) 2010 | GREECE (2009) 2007 | GREECE (2012) 2012 | GREECE (2015) 2012 | HONG KONG (2004) 2000 | HONG KONG (2008) 2004 | HONG KONG (2012) 2008 | HUNGARY (2002) 1998 | ICELAND (2003) 1999 | ICELAND (2007) 2003 | ICELAND (2009) 2007 | ICELAND (2013) 2009 | IRELAND (2002) 1997 | IRELAND (2007) 2002 | IRELAND (2011) 2007 | ISRAEL (2003) 1999 | ISRAEL (2006) 2003 | ISRAEL (2013) 2013 | JAPAN (2004) 2003 | JAPAN (2007) 2005* | JAPAN (2013) 2012 | LATVIA (2010) 2006 | LATVIA (2011) 2010 | LATVIA (2014) 2011 | MEXICO (2003) 2000 | MEXICO (2012) 2009 | MEXICO (2015) 2012 | MONTENEGRO (2012) 2009 | NETHERLANDS (2002) 1998 | NETHERLANDS (2006) 2003 | NETHERLANDS (2010) 2006 | NEW ZEALAND (2002) 1999 | NEW ZEALAND (2008) 2005 | NEW ZEALAND (2011) 2008 | NEW ZEALAND (2014) 2011 | NORWAY (2001) 1997 | NORWAY (2005) 2001 | NORWAY (2009) 2005 | NORWAY (2013) 2009 | PHILIPPINES (2004) 1998 | PHILIPPINES (2016) 2013 | POLAND (2001) 1997 | POLAND (2005) 2001 | POLAND (2007) 2005 | POLAND (2011) 2007 | PORTUGAL (2002) 1999 | PORTUGAL (2005) 2002 | PORTUGAL (2015) 2011 | ROMANIA (2004) 2000 | ROMANIA (2009) 2008 | ROMANIA (2012) 2008 | SERBIA (2012) 2008 | SLOVAKIA (2010) 2006 | SLOVAKIA (2016) 2012 | SLOVENIA (2004) 2000 | SLOVENIA (2008) 2004 | SLOVENIA (2011) 2008 | SOUTH AFRICA (2014) 2009 | SOUTH KOREA (2004) 2000 | SOUTH KOREA (2012) 2008 | SPAIN (2004) 2000 | SWEDEN (2002) 1998 | SWEDEN (2006) 2002 | SWEDEN (2014) 2010 | SWITZERLAND (2003) 1999 | SWITZERLAND (2007) 2003 | SWITZERLAND (2011) 2007 | TAIWAN (2001) 1998 | TAIWAN (2012) 2008 | THAILAND (2007) 2005 | THAILAND (2011) 2007 | TURKEY (2011) 2007 | TURKEY (2015) 2011 | UNITED STATES (2004) 2000 | URUGUAY (2009) 2004 | ------------------------------------------------------------- | KEY: * = See election study notes below | | Inconsistency response category from CSES Module 2 coded as | "4. INCONSISTENT RESPONSE: R reported not casting a ballot but | reported a vote choice" was coded as "0. RESPONDENT DID NOT | CAST A BALLOT" in IMD. | | The corresponding variables in the Standalone CSES Modules are: | MODULE 1: Not included | MODULE 2: B3016 | MODULE 3: C3031 | MODULE 4: D3007_LH | | Data are unavailable for MODULE 1 and for ARGENTINA (2015), | AUSTRIA (2008), DENMARK (2001), ITALY (2006), KENYA (2013), | KYRGYZSTAN (2005), MEXICO (2015), PERU (2016), PORTUGAL (2009), | SOUTH AFRICA (2009), SPAIN (2008), and the UNITED STATES (2008, | 2012). | [ELECTION STUDY NOTES] - IMD3003_LH | | In five studies from CSES Module 2 (Belgium 2003; Hong Kong 2004 | Poland 2001; Portugal 2002 and 2005) the code 6 referred to "Not | registered on Electoral lists" was re-coded into "9999993. | RESPONDENT NOT REGISTERED ON THE ELECTORAL LISTS" in the IMD. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- IMD3003_UH >>> TURNOUT - PREVIOUS UPPER HOUSE ELECTION --------------------------------------------------------------------------- This item ascertains whether or not the respondent cast a ballot, regardless of whether or not it was valid, in the PREVIOUS UPPER HOUSE election. .................................................................. 0. RESPONDENT DID NOT CAST A BALLOT 1. RESPONDENT CAST A BALLOT 9999993. VOLUNTEERED: RESPONDENT NOT REGISTERED ON ELECTORAL LISTS [IF APPLICABLE] 9999995. NOT APPLICABLE: UNICAMERAL SYSTEM 9999996. NOT APPLICABLE: NO UPPER HOUSE ELECTIONS 9999997. VOLUNTEERED: REFUSED 9999998. VOLUNTEERED: DON'T KNOW 9999999. MISSING / ABSTAINED (DID NOT VOTE) | VARIABLE NOTES: IMD3003_UH | | +++ TABLE: SUMMARY OF TYPE OF PREVIOUS ELECTION | AND THE YEAR IN WHICH IT WAS HELD | | Upper House | POLITY (ELEC YEAR) Election | ------------------------------------------------------------- | BRAZIL (2002) 1998 | BRAZIL (2010) 2006 | BRAZIL (2014) 2010 | JAPAN (2007) 2005 | MEXICO (2009) 2006 | POLAND (2001) 1997 | ROMANIA (2004) 2000 | ROMANIA (2012) 2008 | URUGUAY (2009) 2004 | ------------------------------------------------------------- | KEY: * = See election study notes below | | Inconsistency response category from CSES Module 2 coded as | "4. INCONSISTENT RESPONSE: R reported not casting a ballot but | reported a vote choice" was coded as "0. RESPONDENT DID NOT | CAST A BALLOT" in IMD. | | The corresponding variables in the Standalone CSES Modules are: | MODULE 1: Not included | MODULE 2: B3016 | MODULE 3: C3031 | MODULE 4: D3007_UH | | Data for IMD3003_UH are unavailable for MODULE 1 and for | ARGENTINA (2015), AUSTRALIA (2013), JAPAN (2013), KENYA (2013), | MEXICO (2006, 2012), POLAND (2011), and the UNITED STATES (2004, | 2008, 2012). | [ELECTION STUDY NOTES] - POLAND (2001) - IMD3003_UH | | Code 6, which referred to "Not registered on Electoral lists" | in CSES Module 2, was re-coded into "9999993. RESPONDENT NOT | REGISTERED ON THE ELECTORAL LISTS" in the IMD. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- IMD3004_PR_1 >>> PREVIOUS PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION: VOTE CHOICE - ROUND 1 IMD3004_PR_2 >>> PREVIOUS PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION: VOTE CHOICE - ROUND 2 --------------------------------------------------------------------------- If applicable and respondent cast a ballot in the presidential election: This item reports the respondent's vote choice for president in the PREVIOUS election. .................................................................. 0000001-9000000. [SEE CSES IMD CODEBOOK PART 3 FOR HARMONIZED PARTY /COALITION NUMERICAL CODES] 9999988. NONE OF THE CANDIDATES 9999989. INDEPENDENT CANDIDATE 9999990. OTHER LEFT WING CANDIDATE (NOT FURTHER SPECIFIED) 9999991. OTHER RIGHT WING CANDIDATE (NOT FURTHER SPECIFIED) 9999992. OTHER CANDIDATE (NOT FURTHER SPECIFIED) 9999993. R CAST INVALID/ BLANK BALLOT 9999995. NOT APPLICABLE: NO ROLE OF PRESIDENT 9999996. NOT APPLICABLE: NO PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION 9999997. VOLUNTEERED: REFUSED 9999998. VOLUNTEERED: DON'T KNOW 9999999. MISSING/ABSTAINED (DID NOT VOTE) | VARIABLE NOTES: IMD3004_PR_1 & PR_2 | | Numerical party/alliance codes are listed in Part 3 of the CSES | Codebook. | | Respondents that mentioned not casting a ballot in the previous | Presidential election (IMD3003_PR) but report a vote choice are | included as it is not possible to identify why this | inconsistency occurred. Such deviations are reported in the | Standalone CSES Module ELECTION STUDY NOTES. | | CSES MODULE 2 category "94. INCONSISTENT RESPONSE: R reported | casting a ballot, but T did not vote." has been coded into | "9999999. MISSING" for the IMD. | | The corresponding variables in the Standalone CSES Modules are: | MODULE 1: Not included | MODULE 2: B3017 | MODULE 3: C3032_PR_1 (IMD3003_PR_1) & C3032_PR_2 (IMD3003_PR_2) | MODULE 4: D3008_PR_1 (IMD3003_PR_1) & D3008_PR_2 (IMD3003_PR_2) | | Data for IMD3004_PR_1 are unavailable for MODULE 1 and for | CHILE (2009), MEXICO (2012), PHILIPPINES (2016), SERBIA (2012), | and TAIWAN (2012). | | Data for IMD3004_PR_2 are unavailable for MODULE 1 and for | CHILE (2005), FRANCE (2002), CROATIA (2007), PERU (2016), | ROMANIA (2004), and SERBIA (2012). | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - KYRGYZSTAN (2005): IMD3004_PR_1 | | Kyrgyz Presidential elections are technically not party-based, | i.e., there is no straightforward connection between the | presidential candidates and political parties. Hence, they are | labeled as independent candidates in CSES IMD. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- IMD3004_LH_PL >>> PREVIOUS LOWER HOUSE ELECTION: VOTE CHOICE - PARTY LIST --------------------------------------------------------------------------- If applicable and respondent cast a ballot in the Lower House legislative election: This item reports the respondent's vote choice for party list in the PREVIOUS election. .................................................................. 0000001-9000000. [SEE CSES IMD CODEBOOK PART 3 FOR HARMONIZED PARTY /COALITION NUMERICAL CODES] 9999988. NONE OF THE CANDIDATES/PARTIES 9999989. INDEPENDENT CANDIDATE 9999990. OTHER LEFT WING CANDIDATE/PARTY (NOT FURTHER SPECIFIED) 9999991. OTHER RIGHT WING CANDIDATE/PARTY (NOT FURTHER SPECIFIED) 9999992. OTHER CANDIDATE/PARTY (NOT FURTHER SPECIFIED) 9999993. R CAST INVALID/ BLANK BALLOT 9999995. NOT APPLICABLE: NOT A LIST SYSTEM 9999996. NOT APPLICABLE: NO LOWER HOUSE ELECTION 9999997. VOLUNTEERED: REFUSED 9999998. VOLUNTEERED: DON'T KNOW 9999999. MISSING/ABSTAINED (DID NOT VOTE) | VARIABLE NOTES: IMD3004_LH_PL | | Numerical party/alliance codes are listed in Part 3 of the CSES | Codebook. | | Respondents that mentioned not casting a ballot in the previous | lower house election (IMD3003_LH) but report a vote choice | are included as it is not possible to identify why this | inconsistency occurred. Such deviations are reported in the | Standalone CSES Module ELECTION STUDY NOTES. | | CSES MODULE 2 category "94. INCONSISTENT RESPONSE: R reported | casting a ballot, but T did not vote." has been coded into | "9999999. MISSING" for the IMD. | | The corresponding variables in the Standalone CSES Modules are: | MODULE 1: Not included | MODULE 2: B3018_1 | MODULE 3: C3032_LH_PL | MODULE 4: D3008_LH_PL | | Data are unavailable for MODULE 1 and for ARGENTINA (2015), | AUSTRIA (2008), BRAZIL (2002, 2006, 2010), PERU (2016), | PORTUGAL (2009), SOUTH AFRICA (2009), and SPAIN (2008). | | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - PORTUGAL (2002): IMD3004_LH_PL | | Portugal 2002 appeared in CSES MODULE 1 and 2. The data | for this variable was taken from the CSES Module 2 version of | the Portuguese dataset. | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - TAIWAN (2008): IMD3004_LH_PL | | The previous vote choice variables for the lower house | refers to the 2008 legislative elections which took place | place in January, 3 months before the presidential election. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- IMD3004_LH_DC >>> PREVIOUS LOWER HOUSE ELECTION: VOTE CHOICE - DISTRICT CANDIDATE --------------------------------------------------------------------------- If applicable and respondent cast a ballot in the Lower House legislative election: This item reports the respondent's vote choice for district candidate in the PREVIOUS election. .................................................................. 0000001-9000000. [SEE CSES IMD CODEBOOK PART 3 FOR HARMONIZED PARTY /COALITION NUMERICAL CODES] 9999988. NONE OF THE CANDIDATES/PARTIES 9999989. INDEPENDENT CANDIDATE 9999990. OTHER LEFT WING CANDIDATE/PARTY (NOT FURTHER SPECIFIED) 9999991. OTHER RIGHT WING CANDIDATE/PARTY (NOT FURTHER SPECIFIED) 9999992. OTHER CANDIDATE/PARTY (NOT FURTHER SPECIFIED) 9999993. R CAST INVALID/ BLANK BALLOT 9999995. NOT APPLICABLE: NO DISTRICT CANDIDATE VOTE 9999996. NOT APPLICABLE: NO LOWER HOUSE ELECTION 9999997. VOLUNTEERED: REFUSED 9999998. VOLUNTEERED: DON'T KNOW 9999999. MISSING/ABSTAINED (DID NOT VOTE) | VARIABLE NOTES: IMD3004_LH_DC | | Numerical party/alliance codes are listed in Part 3 of the CSES | Codebook. | | Respondents that mentioned not casting a ballot in the previous | lower house election (IMD3003_LH) but report a vote choice | are included as it is not possible to identify why this | inconsistency occurred. Such deviations are reported in the | Standalone CSES Module ELECTION STUDY NOTES. | | CSES MODULE 2 category "94. INCONSISTENT RESPONSE: R reported | casting a ballot, but T did not vote." has been coded into | "9999999. MISSING" for the IMD. | | The corresponding variables in the Standalone CSES Modules are: | MODULE 1: Not included | MODULE 2: B3018_1 & B3018_2 | MODULE 3: C3032_LH_DC | MODULE 4: D3008_LH_DC | | Data are unavailable for MODULE 1 and for MEXICO (2015), | SWITZERLAND (2011), and the UNITED STATES (2004, 2012). | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - TAIWAN (2008): IMD3004_LH_DC | | The previous vote choice variables for the lower house | refers to the 2008 legislative elections which took place | place in January, 3 months before the presidential election. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- IMD3004_UH_PL >>> PREVIOUS UPPER HOUSE ELECTION: VOTE CHOICE - PARTY LIST --------------------------------------------------------------------------- If applicable and respondent cast a ballot in the Upper House legislative election: This item reports the respondent's vote choice for party list in the PREVIOUS Upper House election. .................................................................. 0000001-9000000. [SEE CSES IMD CODEBOOK PART 3 FOR HARMONIZED PARTY /COALITION NUMERICAL CODES] 9999988. NONE OF THE CANDIDATES/PARTIES 9999989. INDEPENDENT CANDIDATE 9999990. OTHER LEFT WING CANDIDATE/PARTY (NOT FURTHER SPECIFIED) 9999991. OTHER RIGHT WING CANDIDATE/PARTY (NOT FURTHER SPECIFIED) 9999992. OTHER CANDIDATE/PARTY (NOT FURTHER SPECIFIED) 9999993. R CAST INVALID/ BLANK 9999995. NOT APPLICABLE: UNICAMERAL SYSTEM 9999996. NOT APPLICABLE: NO UPPER HOUSE ELECTION OR LIST VOTE 9999997. VOLUNTEERED: REFUSED 9999998. VOLUNTEERED: DON'T KNOW 9999999. MISSING/ABSTAINED (DID NOT VOTE) | VARIABLE NOTES: IMD3004_UH_PL | | Numerical party/alliance codes are listed in Part 3 of the CSES | IMD Codebook. | | Respondents that mentioned not casting a ballot in the previous | upper house election (IMD3003_UH) but report a vote choice | are included as it is not possible to identify why this | inconsistency occurred. Such deviations are reported in the | Standalone CSES Module ELECTION STUDY NOTES. | | CSES MODULE 2 category "94. INCONSISTENT RESPONSE: R reported | casting a ballot, but T did not vote." has been coded into | "9999999. MISSING" for the IMD. | | The corresponding variables in the Standalone CSES Modules are: | MODULE 1: Not included | MODULE 2: B3019_1 | MODULE 3: C3032_UH_PL | MODULE 4: D3008_UH_PL | | Data are unavailable for MODULE 1 and for ARGENTINA (2015), | JAPAN (2013), and MEXICO (2012). --------------------------------------------------------------------------- IMD3004_UH_DC_1 >>> PREVIOUS UPPER HOUSE ELECTION: VOTE CHOICE - DISTRICT CANDIDATE 1 IMD3004_UH_DC_2 >>> PREVIOUS UPPER HOUSE ELECTION: VOTE CHOICE - DISTRICT CANDIDATE 2 IMD3004_UH_DC_3 >>> PREVIOUS UPPER HOUSE ELECTION: VOTE CHOICE - DISTRICT CANDIDATE 3 --------------------------------------------------------------------------- If applicable and respondent cast a ballot in the Upper House legislative election: This item reports the respondent's vote choice for district candidate in the PREVIOUS Upper House election. .................................................................. 0000001-9000000. [SEE CSES IMD CODEBOOK PART 3 FOR HARMONIZED PARTY /COALITION NUMERICAL CODES] 9999988. NONE OF THE CANDIDATES/PARTIES 9999989. INDEPENDENT CANDIDATE 9999990. OTHER LEFT WING CANDIDATE/PARTY (NOT FURTHER SPECIFIED) 9999991. OTHER RIGHT WING CANDIDATE/PARTY (NOT FURTHER SPECIFIED) 9999992. OTHER CANDIDATE/PARTY (NOT FURTHER SPECIFIED) 9999993. R CAST INVALID/ BLANK 9999995. NOT APPLICABLE: UNICAMERAL SYSTEM 9999996. NOT APPLICABLE: NO UPPER HOUSE ELECTION OR LIST VOTE 9999997. VOLUNTEERED: REFUSED 9999998. VOLUNTEERED: DON'T KNOW 9999999. MISSING/ABSTAINED (DID NOT VOTE) | VARIABLE NOTES: IMD3004_UH_DC_ | | Numerical party/alliance codes are listed in Part 3 of the CSES | IMD Codebook. | | Respondents that mentioned not casting a ballot in the previous | upper house election (IMD3003_UH) but report a vote choice | are included as it is not possible to identify why this | inconsistency occurred. Such deviations are reported in the | Standalone CSES Module ELECTION STUDY NOTES. | | CSES MODULE 2 category "94. INCONSISTENT RESPONSE: R reported | casting a ballot, but T did not vote." has been coded into | "9999999. MISSING" for the IMD. | | The corresponding variables in the Standalone CSES Modules are: | MODULE 1: Not included | MODULE 2: B3019_1, B3019_2, & B3019_3 | MODULE 3: C3032_UH_DC | MODULE 4: D3008_UH_DC_1 & D3008_UH_DC_2 | | Data are not available for MODULE 1 and for AUSTRALIA (2013), | JAPAN (2013), KENYA (2013), POLAND (2011), and the UNITED STATES | (2004, 2008, 2012). --------------------------------------------------------------------------- IMD3005_1 >>> PARTY IDENTIFICATION: ARE YOU CLOSE TO ANY POLITICAL PARTY --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Do you usually think of yourself as close to any particular party? .................................................................. 1. YES 5. NO 7. VOLUNTEERED: REFUSED 8. VOLUNTEERED: DON'T KNOW 9. MISSING | VARIABLE NOTES: IMD3005_1 | | For MODULES 1 and 2, the question wording for IMD3005_1 slightly | deviated from the recent version applied for the CSES IMD. | Specifically, MODULES 1 and 2 questionnaires asked respondents | whether they were close to "any particular political party". | | IMD3005_1 was intended as a filter question for IMD3005_2. | Only respondents who answered "YES" at IMD3005_1 should continue | with IMD3005_3 (PARTY IDENTIFICATION: WHO). All other respondents | should continue with D3005_2 (PARTY IDENTIFICATION: DO YOU FEEL | CLOSER TO ONE PARTY). | | In MODULE 1 and MODULE 2, a long and a short version of the | party identification questions (Q3, Q18) were administered, | depending on whether party blocks (or electoral alliances) | formed for the respective election or not. | The LONG version of Q3/Q18 was used for respondents in systems | where AT LEAST ONE party block (or electoral alliance) was | formed. This version of the party identification question | prompts respondents who identify with a party block, to specify | which affiliated party they identify with most. | The SHORT version of Q3/Q18 was to be used in polities where NO | party blocks (or election alliances) formed. | IMD3005_1 (A3004, B3028) was administered for both versions of | Q3/Q18. | | +++ TABLE: MAPPING OF CLOSE TO PARTY CODES IN CSES MODULE 1 | TO CLOSE TO PARTY CODES IN CSES IMD | | IMD CODE CSES MODULE 1 CLASSIFICATION (CSES MODULE 1 CODE) |----------------------------------------------------------------- | 1. Yes; Inconsistent response: Yes, no party identified | (1/6) | 5. No; Inconsistent response: No, party identified (5/7) | 8. Don't know (8) | 9. Missing; Not Applicable - Item not asked (9/0) |----------------------------------------------------------------- | | The corresponding variables in the Standalone CSES Modules are: | MODULE 1: A3004 | MODULE 2: B3028 | MODULE 3: C3020_1 | MODULE 4: D3018_1 | | Data are unavailable for BELGIUM-WALLONIA (1999). --------------------------------------------------------------------------- IMD3005_2 >>> PARTY IDENTIFICATION: DO YOU FEEL CLOSER TO ONE PARTY --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Do you feel yourself a little closer to one of the political parties than the others? .................................................................. 1. YES 5. NO 7. VOLUNTEERED: REFUSED 8. VOLUNTEERED: DON'T KNOW 9. MISSING | VARIABLE NOTES: IMD3005_2 | | IMD3005_1 and IMD3005_2 were intended as a filter questions | for IMD3005_3. | Only respondents who answered "YES" at IMD3005_1 or IMD3005_2 | should continue with IMD3005_3 (PARTY IDENTIFICATION: WHO). | | In MODULE 1 and MODULE 2, a long and a short version of the | party identification questions (Q3, Q18) were administered, | depending on whether party blocks (or electoral alliances) | formed for the respective election or not. | The LONG version of Q3/Q18 was used for respondents in systems | where AT LEAST ONE party block (or electoral alliance) was | formed. This version of the party identification question | prompts respondents who identify with a party block, to specify | which affiliated party they identify with most. | The SHORT version of Q3/Q18 was to be used in polities where NO | party blocks (or election alliances) formed. | IMD3005_2 (A3010, B3034) was administered for both versions of | Q3/Q18. | | +++ TABLE: MAPPING OF CLOSER TO PARTY CODES IN CSES MODULE 1 | TO CLOSER TO PARTY CODES IN CSES IMD | | IMD CODE CSES MODULE 1 CLASSIFICATION (CSES MODULE 1 CODE) |----------------------------------------------------------------- | 1. Yes; Inconsistent response: Yes, no party identified | (1/6) | 5. No; Inconsistent response: No, party identifed (5/7) | 8. Don't know (8) | 9. Missing; Not Applicable - Item not asked (9/0) |----------------------------------------------------------------- | | The corresponding variables in the Standalone CSES Modules are: | MODULE 1: A3010 | MODULE 2: B3034 | MODULE 3: C3020_2 | MODULE 4: D3018_2 | | Data are unavailable for AUSTRALIA (1996, 2004, 2013), BELGIUM- | FLANDERS (1999), BELGIUM-WALLONIA (1999), BELGIUM (2003), | CANADA (1997), LATVIA (2010, 2011, 2014), NORWAY (2001, 2005, | 2009, 2013), NEW ZEALAND (1996), PERU (2016), SLOVENIA (1996, | 2008, 2011), and SWITZERLAND (2007). --------------------------------------------------------------------------- IMD3005_3 >>> PARTY IDENTIFICATION: WHO --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Which party do you feel closest to? .................................................................. 0000001-9000000. [SEE CODEBOOK PART 3 FOR PARTY AND LEADER NUMERIC CODES] 9999988. NONE OF THE CANDIDATES/PARTIES 9999989. INDEPENDENT CANDIDATE 9999990. OTHER LEFT WING CANDIDATE/PARTY (NOT FURTHER SPECIFIED) 9999991. OTHER RIGHT WING CANDIDATE/PARTY (NOT FURTHER SPECIFIED) 9999992. OTHER CANDIDATE/PARTY (NOT FURTHER SPECIFIED) 9999997. VOLUNTEERED: REFUSED 9999998. VOLUNTEERED: DON'T KNOW 9999999. MISSING | VARIABLE NOTES: IMD3005_3 | | Respondents' party mentions in IMD3005_3 depend on the two | former questions (IMD3005_1 and IMD3005_2). The party mention in | IMD3005_3 should have only been asked for those respondents that | reported to be close (IMD3005_1) or at least closer (IMD3005_2) | to a party. | However, there are several respondents that mentioned a party | (IMD3005_3), without feeling close (IMD3005_1) or closer | (IMD3005_2) to a party. These data remained unchanged. For | further details on these inconsistencies, see Standalone CSES | Module Codebooks. | | In MODULES 1 and 2, respondents were asked "Which party is that?" | For respondents who named more than one party that they identify | with in MODULE 1 or MODULE 2 (SQ3a, Q18A), there was | a follow-up question, asking respondents to specify a single | party they felt closest to (SQ3b, Q18B). | Furthermore, MODULES 1 and 2 differentiated between respondents | from settings where party blocs (or electoral alliances) formed | for the respective election and settings in which this was not | the case. Respondents initially indicating they identify with a | party bloc or an electoral alliance (SQ3a, Q18A) received a | follow-up question, prompting respondents to specify | which affiliated party they identify with most (LQ3a(1), Q18A1). | For the CSES IMD, in case a respondent provided only one answer | to A3005_/B3029_, this answer was adopted for IMD3005_3, | irrespective of whether respondents named a single party or an | electoral alliance. In cases respondents initially provided | multiple parties that they feel close to, as indicated by | A3006/B3030, Q3b/Q18B was used for IMD3005_3. | Finally, Q13d/Q18D was used if respondents replied NO to | IMD3005_1 (Are you close to any political party) but replied | YES to IMD3005_2 (Do you feel closer to one party). | | The corresponding variables in the Standalone CSES Modules are: | MODULE 1: A3005_1, A3009, & A3011 | MODULE 2: B3029_1, B3033, & B3035 | MODULE 3: C3020_3 | MODULE 4: D3018_3 | | Data are unavailable for BELGIUM-WALLONIA (1999) and IRELAND | [ELECTION STUDY NOTES] - BELGIUM-FLANDERS (1999): IMD3005_3 | | In Module 1, 50 respondents are coded as "50" in the variable | indicating their first mention of the parties they are closest | to (A3005_1). No further information about the meaning of the | code is provided. Hence, these respondents were coded to | "9999999. MISSING" for IMD. | [ELECTION STUDY NOTES] - CHILE (1999): IMD3005_3 | | In Module 1, 1 respondent is coded as "93" in the variable | indicating their first mention of the parties they are closest | to (A3005_1). No further information about the meaning of the | code is provided. Hence, this respondent was coded to | "9999999. MISSING" for IMD. | [ELECTION STUDY NOTES] - MODULE 1: IMD3005_3 | | A3011 (Which party do you feel closer to) was a follow-up | variable to A3010 (Do you feel closer to one party) according to | the CSES questionnaire skip pattern and should have only been | answered of respondents if they reported to feel closer to one | party than the others in A3010 ("1. YES"). However, in multiple | election studies, respondents who are coded as "9. MISSING" for | variable A3010 are also coded as "9" for variable A3010, | indicating a valid party code. These respondents should have | been coded as "99. MISSING" for A3011. This applies to 6,511 | respondents from the following election studies: AUSTRALIA 1996 | (N=346), BELGIUM-FLANDERS 1999 (N=320), CANADA 1997 (N=892), | CHILE 1999 (N=10), CZECH REPUBLIC 1996 (N=17), GERMANY 1998 | (N=9), GREAT BRITAIN 1997 (N=55), HONG KONG 1998/2000 | (N=11/116), HUNGARY 1998 (N=19), ICELAND 1999 (N=1), ISRAEL | 1999 (N=400), LITHUANIA 1997 (1), MEXICO 1997/2000 (N=52/39), | NORWAY 1997 (1), NEW ZEALAND 1996 (N=1,812), POLAND 1997 (N=2), | ROMANIA 1996 (N=108), RUSSIA 1999/2000 (N=20/16), SLOVENIA 1996 | (N=1,623), SWEDEN 1998 (N=124), THAILAND 2001 (N=504), | SWITZERLAND 1999 (N=4), and the UNITED STATES 1996 (N=9). | This has been corrected in CSES IMD and respondents were coded | accordingly. | [ELECTION STUDY NOTES] - POLAND (2001): IMD3005_3 | | The original Party identification variable from CSES Module 2 | for Poland (2001) study had codes 12 and 18. No party in Parties | and Leaders table, nor in the original questionnaire match these | codes, so they have been re-coded into 9999999. MISSING for IMD. | [ELECTION STUDY NOTES] - RUSSIA (1999): IMD3005_3 | | In MODULE 1, there are multiple irregular codes in the variables | indicating respondents' 1st (codes 50, 69, and 96; N=5), 2nd | (code 96; N=2), and 3rd (code 96; N=1) mention to the question | about the party they feel closest to. Furthermore, there are | three irregular codes for the variable indicating the party | respondents feel closest to (A3009). These are 72 (N=1), 83 | (N=1), and 96 (N1). Finally, there is an irregular code in the | variable indicating which party respondents feel closer to | (A3011), namely 68 (N=1). These were all coded to "9999999. | MISSING" for IMD. | [ELECTION STUDY NOTES] - RUSSIA (2000): IMD3005_3 | | In MODULE 1, there are multiple irregular codes in the variables | indicating respondents' 1st (code 96; N=4) and 2nd (code 96; | N=1) mention to the question about the party they feel closest | to. Furthermore, there is one irregular code for the variable | indicating the party respondents feel closest to (A3009), namely | 96 (N=2). Finally, there is an irregular code in the variable | indicating which party respondents feel closer to (A3011), | namely 96 (N=1). These were all coded to "9999999. MISSING" for | IMD. | [ELECTION STUDY NOTES] - SWITZERLAND (1999): IMD3005_3 | | In MODULE 1, 1 respondent is coded as "42" in the variable | indicating the party they feel closest to (A3009). No further | information about the meaning of the code is provided. Hence, | this respondent was coded to "9999999. MISSING" for IMD. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- IMD3005_4 >>> PARTY IDENTIFICATION: HOW CLOSE --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Do you feel very close to this party, somewhat close, or not very close? .................................................................. 1. VERY CLOSE 2. SOMEWHAT CLOSE 3. NOT VERY CLOSE 7. VOLUNTEERED: REFUSED 8. VOLUNTEERED: DON'T KNOW 9. MISSING | VARIABLE NOTES: IMD3005_4 | | The degree of closeness to the party, mentioned in IMD3005_4, | should have only been asked for those respondents that mentioned | a party in IMD3005_3. However, there are several respondents that | reported the degree of closeness (IMD3005_4), without mentioning | a party (IMD3005_3). These data remained unchanged (Also see | Variable Notes on IMD3005_3. For further details on these | inconsistencies, see Standalone CSES Module Codebooks. | | In MODULE 1 and MODULE 2, a long and a short version of the | party identification questions (Q3, Q18) were administered, | depending on whether party blocks (or electoral alliances) | formed for the respective election or not. | The LONG version of Q3/Q18 was used for respondents in systems | where AT LEAST ONE party block (or electoral alliance) was | formed. This version of the party identification question | prompts respondents who identify with a party block, to specify | which affiliated party they identify with most. | The SHORT version of Q3/Q18 was to be used in polities where NO | party blocks (or election alliances) formed. | IMD3005_4 (A3012, B3036) was administered for both | versions of Q3/Q18. | | +++ TABLE: MAPPING OF CLOSENESS TO PARTY CODES IN CSES MODULE 1 | TO CLOSENESS TO PARTY CODES IN CSES IMD | | IMD CODE CSES MODULE 1 CLASSIFICATION (CSES MODULE 1 CODE) |----------------------------------------------------------------- | 1. Very close (1) | 2. Somewhat close (2) | 3. Not very close (3) | 8. Don't know (8) | 9. Missing; Not Applicable (9/0) |----------------------------------------------------------------- | | The corresponding variables in the Standalone CSES Modules are: | MODULE 1: A3012 | MODULE 2: B3036 | MODULE 3: C3020_4 | MODULE 4: D3018_4 | | Data are unavailable for BELGIUM-FLANDERS (1999), BELGIUM- | WALLONIA (1999), CHILE (1999), KENYA (2013), NEW ZEALAND (1996), | and SLOVENIA (1996). --------------------------------------------------------------------------- IMD3006 >>> LEFT-RIGHT - SELF --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Respondents' self-placement on a 0-10 left-right scale. .................................................................. 00. LEFT 01. 02. 03. 04. 05. 06. 07. 08. 09. 10. RIGHT 95. VOLUNTEERED: HAVEN'T HEARD OF LEFT-RIGHT 97. VOLUNTEERED: REFUSED 98. VOLUNTEERED: DON'T KNOW WHERE TO PLACE 99. MISSING | VARIABLE NOTES: IMD3006 | | IMD3006 asked respondents to place themselves on a 0-10 | left-right ideological scale. | | Placement of this question in successive Standalone CSES Module | questionnaires varies and thus might have resulted in a small | deviation in the introduction to the question - please consult | the Standalone CSES Module Codebooks for more information. | | In the following, question wordings for each Module are listed. | | MODULES 1 and 2: | "In politics people sometimes talk of left and right. | Where would you place yourself on a scale from 0 to 10 | where 0 means the left and 10 means the right?" | | MODULES 3 and 4: | "Where would you place yourself on this scale?" | | In MODULE 1, respondents were first asked to place themselves | on the left-right scale before placing parties on the same scale. | That question order was reversed for MODULES 2 to 4. | | The CSES asks collaborators to ask the left-right | scale questions even if left-right is not considered to be | meaningful/important/widely understood in the area being | studied. However, it was possible to add an optional | alternative scale question on which respondents were asked to | place parties A - I and themselves. These alternative scale | questions were not harmonized for the IMD, but are available | in the separate MODULES 1 to 4. | | Several respondents mentioned not to know the left-right scale | in one of the appropriate variables on IMD3006 or IMD3007_, but | evaluated the other parties on even that scale. These data | remain unchanged. For further details on these inconsistencies, | see the variable and election study notes in the Standalone | CSES Module Codebooks. | | The corresponding variables in the Standalone CSES Modules are: | MODULE 1: A3031 | MODULE 2: B3045 | MODULE 3: C3013 | MODULE 4: D3014 | | Data are unavailable for JAPAN (1996, 2004) TAIWAN (2012), | and THAILAND (2001, 2011). | [ELECTION STUDY NOTES] - LITHUANIA (1997): IMD3006 | | Six respondents were coded as "96 [SEE ELECTION STUDY NOTES]" | in MODULE 1. Because no further information about the meaning of | the code was available, these respondents were re-coded to "99. | MISSING" here. | [ELECTION STUDY NOTES] - PERU (2001): IMD3006 | | Seven respondents were coded as "96 [SEE ELECTION STUDY NOTES]" | in MODULE 1. Because no further information about the meaning of | the code was available, these respondents were re-coded to "99. | MISSING" here. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- IMD3007_A >>> LEFT-RIGHT - PARTY A IMD3007_B >>> LEFT-RIGHT - PARTY B IMD3007_C >>> LEFT-RIGHT - PARTY C IMD3007_D >>> LEFT-RIGHT - PARTY D IMD3007_E >>> LEFT-RIGHT - PARTY E IMD3007_F >>> LEFT-RIGHT - PARTY F IMD3007_G >>> LEFT-RIGHT - PARTY G (OPTIONAL) IMD3007_H >>> LEFT-RIGHT - PARTY H (OPTIONAL) IMD3007_I >>> LEFT-RIGHT - PARTY I (OPTIONAL) --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Placement of Parties A-I on a 0-10 left-right scale. .................................................................. 00. LEFT 01. 02. 03. 04. 05. 06. 07. 08. 09. 10. RIGHT 95. VOLUNTEERED: HAVEN'T HEARD OF LEFT-RIGHT 96. VOLUNTEERED: HAVEN'T HEARD OF PARTY 97. VOLUNTEERED: REFUSED 98. VOLUNTEERED: DON'T KNOW WHERE TO PLACE 99. MISSING | VARIABLE NOTES: IMD3007_ | | IMD3007_ asked respondents to place Parties A-I on a 0-10 | left-right scale. | | Placement of this question in successive Standalone CSES Module | questionnaire varies and thus might have resulted in a small | deviation in the introduction to the question - please consult | the Standalone CSES Module Codebooks for more information. | In the following, question wordings for each Module are listed. | | MODULE 1: | "Now, using the same scale, where would you place [Party A-F]?" | | MODULES 2 and 4: | "In politics people sometimes talk of left and right. | Where would you place [PARTY A] on a scale from 0 to 10 | where 0 means the left and 10 means the right? | Using the same scale, where would you place, [PARTY B]? | Using the same scale, where would you place, [PARTY C]? | Using the same scale, where would you place, [PARTY D]? | Using the same scale, where would you place, [PARTY E]? | Using the same scale, where would you place, [PARTY F]? | Using the same scale, where would you place, [PARTY G]? | Using the same scale, where would you place, [PARTY H]? | Using the same scale, where would you place, [PARTY I]?" | | MODULE 3: | "In politics people sometimes talk of left and right. Where | would you place [PARTY A] on a scale from 0 to 10 where 0 means | the left and 10 means the right? | Using the same scale, where would you place [PARTY B]? | Where would you place [PARTY C]? | Where would you place [PARTY D]? | Where would you place [PARTY E]? | Where would you place [PARTY F]?" | | Parties and their numerical classifications for each election | study are detailed in Part 3 of the CSES IMD Codebook. For | linking alphabetical to numerical party codes, please see | VARIABLE NOTES on IMD5000_. | For more detailed information on how CSES IMD codes parties/ | coalitions and leaders, please see Part 3 of the CSES IMD | Codebook. | | The CSES asks collaborators to ask the left-right scale | questions even if left-right is not considered to be | meaningful/important/widely understood in the area being | studied. However, it was possible to add an optional | alternative scale question on which respondents were asked to | place parties A - I and themselves. These alternative scale | questions were not harmonized for the IMD, but are available | in the separate MODULES 1 to 4. | | Users should note that IMD3007_ includes several observations in | which all parties are scored equally by respondents. Also, there | may be instances in which respondents provide the same answer to | all items, e.g. "don't know". Furthermore, several respondents | mentioned not to know the left-right scale in one of the | appropriate variables on IMD3006 or IMD3007_, but evaluated the | other parties on even that scale. These data remain unchanged. | For further details on these inconsistencies, see the variable | and election study notes in the Standalone CSES Module | Codebooks. | | The corresponding variables in the Standalone CSES Modules are: | MODULE 1: A3032_A-A3032_I | MODULE 2: B3038_A-B3038_I | MODULE 3: C3011_A-C3011_I | MODULE 4: D3013_A-D3013_I | | Data are unavailable for BELGIUM (2003), CHILE (1999), JAPAN | (1996, 2004), RUSSIA (2000), TAIWAN (2012), THAILAND (2001), | and the UNITED STATES (1996). | [ELECTION STUDY NOTES] – GREAT BRITAIN (1997): IMD3007_D & | IMD3007_E | | Respondents outside of a region where a party contested the | election were not asked to evaluate it. These respondents are | coded as 97 in CSES Module 1 but were re-coded to “99. MISSING” | for IMD. This applies to the Scottish National Party, SNP | (PARTY D) and Plaid Cymru, PC (PARTY E). | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - MEXICO (2000): IMD3007_A & IMD3007_C | | IMD3007_A refers to the National Action Party (PAN) which was | part of the Alliance for Change (PARTY A in Mexico 2000). | IMD3007_C refers to the Democratic Revolution Party (PRD) | which was part of the Alliance for Mexico (PARTY C in | Mexico 2000) | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - ROMANIA (1996): IMD3007_A & IMD3007_C | | IMD3007_A refers to the National Peasant and Christian | Democratic Party (PNT-CD) which was part of the electoral | alliance Romanian Democratic Convention, CDR (PARTY A in Romania | 1996). IMD3007_C refers to the Democratic Party (PD) which was | part of the electoral alliance Social Democratic Union (PARTY C | in Romania 1996). --------------------------------------------------------------------------- IMD3008_A >>> LIKE-DISLIKE - PARTY A IMD3008_B >>> LIKE-DISLIKE - PARTY B IMD3008_C >>> LIKE-DISLIKE - PARTY C IMD3008_D >>> LIKE-DISLIKE - PARTY D IMD3008_E >>> LIKE-DISLIKE - PARTY E IMD3008_F >>> LIKE-DISLIKE - PARTY F IMD3008_G >>> LIKE-DISLIKE - PARTY G (OPTIONAL) IMD3008_H >>> LIKE-DISLIKE - PARTY H (OPTIONAL) IMD3008_I >>> LIKE-DISLIKE - PARTY I (OPTIONAL) --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Likeability rating of Parties A-I on a 0-10 scale. .................................................................. 00. STRONGLY DISLIKE 01. 02. 03. 04. 05. 06. 07. 08. 09. 10. STRONGLY LIKE 96. HAVEN'T HEARD OF PARTY 97. VOLUNTEERED: REFUSED 98. DON'T KNOW ENOUGH ABOUT/DON'T KNOW WHERE TO RATE 99. MISSING | VARIABLE NOTES: IMD3008_ | | IMD3008_ asked respondents to place Parties A-I on a 0-10 | likeability scale. | | Placement of this question in successive Standalone CSES Module | questionnaire varies and thus might have resulted in a small | deviation in the introduction to the question - please consult | the Standalone CSES Module Codebooks for more information. | | For IMD3008_, the question wording was: | "I'd like to know what you think about each of our | political parties. After I read the name of a political | party, please rate it on a scale from 0 to 10, where 0 | means you strongly dislike that party and 10 means that | you strongly like that party. If I come to a party you | haven't heard of or you feel you do not know enough | about, just say so. | The first party is [PARTY A]." | | Additionally, the Standalone Module Questionnaires for CSES | MODULES 3 and 4 also specified the wordings for the rating of | parties B to I: | "Using the same scale, where would you place, [PARTY B]? | Using the same scale, where would you place, [PARTY C]? | Using the same scale, where would you place, [PARTY D]? | Using the same scale, where would you place, [PARTY E]? | Using the same scale, where would you place, [PARTY F]? | Using the same scale, where would you place, [PARTY G]? | Using the same scale, where would you place, [PARTY H]? | Using the same scale, where would you place, [PARTY I]?" | | CSES MODULES 1 and 2 Questionnaires did not include such a | specification. | | Parties and their alphabetical classifications for each country | are detailed in Part 3 of the CSES IMD Codebook. For linking | alphabetical to numerical party codes, please see VARIABLE NOTES | on IMD5000_. | For more detailed information on how CSES codes parties/ | coalitions and leaders, please see Part 3 of the CSES IMD | Codebook. | | Users should note that IMD3008_ includes several observations in | which all parties are scored equally by respondents. Also, there | may be instances in which respondents provide the same answer to | all items, e.g. "don't know". Furthermore, several respondents | mentioned not to know a certain party in one of the appropriate | variables on IMD3007_ or IMD3008_ but evaluated even this party | on any other scale. These data remain unchanged. | For further details on these inconsistencies, see variable and | election study notes in the Standalone CSES Module Codebooks. | | The corresponding variables in the Standalone CSES Modules are: | MODULE 1: A3020_A-A3020_I | MODULE 2: B3037_A-B3037_I | MODULE 3: C3009_A-C3009_I | MODULE 4: D3011_A-D3011_I | [ELECTION STUDY NOTES] – GREAT BRITAIN (1997): IMD3008_D & | IMD3008_E | | Respondents outside of a region where a party contested the | election were not asked to evaluate it. These respondents are | coded as 97 in CSES Module 1 but were recoded to “99. MISSING” | for IMD. This applies to the Scottish National Party, SNP | (PARTY D) and Plaid Cymru, PC (PARTY E). | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - MEXICO (2000): IMD3008_A & IMD3008_C | | IMD3008_A refers to the National Action Party (PAN) which was | party of the Alliance for Change (PARTY A in Mexico 2000). | IMD3008_C refers to the Democratic Revolution Party (PRD) | which was party of the Alliance for Mexico (PARTY C in | Mexico 2000). | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - ROMANIA (1996): IMD3008_A & IMD3008_C | | IMD3008_A refers to the National Peasant and Christian | Democratic Party (PNT-CD) which was part of the electoral | alliance Romanian Democratic Convention, CDR (PARTY A in Romania | 1996). IMD3008_C refers to the Democratic Party (PD) which was | part of the electoral alliance Social Democratic Union (PARTY C | in Romania 1996). --------------------------------------------------------------------------- IMD3009_A >>> LIKE-DISLIKE - LEADER A IMD3009_B >>> LIKE-DISLIKE - LEADER B IMD3009_C >>> LIKE-DISLIKE - LEADER C IMD3009_D >>> LIKE-DISLIKE - LEADER D IMD3009_E >>> LIKE-DISLIKE - LEADER E IMD3009_F >>> LIKE-DISLIKE - LEADER F IMD3009_G >>> LIKE-DISLIKE - LEADER G (OPTIONAL) IMD3009_H >>> LIKE-DISLIKE - LEADER H (OPTIONAL) IMD3009_I >>> LIKE-DISLIKE - LEADER I (OPTIONAL) --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Likeability rating of Leaders A-I on a 0-10 scale. .................................................................. 00. STRONGLY DISLIKE 01. 02. 03. 04. 05. 06. 07. 08. 09. 10. STRONGLY LIKE 96. HAVEN'T HEARD OF LEADER 97. VOLUNTEERED: REFUSED 98. DON'T KNOW ENOUGH ABOUT/DON'T KNOW WHERE TO RATE 99. MISSING | VARIABLE NOTES: IMD3009_ | | IMD3009_ asked respondents to place the Leaders of Parties A-I | on a 0-10 likeability scale. | | Placement of this question in successive Standalone CSES Module | questionnaire varies and thus might have resulted in a small | deviation in the introduction to the question - please consult | the Standalone CSES Module Codebooks for more information. | In the following, question wordings for each Module are listed. | | MODULE 1: | "And now, using the same scale, I'd like to | ask you how much you like or dislike some political leaders. | Again, if I come to a leader you haven't heard of or you do not | know enough about them, just say so. The first political leader | is LEADER A." | | MODULES 3 and 4: | "And what do you think of the presidential candidates/ | party leaders? After I read the name of a presidential | candidate/party leader, please rate them on a scale from | 0 to 10, where 0 means you strongly dislike that | candidate and 10 means that you strongly like that | candidate. If I come to a presidential candidate/party | leader you haven't heard of or you feel you do not know | enough about, just say so. | The first is [LEADER A]. | Using the same scale, where would you place, [LEADER B]? | Using the same scale, where would you place, [LEADER C]? | Using the same scale, where would you place, [LEADER D]? | Using the same scale, where would you place, [LEADER E]? | Using the same scale, where would you place, [LEADER F]? | Using the same scale, where would you place, [LEADER G]? | Using the same scale, where would you place, [LEADER H]? | Using the same scale, where would you place, [LEADER I]?" | | Leaders and their alphabetical classifications for each country | are detailed in Part 3 of the CSES IMD Codebook. For linking | alphabetical to numerical party codes, please see VARIABLE NOTES | on D5000_. | For more detailed information on how CSES codes parties/ | coalitions and leaders, please see Part 3 of the CSES IMD | Codebook. | | Users should note that IMD3009_ includes several observations in | which all leaders are scored equally by respondents. Also, there | may be instances in which respondents provide the same answer to | all items, e.g. "don't know". These data remain unchanged. | For further details on these inconsistencies, see variable and | election study notes in the Standalone CSES Module Codebooks. | | IMD3009_ was not included as a regular question in the MODULE 2 | questionnaire. Therefore, data on IMD3009_ is not available for | most of the studies from MODULE 2. Two exemptions are AUSTRALIA | (2004) and BRAZIL (2002). These countries included IMD3009_ as | an optional scale question (see B3041_, Codebook Part 2 of | MODULE 2). | | The corresponding variables in the Standalone CSES Modules are: | MODULE 1: A3021_A-A3021_I | MODULE 2: B3041_A-B3041_I (See above) | MODULE 3: C3010_A-C3010_I | MODULE 4: D3012_A-D3012_I | | Data are unavailable for MODULE 2 and for AUSTRIA (2008), | BELGIUM-FLANDERS (1999), BELGIUM-WALLONIA (1999), CHILE (1999), | and MEXICO (2015). | [ELECTION STUDY NOTES] - ISRAEL (2013): IMD3009_A | | Data for Leader A will be available in a subsequent release of | CSES IMD. | [ELECTION STUDY NOTES] – GREAT BRITAIN (1997): IMD3009_D & | IMD3009_E | | Respondents outside of a region where a party contested the | election were not asked to evaluate its leaders. These | respondents are coded as 97 in CSES Module 1 but were re-coded | to “99. MISSING” for IMD. This applies to the Scottish National | Party, SNP (PARTY D) and Plaid Cymru, PC (PARTY E). --------------------------------------------------------------------------- IMD3010 >>> SATISFACTION WITH DEMOCRACY --------------------------------------------------------------------------- On the whole, are you very satisfied, fairly satisfied, not very satisfied, or not at all satisfied with the way democracy works in [COUNTRY]? .................................................................. 1. VERY SATISFIED 2. FAIRLY SATISFIED 4. NOT VERY SATISFIED 5. NOT AT ALL SATISFIED 6. NEITHER SATISFIED NOR DISSATISFIED 7. VOLUNTEERED: REFUSED 8. VOLUNTEERED: DON'T KNOW 9. MISSING | VARIABLE NOTES: IMD3010 | | The corresponding variables in the Standalone CSES Modules are: | MODULE 1: A3010 | MODULE 2: B3001 | MODULE 3: C3012 | MODULE 4: D3017 | | Data are unavailable for ARGENTINA (2015), CHILE (1999, 2009), | and PERU (2000). | [ELECTION STUDY NOTES] - HONG KONG (2000): IMD3010 | | 31 respondents were coded as "3 [SEE VARIABLE NOTES]" in CSES | MODULE 1. There were, however, no details about what exactly | this code refers to. Hence, these respondents were coded as | "9. MISSING" for CSES IMD. | [ELECTION STUDY NOTES] - JAPAN (2004): IMD3010 | | In CSES MODULE 2 for Satisfaction with democracy variable, | Japan (2004) study had code “6. Can't decide." This is | recoded into “8. Don't know”, for CSES IMD. | [ELECTION STUDY NOTES] – SOUTH AFRICA (2009): IMD3010 | | In CSES MODULE 3, 12 respondents were coded as “07. South Africa | is not a democracy (volunteered).” These respondents were | recoded to missing. | [ELECTION STUDY NOTES] – SOUTH AFRICA (2014): IMD3010 | | In CSES MODULE 4, 14 respondents were coded as “06. South Africa | is not a democracy (volunteered).” These respondents were | recoded to missing. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- IMD3011 >>> EFFICACY: WHO IS IN POWER CAN MAKE A DIFFERENCE --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Some people say that it doesn't make any difference who is in power. Others say that it makes a big difference who is in power. Using the scale on this card, (where ONE means that it doesn't make any difference who is in power and FIVE means that it makes a big difference who is in power), where would you place yourself? .................................................................. 1. IT DOESN'T MAKE ANY DIFFERENCE WHO IS IN POWER 2. 3. 4. 5. IT MAKES A BIG DIFFERENCE WHO IS IN POWER 7. VOLUNTEERED: REFUSED 8. VOLUNTEERED: DON'T KNOW 9. MISSING | VARIABLE NOTES: IMD3011 | | For MODULES 1 and 2, IMD3011 had an inversed scale running from | "1. IT MAKES A DIFFERENCE WHO IS IN POWER" to "5. IT DOESN'T | MAKE A DIFFERENCE WHO IS IN POWER". These scales were re-coded | to fit the coding of IMD3011 as outlined above. | For MODULES 1 and 2, therefore, question-wording reflects the | inversed scale and deviated slightly from the recent version | applied for the CSES IMD. | | In MODULE 2, some election studies used an earlier version of | the CSES questionnaire which included the words "BIG" and "ANY" | in the question text and response options. | | For example: | "1. It makes a BIG difference who is in power" | "5. It doesn't make ANY difference who is in power" | | As a result, there has been variation in question-wording and | response options for IMD3011 in MODULE 2. A table documenting | how election studies asked these items is available in CSES | MODULE 2 Codebook (Part 2 below variable B3013). | | The corresponding variables in the Standalone CSES Modules are: | MODULE 1: A3028 | MODULE 2: B3013 | MODULE 3: C3004 | MODULE 4: D3009 | | Data are unavailable for IRELAND (2007, 2011), RUSSIA (2000), | and SWITZERLAND (2007). --------------------------------------------------------------------------- IMD3012 >>> EFFICACY: WHO PEOPLE VOTE FOR MAKES A DIFFERENCE --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Some people say that no matter who people vote for, it won't make any difference to what happens. Others say that who people vote for can make a big difference to what happens. Using the scale on this card, (where ONE means that voting won't make any difference to what happens and FIVE means that voting can make a big difference), where would you place yourself? .................................................................. 1. WHO PEOPLE VOTE FOR WON'T MAKE ANY DIFFERENCE 2. 3. 4. 5. WHO PEOPLE VOTE FOR CAN MAKE A BIG DIFFERENCE 7. VOLUNTEERED: REFUSED 8. VOLUNTEERED: DON'T KNOW 9. MISSING | VARIABLE NOTES: IMD3012 | | For MODULES 1 and 2, the question wording and labeling of scales | for IMD3012 slightly deviated from the recent version applied for | the CSES IMD. Specifically, scales were labeled with | "1. WHO PEOPLE VOTE FOR WON'T MAKE A DIFFERENCE" to "5. WHO | PEOPLE VOTE FOR CAN MAKE A DIFFERENCE". | | In MODULE 2, some election studies used an earlier version of | the CSES questionnaire which included the words "BIG" and "ANY" | in the question text and response options (see VARIABLE NOTES on | IMD3011). | | As a result, there has been variation in question-wording and | response options for IMD3012 in MODULE 2. A table documenting | how election studies asked these items is available in CSES | MODULE 2 Codebook (Part 2 below variable B3014). | | The corresponding variables in the Standalone CSES Modules are: | MODULE 1: A3029 | MODULE 2: B3014 | MODULE 3: C3005 | MODULE 4: D3010 | | Data are unavailable for GERMANY (2005), NETHERLANDS (2002), | POLAND (2005), and RUSSIA (2000). --------------------------------------------------------------------------- IMD3013_1 >>> STATE OF ECONOMY (OVER PAST 12 MONTHS) --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Would you say that over the past twelve months, the state of the economy in [COUNTRY] has gotten better, stayed about the same, or gotten worse? .................................................................. 1. GOTTEN BETTER 3. STAYED THE SAME 5. GOTTEN WORSE 7. VOLUNTEERED: REFUSED 8. VOLUNTEERED: DON'T KNOW 9. MISSING | VARIABLE NOTES: IMD3012 | | IMD3013_1 was intended as a filter question for IMD3013_2 | and IMD3013_3. For further information on this, see variable | notes for IMD3013_2 and IMD 3013_3. | | The corresponding variables in the Standalone CSES Modules are: | MODULE 1: A3023 | MODULE 2: Not included | MODULE 3: Not included | MODULE 4: D3003_1 | | Data are unavailable for studies from MODULES 2 and 3 and for | CHILE (1999). --------------------------------------------------------------------------- IMD3013_2 >>> STATE OF ECONOMY - BETTER --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Would you say much better or somewhat better? .................................................................. 1. MUCH BETTER 2. SOMEWHAT BETTER 7. VOLUNTEERED: REFUSED 8. VOLUNTEERED: DON'T KNOW 9. MISSING | VARIABLE NOTES: IMD3013_2 | | IMD3013_1 was intended as a filter question for IMD3013_2 | and IMD3013_3. Only respondents who answered "GOTTEN BETTER" at | IMD3013_1 should receive this question. However, there is | variation in the ways in which the questions about respondent's | perception of the state of economy (IMD3013_1) were administered | in different election studies. In some cases the follow-up | question on a better state of economy (IMD3013_2) was asked | irrespectively of a respondent's answer on IMD3013_1. | Consequently, IMD3013_2 sometimes includes information on | respondents that did not mention a better state of economy | (code 1) in IMD3013_1. These data remained unchanged in CSES | IMD. | | The corresponding variables in the Standalone CSES Modules are: | MODULE 1: A3024 | MODULE 2: Not included | MODULE 3: Not included | MODULE 4: D3003_2 | | Data are unavailable for studies from MODULES 2 and 3 and for | CANADA (2011, 2015), CHILE (1999), and TAIWAN (2012). --------------------------------------------------------------------------- IMD3013_3 >>> STATE OF ECONOMY - WORSE --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Would you say much worse or somewhat worse? .................................................................. 4. SOMEWHAT WORSE 5. MUCH WORSE 7. VOLUNTEERED: REFUSED 8. VOLUNTEERED: DON'T KNOW 9. MISSING | VARIABLE NOTES: IMD3013_3 | | IMD3013_1 was intended as a filter question for IMD3013_2 | and IMD3013_3. Only respondents who answered "GOTTEN WORSE" at | IMD3013_1 should receive this question. However, there is | variation in the ways in which the questions about respondent's | perception of the state of economy (IMD3013_1) were administered | in different election studies. In some cases the follow-up | question on a worse state of economy (IMD3013_3) was asked | irrespectively of a respondent's answer on IMD3013_1. | Consequently, IMD3013_3 sometimes includes information on | respondents that did not mention a worse state of economy | (code 5) in IMD3013_1. These data remained unchanged. | | The corresponding variables in the Standalone CSES Modules are: | MODULE 1: A3025 | MODULE 2: Not included | MODULE 3: Not included | MODULE 4: D3003_3 | | Data are unavailable for studies from MODULES 2 and 3 and for | CANADA (2011, 2015), CHILE (1999), and TAIWAN (2012). --------------------------------------------------------------------------- IMD3014 >>> GOVERNMENT PERFORMANCE: GENERAL --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Now thinking about the performance of the [government in [CAPITAL]/president] in general, how good or bad a job do you think the [government/president in [CAPITAL]] has done over the past [NUMBER OF YEARS SINCE LAST GOVERNMENT TOOK OFFICE, BEFORE THE CURRENT ELECTION] years? Has [it/he/she] done a very good job? A good job? A bad job? A very bad job? .................................................................. 1. VERY GOOD JOB 2. GOOD JOB 3. BAD JOB 4. VERY BAD JOB 6. [SEE ELECTION STUDY NOTES] 7. VOLUNTEERED: REFUSED 8. VOLUNTEERED: DON'T KNOW 9. MISSING | VARIABLE NOTES: IMD3014 | | For more details on the meaning of “6. [SEE ELECTION STUDY | NOTES]” codes, see Standalone CSES Modules. | | The corresponding variables in the Standalone CSES Modules are: | MODULE 1: Not included | MODULE 2: B3011 | MODULE 3: C3006 | MODULE 4: Not included | | Data are unavailable for MODULES 1 and 4 and CHILE (2009) | and PERU (2006). | | Category “5. [SEE ELECTION STUDY NOTES]” from CSES Module 2 | (B3011) has been recoded to “6. [SEE ELECTION STUDY NOTES]” in | CSES IMD. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- IMD3015_1 >>> DICHOTOMIZED POLITICAL INFORMATION ITEM - 1ST IMD3015_2 >>> DICHOTOMIZED POLITICAL INFORMATION ITEM - 2ND IMD3015_3 >>> DICHOTOMIZED POLITICAL INFORMATION ITEM - 3RD IMD3015_4 >>> DICHOTOMIZED POLITICAL INFORMATION ITEM - 4TH --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Political information items. .................................................................. 0. INCORRECT 1. CORRECT 7. VOLUNTEERED: REFUSED 8. VOLUNTEERED: DON'T KNOW 9. MISSING | VARIABLE NOTES: IMD3015_1 - IMD3015_4 | | Items in IMD3015_ were designed to assess a respondent's level | of political information. Answers to IMD3015_ are dichotomized | and only include respondents who explicitly answered correctly or | incorrectly to the respective information question. Respondents | who answered don't know or who refused to give an answer are | not included in the incorrect answer category, unless specified | otherwise. | | The following election studies do not include a "DON'T KNOW" | category: | AUSTRALIA (1996), BELGIUM FLANDERS (1999), CZECH REPUBLIC (1996), | GERMANY (2005), GREECE (2015), HUNGARY (2002), IRELAND (2011), | ISRAEL (1996), ITALY (2006), JAPAN (2004), MEXICO (1997), MEXICO | (2000), NORWAY (1997), ROMANIA (1996), PHILIPPINES (2004), | PHILIPPINES (2010), POLAND (1997), POLAND (2005), SWEDEN (2002), | SPAIN (1996), SPAIN (2008), TAIWAN (1996), UKRAINE (1998), and | UNITED STATES (2008). | | The corresponding variables in the Standalone CSES Modules are: | MODULE 1: A2023, A2024, & A2025 | MODULE 2: B3047_1 - B3047_3 | MODULE 3: C3036_1 - C3036_3 | MODULE 4: D3025_1_A - D3025_4_A | | In CSES MODULES 1-3, most studies included up to three political | information items, designed to test respondents' general | knowledge. These items were designed by CSES collaborators and | therefore vary across studies both in content and in difficulty. | | For CSES MODULES 2 and 3, the CSES questionnaire provided advice | to collaborators on how to assess political information, namely: | "These items are designed to indicate the respondents' general | political knowledge. They should be coded as shown below. The | set of questions should include one that is easy (i.e. 2/3 will | answer correctly), one that is slightly more difficult (i.e. 1/2 | will answer correctly), and one that is difficult (i.e. 1/3 | will answer correctly)." | | The question wordings of the items used in CSES MODULES 1-3, and | their correct answers, are reported in the ELECTION STUDY NOTES | below. | | In CSES MODULE 4, political knowledge was assessed uniformly | across polities, by the following four items: | | IMD3015_1: | Which of these persons was the Finance Minister before the | recent election - [CABINET MINISTER NAME - FIRST CHOICE], | [CABINET MINISTER NAME - SECOND CHOICE], [CABINET MINISTER | NAME - THIRD CHOICE], or [CABINET MINISTER NAME - FOURTH | CHOICE]? | | IMD3015_2 (FINALIZED QUESTIONNAIRE): | What was the current unemployment rate in [COUNTRY] as of | [DATE] - [UNEMPLOYMENT RATE - FIRST CHOICE], [UNEMPLOYMENT | RATE - SECOND CHOICE], [UNEMPLOYMENT RATE - THIRD CHOICE], | or [UNEMPLOYMENT RATE - FOURTH CHOICE]? | | IMD3015_2 (PILOT QUESTIONNAIRE): | What is the longest time permitted between one [UNIT OF | GOVERNMENT] election and the next - [NUMBER OF YEARS - | FIRST CHOICE], [NUMBER OF YEARS - SECOND CHOICE], | [NUMBER OF YEARS - THIRD CHOICE], or [NUMBER OF YEARS | - FOURTH CHOICE]? | | IMD3015_3: | Which [PARTY, ALLIANCE, OR COALITION] came in second in | seats in the [NAME OF THE LOWER HOUSE IN BICAMERAL SYSTEMS; | OR ASSEMBLY, PARLIAMENT, OR CONGRESS IN UNICAMERAL SYSTEMS] | - [PARTY, ALLIANCE, OR COALITION - FIRST CHOICE], [PARTY, | ALLIANCE, OR COALITION - SECOND CHOICE], [PARTY, ALLIANCE, | OR COALITION - THIRD CHOICE], or [PARTY, ALLIANCE, OR | COALITION - FOURTH CHOICE]? | | IMD3015_4 (FINALIZED QUESTIONNAIRE): | Who is the current Secretary-General of the United Nations | - Kofi Annan, Kurt Waldheim, Ban Ki-moon, or Boutros | Boutros-Ghali? | | IMD3015_4 (PILOT QUESTIONNAIRE): | Who was the first president of South Africa after | apartheid ended? Desmond Tutu, Robert Mugabe, Nelson | Mandela, or Rupiah Banda? | | CANADA (2011) and IRELAND (2011) fielded the CSES MODULE 4 pilot | questionnaire. In the pilot version, items for IMD3015_2 and | IMD3015_4 differed from the final questionnaire as indicated | above. | | As question wordings did not differ between election studies in | CSES MODULE 4, ELECTION STUDY NOTES only list a short description | of the item, together with the respective answer categories for | IMD3015_1 - IMD3015_3. | | Data are not available for BELARUS (2001), BELARUS (2008), | BULGARIA (2001), CHILE (1999), DENMARK (1998), DENMARK (2001), | GERMANY (2002_1, MAILBACK) ICELAND (1999), ICELAND (2003), | LATVIA (2014), LITHUANIA (1997), PERU (2000), PERU (2001), PERU | (2016), RUSSIA (1999), RUSSIA (2000), SLOVENIA (1996), SLOVENIA | (2008), SOUTH KOREA (2000), THAILAND (2001), TURKEY (2011), and | URUGUAY (2009). | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - ALBANIA (2005): IMD3015_ | | IMD3015_1: | Question text: Do you know who was the speaker of the | last Albanian parliament? | Correct answer: Servet Pellumbi | | IMD3015_2: | Question text: Can the president of the republic be elected by | a simple majority of the parliament, a 3/5 | majority or unanimity? | Correct answer: 3/5 majority | | IMD3015_3: | Question text: Do you know the percentage of the votes a party | must get in order to enter the parliament? | Correct answer: 2.5 percent | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - ARGENTINA (2015): IMD3015_ | | IMD3015_1: Finance Minister before the recent election | Answer options: 1. Jorge Capitanich | 2. Axel Kicillof | 3. Hector Timerman | 4. Florencio Randazzo | Correct Answer: 2. Axel Kicillof | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - AUSTRALIA (1996): IMD3015_ | | These variables were derived from G12P3, G12P9, and G12P6, | respectively (User's Guide, pp.86-88). | | Question text: And finally, a quick quiz on Australian | government. For each of the following statements, | please say whether it is true or false. | If you don't know the answer, just circle '3' | ["Don't know"] and try the next one. | | IMD3015_1: Australia became a federation in 1901. | Correct answer: True | | IMD3015_2: The Senate election is based on proportional | representation. | Correct answer: True | | IMD3015_3: No-one may stand for Federal parliament unless | they pay a deposit. | Correct answer: True | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - AUSTRALIA (2004): IMD3015_ | | IMD3015_1: | Question text: G.26. Prior to the 2004 Federal election, who was | the most recent Australian Labor Party Prime | Minister? | Correct answer: Paul Keating | | IMD3015_2: | Question text: G.19. Can you say which political party has the | second largest number of seats in the House of | Representatives, following the 2004 Federal | election? | Correct answer: The Labor Party | | IMD3015_3: | Question text: G.20. Obviously, a person on a low income will | pay less total money in income tax than someone | on a high income. But do you think that a person | on a low income pays ... | Answer options: 1. A bigger proportion of their earnings in | income tax than someone on a high income; | 2. The same proportion; | 3. Or a smaller proportion of their earnings in | income tax? | Correct Answer: 3. A smaller proportion | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - AUSTRALIA (2007): IMD3015_ | | Australia asked six questions about political knowledge out of | which three were selected. To do so, the one with the highest | as well as the one with the lowest number of correct answers | were chosen. The third question was selected by calculating the | minimal gap between the mean of all correctly given answers and | the current frequencies of the correct answer for the remaining | four questions. | | Question Text: For each of the following statements, please say | whether it is true or false. | | IMD3015_1: Australia became a federation in 1901. | Correct Answer: true | | IMD3015_2: The longest time allowed between Federal | elections for the House of Representatives is | four years. | Correct Answer: false | | IMD3015_3: No-one may stand for Federal parliament unless | they pay a deposit. | Correct Answer: true | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - AUSTRALIA (2013): IMD3015_ | | IMD3015_1: Finance Minister before the recent election | Answer options: 1. Bob Carr | 2. Bill Shorten | 3. Chris Bowen | 4. Tony Burke | Correct Answer: 3. Chris Bowen | | IMD3015_2: Current unemployment rate | Answer options: 1. 3.7% | 2. 5.7% | 3. 7.7% | 4. 9.7% | Correct Answer: 2. 5.7% | | IMD3015_3: Party that came in second | Answer options: 1. Greens | 2. Katter's Australian Party | 3. Labor Party (ALP) | 4. Liberal-National Coalition | Correct Answer: 3. Labor Party (ALP) | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - AUSTRIA (2008): IMD3015_ | | Respondents were asked for party positions on the policy area | of the opening of the Austrian job market to the new EU member | states. The variables' order was rearranged according to the | percentage of correct answers. | | Question Text: What do these parties think concerning the | opening of the Austrian job market to the New | Member States of the EU? Please tell me if you | do not know the position. | | IMD3015_1: The FPO | Correct Answer: is against | | IMD3015_2: The OVP | Correct Answer: is in favor | | IMD3015_3: The SPO | Correct Answer: is in favor | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - AUSTRIA (2013): IMD3015_ | | IMD3015_1: Finance Minister before the recent election | Answer options: 1. Josef Proell | 2. Johanna Mikl-Leitner | 3. Maria Fekter | 4. Rudolf Hundstorfer | Correct answer: 3. Maria Fekter | | IMD3015_2: Current unemployment rate | Answer options: 1. 2.9% | 2. 6.9% | 3. 8.9% | 4. 9.9% | Correct Answer: 2. 6.9% | | IMD3015_3: Party that came in second | Answer options: 1. FPO | 2. Greens | 3. OVP | 4. SPO | Correct Answer: 3. OVP | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - BELGIUM-FLANDERS (1999): IMD3015_ | | IMD3015_1: | Question text: Who was the chairman of the Dutroux Fact-Finding | Committee? | Correct answer: Marc Verwilghen | | IMD3015_2: | Question text: Comparing the SP and the CVP, which party is the | greatest supporter of governmental regulation of | the economy? | Correct answer: SP | | IMD3015_3: | Question text: Which of the two political parties in the USA | is considered to be the most economically | conservative? | Correct answer: Republicans | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - BELGIUM-WALLONIA (1999): IMD3015_ | | The Belgium Wallonia study (1999) fielded eight items assessing | a respondent's level of political knowledge, which are available | in the original French questionnaire on the CSES Homepage | (question 74, page 30). The CSES Module 1 Codebook does not | include any information on which three out of those eight items | were selected for inclusion into CSES Module 1. The best guess of | the CSES Secretariat is that those three knowledge items were | selected for CSES Module 1 that resemble the questions from the | Belgium Flanders (1999) study, namely: | Question 74.1 (resembling IMD3015_1 for Belgium Flanders 1999) | Question 74.3 (resembling IMD3015_3 for Belgium Flanders 1999) | Question 74.8 (resembling IMD3015_2 for Belgium Flanders 1999). | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - BELGIUM (2003): IMD3015_ | | IMD3015_1: | Question text: Green is the color of the Agalev/ECOLO; Orange | the color for the CD&V/CDH; What color for the | VLD/MR? | Correct answer: Blue | | IMD3015_2: | Question text: How many years do city counsel members serve in | a term: 4, 5 or 6 years? | Correct answer: 6 years | | IMD3015_3: | Question text: How many representatives are there in the Chamber | of Representatives 150, 175, or 212? | Correct Answer: 150 | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - BRAZIL (2002): IMD3015_ | | Exact question wording unavailable. | | IMD3015_1: The name of the state governor. | | IMD3015_2: The name of the mayor ['prefeito'] of the capital of | the state. | | IMD3015_3: The state deputy (congressperson) who received more | votes. | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - BRAZIL (2006 & 2010): IMD3015_ | | In Brazil, respondents had to answer a set of four multiple | choice questions of which for CSES three were chosen according | to their prospected difficulty (correct and false proportion | of answers). | Statements to be answered were as follows: | | IMD3015_1: The president has a 4 year mandate. | Correct Answer: true | | IMD3015_2: Geraldo Alckmin belongs to the PTB. | Correct Answer: false | | IMD3015_3: The deputies of the House of Representatives are | elected by majoritarian vote. | Correct Answer: false | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - BRAZIL (2014): IMD3015_ | | IMD3015_1: Finance Minister before the recent election | Answer options: 1. Gilberto Carvalho | 2. Aloisio Mercadante | 3. Guido Mantega | 4. Jose Eduardo Cardozo | Correct Answer: 3. Guido Mantega | | IMD3015_2: Current unemployment rate | Answer options: 1. 7.0% | 2. 11.0% | 3. 5.0% | 4. 9.0% | Correct Answer: 3. 5.0% | | IMD3015_3: Party that came in second | Answer options: 1. PMDB | 2. PT | 3. PSDB | 4. PSB | Correct Answer: 1. PMDB | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - BULGARIA (2014): IMD3015_ | | IMD3015_1: Finance Minister before the recent election | Answer options: 1. Yordan Bakalov | 2. Rumen Porozhanov | 3. Velizar Shalamanov | 4. Evgenia Radanova | Correct Answer: 2. Rumen Porozhanov | | IMD3015_2: Current unemployment rate | Answer options: 1. 6.8% | 2. 8.8% | 3. 10.8% | 4. 12.8% | Correct Answer: 3. 10.8% | | The Bulgarian Study asked for the unemployment rate as of | September 2014, and hence four months before the survey was | administered. | | IMD3015_3: Party that came in second | Answer options: 1. BSP Left Bulgaria | 2. CEDB | 3. Patriotic Front - National front for the | salvation of Bulgaria | 4. Reformist block | Correct Answer: 1. BSP Left Bulgaria | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - CANADA (1997): IMD3015_ | | IMD3015_1: | Question text: Who is the premier of your province? | Correct answer: The correct answer to IMD3015_1 depends on the | province the respondent was living in. | Respondents' provinces are available in | variable A2019 of CSES Module 1. The following | table lists all provinces and their Premiers: | | Province Premier | -------------------------------------------- | Newfoundland Brian Tobin | Prince Edward Island Pat Binns | Nova Scotia John Savage* / | Russell MacLellan* | New Brunswick Francis Joseph | McKenna | Quebec Lucien Bouchard | Ontario Mike Harris | Manitoba Gary Filmon | Saskatchewan Roy Romanow | Alberta Ralph Klein | British Columbia Glen Clark | * John Savage resigned on July 18, 1997. | Russell MacLellan was designated as his | successor. | | IMD3015_2: | Question text: Who was Canada's first female Prime Minister? | Correct answer: Kim Campbell | | IMD3015_3: | Question text: Who is the Federal Minister of Finance? | Correct answer: Paul Martin | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - CANADA (2004): IMD3015_ | | IMD3015_1: | Question text: (e2) Do you happen to recall the name of the | leader of the Federal Conservative Party? | Correct answer: Stephen Harper | | IMD3015_2: | Question text: (n6) Do you happen to recall which party promised | to spend 4 billion dollars to reduce waiting | times for surgeries? | Correct answer: Liberals/Paul Martin | | IMD3015_3: | Question text: (n7) Which party promised an inheritance tax on | estates over 1 million dollars? | Correct answer: NDP/Jack Layton | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - CANADA (2008): IMD3015_ | | IMD3015_1: | Question Text: Do you happen to recall the name of the | Premier of your Province? | Correct Answer: The correct answer to IMD3015_1 depends on the | province the respondent was living in. | Respondents' provinces are available in | variable C2027 of CSES Module 3. The following | table lists all provinces and their Premiers: | | Province Premier | -------------------------------------------- | Newfoundland Danny Williams | Prince Edward Island Robert Ghiz | Nova Scotia Rodney MacDonald | New Brunswick Shawn Graham | Quebec Jean Charest | Ontario Dalton McGuinty | Manitoba Gary Doer | Saskatchewan Brad Wall | Alberta Ed Stelmach | British Columbia Gordon Campbell | | IMD3015_2: | Question Text: Can you recall the name of the Republican | running for president of the United States? | Correct Answer: John McCain | | IMD3015_3: | Question Text: Do you happen to recall the name of a current | cabinet Minister in the federal government? | Correct Answers: Ambrose Rona, Baird John, Blackburn Jean-Pierre, | Cannon Lawrence, Clement Tony, Day Stockwell, | Emerson David, Finley Diane, Flaherty Jim, | Fortier Michael | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - CANADA (2011): IMD3015_ | | The variables are from the post-election mail-back survey. | | IMD3015_1: Finance Minister before the recent election | Answer options: 1. John Baird | 2. Laurence Cannon | 3. Jim Flaherty | 4. Peter MacKay | Correct Answer: 3. Jim Flaherty | | IMD3015_2: longest time permitted between two elections | Answer options: 1. 3 years | 2. 4 years | 3. 5 years | 4. 6 years | Correct Answer: 2. 4 years | | IMD3015_3: Party that came in second | Answer options: 1. Bloc Quebecois | 2. Conservative Party | 3. Liberal Party | 4. New Democratic Party | Correct Answer: 4. New Democratic Party | ELECTION STUDY NOTES – CANADA (2015): IMD3015_ | | The variables are from the post-election mail-back survey. | The option "Not sure" in the election study questionnaire | was recoded to "8. Don't know." | | IMD3015_1: Finance Minister before the recent election | Answer options: 1. John Baird | 2. Jim Flaherty | 3. Peter MacKay | 4. Joe Oliver | Correct Answer: 4. Joe Oliver | | IMD3015_2: Current unemployment rate | Answer options: 1. 5.1% | 2. 7.1% | 3. 9.1% | 4. 11.1% | Correct Answer: 2. 7.1% | | IMD3015_3: Party that came in second | Answer options: 1. Conservative Party | 2. Liberal Party | 3. New Democratic Party | 4. Bloc Quebecois | 5. Green Party | Correct Answer: 1. Conservative Party | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - CHILE (2005): IMD3015_ | | IMD3015_1: | Question text: Q25. Do you know the name of the President of | the Republic in office before president Ricardo | Lagos? | Correct answer: Eduardo Frei | | IMD3015_2: | Question text: Q26. Do you know the name of the first President | of the Republic after the return to democracy | in 1990? | Correct answer: Patricio Aylwin | | IMD3015_3: | Question text: Q27. In which year was the Chilean constitution | approved? | Correct answer: 1980 | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - CHILE (2009): IMD3015 | | Respondents were only asked two knowledge questions. | | IMD3015_1: | Question Text: Name the chambers of the Congress. | Correct Answer: Camara dos Deputados, Senado | | IMD3015_2: | Question Text: For how long does a deputy in general stay | in office? | Correct Answer: For four years | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - CROATIA (2007): IMD3015_ | | IMD3015_1: | Question Text: Who was the Croatian prime minister before | Ivo Sanader, from 2000 to 2003? | Correct Answer: Ivica Racan | | IMD3015_2: | Question Text: For how many years is the Croatian president | elected? | Correct Answer: for 5 years | | IMD3015_3: | Question Text: What is the legal electoral threshold in Croatia, | i.e. how many percentage a party must get in the | constituency in order to be counted for | distribution of seats? | Correct Answer: 5 percent | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - CZECH REPUBLIC (1996): IMD3015_ | | IMD3015_1: | Question text: Can you tell me how many percent of votes has to | gain a political party in our country in the | elections in order to get into the Parliament? | Correct answer: 5 Percent | | IMD3015_2: | Question text: Who was the last minister of transportation | before the elections? | Correct answer: Vladimir Budinsky | | IMD3015_3: | Question text: How many members has our Parliament? | Correct answer: 200 (Lower House), 81 (Upper House) | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - CZECH REPUBLIC (2006): IMD3015_ | | There are relatively high proportions of respondents who answer | "Don't know". This may be due to the Czech question text | explicitly not insisting on an answer if the respondents | were unsure. | | IMD3015_1: | Question Text: Was current President Vaclav Klaus elected based | on the vote of the Chamber of Deputies and the | Senate? | Correct Answer: true | | IMD3015_2: | Question Text: Does the EU have 25 member states? | Correct Answer: true | | IMD3015_3: | Question Text: Is the Chamber of Deputies elected based on | proportional representation or the majoritarian | system? | Correct Answer: Proportional Representation | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - CZECH REPUBLIC (2010): IMD3015_ | | Respondents were asked that if they don't know the answer they | should not guess, but answer don't know. | | IMD3015_1: | Question Text: Was current President Vaclav Klaus elected based | on the vote of the Chamber of Deputies and the | Senate? | Correct Answer: True | | IMD3015_2: | Question Text: Is the Chamber of Deputies elected based on | proportional representation or majoritarian | system? | Correct Answer: Proportional Representation | | IMD3015_3: | Question Text: Does the EU have 25 member states? | Correct Answer: False | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - CZECH REPUBLIC (2013): IMD3015_ | | IMD3015_1: Finance Minister before the recent election | Answer options: 1. Rusnok | 2. Martin Pecina | 3. Jan Fischer | 4. Jan Kohout | Correct Answer: 3. Jan Fischer | | IMD3015_2: Current unemployment rate | Answer options: 1. 5.6% | 2. 7.6% | 3. 9.6% | 4. 11.6% | Correct Answer: 2. 7.6% | | IMD3015_3: Party that came in second | Answer options: 1. CSSD | 2. KSCM | 3. ANO 2011 | 4. TOP 09 | Correct answer: 3. ANO 2011 | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - DENMARK (2007): IMD3015_ | | IMD3015_1: | Question Text: Which parties does the current government | consist of? | Correct answer: Konservative Folkeparti and Venstre | | IMD3015_2: | Question Text: How many members are there in parliament, when | you don't count the four members from Greenland | and Faroe Islands? | Correct answer: 175 | | IMD3015_3: | Question Text: Which of the following public expenses do you | think is biggest: Expenses to primary schools, | expenses to old age pension, or to the defense? | Correct answer: Expenses to old age pension | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - ESTONIA (2011): IMD3015_ | | IMD3015_1_ | Question Text: According to your knowledge, how many members are | in the Estonian parliament? | Correct answer: 101 | | IMD3015_2: | Question Text: According to your knowledge, who is the president | of the Bank of Estonia? | Correct answer: Andres Lipstok | | IMD3015_3: | Question Text: According to your knowledge, in which year did | Estonia join the European Union? | Correct answer: 2004 | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - FINLAND (2003): IMD3015_ | | IMD3015_1: | Question text: Which political party does Paavo Lipponen | represent? | Correct answer: Social Democratic Party of Finland (SDP). Paavo | Lipponen was Prime Minister when data were | collected. | | IMD3015_2: | Question text: Wages earned by employees are taxable income in | Finland. We would like to ask you about state | taxation. Let us presume that Virtanen earns | 2,000 euros a month and Herranen 5,000 euros. | In your view, which one of the following | statements is closest to the truth? | Answer options: 1. Virtanen's and Herranen's tax rates are equal. | 2. Income tax rate is higher for Virtanen than | for Herranen. | 3. Income tax rate is higher for Herranen than | for Virtanen. | 4. Virtanen does not pay any taxes on income, | only Herranen is taxed. | Correct answer: 3. Income tax rate is higher for Herranen than | for Virtanen. | | IMD3015_3: | Question text: Which of the following countries is a permanent | member in the United Nation (UN) Security | Council? | Correct Answer: Russia | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - FINLAND (2007): IMD3015_ | | IMD3015_1: | Question Text: Who is eligible to vote in Finnish parliamentary | elections? | Correct Answer: All adult citizens of Finland | | IMD3015_2: | Question Text: Which of the following parties has the second | largest number of seats in the newly elected | Parliament? | Correct Answer: National Coalition Party (KOK) | | IMD3015_3: | Question Text: What in your opinion does a parliamentary system | of government mean? | Correct Answer: That the government is dependent on the | confidence of the parliament | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - FINLAND (2011) IMD3015_ | | IMD3015_1: | Question text: Who of the following was the Finnish Foreign | Minister in 2010? | Answer options: Erkki Tuomioja | Astrid Thors | Olli Rehn | Alexander Stubb? | Correct Answer: Alexander Stubb | | IMD3015_2: | Question text: Who is entitled to vote in Finnish parliamentary | elections? | Answer options: - Over 18 year old Finnish citizens living in | Finland | - Over 18 year old Finnish citizens regardless of | country of residence | - Besides Finns, over 18 year old EU citizens | living in Finland | - Over 18 Finnish citizens who haven't lost the | right due to crime? | Correct Answer: Over 18 year old Finnish citizens regardless of | country of residence | | IMD3015_3: | Question text: What is the European Union (EU) treaty that came | into force at the end of the year 2009 called? | Answer options: Geneva Convention | Schengen Agreement | Lisbon Treaty | Maastricht Treaty | Correct Answer: Lisbon Treaty | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - FINLAND (2015): IMD3015_ | | IMD3015_1: Finance Minister before the recent election | Answer options: 1. Krista Kiuru | 2. Jan Vapaavuori | 3. Paula Risikko | 4. Antti Rinne | Correct Answer: 4. Antti Rinne | | IMD3015_2: Current unemployment rate | Answer options: 1. 8.1% | 2. 10.1% | 3. 12.1% | 4. 14.1% | Correct Answer: 2. 10.1% | | IMD3015_3: Party that came in second | Answer options: 1. Social Democratic Party of Finland (SDP) | 2. True Finns (PS) | 3. Centre Party of Finland (KESK) | 4. National Coalition Party (KOK) | Correct Answer: 2. True Finns (PS) | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - FRANCE (2002): IMD3015_ | | IMD3015_1: | Question text: Laurent Fabius is a member of the Socialist | Party. | Correct Answer: True | | IMD3015_2: | Question text: The deputies are elected by proportional | representation. | Correct Answer: False | | IMD3015_3: | Question text: Michelle Alliot Marie is the president of RPR. | Correct Answer: True | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - FRANCE (2007) IMD3015_ | | IMD3015_1: | Question text: President has the right to dissolve national | assembly. | Correct Answer: True | | IMD3015_2: | Question text: The deputies are elected by proportional | representation. | Correct Answer: False | | IMD3015_3: | Question text: Michelle Alliot Marie is the president of RPR. | Correct Answer: True | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - FRANCE (2012): IMD3015_ | | IMD3015_1: Finance Minister before the recent election | Answer options: 1. Francois Baroin | 2. Xavier Bertrand | 3. Luc Chatel | 4. Alain Juppe | Correct Answer: 1. Francois Baroin | | IMD3015_2: Current unemployment rate | Answer options: 1. 8% | 2. 10% | 3. 12% | 4. 14% | Correct Answer: 2. 10% | | IMD3015_3: Party that came in second | Answer options: 1. Le Parti communiste | 2. Le Parti socialiste | 3. Le MoDem | 4. L'UMP | Correct Answer: 2. Le Parti socialiste | | This question refers to the last election of the National | Assembly in 2007. | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - GERMANY (1998): IMD3015_ | | IMD3015_1: | Question text: And now three (quiz) questions about politics. | What is the name of the current Minister for | Foreign Affairs? ["Easy"] | Correct answer: Klaus Kinkel | | IMD3015_2: How many states are there in the Federal Republic | of Germany since the reunification? ["Moderate"] | Correct answer: 16 States | | IMD3015_3: And how many countries are currently member of | the European Union? ["Difficult"] | Correct answer: 15 Countries | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - GERMANY (2002 Telephone): IMD3015_ | | IMD3015_1: | Question text: We would now like to ask you three quiz | questions. What's the name of the current | Federal Minister of the Interior? | Correct Answer: Otto Schily | | IMD3015_2: | Question text: How many states are there in the Federal Republic | of Germany since the reunification? | Correct Answer: 16 States | | IMD3015_3: | Question text: And how many countries are currently member of | the European Union? | Correct Answer: 15 Countries | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - GERMANY (2005): IMD3015_ | | IMD3015_1 | Question Text: The election campaign, among other things, | proposed to introduce a new citizens' insurance | scheme for the health insurance, in which all | citizens, including self-employed and civil | servants pay for it. Can you tell me which party | made this proposal? | Correct Answer: SPD | | IMD3015_2: | Question Text: It was also suggested that the labor market | reforms - the so-called Hartz IV Reformen - | should be canceled. Can you tell me which party | made this proposal? | Correct Answer: Left.PDS | | IMD3015_3: | Question Text: Furthermore, it was suggested to cancel the | escape of nuclear power. Can you tell me which | party made this proposal? | Correct Answer: CDU/CSU | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - GERMANY (2009): IMD3015_ | | IMD3015_1: | Question Text: We would like to know the actual threshold a | party has to reach to achieve seats in the | national parliament. | Correct answer: 5 percent | | IMD3015_2: | Question Text: For the parliament election of Germany, each | voter has two votes. Could you please tell us, | which of these two votes is crucial for the | distribution of seats within the parliament? | Correct answer: second vote | | IMD3015_3: | Question Text: In which election are European citizens that do | not have the German citizenship allowed to vote? | Correct answer: communal election | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - GERMANY (2013): IMD3015_ | | IMD3015_1: Finance Minister before the recent election | Answer options: 1. Rainer Bruederle | 2. Thomas De Maiziere | 3. Wolfgang Schaeuble | 4. Dirk Niebel | Correct answer: 3. Wolfgang Schaeuble | | IMD3015_2: Current unemployment rate | Answer options: 1. 4.8% | 2. 6.8% | 3. 8.8% | 4. 10.8% | Correct answer: 2. 6.8% | | IMD3015_3: Party that came in second | Answer options: 1. FDP | 2. Greens | 3. SPD | 4. CDU | Correct answer: 3. SPD | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - GREAT BRITAIN (1997): IMD3015_ | | IMD3015_1: | Question text: MPs from different parties are on parliamentary | committees. | Correct answer: True | | IMD3015_2: | Question text: The longest time allowed between general | elections is four years. | Correct answer: False | | IMD3015_3: | Question text: Britain's electoral system is based on | proportional representation. | Correct answer: False | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - GREAT BRITAIN (2005): IMD3015_ | | Question text: For each of these statements, please tick | whether you think it is true or false. If you | don’t know, just choose the box on the right. | [Box on the right labeled as "Don't Know"] | | IMD3015_1: The longest time allowed between general | elections is four years | Correct answer: False | | IMD3015_2: Britain's electoral system is based on | proportional representation | Correct answer: False | | IMD3015_3: MPs from different parties are on parliamentary | committees. | Correct answer: True | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - GREAT BRITAIN (2015): IMD3015_ | | IMD3015_1: Finance Minister before the recent election | Answer options: 1. George Osborne | 2. Vince Cable | 3. Theresa May | 4. Philip Hammond | Correct Answer: 1. George Osborne | | IMD3015_2: Current unemployment rate | Answer options: 1. 4% | 2. 6% | 3. 8% | 4. 10% | Correct Answer: 2. 6% | | IMD3015_3: Party that came in second | Answer options: 1. Conservatives | 2. Labor | 3. Liberal Democrats | 4. UKIP | Correct answer: 2. Labor | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - GREECE (2009): IMD3015_ | | IMD3015_1: | Question Text: Could you tell me how many parties are | represented in parliament today? | Correct Answer: 5 parties | | IMD3015_2: | Question Text: How many years does one term of the President of | the Republic last? | Correct Answer: 5 years | | IMD3015_3: | Question Text: Based on the current electoral law, what | percentage of votes constitutes the threshold for | entry of a political party into parliament? | Correct Answer: 3 percent | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - GREECE (2012): IMD3015_ | | IMD3015_1: Finance Minister before the recent election | Answer options: 1. Anna Diamantopoulou | 2. Antreas Loverdos | 3. Michalis Chrisochoidis | 4. Filippos Sachinidis | Correct Answer: 4. Filippos Sachinidis | | IMD3015_2: Current unemployment rate | Answer options: 1. 23% | 2. 25% | 3. 27% | 4. 29% | Correct Answer: 2. 25% | | IMD3015_3: Party that came in second | Answer options: 1. Anel | 2. DIMAR | 3. PASOK | 4. Syriza | Correct answer: 4. SYRIZA | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - GREECE (2015): IMD3015_ | | IMD3015_1: Finance Minister before the recent election | Answer options: 1. Gikas Hardouvelis | 2. Andreas Loverdos | 3. Michalis Chrysochoidis | 4. Kiriakos Mitsotakis | Correct Answer: 1. Gikas Hardouvelis | | IMD3015_2: Current unemployment rate | | IMD3015_3: Party that came in second | Answer options: 1. ANEL | 2. ND | 3. PASOK | 4. POTAMI | Correct Answer: 2. ND | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - HONG KONG (1998 & 2000): IMD3015_ | | Question text: Are the three statements below correct or | incorrect? | | IMD3015_1: Ms Anson Chan is the Chief Secretary of HKSAR | Correct answer: Correct | | IMD3015_2: There are five geographical constituencies in | the [1998/2000] Legislative Council Election of | HKSAR | Correct answer: Correct | | IMD3015_3: Members of Executive Council of HKSAR are | directly elected by the public | Correct answer: Incorrect | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - HONG KONG (2004): IMD3015_ | | Question text: Are the following three statements correct or | incorrect? | | IMD3015_1: The Chief Executive of the HKSAR is not allowed | to have any party affiliation. | Correct answer: Yes | | IMD3015_2: Senior secretaries and bureau secretaries | (Principal Officials) of HKSAR are appointed by | the Chief Executive and their appointments do not | require approvals from the Central People's | Government. | Correct answer: No | | IMD3015_3: 30 seats were returned by geographical | constituencies in the 2004 LegCo Election. | Correct Answer: Yes | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - HONG KONG (2008): IMD3015_ | | IMD3015_1: | Question text: Correct or incorrect: Currently, the Chief | Executive of the Hong Kong SAR is elected by a | 800-member Election Committee. | Correct answer: The statement is correct. | | IMD3015_2: | Question text: Correct or incorrect: Currently, the geographical | constituency elections of LegCo Elections adopt | the proportional representation system. | Correct answer: The statement is correct. | | IMD3015_3: | Question text: Correct or incorrect: The terms of office of the | Chief Executive and Legislative Council members | in Hong Kong SAR both last for four years. | Correct answer: The statement is not correct. | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - HONG KONG (2012): IMD3015_ | | IMD3015_1: Finance Minister before the recent election | Answer options: 1. Tsang Chun-wah, John | 2. Lam Cheng Yuet-ngor, Carrie | 3. Chan Ka-keung, Ceajer | 4. Yuen Kwok-keung, Rimsky | Correct Answer: 1. Tsang Chun-wah, John | | IMD3015_2: Current unemployment rate | Answer options: 1. 1.2% | 2. 3.2% | 3. 5.2% | 4. 7.2% | Correct Answer: 2. 3.2% | | IMD3015_3: Party that came in second | According to the sum of votes to the three tiers Geographical | Constituency (GC), District Council (Second) Functional | Constituency (FC) and traditional FC lead to three parties | coming in second. They all gained 6 seats. The question was | hence changed into "Which party did not come in second | (...). | | Answer options: 1. Democratic Party | 2. Hong Kong Federation of Trade Unions [FTU] | 3. Civic Party | 4. Labor Party | Correct answer: 4. Labor Party | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - HUNGARY (1998): IMD3015_ | | IMD3015_1: | The following question asked the interviewers to rate the | respondents right after the post-election interview: | | Question text: Irrespective of how interested the respondent | was in politics, how well-informed, in your | opinion, she/he is about political matters: | Answer options: 5. Substantially better informed than the | average, | 4. Somewhat better informed than the average, | 3. About average, | 2. Somewhat less informed than the average, or | 1. Substantially less informed than the average. | | Correct answer: The original codes 1 and 2 (below average) were | recoded as "incorrect" and codes 3, 4 and 5 | (at least average political information level) | as "correct" responses. | | IMD3015_2: | Question text: What percentage of the list votes does a party | have to get nationwide in order to see at least | some of its candidates surely elected to the new | parliament? | Correct answer: 5 percent | | IMD3015_3: | Question text: The respondents were asked to name the chairman | of the Constitutional Court. | Correct answer: Laszlo Solyom | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - HUNGARY (2002): IMD3015_ | | IMD3015_1: | Question text: Please select the ones you are familiar with and | tell me which of these would you like to see | playing an important part in politics in the | next years? | Correct Answer: Respondents were presented with a list of | prominent politicians. This item was coded as | correct if the respondent rated - positively or | negatively - at least 27 out of the 41 | politicians listed on the cards. | | IMD3015_2: | Question text: Do you know what percentage of the list votes a | party must get in order to be sure have some of | its candidates sent to the new Parliament? | Correct Answer: Five percent | | IMD3015_3: | Question text: Do you know who is the presiding judge of the | Constitutional Court? | Correct Answer: Janos Nemeth | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - ICELAND (2007): IMD3015_ | | IMD3015_1: | Question Text: Do you know in what party Jonina Bjartmarz is? | Correct answer: Progressive Party | | IMD3015_2: | Question Text: Can you tell me who is the vice-chairman of the | Independence Party? | Correct answer: Thorgerdur Katrin Gunnarsdottir | | IMD3015_3: | Question Text: And can you tell me how many electoral districts | are in Iceland? | Correct answer: Six | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - ICELAND (2009): IMD3015_ | | IMD3015_1: | Question Text: Do you know in what party Kolbrun | Halldorsdottir is? | Correct answer: Left Green Movement | | IMD3015_2: | Question Text: Can you tell me who is the vice-chairman of the | Independence Party? | Correct answer: Thorgerdur Katrin Gunnarsdottir | | IMD3015_3: | Question Text: And can you tell me how many electoral districts | are in Iceland? | Correct answer: Six | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - ICELAND (2013): IMD3015_ | | IMD3015_1: Finance Minister before the recent election | Answer options: 1. Katrin Juliusdottir | 2. Svandis Svavarsdottir | 3. Ogmundur Jonasson | 4. Ossur Skarpheoinsson | Correct Answer: 1. Katrin Juliusdottir | | IMD3015_2: Current unemployment rate | Answer options: 1. 4.8% | 2. 6.8% | 3. 7.8% | 4. 10.8% | Correct Answer: 2. 6.8% | | IMD3015_3: Party that came in second | ICENES asked "Which party came in second in votes in the | election to Althingi...". That is instead of asking who came in | second in seats respondents were asked about who came in second | in votes. The reason is because there was a tie in the seats of | the top two parties (19 seats each). | | Answer options: 1. Social Democratic Alliance | 2. Progressive Party | 3. Independence Party | 4. Left Green Movement | Correct answer: 2. Progressive Party | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - IRELAND (2002): IMD3015_ | | IMD3015_1: | Question text: Can you tell me who was the leader of the Fianna | Fail during the recent general election campaign? | Answer options: 1. Charlie McCreevy | 2. Brian Cowen | 3. Charles Haughey | 4. Bertie Ahern | Correct Answer: 4. Bertie Ahern | | IMD3015_2: | Question text: The Green party recently elected a leader for | the first time. Could you tell me who it is? | Answer options: 1. Patricia McKenna | 2. John Gormley | 3. Trevor Sargent | 4. Roger Garland | Correct Answer: 3. Trevor Sargent | | IMD3015_3: | Question text: Who is Ireland's European Commissioner? | Answer options: 1. David Byrne | 2. Maire Geoghegan Quinn | 3. Barry Desmond | 4. Padraig Flynn | Correct Answer: 1. David Byrne | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - IRELAND (2007): IMD3015_ | | IMD3015_1: | Question text: Who was the Minister for Finance at the time when | the last Dail was dissolved? | Correct answer: Brian Cowen | | IMD3015_2: | Question text: Which Government Department received the most | money in last year's budget? | Correct answer: Social Welfare | | IMD3015_3: | Question text: Which was the first party to announce that it | would cut the standard rate of tax in the 2007 | campaign? | Correct answer: Labor | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - IRELAND (2011): IMD3015_ | | IMD3015_1: Which, if any, of these persons was Finance | Minster before the recent election? | Answer options: 1. Brian Lenihan | 2. Brian Cowen | 3. Micheal Martin | 4. Michael Noonan | Correct Answer: 1. Brian Lenihan | | IMD3015_2: | As the pretest question implemented by Ireland (2011) differs | substantially from the one fielded in the final Module 4 | questionnaire, it is not included in this variable. The data | might be included in a subsequent release. | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - ISRAEL (1996): IMD3015_ | | IMD3015_1: | Question text: To the best of your knowledge, according to the | new law, is there a limit on the number of terms | the Prime Minister can serve? | Correct answer: Yes, two terms | | IMD3015_2: | Question text: To the best of your knowledge, who is the new | chairman of Knesset? | Correct answer: Dan Tichon | | IMD3015_3: | Question text: To the best of your knowledge, what part of the | government budget does the defense budget take? | Correct answer: 10 to 40 percent | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - ISRAEL (2003): IMD3015_ | | IMD3015_1: | Question text: To the best of your knowledge, which party has | been strengthened in the last election? | Correct answer: Likud and/or Shinui | | IMD3015_2: | Question text: To the best of your knowledge, who is the | chairman of the Knesset? | Correct answer: Avraham Burg | | IMD3015_3: | Question text: To the best of your knowledge, what part of the | government budget is for defense? | Correct answer: between 10 to 40 percent | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - ISRAEL (2006): IMD3015_ | | IMD3015_1: | Question text: To the best of your knowledge, which party got | weaker in the 2006 elections? | Correct answer: Likud | | IMD3015_2: | Question text: To the best of your knowledge, who is the | Knesset's chairman? | Correct answer: Dalia Itzik | | IMD3015_3: | Question text: To the best of your knowledge, what percentage of | the government's budget is allotted to security? | Correct answer: between 10 and 40 percent | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - ISRAEL (2013): IMD3015_ | | IMD3015_1: Finance Minister before the recent election | Answer options: 1. Uzi Landau | 2. Gideon Sa'ar | 3. Yuval Steinitz | 4. Eli Yishai | Correct Answer: 3. Yuval Steinitz | | IMD3015_2: Current unemployment rate | Answer options: 1. 4.7% | 2. 6.7% | 3. 8.7% | 4. 10.7% | Correct Answer: 2. 6.7% | | IMD3015_3: Party that came in second | Answer options: 1. Shas | 2. Habayit Hayehudi | 3. Ha'avoda | 4. Yesh Atid headed by Yair Lapid | Correct answer: 4. Yesh Atid | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - ITALY (2006): IMD3015_ | | IMD3015_1: | Question text: Q25. Do you know approximately how many deputies | are in the Chamber of Deputies? | Correct answer: 630 | | IMD3015_2: | Question text: Q26. Do you know who was the President of the | Chamber at the time of the elections? | Correct answer: Pier Ferdinando Casini | | IMD3015_3: | Question text: Q27. Do you know who was foreign minister at the | time of the elections? | Correct Answer: Gianfranco Fini | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - JAPAN (1996): IMD3015_ | | There are only two political information variables available in | the Japanese survey. Both items are constructed from Q17. | Respondents who could name Okinawa prefecture are given 1 correct | for the 2ND ITEM, and Rs who could name Niigata prefecture (or | Maki town) are given 1 (correct) for the 2ND ITEM. At the time | of the election, these were the only two referendums held in | Japan. The Okinawa referendum was known by more people than | the Niigata referendum. | | Question wordings are: | | 1ST ITEM: | Q17 By the way, do you know that a referendum was held in | Japan recently? | 01. I know (If 1, go to SQ) | 02. I do not know (If 2, go to Q18) | | 2ND ITEM: | SQ Do you know what local government it was? | What about others? (O.A.-M.A.) | Q17a Okinawa 1. mentioned 2. not mentioned | Q17b Niigata 1. mentioned 2. not mentioned | Q17c Makimachi 1. mentioned 2. not mentioned | Q17d Others 1. mentioned 2. not mentioned | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - JAPAN (2004): IMD3015_ | | IMD3015_1: | Question text: Which of the following is a requirement to make | an amendment to the constitution? | Answer options: 1. A majority of more than two-thirds of all of | the members in both Houses. | 2. A majority of more than half of all of the | members in both Houses. | 3. A majority of more than two-third of all of | the members present in both Houses. | 4. A majority of more than half of all of the | members present in both Houses. | Correct answer: 1. | | IMD3015_2: | Question text: Which of the following is one of the requirements | to become a Prime Minister in Japan? | Answer options: 1. Must be in the House of Councilors | 2. Must be part of Congress | 3. Does not necessarily have to be a part of | Congress. | Correct answer: 2. | | IMD3015_3: | Question text: Out of the following, which is the name given for | the election system for the House of Councilors? | Answer options: 1. Multiple seat constituency system. | 2. System of proportional representation as a | major part of the system which is combined | with single-seat constituencies. | 3. System that combines single-seat districts | and proportional-seat representation. | Correct answer: 3. | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - JAPAN (2007): IMD3015_ | | IMD3015_1: | Question Text: Who is eligible for the Japanese prime minister? | Answer options: 1. the person who is the member of the lower | house (the House of Representatives) only | 2. the person who is the member of the lower | house (the House of Representatives) or the | upper house (The House of Chancellors) | 3. every voter | Correct Answer: option 2 | | IMD3015_2: | Question Text: Which is the requirement to have the initiative | for proposing constitutional amendments? | Answer options: 1. more than two-thirds approval of the all | members at the both house | 2. more than majority approval of the all members | at the both house | 3. more than two-thirds approval of the attending | members at both houses | 4. more than majority approval of the attending | members at the both house | Correct Answer: option 1 | | IMD3015_3: | Question Text: Which is the name of the current electoral system | of the lower house in Japan? | Answer options: 1. "chu-senkyoku-sei" | 2. "shou-senkyoku-hirei-daihyo-heiyou-sei" | 3. "shou-senkyoku-hirei-daihyo-heiritsu-sei" | Correct Answer: option 3. Japan has changed the electoral | system in 1994, and the earliest election | under the new system was 1996. | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - JAPAN (2013): IMD3015_ | | IMD3015_1: Finance Minister before the recent election | Answer options: 1. Kaoru Yosano | 2. Jun Azumi | 3. Taro Aso | 4. Sadakazu Tanigaki | Correct Answer: 3. Taro Aso | | IMD3015_2: Current unemployment rate | Answer options: 1. 2.1% | 2. 4.1% | 3. 6.1% | 4. 8.1% | Correct Answer: 2. 4.1% | | IMD3015_3: Party that came in second | Answer options: 1. Japan Restoration Party | 2. Liberal Democratic Party of Japan | 3. New Komeito | 4. Democratic Party of Japan | Correct answer: 4. Democratic Party of Japan | | IMD3015_4: Current UN Secretary-General | The UN secretary-general was mistakenly translated as | chairperson of the UN to the Japanese language. This difference | to the official translation for the UN secretary-general might | have led to difficulties in answering this particular question. | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - KENYA (2013): IMD3015_ | | IMD3015_1: Finance Minister before the recent election | Answer options: 1. Mutula Kilonzo | 2. Njeru Githae | 3. Wycliffe Oparanya | 4. Amos Kimunya | Correct Answer: 2. Njeru Githae | | IMD3015_2: Current unemployment rate | Answer options: 1. 15% | 2. 25% | 3. 35% | 4. 45% | 5. 55% | Correct Answer: 4. 45% | | IMD3015_3: Party that came in second | Answer options: 1. AMANI | 2. CORD | 3. EAGLE | 4. JUBILEE | 5. PAMBAZUKA | 6. Other | Correct answer: 2. CORD | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - KYRGYZSTAN (2005): IMD3015_ | | IMD3015_1: | Question text: Who is the Ombudsman in Kyrgyzstan? | Correct answer: Bakir uulu Tursunbai | | IMD3015_2: | Question text: Who is the head of the Constitutional court? | Correct answer: Cholpon Baekova | | IMD3015_3: | Question text: Who is the head of the Central Electoral | Committee? | Correct answer: Tuigunaaly Abdraimov | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - LATVIA (2010): IMD3015_ | | IMD3015_1: | Question text: Who is the current Latvian President? | Correct answer: Valdis Zatlers | | IMD3015_2: | Question text: When was the Latvian Republic established? | Correct answer: 1918 | | IMD3015_3: | Question text: What is the name of the electoral system which is | used in the election of the members of | parliament? | Correct answer: Proportional (electoral) system | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - LATVIA (2011): IMD3015_ | | IMD3015_1: Finance Minister before the recent election | Answer options: 1. Aigars Stokenbergs | 2. Uldis Augulis | 3. Andris Vilks | 4. Artis Kampars | Correct Answer: 3. Andris Vilks | | IMD3015_2: Current unemployment rate | Answer options: 1. 9.8% | 2. 11.8% | 3. 13.8% | 4. 15.8% | Correct Answer: 4. 15.8% | | IMD3015_3: Party that came in second | Answer options: 1. National Alliance | 2. Unity | 3. Union of Greens and Farmers | 4. Zatlers' Reform Party | Correct Answer: 4. Zatlers' Reform Party | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - MEXICO (1997 & 2000): IMD3015_ | | IMD3015_1: Duration of the President's term | Correct answer: 6 years | | IMD3015_2: Duration of the Deputies' terms | Correct answer: 3 years | | IMD3015_3: Number of chambers in Congress | Correct answer: 2 chambers | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - MEXICO (2003): IMD3015_ | | IMD3015_1: | Question text: Which are the chambers of Mexico's Congress? | Correct answer: Deputies and Senators | | IMD3015_2: | Question text: On the whole, How many years does a Deputy stay | on his charge? | Correct answer: Three years | | IMD3015_3: | Question text: Could you tell me the name of the governor of | your state? | Correct answer: The interviewer had a list of state-governors' | names and classified the answer as correct or | incorrect, directly. | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - MEXICO (2006): IMD3015_ | | IMD3015_1: | Question text: Which are the chambers of Mexico's Congress? | Correct answer: Deputies and Senators | | IMD3015_2: | Question text: Could you tell me the name of the governor of | your state? | Correct answer: The interviewer had a list of state-governors' | names and classified the answer as correct or | incorrect, directly. | | IMD3015_3: | Question text: On the whole, how many years does a Deputy stay | on his charge? | Correct answer: 3 years | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - MEXICO (2009): IMD3015_ | | IMD3015_1: | Question text: Could you tell me the name of the governor of | your state? | Correct answer: The interviewer had a list of state-governors' | names and classify the answer as correct or | incorrect, directly. | | IMD3015_2: | Question text: On the whole, how many years does a Deputy stay | on his charge? | Correct answer: 3 years | | IMD3015_3: | Question text: Which are the chambers of Mexico's Congress? | Correct answer: Deputies and Senators | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - MEXICO (2012): IMD3015_ | | IMD3015_1: Finance Minister before the recent election | Answer options: 1. Jose Antonio Mid | 2. Alejandro Poare | 3. Heriberto Felix Guerra | 4. Genaro Garcia Luna | Correct Answer: 1. Jose Antonio Mid | | IMD3015_2: Current unemployment rate | Answer options: 1. 2.87% | 2. 4.87% | 3. 6.87% | 4. 8.87% | Correct answer: 2. 4.87% | | IMD3015_3: Party that came in second | Answer options: 1. PAN | 2. PRD | 3. PRI | 4. PVEM | 5. Other | Correct answer: 1. PAN | | The Mexican Election study contained an additional category | (5. other), which was coded as an incorrect answer. | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - MEXICO (2015): IMD3015_ | | IMD3015_1: | This question was formulated slightly differently reading "Who | of the following is the finance minister?". As the Mexican | election study was conducted between 13 and 21 days after the | elections, it is clear that no new cabinet had been formed yet | and that this question, hence, refers to the finance minister | before the elections. | | Answer options: 1. Luis Videgaray | 2. Miguel Angel Osorio Chong | 3. Rosario Robles | 4. Arely Gomez | Correct Answer: 1. Luis Videgaray | | IMD3015_2: Current unemployment rate | Answer options: 1. 2.87% | 2. 4.32% | 3. 6.87% | 4. 8.87% | Correct Answer: 2. 4.32% | | IMD3015_3: Party that came in second | Answer options: 1. PAN | 2. PRD | 3. PRI | 4. Partido Verde (PVEM) | 5. MORENA | 6. Other | Correct answer: 1. PAN | | The Mexican Election study contained two additional categories | (5.MORENA, 6. Other), which were coded as incorrect answers. | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - MONTENEGRO (2012): IMD3015_ | | IMD3015_1: Finance Minister before the recent election | Answer options: 1. Igor Luksic | 2. Miodrag Katnic | 3. Vladimir Kavaric | 4. Dusko Markovic | Correct Answer: 2. Miodrag Katnic | | IMD3015_2: Current unemployment rate | Answer options: 1. 11.1% | 2. 13.1% | 3. 15.1% | 4. 17.1% | Correct answer: 2. 13.1% | | IMD3015_3: Party that came in second | Answer options: 1. Demokratski front - Miodrag Lekic | 2. Koalicija evropska CG - Milo Dukanovic | 3. Pozitivna Crna Gora | 4. SocijalistiCka narodna partija | Correct answer: 1. Demokratski front - Miodrag Lekic | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - NETHERLANDS (1998): IMD3015_ | | IMD3015_1: ["Easy"] | Question text: Is CDA a member of present coalition? | Correct answer: No | | IMD3015_1: ["Moderate"] | Question text: Is Norway a member of the European Union? | Correct answer: No | | IMD3015_1: ["Difficult"] | Question text: What is the name of this Politician? | (Photo identification) | Correct answer: De Graaf | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - NETHERLANDS (2002): IMD3015_ | | Questions were presented in random order. | | Question text: Here are photographs of a number of politicians. | Could you tell me for each person the name, the | party and the function within the party? | | IMD3015_1: Photo 1 | Correct answer: Tineke Netelenbos, PvdA, Minister of Transport, | Public Works and Water Management | | IMD3015_2: Photo 4 | Correct answer: Jeltje van Nieuwenhoven, PvdA, Chair of Second | Chamber | | IMD3015_3: Photo 2 | Correct answer: Boris Ditrich, D66, Member of Second Chamber | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - NETHERLANDS (2006): IMD3015_ | | The Dutch respondents were shown photographs of politicians | and asked for their name, the party, and the function. In | IMD3015, those respondents who provided correct answers to all | three sub-questions were coded as providing the correct answers. | The political knowledge questions were part of the first wave, | i.e. pre-election, survey. | | Question Text: I will now show you photographs of politicians. | Could you tell me for each person the name; | the party; and the function? | | IMD3015_1: Photo 1 | Correct answer: Wouter Bos; PvdA; party leader | | IMD3015_2: Photo 2 | Correct answer: Rita Verdonk; VVD; minister | | IMD3015_3: Photo 3 | Correct answer: Maxime Verhagen; CDA; MP, leader of party group | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - NETHERLANDS (2010): IMD3015_ | | The Dutch respondents were shown photographs of politicians | and asked for their name, the party, and the function. In | IMD3015, those respondents who provided correct answers to all | three sub-questions were coded as providing the correct answers. | Note that the political knowledge questions were part of the | first wave, i.e. pre-election, survey. | | Question Text: I will now show you photographs of politicians. | Could you tell me for each person the name; | the party; and the function? | | IMD3015_1: Photo 1 | Correct answer: Alexander Pechtold; D66; party leader | | IMD3015_2: Photo 2 | Correct answer: Camiel Eurlings; CDA; minister | | IMD3015_3: Photo 3 | Correct answer: Gerdi Verbeet; PvdA; MP, Speaker | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - NEW ZEALAND (1996): IMD3015_ | | Question text: Now, here is a quiz on New Zealand Government. | For each of the following statements, please say | whether it is true or false. If you don't know | the answer, just circle under "don't know" and | try the next one. | | IMD3015_1: Cabinet Ministers must be MPs | Correct answer: True | | IMD3015_2: There are 99 members of Parliament | Correct answer: False | | IMD3015_3: The New Zealand Parliament has never had an | Upper House | Correct answer: False | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - NEW ZEALAND (2002): IMD3015_ | | IMD3015_1: | Question text: Now, here is a quick quiz on New Zealand | government. For each of the following statements, | please say whether it is true or false. If you | don't know the answer, put a tick under 'don't | know' and try the next. | Enrolling as a voter in New Zealand is | compulsory. | Correct answer: True | | IMD3015_2: | Question text: Here are some other statements about MMP. Do you | think they are true, or false? | The party with the most votes is more likely to | get the most seats under MMP than under first | past the post. | Correct answer: False | | IMD3015_3: | Question text: Only some parties in parliament form a | government, made up of a Prime Minister and | Cabinet Ministers. Can you recall which party or | parties formed the government after the 1999 | election? Please tick as many boxes as apply. | Answer options: - No, can't recall | - Yes, Labor | - Yes, National | - Yes, NZ First | - Yes, Green | - Yes, Act | - Yes, Alliance | - Yes, United | Correct answer: Labor and Alliance | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - NEW ZEALAND (2008): IMD3015_ | | IMD3015_1: | Question text: For the MMP electoral system, party votes are | used to allocate seats in parliament for all | parties that cross the threshold. | Can you recall which of the following a party has | to do in order to cross that threshold? Win 5% | of all party votes OR win at least one | electorate? | Correct answer: True | | IMD3015_2: | Question text: The term of Parliament is four years. | Correct answer: False | | IMD3015_3: | Question text: It is not necessary to be a New Zealand citizen | to be eligible to vote in New Zealand? | Correct answer: True | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - NEW ZEALAND (2011): IMD3015_ | | IMD3015_1: Finance Minister before the recent election | Answer options: 1. Simon Power | 2. Bill English | 3. Tony Ryall | 4. Nick Smith | Correct answer: 2. Bill English | | IMD3015_2: Current unemployment rate | Answer options: 1. 4.6% | 2. 6.6% | 3. 8.6% | 4. 10.6% | Correct answer: 2. 6.6% | | IMD3015_3: Party that came in second | Answer options: 1. Labor Party | 2. National Party | 3. Green Party | 4. New Zealand First | 5. Act | 6. Maori | 7. United Future | 8. Mana Party | Correct answer: 1. Labor Party | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - NEW ZEALAND (2014): IMD3015_ | | IMD3015_1: Finance Minister before the recent election | Answer options: 1. Judith Collins | 2. Bill English | 3. Tony Ryall | 4. Nick Smith | Correct Answer: 2. Bill English | | IMD3015_2: Current unemployment rate | Answer options: 1. 3.6% | 2. 5.6% | 3. 7.6% | 4. 9.6% | Correct Answer: 2. 5.6% | | IMD3015_3: Party that came in second | Answer options: 1. Labor | 2. National | 3. Green | 4. NZ First | 5. ACT | 6. United Future | 7. Maori Party | 8. Internet-Mana Party | Correct answer: 1. Labor | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - NORWAY (1997): IMD3015_ | | 'Don't know' responses were reported as missing in all three | questions. | | IMD3015_1: | Question text: (Q15D) To which party do the President of the | Storting during the last four years belong? | Correct answer: Labor Party | | IMD3015_2: | Question text: (Q15E) How many representatives are selected at | the Storting? | Correct answer: 165 | | IMD3015_3: | Question text: (Q15B) Do you remember who's been the Minister | of Local Government and Labor the year before | the election? | Correct answer: Kjell Opseth | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - NORWAY (2001): IMD3015_ | | IMD3015_1: | Question text: Who has been president of the Storting for the | last four years? | Correct answer: Kirsti Kolle Grondahl | | IMD3015_2: | Question text: Do you happen to know which parties formed the | Bondevik-Government in the years 1997 to 2000? | Correct answer: Christian Democratic Party (KrF), Center Party | (Sp), and Liberal Party (V) | | IMD3015_3: | Question text: Do you recall who was minister for local | Government and regional development the year | before the election? | Correct answer: Sylvia Brustad | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - NORWAY (2005): IMD3015_ | | Question IMD3015_2 is a "double" question. If the respondent is | correct on both, it was registered as a correct answer. If the | respondents answer only one of them correct, it is registered | as incorrect. The same holds for incorrect answering on both. | | IMD3015_1: | Question Text: Do you recall who the Minister of Modernization | was the last year before the election?" | Correct Answer: Morten A. Meyer | | IMD3015_2: | Question Text: Six national referendums have been conducted in | Norway. Do you happen to know when the last of | them was, and what it was about? | Correct Answer: 1994, EU-referendum | | IMD3015_3: | Question Text: Do you happen to know how many representatives | there are on the Storting? | Correct Answer: 169 | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - NORWAY (2009): IMD3015_ | | The correct response on all three Norwegian knowledge items | includes multiple answers. Responses were defined as a correct | answer if all appropriate items were mentioned. | | IMD3015_1: | Question Text: Do you happen to know which parties have been in | government in the last election period? | Correct Answer: Labor Party, Social Left Party and Center Party | | IMD3015_2: | Question Text: Do you know who was minister of transport in the | last year before the election, and which party | the person in question represent? | Correct Answer: Liv Signe Navarsete and Centre Party | | IMD3015_3: | Question Text: In recent years there has been disagreement about | the development of new fields of oil and gas | exploration on the Norwegian continental shelf. | Can you say which two areas that have been | particularly controversial? | Correct Answer: Lofoten and Vesteraalen | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - NORWAY (2013): IMD3015_ | | IMD3015_1: Finance Minister before the recent election | Answer options: 1. Grete Faremo | 2. Kristin Halvorsen | 3. Sigbjoern Johnsen | 4. Trond Giske | Correct answer: 3. Sigbjoern Johnsen | | IMD3015_2: Current unemployment rate | Answer options: 1. 0-2% | 2. 2-4% | 3. 4-6% | 4. 6-8% | Correct answer: 2. 2-4% | | IMD3015_3: Party that came in second | Answer options: 1. Labor Party | 2. Conservative Party | 3. Progress Party | 4. Socialist Left Party | Correct answer: 2. Conservative Party | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - PERU (2006): IMD3015_ | | IMD3015_1: | Question text: Who is the president of Bolivia? | Correct answer: Evo Morales | | IMD3015_2: | Question text: In what year was the Political Constitution of | Peru promulgated? | Correct answer: 1993 | | IMD3015_3: | Question text: What was the name of the democratically elected | president following the military dictatorship in | 1980? | Correct Answer: Fernando Belaunde Terry | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - PERU (2011): IMD3015_ | | IMD3015_1: | Question Text: Who is the current president of Ecuador? | Correct answer: Rafael Correa | | IMD3015_2: | Question Text: What public position does Magdalena Chu currently | occupy? | Correct answer: Head of the National Office of Electoral | Processes (ONPE) | | IMD3015_3: | Question Text: In what year was the current Constitution of Peru | enacted? | Correct answer: 1993 | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - PERU (2016): IMD3015_ | | As political information questions deviated from CSES Module 4 | questions, they were not included in the CSES Module 4 dataset | and hence are not available in CSES IMD either. Interested | researchers can refer to the original Peruvian election study. | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - PHILIPPINES (2004): IMD3015_ | | IMD3015_1: | Question text: How many years, in your knowledge, is a | congressman's term of office? | Correct answer: 3 years | | IMD3015_2: | Question text: Who, based on your knowledge, has the final | responsibility to decide if a law is | constitutional or not? Is it the President, the | Congress, or the Supreme Court? | Correct answer: Supreme Court | | IMD3015_3: | Question text: Please tell me, based on your knowledge, the | current position in government of Jose De | Venecia? | Correct answer: Speaker of the House of Representatives | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - PHILIPPINES (2010): IMD3015 | | IMD3015_1: | Question Text: What is minimum voting age requirement? | Correct Answer: 18 years | | IMD3015_2: | Question Text: And how many years, in your knowledge, is a | Senator's term of office? | Correct Answer: 6 years | | IMD3015_3: | Question Text: Who, based on your knowledge, has the final | responsibility to decide if a law is | constitutional or not? Is it the President, the | Congress, or the Supreme Court? | Correct Answer: the Supreme Court | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - PHILIPPINES (2016): IMD3015_ | | IMD3015_1: Finance Minister before the recent election | Answer options: 1. Jose Pardo | 2. Gary Teves | 3. Cesar Purisima | 4. Roberto de Ocampo | Correct Answer: 3. Cesar Purisima | | IMD3015_2: Current unemployment rate | Answer options: 1. 6.6% | 2. 7.8% | 3. 6.1% | 4. 10.8% | Correct Answer: 3. 6.1% | | IMD3015_3: Party that came in second | Answer options: 1. Partido Demokratikong Pilipino | - Lakas Ng Bayan (PDP-Laban) | 2. United Nationalist Alliance (UNA) | 3. Liberal Party | 4. Nacionalista Party (NP) | 5. National People's Coalition (NPC) | 6. People's Reform Party (PRP) | Correct answer: 5. National People's Coalition (NPC) | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - POLAND (1997): IMD3015_ | | Question text: Now we would like to ask you a few questions | about Polish political life. Of course, many | people are not interested in politics. Thus, it | is natural that many will decline from answering | these sort of questions. | | IMD3015_1: Please name persons occupying the following | positions: Minister of Foreign Affairs. | Correct answer: Dariusz Rosati | | IMD3015_2: Please name political parties that formed the | governmental coalition in 1993-97 period. | Correct answer: Respondent mentioned Polish People's Party (PSL); | During the 1993-1997 period, the PSL formed | coalitions with what is now the Democratic Left | Alliance (SLD). | | IMD3015_3: | Question text: In July this year Poland was invited to join an | important international organization. What | organization was it? | Correct answer: NATO | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - POLAND (2001): IMD3015_ | | IMD3015_1: | Question text: Could you please name the military alliance of | which Poland is currently a member? | Correct answer: NATO | | IMD3015_2: | Question text: Who is the chairman of the SLD? | Correct answer: Leszek Miller | | IMD3015_3: | Question text: Who currently is the president of Russia? | Correct answer: Vladimir Putin | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - POLAND (2005): IMD3015_ | | IMD3015_1: | Question text: A proposal about introducing linear tax was | mentioned during the electoral campaign. Which | party proposed such a solution? | Correct Answer: PO | | IMD3015_2: | Question text: Which party wants to change state regime by | strengthening the position of the president? | Correct answer: PiS, Samoobrona | | IMD3015_3: | Question text: Which party wants to transfer the majority of the | foreign exchange reserves to the state budget to | help the economy? | Correct answer: Samoobrona | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - POLAND (2007): IMD3015_ | | IMD3015_1: | Question Text: To which military alliance Poland belongs? | Answer options: 1. Warsaw Pact; | 2. ASEAN; | 3. Visegrad Group; | 4. NATO; | 5. Weimar Triangle; | 6. ANZUS; | 7. Hard to say | Correct Answer: 4. NATO | | IMD3015_2: | Question Text: Who is currently the Chancellor of Germany? | Answer options: 1. Helmut Kohl; | 2. Gerhard Schroeder; | 3. Angela Merkel; | 4. Hans Dietrich-Genscher; | 5. Edmund Stoiber; | 6. Konrad Adenauer; | 7. Hard to say | Correct Answer: 3. Angela Merkel | | IMD3015_3: | Question Text: Which institutional body is established in Poland | to resolve disputes on the constitutionality of | the acts of Parliament? | Answer options: 1. the High Court; | 2. the State Tribunal; | 3. the Supreme Administrative Court; | 4. the General Prosecutor's Office; | 5. The Constitutional Tribunal; | 6. Minister of Justice; | 7. hard to say | Correct Answer: 5. The Constitutional Tribunal | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - POLAND (2011): IMD3015_ | | IMD3015_1: Finance Minister before the recent election | Answer options: 1. Leszek Balcerowicz | 2. Marek Belka | 3. Jacek Rostowski | 4. Zyta Gilowska | Correct Answer: 3. Jacek Rostowski | | IMD3015_2: Current unemployment rate | Answer options: 1. 5.0% | 2. 8.0% | 3. 11.6% | 4. 16.4% | Correct Answer: 3. 11.6% | | IMD3015_3: Party that came in second | Answer options: 1. PiS | 2. PO | 3. PSL | 4. Ruch Palikota | Correct answer: 1. PiS | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - PORTUGAL (2002): IMD3015_ | | IMD3015_1: | Question text: Do you happen to remember the name of the | Portuguese Prime Minister before Antonio | Guterres? | Correct answer: Cavaco Silva | | IMD3015_2: | Question text: And do you happen to remember the Number of EU | member-states? | Correct answer: 15 | | IMD3015_3: | Question text: Do you happen to remember the name of any | candidates who ran in your electoral district in | the last parliamentary/legislative election? | Correct answer: For the answer to be considered correct, the | respondent needed to mention only one candidate | correctly. | | The item in IMD3015_3 was a standard item in the CSES Module 1 | questionnaire and coded based on A3019 (NUMBER OF CANDIDATES | CORRECTLY NAMED). See Codebook Part 2 of CSES Module 1 for more | information. | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - PORTUGAL (2005): IMD3015_ | | IMD3015_1: | Question text: And do you remember who was the prime-minister | before Durao Barroso? | Correct answer: Antonio Guterres | | IMD3015_2: | Question text: Do you remember what party received the biggest | share of the votes in the 2002 legislative | elections? | Correct answer: PPD-PSD | | IMD3015_3: | Question text: And do you remember how many countries entered | the European Union in the last enlargement? | Correct answer: Ten countries | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - PORTUGAL (2009): IMD3015_ | | IMD3015_1: | Question Text: Do you remember, which was the most voted party | of the 2005 legislative election? | Correct Answer: Partido Socialista (PS) | | IMD3015_2: | Question Text: How many countries are parts of the European | Union? | Correct Answer: 27 | | IMD3015_3: | Question Text: Do you remember who the prime minister before | Jose Socrates was? | Correct Answer: Pedro Santana Lopes | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - PORTUGAL (2015): IMD3015_ | | IMD3015_1: Finance Minister before the recent election | Answer options: 1. Vieira da Silva | 2. Vitor Gaspar | 3. Augusto Santos Silva | 4. Maria Luis Albuquerque | Correct Answer: 4. Maria Luis Albuquerque | | IMD3015_2: Current unemployment rate | Answer options: 1. 13.9% | 2. 11.9% | 3. 15.9% | 4. 17.9% | Correct Answer: 1. 13.9% | | Respondents were asked the unemployment rate in 2014. | By the time the survey was implemented, it hence referred to a | point in time that was between 10 and 12 months ago. | | IMD3015_3: Party that came in second | Answer options: 1. CDU | 2. PaF (PPD-PSD/CDS-PP) | 3. PS | 4. BE | Correct answer: 3. PS | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - ROMANIA (1996): IMD3015_ | | The political information items concern a treaty between Romania | and Hungary, and the positions different parties took. The first | question concerned whether or not the treaty was ratified (exact | wording is unavailable). IMD3015_1 and IMD3015_2 were constructed | from the following two items: | | IMD3015_1: | Question text: Last year, Romania and Hungary conducted | negotiations concerning a treaty between the two. | Referring only to the political party that you | mentioned before that you prefer, do you remember | their position concerning the Romanian-Hungarian | treaty? Please tell me their position on a scale | of 1 to 5, where 1 means that they were strongly | in favor of the treaty, and 5 means they were | strongly opposed. | | For this item, there is a considerable amount of missing data | because of the limited distribution of party identification. | | IMD3015_2: | Question text: Please tell me the name of a party, different | from the one above, which opposed the signing of | such a treaty. | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - ROMANIA (2004): IMD3015_ | | IMD3015_1: | Question text: What is the closing time of election polls in | Romania? | Correct answer: 9 P.M. | | IMD3015_2: | Question text: Do you happen to remember who is the governor of | the Romanian National Bank? | Correct answer: Mugur Isarescu | | IMD3015_3: | Question text: What is the minimal age for a citizen of Romania | in order to be allowed to become a candidate in | the presidential elections? | Correct answer: 35 years | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - ROMANIA (2009): IMD3015_ | | IMD3015_1: | Question Text: In Romania, polling stations close at 9 PM. | Correct Answer: True | | IMD3015_2: | Question Text: According to the Romanian legislation, electoral | campaigns start 30 days before the election day. | Correct Answer: True | | IMD3015_3: | Question Text: EU countries have an equal number of members in | the European Parliament. | Correct Answer: False | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - ROMANIA (2012): IMD3015_ | | IMD3015_1: Finance Minister before the recent election | Answer options: 1. Titus Corlatean | 2. Florin Georgescu | 3. Mircea Dusa | 4. Daniel Constantin | Correct Answer: 2. Florin Georgescu | | IMD3015_2: Current unemployment rate | Answer options: 1. 3.1% | 2. 5.1% | 3. 7.1% | 4. 9.1% | Correct Answer: 3. 7.1% | | IMD3015_3: Party that came in second | Answer options: 1. The Alliance for a Just Romania (ARD) | 2. People's Party - Dan Diaconescu (PP-DD) | 3. Hungarian Democratic Union of Romania | (UDMR) | 4. Social Liberal Union (USL) | Correct answer: 1. The Alliance for a Just Romania (ARD) | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - ROMANIA (2014): IMD3015_ | | IMD3015_1: Finance Minister before the recent election | Answer options: 1. Titus Corlatean | 2. Ioana-Maria Petrescu | 3. Rovana Plumb | 4. Daniel Constantin | Correct Answer: 2. Ioana-Maria Petrescu | | IMD3015_2: Current unemployment rate | Answer options: 1. 2.9% | 2. 4.9% | 3. 6.9% | 4. 8.9% | Correct Answer: 3. 6.9% | | IMD3015_3: Party that came in second | As the data was collected on the 2014 Romanian Presidential | Election, the question read "Which candidate came in second in | votes in the 1st round of the Presidential elections of November | 2, 2014?" | | Answer options: 1. Victor Ponta | 2. Klaus Iohannis | 3. Elena Udrea | 4. Calin Popescu-Tariceanu | Correct answer: 2. Klaus Iohannis | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - RUSSIA (2004): IMD3015_ | | IMD3015_1: | Question text: w35x. Which party or bloc received a majority in | the State Duma as a result of the election that | took place in December of last year? | Correct answer: United Russia | | IMD3015_2: | Question text: w37x. Who is the chairman of the Central | Electoral Commission? | Correct answer: Veshnyakov | | IMD3015_3: | Question text: w36x. Who is the chairman of the Constitutional | Court? | Correct answer: Zorkin | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - SERBIA (2012): IMD3015_ | | The the Serbian Election study contained an additional | category (5. none), which is treated as an incorrect answer. | | IMD3015_1: Finance Minister before the recent election | Answer options: 1. Oliver Dulic | 2. Mirko Cvetkovic | 3. Ivica Daeic | 4. Snezana Malovic | 5. None | Correct Answer: 2. Mirko Cvetkovic | | IMD3015_2: Current unemployment rate | Answer options: 1. 21.5% | 2. 23.5% | 3. 25.5% | 4. 27.5% | 5. None | Correct Answer: 3. 25.5% | | IMD3015_3: Party that came in second | Answer options: 1. Choice for a Better Life - Boris Tadic | 2. Ivica Daeic - Socialist Party of Serbia - | PUPS-JS" (SPS) | 3. Democratic Party of Serbia (DSS) - Vojislav | Kostunica | 4. Let's Get Serbia Moving - Tomislav Nikolic | 5. None | Correct answer: 1. Choice for a Better Life - Boris Tadic | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - SLOVAKIA (2010): IMD3015_ | | IMD3015_1: | Question Text: In your opinion, is the number of MPs in the | National Parliament 200? (Only one response) | Correct Answer: No (150 members) | | IMD3015_2: | Question Text: Who was the speaker of the National Parliament | until this June election? | Correct Answer: Pavol Paska | | IMD3015_3: | Question Text: The European Union currently consists of 25 | member states? | Correct Answer: No (27 member states) | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - SLOVAKIA (2016): IMD3015_ | | IMD3015_1: Finance Minister before the recent election | Answer options: 1. Robert Kalinak | 2. Peter Kazimir | 3. Jan Pociatek | 4. Lubomir Vazny | Correct Answer: 2. Peter Kazimir | | IMD3015_2: Current unemployment rate | Answer options: 1. 10.6% | 2. 12.8% | 3. 8.2% | 4. 15.6% | Correct Answer: 1. 10.6% | | IMD3015_3: Party that came in second | Answer options: 1. Slovak National Party (SNS) | 2. Ordinary people - Independent | personalities (OLaNO) | 3. Freedom and Solidarity (SaS) | 4. Sme Rodina - Boris Kollar (SR) | Correct answer: 3. Freedom and Solidarity (SaS) | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - SLOVENIA (2004): IMD3015_ | | Exact question wording unavailable. | | IMD3015_1: | Question text: 6.38) Do you know, who is present minister for | finances? | Correct answer: Andrej Bajuk | | IMD3015_2: | Question text: 6.39) How many states are now members of the | European Union? | Correct answer: 25 | | IMD3015_3: | Question text: 6.40) How many deputies does the National | Assembly of the Republic of Slovenia have? | Correct answer: 90 | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - SLOVENIA (2011): IMD3015_ | | IMD3015_1: Finance Minister before the recent election | Answer options: 1. Mitja Gaspari | 2. Ales Zalar | 3. Franci Krizanic | 4. Ivan Svetlik | Correct Answer: 3. Franci Krizanic | | IMD3015_2: Current unemployment rate | Answer options: 1. 5.1% | 2. 8.2% | 3. 10.4% | 4. 15.3% | Correct Answer: 3. 10.4% | | IMD3015_3: Party that came in second | Answer options: 1. SD | 2. PS | 3. SDS | 4. DLGV | Correct answer: 1. SDS | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - SOUTH AFRICA (2009): IMD3015_ | | Question Text: We would now like to know to what degree South | Africans are familiar with certain public figures. | For example, do you remember the name of the ... | | IMD3015_1: Deputy President? | Correct Answer: Kgalema Motlanthe | | IMD3015_2: Leader of COSATU? | Correct Answer: Zwelinzima Vai | | IMD3015_3: Speaker of Parliament? | Correct Answer: Pravin Gordhan | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - SOUTH AFRICA (2014): IMD3015_ | | IMD3015_2: Current unemployment rate | Answer options: 1. 5 % | 2. 15 % | 3. 25 % | 4. 50 % | 5. 75 % | Correct Answer: 3. 25 % | | IMD3015_3: Party that came in second | Answer options: 1. Congress of the People (COPE) | 2. Democratic Alliance (DA) | 3. Economic Freedom Fighters (EFF) | 4. Inkatha Freedom Party (IFP) | Correct answer: 2. Democratic Alliance (DA) | | IMD3015_4: Current UN Secretary General | Respondents could specify another person, who was | not mentioned in the question. | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - SOUTH KOREA (2004): IMD3015_ | | IMD3015_1: | Question text: What do you think how many years the presidential | term of office is? | Correct answer: Five years | | IMD3015_2: | Question text: What do you think how many years the legislator's | term of office is? | Correct answer: Four years | | IMD3015_3: | Question text: Do you know the name of the prime minister? | Correct answer: Goh Kun | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - SOUTH KOREA (2008): IMD3015_ | | IMD3015_1: | Question Text: Which party is the governing party currently? | Correct Answer: Grand National Party | | IMD3015_2: | Question Text: How long does the President stay in office once | elected? | Correct Answer: 5 years | | IMD3015_3: | Question Text: What is the name of the current Prime Minister? | Correct Answer: Seung-Su | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - SOUTH KOREA (2012): IMD3015_ | | IMD3015_1: Finance Minister before the recent election | Answer options: 1. Han Seung-soo | 2. Lee Heon-jae | 3. Kwon O-kyu | 4. Park Jae-wan | Correct Answer: 4. Park Jae-wan | | IMD3015_2: Current unemployment rate | Answer options: 1. 2.2% | 2. 4.2% | 3. 6.2% | 4. 8.2% | Correct Answer: 2. 4.2% | | IMD3015_3: Party that came in second | Answer options: 1. New Frontier Party | 2. Democratic United Party | 3. Liberty Forward Party | 4. Unified Progressive Party | Correct answer: 2. Democratic United Party | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - SPAIN (1996 & 2000): IMD3015_ | | IMD3015_1: | Question text: How many countries does the European Union have? | Correct answer: 15 | | IMD3015_2: | Question text: How many regions does our country have? | Correct answer: 17 | | IMD3015_3: | Question text: Can you tell me who was the former President of | Government before Felipe Gonzalez? | Correct answer: Leopoldo Calvo Sotelo | | For SPAIN (2000), IMD3015_3 asked respondents to identify the | President of the Government before Jose M. Azar. The correct | response was Felipe Gonzales. | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - SPAIN (2004): IMD3015_ | | IMD3015_1: | Question text: First President of Government in our democracy? | Correct answer: Adolfo Suarez | | IMD3015_2: | Question text: In what year the Spanish Constitution was | approved? | Correct answer: 1978 | | IMD3015_3: | Question text: Do you know how many countries comprise the | European Union at the present time, before the | new members enter in May? | correct Answer: 15 countries | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - SPAIN (2008): IMD3015_ | | IMD3015_1: | Question Text: In this list of persons I will read out now, | could you tell me for each of them if you know | of her/him or not? | Correct Answer: NOT APPLICABLE | | IMD3015_2: | Question Text: Do you remember what PP voted in each of the two | votes regarding the parliamentary election of | Rodriguez Zapatero as President of the Government | of Spain? | Correct Answer: Against | | IMD3015_3: | Question Text: Do you know what is the interest rate that you | are paying to your financial institution for | postponing payments with your credit card? | Correct Answer: not available | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - SWEDEN (1998): IMD3015_ | | IMD3015_1: | Question text: On this card there are a number of statements. | Could you say whether each of them is true or | false. If you are uncertain of the answer, you | can answer that you do not know whether the | statement is true or false. | 'The Swedish Riksdag has 349 members' | Correct answer: True | | Question text: Here is a list with names of different persons. | Could you say to which party each of them | belongs? | | IMD3015_2: Lars Tobisson? | Correct answer: Moderate Party | | IMD3015_3: Marianne Samuelsson? | Correct answer: Green Party | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - SWEDEN (2002): IMD3015_ | | IMD3015_1: | Question text: One Euro is today valued to more than 10 Swedish | kronor. | Correct answer: False | | IMD3015_2: | Question text: The open unemployment in Sweden is less than | five percent. | Correct answer: False | | IMD3015_3: | Question text: Swedish aid to the developing countries is today | one percent of the gross national income. | Correct answer: False | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - SWEDEN (2006): IMD3015_ | | IMD3015_1: | Question Text: On this card there are a number of statements. | Could you say whether each of them is true or | false. If you are not certain of the answer, you | may say that you do not know whether the | statement is true or false. | The Swedish parliament has 349 members. | Correct Answer: True | | IMD3015_2: | Question Text: On this card there are a number of statements. | Could you say whether each of them is true or | false. If you are not certain of the answer, you | may say that you do not know whether the | statement is true or false. | During the 2002 - 2006 election period, Sweden | had a single party Social Democratic government. | Correct Answer: True | | IMD3015_3: | Question Text: Here is a list with names of different persons. | Could you tell me which party each of them | belongs to? | Correct Answer: NOT APPLICABLE | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - SWEDEN (2014): IMD3015_ | | IMD3015_1: Finance Minister before the recent election | Answer options: 1. Carl Bildt | 2. Anders Borg | 3. Annie Loof | 4. Beatrice Ask | Correct answer: 2. Anders Borg | | IMD3015_2: Current unemployment rate | Answer options: 1. 6.0% | 2. 8.0% | 3. 10.0% | 4. 12.0% | Correct answer: 2. 8.0% | | IMD3015_3: Party that came in second | Answer options: 1. Liberals | 2. Green Party | 3. Conservatives | 4. Social Democrats | Correct answer: 3. Conservatives | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - SWITZERLAND (1999): IMD3015_ | | IMD3015_1: | Question text: Do you know the name of this years president of | the federal council? | Correct answer: Ruth Dreifuss | | IMD3015_2: | Question text: Can you tell me how many political parties are | represented in the federal council? | Correct answer: Four | | IMD3015_3: | Question text: How many signatures have to be collected for a | popular initiative? | Correct answer: 100,000 | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - SWITZERLAND (2003): IMD3015_ | | IMD3015_1: | Question text: What is the name of this year's federal | president? (Head of the state in the year 2003) | Correct answer: Pascal Couchepin | | IMD3015_2: | Question text: How many signatures do you need for a people's | initiative at the federal level? | Correct answer: 100,000 | | IMD3015_3: | Question text: How many seats does your canton have in the | national council? (the lower house) | Correct answer: The following table lists all cantons and | the number of seats awarded to them in the | 2003 election: | | Canton N Seats | -------------------------------------------- | Zurich 34 | Bern 26 | Luzern 10 | Uri 1 | Schwyz 4 | Obwalden 1 | Nidwalden 1 | Glarus 1 | Zug 3 | Fribourg 7 | Solothurn 7 | Basel-Stadt 5 | Basel-Landschaft 7 | Schaffhausen 2 | Appenzell Ausserrhoden 1 | Appenzell Innerrhoden 1 | St. Gallen 12 | Graubunden / Grisons 5 | Aargau 15 | Thurgau 6 | Ticino 8 | Vaud 18 | Valais 7 | Neuchatel 5 | Geneva 11 | Jura 2 | Source: Official election results of the Swiss 2003 elections | available at: https://www.bk.admin.ch/ch/d/nrw/nrw03/list/ | kt_index.html | (Date accessed: August 20, 2019) | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - SWITZERLAND (2007): IMD3015_ | | IMD3015_1: | Question Text: What's the name of the current president of the | Federal Council? | Correct answer: Micheline Calmy-Rey | | IMD3015_2: | Question Text: How many parties are in the Federal Council? | Correct answer: 4 | | IMD3015_3: | Question Text: How many signatures do you need for a people's | initiative at the federal level? | Correct answer: 100,000 | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - SWITZERLAND (2011): IMD3015_ | | IMD3015_1: Finance Minister before the recent election | Answer options: 1. Micheline Calmy-Rey | 2. Johann Schneider-Amman | 3. Eveline Widmer-Schlumpf | 4. Doris Leuthard | Correct answer: 3. Eveline Widmer-Schlumpf | | IMD3015_2: Current unemployment rate | Answer options: 1. 2.8% | 2. 4.8% | 3. 6.8% | 4. 8.8% | Correct Answer: 1. 2.8% | | IMD3015_3: Party that came in second | Answer options: 1. SVP | 2. CVP | 3. FDP | 4. SP | Correct answer: 4. SP | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - TAIWAN (1996): IMD3015_ | | IMD3015_1: | Question text: Who is the Premier? | Correct answer: Lien Chan | | IMD3015_2: | Question text: Who is the Chairman of the DPP? | Correct answer: Chang Chun-hung (until July 18, 1996) | Hsu Hsin-liang (starting July 18, 1996) | | IMD3015_3: | Question text: Who is the Speaker of the Legislative Yuan? | Correct answer: Liu Sung-pan | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - TAIWAN (2001): IMD3015_ | | IMD3015_1: | Question text: Who is the current Vice President? | Correct answer: Annette Lu Hsiu-lien | | IMD3015_2: | Question text: Who is the President of the PRC? | Correct answer: Jiang Zemin | | IMD3015_3: | Question text: How many years is a legislators' term? | Correct answer: Three years | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - TAIWAN (2004): IMD3015_ | | IMD3015_1: | Question text: G02. Who is the current President of the United | States? | Correct answer: George Bush | | IMD3015_2: | Question text: G04. Which body has the power to interpret the | Constitution? | Correct answer: The Council of Grand Justices | | IMD3015_3: | Question text: G03. How many years is a legislator's term? | Correct answer: Three years | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - TAIWAN (2008): IMD3015_ | | IMD3015_1: | Question text: Who is the current president of the United | States? | Correct answer: George W. Bush | | IMD3015_2: | Question text: Who is the current premier of our country? | Correct answer: Chao-Shiuan Liu | | IMD3015_3: | Question text: What institution has the power to interpret the | constitution? | Correct answer: Grand Justices Council | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - TAIWAN (2012): IMD3015_ | | IMD3015_1: Finance Minister before the recent election | Answer options: 1. Jiang Yi-huah | 2. Chen Chun (Sean Chen) | 3. Mao Chi-kuo | 4. Lee Sush-der | Correct Answer: 4. Lee Sush-der | | IMD3015_2: Current unemployment rate | Answer options: 1. 2.3% | 2. 4.3% | 3. 6.3% | 4. 8.3% | Correct Answer: 2. 4.3% | | IMD3015_3: Party that came in second | Answer options: 1. Kuomintang Recommendation | 2. Democratic Progressive Party | 3. People First Party | 4. Non-Partisan Solidarity Union | Correct answer: 2. Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - THAILAND (2007): IMD3015_ | | IMD3015_1: | Question text: How many MPs are required under the New | Constitution? | Correct answer: 480 MPs | | IMD3015_2: | Question text: How many cluster (districts) are there under the | proportional election system? | Correct answer: 8 | | IMD3015_3: | Question text: Which cluster (district) number are you in | (in MPs election)? | Correct answer: Depends on the respondent's place of residence, | e.g. for a respondent in Tak province, the answer | "1" is correct. | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - THAILAND (2011): IMD3015_ | | IMD3015_1: Finance Minister before the recent election | Answer options: 1. Chinnaworn Boonyukida | 2. Korn Chatikavanij | 3. Chaovarat Chanweerakul | 4. Jurin Laksanawisit | Correct Answer: 2. Korn Chatikavanij | | IMD3015_2: Current unemployment rate | Answer options: 1. 0.8% | 2. 1.8% | 3. 2.8% | 4. 3.8% | Correct Answer: 1. 0.8% | | IMD3015_3: Party that came in second | Answer options: 1. Bhumjaithai Party | 2. Thais United National Development Party | 3. Social Action Party | 4. Chartthaipattana Party | Correct answer: 4. Chartthaipattana Party | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - TURKEY (2015): IMD3015_ | | IMD3015_1: Finance Minister before the recent election | Answer options: 1. Bulent Arinc | 2. Taner Yildiz | 3. Mehmet Simsek | 4. Mevlut Cavusoglu | Correct Answer: 3. Mehmet Simsek | | IMD3015_2: Current unemployment rate | Answer options: 1. 8.6% | 2. 10.6% | 3. 12.6% | 4. 14.6% | Correct Answer: 2. 10.6% | | IMD3015_3: Party that came in second | Answer options: 1. Justice and Development Party (AKP) | 2. Republican People's Party (CHP) | 3. Peoples' Democratic Party (HDP) | 4. Nationalist Action Party (MHP) | Correct Answer: 2. Republican People's Party (CHP) | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - UKRAINE (1998): IMD3015_ | | IMD3015_1: | Question text: Date of Election to the Verkhovna Rada of | Ukraine? | Correct answer: 29 March 1998 | | IMD3015_2: | Question text: Is Ukraine a NATO member? | Correct answer: No | | IMD3015_3: | Question text: What is the name of the Minister of Foreign | Affairs of Ukraine? | Correct answer: Genady Udovenko | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - UNITED STATES (1996): IMD3015_ | | In the U.S. study, respondents were asked to identify the office | held by persons whose names were read. These names were: | | IMD3015_1: Al Gore | Correct answer: Vice President | | IMD3015_2: Newt Gingrich | Correct answer: Speaker of the House of Representatives | | IMD3015_3: William Rehnquist | Correct answer: Chief Justice of the Supreme Court | | Incorrect or incomplete responses were considered 'incorrect'; | if R made no attempt to guess, 'Don't Know' was coded. These | items are not in order of difficulty. | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - UNITED STATES (2004): IMD3015_ | | Code 8 In the US survey means: "R makes no attempt to guess". | | Question text: Now we have a set of questions concerning various | public figures. We want to see how much | information about them gets out to the public | from television, newspapers and the like. | | IMD3015_1: Dick Cheney. What job or political office does | he NOW hold? | Correct answer: Vice-President of the U.S. | | IMD3015_2: Tony Blair. What job or political office does | he NOW hold? | Correct answer: Prime Minister of England/Great Britain | | IMD3015_3: William Rehnquist. What job or political office | does he NOW hold? | Correct Answer: Chief Justice of the Supreme Court | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - UNITED STATES (2008): IMD3015_ | | The US questionnaire asked respondents about the current | political position of different persons. | | Question Text: What job or political office does [...] now hold? | | IMD3015_1: Dick Cheney | Correct Answer: Vice president of the United States | | IMD3015_2: Nancy Pelosi | Correct Answer: Speaker of the House of Representatives | | IMD3015_3: John Roberts | Correct Answer: U.S. Supreme Court Chief Justice | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - UNITED STATES (2012): IMD3015_ | | IMD3015_1: Finance Minister before the recent election | Answer options: 1. Hillary Clinton | 2. Eric Holder | 3. Leon Panetta | 4. Timothy Geithner | Correct Answer: 4. Timothy Geithner | | IMD3015_2: Current unemployment rate | Answer options: 1. 5.9% | 2. 7.9% | 3. 9.9% | 4. 11.9% | Correct Answer: 2. 7.9% | | IMD3015_3: Party that came in second | Answer options: 1. Democratic Party | 2. Republican Party | 3. Green Party | 4. Libertarian Party | Correct Answer: 1. Democratic Party --------------------------------------------------------------------------- IMD3015_A >>> POLITICAL KNOWLEDGE SCALE - CSES MODULE 1 (0-3 SCALE) IMD3015_B >>> POLITICAL KNOWLEDGE SCALE - CSES MODULE 2 (0-3 SCALE) IMD3015_C >>> POLITICAL KNOWLEDGE SCALE - CSES MODULE 3 (0-3 SCALE) IMD3015_D >>> POLITICAL KNOWLEDGE SCALE - CSES MODULE 4 (0-4 SCALE) --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Number of correct answers respondents provided to all political information items included in the Standalone CSES Modules. .................................................................. 0-3 SCALE (CSES MODULES 1, 2, 3) 0-3. NUMBER OF CORRECT ANSWERS 9. MISSING 0-4 SCALE (CSES MODULE 4) 0-4. NUMBER OF CORRECT ANSWERS 9. MISSING | VARIABLE NOTES: IMD3015_A - IMD3015_D | | Scales in IMD3015_A - IMD3015_D indicate the number of correct | answers each respondent provided to the political information | items included in the Standalone CSES Modules. As political | information items differed both between polities and election | studies from the same polities, one separate variable for each | CSES Module was created. | | As the number of political information items respondents were | exposed to differed between Standalone CSES Modules, two separate | scales were created: | | CSES MODULES 1, 2, and 3 featured three political information | items, such that the number of correct answers per respondent | ranges between 0 and 3. Scores on the 0-3 scale are provided | in IMD3015_A (MODULE 1), IMD3015_B (MODULE 2), and IMD3015_C | (MODULE 3). | | CSES MODULE 4 featured four political information items, such | that the number of correct answers per respondent ranges between | 0 and 4. Scores on the 0-4 scale are provided in IMD3015_D. | | Some studies included fewer political information items than | envisaged by the Standalone CSES Module questionnaire. IMD3015_A- | IMD3015_D were not calculated for respondents from these studies. | | Data is not available for ARGENTINA (2015), CHILE (2009), | HUNGARY (1998), JAPAN (1996), ROMANIA (1996) and SOUTH AFRICA | (2014). | | This variable is original to CSES IMD, and therefore there are | no corresponding variables in the Standalone CSES Modules. =========================================================================== ))) CSES IMD VARIABLES: MACRO-LEVEL DATA =========================================================================== --------------------------------------------------------------------------- IMD5000_A >>> PARTY A IDENTIFIER - NUMERICAL IMD5000_B >>> PARTY B IDENTIFIER - NUMERICAL IMD5000_C >>> PARTY C IDENTIFIER - NUMERICAL IMD5000_D >>> PARTY D IDENTIFIER - NUMERICAL IMD5000_E >>> PARTY E IDENTIFIER - NUMERICAL IMD5000_F >>> PARTY F IDENTIFIER - NUMERICAL IMD5000_G >>> PARTY G IDENTIFIER - NUMERICAL IMD5000_H >>> PARTY H IDENTIFIER - NUMERICAL IMD5000_I >>> PARTY I IDENTIFIER - NUMERICAL --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Numeric Party Code Identifier for Parties A-I (see variable notes). .................................................................. | VARIABLE NOTES: IMD5000_ | | In the Standalone CSES Modules, parties A through F are the six | most popular parties/coalitions, ordered in descending order of | their share of the popular vote in the parliamentary election | (unless otherwise stated). Parties G, H, and I are supplemental | parties. They may, but do not have to, accord with how parties | A-F are ordered and often reflect important or notable parties | within a country or members of party coalitions. | For the CSES IMD, this alphabetical structure was maintained, | meaning that alphabetical codes assigned to parties/coalitions | and leaders in Standalone CSES Modules were not changed. Rather, | IMD5000_ serves as an identifier in the dataset, providing | the unique and unambiguous numerical party codes listed in | Codebook Part 3. As codes in IMD5000_ are labeled with the | corresponding party names, they allow for easy identification of | the relational data. | | For the CSES IMD dataset, alphabetical codes are used to | identify the following: | - Respondent's likability of the party/coalition | (variable IMD3008_). | - Respondent's left-right placement of the party/coalition | (variable IMD3007_). | - Election Results: percentage of vote for each party/coalition | in lower house (variable IMD5001_) | - Election Results: percentage of seats for each party/coalition | in lower house (variable IMD5002_) | - Election Results: percentage of vote for each party/coalition | in upper house (variable IMD5003_) | - Election Results: percentage of seats for each party/coalition | in upper house (variable IMD5004_) | - Election Results: percentage of vote for each party/coalition | in presidential election (variable IMD5005_) | - Expert judgments by the national collaborators of the said | party/coalition's ideological family placement | (variable IMD5011_). | - Expert judgments by the national collaborators of the | said party/coalition's left-right placement (variable | IMD5012). | - Number of cabinet portfolios held by each party/coalition | before the election (variable IMD5029_). | - Number of cabinet portfolios held by each party/coalition after | the election (variable IMD5031_). | | In most cases, the alphabetical party codes correspond to the | alphabetical code for the leader of that same party (e.g., | LEADER A is the leader of PARTY A). However, there are | exceptions, such as in instances in which data is available for | two leaders of the same party (e.g., Ireland 2011 in CSES MODULE | 4). For more detailed information on how CSES codes parties/ | coalitions and leaders, please see Part 4 of the CSES IMD | Codebook. | | This variable is original to CSES IMD, and therefore there are | no corresponding variables in the Standalone CSES Modules. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- IMD5001_A >>> PERCENT VOTE - LOWER HOUSE - PARTY A IMD5001_B >>> PERCENT VOTE - LOWER HOUSE - PARTY B IMD5001_C >>> PERCENT VOTE - LOWER HOUSE - PARTY C IMD5001_D >>> PERCENT VOTE - LOWER HOUSE - PARTY D IMD5001_E >>> PERCENT VOTE - LOWER HOUSE - PARTY E IMD5001_F >>> PERCENT VOTE - LOWER HOUSE - PARTY F IMD5001_G >>> PERCENT VOTE - LOWER HOUSE - PARTY G IMD5001_H >>> PERCENT VOTE - LOWER HOUSE - PARTY H IMD5001_I >>> PERCENT VOTE - LOWER HOUSE - PARTY I --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Percent of popular vote received by PARTY [A/B/C/D/E/F/G/H/I] in current (lower house) legislative election: .................................................................. 000.00-100.00. PERCENT OF THE POPULAR VOTE THAT PARTY/COALITION [A/B/C/D/E/F/G/H/I] RECEIVED IN LOWER HOUSE 997.00. NOT APPLICABLE: NO LOWER HOUSE ELECTION 999.00. MISSING | VARIABLE NOTES: IMD5001 | | Parties numerical classifications are detailed in Part 3 of the | CSES IMD Codebook. Alphabetical party and leader codes are | identified in Part 4 of the CSES IMD Codebook. | For linking alphabetical to numerical party codes, please see | VARIABLE NOTES on IMD5000_. | For more detailed information on how CSES IMD codes parties/ | coalitions and leaders, please see Parts 3 and 4 of the | CSES IMD Codebook. | | Sources of data: | - CSES Macro Reports | - Other publicly available data | | Since CSES Module 4, the CSES Secretariat always verifies the | election results provided by the collaborators. | | For more detailed information concerning individual election | studies, please consult ELECTION STUDY NOTES, available in the | Part 2 of the Standalone CSES Modules. | | The corresponding variables in the Standalone CSES Modules are: | MODULE 1: A5005_A-A5005_I | MODULE 2: B5001_A-B5001_I | MODULE 3: C5001_A-C5001_I | MODULE 4: D5001_A-D5001_I | | CSES MODULE 1 category "997.00. ALLIANCE MEMBER (NO INDIVIDUAL | TALLY)" was coded as "999.00. MISSING" in CSES IMD. | | CSES MODULE 2 category "996.00. ALLIANCE MEMBER (NO INDIVIDUAL | TALLY)" was coded as "999.00. MISSING" in CSES IMD. | | In CSES MODULE 2 and 3, returns of electoral alliances/ | coalitions were entered for all its members. ELECTION STUDY | NOTES, available in Codebook Parts 2 of the Standalone CSES | Modules 2 and 3, provide detailed information on these instances. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- IMD5002_A >>> PERCENT SEATS - LOWER HOUSE - PARTY A IMD5002_B >>> PERCENT SEATS - LOWER HOUSE - PARTY B IMD5002_C >>> PERCENT SEATS - LOWER HOUSE - PARTY C IMD5002_D >>> PERCENT SEATS - LOWER HOUSE - PARTY D IMD5002_E >>> PERCENT SEATS - LOWER HOUSE - PARTY E IMD5002_F >>> PERCENT SEATS - LOWER HOUSE - PARTY F IMD5002_G >>> PERCENT SEATS - LOWER HOUSE - PARTY G IMD5002_H >>> PERCENT SEATS - LOWER HOUSE - PARTY H IMD5002_I >>> PERCENT SEATS - LOWER HOUSE - PARTY I --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Percent of seats in lower house received by PARTY [A/B/C/D/E/F/G/H/I] in current (lower house) election: .................................................................. 000.00-100.00. PERCENT OF THE SEATS THAT PARTY/COALITION [A/B/C/D/E/F/G/H/I] RECEIVED IN LOWER HOUSE 997.00. NOT APPLICABLE: NO LOWER HOUSE ELECTION 999.00. MISSING | VARIABLE NOTES: IMD5002 | | Parties numerical classifications are detailed in Part 3 of the | CSES IMD Codebook. Alphabetical party and leader codes are | identified in Part 4 of the CSES IMD Codebook. | For linking alphabetical to numerical party codes, please see | VARIABLE NOTES on IMD5000_. | For more detailed information on how CSES IMD codes parties/ | coalitions and leaders, please see Parts 3 and 4 of the | CSES IMD Codebook. | | Sources of data: | - CSES Macro Reports | - Other publicly available data | | Since CSES MODULE 4, the CSES Secretariat always verifies the | election results provided by the collaborators. | | For more detailed information concerning individual election | studies, please consult ELECTION STUDY NOTES, available in the | Codebook Parts 2 of the Standalone CSES Modules. | | The corresponding variables in the Standalone CSES Modules are: | MODULE 1: A5006_A-A5006_I | MODULE 2: B5002_A-B5002_I | MODULE 3: C5002_A-C5002_I | MODULE 4: D5002_A-D5002_I | | CSES MODULE 1 category "997.00. ALLIANCE MEMBER (NO INDIVIDUAL | TALLY)" was coded as "999.00. MISSING" in CSES IMD. | | CSES Module 2 category "996.00. ALLIANCE MEMBER (NO INDIVIDUAL | TALLY)" was coded as "999.00. MISSING" in CSES IMD. | | In CSES Modules 2 and 3, returns of electoral alliances/ | coalitions were entered for all its members. ELECTION STUDY | NOTES, available in Codebook Parts 2 of the Standalone CSES | Modules 2 and 3, provide detailed information on these instances. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- IMD5003_A >>> PERCENT VOTE - UPPER HOUSE - PARTY A IMD5003_B >>> PERCENT VOTE - UPPER HOUSE - PARTY B IMD5003_C >>> PERCENT VOTE - UPPER HOUSE - PARTY C IMD5003_D >>> PERCENT VOTE - UPPER HOUSE - PARTY D IMD5003_E >>> PERCENT VOTE - UPPER HOUSE - PARTY E IMD5003_F >>> PERCENT VOTE - UPPER HOUSE - PARTY F IMD5003_G >>> PERCENT VOTE - UPPER HOUSE - PARTY G IMD5003_H >>> PERCENT VOTE - UPPER HOUSE - PARTY H IMD5003_I >>> PERCENT VOTE - UPPER HOUSE - PARTY I --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Percent of popular vote received by PARTY [A/B/C/D/E/F/G/H/I] in current (upper house) legislative election: .................................................................. 000.00-100.00. PERCENT OF THE POPULAR VOTE THAT PARTY/COALITION [A/B/C/D/E/F/G/H/I] RECEIVED IN UPPER HOUSE 996.00. NOT APPLICABLE: UNICAMERAL SYSTEM 997.00. NOT APPLICABLE: NO UPPER HOUSE ELECTION 999.00. MISSING | VARIABLE NOTES: IMD5003_ | | Parties numerical classifications are detailed in Part 3 of the | CSES IMD Codebook. Alphabetical party and leader codes are | identified in Part 4 of the CSES IMD Codebook. | For linking alphabetical to numerical party codes, please see | VARIABLE NOTES on IMD5000_. | For more detailed information on how CSES IMD codes parties/ | coalitions and leaders, please see Parts 3 and 4 of the | CSES IMD Codebook. | | Sources of data: | - CSES Macro Reports | - Other publicly available data | | Since CSES MODULE 4, the Secretariat always verifies the election | results provided by the collaborators. | | For more detailed information concerning individual election | studies, please consult ELECTION STUDY NOTES, available in the | Codebook Parts 2 of the Standalone CSES Modules. | | The corresponding variables in the Standalone CSES Modules are: | MODULE 1: A5007_A-A5007_I | MODULE 2: B5003_A-B5003_I | MODULE 3: C5003_A-C5003_I | MODULE 4: D5003_A-D5003_I | | CSES MODULE 1 category "997.00. ALLIANCE MEMBER (NO INDIVIDUAL | TALLY)" was coded as "999.00. MISSING" in CSES IMD. | | CSES MODULE 2 category "996.00. ALLIANCE MEMBER (NO INDIVIDUAL | TALLY)" was coded as "999.00. MISSING" in CSES IMD. | | In CSES MODULE 2 and 3, returns of electoral alliances/ | coalitions were entered for all its members. ELECTION STUDY | NOTES, available in Codebook Parts 2 of the Standalone CSES | MODULES 2 and 3, provide detailed information on these instances. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- IMD5004_A >>> PERCENT SEATS - UPPER HOUSE - PARTY A IMD5004_B >>> PERCENT SEATS - UPPER HOUSE - PARTY B IMD5004_C >>> PERCENT SEATS - UPPER HOUSE - PARTY C IMD5004_D >>> PERCENT SEATS - UPPER HOUSE - PARTY D IMD5004_E >>> PERCENT SEATS - UPPER HOUSE - PARTY E IMD5004_F >>> PERCENT SEATS - UPPER HOUSE - PARTY F IMD5004_G >>> PERCENT SEATS - UPPER HOUSE - PARTY G IMD5004_H >>> PERCENT SEATS - UPPER HOUSE - PARTY H IMD5004_I >>> PERCENT SEATS - UPPER HOUSE - PARTY I --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Percent of seats in upper house received by PARTY [A/B/C/D/E/F/G/H/I] in current (upper house) election: .................................................................. 000.00-100.00. PERCENT OF THE SEATS THAT PARTY/COALITION [A/B/C/D/E/F/G/H/I] RECEIVED IN UPPER HOUSE 996.00. NOT APPLICABLE: UNICAMERAL SYSTEM 997.00. NOT APPLICABLE: NO UPPER HOUSE ELECTION 999.00. MISSING | VARIABLE NOTES: IMD5004_ | | Parties numerical classifications are detailed in Part 3 of the | CSES IMD Codebook. Alphabetical party and leader codes are | identified in Part 4 of the CSES IMD Codebook. | For linking alphabetical to numerical party codes, please see | VARIABLE NOTES on IMD5000_. | For more detailed information on how CSES IMD codes parties/ | coalitions and leaders, please see Parts 3 and 4 of the | CSES IMD Codebook. | | Sources of data: | - CSES Macro Reports | - Other publicly available data | | Since CSES MODULE 4, the CSES Secretariat always verifies the | election results provided by the collaborators. | | For more detailed information concerning individual election | studies, please consult ELECTION STUDY NOTES, available in the | Codebook Parts 2 of the Standalone CSES Modules. | | The corresponding variables in the Standalone CSES Modules are: | MODULE 1: A5008_A-A5008_I | MODULE 2: B5004_A-B5004_I | MODULE 3: C5004_A-C5004_I | MODULE 4: D5004_A-D5004_I | | CSES MODULE 1 category "997.00. ALLIANCE MEMBER (NO INDIVIDUAL | TALLY)" was coded as "999.00. MISSING" in CSES IMD. | | CSES MODULE 2 category "996.00. ALLIANCE MEMBER (NO INDIVIDUAL | TALLY)" was coded as "999.00. MISSING" in CSES IMD. | | In CSES MODULES 2 and 3, returns of electoral alliances/ | coalitions were entered for all its members. ELECTION STUDY | NOTES, available in Codebook Parts 2 of the Standalone CSES | Modules 2 and 3, provide detailed information on these instances. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- IMD5005_A >>> PERCENT VOTE - PRESIDENT - PARTY A IMD5005_B >>> PERCENT VOTE - PRESIDENT - PARTY B IMD5005_C >>> PERCENT VOTE - PRESIDENT - PARTY C IMD5005_D >>> PERCENT VOTE - PRESIDENT - PARTY D IMD5005_E >>> PERCENT VOTE - PRESIDENT - PARTY E IMD5005_F >>> PERCENT VOTE - PRESIDENT - PARTY F IMD5005_G >>> PERCENT VOTE - PRESIDENT - PARTY G IMD5005_H >>> PERCENT VOTE - PRESIDENT - PARTY H IMD5005_I >>> PERCENT VOTE - PRESIDENT - PARTY I --------------------------------------------------------------------------- If multiple rounds, percent of vote received in first round. .................................................................. 000.00-100.00. PERCENT OF THE POPULAR VOTE THAT PARTY [A/B/C/D/E/F/G/H/I] RECEIVED 996.00. NOT APPLICABLE: NO ROLE OF PRESIDENT 997.00. NOT APPLICABLE: NO PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION 999.00. MISSING | VARIABLE NOTES: IMD5005_ | | Parties numerical classifications are detailed in Part 3 of the | CSES IMD Codebook. Alphabetical party and leader codes are | identified in Part 4 of the CSES IMD Codebook. | For linking alphabetical to numerical party codes, please see | VARIABLE NOTES on IMD5000_. | For more detailed information on how CSES IMD codes parties/ | coalitions and leaders, please see Parts 3 and 4 of the | CSES IMD Codebook. | | In elections with two rounds, data refers to the results | received by each candidate in Round 1 unless otherwise specified | in ELECTION STUDY NOTES, available in Codebook Parts 2 of the | Standalone CSES Modules. | | Sources of data: | - CSES Macro Reports | - Other publicly available data | | Since CSES Module 4, the CSES Secretariat always verifies the | election results provided by the collaborators. | | For more detailed information concerning individual election | studies, please consult ELECTION STUDY NOTES, available in the | Codebook Parts 2 of the Standalone CSES Modules. | | The corresponding variables in the Standalone CSES Modules are: | MODULE 1: A5009_A-A5009_I | MODULE 2: B5005_A-B5005_I | MODULE 3: C5005_A-C5005_I | MODULE 4: D5005_A-D5005_I | | CSES Module 1 category "997.00. ALLIANCE MEMBER (NO INDIVIDUAL | TALLY)" was coded as "999.00. MISSING" in CSES IMD. | | CSES Module 2 category "996.00. ALLIANCE MEMBER (NO INDIVIDUAL | TALLY)" was coded as "999.00. MISSING" in CSES IMD. | | In CSES Modules 2 and 3, returns of electoral alliances/ | coalitions were entered for all its members. ELECTION STUDY | NOTES, available in Codebook Parts 2 of the Standalone CSES | Modules 2 and 3, provide detailed information on these instances. | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - KYRGYZSTAN (2005): IMD5005_ | | IMD5005_ variables list election results of the candidates that | participated in the 2005 presidential election. Candidates and | parties listed in IMD5005_A to IMD5005_F do not correspond to | parties in the other items that code parties from A to F (or I). | Candidates competing in the early presidential election of | July 10, 2005, did not represent parties that respondents were | asked about in survey items. | | Candidate Party | --------------------------- ----------------------------- | PARTY A Kurmanbek Bakiev Tandem/People's Movement of | Kyrgyzstan | PARTY B Bakir uulu Tursunbai Independent candidate | PARTY C Akbarali Aitikeev Party of "Defence" | PARTY D Zhipar Zheksheev Democratic Movement of | Kyrgyzstan | PARTY E Toktaiim Umetalieva Independent candidate | PARTY F Keneshbek Dushebaev Justice - "Akyitkat" | [ELECTION STUDY NOTES] - UNTIED STATES (2012): IMD5005_C - | IMD5005_E | | Data for Parties G (Libertarian Party, LP), H (Green Party, | GPUS) and I (Constitution Party, Con) are listed in slots C | (Libertarian Party, LP), D (Green Party, GPUS) and E | (Constitution Party, Con). --------------------------------------------------------------------------- IMD5006_1 >>> TURNOUT AS A PERCENTAGE OF THE ELECTORAL REGISTER (ER) --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Official voter turnout - Percentage of the registered voters (ER). .................................................................. 000.00-100.00. PERCENT OF REGISTERED VOTERS (ER) WHO VOTED 999.00. MISSING | VARIABLE NOTES: IMD5006_1 | | The Electoral Register (ER) is the total number of votes cast | (valid and invalid) divided by the number of names on the | voters' register, expressed as a percentage. | Turnout data refers to lower house elections unless otherwise | specified. Please refer to ELECTION STUDY NOTES, available in | Part 2 of the Codebooks for the respective CSES Modules. | | In Presidential elections with two rounds of voting, turnout | data refers to the first round of elections. | | Turnout data primarily comes from the International Institute | for Democracy and Electoral Assistance (IDEA) Voter Turnout | Database. During the fielding of Module 4, the IDEA website | from where the data was sourced changed. The most up to date | website is: http://www.idea.int/data-tools/data/voter-turnout | (Date accessed: May 17, 2018). Previously, data was also | obtained from the old IDEA website, previously available at: | http://www.oldsite.idea.int/vt/index.cfm. This URL is no longer | active at the time of publication. | | If source deviates from the above, it is detailed in the | ELECTION STUDY NOTES, available in Part 2 of the Codebooks for | the respective CSES Modules. | | Data on IMD5006_1 were originally not included in MODULE 1 and | MODULE 2, but were now collected for these election studies for | the CSES IMD. | | The corresponding variables in the Standalone CSES Modules are: | MODULE 1: Not included (See above) | MODULE 2: Not included (See above) | MODULE 3: C5006_1 | MODULE 4: D5006_1 | | Data are unavailable for HONG KONG (2004), ISRAEL (2006), JAPAN | (2004). --------------------------------------------------------------------------- IMD5006_2 >>> TURNOUT AS A PERCENTAGE OF THE VOTING AGE POPULATION (VAP) --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Official voter turnout - Percentage of Voting Age Population (VAP) .................................................................. 000.00-100.00. PERCENT OF VOTING AGE POPULATION (VAP) WHO VOTED 999.00. MISSING | VARIABLE NOTES: IMD5006_2 | | The Voting Age Population (VAP) includes all citizens above the | legal voting age in a country. It is not intended to be a | precise measure of the number of citizens entitled to vote as it | does not take into account legal or systematic impediments such | as resident non-citizens. Rather, its intent is to provide an | estimate of turnout besides estimates based solely on an | electoral register. Voter registers are often outdated or | inaccurate or in some circumstances are not used for elections | (e.g.: 1994 South African elections). | | In some polities, voters are registered automatically and hence | it might be expected that the electoral register measure and the | voting age population would be identical. This is not always the | case for the reasons set out above. However, and unless we can | verify accuracy, CSES reports the voting age population as | listed by the IDEA. However, ELECTION STUDY NOTES, available in | Part 2 of the Codebooks for the respective CSES Modules, do | alert users to instances where voter registration is automatic | and thus to cases for which in theory the ER and VAP estimates | could be identical. | | Turnout data refers to lower house elections unless otherwise | specified. Please refer to ELECTION STUDY NOTES, available in | Part 2 of the Codebooks for the respective CSES Modules. | | In Presidential elections with two rounds of voting, turnout | data refers to the first round of elections. | | Turnout data primarily comes from the International Institute | for Democracy and Electoral Assistance (IDEA) Voter Turnout | Database. During the fielding of Module 4, the IDEA website | from where the data was sourced changed. The most up to date | website is: http://www.idea.int/data-tools/data/voter-turnout | (Date accessed: May 17, 2018). Previously, data was also | obtained from the old IDEA website, previously available at: | http://www.oldsite.idea.int/vt/index.cfm. This URL is no longer | active at the time of publication. | | If source deviates from the above, it is detailed in the | ELECTION STUDY NOTES, available in Part 2 of the Codebooks for | the respective CSES Modules. | | Data on IMD5006_2 were originally not included in MODULE 1 and | MODULE 2, but were now collected for these election studies for | the CSES IMD. | | The corresponding variables in the Standalone CSES Modules are: | MODULE 1: Not included (See above) | MODULE 2: Not included (See above) | MODULE 3: C5006_2 | MODULE 4: D5006_2 | | Data are unavailable for CHILE (1999), HONG KONG (1998, 2000, | 2004), JAPAN (2004), LITHUANIA (1997), and SLOVAKIA (2010). --------------------------------------------------------------------------- IMD5007 >>> COMPULSORY VOTING --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Is voting compulsory? Definition: Voting is compulsory if the law states that all those who have the right to vote are obliged to exercise that right. .................................................................. 1. YES; STRICTLY ENFORCED SANCTIONS 2. YES; WEAKLY ENFORCED SANCTIONS 3. YES; WITHOUT SANCTION FOR VIOLATION 5. NO 7. NOT APPLICABLE 9. MISSING | VARIABLE NOTES: IMD5007 | | Source for this variable: CSES Macro Reports. | | The corresponding variables in the Standalone CSES Modules are: | MODULE 1: A5031 | MODULE 2: B5037 | MODULE 3: C5044_1 | MODULE 4: D5044_1 | [ELECTION STUDY NOTES] MODULE 2 - IMD5007 | | The original variable in CSES Module 2 that referred to | compulsory voting (B5037) contained category "3. YES; LIMITED | ENFORCEMENT" but no study was coded into this category in the | CSES Module 2. This category is not used in IMD, so CSES | Module 2 category "4. YES; WITHOUT SANCTION FOR VIOLATION" was | coded as "3. YES; WITHOUT SANCTION FOR VIOLATION" in IMD. | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - CHILE (2009): IMD5007 | | Contrary to CHILE 1999 and CHILE 2005, respondents where coded | as "3. YES; WITHOUT SANCTION FOR VIOLATION" instead of "2. YES; | WEAKLY ENFORCED SANCTIONS." The reason were changes which | included a switch from a system of voluntary registration and | mandatory voting to automated registration and voluntary voting. | For more information, see: | Toro, Sergio. Y. & Luna, J. P. (2011):. The Chilean elections | of December 2009 and January 2010. Electoral Studies 31(1), | 226-230. DOI: 10.1016/j.electstud.2010.08.005 | [ELECTION STUDY NOTES] - NETHERLANDS (1998): IMD5007 | | In MODULE 1, the Netherlands were coded as "YES; LIMITED | ENFORCEMENT." However, the Netherlands did not have compulsory | voting. Hence, respondents were coded as "5. NO" for IMD. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- IMD5008_1 >>> PARTY OF THE PRIME MINISTER BEFORE --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Party of the Prime Minister before the election, regardless of whether the election was parliamentary. .................................................................. 0000001-9000000. [SEE CODEBOOK PART 3 FOR PARTY /COALITION HARMONIZED NUMERICAL CODES] 9999989. INDEPENDENT CANDIDATE 9999997. NOT APPLICABLE 9999999. MISSING | VARIABLE NOTES: IMD5008_1 | | Parties/coalitions numerical classifications are detailed in | Part 3 of the CSES IMD Codebook. | | Sources of data: | - CSES Macro Reports | - Other publicly available data | | Data on IMD5008_1 were originally not included in MODULE 1 and | MODULE 2, but were now collected for these election studies for | the CSES IMD. | | The corresponding variables for IMD5024_ in the Standalone CSES | Modules are: | MODULE 1: Not included (See above) | MODULE 2: Not included (See above) | MODULE 3: C5008 | MODULE 4: D5008 | | For more detailed information concerning individual election | studies, please consult ELECTION STUDY NOTES, available in the | Codebook Parts 2 of the Standalone CSES Modules. | POLITY NOTES - RUSSIA: IMD5008_1 | | Vladimir Putin was Russia's Prime Minister (formally: "Chairman | of the Government of the Russian Federation"), before the Russian | 1999 parliamentary election and the 2000 Presidential election. | Although Putin was formally independent, he supported Unity | (IMD numeric party code 6430051) at the 1999 election and was | backed by Unity after that election. | Therefore, in his role as Prime Minister, Putin is coded as | being affiliated to Unity. | However, additionally to his role as incumbent Prime Minister, | Putin became acting President of Russia, after Boris Yeltsin's | resignation on December 31, 1999 - resulting in early | Presidential elections on March 26, 2000 (see POLITY NOTES on | IMD5009_ for more information). | After Putin was confirmed as President, Mikhail Kasyanov became | Prime Minister, who was independent at that time. | POLITY NOTES - HONG KONG: IMD5008_1 | | There is no post of Prime Minister in Hong Kong. | [POLITY NOTES] - SWITZERLAND: IMD5008_1 | | There is no formal Prime Minister in Switzerland. Instead, | executive power is exercised by a collective organism called the | Federal Council of Switzerland. This organism has seven members | and is elected by the Federal Assembly (which is composed of two | organs, the Council of States and National Council) for a | four-year term. Since 1959 the Federal Council has been composed | of a coalition of all major parties (SVP/UDC, SP/PS, FDP/PRD, | and CVP/PDC), an arrangement called the "magic formula". The | Council elects each year among its members a president, but this | position is presumably largely ceremonial. Consequently, this | variable is coded with 9999997 "Not applicable". | [ELECTION STUDY NOTES] - FRANCE 2002: IMD5008_1 | | The French 2002 election study refers to the Presidential | elections, held on April 21 (first round) and May 5, 2002 (second | round). Incumbent Prime Minister Lionel Jospin contested as | Presidential candidate for the Socialist Party (PS). After Jospin | missed the second round, he resigned from politics. | Jean-Pierre Raffarin became Prime Minister after the 2002 | Presidential election. By that time, Raffarin was still a member | of Liberal Democracy, a party that officially merged into the | Union for a Popular Movement (UMP) in November 2002. Therefore, | Raffarin is coded as belonging to the UMP for IMD5008_2. | [ELECTION STUDY NOTES] - FRANCE 2007: IMD5008_1 | | In CSES Module 3, the Prime Minister before and after the | French 2007 legislative election is coded as being a member of | the Greens (V). | However, both Dominique de Villepin, who resigned as Prime | Minister on May 15, 2007, and Francois Fillon, his successor, | were members of the Union for a Popular Movement (UMP). Hence, | both IMD5008_ variables have been recoded to "2500001. Union for | a Popular Movement (UMP)" for France 2007. | [ELECTION STUDY NOTES] - POLAND 2007: IMD5008_1 | | In CSES Module 3, the Prime Minister before the 2007 Polish | parliamentary election is coded as being a member of Civic | Plattform (PO). | However, the outgoing Prime Minister was Jaroslaw Kaczynski, | a member of Law and Justice (PiS). Hence, IMD5008_1 was recoded | to "6160002. Law and Justice (PiS)" for Poland 2007. | Donald Tusk, who became Prime Minister after the 2007 election, | was a member of Civic Plattform (PO). Hence, IMD5008_2 was | recoded to "6160001. Civic Platform (PO)" for Poland 2007, as | the coding of IMD5008_2 in Module 3 refers to the Polish | Peasant Party. | [ELECTION STUDY NOTES] - SLOVENIA 2008: IMD5008_1 | | In CSES Module 3, the Prime Minister before the 2008 Slovenian | parliamentary election is coded as being a member of Liberal | Democracy of Slovenia (LDS). | However, the outgoing Prime Minister was Janez Jansa, a member of | Slovenian Democratic Party (SDS). Hence, IMD5008_1 was recoded | to "7050001. Social Democratic Party (SDS)" for Slovenia 2008. | Borut Pahor, who became Prime Minister after the 2008 election, | was a member of the Social Democrats (SD). Hence, IMD5008_2 was | recoded to "7050002. Social Democrats (SD)", as the coding of | IMD5008_2 in Module 3 also refers to the LDS. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- IMD5008_2 >>> PARTY OF THE PRIME MINISTER AFTER --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Party of the Prime Minister AFTER the election, regardless of whether the election was parliamentary. .................................................................. 0000001-9000000. [SEE CODEBOOK PART 3 FOR PARTY /COALITION HARMONIZED NUMERICAL CODES] 9999989. INDEPENDENT CANDIDATE 9999997. NOT APPLICABLE 9999999. MISSING | VARIABLE NOTES: IMD5008_2 | | Source: CSES Macro Reports. | | Parties/coalitions numerical classifications are detailed in | Part 3 of the CSES IMD Codebook. | | Sources of data: | - CSES Macro Reports | - Other publicly available data | | Data on IMD5008_2 were originally not included in MODULE 1 and | MODULE 2, but were now collected for these election studies for | the CSES IMD. | | The corresponding variables for IMD5008_2 in the Standalone | CSES Modules are: | MODULE 1: Not included (See above) | MODULE 2: Not included (See above) | MODULE 3: C5012 | MODULE 4: D5012 | | For more detailed information concerning individual election | studies, please consult ELECTION STUDY NOTES, available in the | Codebook Parts 2 of the Standalone CSES Modules. | POLITY NOTES - HONG KONG: IMD5008_2 | | There is no post of Prime Minister in Hong Kong. | POLITY NOTES - RUSSIA: IMD5008_2 | | Vladimir Putin was Russia's Prime Minister (formally: "Chairman | of the Government of the Russian Federation"), after the Russian | 1999 parliamentary election. | Although Putin was formally independent, he supported Unity | (IMD numeric party code 6430051) at the 1999 election and was | backed by Unity after that election. | Therefore, in his role as Prime Minister, Putin is coded as | being affiliated to Unity. | However, additionally to his role as incumbent Prime Minister, | Putin became acting President of Russia, after Boris Yeltsin's | resignation on December 31, 1999 - resulting in early | Presidential elections on March 26, 2000 (see POLITY NOTES on | IMD5009_ for more information). | After Putin was confirmed as President, Mikhail Kasyanov became | Prime Minister, who was independent at that time. | [POLITY NOTES] - SWITZERLAND: IMD5008_2 | | There is no formal Prime Minister in Switzerland. Instead, | executive power is exercised by a collective organism called the | Federal Council of Switzerland. This organism has seven members | and is elected by the Federal Assembly (which is composed of two | organs, the Council of States and National Council) for a | four-year term. Since 1959 the Federal Council has been composed | of a coalition of all major parties (SVP/UDC, SP/PS, FDP/PRD, | and CVP/PDC), an arrangement called the "magic formula". The | Council elects each year among its members a president, but this | position is presumably largely ceremonial. Consequently, this | variable is coded with 9999997 "Not applicable". | [ELECTION STUDY NOTES] - FRANCE 2002: IMD5008_2 | | The French 2002 election study refers to the Presidential | elections, held on April 21 (first round) and May 5, 2002 (second | round). Incumbent Prime Minister Lionel Jospin contested as | Presidential candidate for the Socialist Party (PS). After Jospin | missed the second round, he resigned from politics. | Jean-Pierre Raffarin became Prime Minister after the 2002 | Presidential election. By that time, Raffarin was still a member | of Liberal Democracy, a party that officially merged into the | Union for a Popular Movement (UMP) in November 2002. Therefore, | Raffarin is coded as belonging to the UMP for IMD5008_2. | [ELECTION STUDY NOTES] - FRANCE 2007: IMD5008_2 | | In CSES Module 3, the Prime Minister before and after the | French 2007 legislative election is coded as being a member of | the Greens (V). | However, both Dominique de Villepin, who resigned as Prime | Minister on May 15, 2007, and Francois Fillon, his successor, | were members of the Union for a Popular Movement (UMP). Hence, | both IMD5008_ variables have been recoded to "2500001. Union for | a Popular Movement (UMP)" for France 2007. | [ELECTION STUDY NOTES] - POLAND 2007: IMD5008_2 | | In CSES Module 3, the Prime Minister before the 2007 Polish | parliamentary election is coded as being a member of Civic | Plattform (PO). | However, the outgoing Prime Minister was Jaroslaw Kaczynski, | a member of Law and Justice (PiS). Hence, IMD5008_1 was recoded | to "6160002. Law and Justice (PiS)" for Poland 2007. | Donald Tusk, who became Prime Minister after the 2007 election, | was a member of Civic Plattform (PO). Hence, IMD5008_2 was | recoded to "6160001. Civic Platform (PO)" for Poland 2007, as | the coding of IMD5008_2 in Module 3 refers to the Polish | Peasant Party. | [ELECTION STUDY NOTES] - SLOVENIA 2008: IMD5008_2 | | In CSES Module 3, the Prime Minister before the 2008 Slovenian | parliamentary election is coded as being a member of Liberal | Democracy of Slovenia (LDS). | However, the outgoing Prime Minister was Janez Jansa, a member of | Slovenian Democratic Party (SDS). Hence, IMD5008_1 was recoded | to "7050001. Social Democratic Party (SDS)" for Slovenia 2008. | Borut Pahor, who became Prime Minister after the 2008 election, | was a member of the Social Democrats (SD). Hence, IMD5008_2 was | recoded to "7050002. Social Democrats (SD)", as the coding of | IMD5008_2 in Module 3 also refers to the LDS. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- IMD5009_1 >>> PARTY OF THE PRESIDENT BEFORE --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Party of the president before the election, regardless of whether the election was presidential. .................................................................. 0000001-9000000. [SEE CODEBOOK PART 3 FOR PARTY /COALITION HARMONIZED NUMERICAL CODES] 9999989. INDEPENDENT CANDIDATE 9999997. NOT APPLICABLE 9999999. MISSING | VARIABLE NOTES: IMD5009_1 | | Parties numerical classifications are detailed in Part 3 of the | CSES IMD Codebook. | | Sources of data: | - CSES Macro Reports | - Other publicly available data | | Data on IMD5009_1 were originally not included in MODULE 1 and | MODULE 2, but were now collected for these election studies for | the CSES IMD. | | The corresponding variables for IMD5009_1 in the Standalone | CSES Modules are: | MODULE 1: Not included (See above) | MODULE 2: Not included (See above) | MODULE 3: C5007 | MODULE 4: D5007 | | For more detailed information concerning individual election | studies, please consult ELECTION STUDY NOTES, available in the | Codebook Parts 2 of the Standalone CSES Modules. | [POLITY NOTES] - RUSSIA: IMD5009_1 | | Before and after the 1999 Russian parliamentary election, Boris | Yeltsin (independent) was President of Russia. | However, Yeltsin resigned from office on December 31, 1999, | resulting in early Presidential elections on March 26, 2000. | Incumbent Prime Minister Vladimir Putin became acting President | and won the 2000 and 2004 Presidential elections as an | independent candidate (IMD Code 6430101). | In his role as Prime Minister, Putin supported and was backed | by Unity, and is therefore coded as being affiliated to Unity | in IMD5008_ (Party of the Prime Minister Before / After). | Also see POLITY NOTES for IMD5008_. | [ELECTION STUDY NOTES] - BULGARIA 2001: IMD5009_1 | | The Bulgarian 2001 election study refers to the parliamentary | elections, held on June 17, 2001. | The Bulgarian President before and after the 2001 parliamentary | election was Petar Stoyanov, a member of the Union of Democratic | Forces (SDS). Therefore, both IMD5009_ variables were coded as | "1000034. Union of Democratic Forces (SDS)". | Bulgarian Presidential elections were held later the same year | in November 2001 and won by Georgi Parvanov, the candidate of | the Bulgarian Socialist Party. | [ELECTION STUDY NOTES] - FRANCE 2002: IMD5009_1 | | The French 2002 election study refers to the Presidential | elections, held on April 21 (first round) and May 5, 2002 (second | round). Incumbent President Jacques Chirac was re-elected as a | member of Rally for the Republic (RPR, IMD numeric party code | 2500008). | However, in preparation for the legislative election, which took | place shortly after on June 9 and 16, 2002, Chirac's supporters | created the "Union for the Presidential Majority", to contest | the legislative election jointly with several other center-right | parties. This alliance formally turned into the Union for a | Popular Movement (UMP) later the same year. Therefore, for | IMD5009_2, Chirac is coded as being a UMP member (IMD numeric | party code 2500001). | [ELECTION STUDY NOTES] - FRANCE 2007: IMD5009_1 | | In CSES Module 3, the President before and after the French 2007 | legislative election is coded as being a member of the | Greens (V). | However, both former President Jacques Chirac, and newly elected | President Nicolas Sarkozy were members of the Union for a Popular | Movement (UMP). Hence, both IMD5009_ variables have been recoded | to "2500001. Union for a Popular Movement (UMP)" for France 2007. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- IMD5009_2 >>> PARTY OF THE PRESIDENT AFTER --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Party of the president AFTER the election, regardless of whether the election was presidential. .................................................................. 0000001-9000000. [SEE CODEBOOK PART 3 FOR PARTY /COALITION HARMONIZED NUMERICAL CODES] 9999989. INDEPENDENT CANDIDATE 9999997. NOT APPLICABLE 9999999. MISSING | VARIABLE NOTES: IMD5009_2 | | Parties numerical classifications are detailed in Part 3 of the | CSES IMD Codebook. | | Sources of data: | - CSES Macro Reports | - Other publicly available data | | Data on IMD5009_2 were originally not included in MODULE 1 and | MODULE 2, but were now collected for these election studies for | the CSES IMD. | | The corresponding variables for IMD5009_2 in the Standalone | CSES Modules are: | MODULE 1: Not included (See above) | MODULE 2: Not included (See above) | MODULE 3: C5011 | MODULE 4: D5011 | | For more detailed information concerning individual election | studies, please consult ELECTION STUDY NOTES, available in the | Codebook Parts 2 of the Standalone CSES Modules. | [POLITY NOTES] - RUSSIA: IMD5009_2 | | Before and after the 1999 Russian parliamentary election, Boris | Yeltsin (independent) was President of Russia. | However, Yeltsin resigned from office on December 31, 1999, | resulting in early Presidential elections on March 26, 2000. | Incumbent Prime Minister Vladimir Putin became acting President | and won the 2000 and 2004 Presidential elections as an | independent candidate (IMD Code 6430101). | In his role as Prime Minister, Putin supported and was backed | by Unity, and is therefore coded as being affiliated to Unity | in IMD5008_ (Party of the Prime Minister Before / After). | Also see POLITY NOTES for IMD5008_. | [ELECTION STUDY NOTES] - BULGARIA 2001: IMD5009_2 | | The Bulgarian 2001 election study refers to the parliamentary | elections, held on June 17, 2001. | The Bulgarian President before and after the 2001 parliamentary | election was Petar Stoyanov, a member of the Union of Democratic | Forces (SDS). Therefore, both IMD5009_ variables were coded as | "1000034. Union of Democratic Forces (SDS)". | Bulgarian Presidential elections were held later the same year | in November 2001 and won by Georgi Parvanov, the candidate of | the Bulgarian Socialist Party. | [ELECTION STUDY NOTES] - FRANCE 2002: IMD5009_2 | | The French 2002 election study refers to the Presidential | elections, held on April 21 (first round) and May 5, 2002 (second | round). Incumbent President Jacques Chirac was re-elected as a | member of Rally for the Republic (RPR, IMD numeric party code | 2500008). | However, in preparation for the legislative election, which took | place shortly after on June 9 and 16, 2002, Chirac's supporters | created the "Union for the Presidential Majority", to contest | the legislative election jointly with several other center-right | parties. This alliance formally turned into the Union for a | Popular Movement (UMP) later the same year. Therefore, for | IMD5009_2, Chirac is coded as being a UMP member (IMD numeric | party code 2500001). | [ELECTION STUDY NOTES] - FRANCE 2007: IMD5009_2 | | In CSES Module 3, the President before and after the French 2007 | legislative election is coded as being a member of the | Greens (V). | However, both former President Jacques Chirac, and newly elected | President Nicolas Sarkozy were members of the Union for a Popular | Movement (UMP). Hence, both IMD5009_ variables have been recoded | to "2500001. Union for a Popular Movement (UMP)" for France 2007. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- IMD5011_A >>> IDEOLOGICAL FAMILY - PARTY A IMD5011_B >>> IDEOLOGICAL FAMILY - PARTY B IMD5011_C >>> IDEOLOGICAL FAMILY - PARTY C IMD5011_D >>> IDEOLOGICAL FAMILY - PARTY D IMD5011_E >>> IDEOLOGICAL FAMILY - PARTY E IMD5011_F >>> IDEOLOGICAL FAMILY - PARTY F IMD5011_G >>> IDEOLOGICAL FAMILY - PARTY G IMD5011_H >>> IDEOLOGICAL FAMILY - PARTY H IMD5011_I >>> IDEOLOGICAL FAMILY - PARTY I --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Ideological Family Party is Closest to: .................................................................. 01. ECOLOGY PARTIES 02. COMMUNIST PARTIES 03. SOCIALIST PARTIES 04. SOCIAL DEMOCRATIC PARTIES 05. LEFT LIBERAL PARTIES 06. LIBERAL PARTIES 07. RIGHT LIBERAL PARTIES 08. CHRISTIAN DEMOCRATIC PARTIES 09. CONSERVATIVE PARTIES 10. NATIONAL PARTIES 11. AGRARIAN PARTIES 12. ETHNIC PARTIES 13. REGIONAL PARTIES 14. INDEPENDENT PARTIES 16. RELIGIOUS PARTIES* - SEE VARIABLE NOTES 17. SINGLE ISSUE PARTIES** - SEE VARIABLE NOTES 18. SOCIAL-LIBERAL** - SEE VARIABLE NOTES 19. EXTREME LEFT** - SEE VARIABLE NOTES 20. MONARCHIST** - SEE VARIABLE NOTES 21. EXTREME NATIONALIST** - SEE VARIABLE NOTES 22. NATIONALIST LEFT** - SEE VARIABLE NOTES 23. EXTREME RIGHT** - SEE VARIABLE NOTES 24. CENTRIST** - SEE VARIABLE NOTES 25. COMMUNIST-GREEN** - SEE VARIABLE NOTES 26. ORTHODOX-CALVINIST** - SEE VARIABLE NOTES 90. OTHER 97. NOT APPLICABLE 98. NO IDEOLOGICAL FAMILY MENTIONED 99. MISSING | VARIABLE NOTES: IMD5011_ | | Parties/coalitions numerical classifications are detailed in | Part 3 of the CSES IMD Codebook. Alphabetical party and leader | codes are identified in Part 4 of the CSES IMD Codebook. | For linking alphabetical to numerical party codes, please see | VARIABLE NOTES on IMD5000_. | For more detailed information on how CSES IMD codes parties/ | coalitions and leaders, please see Parts 3 and 4 of the | CSES IMD Codebook. | | This variable represents the expert judgment of the national | collaborators as to which ideological family each party belongs | to. Often collaborators provide two characterizations for a | party. These multiple characterizations, together with details | of what characterization is coded in the dataset, are detailed | in the ELECTION STUDY NOTES, available in the Codebook Parts 2 | of the Standalone CSES Modules. | | Collaborators at times provide additional information to help | refine the characterization and when applicable these are | detailed in the ELECTION STUDY NOTES, available in the Codebook | Parts 2 of the Standalone CSES Modules. | | The corresponding variables in the Standalone CSES Modules are: | MODULE 1: A5002_A-A5002_I | MODULE 2: B5012_A-B5012_I | MODULE 3: C5016_A-C5016_I | MODULE 4: D5016_A-D5016_I | | Source: CSES Macro Reports. | | * Code "16. RELIGIOUS PARTIES" was only used in CSES Modules 1 | and 2. | | ** Codes "17. SINGLE ISSUE PARTIES" to "26. ORTHODOX-CALVINIST" | were only used in CSES Module 2. | | Users are advised that the same party might have been coded as | belonging to different party families across different elections. | These differences may reflect actual changes in parties' | ideological positions across time. | Alternatively, they might reflect disagreement on different | experts on which ideological family the respective party | belongs to, whenever national collaborators changed between | election studies. | | The following table lists all parties whose assigned ideological | families differ across election studies: | | +++ TABLE: PARTIES FOR WHICH IMD5011_ (IDEOLOGICAL FAMILY CODES) | DIFFER ACROSS ELECTION STUDIES | | CSES IMD NUMERICAL CODE AND IMD5011_ BY CSES MODULE | PARTY/COALITION NAME M1 M2 M3 M4 |----------------------------------------------------------------- | AUSTRALIA: | 0360001. Liberal Party (LP) 7 7 9 9 | 0360002. National Party of | Australia (NPA) 13 13 11 10 | | AUSTRIA: | 0400002. Austrian People's | Party (OVP) - - 9 8 | | BELGIUM: | 0560002. Socialist Party | (Francophone) (SP) 4 3 - - | 0560004. Flemish Liberals and | Democrats (VLD) 7 6 - - | 0560005. Socialist Party Differently | (SP.A) 4 3 - - | 0560012. Flemish Block (VB) 13 23 - - | | BRAZIL: | 0760001. Workers Party (PT) - 3 3/4 4 | 0760003. Party of the Brazilian | Democratic Movement (PMDB) - 9 6/6 6 | 0760010. Brazilian Labor Party (PTB) - 24 6/9 - | 0760011. Labor Democratic Party (PDT) - 3 4/4 - | | BULGARIA: | 1000003. Movement for Rights and | Freedoms (DPS) - 6 - 12 | | BELARUS: | 1120004. Agrarian Party 11 - 4 - | 1120005. United Civil Party 99 - 7 - | 1120009. Belarusian Social- | Democratic (Assembly) 99 - 4 - | 1120017. Christian Conservative | Party (BPF) 99 - 8 - | | CANADA: | 1240004. Bloc Quebecois (BQ) 13 10 13 13/13 | | TAIWAN: | 1580001. Democratic Progressive | Party (DPP) 5 5/5 5 99 | 1580002. Kuomintang of China (KMT) 7 7/7 7 99 | 1580003. People First Party (PFP) - 7/7 - 99 | 1580004. New Party (NP) 10 99/98 - - | 1580006. Taiwan Solidarity Union | (TSU) - 99/5 - - | | CZECH REPUBLIC: | 2030001. Czech Social Democratic | Party (CSSD) 4 4 4/4 3 | 2030005. Green Party (SZ) - - 1/99 1 | 2080005. United List - Red-Greens | (En - O) - 1 15 - | | DENMARK: | 2080006. Danish Social Liberal | Party (RV) - 6 5 - | 2080011. Centre Democrats (CD) 5 99 - - | | FINLAND: | 2460001. Center Party (KESK) - 6 11/11 11 | 2460004. True Finns (PS) - - 11/10 10 | 2460006. Left Alliance (VAS) - 3 3/3 5 | 2460007. Christian Democrats (KD) - 8 8/8 9 | | FRANCE: | 2500003. Democratic Movement (MoDem) - 7 8 15 | | GERMANY: | 2760006. Free Democratic Party (FDP) 7 6/6 6/6 6 | 2760009. National Democratic Party | of Germany (NPD) - - 99/10 - | | GREECE: | 3000001. Pan-Hellenic Socialist | Movement (PASOK) - - 3 4/4 | 3000003. Coalition of the Radical | Left (SYRIZA) - - 5 2/5 | 3000007. The Independent Greeks | (ANEL) - - - 9/10 | | HONG KONG: | 3440001. Dem. Alliance for Betterment | of Hong Kong (DAB) 3/3 3 4 4 | 3440005. Hong Kong Federation of | Trade Unions (HKFTU) - 3 4 3 | 3440019. Frontier 15/15 - 6 - | 3440032. Citizen's Party 15/97 - - - | | HUNGARY: | 3480002. Fidesz-Hungarian Civic | Party (Fidesz - MPP) 8 9 - - | 3480007. Hungarian Democratic Forum | (MDF) 99 8 - - | | ICELAND: | 3520005. Left-Green Movement (VG) 1 1 3/3 3 | | IRELAND: | 3720001. Fianna Fail (FF) - 8 9 9 | 3720004. Sinn Fein (SF) - 22 10 10 | 3720006. Progressive Democrats (PD) - 7 6 - | | ISRAEL: | 3760001. Likud - The Consolidation (L) 10 7 7 - | 3760003. Sfarad's Keepers of the Torah | (Shas) 14 16 15 15 | 3760004. Energy (Meretz) 5 3 - 5 | | JAPAN: | 3920003. New Komeito (NK) - 16 15 15 | | LATVIA: | 4280001. Harmony Center (SC) - - 4 12/12 | 4280003. National Union All for Latvia | For Fatherland and Freedom | (LNNK) - - 10 10/9 | 4280005. Union of Greens and Farmers | (ZZS) - - 1 11/11 | | MEXICO: | 4840001. Institutional | Revolutionary Party (PRI) 10/10 4 4/4 4/4 | 4840002. National Action Party (PAN) 7/- 7 7/8 8/8 | 4840004. Labor Party (PT) 4/4 4 1/3 4/3 | | NETHERLANDS: | 5280003. People's Party for Freedom | and Democracy (VVD) 6 7 7/7 - | 5280004. Democrats 66 (D66) 6 5 5/5 - | 5280007. Reformed Political Party | (SGP) - 26 9/15 - | 5280008. Christian Union (CU) - 26 15/15 - | | NEW ZEALAND: | 5540003. New Zealand First (NZF) 10 10 15 15/15 | 5540006. United Future New Zealand | (UFNZ) - 8 15 6/6 | 5540009. Alliance (ALL) 4 2 - - | 5540012. Jim Anderton's Progressive | Party (PP) - 5 4 - | | PERU: | 6040008. Possible Peru 16/14 - 14 6 | 6040026. Peruvian Aprista Party | (PAP) 14/4 4 15 - | 6040052. National Unity (UN) -/99 8 - - | | PHILIPPINES: | 6080143. Rise Up Philippines (BP) - 10 15 - | | POLAND: | 6160001. Civic Platform (PO) - 7 6/6 7 | 6160002. Law and Justice (PiS) - 9 10/10 10 | | PORTUGAL: | 6200004. Unitarian Democratic | Coalition (CDU) 99 25 15 1 | 6200006. Left Block (BE) 99 19 5 5 | | ROMANIA: | 6420004. Greater Romania Party (PRM) 99 22 15 10/15 | 6420005. National Liberal Party (PNL) 99 7 6 6/- | | RUSSIA: | 6430002. Communist Party of the | Russian Federation (KPRF) 2/97 2 - - | 6430004. Yabloko (RDPY) 6/97 6 - - | 6430008. Fatherland All Russia | (OBP) 10/97 - - - | 6430043. Union of Right Forces (SPS) 7/97 6 - - | 6430051. Unity Inter-Regional | Movement 15/97 - - - | | SLOVAKIA: | 7030008. Bridge (MH) - - 12 13 | | SLOVENIA: | 7050001. Social Democratic Party | (SDS) 4 9 4 9 | 7050003. Democratic Party of | Pensioners (DeSUS) 15 17 15 15 | | SOUTH AFRICA: | 7100002. Democratic Alliance (DA) - - 7 6 | 7100006. United Democratic Movement | (UDM) - - 12 13 | 7100008. Congress of the People | (COPE) - - 15 4 | | SPAIN: | 7240008. Galician Nationalist Bloc | (BNG) - 99 13 - | 7240013. Canary Coalition (CC) 13/- 99 - - | | SWEDEN: | 7520002. Moderate Party (M) 8 9 9 9 | 7520006. Centre Party (C) 11 11 12 11 | 7520008. Sweden Democrats (SD) - - 99 10 | 7520009. Feminist Party (Fi) - - 99 15 | | SWITZERLAND: | 7560001. Swiss People's Party | (SVP/UDC) 7 10 10 10 | 7560002. Social Democratic Party | (SP/PS) 4 4 3 4 | 7560006. Evangelical People's Party | (EVP/PEP) - - 15 1 | 7560008. Ticino League (Lega) - - 13 9 | 7560014. Liberal Party (LPS/PLS) 7 - 6 - | | THAILAND: | 7640002. Democrat Party (DP) 15 - 99 98 | 7640021. Thai Nation Party (CTP) 15 - 99 - | | TURKEY: | 7920004. Peoples' Democratic Party | (HDP) - - 99 12 | 7920005. Felicity Party (SP) - - 15 9 | | GREAT BRITAIN: | 8260003. Liberal Democrats (LD) 6 5 - 6 | 8260004. Scottish National Party | (SNP) 13 13 - 10 | 8260006. Plaid Cymru (PC) 13 13 - 10 | | UNITED STATES: | 8400001. Republican Party (GOP) 7 7 7 9 | 8400004. Reform Party (REF) 14 99 - - --------------------------------------------------------------------------- IMD5012_A >>> LEFT-RIGHT - PARTY A IMD5012_B >>> LEFT-RIGHT - PARTY B IMD5012_C >>> LEFT-RIGHT - PARTY C IMD5012_D >>> LEFT-RIGHT - PARTY D IMD5012_E >>> LEFT-RIGHT - PARTY E IMD5012_F >>> LEFT-RIGHT - PARTY F IMD5012_G >>> LEFT-RIGHT - PARTY G IMD5012_H >>> LEFT-RIGHT - PARTY H IMD5012_I >>> LEFT-RIGHT - PARTY I --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Parties' positions on the left-right scale (in the expert judgment of the CSES Collaborator): .................................................................. 00. LEFT 01. 02. 03. 04. 05. 06. 07. 08. 09. 10. RIGHT 97. NOT APPLICABLE 99. MISSING | VARIABLE NOTES: IMD5012_ | | For linking alphabetical to numerical party codes, please see | VARIABLE NOTES on IMD5000_. | For more detailed information on how CSES codes parties/ | coalitions and leaders, please see Part 4 of the CSES IMD | Codebook. | | This variable represents the expert judgment of the national | collaborators as to where parties are located on the left-right | ideological scale. Sometimes parties ideological differences in | certain polities on the left-right scale are difficult to | detect, perhaps because party competition is not structured on | the left-right dimension. These instances are detailed in | ELECTION STUDY NOTES, available in Codebook Parts 2 of the | respective CSES MODULES. Moreover, Standalone CSES Modules | include variables covering an alternative expert judgment scale | based on national collaborators ratings of parties on a scale of | their choice which is related to relevant national political | circumstances. These alternative scale ratings were not | harmonized for the IMD, but are available in the separate | MODULES 2 to 4. | | Source for this variable: CSES Macro Reports. | | The corresponding variables in the Standalone CSES Modules are: | MODULE 1: A5004_A-A5004_F | MODULE 2: B5018_A-B5018_I | MODULE 3: C5017_A-C5017_I | MODULE 4: D5017_A-D5017_I | | Data are unavailable for BELGIUM-WALLONIA (1999), KYRGYZSTAN | (2005), NORWAY (1997), PERU (2001), PHILIPPINES (2004), SPAIN | (2000), TAIWAN (2012), and THAILAND (2001). | [ELECTION STUDY NOTES] - UNITED STATES (2012): IMD5012_ | | The alphabetical codes assigned to parties G, H, and I for the | UNITED STATES 2012 do not match the letter in this variable. | Data for PARTY G (Libertarian Party, LP) is coded in IMD5012_C, | data for PARTY H (Green Party, GPUS) is coded in IMD5012_D, and | data for PARTY I (Constitution Party, Con) is coded in | IMD5012_E. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- IMD5013 >>> ELECTORAL FORMULA IN ALL SEGMENTS: LOWER HOUSE --------------------------------------------------------------------------- The precise electoral formula used in the first or lowest electoral segment (tier) of the lower house. .................................................................. 10. PLURALITY 11. PLURALITY - SINGLE MEMBER DISTRICTS 12. PLURALITY - MULTI MEMBER DISTRICTS 20. MAJORITY 21. MAJORITY - RUN-OFF 22. MAJORITY - ALTERNATIVE 30. PROPORTIONAL REPRESENTATION 31. PR - D'HONDT 32. PR - LARGEST REMAINDER - DROOP 33. PR - LARGEST REMAINDER - HARE 34. PR - MODIFIED STE-LAGUE 98. OTHER [SEE ELECTION STUDY NOTES] 99. MISSING | VARIABLE NOTES: IMD5013 | | Sources: CSES Macro Reports and Publicly Available Sources. | | For more detailed information concerning individual election | studies, please consult ELECTION STUDY NOTES, available in the | Codebook Parts 2 of the Standalone CSES Modules. | | Data on IMD5013 were originally not included in MODULE 1 and | MODULE 2, but were now collected for these election studies for | the CSES IMD. | | The corresponding variables in the Standalone CSES Modules are: | MODULE 1: Not included (See above) | MODULE 2: Not included (See above) | MODULE 3: C5058 | MODULE 4: D5058 --------------------------------------------------------------------------- IMD5014 >>> ELECTORAL FORMULA: PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION --------------------------------------------------------------------------- This variable indicates what electoral formula was used to elect the president. The variable is coded in all cases where presidents are elected by the electorate. In cases where presidents are elected by the national parliament, the variable is coded as "not applicable." Furthermore, IMD5014 is a system variable, meaning that it is also coded for a country even though a presidential may not have taken place (e.g., Mexico 2003). The definition of this variable is taken from Matt Golder's database about Democratic Electoral Systems Around the World, 1946-2000 (http://mattgolder.com/elections, Date accessed: May 17, 2018). PLURALITY - the candidate that obtains the most votes wins. ABSOLUTE MAJORITY RULE - A candidate must win over 50% of the vote to win. If no candidate wins this many votes, then there is a runoff between the top two candidates. QUALIFIED MAJORITY RULE - Each qualified majority system specifies a particular percentage of the vote that a candidate must win in order to be elected in the first round. If two or more candidates overcome these thresholds, then the one with the highest number of votes wins. The qualified majority systems vary in terms of the electoral procedure that applies when these thresholds are not met. ELECTORAL COLLEGE - The candidate that wins a plurality of the electoral college votes wins. SINGLE TRANSFERABLE VOTE - Requires voters to rank single candidates in order of the most to least preferred. Votes are transferred until candidates obtain the Droop quota. The candidate that obtains this quota first is elected. .................................................................. 1. PLURALITY 2. ABSOLUTE MAJORITY RULE 3. QUALIFIED MAJORITY RULE 4. ELECTORAL COLLEGE 5. SINGLE TRANSFERABLE VOTE 7. NOT APPLICABLE 9. MISSING | VARIABLE NOTES: IMD5014 | | Source: Publicly Available Sources. | | Data on IMD5014 were originally not included in MODULE 1 and | MODULE 2, but were now collected for these election studies for | the CSES IMD. | | The corresponding variables in the Standalone CSES Modules are: | MODULE 1: Not included (See above) | MODULE 2: Not included (See above) | MODULE 3: C5057 | MODULE 4: D5057 --------------------------------------------------------------------------- IMD5016_1 >>> VOTES CAST - LOWER – 1ST SEGMENT (TIER) IMD5016_2 >>> VOTES CAST - LOWER – 2ND SEGMENT (TIER) IMD5016_3 >>> VOTES CAST - UPPER – 1ST SEGMENT (TIER) IMD5016_4 >>> VOTES CAST - UPPER - 2ND SEGMENT (TIER) --------------------------------------------------------------------------- How many votes do voters cast or can cast? In systems where voters rank order the candidates, if there are 10 candidates (for example), the response to this question should be 10. .................................................................. 01-90. NUMBER OF VOTES 91. OTHER [SEE ELECTION STUDY NOTES] 97. NOT APPLICABLE 99. MISSING | VARIABLE NOTES: IMD5016_ | | For more details on meaning of “91. OTHER” codes, see CSES | Standalone codebooks. | | In instances where the study refers to presidential election, | coding of variables IMD5016_1 and IMD5016_2 refers to the | election at stake (presidential). | | The corresponding variables in the Standalone CSES Modules are: | MODULE 1: A5032_1-A5032_4 | MODULE 2: B5038_1-B5038_4 | MODULE 3: C5038_1-C5038_4 | MODULE 4: D5038_1-D5038_4 | POLITY NOTES - AUSTRALIA: IMD5016_ | | For lower house elections, Australia employs the Alternative | Vote system. In this system, voters are required | to list their preferences for as many candidates | as there are on the ballot. Thus, the total number of votes | varies across electoral districts. | | For upper house elections, Australia employs a single- | transferable-vote form of proportional representation. In this | system each voter indicates the order of preference among all | the candidates in competing in her district, or alternatively, | she can indicate support for a party ticket (which determines | the order of preference of candidates within the party). | [POLITY NOTES] - BELGIUM: IMD5016_3 - IMD5016_4 | | Previously, the process of electing Senators in Belgium was a | mixture, some were indirectly elected, and 40 Senators were | directly elected (25 in Flanders, 15 in Wallonia). For these | elections voters used to cast one vote (one-tier system). That | is why all three Belgium studies have been coded "97. Not | applicable" for the variable IMD5016_4 in CSES IMD. | The law changed in 2014 and Senators in Belgium are not directly | elected anymore. | [POLITY NOTES] - BRAZIL: IMD5016_3 | | Members of the Brazilian Senate (Senado Federal) are elected | for an 8-year term and the chamber is composed of 81 members, | with each state in Brazil having three Senators each. | Members are elected in alternative electoral cycles: two thirds | of the Senate seats (n=54) are contested in one election cycle | while the remaining one third are contested in the other. | In 2002 and 2010, two-thirds of the Senate were renewed, giving | voters two votes in these upper house elections. | The 2006 and 2014 elections saw a third of the Senate seats | contested (n=27). Accordingly, voters therefore had one vote in | these elections as only one Senator per State was being | selected. | [POLITY NOTES] - CZECH REPUBLIC: IMD5016_3 | | Czech Republic (1996, 2002) studies have been coded "97. Not | applicable" because these studies do not refer to Upper House | elections. | [ELECTION STUDY NOTES] - FRANCE (2002): IMD5016_3 | | France (2002) has been coded “97. NOT APPLICABLE” for variable | IMD5016_3 because members of Senate (French Upper House) are | indirectly elected. | [ELECTION STUDY NOTES] - GERMANY (1998): IMD5016_3 | | GERMANY (1998) has been coded “97. NOT APPLICABLE” for variable | IMD5016_3 because members of Bundesrat (German Upper House) are | indirectly elected. | [POLITY NOTES] - HONG KONG: IMD5016_ | | Hong Kong adopted a constitutional reform package in 2010, which | also affected the election law. Reforms increased the size of | the unicameral Legislative Council of the HKSAR to 70 members. | Half of the legislative council is returned by geographic | constituency (popular) elections; the other half is returned by | functional constituency elections. | Election data on Hong Kong electoral institutions refer to the | geographical constituency elections only. | In the Geographical Constituency (GC) part of the Election, Hong | Kong is divided into 5 constituencies and voters elect | candidates by universal suffrage. The number of LegCo seats in | each constituency is decided according to the constituency | population. The voting system adopted is the closed list | proportional representation system. Geographical Constituency is | treated here as the first segment of the LegCo. | There are two parts of the Functional Constituencies (FCs): the | traditional FCs and the District Council (Second) FC. | The traditional FCs return 30 LegCo members. Registration as a | voter in some traditional Fcs requires certain qualifications, | for example, registered medical practitioners or dentists for | the Medical FC. Note that in some FCs, voters are individuals, | while in others, 'voters' are not individuals but companies or | organizations. | The District Council (Second) FC was created in 2012 and is | treated here as the second segment of the LegCo. This segment | returns 5 LegCo members. In this part of election, the whole of | Hong Kong has one constituency only and the voting system adopted | is the closed-list proportional representation system. Candidates | must be elected District Council members who are nominated by no | less than 15 other elected District Council members; whereas | voters are registered GC electors who are not registered in | other FCs. | [POLITY NOTES] - MEXICO: IMD5016_1 - IMD5016_2 | | Mexican voters cast a single vote in a single-member district | plurality election. However, this also counts for the allocation | of the proportional representation seats disputed in the larger | regional multi-member districts (five circumscriptions). Thus, | voters are not allowed to split their vote, in fact, the same | vote is subject to a double-counting that produces two-seat | relevant vote totals. The first vote total determines who wins | the plurality in the single-member district (300 seats). The | second serves to allocate seats in the multi-member districts | (200 seats). The PR seats are allocated according to the | aggregate distribution of votes of multi-member districts. | For a party to be entitled to have members of proportional | representation in the Lower Chamber, it must attain at | least 2% of the total votes cast for these elections. | | Since voters in Mexico cast a single vote, all Mexican studies | have been coded "97. Not applicable" for variable IMD5016_2. | This is a change in IMD compared with CSES Standalone Module. | The change applies to Mexico 1997 and 2000 studies. | [POLITY NOTES] - NETHERLANDS: IMD5016_3 - IMD5016_4 | | Members of the Senate (Eerste Kamer) of the Dutch Parliament | (the States General) are elected indirectly - by the members | of the twelve Provincial Councils. Thus, coding for Netherlands | 1998 and 2002 studies is set to "97, Not applicable" which is | not the case in Standalone Modules. | [POLITY NOTES] - NORWAY: IMD5016_ | | The Norwegian Parliament comprises 169 seats in two tiers: | 150 members are elected in 19 multi-member districts using | proportional representation. The remaining 19 seats are | compensatory and are allocated to parties that receive 4%+ of | the national vote. These seats are known as "members at large" | and are seen as a means of evening out discrepancies between | the number of votes received and the number of seats in the | Storting. The distribution is based on a comparison of the | actual distribution of seats with what would have occurred | had the country been treated as one big constituency, thus | allowing a determination to be made as to which parties are | under-represented. These parties are then awarded "seats at | large" in the constituencies where they were closest to winning | an ordinary seat. While voters do not cast a ballot directly for | this tier and the seats are awarded at the national level | (albeit dispersed at the constituency level), it is widely | acknowledged to constitute a separate tier of the electoral | system. | | For more information see: | https://www.stortinget.no/en/In-English/About-the-Storting/ | Elections/ | (Date accessed: July 22, 2019). | [POLITY NOTES] - PHILIPPINES: IMD5016_3 | | The Philippines Senate (Senado) has 24 members, serving six- | years terms. Concurrently with presidential elections, half | of the Senate (12 members) is renewed every three years, in a | single nation-wide constituency. Senators are elected | according to the simple majority, and each voter can cast | up to 12 votes. Hence, vote percentages and national totals | are not meaningful figures. | [POLITY NOTES] - POLAND: IMD5016_2 | | Constitution reform in 1997 and the changed divisions of 1999 | required reform of the electoral system. System changed before | the 2001 elections seeing the final liquidation of the party list | system where some MPs were elected based on nationwide support | and some based on the support from local constituencies. This | changed in the mentioned reform, and Polish citizens, in the | subsequent Parliamentary elections covered by CSES (2001-2011) | casted a single vote. | [POLITY NOTES] - POLAND: IMD5016_3 | | In Senate election voters have as many votes as there are | candidates to be elected in a district (between 1 and 4). | Thus, all Poland studies have been coded "91. OTHER [SEE | ELECTION STUDY NOTES]" for the variable IMD5016_3. Coding has | changed for the following Polish studies: 1997, 2005, 2007 and | 2011. | [POLITY NOTES] - SLOVENIA: IMD5016_2 | | Voters in Slovenia cast a single vote in open list proportional | system, a one-tier system. Since there has not been a rule | change in between elections covered by CSES, Slovenia 1996 and | 2004 studies are coded "97. Not applicable" for the CSES IMD. | [POLITY NOTES] - SPAIN: IMD5016_3 | | The Senate contains 208 directly elected seats and 56 | indirectly elected seats. This section refers to the directly | elected section. There are 52 multi-member constituencies | corresponding to the country's provinces, plus Ceuta and Melilla | The provinces elect 4 Senators each. In the case of insular | provinces, major islands elect 3 Senators each while small | islands elect 1 Senator each. The autonomous cities of Ceuta | and Melilla elect 2 Senators each. | Thus, Spain (1996, 2004 and 2004) studies have been recoded to | 3 for the variable IMD5016_3. | [ELECTION STUDY NOTES] - TAIWAN (1996): IMD5016_ | | In 1996, Taiwan held Presidential elections. Coding for variables | IMD5016_2 - IMD5016_4 for Taiwan (1996) study in CSES Module 1 | refers to the system, and not the election in question. For the | IMD these codes have been changed into "97. Not applicable." | | After 2004, Taiwan underwent electoral reform, and 2008 | elections were the first in Taiwan held under a mixed-member | system based on a two-ballot design incorporating single-member | districts and party-list seats. | [POLITY NOTES] - THAILAND: IMD5016_ | | Under the 2007 Constitution, a new electoral system was adopted, | reintroducing a modified version of a previous form of electoral | system (the one preceding the 1997 constitution). There are 400 | single-seat districts were combined into larger | districts: 4 single-seat, 63 with 2 seats, and 90 with 3 seats. | These constituencies use the Block Vote (BV) system which allows | voters to cast as many ballots as there are seats in a district. | Voters are not permitted to cast all their votes for a single | candidate but can split their votes between candidates nominated | by different parties, for a total of 400 seats. Parallel to this | tier, 80 seats are distributed according to PR list, in 8 | regional constituencies of roughly equivalent proportions, | without a threshold. Each party submits a list with 10 | candidates who are listed once, and who can also contest | constituency seats. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- IMD5017_1 >>> VOTING PROCEDURE - LOWER – 1ST SEGMENT (TIER) IMD5017_2 >>> VOTING PROCEDURE - LOWER – 2ND SEGMENT (TIER) IMD5017_3 >>> VOTING PROCEDURE - UPPER – 1ST SEGMENT (TIER) IMD5017_4 >>> VOTING PROCEDURE - UPPER – 2ND SEGMENT (TIER) --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Do they vote for candidates (not party lists) or party lists? Definition: Party bloc voting is used in multi-member districts where voters cast a single party-centered vote for their party of choice; the party with the most votes wins all of the district seats. .................................................................. 1. CANDIDATES 2. PARTY LISTS 3. PARTY BLOC VOTING 4. OTHER [SEE ELECTION STUDY NOTES] 7. NOT APPLICABLE 9. MISSING | VARIABLE NOTES: IMD5017_ | | The coding classification differs for MODULES 1 and 2, compared | to MODULES 3 and 4. Data for the variable IMD5017_ was | harmonized, utilizing the codes from CSES MODULES 3 and 4. | In what follows, we list how the original categories employed in | the Standalone CSES MODULES were coded in CSES IMD. | | +++ TABLE: MAPPING OF VOTING PROCEDURE CODES IN CSES | MODULES 1 AND 2 TO VOTING PROCEDURE CODES IN | CSES IMD | | IMD CODE CSES MODULE 1-2 CLASSIFICATION (CSES MODULE 1-2 CODE) |----------------------------------------------------------------- | 1. Single candidate | Single candidate, with alternatives | 2. Closed party list | Preferential or Open party list | 5. Other | 7. Not applicable | 9. Missing |----------------------------------------------------------------- | | For more details on the meaning of “4. OTHER” codes, see CSES | Standalone codebooks. | | The corresponding variables in the Standalone CSES Modules are: | MODULE 1: A5033_1-A5033_4 | MODULE 2: B5039_1-B5039_4 | MODULE 3: C5039_1-C5039_4 | MODULE 4: D5039_1-D5039_4 | [POLITY NOTES] - BELGIUM: IMD5017_4 | | Senators from the second segment are indirectly elected, by two | electoral colleges (French and Dutch). Thus, all Belgium studies | have been coded "7. Not applicable" for the variable IMD5017_4. | [POLITY NOTES] - BRAZIL: IMD5017_1 | | Each political party presents a list of candidates. Voters can | vote for a candidate or they can vote for a party. Thus, all | studies have been recoded to "4. Other" for the variable | IMD5017_1. | [POLITY NOTES] - CHILE: IMD5017_ | | Each political coalition presents a list of a maximum of two | candidates per electoral district, normally each from a | different party of the coalition. Voters vote for one candidate | of one of the lists. However, parties present lists, and thus | all Chile studies have been coded "2. Party lists" for the | variables IMD5017_1 and IMD5017_3. | [POLITY NOTES] - CZECH REPUBLIC: IMD5017_3 | | None of the Czech Republic studies in CSES Standalone modules | does not deal with the upper house election in the country. | Thus, all Czech studies have been recoded to "7. Not applicable" | for the variable IMD5017_3. | [POLITY NOTES] - DENMARK: IMD5017_1 | | Voters can choose to endorse a party, a candidate on a party | list, or an independent candidate. Parties can choose to have | either an open or a party ranked list of candidates. If the | list is open votes that are cast on the party (the voter has | not given a personal vote) are distributed between the | candidates based on the number of personal votes. If the list | is party ranked a vote cast on the party will be given to the | candidate listed first on the list until he or she has | received enough votes to be elected and so on. Thus, all studies | for Denmark have been recoded to "4. Other" for variable | IMD5017_1. | [POLITY NOTES] - FRANCE: IMD5017_3 | | The Upper House (Senate) of French Parliament constitutes of 348 | members who are indirectly elected by elected officials. Thus, | all French studies have been coded "7. Not applicable" for the | variable IMD5017_3. | [POLITY NOTES] - GERMANY: IMD5017_3 | | The Upper House (Bundesrat) of German Parliament constitutes of | 69 members who are indirectly elected. Thus, all German studies | have been coded "7. Not applicable" for the variable IMD5017_3. | POLITY NOTES - HONG KONG: IMD5017_ | | Hong Kong adopted a constitutional reform package in 2010, which | also affected the election law. Geographical Constituency (GC) | and Functional constituency (FG) constitute two segments, tiers. | In both tiers voters cast a vote for candidates. | Please consult the POLITY NOTE for IMD5016_. | | Prior to the 2010 reform, in geographical constituency elections, | each voter can casted 1 vote for a list that includes the names | of one or more candidates (up to the maximum number of Legco | members returned by that geographical constituency). The same | political party (group) may put up more than one list in a | constituency, and candidates on a list may belong to different | political party (group). | | Due to the above-mentioned change, coding for Hong Kong (2012) | study differs from the earlier Hong Kong studies, for the | variables IMD5017_. | [POLITY NOTES] - MEXICO: IMD5017_2 | | In Mexico, each voters' vote is counted twice; once for the | single-member district contest, and a second time for the | regional PR contest. Accordingly, the voting procedure is coded | as voting for candidates and for a party list for each | respective contest. For that reason, Mexico (2003) has been | recoded to 2 for the variable IMD5017_2. | [POLITY NOTES] - MEXICO: IMD5017_3 and IMD5017_4 | | In Mexico, each voters' vote for choosing senators is counted | twice; once for the 3-seat multi-member districts contest, and a | second time for the national PR contest (see Election Study note | for D5038_3-4 for details). Accordingly, the voting procedure is | coded as voting for candidates and for a party list for each | respective contest. | [POLITY NOTES] - NETHERLANDS: IMD5017_1 | | A vote is always one for a list and for a candidate at the | same time (matrix). A majority of voters cast their vote on | the first candidate on the list. However, not all voters do | that. Thus, all Netherlands studies have been recoded to | "4. Other" for the variable IMD5017_1. | [POLITY NOTES] - NETHERLANDS: IMD5017_3 | | Members of the Senate (Eerste Kamer) of the Dutch Parliament | (the States General) are elected indirectly - by the members | of the twelve Provincial Councils. Thus, all Dutch studies have | been coded "7. Not applicable" for the variable IMD5017_3. | [POLITY NOTES] - NORWAY: IMD5017_2 | | Voters in Norway cast only one single ballot in the election on | the basis of party lists. This vote directly impacts the | selection of the 150 members elected in the 19 multi-member | districts using proportional representation. However, the ballot | also influences the dispersion of the 19 "member at large seats" | (for more see D5038_2). As such, when voters are casting their | ballot for party lists they are also casting a ballot, albeit | indirectly for the allocation of the "member at large seats". | Accordingly, we code this as "2.PARTY LISTS" for all Norway | studies. | [POLITY NOTES] - PERU: IMD5017_1 | | In Peru, voters cast one vote for a party list, but they can | also express optionally a preferential vote for some specific | candidate. They can signal up to two preferred candidates from | the list he has chosen. The preferential votes are taken into | account only to decide the order in which candidates | from a list will fill the seats the party has won in the | election. Thus, Peru (2011) study has been recoded to 2 for | the variable IMD5017_1. | [POLITY NOTES] - POLAND: IMD5017_ | | For the Polish 1997 election, 460 members of Polish Parliament | (Sejm) were elected in a two-tier system: 391 members from | party lists who passed a threshold of 5% of the total vote | (8% for registered coalitions). The remaining 69 seats were | reserved for parties/coalitions which (a) registered their lists | in at least half of the districts by collecting 3,000 valid | signatures in each, (b) submitted a national list of candidates, | and (c) gained at least 7% of the total vote. This constituted a | second tier. | | The new Constitution from 1997, and a change of administrative | divisions adopted in 1999, required a change of the electoral | system. New rules were implemented for the 2001 elections. | One of the most important changes included final liquidation of | party list, and the liquidation of the second tier. | [POLITY NOTES] - ROMANIA: IMD5017_1 and IMD5017_3 | | Romania (2009 and 2014) studies are about Presidential | elections. Thus, these two studies have been coded "7. Not | applicable" for the variable IMD5017_3. | | The remaining three Romanian studies are concerned with the | Parliamentary election. Romania (1996 and 2004) studies are | coded "2. Party lists" because from 1992 to 2008 Romania used | proportional systems, closed lists, for the Upper house | elections. Romania (2012) study is coded "4. Other" because | from 2008 to 2016 Romania used mixed-member proportional | system - voters had two votes, one for a party, and the other for | candidates. | From 2016 the law changed again, and Romania is now back to | using a proportional system with closed lists. | [POLITY NOTES] - SLOVENIA: IMD5017_2 | | In Slovenia members of Italian and Hungarian indigenous ethnic | communities, under the Constitution, are entitled to 2 deputy | seats, one seat for each community. | For Slovenia (1996 and 2004) studies this was treated as second | segment (tier). However, members of the Italian and Hungarian | community, as other voters in Slovenia, cast one vote, and even | though they are calculated separately, they do not constitute a | separate tier. Thus, all Slovenia studies are recoded to "7. Not | applicable" in CSES IMD for IMD5017_2. | [POLITY NOTES] - SPAIN: IMD5017_3 | | The Upper House (Senate) of Spain Parliament (Cortes Generales), | constitutes of 266 members. Regional legislatures designate | their representatives for the Senate (58 members). The remaining | 208 senators are directly elected. | | For the Upper House election, Spain uses single non-transferable | vote (limited voting), where voters have fewer votes than there | are positions available. Parties present a list of three names, | but voters cast votes for candidates. Each voter may mark up to | three candidates' names, from any party. Even though they are | allowed to give their votes to candidates from different party | lists (panachage) this happens rarely, and the four Senators are | usually the three candidates from the most popular party and the | first placed candidate from the next most popular. | | Thus, all Spain studies have been coded "4. Other" for the | variable IMD5017_3. | [POLITY NOTES] - SWITZERLAND: IMD5017_1 | | Swiss voters can cast their vote in many different ways. Among | others they can a) simply vote for a party list, b) endorse | specific candidates from the party list, c) add candidates from | other parties instead of a candidate of the list (panachage), | d) delete candidates or vote twice for the same candidate | (cumulation). Due to these varieties in options for voters, all | Swiss studies have been coded "4. Other" for the variable | IMD5017_1. | POLITY NOTES - TAIWAN: IMD5017_2 | | The electoral law in 2008 changed rules for legislative | elections to a mixed-member majoritarian (MMM) system, and the | total number of seats has been reduced to 113. Among them, | 73 seats are elected based on the single-member districts (SMD), | 34 seats based on the proportional representation (PR) in a | nationwide district, and 6 seats for the aboriginals. | | Previously, Legislative Yuan had 225 seats; 168 legislators from | the special municipalities, counties, and cities (29 such | primary districts); 4 seats for members of plains Aborigine | tribes and 4 for members of mountain Aborigine tribes, 8 seats | representing the overseas Taiwanese community, and 41 'at-large' | legislators. In case of overseas and 'at large' seats, political | parties are given those seats to fill, based on their percentage | (national) of the vote. Since Taiwanese voters cast only single | nontransferable vote (SNTV) the country is coded as having one | segment, but primary and secondary districts. | | Thus, there is a difference in coding for Taiwan studies before | and after 2008 change of law. Additionally, Taiwan (1996) study, | for the same reason, has been recoded to "7. Not applicable" for | the variable IMD5017_2. | POLITY NOTES - TAIWAN: IMD5017_3-IMD5017_4 | | Constitutional amendments promulgated on April 25, 2000, | established a unicameral legislative system in Taiwan. Thus, | coding for Taiwan (1996) study from Module 1 differs from all | following Taiwan studies. For all the following studies, | starting from 2001 study, variables IMD5017_3 and IMD5017_4 are | coded “7. Not applicable.” --------------------------------------------------------------------------- IMD5018_1 >>> VOTING ROUNDS - LOWER – 1ST SEGMENT (TIER) IMD5018_2 >>> VOTING ROUNDS - LOWER – 2ND SEGMENT (TIER) IMD5018_3 >>> VOTING ROUNDS - UPPER – 1ST SEGMENT (TIER) IMD5018_4 >>> VOTING ROUNDS - UPPER – 2ND SEGMENT (TIER) --------------------------------------------------------------------------- How many rounds of voting are there? .................................................................. 01-90. NUMBER OF ROUNDS 97. NOT APPLICABLE 99. MISSING | VARIABLE NOTES: IMD5018_ | | Data for Modules 1 and 2 have been additionally collected by | CSES Secretariat relying on macro experts, and additional | sources such as Parline, Notes on recent elections published in | Electoral Studies and other journal articles. | | The corresponding variables in the Standalone CSES Modules are: | MODULE 1: Not included (See above) | MODULE 2: Not included (See above) | MODULE 3: C5040_1-C5040_4 | MODULE 4: D5040_1-D5040_4 | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - BELARUS (2008): IMD5018_1 | | The electoral law of 15 March 1994 Constitution (Art. 64 - 72) | stipulates that Belarus has a majority/plurality electoral | systems composed of 2 rounds. | Parline describes that "In the first round, voting is | considered valid if over 50 percent of eligible voters take | part in the polls. Candidates who receive over 50 percent of | votes are declared elected. If none of the candidates obtains 50 | percent of votes, a run-off election between the two leading | candidates is held within two weeks. Run-off elections are | considered valid if more than 25 percent of eligible voters | take part. The candidate securing a simple majority of votes | wins the seat. If the second round of voting is held for only | one candidate, the candidate needs to obtain the support of over | half of the voters taking part in the election.)" | Source: http://www.ipu.org/parline/reports/2027_B.htm | Date accessed: August 5, 2019. | | However in the course of the election of 2008, all 110 deputies | were elected in the first round of voting (more than 50 % | of voters took part, and each from 110 elected candidates | received more than 50 % of votes). Thus, the second round was | not necessary in any electoral district. So the variable | IMD5018_1 is coded “1.” | [POLITY NOTES] - CHILE: IMD5018_3 | | Constitution reform in Chile, in 2005, eliminated all the | appointed seats in Senate, as well as those held by previous | presidents. Later reforms in 2017 made Senate in Chile a | 50-members body, with senators elected for an eight-year term. | Senate elections are held every four years for approximately | half the seats. All the voting for Senators happens in one round. | Thus, all Chile studies have been coded 1 for variable IMD5018_3. | [POLITY NOTES] - HONG KONG: IMD5018_ | | In geographical constituency elections, there is only one round | of voting. Thus, all Hong Kong studies in CSES IMD have been | recoded to 1. | [POLITY NOTES] - NORWAY: IMD5018_ | | Voters in Norway cast only one single ballot in the election on | the basis of party lists. This vote directly impacts the | selection of the 150 members elected in the 19 multi-member | districts using proportional representation. However, the ballot | also influences the dispersion of the 19 "member at large seats" | As such, when voters are casting their ballot for party lists | they are also casting a ballot, albeit indirectly for the | allocation of the "member at large seats". However, since this | is a single ballot (single vote) in the same round, all Norway | studies have been coded 1 for IMD5018_. | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - ROMANIA (1996): IMD5018_ | | The Romanian (1996) study concerns the Parliamentary election. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- IMD5021_1 >>> IS THERE PARTY THRESHOLD - LOWER – 1ST SEGMENT (TIER) IMD5021_2 >>> IS THERE PARTY THRESHOLD - LOWER – 2ND SEGMENT (TIER) IMD5021_3 >>> IS THERE PARTY THRESHOLD - UPPER – 1ST SEGMENT (TIER) IMD5021_4 >>> IS THERE PARTY THRESHOLD - UPPER – 2ND SEGMENT (TIER) --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Are there legally mandated thresholds that a party must exceed before it is eligible to receive seats? .................................................................. 1. YES 5. NO 7. NOT APPLICABLE 9. MISSING | VARIABLE NOTES: IMD5021_ | | The corresponding variables in the Standalone CSES Modules are: | MODULE 1: Not included | MODULE 2: Not included | MODULE 3: C5045_1-C5045_4 | MODULE 4: D5045_1-D5045_4 | [POLITY NOTES] - CZECH REPUBLIC: IMD5021_3 | | None of the Czech Republic studies in CSES Standalone modules | does not deal with the upper house election in the country. | Thus, all Czech studies have been recoded to "7. Not applicable" | for the variable IMD5021_3. | POLITY NOTES - HONG KONG: IMD5021_ | | Hong Kong underwent a change in electoral rules in 2010, and | these changes were applied in the 2012 elections. One of the | novelties of the system is introducing 5 new members elected | from Functional constituencies (FC), which are special interest | groups involved in the elections. These additions have been | treated as second segment (tier) in the CSES schema. As a | consequence of this change, coding of IMD5021_ variables | differ in some instances, among studies before and after the | 2010 reforms. | [ELECTION STUDY NOTES] - ROMANIA (2009): IMD5021_2 & IMD5021_4 | | The data for the Romanian (2009) study in CSES Module 3 for the | variable "Is there party threshold" (C5045_) refers to the 2008 | Parliamentary elections in Romania. Since the 2009 study refers | to Presidential elections, this variable was recoded to "7. Not | applicable" for the CSES IMD. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- IMD5022_1 >>> PARTY THRESHOLD - LOWER – 1ST SEGMENT (TIER) IMD5022_2 >>> PARTY THRESHOLD - LOWER – 2ND SEGMENT (TIER) IMD5022_3 >>> PARTY THRESHOLD - UPPER – 1ST SEGMENT (TIER) IMD5022_4 >>> PARTY THRESHOLD - UPPER – 2ND SEGMENT (TIER) --------------------------------------------------------------------------- If YES in Question IMD5021, what is the threshold? .................................................................. 00.00. THERE IS NO THRESHOLD 00.10-95.00. A PARTY MUST RECEIVE THIS PERCENT (0.1% TO 95%) OF THE POPULAR VOTE IN ORDER TO BE ELIGIBLE FOR SEATS 96.00. OTHER THRESHOLD [SEE ELECTION STUDY NOTES] 97.00. NOT APPLICABLE 99.00. MISSING | VARIABLE NOTES: IMD5022_ | | For more details on the meaning of “96. OTHER THRESHOLD [SEE | ELECTION STUDY NOTES]” codes, see CSES Standalone codebooks. | | The corresponding variables in the Standalone CSES Modules are: | MODULE 1: Not included | MODULE 2: Not included | MODULE 3: C5046_1-C5046_4 | MODULE 4: D5046_1-D5046_4 | [ELECTION STUDY NOTES] - CANADA (2008): IMD5022_2 | | Canada uses plurality voting "first-past-the-post" system, with | single-member electoral divisions. Thus it is a single-tier | system, and Canadian (2008) study was recoded to "97. Not | applicable" for variable IMD5022_2. | [POLITY NOTES] - CANADA: IMD5022_3 & IMD5022_4 | | Canada's Senate (Upper house) comprises of 105 individuals, | appointed by the Governor-General, on the advice of Prime | Minister. Since Senators are indirectly elected, all Canada | studies have been coded "97. Not applicable" for the variables | IMD5022_3 and IMD5022_4. | [POLITY NOTES] - CZECH REPUBLIC: IMD5022_3 | | None of the Czech Republic studies in CSES Standalone modules | does not deal with the upper house election in the country. | Thus, all Czech studies have been recoded to "97. Not | applicable" for the variable IMD5022_3. | POLITY NOTES - HONG KONG: IMD5022_ | | Hong Kong underwent a change in electoral rules in 2010, and | these changes were applied in the 2012 elections. One of the | novelties of the system is introducing 5 new members elected | from Functional constituencies (FC), which are special interest | groups involved in the elections. These additions have been | treated as second segment (tier) in the CSES schema. As a | consequence of this change, coding of IMD5022_ variables | differ in some instances, among studies before and after the | 2010 reforms. | [ELECTION STUDY NOTES] - IRELAND (2007): IMD5022_3 | | Upper house of Irish Parliament (Oireachtas) consists of members | which are not directly elected. Thus, Ireland (2007) study has | been recoded to "97. Not applicable" for variable IMD5022_3. | POLITY NOTES - JAPAN: IMD5022_1 | | In the single-member districts of the Lower House contest, as | well as for the prefecture-level districts of the Upper House, | a candidate needs to obtain votes at least equal to one-sixth | of the quotient obtained by dividing the total of valid ballots | cast by the number of seats to be filled from the constituency | concerned. For all single-member districts of the lower house | contest this equals obtaining at least 1/6 (16.7%) of | the total valid votes. Instead, the multi-member prefecture | -level districts of the Upper House contest have variable | district magnitudes with a minimum of 1 and a maximum of 5. In | this case, this quotient varies from 16.6% to 3.33% of the valid | votes. | This rule has been in force for all of the elections covered by | studies included in CSES. However, some minor differences may | occur due to rounding issues of statistical software packages. | [ELECTION STUDY NOTES] - LATVIA (2010): IMD5022_3 & IMD5022_4 | | Latvia's Parliament (Saeima) is unicameral body. Thus, Latvia | (2010) study has been recoded to "97. Not applicable" for | variables IMD5022_3 and IMD5022_4. | [POLITY NOTES] - NEW ZEALAND: IMD5022_2 | | New Zealand has an alternative threshold: Parties with more than | 5% of the total votes nationally on the basis of the party list | votes ('party vote', tier 2) or those who have won one of the 70 | constituency seats (tier 1) are entitled to sit in parliament | and may be eligible to receive a proportional share of the 50 | list seats on the basis of their national vote share. | Thus, New Zealand (2008) coded in Standalone module dataset "5" | has been recoded to 96, like the other New Zealand studies in | CSES. | [ELECTION STUDY NOTES] - NEW ZEALAND (2014): IMD5022_3 | | New Zealand's Parliament is a unicameral body. Thus, New Zealand | (2014) study has been recoded to "97. Not applicable" for | variable IMD5022_3. | [ELECTION STUDY NOTES] - PERU (2011): IMD5022_3 & IMD5022_4 | | Peru's Parliament (Congress of the Republic of Peru) is | unicameral body. Thus, Peru (2011) study has been recoded to | "97. Not applicable" for variables IMD5022_3 and IMD5022_4. | [ELECTION STUDY NOTES] - ROMANIA (2009): IMD5022_2 & IMD5022_4 | | The CSES survey was conducted for the 2009 Presidential | Election in Romania. Thus, the study is recoded to "97. Not | applicable" for variables IMD5022_2 and IMD5022_4. | [ELECTION STUDY NOTES] - ROMANIA (2012): IMD5022_1 & IMD5022_3 | | The threshold for political parties to obtain seats is 5% of the | valid votes. However, it is higher for electoral alliances | comprising of more parties: | - A threshold of 8% of valid votes for coalitions | of 2 parties. | - A threshold of 9% of valid votes for coalitions | of 3 parties. | - A threshold of 10% of valid votes for coalitions | of 4 parties or more. | Alternatively, a party that wins six district seats in the | Chamber of Deputies or three district seats in the Senate | may also receive seats. | [POLITY NOTES] - SOUTH AFRICA: IMD5022_1 | | South Africa is one national district with a magnitude of four | hundred. There is no legal threshold for gaining representation. | Thus, all South Africa studies have been recoded to 0 for | variable IMD5022_1 | [ELECTION STUDY NOTES] - SOUTH AFRICA (2009): IMD5022_2 | | South Africa is a one-tier (segment) system. Thus, South Africa | (2009) study has been coded "97. Not applicable" for the | variable IMD5022_2. | [POLITY NOTES] - SOUTH AFRICA: IMD5022_3 & IMD5022_4 | | South Africa's National Council of Provinces (Upper house) | comprises of 90 provincial delegates, who are indirectly | elected. Thus, all South Africa studies have been coded | "97. Not applicable" for the variables IMD5022_3 and IMD5022_4. | [POLITY NOTES] - SOUTH KOREA: IMD5022_2 | | The threshold applies to the nation-wide proportional district: | 3% of the total valid votes for party lists, or at least 5 | primary district seats. | Thus, South Korea (2008) has been recoded to "96. OTHER | THRESHOLD [SEE ELECTION STUDY NOTES]." --------------------------------------------------------------------------- IMD5024_1 >>> DATE ELECTION SCHEDULED - MONTH IMD5024_2 >>> DATE ELECTION SCHEDULED - DAY IMD5024_3 >>> DATE ELECTION SCHEDULED - YEAR IMD5025_1 >>> DATE ELECTION HELD - MONTH IMD5025_2 >>> DATE ELECTION HELD - DAY IMD5025_3 >>> DATE ELECTION HELD - YEAR --------------------------------------------------------------------------- On what date was the election originally scheduled to be held? On what date was the election actually held? .................................................................. MONTH 01. JANUARY 02. FEBRUARY 03. MARCH 04. APRIL 05. MAY 06. JUNE 07. JULY 08. AUGUST 09. SEPTEMBER 10. OCTOBER 11. NOVEMBER 12. DECEMBER 99. MISSING DAY 01-31. DAY OF MONTH 96. [SEE ELECTION STUDY NOTES] 99. MISSING YEAR 1996-2017. YEAR 9999. MISSING | VARIABLE NOTES: IMD5024_ & IMD5025_ | | Source: CSES Macro Reports and other publicly available sources | (see below). | | Data on IMD5024_ were originally not included in MODULE 1 and | MODULE 2, and are not available for these election studies for | the CSES IMD. | | The corresponding variables for IMD5024_ in the Standalone CSES | Modules are: | MODULE 1: Not included (See above) | MODULE 2: Not included (See above) | MODULE 3: C5023_1-3 | MODULE 4: D5023_1-3 | | Data on IMD5025_ were originally not included in MODULE 1 and | MODULE 2, but were now collected for these election studies for | the CSES IMD, based on the CSES Macro- and Design Reports. | In cases where election dates were not provided, IMD5025_ was | coded based on the following sources: | | International Foundation for Electoral Systems (IFES) Election | Guide. Available at: http://www.electionguide.org/countries/ | (Date accessed: August 16, 2019). | | Nohlen, D. & Stoever, P. (Eds.). (2010). Elections in | Europe. A Data Handbook. Baden-Baden: Nomos. | | The corresponding variables for IMD5025_ in the Standalone CSES | Modules are: | MODULE 1: Not included (See above) | MODULE 2: Not included (See above) | MODULE 3: C5024_1-3 | MODULE 4: D5024_1-3 | POLITY NOTES – CZECH REPUBLIC: IMD5025_ | | Lower House elections are conventionally held across two | days in the Czech Republic. The following table lists all | dates for Czech Lower House elections included in the CSES: | | Dates of Lower House Election | ----------------------------------------------------------- | CZECH REPUBLIC (1996) May 31 – June 01, 1996 | CZECH REPUBLIC (2002) June 14 - June 15, 2002 | CZECH REPUBLIC (2006) June 02 – June 03, 2006 | CZECH REPUBLIC (2010) May 28 - May 29, 2010 | CZECH REPUBLIC (2013) Oct. 25 – Oct. 26, 2013 --------------------------------------------------------------------------- IMD5026_1 >>> NUMBER OF LEGISLATIVE CHAMBERS --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Number of legislative chambers: .................................................................. 1. UNICAMERAL LEGISLATURE (ONE LEGISLATIVE CHAMBER) 2. BICAMERAL LEGISLATURE (TWO LEGISLATIVE CHAMBERS) 9. MISSING | VARIABLE NOTES: IMD5026_1 | | Source: CSES Macro Report and Publicly Available Sources. | | IMD5026_1 distinguishes unicameral from bicameral systems, | irrespective of the principal mode of designation of members of | the upper houses. | | For more detailed information concerning the composition of first | and second chambers, please consult ELECTION STUDY NOTES, | available in the Codebook Parts 2 of the Standalone CSES Modules. | | All four CSES Standalone Module datasets included in the CSES | IMD provide variables on the number of legislative chambers. | However, concepts of the respective variables differ between CSES | Standalone Modules: CSES Modules 1 and 2 capture the number of | elected legislative chambers. | CSES Module 3 employed a hybrid approach, not clearly | distinguishing between uni- and bicameral systems. | CSES Module 4 captures the number of legislative chambers, | without distinguishing whether they are directly or indirectly | elected. | | CSES IMD includes two variables on the number of legislative | chambers which build on the coding in the Standalone CSES | Modules. | IMD 5026_1 measures whether a polity has one or two legislative | Chambers, no matter whether it is elected or not. | IMD5026_2 distinguishes between whether the bicameral legislature | is directly elected by voters or partially elected by voters or | indirectly elected. | | The corresponding variables for IMD5024_ in the Standalone CSES | Modules are: | MODULE 1: A5024 (Number of elected legislative chambers) | MODULE 2: B5030 (Number of elected legislative chambers) | MODULE 3: C5091 (Number of legislative chambers) | MODULE 4: D5100 (Number of legislative chambers) | POLITY NOTES - TAIWAN: IMD5026_2 | | Next to the Legislative Yuan, Taiwan's lower house, Taiwan also | had a directly elected National Assembly, which was formally | abolished only in 2005. | The National Assembly originally had two main powers: Electing | the President and Vice President, and amending the constitution. | Since 1996, President and Vice President are elected directly. | As of 2000, the National Assembly was only to be elected ad hoc | whenever constitutional amendments were proposed by the | Legislative Yuan. Since then, the National Assembly gathered | only once after its direct elections in 2005, to vote on the | constitutional amendment to suspend itself until a reunification | with Mainland China. | However, since direct elections to the National Assembly last | took place in 2005, Taiwan is coded as a bicameral system for | the Taiwanese election studies in 1996, 2001 and 2004 and as | a unicameral system thereafter. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- IMD5026_2 >>> LEGISLATIVE CHAMBERS: MEANS OF ELECTION --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Means of election of legislative chambers: .................................................................. 0. UNICAMERAL LEGISLATURE 1. BICAMERAL LEGISLATURE: INDIRECTLY ELECTED OR APPOINTED 2. BICAMERAL LEGISLATURE: FULLY DIRECTLY ELECTED 6. BICAMERAL LEGISLATURE: PARTIALLY DIRECTLY ELECTED [SEE POLITY NOTES] 9. MISSING | VARIABLE NOTES: IMD5026_2 | | Source: CSES Macro Report and Publicly Available Sources. | | CSES IMD includes two variables on the number of legislative | chambers which build on the coding in the Standalone CSES | Modules. | IMD5026_1 measures whether a polity has one or two legislative | Chambers, no matter whether it is elected or not. | IMD5026_2 distinguishes between whether the bicameral legislature | is directly elected by voters or partially elected by voters or | indirectly elected. | | IMD5026_2 classifies the means of election of each chamber. Most | unicameral systems are directly elected by citizens (although | there are some exceptions to this but CSES does not classify | partially elected unicameral systems). For bicameral systems, | CSES classifies whether the chamber is fully directly elected by | voters, partially elected, or indirectly elected. | | Bicameral legislatures are classified as having fully directed | elected chambers only if all members of the second chamber are | elected by the people, based on universal suffrage. | | For more detailed information concerning the composition of first | and second chambers, please consult ELECTION STUDY NOTES, | available in the Codebook Parts 2 of the Standalone CSES Modules. | | All four CSES Standalone Module datasets included in the CSES | IMD provide variables on the number of legislative chambers. | However, concepts of the respective variables differ between CSES | Standalone Modules: CSES MODULES 1 and 2 capture the number of | elected legislative chambers. CSES MODULE 3 employed a hybrid | approach, not clearly distinguishing between uni- and bicameral | systems. CSES MODULE 4 captures the number of legislative | chambers, without distinguishing whether they are directly or | indirectly elected. | | The corresponding variables for IMD5024_ in the Standalone CSES | Modules are: | MODULE 1: A5024 (Number of elected legislative chambers) | MODULE 2: B5030 (Number of elected legislative chambers) | MODULE 3: C5091 (Number of legislative chambers) | MODULE 4: D5100 (Number of legislative chambers) | POLITY NOTES - BELGIUM: IMD5026_2 | | Before 2014, and applicable to all Belgian studies in the CSES | IMD, there were three segments in Upper House elections. Of the | then 71 members of the upper house, 40 were directly elected, 21 | were appointed by regional assemblies of the three communities | (Flemish, French, German), and 10 were appointed by elected | senators. The 40 members were directly elected in three multi- | member districts (Flanders, Wallonia and Brussels). | Since 2014, the Belgian Senate consists of 60 members, out of | which 10 are appointed by fellow Senators, and 50 are appointed | by the community and regional parliaments. | POLITY NOTES - CHILE: IMD5026_2 | | Until 2006, and applicable to the Chilean 1999 and 2005 | studies in the CSES IMD, Chile’s upper house - the Senate - | included 38 directly elected members and 9 members who were | appointed (4 by the military, 3 by the Supreme Court, and | another 2 by the President). Additionally, former Presidents | Augusto Pinochet and Eduardo Frei Ruiz-Tagle held seats in the | Senate (appointed for a lifetime). | As of 2006, all appointed seats were abolished, and since then, | the whole Senate is directly elected. | POLITY NOTES - ITALY: IMD5026_2 | | In Italy, 315 Senators are directly elected. However, the | President has the right to appoint up to 5 (additional) | outstanding citizens as Senate members for a lifetime. Further, | former Italian Presidents hold a seat in the Senate ex-officio. | POLITY NOTES - KENYA: IMD5026_2 | | Parliament of Kenya consists of two directly elected houses: | The National Assembly (lower house) and The Senate (upper | house). | The National Assembly consists of 350 representatives: 290 | members are elected in single-member constituencies, 47 seats | are awarded to women in a separate election in 47 counties, where | each county constitutes a single-member constituency. Further 12 | representatives are appointed, which makes a total number of 349 | representatives. In addition, the Speaker of the Assembly who is | an ex officio member. | The Senate has 68 seats, of which 47 are elected from single- | member constituencies based on the counties using first-past- | the-post, and the remaining 21 are appointed; 16 women based on | party's seat numbers, two representing disabled groups and two | representing youth (both of which must consist of a male and | female nominee) and one elected Speaker, who is an ex officio | member. | POLITY NOTES - SPAIN: IMD5026_2 | | The Spanish Upper House, the Senate, consists of 208 Senators | who are directly elected, and a second group of 58 Senators who | is indirectly elected by regional parliaments (one fixed senator | per region, plus another for each 1 million inhabitants). | POLITY NOTES - TAIWAN: IMD5026_2 | | Next to the Legislative Yuan, Taiwan's lower house, Taiwan also | had a directly elected National Assembly, which was formally | abolished only in 2005. | The National Assembly originally had two main powers: Electing | the President and Vice President, and amending the constitution. | Since 1996, President and Vice President are elected directly. | As of 2000, the National Assembly was only to be elected ad hoc | whenever constitutional amendments were proposed by the | Legislative Yuan. Since then, the National Assembly gathered | only once after its direct elections in 2005, to vote on the | constitutional amendment to suspend itself until a reunification | with Mainland China. | However, since direct elections to the National Assembly last | took place in 2005, Taiwan is coded as having two fully directly | elected legislative chambers for the Taiwanese election studies | in 1996, 2001 and 2004 and as a unicameral system thereafter. | POLITY NOTES - THAILAND: IMD5026_2 | | From 1997 to 2006, and applicable to the Thai 2001 election study | in the CSES IMD, all members of Thailand's upper house, the | Senate, were directly elected. Under the 2007 Constitution, and | applicable to the Thai 2007 and 2011 studies in the CSES IMD, | half of Thailand’s Senate was directly elected, while the other | half was appointed. | The current 2017 constitution specifies that all 250 Senate | members are appointed, mainly by the National Council for Peace | and Order, the NCPO). --------------------------------------------------------------------------- IMD5027 >>> SIZE OF THE LOWER HOUSE --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Total number of seats in the lower house of the legislature during the election year. .................................................................. 001-900. SEATS IN THE LOWER HOUSE 999. MISSING. | VARIABLE NOTES: IMD5027 | | IMD5027 refers to the total number of seats available in the | lower house of the legislature, not to the number of seats | that were actually taken by legislators. Further, counts for | the total number of seats in the lower house include the | seat held by the Speaker. | | Sources of data: | - CSES Macro Reports | - Other publicly available sources | | Data on IMD5027 were originally not included in MODULE 1 and | MODULE 2, but were now collected for these election studies | for the CSES IMD. | | Data newly collected for the CSES IMD heavily rely on | Nils-Christian Bormann's and Matt Golder's database about | Democratic Electoral Systems Around the World, 1946-2011 | (http://mattgolder.com/elections, Date accessed: May 17, | 2018). | | Additionally, data were cross-checked against the following | sources: | International Foundation for Electoral Systems (IFES) Election | Guide. Available at: http://www.electionguide.org/countries/ | (Date accessed: August 16, 2019). | | Gallagher, Michael, 2017. "Election indices dataset" - see: | http://www.tcd.ie/Political_Science/staff/michael_gallagher | /ElSystems/index.php, | (Date accessed: April 9, 2019). | | The corresponding variables in the Standalone CSES Modules are: | MODULE 1: Not included (See above) | MODULE 2: Not included (See above) | MODULE 3: C5075 | MODULE 4: D5075 | POLITY NOTES - GERMANY: IMD5027 | | Constitutionally, the Bundestag consists of 598 seats. Half | of the members (299) are elected in single-member districts | using the first past the post electoral system (the "first | vote") The remaining 299 seats are filled by proportional | representation using the party list (the "second vote"). | | Until the Bundestag elections 2009, so-called overhang | mandates (i.e., additional seats) were allocated to parties | winning more seats in single-member districts than they were | entitled to according to their vote share obtained by | proportional representation. Thus, overhang mandates | potentially changed the proportional composition of | parliament to the benefit of larger parties. | | Since 2013, compensatory seats are allocated to all | parties not benefiting from overhang mandates. |  | The following table lists the number of overhang mandates | (until 2009) plus compensatory seats (in 2013) and the | resulting size of the Bundestag for after each German | election covered in the IMD: | | Regular Additional | Seats Seats IMD5027 | ----------------------------------------------------------- | GERMANY (1998) 656* 13 669 | GERMANY (2002) 598 5 603 | GERMANY (2005) 598 16 614 | GERMANY (2009) 598 24 622 | GERMANY (2013) 598 33 631 | | * from the 1990 to the 2002 elections, the Bundestag had | 656 regular members. | | Source: The Federal Returning Officer | https://www.bundeswahlleiter.de/en/service/glossar/u/ | ueberhangmandate.html | (Date accessed: August 21, 2019) | POLITY NOTES - NEW ZEALAND: IMD5027 | | Conventionally, the New Zealand Parliament has 120 members. | However this can sometimes increase due to 'overhang' seats, | which arise when a party gains more constituency seats (tier 1) | than its party list vote (tier 2) would entitle it to on a | proportional basis. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- IMD5028 >>> SIZE OF THE CABINET BEFORE --------------------------------------------------------------------------- The size of the cabinet before the election. .................................................................. 00-99. SIZE OF THE CABINET BEFORE THE ELECTION 999. MISSING | VARIABLE NOTES: IMD5028 | | Source: CSES Macro Report. | | Definitions: | a) Parliamentary and Semi-Presidential Regimes: | Cabinet size is defined by the total number of ministers | (persons, not posts) in a defined government. Ministers are | considered members of a cabinet when they exercise voting | rights. This number includes both ministers with and without | portfolio, but excludes deputy ministers, undersecretaries, | parliamentary secretaries, ministerial alternates, given that | in the majority of cases, they do not exercise full voting | rights. | b) Presidential Regimes: | Cabinet size is defined by the total number of ministers or | secretaries who head a ministry. | | Module 2 code "997. Not applicable" (B5008) has been recoded to | "999. Missing" in the IMD. This change affects the following | studies: FRANCE (2002), KYRGYZSTAN (2005), and RUSSIA (2004). | | The corresponding variables in the Standalone CSES Modules are: | MODULE 1: Not included | MODULE 2: B5008 | MODULE 3: C5010 | MODULE 4: D5010 | | Data are unavailable for IMD5028 for Module 1 and CHILE (2009), | DENMARK (2001) and UNITED STATES (2004, 2008, 2012). | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - ALBANIA (2005): IMD5028 | | One unaccounted portfolio was held by the Human Rights Union | Party. | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - AUSTRALIA (2007): IMD5028 | | 17 ministerial posts plus the prime minister for a | total of 18. | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - AUSTRIA (2013): IMD5028 | | In addition to 7 cabinet members from the Social Democratic | Party (SPO; Party A) and 6 from the Austrian People's Party | (OVP; Party B), there was one Independent member (nominated | by the Austrian People's Party (OVP). | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - BELARUS (2008): IMD5028 | | 38 individuals, including the prime minister. | The number specified here represents the total number | of ministerial positions in a Presidential cabinet. None of | the cabinet members were from a formal political party. | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - BELGIUM (2003): IMD5028 | | The remaining two cabinet posts belong to 0560018. Live | Differently - Flemish-speaking Ecologists (AGALEV). | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - BRAZIL (2002): IMD5028 | | Ten portfolios were held by members of political parties | and three were held by non-members of one political party. | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - BRAZIL (2014): IMD5028 | | The size of the cabinet is 39 seats in total with thirteen | cabinet positions occupied by Independents and a further two | occupied by the PCdoB and the PDT parties, respectively. | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - BULGARIA (2014): IMD5028 | | The data refers to Oresharski Government, formed on May 29, | 2013 and dissolved on August 6, 2014. | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - CROATIA (2007): IMD5028 | | 18 ministers including the prime minister. The number | specified here represents the total number of ministers. | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - CZECH REPUBLIC (2006): IMD5028 | | Three unaccounted portfolios were held by the Union of | Freedom-Democratic Union (Unie svobody-Demokraticka unie; | US-DEU). US-DEU received 0.3% of the vote in the 2006 elections. | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - CZECH REPUBLIC (2010): IMD5028 | | The were three cabinets between April 2006 and 2010. | The figure reported in these variables are about the | caretaker government established after Topolanek and his | government lost a confidence vote, and was established in | May 2009. These figures represent the numbers of portfolios | nominated to non-partisans by each party in the caretaker | government. | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - CZECH REPUBLIC (2013): IMD5028 | | The caretaker government of Jiri Rusnok consisted of 15 | ministers, 14 of whom were independent, i.e., had no formal | party membership. | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - ESTONIA (2011): IMD5028 | | The cabinet prior to the parliamentary election of 2011 was | composed of 13 persons in total; 12 cabinet ministers and 1 | Prime Minister. | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - FRANCE (2007): IMD5028 | | 32 ministers including the prime minister. | The number specified here represents the total number of | ministers. | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - GERMANY (2002): IMD5028 | | Fourteen ministerial posts, plus the Chancellor (from SPD - | PARTY A). | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - GERMANY (2005): IMD5028 | | 13 ministerial posts, plus the Chancellor (from SPD) for | a total of 14. | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - GERMANY (2009): IMD5028 | | 15 ministerial posts, plus the Chancellor (from CDU) for | a total of 16. | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - GREECE (2009): IMD5028 | | The cabinet prior to the parliamentary election of the | 4th October 2009 was composed of 17 cabinet ministers in total: | the Prime Minister (Kostas Karamanlis) and 16 ministers. | Not counted are 1 alternate minister and 26 deputy ministers. | This cabinet composition is based on the latest reshuffling of | that government (as of 8/29 January 2009). | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - HONG KONG (2004): IMD5028 | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - HONG KONG (2008): IMD5028 | | See election study note for IMD5029. | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - HONG KONG (2012): IMD5028 | | The Executive Council (ExCo) has 30 members (including the CE, | 15 official members and 14 non-official members). However, both | the official and non-official members do not have voting rights | in the ExCo (see Election study note for IMD5029). | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - HUNGARY (2002): IMD5028 | | This variable reports the cabinet size without the post of the | prime minister. | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - ICELAND (2009): IMD5028 | | In addition to the Social Democratic Alliance and the Left Green | Movement members, there were also two non-party affiliated | cabinet members. | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - ISRAEL (2003): IMD5028 | | Four unaccounted portfolios were held by Israel Baaliya (2 | posts) and Mafdal (2 posts). | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - ISRAEL (2006): IMD5028 | | 12 ministers including the prime minister. The | number specified here represents the total number of ministers. | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - JAPAN (2004): IMD5028 | | Two unaccounted portfolios were held by independents. | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - JAPAN (2007): IMD5028 | | One unaccounted portfolio was held by an independent. | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - JAPAN (2013): IMD5028 | | The data refers to Abe the cabinet, formed on Dec. 26, 2012. | Since the current elections refer to the Upper House elections, | the data about the Cabinet prior to the election (variables | D5008, D5009_ and IMD5028 are the same as those for the period | after the election. | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - LATVIA (2014): IMD5028 | | In addition to the listed portfolios, there was one independent | cabinet member, but according to the collaborator, affiliated | with party Unity (PARTY B). | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - MEXICO (2003): IMD5028 | | Mexico has a Presidential System in which the portfolios are | designated directly by the president and for the case of General | Attorney with the approval of the Senate. The elections held on | July 2003 were for federal deputies. The executive power was not | modified. | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - MEXICO (2006): IMD5028 | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - MEXICO (2009): IMD5028 | | Note that Mexico has a presidential system. The cabinet is made | up of eighteen portfolios held by state secretaries directly | appointed by the President, and the Attorney-General (19 in | total). Only the Secretary of Foreign Relations and the General | Attorney need approval from the Senate. There is no voting in | the cabinet, and the positions are not necessarily political. | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - NETHERLANDS (2006): IMD5028 | | The caretaker government had 17 ministers. See note for IMD5029. | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - PORTUGAL (2002): IMD5028 | | Seventeen ministerial positions, plus the prime minister. | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - PORTUGAL (2009): IMD5028 | | Including the Prime Minister, the size of the Cabinet | prior to the election was 16. | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - PORTUGAL (2015): IMD5028 | | The size of the cabinet is 15 seats in total with three cabinet | positions occupied by Independents. | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - ROMANIA (2012): IMD5028 | | The size of the cabinet is 21 seats in total with five cabinet | positions occupied by Independents. | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - RUSSIA (2004): IMD5028 | | See election study note for IMD5029. | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - SLOVAKIA (2010): IMD5028 | | The cabinet prior to the parliamentary election of 2010 | was composed of 15 members, including the prime minister. | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - SLOVENIA (2004): IMD5028 | | Sixteen ministerial posts (2 without portfolios), plus the | Prime Minister (from SDS - PARTY B). | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - SLOVENIA (2008): IMD5028 | | The cabinet prior to the parliamentary election of 2008 was | composed of 18 persons in total; 15 cabinet ministers, 2 | ministers without portfolio, and 1 Prime Minister. | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - SLOVENIA (2011): IMD5028 | | See election study note for IMD5029. | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - SPAIN (2004): IMD5028 | | Of the 15 ministers in the cabinet, two were vice | presidents of government. | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - SPAIN (2008): IMD5028 | | The cabinet prior to the parliamentary election of 2008 was | composed of 16 persons in total; including 2 vice-presidents | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - TAIWAN (2008): IMD5028 | | Total of 45 ministers including premier and vice premier | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - THAILAND (2007): IMD5028 | | These figures contain 26 ministers plus the prime minister for a | total of 27. | These have no party entries because the Council for National | Security, a military junta, had overthrown Thailand's elected | government and abrogated the constitution on September 19, 2006 | and the ministers were appointed by the perpetrators of the | coup. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- IMD5029_A >>> GOVERNMENT COMPOSITION BEFORE ELECTION - PARTY A IMD5029_B >>> GOVERNMENT COMPOSITION BEFORE ELECTION - PARTY B IMD5029_C >>> GOVERNMENT COMPOSITION BEFORE ELECTION - PARTY C IMD5029_D >>> GOVERNMENT COMPOSITION BEFORE ELECTION - PARTY D IMD5029_E >>> GOVERNMENT COMPOSITION BEFORE ELECTION - PARTY E IMD5029_F >>> GOVERNMENT COMPOSITION BEFORE ELECTION - PARTY F IMD5029_G >>> GOVERNMENT COMPOSITION BEFORE ELECTION - PARTY G IMD5029_H >>> GOVERNMENT COMPOSITION BEFORE ELECTION - PARTY H IMD5029_I >>> GOVERNMENT COMPOSITION BEFORE ELECTION - PARTY I --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Number of cabinet posts (portfolios) held by PARTY [A/B/C/D/E/F/G/H/I] before the election. .................................................................. 00-99. NUMBER OF CABINET POSTS BEFORE ELECTION HELD BY PARTY/COALITION X 999. MISSING | VARIABLE NOTES: IMD5029_ | | Source: CSES Macro Report. | | Ministers are considered those members of government who are | members of the Cabinet and who have Cabinet voting rights. | | Module 2 code "997. Not applicable" (B5007) has been recoded to | "999. Missing" in the IMD. This change affects the following | studies: FRANCE (2002) and KYRGYZSTAN (2005). | | The corresponding variables in the Standalone CSES Modules are: | MODULE 1: Not included | MODULE 2: B5007_A-I (Number of Portfolios Before) | MODULE 3: C5009_A-I (Government Composition Before Election) | MODULE 4: D5009_A-I (Government Composition Before Election) | | Data are unavailable for IMD5029_A-I for Module 1 and CHILE | (2009), DENMARK (2001), RUSSIA (2004), THAILAND (2007) and | UNITED STATES (2004, 2008, 2012). | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - BRAZIL (2010): IMD5029 | | This variable shows the composition of the Cabinet on October | 29, 2010. | In addition to the portfolios coded in the entries, there | was one post held by PCdoB, one post held PV, and 10 additional | independent cabinet members. Note that Brazil has a presidential | system. | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - BULGARIA (2014): IMD5029 | | The data refers to Oresharski Government, formed on May 29, | 2013 and dissolved on August 6, 2014. In addition to the listed | cabinet members, there was one independent minister. | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - CHILE (2005): IMD5029 | | One additional portfolio was held by 1520007. Radical | Social-Democratic Party (PRSD), and three more were held by | independents. | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - CZECH REPUBLIC (2010): IMD5029 | | The were three cabinets between April 2006 and 2010. | The figure reported in these variables are about the | caretaker government established after Topolanek and his | government lost a confidence vote, and was established in | May 2009. These figures represent the numbers of portfolios | nominated to non-partisans by each party. | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - CZECH REPUBLIC (2013): IMD5029 | | The caretaker government of Jiri Rusnok consisted of 15 | ministers, 14 of whom were independent, i.e. had no formal | party membership. | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - FRANCE (2012): IMD5029 | | In addition to 21 full cabinet ministers from Party B (UMP), | there were two full cabinet ministers from 2500020. New Center | (NC) and two independent cabinet ministers. | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - GERMANY (2002): IMD5029 | | One cabinet post belonged to a non-affiliated member. | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - GREECE (2012): IMD5029 | | The data (all independent members) refers to the caretaker | government between the elections of May 6, 2012, and current | elections of June 17, 2012. | Before the May 6 election, the government was composed of 11 | members from Panellinio Sosialistiko Kinima (PA.SO.K.; Party C), | two members from Nea Dimokratia (Party A), one member from Laikos | Orthodoxos Synagermos (Party E), and four independent members | (17 in total). | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - GREECE (2015): IMD5029 | | One additional post was held by an independent cabinet member. | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - HONG KONG (2004): IMD5029 | | In the context of Hong Kong, the Executive Council (ExCo) can be | regarded as the cabinet. The ExCo comprises the Official Members | (all the Principal Officials in the government secretariat have | been appointed concurrently the Official Members of the ExCo | since July 2002) and the Non-official Members. The members of | the ExCo are appointed by the Chief Executive of the Hong Kong | Special Administrative Region (HKSAR), while the Principal | Officials are nominated by the Chief Executive and are appointed | by the Central People's Government of China. Figures reported in | IMD5029 refer to non-official members (without portfolios) of | the Executive Council. Official members do not have a party | affiliation. | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - HONG KONG (2008): IMD5029 | | In Hong Kong, the Executive Council (equivalent to the | cabinet elsewhere) consists of the CE (1), official members (15 | principal government officials known as "secretaries", who | are CS, Financial Secretary, Secretary for Justice and 12 bureau | secretaries) and unofficial members (15 before the 2008 | Election). Altogether, the Executive Council had 31 members | before the 2008 LegCo Elections. | Before the Election, the CE and the official members were not | members of any political parties; 4 of the 15 unofficial | members were members of political parties (groups). (From the | Macro Report.) | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - HONG KONG (2012): IMD5029 | | In Hong Kong, the Executive Council (ExCo), which is established | to assist the Chief Executive (CE; equivalent of Prime Minister, | or President) in policymaking, is some equivalent of the cabinet | elsewhere. However, the majority views of the ExCo, if any, are | not binding and it is up to the CE to decide whether to accept | them or not. In this sense, the ExCo members do not have voting | rights. The ExCo had 30 members (including the CE, 15 official | members and 14 non-official members). Only three of the ExCo | members have party affiliation, reported in this variable. One | of the three members belongs to party Rural Council. | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - HUNGARY (2002): IMD5029 | | Party B (Fidesz-MPP) had 12 cabinet members plus the Prime | Minister. Four additional cabinet posts were held by | 3480013. Independent Small Holders Party (FKgP). | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - ICELAND (2009): IMD5029 | | Immediately before the 2009 election, the government was in hands | of a coalition between the Social Democratic Alliance and the | Left Green Movement (in addition to 2 non-partisan cabinet | members). However, this was a caretaker government that took | office in February 2009 after the breakdown of the previous | government (a coalition between the Independence Party and the | Social Democratic with 6 seats each). The previous government | led by Mr. Haarde, had taken office in May 2007. | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - IRELAND (2011): IMD5029 | | One additional post was held by the Progressive Democrats. | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - ISRAEL (2003): IMD5029_A | | Likud - 13 (9 ministers with portfolios, 3 ministers without | portfolios and P.M. Sharon with 4 portfolios). | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - ISRAEL (2006): IMD5029_A to IMD5029_G | | Some ministers were in charge of 2 ministries, hence the higher | count of portfolios than ministers. | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - ISRAEL (2013): IMD5029_A | | Likud had 13 cabinet ministers while Yisrael Beiteinu had 3. | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - ITALY (2006): IMD5029 | | The specified values refer to the number of cabinet posts and | not portfolios (cabinet posts have no autonomous budgeting). The | distribution of portfolios is: Forward Italy (5), National | Alliance (4), Northern League (2), Union of Christian and Centre | Democrats (1), Independents (1) plus one ad interim position | held by Prime Minister. | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - JAPAN (2013): IMD5029 | | The data refers to the Abe cabinet, formed on Dec. 26, 2012. | Since the current elections refer to the Upper House elections, | the data about the Cabinet prior to the election are the same as | those for the period after the election. | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - KENYA (2013): IMD5029_A | | Before the 2013 elections, the Cabinet had 40 members. In | addition to the 25 cabinet members reported in this variable, | 13 ministers came from the Party of National Unity, while 2 | ministers were independent. | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - LATVIA (2014): IMD5029_B | | The data for PARTY B (Unity) includes 3 portfolios held by | The Reform Party, which took part in the 2014 elections in a | coalition with Unity. In 2015, the Reform Party was absorbed | by Unity. | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - MEXICO (2006): IMD5029_A-IMD5029_H | | In addition to the portfolios (State Secretaries) coded in the | entries, there were 4 additional independent ministers and 2 | with unknown affiliation. | | Note that Mexico has a presidential system. The cabinet is made | up of eighteen portfolios held by state secretaries directly | appointed by the President, and the Attorney-General (19 in | total). Only the Secretary of Foreign Relations and the General | Attorney need approval from the Senate. There is no voting in | the cabinet, and the positions are not necessarily political. | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - MEXICO (2009): IMD5029 | | In addition to the 12 portfolios (State Secretaries) coded in | the entries, there were 7 additional independent cabinet | members. Note that Mexico has a presidential system. The cabinet | is made up of eighteen portfolios held by state secretaries | directly appointed by the President, and the Attorney-General | (19 in total). Only the Secretary of Foreign Relations and the | General Attorney need approval from the Senate. There is no | voting in the cabinet, and the positions are not necessarily | political. | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - MEXICO (2012): IMD5029 | | In addition to the portfolios (State Secretaries) coded in the | data, there were 10 additional independent ministers. | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - MEXICO (2015): IMD5029 | | Mexico has a presidential system. The cabinet is made up by | eighteen portfolios held by state secretaries directly appointed | by the President, and the General Attorney (19 in total). Only | the Secretary of Foreign Relations and the General Attorney need | approval from the Senate. There is no voting in the cabinet, and | the positions are not necessarily political. | In addition to the portfolios (State Secretaries) coded in the | data, there were 4 additional independent ministers. | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - MONTENEGRO (2012): IMD5029 | | One additional post was held by the Democratic Union of | Albanians DUA (Demokratska unija Albanaca). | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - MONTENEGRO (2012): IMD5029_A | | Party A represents the coalition of Democratic Party of | Socialists (DPS; dominant member) and Socialdemocratic party | (SDP). The former obtained 13 cabinet posts, and the latter 3 | cabinet posts. | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - NETHERLANDS (2006): IMD5029 | | After the resignation of the cabinet (Balkeneende-2) on 30 | June 2006, a caretaker government (Balkenende-3) was formed | of 9 CDA (Party A)-and 8 VVD (Party D) ministers, which was | installed on July 7, 2006. | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - PERU (2006): IMD5029 | | Possible Peru (the party of former President Alejandro Toledo) | held 4 out of 16 portfolios (15 cabinets plus one for the | president of Council of Ministers) before the 2006 presidential | elections took place. All the rest of the Cabinet members were | independents. | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - PERU (2006): IMD5029 | | The Aprista party (the party of current President Alan Garcia) | held 6 out of 16 portfolios (15 cabinets plus one for the | president of Council of Ministers) after the 2006 presidential | elections took place. All the rest of the Cabinet members were | independents. | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - PERU (2016): IMD5029 | | Prior to the 2016 elections, all cabinet posts were held by | members of Partido Nacionalista Peruano (the party does not | have an alphabetical CSES code, because it did not participate | in the 2016 election). | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - PHILIPPINES (2004): IMD5029 | | These data report just two cabinet members from Lakas-NUCD-UMDP | (Party A). One more post was held by a member of PDSP. The | remaining cabinet members were not affiliated with parties. They | are basically from the academe, private sector or career | government officers. | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - PHILIPPINES (2010): IMD5029_D | | This entry refers to the Lakas-Kampi coalition. Lakas had 6 | cabinet posts, while KAMPI had 2 cabinet posts. One additional | seat belonged to PDSP (Philippine Social Democratic Party). | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - PHILIPPINES (2010): IMD5029 | | To additional cabinet posts have been held by Akbayan | (Citizens' Action Party). | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - PHILIPPINES (2016): IMD5029 | | There were 24 cabinet members before the election. However, | most were independent, while some were members of parties | participating in the party list (proportional) electoral | segment. | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - POLAND (2001): IMD5029_G | | Before the election, 19 portfolios were held by | 6160004. Solidarity Electoral Action (AWSP), and the | remaining 2 by independents nominated by AWSP. | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - POLAND (2005): IMD5029 | | This variable shows party affiliation of six Cabinet Ministers. | Out of the remaining 11 Ministers, one is a member of Unia | Lewicy, and 10 are Independents. | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - POLAND (2007): IMD5029 | | This variable shows party affiliation of 12 Cabinet Ministers. | Out of the remaining 11 Ministers, one was a member of | Stronnictwo Konserwatywno-Liberalne (SKL), and 10 are | Independents. | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - POLAND (2011): IMD5029 | | Six additional posts were held by independent ministers, but, | according to the Macro Report, close to or affiliated with | the Platforma Obywatelska (Party A). | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - PORTUGAL (2002): IMD5029_B | | Socialist Party (PS) held 12 out of 17 portfolios. One of the | 12 was held by an independent candidate who ran on PS' electoral | list. The remaining 5 portfolios were held by independent | candidates. Prime Minister was also from the Socialist Party | (Antonio Guterres). | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - PORTUGAL (2015): IMD5029_A | | Social Democratic Party (PPD-PSD - Party A) held 8 cabinet posts | while the People's Party (CDS-PP - Party H) held 4 cabinet | posts. | The data in Module 4 mistakenly assigns 4 portfolios to Party | for People, Animals and Nature (party E). This party held no | cabinet post, and thus is coded "0" for the variable IMD5029_E. | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - ROMANIA (2009): IMD5029 | | The figures represent the interim cabinet that was formed after | the 2008 legislative elections fell. 10 ministers from the | Democrat-Liberal Party hold 19 portfolios, and 2 independents | hold the remaining 2 portfolios. | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - ROMANIA (2012): IMD5029_G | | PARTY G (Social Democratic Party, PSD) is part of the alliance | Social Liberal Union (coded PARTY A). The individual share of | cabinet seats for constituent parts of the alliance are also | available and are detailed here. Data for the share of | cabinet seats for the entire alliance that this party belong to | is detailed in IMD5029_A. The complete distribution of cabinet | portfolios for Romania is obtained by taking into account | the number of portfolios for parties A-E inclusive. | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - ROMANIA (2012): IMD5029_H | | PARTY H (National Liberal Union, NLP) is part of the alliance | Social Liberal Union (coded PARTY A). The individual share of | cabinet seats for constituent parts of the alliance are also | available and are detailed here. Data for the share of | cabinet seats for the entire alliance that this party belong to | is detailed in IMD5029_A. The complete distribution of cabinet | portfolios for Romania is obtained by taking into account | the number of portfolios for parties A-E inclusive. | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - ROMANIA (2012): IMD5029_I | | PARTY I (Liberal Democratic Party, PDL) is part of the alliance | Alliance for a Just Romania (coded PARTY B). The individual | share of cabinet seats for constituent parts of the alliance | are also available and are detailed here. Data for the share of | cabinet seats for the entire alliance that this party belong to | is detailed in IMD5029_B. The complete distribution of cabinet | portfolios for Romania is obtained by taking into account | the number of portfolios for parties A-E inclusive. | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - ROMANIA (2014): IMD5029_A | | This data refers to the number of posts held by the members of | the coalition under Party A label here. The dominant member | (Social-Democrat Party, PSD) had 15 members, including the PM. | UNPR had 2 members, while PC had one cabinet member. In | addition, there we 6 independent members of the cabinet. | The overall number includes the 8 (eight) so-called delegate | ministers who, according to Romanian law, are Cabinet members | and have voting right if they received parliamentary approval. | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - RUSSIA (2004): IMD5029 | | Not applicable. Cabinet posts in Russia are not allocated by | party affiliation or membership. Systematic data on party | affiliations of cabinet ministers, if any, are not available. | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - SERBIA (2012): IMD5029 | | The Serbian government has one Prime Minister, one or more vice- | ministers and ministers - they together constitute the cabinet | and they all have voting rights. Former Prime Minister was at | the same time also the Finance Minister (one among the 19 | cabinet members). There were three Deputy Prime Ministers. | Immediately after the 2008 election, the cabinet had 27 members. | Cabinet members not accounted in IMD5029 come from Serbian | Renewal Movement (SPO), Social Democratic Party of Serbia (SDPS) | (Socijaldemokratska partija Srbije), Party of United Pensioners | of Serbia (PUPS), Independent (G17+ endorsed), and Party of | Democratic Action of Sandzak (SDAS), each having one cabinet | member. | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - SERBIA (2012): IMD5029_F | | Party F, United Regions of Serbia (URS) changed its name in | 2010. Its former name was G17 Plus. This data shows the number | of cabinet members from G17 plus. | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - SLOVENIA (2004): IMD5029_B | | Liberal Democracy of Slovenia (LDS) held 9 portfolios until six | months before the election, when SLS was excluded from the | governmental coalition. Its three portfolios were reassigned to | LDS, leaving this party with twelve portfolios. | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - SLOVENIA (2011): IMD5029 | | This data shows the distribution of portfolios just before the | December 2011 elections. During 2011 previous coalition partners | left the government, while the seats they formerly occupied were | distributed among the SD (Party C) and LDS. The overall number | of cabinet posts remained the same, but a number of remaining | ministers took more than a single ministry. Thus, Party C (SD) | held 15 posts (including the PM), LDS held 2 posts, and one post | was held by an independent minister. | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - SOUTH KOREA (2012): IMD5029_A | | Note from the Collaborator: "Most of the Ministers are not | affiliated to political parties, but they can be considered as | the members of the Frontier Party because they were chosen by | the President belonging to the Frontier party, which means the | Ministers probably have the same political view with the | President." | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - TAIWAN (2008): IMD5029 | | 4 Ministers were from the KMT, 21 from the DDP, and 20 were | independents, for a total of 45 ministers including premier and | vice premier | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - THAILAND (2007): IMD5029_A to IMD5029_G | | These have no party entries because the Council for National | Security, a military junta, had overthrown Thailand's elected | government and abrogated the constitution on September 19, 2006 | and the ministers were appointed by the perpetrators of the | coup. | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - URUGUAY (2009): IMD5029_A | | There were 14 cabinet members (13 ministers plus the President | of the Republic, who is simultaneously the President of the | Council of Ministers and a member of it, with an equal vote to | each minister. The entire cabinet came from Party A (Broad | Front/Frente Amplio). --------------------------------------------------------------------------- IMD5030 >>> SIZE OF THE CABINET AFTER --------------------------------------------------------------------------- The size of the cabinet after the election. .................................................................. 00-99. SIZE OF THE CABINET AFTER THE ELECTION 999. MISSING | VARIABLE NOTES: IMD5030 | | Source: CSES Macro Report. | | Definitions: | a) Parliamentary and Semi-Presidential Regimes: | Cabinet size is defined by the total number of ministers | (persons, not posts) in a defined government. Ministers are | considered members of a cabinet when they exercise voting | rights. This number includes both ministers with and without | portfolio, but excludes deputy ministers, undersecretaries, | parliamentary secretaries, ministerial alternates, given that | in the majority of cases, they do not exercise full voting | rights. | b) Presidential Regimes: | Cabinet size is defined by the total number of ministers or | secretaries who head a ministry. | | Module 2 code "997. Not applicable" (B5010) has been recoded to | "999. Missing" in the IMD. This change affects the following | studies: FRANCE (2002), KYRGYZSTAN (2005) and RUSSIA (2004). | | The corresponding variables in the Standalone CSES Modules are: | MODULE 1: Not included | MODULE 2: B5010 | MODULE 3: C5014 | MODULE 4: D5014 | | Data are unavailable for IMD5030 for Module 1 and CHILE (2009), | FRANCE (2002), KYRGYZSTAN (2005) RUSSIA (2004) and UNITED STATES | (2004, 2008, 2012). | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - ALBANIA (2005): IMD5030 | | One unaccounted portfolio was held by the Human Rights Union | Party. | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - ARGENTINA (2015): IMD5030 | | The size of the cabinet is 21 seats in total with six cabinet | positions occupied by Independents. | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - AUSTRALIA (2007): IMD5030 | | 20 ministerial posts plus the prime minister for a | total of 21. | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - AUSTRIA (2013): IMD5030 | | In addition to 7 cabinet members from the Social Democratic | Party (SPO, PARTY A) and 5 from the Austrian People's Party | (OVP, PARTY B), there were two Independent members (nominated | by the Austrian People's Party (OVP)). | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - BELARUS (2008): IMD5030 | | 38 individuals including the prime minister. | The number specified here represents the total number | of ministerial positions in a Presidential cabinet. None of | the cabinet members were from a political party. | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - BELGIUM (2003): IMD5030 | | Of the remaining two cabinet posts, one belongs to SPIRIT, a | coalition partner of SP.A (PARTY B), and another one to FDF. | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - BRAZIL (2002): IMD5030 | | There were 21 portfolios. Fifteen were held by members of | political parties and six were held by the independents. | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - BRAZIL (2014): IMD5030 | | The size of the cabinet is 39 seats in total with thirteen | cabinet positions occupied by Independents and a further two | occupied by the PCdoB and the PDT parties respectively. | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - BULGARIA (2001): IMD5030 | | Initially 20 posts but one member of the Coalition for Bulgaria | resigned. | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - BULGARIA (2014): IMD5030 | | These data refer to the so-called Second Borisov Cabinet, | formed on November 7, 2014, after the parliamentary elections | which were held on October 5, 2014. | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - CZECH REPUBLIC (2006): IMD5030 | | Six unaccounted portfolios were held by non-partisans nominated | by the Civic Democratic Party (ODS) (Party A). That was the so | called Topolanek I cabinet (September 4, 2006 - January 1, 2007). | In Topolanek II cabinet, the following shows the distribution of | portfolios: | | Party A Civic Democratic Party (ODS) 9 | Party D Christian-Democratic Union-Czechoslovak | People's Party (KDU-CSL) 4 | Party E Green Party (SZ) 3 | Non-partisans nominated by KDU-CSL 1 | Non-partisans nominated by SZ 1 | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - ESTONIA (2011): IMD5030 | | The cabinet formed after the parliamentary election of 2011 was | composed of 13 persons in total; 12 cabinet ministers and 1 | Prime Minister. | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - FRANCE (2007): IMD5030 | | 16 ministers including the prime minister. | The number specified here represents the total number of | ministers. | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - GERMANY (2002): IMD5030 | | Fourteen ministerial posts, plus the Chancellor (from | SPD - Party A). | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - GERMANY (2005): IMD5030 | | 15 ministerial positions, plus one minister without portfolio, | but with voting rights in cabinet meetings (Federal Minister for | Special Affairs Thomas de Maiziere (CDU). | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - GERMANY (2009): IMD5030 | | 15 ministerial posts, plus the Chancellor (from CDU) for | a total of 16. | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - GREECE (2009): IMD5030 | | The cabinet which was formed after the parliamentary election | of the 4th October 2011 was composed of 16 persons. The | Prime Minister (George Papandreou), the vice-President of the | government (Theodoros Pagalos), 15 ministers (including | Papandreou as minister of foreign affairs). Not counted are 2 | alternate ministers and 19 deputy ministers. | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - HONG KONG (2004): IMD5030 | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - HONG KONG (2008): IMD5030 | | See election study note for IMD5029. | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - HONG KONG (2012): IMD5030 | | The Executive Council (ExCo) has 32 members (including the CE, | 15 official members and 16 non-official members). However, both | the official and non-official members do not have voting rights | in the ExCo. | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - HUNGARY (2002): IMD5030 | | This variable reports the cabinet size without the post of the | prime minister. | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - ICELAND (2009): IMD5030 | | In addition to the Social Democratic Alliance and the Left Green | Movement members, there were two non-party affiliated | cabinet members. | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - ISRAEL (2003): IMD5030 | | Two unaccounted portfolios held Mafdal. | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - ISRAEL (2006): IMD5030 | | 25 ministers plus the prime minister. In addition to the parties | mentioned in IMD5031, two remaining cabinet posts were held | by members of the Pensioners Party (Gil). | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - JAPAN (2004): IMD5030 | | One unaccounted portfolio was held by an independent candidate. | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - JAPAN (2007): IMD5030 | | Two unaccounted portfolios were held by independents. | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - JAPAN (2013): IMD5030 | | The data refers to Abe cabinet which was formed on | December 26, 2012. | Since the 2013 elections refer to the Upper House elections, | the data about the Cabinet prior to the election. | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - MEXICO (2003): 5010 | | "Mexico has a Presidential System in which the portfolios are | designated directly by the president and for the case of general | attorney with the approval of the senate. The elections held on | July were for federal deputies. The executive power was not | modified." | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - MEXICO (2006): IMD5030 | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - MEXICO (2009): IMD5030 | | Mexico has a Presidential System in which portfolios (State | Secretaries) are designated directly by the president. | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - MEXICO (2012): IMD5030 | | Since December 1, 2013, the cabinet in Mexico consists of | twenty secretariats. | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - PORTUGAL (2002): IMD5030 | | Seventeen ministerial positions, plus the Prime Minister. | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - PORTUGAL (2009): IMD5030 | | Including the Prime Minister, the size of the cabinet is 17. | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - PORTUGAL (2015): IMD5030 | | The size of the cabinet is 18 seats in total with eight cabinet | positions occupied by Independents. | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - ROMANIA (2009): IMD5030 | | The cabinet changes are not due to the presidential election | but are the results of a motion of no confidence voted in | October 2009. | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - ROMANIA (2012): IMD5030 | | The size of the cabinet is 28 seats in total with one cabinet | position occupied by an Independent. | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - RUSSIA (2004): B5007-IMD5030 | | See election study note for B5007. | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - SLOVAKIA (2010): IMD5030 | | The cabinet following the parliamentary election of 2010 | was composed of 15 cabinet ministers, one prime-minister | and once vice-prime minister for a total of 15 members. | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - SLOVENIA (2004): IMD5030 | | Sixteen ministerial posts (1 without portfolio), plus the Prime | Minister (from SDS - PARTY A). | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - SLOVENIA (2008): IMD5030 | | The cabinet following the parliamentary election of 2008 was | composed of 19 persons in total including the Prime Minister, | and one minister without a portfolio. | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - SLOVENIA (2011): IMD5030 | | This number includes 12 ministerial posts (one of them | without portfolio), plus the Prime Minister and a Deputy | Prime Minister. | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - SPAIN (2004): IMD5030 | | Out of 16 ministers in the cabinet, two were vice presidents of | Government. | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - SPAIN (2008): IMD5030 | | The cabinet prior to the parliamentary election of 2008 was | composed of 18 persons in total; including 2 vice-presidents. | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - THAILAND (2007): IMD5030 | | These figures contain 35 ministers plus the prime minister for a | total of 36. | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - THAILAND (2011): IMD5030 | | This data contains 35 ministers plus the prime minister for a | total of 36. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- IMD5031_A >>> GOVERNMENT COMPOSITION AFTER ELECTION - PARTY A IMD5031_B >>> GOVERNMENT COMPOSITION AFTER ELECTION - PARTY B IMD5031_C >>> GOVERNMENT COMPOSITION AFTER ELECTION - PARTY C IMD5031_D >>> GOVERNMENT COMPOSITION AFTER ELECTION - PARTY D IMD5031_E >>> GOVERNMENT COMPOSITION AFTER ELECTION - PARTY E IMD5031_F >>> GOVERNMENT COMPOSITION AFTER ELECTION - PARTY F IMD5031_G >>> GOVERNMENT COMPOSITION AFTER ELECTION - PARTY G IMD5031_H >>> GOVERNMENT COMPOSITION AFTER ELECTION - PARTY H IMD5031_I >>> GOVERNMENT COMPOSITION AFTER ELECTION - PARTY I --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Number of cabinet posts (portfolios) held by PARTY [A/B/C/D/E/F/G/H/I] after the election. .................................................................. 00-99. NUMBER OF CABINET POSTS AFTER ELECTION HELD BY PARTY/COALITION X 999. MISSING | VARIABLE NOTES: IMD5031_ | | Source: CSES Macro Report. | | Ministers are considered those members of government who are | members of the Cabinet and who have Cabinet voting rights. | | Module 2 code "997. Not applicable" (B5009) has been recoded to | "999. Missing" in the IMD. This change affects the following | studies: FRANCE (2002) and KYRGYZSTAN (2005). | | The corresponding variables in the Standalone CSES Modules are: | MODULE 1: Not included | MODULE 2: B5009_A-I (Number of Portfolios After) | MODULE 3: C5013_A-I (Government Composition After Election) | MODULE 4: D5013_A-I (Government Composition After Election) | | Data are unavailable for IMD5031_A-I for Module 1 and CHILE | (2009), FRANCE (2002), KYRGYZSTAN (2005) RUSSIA (2004) and | UNITED STATES (2004, 2008, 2012). | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - ARGENTINA (2015): IMD5031_G/H | | PARTY G (Republican Proposal, PRO) and PARTY H (Radical Civic | Union, UCR) is part of the alliance Let's Change Cambiemos | (PARTY B). The individual share of cabinet seats for | constituent parts of the alliance are also available and are | detailed here. Data for the share of cabinet seats for the | entire alliance that these parties belong to is detailed in | IMD5031_B. The complete distribution of cabinet portfolios for | Argentina is obtained by taking into account the number of | portfolios for parties A-F inclusive. | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - AUSTRIA (2008): IMD5031_B | | One of the seven posts that belong to Party B (Austrian People's | Party) is represented by one non-partisan minister, nominated by | ÖVP (Austrian People's Party) and filling an ÖVP slot. | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - BULGARIA (2001): IMD5031_C | | Coalition for Bulgaria (KzB headed by the Bulgarian Socialist | Party) initially had 2 posts in the cabinet. One minister | resigned soon after. | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - BULGARIA (2014): IMD5031 | | The data refers to the so-called Second Borisov Cabinet, | formed on November 7, 2014, after the parliamentary elections | which were held on October 5, 2014. | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - CHILE (2005): IMD5031 | | One additional portfolio was held by a Social Democrat Radical | Party member, and three more were held by independents. | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - CZECH REPUBLIC (2006): IMD5031 | | From 04/09/2006- to 09/01/2007 there were 9 cabinet | ministers from the Civic Democratic Party (ODS) and 6 | non-partisans nominated by ODS. | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - FRANCE (2012): IMD5031_A | | In addition to 30 full cabinet ministers from Party A (PS), | there are 2 full cabinet ministers from Party F (Europe | Ecologie Les Verts; EELV), two from Party 16 (Parti radical | de gauche; PRG) and one independent cabinet minister. | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - GREECE (2012): IMD5031 | | The data refers to the government formed after the elections | of June 17, 2012. In addition to the listed members, there was | one independent cabinet member. | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - HONG KONG (2004): IMD5031 | | See election study note for IMD5029. | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - HONG KONG (2004): IMD5031 | | The Alliance (formed after the 2004 LegCo Election by | reorganizing the Breakfast Group) had one non-official member of | the Executive Council (the Cabinet). | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - HONG KONG (2008): IMD5031 | | After the Election, the CE and the 15 official members were not | members of any political parties; 2 of the 14 unofficial members | were members of political parties (groups). | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - HONG KONG (2012): IMD5031 | | In Hong Kong, the Executive Council (ExCo), which is established | to assist the Chief Executive (CE; equivalent of Prime Minister, | or President) in policymaking, is some equivalent of the cabinet | elsewhere. However, the majority views of the ExCo, if any, are | not binding and it is up to the CE to decide whether to accept | them or not. In this sense, the ExCo members do not have voting | rights. | After the 2012 elections, the ExCo had 32 members (including the | CE, 15 official members and 16 non-official members). Five of | the non-official ExCo members have party affiliation, reported | in this variable. One of the five members belongs to party Rural | Council, and another one to Business and Professional Alliance | for Hong Kong. | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - HUNGARY (2002): IMD5031_A | | Party A (MSZP) had 11 cabinet members plus the prime minister. | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - ISRAEL (2003): IMD5031_A | | Likud - 14 (11 ministers with portfolios and P.M. Sharon | with 3 portfolios). | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - ISRAEL (2013): IMD5031_A | | Likud has 12 cabinet ministers while Yisrael Beiteinu has 4. | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - ITALY (2006): IMD5031 | | The specified values refer to the number of cabinet posts and | not portfolios (cabinet posts have no autonomous budgeting). The | distribution of portfolios is: Democrats of the Left (5), | Daisy-Democracy is Freedom (4), Rose in the Fist (1), | Popular-UDEUR (1), Italy of Values (1), Federation of the Greens | (1), Communist Refoundation Party (1) and Independents (4). | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - JAPAN (2013): IMD5031 | | The data refers to the Abe cabinet, which was formed on Dec. 26, | 2012. | Since the current elections refer to the Upper House elections, | the data about the Cabinet prior to the election. | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - KENYA (2013): IMD5031 | | All member of the Cabinet after the election, including the | President and Vice President, were members or affiliated with | the Jubilee Coalition, of which principal members were parties | TNA (Party A) and URP (Party C). This alliance supported the | winning presidential candidate coming from TNA (Party A). | In addition to the 11 members of the Cabinet recorded in this | variable, there were 7 nominally independent members, one from | New Ford Kenya party, one from the Republican Congress Party, | and 2 former members of the ODM (opposition Party B). | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - LATVIA (2011): IMD5031 | In addition to the listed portfolio, there were two independent | cabinet member, but according to the collaborator, they were | affiliated with party Unity (PARTY C). | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - MEXICO (2003): IMD5031 | | In the Mexican presidential system, the party affiliation of | the cabinet members is not explicit. This variable reports | party affiliation in those cases when a Secretary is a | participating member of the party, either as a former or | expected candidate to some post, if he/she has held a post | in the directive organization of the party, or if he/she has | made his/her affiliation explicit. Six cabinet members are | Independent. Party affiliation of two cabinet members | (Secretary of Defense and Secretary of the Navy) are unknown. | However, these secretaries traditionally do not have any | political affiliation. | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - MEXICO (2006): IMD5031 | | In addition to the portfolios (State Secretaries) coded in the | entries, there were 4 additional independent ministers and 2 | with unknown affiliation. | | Note that Mexico has a presidential system. The cabinet is made | up by eighteen portfolios held by state secretaries directly | appointed by the President, and the Attorney-General (19 in | total). Only the Secretary of Foreign Relations and the General | Attorney need approval from the Senate. There is no voting in | the cabinet, and the positions are not necessarily political. | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - MEXICO (2009): IMD5031 | | In addition to the 12 portfolios (State Secretaries) coded in | the entries, there were 7 additional independent ministers. | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - MEXICO (2012): IMD5031 | | In addition to the portfolios (State Secretaries) coded in the | data, there were 5 additional independent ministers. | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - MEXICO (2015): IMD5031 | | Mexico has a presidential system. After the 2015 election | there were 18 cabinet posts, including the General Attorney | who is appointed by the President but has to be approved by | the Senate as the Foreign Affairs Secretary. There is no | voting in the cabinet, and positions are not necessarily | political. In addition to the portfolios (State Secretaries) | coded in IMD5031, the remaining posts were held by independent | candidates. | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - MONTENEGRO (2012): IMD5031_A | | Party A represents a coalition of Democratic Party of Socialists | (DPS; dominant member) and Social Democratic Party (SDP). The | former obtained 14 cabinet posts, and the later 3 cabinet posts. | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - PHILIPPINES (2004): IMD5031 | | These data report five cabinet members, from Lakas-NUCD-UMDP (3 | members), LP (1), and NPC (1). One additional post was held by a | member of PDSP. The remaining cabinet members were not | affiliated with parties. They are basically from the academe, | private sector or career government officers. | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - PHILIPPINES (2016): IMD5031 | | There were 23 cabinet members after the election. However, | most are independent, while some are members of parties | participating in the party list (proportional) electoral | segment. | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - POLAND (2001): IMD5031 | | Additional 4 portfolios held by independent candidates nominated | either by SLD or PSL. | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - POLAND (2001): IMD5031_A | | This entry refers to portfolios obtained by SLD alone. | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - POLAND (2001): IMD5031_I | | This entry refers to portfolios obtained by UP alone. | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - POLAND (2005): IMD5031 | | This variable shows party affiliation of 11 Cabinet Ministers. | Out of the remaining 7 Ministers, one is a member of Partia | Centrum (party that received 0.19% of votes), while 6 are | Independents. | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - POLAND (2007): IMD5031 | | This variable shows party affiliation of 13 Cabinet Ministers. | The remaining 7 Ministers were Independents. | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - POLAND (2011): IMD5031 | | Six additional posts were held by independent ministers, but, | according to the Macro Report, close to or affiliated with | the Platforma Obywatelska (Party A). | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - PORTUGAL (2002): IMD5031 | | Four remaining cabinet posts were held by independent | candidates. | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - ROMANIA (2009): IMD5031 | | The cabinet changes are not due to the presidential election | but are the results of a motion of no confidence voted in | October 2009. | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - ROMANIA (2012): IMD5031_G | | PARTY G (Social Democratic Party, PSD) is part of the alliance | Social Liberal Union (coded PARTY A). The individual share of | cabinet seats for constituent parts of the alliance are also | available and are detailed here. Data for the share of | cabinet seats for the entire alliance that this party belong to | is detailed in IMD5031_A. The complete distribution of cabinet | portfolios for Romania is obtained by taking into account | the number of portfolios for parties A-E inclusive. | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - ROMANIA (2012): IMD5031_H | | PARTY H (National Liberal Union, NLP) is part of the alliance | Social Liberal Union (coded PARTY A). The individual share of | cabinet seats for constituent parts of the alliance are also | available and are detailed here. Data for the share of | cabinet seats for the entire alliance that this party belong to | is detailed in IMD5031_A. The complete distribution of cabinet | portfolios for Romania is obtained by taking into account | the number of portfolios for parties A-E inclusive. | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - ROMANIA (2012): IMD5031_I | | PARTY I (Liberal Democratic Party, PDL) is part of the alliance | Alliance for a Just Romania (coded PARTY B). The individual | share of cabinet seats for constituent parts of the alliance | are also available and are detailed here. Data for the share of | cabinet seats for the entire alliance that this party belong to | is detailed in IMD5031_B. The complete distribution of cabinet | portfolios for Romania is obtained by taking into account | the number of portfolios for parties A-E inclusive. | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - ROMANIA (2014): IMD5031 | | This Cabinet (so-called Ponta 3 Cabinet) was in the office until | December 13, 2014. Following the presidential elections, the | UDMR decided to leave the governing coalition because of the | anti-PSD vote of the Hungarian voters. Because this involved a | political change in the Cabinet parliamentary approval was | sought and received on December 17, 2014. | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - RUSSIA (2004): IMD5031 | | See election study note for IMD5029. | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - SERBIA (2012): IMD5031 | | The Serbian government has one Prime Minister, one or more | vice-ministers and ministers - they together constitute the | cabinet and they all have voting right. After the 2012 | elections, the Serbian government had 19 members with voting | rights: one Prime Minister, four Deputy Prime Ministers, and 14 | ministers. In the new government, the Prime Minister is also | Minister of Internal Affairs. | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - SERBIA (2012): IMD5031_A | | Party A (SNS) had six cabinet members, plus two independents by | nominated by the SNS. Hence, SNS was coded as having 8 Cabinet | members. | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - SERBIA (2012): IMD5031_C | | Party C, SPS, participated in the election as a senior member in | coalition with PUPS. SPS ended up with 4 cabinet members and URS | with one. Given the dominant position of SPS over URS, the | data includes cabinet members of both parties. | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - SLOVAKIA (2016): IMD5031_G IMD5031_H | | Siet (PARTY H) split on August 31, 2016, with several members | quitting the party, including party leader Radoslava Prochazka, | and the party losing its status as an official party | in the Slovak parliament. Siet lost its sole cabinet position | in this split. The Most-Hid (Bridge Party - PARTY G) was | allocated a third position in the cabinet on August 31, 2016 as a | result of the Siet split. | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - SLOVENIA (2008): IMD5031_A | | The collaborator lists 9 individuals (Excluding the Prime | Minister). Two of which without a portfolio. | | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - SLOVENIA (2008): IMD5031_D | | The collaborator lists 3 persons, one of which without a | portfolio. | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - TAIWAN (2008): IMD5031 | | After the elections, 24 Ministers were from the KMT, 1 from the | DDP, and 20 were independents, for a total of 45 ministers | including premier and vice-premier. | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - TAIWAN (2012): IMD5031 | | All Cabinet Ministers were from the KMT. | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - URUGUAY (2009): IMD5031_A | | There are 14 cabinet members - 13 ministers plus the President | of the Republic, who is simultaneously the President of the | Council of Ministers and a member of it, with an equal vote to | each minister. The entire cabinet came from Party A (Broad | Front/Frente Amplio). --------------------------------------------------------------------------- IMD5049 >>> AGE OF THE CURRENT REGIME --------------------------------------------------------------------------- The number of years since the most recent regime change (defined by a three-point change in the POLITY score over a period of three years or less) or the end of transition period defined by the lack of stable political institutions (denoted by a standardized authority score) [Variable "Durable" from Polity IV Project Dataset Users' Manual]. .................................................................. 000-500. AGE OF THE REGIME (YEARS) 999. MISSING | VARIABLE NOTES: IMD5049 | | Source: POLITY IV Project: Political Regime Characteristics | and Transitions, 1800-2017, Monty G. Marshall and Keith Jaggers, | George Mason University and Colorado State University. | Available at: http://www.systemicpeace.org/polity/polity4.htm | (Date accessed: October 29, 2018) | | The Polity IV Dataset Users' Manual, available at: | http://www.systemicpeace.org/inscr/p4manualv2017.pdf | (Date accessed: April 5, 2019). | | The Polity IV annual time-series dataset, available at: | http://www.systemicpeace.org/inscr/p4v2017.xls | (Date accessed: October 29, 2018) | | Data on IMD5049 were originally not included in MODULE 1 and | MODULE 2, but were now collected for these election studies for | the CSES IMD, based on the sources indicated above. | | The corresponding variables in the Standalone CSES Modules are: | MODULE 1: Not included (See above) | MODULE 2: Not included (See above) | MODULE 3: C5052 | MODULE 4: D5052 | POLITY NOTES - HONG KONG: IMD5049 | | Data unavailable as Polity IV does not include Hong Kong. | POLITY NOTES - ICELAND: IMD5049 | | Data unavailable as Polity IV does not include Iceland. | [POLITY NOTES] - ISRAEL: IMD5049 | | The most recent Polity IV dataset dates the last regime change | in Israel back to 1981, the year of Israel’s de-facto annexation | of the Golan Heights. However, previous versions of Polity IV | used for CSES Modules 3 and 4 set 1948 as the year in which | Israel's last regime change occurred. CSES does not retroactively | update estimates as to do so might impede replication. Therefore, | for all Israeli election studies in the CSES IMD, IMD5049 was | coded in such a way that it dates the last regime change back to | 1948. | POLITY NOTES - PERU: IMD5049 | | The age of the current regime is coded 0 for both Peru 2000 | and Peru 2001 - reflecting the period when Peru’s President | Alberto Fujimori won the elections and a controversial third | term in office in May 2000, but fled the country later the same | year when he was charged of corruption and human right | violations. As a consequence, early Presidential elections were | held in spring 2001. | POLITY NOTES - RUSSIA: IMD5049 | | Polity IV distinguishes two recent regime changes in Russia, the | first in 1992 after the dissolution of the Soviet Union and the | second in 2000 when Vladimir Putin won his first Presidential | Elections. | POLITY NOTES - THAILAND: IMD5049 | | In its recent history, Thailand experienced a number of breaks | with democracy. For the Thai election studies included in the | CSES IMD, Polity IV data marks three regime changes, the first | occurring in 1992, the second occurring in a period from 2006 to | 2008, and the third occurring in 2011. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- IMD5050_1 >>> FREEDOM HOUSE RATING - TIME T IMD5050_2 >>> FREEDOM HOUSE RATING - TIME T-1 YEAR IMD5050_3 >>> FREEDOM HOUSE RATING - TIME T-2 YEARS --------------------------------------------------------------------------- These variables report Freedom House's rating of freedom in a country at three time periods: the election year (time T), one year before election (T-1), and two years before election (T-2). Each country and territory is assigned a numerical rating, on a scale of 1 to 7. A rating of 1 indicates the highest degree of freedom and 7 the least amount of freedom. CSES reports average of the "Political Rights" and "Civil Liberties" scores. .................................................................. 1.0-7.0. FREEDOM HOUSE RATING SCORE 9.0. MISSING | VARIABLE NOTES: IMD5050_ | | Source: Freedom House's annual publications "Freedom in the | World" (http://www.freedomhouse.org/images/File/FIW%20All%20Scor | es,%20Countries,%201973-2010.xls and http://www.freedomhouse.org | /images/File/FIW%20All%20Scores,Territories,%201973-2010.xls. | Downloaded on October 13, 2010). | | Until 2003, countries whose combined average ratings for | Political Rights and for Civil Liberties fell between 1.0 and | 2.5 were designated "Free"; between 3.0 and 5.5 "Partly Free", | and between 5.5 and 7.0 "Not Free". Beginning with the ratings | for 2003, countries whose combined average ratings fall between | 3.0 and 5.0 are "Partly Free", and those between 5.5 and 7.0 are | "Not Free". | | More information about Freedom House's methodology available at: | http://freedomhouse.org/. | | Data on IMD5050_ were originally not included in MODULE 1 and | MODULE 2, but were now collected for these election studies for | the CSES IMD. | | The corresponding variables in the Standalone CSES Modules are: | MODULE 1: Not included (See above) | MODULE 2: Not included (See above) | MODULE 3: C5050_1-C5050_3 | MODULE 4: D5050_1-D5050_3 --------------------------------------------------------------------------- IMD5051_1 >>> DEMOCRACY-AUTOCRACY - POLITY IV RATING - TIME T IMD5051_2 >>> DEMOCRACY-AUTOCRACY - POLITY IV RATING - TIME T-1 YEAR IMD5051_3 >>> DEMOCRACY-AUTOCRACY - POLITY IV RATING - TIME T-2 YEARS --------------------------------------------------------------------------- These variables report POLITY IV ratings of institutionalized democracy versus autocracy in a country, at three time periods: the election year (time T), one year before election (T-1), and two years before election (T-2). CSES reports the original variable POLITY - Combined Polity Score. The variable is constructed by subtracting the autocracy score from the democracy score; the resulting scale ranges from +10 (strongly democratic) to -10 (strongly autocratic). .................................................................. 10. DEMOCRATIC 09. 08. 07. 06. 05. 04. 03. 02. 01. 00. -01. -02. -03. -04. -05. -06. -07. -08. -09. -10. AUTOCRATIC -66. INTERRUPTION PERIODS -77. INTERREGUM PERIODS -88. TRANSITION PERIODS 99. MISSING | VARIABLE NOTES: IMD5051_ | | Source: POLITY IV Project: Political Regime Characteristics | and Transitions, 1800-2007, Monty G. Marshall and Keith Jaggers, | George Mason University and Colorado State University. | Available at: http://www.systemicpeace.org/polity/polity4.htm | (Date accessed: May 17, 2018). | | The Polity IV Dataset Users' Manual, available at: | http://www.systemicpeace.org/inscr/p4manualv2012.pdf | (Date accessed: November 25, 2010). | | The Polity IV annual time-series dataset, available at: | http://www.systemicpeace.org/inscrdata.html | (Date accessed: May 17, 2018). | | Data on IMD5051_ were originally not included in MODULE 1 and | MODULE 2, but were now collected for these election studies for | the CSES IMD. | | The corresponding variables in the Standalone CSES Modules are: | MODULE 1: Not included (See above) | MODULE 2: Not included (See above) | MODULE 3: C5051_1-C5051_3 | MODULE 4: D5051_1-D5051_3 | | Data is unavailable for HONG KONG (1998, 2000, 2004, 2008, | 2012) and ICELAND (1999, 2003, 2007, 2009, 2013). --------------------------------------------------------------------------- IMD5052_1 >>> GDP GROWTH - ANNUAL % (WORLD BANK) - TIME T IMD5052_2 >>> GDP GROWTH - ANNUAL % (WORLD BANK) - TIME T-1 IMD5052_3 >>> GDP GROWTH - ANNUAL % (WORLD BANK) - TIME T-2 --------------------------------------------------------------------------- These variables report World Bank estimate of the annual GDP growth, at three time periods: the election year (time T), one year before election (T-1), and two years before election (T-2). Definition: Annual percentage growth rate of GDP at market prices based on constant local currency. Aggregates are based on constant 2000 U.S. dollars. GDP is the sum of gross value added by all resident producers in the economy plus any product taxes and minus any subsidies not included in the value of the products. It is calculated without making deductions for depreciation of fabricated assets or for depletion and degradation of natural resources. .................................................................. -20.000 to +20.000. PERCENT ANNUAL GROWTH 99.000. MISSING/NOT AVAILABLE AT TIME OF PUBLICATION | VARIABLE NOTES: IMD5052_ | | Data for studies included in Modules 1 and 2 comes from the | World Bank World Development Indicators Open Database - see: | http://data.worldbank.org/indicator/NY.GDP.MKTP.KD.ZG | (Date accessed: July 1, 2019). | | Data for studies included in Module 3 comes from the World | Bank World Development Indicators Open Database - see: | http://data.worldbank.org/data-catalog/world-development- | indicators. | | Data for studies included in Module 4 comes from the World Bank | World Development Indicators Open Database - see: | http://data.worldbank.org/indicator/NY.GDP.MKTP.KD.ZG | (Date accessed: April 9, 2017). | | CSES collects the most up to data for each polity available | at the time the data is being processed by the CSES Secretariat. | However, aggregate level macro data from the World Bank is often | updated retroactively as revised estimates become available. | These revised estimates are usually because of improved data | collection, or more evidence becoming available to allow for a | more robust estimates to be made, or changes in methodology. | For more see the advice of the World Bank at: | http://econ.worldbank.org/WBSITE/EXTERNAL/DATASTATISTICS/0,, | contentMDK:20541394~menuPK:1277382~pagePK:64133150~piPK:64133175 | ~print:Y~theSitePK:239419,00.html#recent_data | (Date accessed: July 15, 2019). | | The CSES policy is to provide users with estimates of data | at the time the data is processed. CSES does not retroactively | update these estimates as to do so might impede replication. | | When the data at the time of processing of Standalone Modules | was unavailable, but since became available, we included it in | the CSES IMD. | | The corresponding variables in the Standalone CSES Modules are: | MODULE 1: Not included (See above) | MODULE 2: Not included (See above) | MODULE 3: C5080_1-C5080_3 | MODULE 4: D5080_1-D5080_3 | | Data are unavailable for IMD5052_ for TAIWAN (1996, 2001, 2004). | | Data are unavailable for IMD5052_3 for LITHUANIA (1997). | POLITY NOTES – TAIWAN: IMD5052_ | | The source of data for TAIWAN (2008, 2012) is CIA World Fact | Book. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- IMD5053_1 >>> GDP PER CAPITA, PPP (WORLD BANK) - TIME T IMD5053_2 >>> GDP PER CAPITA, PPP (WORLD BANK) - TIME T-1 IMD5053_3 >>> GDP PER CAPITA, PPP (WORLD BANK) - TIME T-2 --------------------------------------------------------------------------- These variables report World Bank estimate of the GDP per capita, at three time periods: the election year (time T), one year before election (T-1), and two years before election (T-2). Definition: GDP is gross domestic product at purchaser prices divided by midyear population. It is the sum of the gross value added by all resident producers in the economy plus any product taxes and minus any subsidies not included in the value of the products. It is calculated without deductions for depreciation of fabricated assets or for depletion and degradation of natural resources. PPP GDP is gross domestic product converted to international dollars using purchasing power parity rates. An international dollar has the same purchasing power over GDP as a U.S. dollar has in the United States. Data are in constant 2005 international dollars. .................................................................. 000000.00-899999.00. GDP PER CAPITA 999999.00. MISSING/NOT AVAILABLE AT TIME OF PUBLICATION | VARIABLE NOTES: IMD5053_ | | Data for studies included in Modules 1 and 2 comes from the | World Bank World Development Indicators Open Database - see: | http://data.worldbank.org/indicator/NY.GDP.PCAP.PP.CD | (Date accessed: July 1, 2019). | | Data for studies included in Module 3 comes from the World | Bank World Development Indicators Open Database - see: | http://data.worldbank.org/data-catalog/world-development- | indicators. | | Data for studies included in Module 4 comes from the World Bank | World Development Indicators Open Database - see: | http://data.worldbank.org/indicator/NY.GDP.PCAP.PP.CD | (Date accessed: April 9, 2017). | | CSES collects the most up to data for each polity available | at the time the data is being processed by the CSES Secretariat. | However, aggregate level macro data from the World Bank is often | updated retroactively as revised estimates become available. | These revised estimates are usually because of improved data | collection, or more evidence becoming available to allow for a | more robust estimates to be made, or changes in methodology. | For more see the advice of the World Bank at: | http://econ.worldbank.org/WBSITE/EXTERNAL/DATASTATISTICS/0,, | contentMDK:20541394~menuPK:1277382~pagePK:64133150~piPK:64133175 | ~print:Y~theSitePK:239419,00.html#recent_data | (Date accessed: July 15, 2019). | | The CSES policy is to provide users with estimates of data | at the time the data is processed. CSES does not retroactively | update these estimates as to do so might impede replication. | | When the data at the time of processing of Standalone Modules | was unavailable, but since became available, we included it in | the CSES IMD. | | The corresponding variables in the Standalone CSES Modules are: | MODULE 1: Not included (See above) | MODULE 2: Not included (See above) | MODULE 3: C5081_1-C5081_3 | MODULE 4: D5081_1-D5081_3 | | Data are unavailable for IMD5053_ for TAIWAN (1996, 2001, 2004). | POLITY NOTES – TAIWAN: IMD5053_ | | The source of data for TAIWAN (2008, 2012) is CIA World Fact | Book. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- IMD5054_1 >>> UNEMPLOYMENT, TOTAL (WORLD BANK) - TIME T IMD5054_2 >>> UNEMPLOYMENT, TOTAL (WORLD BANK) - TIME T-1 IMD5054_3 >>> UNEMPLOYMENT, TOTAL (WORLD BANK) - TIME T-2 --------------------------------------------------------------------------- These variables report World Bank estimates of the unemployment rate (% of total labor force), at three time periods: the election year (time T), one year before election (T-1), and two years before election (T-2). Unemployment is the share of the labor force without work but available for and seeking employment. Definitions of labor force and unemployment may differ by country. .................................................................. 00.00-100.00. UNEMPLOYMENT RATE (% OF TOTAL LABOR FORCE) 999.00. MISSING/NOT AVAILABLE AT TIME OF PUBLICATION | VARIABLE NOTES: IMD5054_ | | Data for studies included in Modules 1 and 2 comes from the | World Bank World Development Indicators Open Database - see: | https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/SL.UEM.TOTL.ZS | (Date accessed: July 1, 2019). | | Data for studies included in Module 3 comes from the World | Bank World Development Indicators Open Database - see: | http://data.worldbank.org/data-catalog/world-development- | indicators. | | Data for studies included in Module 4 comes from the World Bank | World Development Indicators Open Database - see: | http://data.worldbank.org/indicator/SL.UEM.TOTL.ZS | (Date accessed: April 9, 2017). | | CSES collects the most up to data for each polity available | at the time the data is being processed by the CSES Secretariat. | However, aggregate level macro data from the World Bank is often | updated retroactively as revised estimates become available. | These revised estimates are usually because of improved data | collection, or more evidence becoming available to allow for a | more robust estimates to be made, or changes in methodology. | For more see the advice of the World Bank at: | http://econ.worldbank.org/WBSITE/EXTERNAL/DATASTATISTICS/0,, | contentMDK:20541394~menuPK:1277382~pagePK:64133150~piPK:64133175 | ~print:Y~theSitePK:239419,00.html#recent_data | (Date accessed: July 15, 2019). | | The CSES policy is to provide users with estimates of data | at the time the data is processed. CSES does not retroactively | update these estimates as to do so might impede replication. | | When the data at the time of processing of Standalone Modules | was unavailable, but since became available, we included it in | the CSES IMD. | | The corresponding variables in the Standalone CSES Modules are: | MODULE 1: Not included (See above) | MODULE 2: Not included (See above) | MODULE 3: C5085_1-C5085_3 | MODULE 4: D5085_1-D5085_3 | | Data are unavailable for IMD5054_ for TAIWAN (1996, 2001, 2004). | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - BELARUS (2008): IMD5054_ | | Unemployment estimates are not available from the World Bank | for these years in Belarus. In this case, figures reported are | from the International Labor Organization (ILO), and represent | unemployment rates for men aged 16 to 59 years and women aged 16 | to 54 years, in December for each of the respective years. | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - BRAZIL (2006): IMD5054_ | | These data are from the International Labor Organization (ILO) | and represent persons aged 10 years and over. | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - SOUTH KOREA (2008): IMD5054_ | | The source of these data is the CIA world factbook. | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - TAIWAN (2008): IMD5054_ | | These data are from the International Labor Organization (ILO). | The figures represent total, yearly unemployment rates, for | persons aged 15 years and over. | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - TAIWAN (2012): IMD5054_ | | Taiwan data are unavailable in WDI database. The source of these | data is the International Monetary Fund (IMF) - World economic | outlook database. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- IMD5055_1 >>> HUMAN DEVELOPMENT INDEX (UNPD) - TIME T IMD5055_2 >>> HUMAN DEVELOPMENT INDEX (UNPD) - TIME T-1 IMD5055_3 >>> HUMAN DEVELOPMENT INDEX (UNPD) - TIME T-2 --------------------------------------------------------------------------- These variables report UNDP Human Development Index (HDI) at three time periods: the election year (time T), one year before election (T-1), and two years before election (T-2). Definition: The human development index (HDI) is a composite index that measures the average achievements in a country in three basic dimensions of human development: a long and healthy life; access to knowledge; and a decent standard of living. These basic dimensions are measured by life expectancy at birth, adult literacy and combined gross enrollment in primary, secondary and tertiary level education, and gross domestic product (GDP) per capita in Purchasing Power Parity US dollars (PPP US$), respectively. .................................................................. 00.00-99.00. HUMAN DEVELOPMENT INDEX 999.00. MISSING/NOT AVAILABLE AT TIME OF PUBLICATION | VARIABLE NOTES: IMD5055_ | | Data for studies included in Modules 1 and 2 comes from the | United Nations Human Development Database see: | http://hdr.undp.org/en/content/human-development-index-hdi | (Date accessed: July 1, 2019). | | Data for studies included in Module 3 comes from the Human | Development Report 2010, see: | http://hdrstats.undp.org/en/indicators/49806.html | (Date accessed: December 9, 2010). | | Data for studies included in Module 4 comes from the United | Nations Human Development Database see: | http://hdr.undp.org/en/data | (Date accessed: April 9, 2017). | | As of 2010 HDI data are different from the previous | reports, due to the revision of the HDI methodology. Hence, | data for all the countries included in this CSES release are | updated accordingly. For more details about the change in the | HDI methodology, see: | http://hdr.undp.org/en/faq-page/human-development-index-hdi | (Date accessed: April 9, 2017). | | When the data at the time of processing of Standalone Modules | was unavailable, but since became available, we included it in | the CSES IMD. | | The corresponding variables in the Standalone CSES Modules are: | MODULE 1: Not included (See above) | MODULE 2: Not included (See above) | MODULE 3: C5083_1-C5083_3 | MODULE 4: D5083_1-D5083_3 | Data are unavailable at the time of publication for IMD5055_ for | TAIWAN (1996, 2001, 2004, 2008, 2012). --------------------------------------------------------------------------- IMD5056_1 >>> INFLATION, GDP DEFLATOR (ANNUAL %) (WORLD BANK) - TIME T IMD5056_2 >>> INFLATION, GDP DEFLATOR (ANNUAL %) (WORLD BANK) - TIME T-1 IMD5056_3 >>> INFLATION, GDP DEFLATOR (ANNUAL %) (WORLD BANK) - TIME T-2 --------------------------------------------------------------------------- These variables report World Bank estimate of Inflation at three time periods: the election year (time T), one year before election (T-1), and two years before election (T-2). Definition: Inflation as measured by the annual growth rate of the GDP implicit deflator shows the rate of price change in the economy as a whole. The GDP implicit deflator is the ratio of GDP in current local currency to GDP in constant local currency. .................................................................. -100.00-10000.00. INFLATION (ANNUAL %) 99999.00. MISSING/NOT AVAILABLE AT TIME OF PUBLICATION | VARIABLE NOTES: IMD5056_ | | Data for studies included in Modules 1 and 2 comes from the | World Bank World Development Indicators Open Database - see: | https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/NY.GDP.DEFL.KD.ZG | (Date accessed: August 8, 2019). | | Data for studies included in Module 3 comes from the World | Bank World Development Indicators Open Database - see: | http://data.worldbank.org/data-catalog/world-development- | indicators. | | Data for studies included in Module 4 comes from the World Bank | World Development Indicators Open Database - see: | http://data.worldbank.org/indicator/NY.GDP.DEFL.KD.ZG | (Date accessed: April 9, 2017). | | CSES collects the most up to data for each polity available | at the time the data is being processed by the CSES Secretariat. | However, aggregate level macro data from the World Bank is often | updated retroactively as revised estimates become available. | These revised estimates are usually because of improved data | collection, or more evidence becoming available to allow for a | more robust estimates to be made, or changes in methodology. | For more see the advice of the World Bank at: | http://econ.worldbank.org/WBSITE/EXTERNAL/DATASTATISTICS/0,, | contentMDK:20541394~menuPK:1277382~pagePK:64133150~piPK:64133175 | ~print:Y~theSitePK:239419,00.html#recent_data | (Date accessed: July 15, 2019). | | The CSES policy is to provide users with estimates of data | at the time the data is processed. CSES does not retroactively | update these estimates as to do so might impede replication. | | When the data at the time of processing of Standalone Modules | was unavailable, but since became available, we included it in | the CSES IMD. | | The corresponding variables in the Standalone CSES Modules are: | MODULE 1: Not included (See above) | MODULE 2: Not included (See above) | MODULE 3: C5082_1-C5082_3 | MODULE 4: D5082_1-D5082_3 | | Data are unavailable for IMD5056_ for TAIWAN (1996, 2001, 2004). | | Data are unavailable for IMD5056_3 for LITHUANIA (1997) and | TAIWAN (2012). | POLITY NOTES – TAIWAN: IMD5056_ | | The source of data for TAIWAN (2008, 2012) is CIA World Fact | Book. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- IMD5057_1 >>> POPULATION, TOTAL (WORLD BANK) - TIME T IMD5057_2 >>> POPULATION, TOTAL (WORLD BANK) - TIME T-1 IMD5057_3 >>> POPULATION, TOTAL (WORLD BANK) - TIME T-2 --------------------------------------------------------------------------- These variables report World Bank estimate of the total population size, at three time periods: the election year (time T), one year before election (T-1), and two years before election (T-2). Definition: Total population is based on the de facto definition of population, which counts all residents regardless of legal status or citizenship - except for refugees not permanently settled in the country of asylum, who are generally considered part of the population of their country of origin. .................................................................. 1000-899,999,999. POPULATION SIZE 999,999,999. MISSING/NOT AVAILABLE AT TIME OF PUBLICATION | VARIABLE NOTES: IMD5057_ | | Data for studies included in Modules 1 and 2 comes from the | World Bank World Development Indicators Open Database - see: | https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/SP.POP.TOTL | (Date accessed: August 8, 2019). | | Data for studies included in Module 3 comes from the World | Bank World Development Indicators Open Database - see: | http://data.worldbank.org/data-catalog/world-development- | indicators. | | Data for studies included in Module 4 comes from the World Bank | World Development Indicators Open Database - see: | http://data.worldbank.org/indicator/SP.POP.TOTL | (Date accessed: April 9, 2017). | | CSES collects the most up to data for each polity available | at the time the data is being processed by the CSES Secretariat. | However, aggregate level macro data from the World Bank is often | updated retroactively as revised estimates become available. | These revised estimates are usually because of improved data | collection, or more evidence becoming available to allow for a | more robust estimates to be made, or changes in methodology. | For more see the advice of the World Bank at: | http://econ.worldbank.org/WBSITE/EXTERNAL/DATASTATISTICS/0,, | contentMDK:20541394~menuPK:1277382~pagePK:64133150~piPK:64133175 | ~print:Y~theSitePK:239419,00.html#recent_data | (Date accessed: July 15, 2019). | | The CSES policy is to provide users with estimates of data | at the time the data is processed. CSES does not retroactively | update these estimates as to do so might impede replication. | | When the data at the time of processing of Standalone Modules | was unavailable, but since became available, we included it in | the CSES IMD. | | The corresponding variables in the Standalone CSES Modules are: | MODULE 1: Not included (See above) | MODULE 2: Not included (See above) | MODULE 3: C5084_1-C5084_3 | MODULE 4: D5084_1-D5084_3 | | Data are unavailable for IMD5057_ for TAIWAN (1996, 2001, 2004). | | Data are unavailable for IMD5057_2 and IMD5057_3 for TAIWAN | (2012). | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - AUSTRIA (2013): IMD5057_1 | | The data for Austria (2013) in CSES Module 4 comes from The | Statistics Austria, Population forecast 2013 at: | http://www.statistik.at | (Date accessed: October 18, 2013). | | The data has since become available in World Bank World | Development Indicators Open Database. This source was used for | Austria (2013) study in IMD. So, users should be aware of small | differences on this variable for Austria (2013) between CSES | Module 4 dataset and CSES IMD. | POLITY NOTES – TAIWAN: IMD5057_ | | Data for Taiwan (2008) is from Taiwan's Council for Economic | Planning and Development (CEPD). Figures for 2008 are from | projected estimates, medium variant. | | Data for Taiwan (2012) for IMD5057_1 is from the CIA world fact | book. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- IMD5058_1 >>> EFFECTIVE NUMBER OF ELECTORAL PARTIES --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Effective number of electoral parties (ENEP). Formula: ENPP = 1/(SUM[V_i^2]) where V_i represents the vote share of party i, and all parties (i=1,2...n) receiving votes are included in the calculation. Definition based on Laakso, M. and R. Taagepera (1979). '"Effective" Number of Parties: A Measure with Application to West Europe', Comparative Political Studies 12: 3-27. .................................................................. 000.00-150.00. EFFECTIVE NUMBER OF ELECTORAL PARTIES 997.00. PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION ONLY - NOT CALCULATED 999.00. MISSING | VARIABLE NOTES: IMD5058_1 | | Formula: ENPP = 1/(SUM[V_i^2]) | where V_i represents the vote share of party i, and all | parties (i=1,2...n) receiving votes are included in the | calculation. | | Definition based on Laakso, M. and R. Taagepera (1979). | "Effective" Number of Parties: A Measure with Application to | West Europe', Comparative Political Studies 12: 3-27. | | The electoral data employed to calculate this index comes | from lower house elections, unless the study is focused on | upper house election exclusively. | For countries with mixed electoral systems the electoral | returns come from the segment containing the most seats. If | there are an equal amount of seats in each segment the results | come from the proportional representation segment. | | For Modules 1 and 2, data was collected from: | Gallagher, Michael, 2019. "Election indices dataset" - see: | http://www.tcd.ie/Political_Science/people/michael_gallagher/ | ElSystems/index.php, | (Date accessed: August 14, 2019). | | For Modules 3 and 4,the CSES Secretariat calculated these data | for each polity's election and cross-checked it against the same | source. | | The corresponding variables in the Standalone CSES Modules are: | MODULE 1: Not included (See above) | MODULE 2: Not included (See above) | MODULE 3: C5093 | MODULE 4: D5102 | | Data are unavailable for IMD5058_1 for HONG KONG (1998, 2000, | 2004), JAPAN (2004), PHILIPPINES (2004), THAILAND (2001), | TAIWAN (2001) and UKRAINE (1998). | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - ARGENTINA (2015): IMD5058_1 | | Calculating the effective number of electoral parties in | Argentina is complex given that parties form alliances at the | regional level and moreover election results data is not always | aggregated consistently for parties/alliances. Thus, consistent | estimates of this metric are difficult to arrive at, something | which is noted by Gallagher (2017) in his estimates of the same | data. CSES estimates of this metric are arrived at using the | following approach: | - Parties and alliances are treated as one party/grouping. | - Only parties contesting seats in the 2015 election are | counted. Parties not contesting but who held holdover seats | in parliament are not included in the estimate. | - While 158 parties are estimated to have fielded candidates | in the election, the number of parties competing reduces to | 20 if coalitions are counted as one grouping. | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - AUSTRALIA (2013): IMD5058_1 | | This data is calculated by treating the Liberals (Liberal party | and Liberal National Party) and the Nationals (the National | Party and the Country Liberals) as single entities. | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - BELARUS (2008): IMD5058_1 | | The large differences between the effective number of political | parties and the corrected measure stems from the very large | number of independent candidates gaining a seat. | The residual category "other" in Belarus encompasses more than | 86 percent of the vote, and is entirely composed of independent | candidates. | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - FRANCE (2007): IMD5058_1 | | Electoral returns in France contain more than one "other" | category. The broader categories "regionalist", "Divers", "other | left wing" "other right wing" and "others" were treated as | single parties where appropriate and not amalgamated in a | broader "other" category. | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - FRANCE (2012): IMD5058_1 | | Data unavailable as the 2012 CSES study in France relates to | the Presidential elections held on April 22, 2012 (Round 1) | and May 6, 2012 (Round 2). Parliamentary elections were | subsequently held on June 10 and June 17, 2012. | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - GREAT BRITAIN (2015): IMD5058_1 | | These data are calculated on the national share of the vote | and share of seats attained by parties who fielded candidates | in England, Scotland, and Wales. Northern Ireland data is not | included in the calculation of Effective Number of Electoral | or Parliamentary Parties as the 2015 British Election Study | did not include respondents from Northern Ireland. | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - HONG KONG (2012): IMD5058_1 | | The data refers to the first segment of the Legislative | Council (LegCo), i.e. the election of 35 representatives | in Geographical Constituencies. | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - JAPAN (2013): IMD5058_1 | | The data refers to the first segment of the Upper | House electoral system (majoritarian, segment - Prefectoral | Districts), because the Japanese (2013) CSES data refer to the | Upper House elections of 2013. | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - MEXICO (2006): IMD5058_1 | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - MEXICO (2009): IMD5058_1 | | This entry is calculated using the marginal vote distribution of | the single-member districts. Recall that the proportional | representation vote distribution is calculated using the outcome | of the single-member districts. Additionally, for the 2006 | contest there were two pre-electoral coalitions who's results | are aggregated in the official electoral results, and thus are | calculated as a single entity, but in reality include 2 and 3 | parties each. | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - MEXICO (2012): IMD5058_1 | | The data is calculated on the basis of constituency votes. | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - MEXICO (2015): IMD5058_1 | | The data is calculated on the basis of the national level | election results. | Mexican voters cast a single vote in a single-member district | plurality election. However, this also counts for the allocation | of the proportional representation seats disputed in the larger | regional multi-member districts (five circumscriptions). | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - PHILIPPINES (2010): IMD5058_1 | | These figures are based on the May 10, 2010 Philippine House | of Representatives election results for representatives from | congressional districts. | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - PHILIPPINES (2016): IMD5058_1 | | These data are based the on congressional district election | results (first segment of the Lower House). | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - ROMANIA (2009): IMD5058_1 | | These figures are based on the 2008 parliamentary elections. | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - ROMANIA (2012): IMD5058_1 | | These data is calculated by treating the Alliances Social | Liberal Union (PARTY A) and Alliance for a Just Romania | (PARTY B) as single entities. | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - ROMANIA (2014): IMD5058_1 | | The 2014 Romanian election study is concerned with the | Presidential elections of 2014. Hence, this variable is | coded Missing. | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - SLOVENIA (2011): IMD5058_1 | | Effective number of political parties was calculated without | taking into account parties/candidates competing for the two | seats reserved for the representatives of Hungarian and Italian | minorities. | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - SOUTH KOREA (2012): IMD5058_1 | | The data refers to the second tier of the Parliament | (the proportional segment). They reflect the nationwide | proportion of votes cast for party lists. This data is | provided since the results from single-member constituencies | was not available. Notice that 54 out of 300 parliamentary | seats are allocated through the second segment. | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - TAIWAN (2008): IMD5058_1 | | These figures are calculated using the constituency level | returns from the 2008 legislative (Yuan) elections. | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - TAIWAN (2012): IMD5058_1 | | The data was calculated for the lower tier. | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - THAILAND (2007): IMD5058_1 | | Effective number of political parties was calculated using vote | shares from the PR list tier. | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - THAILAND (2011): IMD5058_1 | | Effective number of political parties was calculated using vote | shares from the PR list tier. | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - TURKEY (2011): IMD5058_1 | | The Peace and Democracy Party (BDP) did not participate in the | elections as a political party, but fielded its candidates as | independents. This figure takes into account the BDP as a | political party --------------------------------------------------------------------------- IMD5058_2 >>> CORRECTED EFFECTIVE NUMBER OF ELECTORAL PARTIES --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Corrected effective number of electoral parties (CENEP). Corrected Effective Number of Electoral Parties corrects for the "other" category using the least component method of bounds suggested by Taagepera (D2015). The method requires calculating the ENEP (IMD5058_1) two times. One is treating the "other" category as a single party and the second is calculating the ENEP as if every vote in the "other" category belonged to a different party. The CENEP is the mean of both measures. Definition based on: Taagepera, R. (1997). 'Effective Number of Parties for incomplete Data', Electoral Studies 16: 145-151. .................................................................. 000.00-150.00. CORRECTED EFFECTIVE NUMBER OF ELECTORAL PARTIES 997.00. PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION ONLY - NOT CALCULATED 999.00. MISSING | VARIABLE NOTES: IMD5058_2 | | Corrected Effective Number of Electoral Parties corrects for the | "other" category using the least component method of bounds | suggested by Taagepera (D2015). The method requires calculating | the ENEP (D5093) two times. One is treating the "other" category | as a single party and the second is calculating the ENEP as if | every vote in the "other" category belonged to a different | party. The CENEP is the mean of both measures. | Definition based on: Taagepera, R. (1997). 'Effective Number of | Parties for incomplete Data', Electoral Studies 16: 145-151. | | The electoral data employed to calculate this index comes | from lower house elections, unless the study is focused on | upper house election exclusively. | For countries with mixed electoral systems (see D5058) the | electoral returns come from the segment containing the most | seats. If there are an equal amount of seats in each segment | the results come from the proportional representation segment. | | The CSES Secretariat calculates these data for each polity's | election and cross-checks it against the standard source, | namely: | Gallagher, Michael, 2019. "Election indices dataset" - see: | http://www.tcd.ie/Political_Science/people/michael_gallagher/ | ElSystems/index.php, | (Date accessed: August 14, 2019). | | The corresponding variables in the Standalone CSES Modules are: | MODULE 1: Not included | MODULE 2: Not included | MODULE 3: C5094 | MODULE 4: D5103 | | Data are unavailable for IMD5058_2 for Modules 1, 2. | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - ARGENTINA (2015): IMD5058_2 | | Calculating the corrected effective number of electoral parties | in Argentina is complex given that parties form alliances at the | regional level and moreover election results data is not always | aggregated consistently for parties/alliances. Thus, consistent | estimates of this metric are difficult to arrive at, something | which is noted by Gallagher (2017) in his estimates of the same | data. CSES estimates of this metric are arrived at using the | following approach: | - Parties and alliances are treated as one party/grouping. | - Only parties contesting seats in the 2015 election are | counted. Parties not contesting but who held holdover seats | in parliament are not included in the estimate. | - While 158 parties are estimated to have fielded candidates | in the election, the number of parties competing reduces to | 20 if coalitions are counted as one grouping. | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - AUSTRALIA (2013): IMD5058_2 | | This data is calculated by treating the Liberals (Liberal party | and Liberal National Party) and the Nationals (the National | Party and the Country Liberals) as single entities. | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - BELARUS (2008): IMD5058_2 | | The large differences between the effective number of political | parties and the corrected measure stems from the very large | number of independent candidates gaining a seat. | The residual category "other" in Belarus encompasses more than | 86 percent of the vote and is entirely composed of independent | candidates. | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - FRANCE (2007): IMD5058_2 | | Electoral returns in France contain more than one "other" | category. The broader categories "regionalist", "Divers", "other | left wing" "other right wing" and "others" were treated as | single parties where appropriate and not amalgamated in a | broader "other" category. | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - FRANCE (2012): IMD5058_2 | | See Election Study Note for variable IMD5058_1. | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - GREAT BRITAIN (2015): IMD5058_2 | | These data are calculated on the national share of the vote | and share of seats attained by parties who fielded candidates | in England, Scotland, and Wales. Northern Ireland data is not | included in the calculation of Effective Number of Electoral | or Parliamentary Parties as the 2015 British Election Study | did not include respondents from Northern Ireland. | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - HONG KONG (2012): IMD5058_2 | | The data refers to the first segment of the Legislative | Council (LegCo), i.e. the election of 35 representatives | in Geographical Constituencies. | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - JAPAN (2013): IMD5058_2 | | The data refers to the first segment of the Upper | House electoral system (majoritarian, segment - Prefectoral | Districts), because the Japanese (2013) CSES data refer to the | Upper House elections of 2013. | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - MEXICO (2012): IMD5058_2 | | This data is calculated on the basis of the constituency votes. | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - MEXICO (2015): IMD5058_2 | | Data is calculated on the basis of the national | level election results. | Mexican voters cast a single vote in a single member district | plurality election. However, this also counts for the allocation | of the proportional representation seats disputed in the larger | regional multi-member districts (five circumscriptions). | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - PHILIPPINES (2010): IMD5058_2 | | These figures are based on the May 10, 2010 Philippine House | of Representatives election results for representatives from | congressional districts. | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - PHILIPPINES (2016): IMD5058_2 | | These data are based the on congressional district election | results (first segment of the Lower House). | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - ROMANIA (2009): IMD5058_2 | | These figures are based on the 2008 parliamentary elections. | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - ROMANIA (2012): IMD5058_2 | | These data is calculated by treating the Alliances Social | Liberal Union (PARTY A) and Alliance for a Just Romania | (PARTY B) as single entities. | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - ROMANIA (2014): IMD5058_2 | | The 2014 Romanian election study is concerned with the | Presidential elections of 2014. Hence, this variable is | coded Missing. | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - SLOVENIA (2011): IMD5058_2 | | Corrected effective number of political parties was calculated | without taking into account parties/candidates competing for | the two seats reserved for the representatives of Hungarian | and Italian minorities. | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - SOUTH KOREA (2012): IMD5058_2 | | Data refers to the second tier of the Parliament | (the proportional segment). They reflect the nationwide | proportion of votes cast for party lists. This data is | provided since the results from single-member constituencies | was not available. Notice that 54 out of 300 parliamentary | seats are allocated through the second segment. | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - TAIWAN (2008): IMD5058_2 | | These figures are calculated using the constituency level | returns from the 2008 legislative (Yuan) elections. | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - TAIWAN (2012): IMD5058_2 | | Data were calculated for lower tier. | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - THAILAND (2007): IMD5058_2 | | Effective number of political parties was calculated using vote | shares from the PR list tier. | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - THAILAND (2011): IMD5058_2 | | Corrected effective number of political parties was calculated | using vote shares from the PR list tier. | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - TURKEY (2011): IMD5058_2 | | The Peace and Democracy Party (BDP) did not participate in the | elections as a political party, but fielded its candidates as | independents. This figure does not take into account the BDP as | a political party. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- IMD5059_1 >>> EFFECTIVE NUMBER OF PARLIAMENTARY PARTIES --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Effective number of parliamentary parties (ENPP). Formula: ENPP = 1/(SUM[S_i^2]) where S_i represents the seat share of party i, and all parties (i=1,2...n) receiving votes are included in the calculation. Definition based on Laakso, M. and R. Taagepera (1979). '"Effective" Number of Parties: A Measure with Application to West Europe', Comparative Political Studies 12: 3-27. .................................................................. 000.00-150.00. EFFECTIVE NUMBER OF PARLIAMENTARY PARTIES 997.00. PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION ONLY - NOT CALCULATED 999.00. MISSING | VARIABLE NOTES: IMD5059_1 | | Formula: ENPP = 1/(SUM[S_i^2]) | where S_i represents the seat share of party i, and all | parties (i=1,2...n) receiving votes are included in the | calculation. | Definition based on Laakso, M. and R. Taagepera (1979). |"Effective Number of Parties: A Measure with Application to | West Europe", Comparative Political Studies 12: 3-27. | | The electoral data employed to calculate this index comes | from lower house elections, unless the study is focused on | upper house election exclusively. | | For Modules 1 and 2, data was collected from: | Gallagher, Michael, 2019. "Election indices dataset" - see: | http://www.tcd.ie/Political_Science/people/michael_gallagher/ | ElSystems/index.php, | (Date accessed: August 14, 2019). | | For Modules 3 and 4,the CSES Secretariat calculated these data | for each polity's election and cross-checked it against the same | source. | | The corresponding variables in the Standalone CSES Modules are: | MODULE 1: Not included (See above) | MODULE 2: Not included (See above) | MODULE 3: C5095 | MODULE 4: D5104 | | Data are unavailable for IMD5059_1 for Modules 1, 2. | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - ARGENTINA (2015): IMD5059_1 | | Calculating the effective number of parliamentary parties in | Argentina is complex given that parties form alliances at the | regional level and moreover election results data is not always | aggregated consistently for parties/alliances. Thus, consistent | estimates of this metric are difficult to arrive at, something | which is noted by Gallagher (2017) in his estimates of the same | data. CSES estimates of this metric are arrived at using the | following approach: | - Parties and alliances are treated as one party/grouping. | - All parties represented in the Chamber of Deputies post the | 2015 elections are included in the count, including parties | /groupings that held holdover seats but did not contest/or | win additional Chamber of Deputy seats in 2015. | - The number of parties/alliances represented in the Chamber | of Deputies after the 2015 elections is estimated by our | count to be 28. This is treating for the most part parties/ | alliances as one. | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - AUSTRALIA (2013): IMD5059_1 | | This data is calculated by treating the Liberals (Liberal party | and Liberal National Party) and the Nationals (the National | Party and the Country Liberals) as single entities. | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - BELARUS (2008): IMD5059_1 | | the large differences between the effective number of political | parties and the corrected measure stems from the very large | number of independent candidates gaining a seat. | The residual category "other" in Belarus encompasses more than | 86 percent of the vote, and is entirely composed of independent | candidates. | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - FRANCE (2007): IMD5059_1 | | Electoral returns in France contain more than one "other" | category. The broader categories "regionalist", "Divers", "other | left wing" "other right wing" and "others" were treated as | single parties where appropriate and not amalgamated in a | broader "other" category. | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - FRANCE (2012): IMD5059_1 | | See Election Study Note for variable IMD5058_1. | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - GREAT BRITAIN (2015): IMD5059_1 | | These data are calculated on the national share of the vote | and share of seats attained by parties who fielded candidates | in England, Scotland, and Wales. Northern Ireland data is not | included in the calculation of Effective Number of Electoral | or Parliamentary Parties as the 2015 British Election Study | did not include respondents from Northern Ireland. | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - HONG KONG (2012): IMD5059_1 | | The data refers to the first segment of the Legislative | Council (LegCo), i.e. the election of 35 representatives | in Geographical Constituencies. | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - JAPAN (2013): IMD5059_1 | | The data refers to the first segment of the Upper | House electoral system (majoritarian, segment - Prefectoral | Districts), because the Japanese (2013) CSES data refer to the | Upper House elections of 2013. | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - MEXICO (2012 & 2015): IMD5059_1 | | The data is calculated on the basis of the total number of seats, | won in both single-member constituencies (300 seats) and in the | national proportional district (200 seats). | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - PHILIPPINES (2010): IMD5059_1 | | These figures are based on the May 10, 2010 Philippine House | of Representatives election results for representatives from | congressional districts. | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - PHILIPPINES (2016): IMD5059_1 | | These data reflect the seat share won in the | congressional district election (first segment | of the Lower House). However, the percentages are calculated | against all seats in the Lower House, i.e., including | those obtained via the proportional party list segment | (59 seats). | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - ROMANIA (2009): IMD5059_1 | | These figures are based on the 2008 parliamentary elections. | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - ROMANIA (2012): IMD5059_1 | | These data is calculated by treating the Alliances Social | Liberal Union (PARTY A) and Alliance for a Just Romania | (PARTY B) as single entities. Where the parties that make | up the coalitions counted separately, the effective number | of parliamentary parties (ENPP) is 4.463. | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - ROMANIA (2014): IMD5059_1 | | The 2014 Romanian election study is concerned with the | Presidential elections of 2014. Hence, this variable is | coded Missing. | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - SLOVENIA (2011): IMD5059_1 | | Data was calculated without taking into account | parties/candidates competing for the two seats reserved for the | representatives of Hungarian and Italian minorities. | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - SOUTH KOREA (2012): IMD5059_1 | | The data is based on the total number of representatives | elected into the parliament. The data includes both the | 54 representatives on the basis of a proportional tier, and | the 246 representatives from the single member constituencies. | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - TAIWAN (2008): IMD5059_1 | | These figures are calculated using the constituency level | returns from the 2008 legislative (Yuan) elections. | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - TAIWAN (2012): IMD5059_1 | | Data were calculated for the lower tier. | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - THAILAND (2011): IMD5059_1 | | Data was calculated using seat shares from both tiers. | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - TURKEY (2011): IMD5059_1 | | The Peace and Democracy Party (BDP) did not participate in the | elections as a political party, but fielded its candidates as | independents. This figure takes into account the BDP as a | political party. --------------------------------------------------------------------------- IMD5059_2 >>> CORRECTED EFFECTIVE NUMBER OF PARLIAMENTARY PARTIES --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Corrected Effective number of parliamentary parties (CENPP). Corrected Effective Number of Parliamentary Parties corrects for the "other" category using the least component method of bounds suggested by Taagepera (1997). The method requires calculating the ENPP two times. One is treating the "other" category as a single party and the second is calculating the ENPP as if every seat in the "other" category belonged to a different party. The CENPP is the mean of both measures. Definition based on: Taagepera, R. (1997). 'Effective Number of Parties for incomplete Data', Electoral Studies 16: 145-151. .................................................................. 000.00-150.00. CORRECTED EFFECTIVE NUMBER OF PARLIAMENTARY PARTIES 997.00. PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION ONLY - NOT CALCULATED 999.00. MISSING | VARIABLE NOTES: IMD5059_2 | | Corrected Effective Number of Parliamentary Parties corrects for | the "other" category using the least component method of bounds | suggested by Taagepera (1997). The method requires calculating | the ENPP two times. One is treating the "other" category as a | single party and the second is calculating the ENPP as if every | seat in the "other" category belonged to a different party. The | CENPP is the mean of both measures. | Definition based on: Taagepera, R. (1997). 'Effective Number of | Parties for incomplete Data', Electoral Studies 16: 145-151. | | The electoral data employed to calculate this index comes | from lower house elections, unless the study is focused on | upper house election exclusively. | | The CSES Secretariat calculates these data for each polity's | election and cross-checks it against the standard source, | namely: | Gallagher, Michael, 2019. "Election indices dataset" - see: | http://www.tcd.ie/Political_Science/people/michael_gallagher/ | ElSystems/index.php, | (Date accessed: August 14, 2019). | | The corresponding variables in the Standalone CSES Modules are: | MODULE 1: Not included | MODULE 2: Not included | MODULE 3: C5096 | MODULE 4: D5105 | | Data are unavailable for IMD5059_1 for HONG KONG (1998, 2000, | 2004), JAPAN (2004), PHILIPPINES (2004), SPAIN (2000), THAILAND | (2001), TAIWAN (2001) and UKRAINE (1998). | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - ARGENTINA (2015): IMD5059_2 | | Calculating the effective number of parliamentary parties in | Argentina is complex given that parties form alliances at the | regional level and moreover election results data is not always | aggregated consistently for parties/alliances. Thus, consistent | estimates of this metric are difficult to arrive at, something | which is noted by Gallagher (2017) in his estimates of the same | data. CSES estimates of this metric are arrived at using the | following approach: | - Parties and alliances are treated as one party/grouping. | - All parties represented in the Chamber of Deputies post the | 2015 elections are included in the count, including parties | /groupings that held holdover seats but did not contest/or | win additional Chamber of Deputy seats in 2015. | - The number of parties/alliances represented in the Chamber | of Deputies after the 2015 elections is estimated by our | count to be 28. This is treating for the most part parties/ | alliances as one. | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - AUSTRALIA (2013): IMD5059_2 | | Data is calculated by treating the Liberals | (Liberal Party and Liberal National Party) and the | Nationals (the National Party and the Country Liberals) | as single entities. | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - BELARUS (2008): IMD5059_2 | | The large differences between the effective number of political | parties and the corrected measure stems from the very large | number of independent candidates gaining a seat. | The residual category "other" in Belarus encompasses more than | 86 percent of the vote, and is entirely composed of independent | candidates. | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - FRANCE (2007): IMD5059_2 | | Electoral returns in France contain more than one "other" | category. The broader categories "regionalist", "Divers", "other | left wing" "other right wing" and "others" were treated as | single parties where appropriate and not amalgamated in a | broader "other" category. | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - FRANCE (2012): IMD5059_2 | | See Election Study Note for variable IMD5058_1. | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - GREAT BRITAIN (2015): IMD5059_2 | | These data are calculated on the national share of the vote | and share of seats attained by parties who fielded candidates | in England, Scotland, and Wales. Northern Ireland data is not | included in the calculation of Effective Number of Electoral | or Parliamentary Parties as the 2015 British Election Study | did not include respondents from Northern Ireland. | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - HONG KONG (2012): IMD5059_2 | | The data refers to the first segment of the Legislative | Council (LegCo), i.e. the election of 35 representatives | in Geographical Constituencies. | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - JAPAN (2013): IMD5059_2 | | Data refers to the first segment of the Upper | House electoral system (majoritarian, segment - Prefectoral | Districts), because the Japanese (2013) CSES data refer to the | Upper House elections of 2013. | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - MEXICO (2012 & 2015): IMD5059_2 | | Data is calculated on the basis of the total number of seats, | won in both single-member constituencies (300 seats) and in the | national proportional district (200 seats). | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - PHILIPPINES (2010): IMD5059_2 | | These figures are based on the May 10, 2010 Philippine House | of Representatives election results for representatives from | congressional districts. | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - PHILIPPINES (2016): IMD5059_2 | | These data reflect the seat share won in the | congressional district election (first segment | of the Lower House). However, the percentages are calculated | against all seats in the Lower House, i.e., including | those obtained via the proportional party list segment | (59 seats). | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - ROMANIA (2009): IMD5059_2 | | These figures are based on the 2008 parliamentary elections. | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - ROMANIA (2012): IMD5059_2 | | These data are calculated by treating the Alliances Social | Liberal Union (PARTY A) and Alliance for a Just Romania | (PARTY B) as single entities. Where the parties that make | up the coalitions counted separately, the corrected effective | number of parliamentary parties (ENPP) is 4.445. | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - ROMANIA (2014): IMD5059_2 | | The 2014 Romanian election study is concerned with the | Presidential elections of 2014. Hence, this variable is | coded Missing. | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - SLOVENIA (2011): IMD5059_2 | | Corrected effective number of parliamentary parties was | calculated without taking into account parties/candidates | competing for the two seats reserved for the representatives of | Hungarian and Italian minorities. | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - SOUTH KOREA (2012): IMD5059_2 | | Data is based on the total number of representatives | elected into the parliament. The data includes both the | 54 representatives on the basis of a proportional tier, and | the 246 representatives from the single member constituencies. | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - TAIWAN (2008): IMD5059_2 | | These figures are calculated using the constituency level | returns from the 2008 legislative (Yuan) elections. | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - TAIWAN (2012): IMD5059_2 | | Data were calculated for the lower tier. | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - THAILAND (2011): IMD5059_2 | | Corrected effective number of parliamentary parties was | calculated using seat shares from both tiers. | ELECTION STUDY NOTES - TURKEY (2011): IMD5059_2 | | The Peace and Democracy Party (BDP) did not participate in the | elections as a political party, but fielded its candidates as | independents. This figure does not take into account the BDP as | a political party. //END OF FILE