Version 01 Codebook
-------------------
CODEBOOK INTRODUCTION FILE
1991 PILOT STUDY
(1991.PNS)




USER NOTE:
This file has been converted to electronic format via OCR scanning. 
As as result, the user is advised that some errors in character 
recognition may have resulted within the text.
                                                                               
                                                                               





                                                                               
                                                                               

                                                                               
                                                                               
                                                                               
                    AMERICAN NATIONAL ELECTION STUDIES


           1990-91 PANEL STUDY OF THE  POLITICAL CONSEQUENCES OF WAR/

                              1991 PILOT STUDY          
 



                            Documentation                          
                              



                                                                               
                                                                               

                                                                               
                                                                               











                       ICPSR ARCHIVE NUMBER 9673  

                                                                               
                                                                                                                                                           
                          BIBLIOGRAPHIC CITATION                     
                                                                     
       PUBLICATIONS BASED  ON   ICPSR   DATA   COLLECTIONS   SHOULD  
       ACKNOWLEDGE   THOSE  SOURCES  BY  MEANS   OF   BIBLIOGRAPHIC  
       CITATIONS.  TO ENSURE  THAT  SUCH  SOURCE  ATTRIBUTIONS  ARE  
       CAPTURED   FOR  SOCIAL  SCIENCE   BIBLIOGRAPHIC   UTILITIES,  
       CITATIONS MUST APPEAR  IN  FOOTNOTES  OR  IN  THE  REFERENCE  
       SECTION OF  PUBLICATIONS.   THE  BIBLIOGRAPHIC  CITATION FOR  
       THIS DATA COLLECTION IS:                                      
                                                                     
             MILLER, WARREN E., DONALD R. KINDER, STEVEN J.          
             ROSENSTONE, AND THE NATIONAL ELECTION STUDIES.          
             AMERICAN NATIONAL ELECTION STUDY, 1990:                 
             POST-ELECTION SURVEY [COMPUTER FILE]. CONDUCTED         
             BY UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN, CENTER FOR POLITICAL         
             STUDIES. ICPSR ED. ANN ARBOR, MI:                       
             INTER-UNIVERSITY CONSORTIUM FOR POLITICAL AND           
             SOCIAL RESEARCH [PRODUCER AND DISTRIBUTOR], 1991.       

                                                                     
        REQUEST FOR INFORMATION ON USE OF ICPSR RESOURCES:
                                                                     
       TO PROVIDE FUNDING AGENCIES WITH ESSENTIAL INFORMATION ABOUT  
       USE OF ARCHIVAL RESOURCES AND TO FACILITATE THE EXCHANGE  OF 

       INFORMATION ABOUT  ICPSR  PARTICIPANTS' RESEARCH ACTIVITIES,  
       USERS OF  ICPSR  DATA  ARE  REQUESTED  TO  SEND   TO   ICPSR  
       BIBLIOGRAPHIC CITATIONS  FOR  EACH  COMPLETED  MANUSCRIPT OR  
       THESIS ABSTRACT.  PLEASE INDICATE IN A  COVER  LETTER  WHICH  
       DATA WERE USED.                                               
                                                                     
                              DATA DISCLAIMER                        
                                                                     
       THE ORIGINAL COLLECTOR OF THE DATA, ICPSR, AND THE  RELEVANT  
       FUNDING AGENCY  BEAR  NO  RESPONSIBILITY  FOR  USES  OF THIS  
       COLLECTION OR FOR INTERPRETATIONS OR INFERENCES  BASED  UPON 
       SUCH USES.                                                    
                                                                               
                              TABLE OF CONTENTS                       



           Note: >>sections in the codebook introduction and
           codebook appendix can be navigated in the
           machine-readable files by searching ">>".



INTRODUCTORY MATERIALS   (file intpil91.cbk)
----------------------
>> 1991 PILOT - 1990 STUDY DESCRIPTION
>> 1991 NES STAFF AND TECHNICAL PAPERS
>> 1989 NES PILOT STUDY REPORTS
>> CODEBOOK INFORMATION



CODEBOOK
--------
    1991 variables 
    1990 variables             



APPENDICES   (file intpil91.cbk)
----------
>> BOARD OF OVERSEERS MEMO, 1990  
>> BOARD OF OVERSEERS MEMO, 1991
>> 1991 MEMBERSHIP OF THE NES BOARD OF OVERSEERS
>> List of Senators and Representatives, 1991
OPEN-END CODES
>> 1990 PARTY-CANDIDATE MASTER CODE                               
>> 1990 IMPORTANT PROBLEM CODE
>> 1990 PARTY DIFFERENCES CODE
>> 1990 GULF WAR CODE
>> 1990 JUROR'S NAMES CODE
>> Footnotes for 1980 Census County Level Contextual Data
>> 1980 CENSUS DEFINITIONS
>> 1990 CAMPAIGN ISSUES MASTER CODE
>> 1990 CANDIDATE NUMBER CODE AND LIST
>> 1990 RELIGIOUS PREFERENCE MASTER CODE
>> 1980 CENSUS OCCUPATION CODE
>> 1980 CENSUS INDUSTRY CODE
>> 1990 ICPSR OCCUPATION RECODES
>> 1990 NATIONALITY AND ETHNIC CODE
>> 1990 STATE AND COUNTRY CODE
>> CITIES WITH POPULATION OF 25,000 AND OVER, 1990 Study


>> 1991 PILOT - 1990 STUDY DESCRIPTION                       
                                                                     

       THE 1990 PILOT FILE ALSO CONTAINS 1990 VARIABLES FOR
       THE RESPONDENTS.

       1990 STUDY DESCRIPTION

       THE NES/CPS AMERICAN NATIONAL ELECTION STUDY 1990 WAS         
       CONDUCTED BY THE CENTER FOR POLITICAL STUDIES OF THE          
       INSTITUTE FOR SOCIAL RESEARCH, UNDER THE GENERAL DIRECTION    
       OF WARREN E. MILLER, DONALD R. KINDER AND STEVEN J.           
       ROSENSTONE. SANTA TRAUGOTT IS THE PROJECT MANAGER FOR THE     
       NATIONAL ELECTION STUDIES.  GIOVANNA MORCHIO WAS THE 1990     
       ELECTION STUDY MANAGER FOR NES, OVERSEEING THE STUDY FROM
       VERY EARLY PLANNING STAGES THROUGH DATA RELEASE.              
                                                                     
       THIS IS THE TWENTY-FIRST IN A SERIES OF STUDIES OF AMERICAN   
       NATIONAL ELECTIONS PRODUCED BY THE POLITICAL BEHAVIOR         
       PROGRAM OF THE SURVEY RESEARCH CENTER AND THE CENTER FOR      
       POLITICAL STUDIES, AND IT IS THE SEVENTH SUCH STUDY TO BE     
       CONDUCTED UNDER THE AUSPICES OF NATIONAL SCIENCE FOUNDATION   
       GRANTS (SOC77-08885 AND SES-8341310) PROVIDING LONG-TERM      
       SUPPORT FOR THE NATIONAL ELECTION STUDIES. SINCE 1978 THE     
       NES ELECTION STUDIES HAVE BEEN DESIGNED BY A NATIONAL BOARD 
       OF OVERSEERS, THE MEMBERS OF WHICH MEET SEVERAL TIMES A YEAR  
       TO PLAN CONTENT AND ADMINISTRATION OF THE MAJOR STUDY         
       COMPONENTS.                                                   
                                                                     
       BOARD MEMBERS DURING THE PLANNING OF THE 1990 NATIONAL        
       ELECTION STUDY INCLUDED:  MORRIS P. FIORINA, HARVARD          
       UNIVERSITY, CHAIR; RICHARD A. BRODY, STANFORD UNIVERSITY;     
       STANLEY FELDMAN, UNIVERSITY OF KENTUCKY; EDIE N. GOLDENBERG, 
       UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN; MARY JACKMAN, UNIVERSITY OF           
       CALIFORNIA AT DAVIS, GARY C. JACOBSON, UNIVERSITY OF          
       CALIFORNIA AT SAN DIEGO; STANLEY KELLEY, JR., PRINCETON       
       UNIVERSITY; THOMAS MANN, THE BROOKINGS INSTITUTION; DOUGLAS  
 
       RIVERS, STANFORD UNIVERSITY; JOHN ZALLER, THE UNIVERSITY OF   
       CALIFORNIA AT LOS ANGELES; WARREN E. MILLER, ARIZONA STATE    
       UNIVERSITY, EX OFFICIO; DONALD R. KINDER, AND STEVEN J.       
       ROSENSTONE, UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN, EX OFFICIO.               
                                                                     
       AS PART OF THE PLANNING PROCESS, A SPECIAL PLANNING           
       COMMITTEE WAS APPOINTED, A PILOT STUDY CONDUCTED, AND         
       STIMULUS LETTERS SENT TO THE MEMBERS OF THE SCHOLARLY         
       COMMUNITY SOLICITING INPUT ON STUDY PLANS.  THE 1990 STUDY    
       PLANNING COMMITTEE INCLUDED KINDER AND MILLER; SEVERAL BOARD  
       MEMBERS (MANN, CO-CHAIR; BRODY; FELDMAN; JACKMAN; MILLER, EX 

       OFFICIO; AND ROSENSTONE, EX-OFFICIO AND CO-CHAIR) AND FOUR    
       OTHER SCHOLARS (JON KROSNICK, OHIO STATE UNIVERSITY; GREGORY 

       MARKUS AND VINCENT PRICE, UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN, AND DAVID   
       LEEGE, NOTRE DAME UNIVERSITY).                                
                                                                     
       A TWO-WAVE PILOT STUDY WAS CARRIED OUT IN JULY AND SEPTEMBER  
       OF 1989 FOR THE PURPOSE OF DEVELOPING NEW INSTRUMENTATION     
       FOR THE 1990 ELECTION STUDY.  NEW ITEMS WERE TESTED IN THE    
       AREA OF RELIGIOUS ATTITUDES AND DENOMINATIONAL                
       AFFILIATION, MEDIA EXPOSURE AND THE TYPE OF INFORMATION       
       RECALLED, AND INDIVIDUALISM.  A SIGNIFICANT PORTION OF THE    
       STUDY WAS DEVOTED TO EXPERIMENTS CONTRASTING DIFFERENT        
       INSTRUMENTATION FOR ISSUE QUESTIONS:  SEVEN-POINT SCALES      
       VERSUS BRANCHING RESPONSE ALTERNATIVES; "FRAMED" VERSUS       
       "STRIPPED" QUESTIONS, UNIPOLAR VERSUS BIPOLAR SCALES; AND     
       FILTERED VERSUS UNFILTERED QUESTIONS.  DATA FROM THE 1989     
       PILOT STUDY ARE AVAILABLE THROUGH THE INTER-UNIVERSITY        
       CONSORTIUM FOR POLITICAL AND SOCIAL RESEARCH (ICPSR 9295).    
       RESULTS FROM THE PILOT STUDY (AS SUMMARIZED IN PILOT STUDY    
       REPORTS, PAGE XIX) WERE USED BY THE PLANNING COMMITTEE IN     
       FORMULATING RECOMMENDATIONS TO THE BOARD ABOUT STUDY CONTENT  
       FOR THE 1990 ELECTION STUDY.                                  

       1990 SURVEY CONTENT                                                

       THE BOARD OF OVERSEERS BALANCED A NUMBER OF CONSIDERATIONS    
       IN SELECTING CONTENT FOR THE POST-ELECTION SURVEY. THERE      
       WAS, AS ALWAYS, THE NECESSITY OF MAINTAINING CONTINUITY WITH
       PAST SURVEYS.  ALL CONGRESSIONAL TIME-SERIES ITEMS WERE       
       EVALUATED BY THE BOARD, AND INPUT WAS SOLICITED FROM THE      
       USER COMMUNITY ABOUT WHETHER EACH SHOULD BE USED FOR THE  
       1990 STUDY.                                                   
                                                                     
       THE ITEMS THAT FALL INTO THE TIME-SERIES, OR "CORE"           
       CATEGORY, ARE:  CAMPAIGN ATTENTION; LIKES AND DISLIKES OF     
       POLITICAL PARTIES; LIKES AND DISLIKES OF CONGRESSIONAL        
       CANDIDATES; CONTACT WITH CONGRESSPERSON OR CANDIDATE; VOTE 
       FOR REPRESENTATIVE, SENATOR AND GOVERNOR; MOST IMPORTANT
       PROBLEM; CAMPAIGN ACTIVITIES; SYSTEM SUPPORT AND EFFICACY     
       ITEMS; FEELING THERMOMETER RATINGS OF CONGRESSIONAL           
       CANDIDATES AND GROUPS; RETROSPECTIVE ECONOMIC EVALUATIONS  
   
       (NATIONAL AND INDIVIDUAL); LIBERAL-CONSERVATIVE SCALE (WITH   
       PROXIMITIES); PARTY IDENTIFICATION, SEVEN-POINT ISSUE SCALES  
       WITH PLACEMENTS; FEDERAL BUDGET PREFERENCES; VIEWS ON         
       ABORTION; AND THE STANDARD AND EXTENSIVE BATTERY OF           
       DEMOGRAPHIC QUESTIONS.                                        
                                                                     
       A NUMBER OF QUESTIONS ARE NEW OR RELATIVELY NEW TO THE        
       STUDY. SOME CAME FROM THE PILOTING WORK DESCRIBED ABOVE--     
       E.G., THE NEW MEASURES OF DENOMINATIONAL AFFILIATION;         
       INDIVIDUALISM; AND ATTITUDES TOWARD ABORTION AND              
       DISCRIMINATION AGAINST WOMEN. OTHERS WERE DESIGNED TO         
       REFLECT TOPICAL CONCERNS OF THE CAMPAIGN.  ITEMS IN THIS      
       CATEGORY INCLUDE SOME FOREIGN POLICY ISSUE ITEMS RELATING TO 
 
       CHANGES IN EASTERN EUROPE AND TO EVENTS IN THE PERSIAN GULF;  
       AND KNOWLEDGE OF AND ATTITUDES ABOUT THE FAILURES OF THE      
       SAVINGS AND LOANS FINANCIAL INSTITUTIONS AND ABOUT THE        
       FEDERAL BUDGET DEFICIT.                                       
                                                                     
       1990 SURVEY ADMINISTRATION                                         
                                                                     
       TWO FORMS WERE USED IN ORDER TO INCORPORATE THE MAXIMUM
       AMOUNT OF CONTENT.  (EVEN SO, THE AVERAGE LENGTH OF THE       
       SURVEY INTERVIEW WAS 78 MINUTES.)  HALF OF THE STUDY SAMPLE   
       WAS RANDOMLY ASSIGNED TO FORM A, AND THE OTHER HALF TO FORM   
       B. MORE THAN 75 PERCENT OF THE QUESTIONNAIRE CONTENT WAS THE
       SAME IN BOTH FORMS; FORM A HAD ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS RELATING  
       TO VALUES AND INDIVIDUALISM; FORM B HAD ADDITIONAL CONTENT    
       RELATING TO FOREIGN RELATIONS. IN ADDITION, THERE WAS A       
       QUESTION FORM EXPERIMENT (BRANCHING ALTERNATIVES VS. A        
       SEVEN-POINT SCALE).                                           
                                                                     
       IN THE POST-ELECTION SURVEY, RESPONDENTS ARE ASKED LENGTHY    
       SERIES OF QUESTIONS ABOUT THEIR PARTICULAR CONGRESSPERSONS    
       AND SENATORS. INTERVIEWERS MUST PRE-EDIT QUESTIONNAIRES TO    
       FILL IN THE NAMES APPROPRIATE FOR THE STATE AND               
       CONGRESSIONAL DISTRICT IN WHICH THE RESPONDENT IS LIVING (OR  
       WAS LIVING DURING THE PRE-ELECTION INTERVIEW).  INTERVIEWERS  
       ARE SENT "CANDIDATE LISTS"  FOR EACH CONGRESSIONAL DISTRICT   
       IN THE SAMPLE SEGMENTS IN WHICH THEY ARE INTERVIEWING.  EACH  
       CANDIDATE AND SENATOR ON THAT LIST IS ASSIGNED A PARTICULAR   
       NUMBER THAT REFLECTS HIS OR HER INCUMBENCY STATUS AND PARTY.  
       (SEE CANDIDATE NUMBER CODE, APPENDIX NOTE 4.)  PARTICULAR     
       QUESTIONS IN THE SURVEY REQUIRE THE INSERTION BY THE          
       INTERVIEWER DURING PRE-EDITING OF THE NAMES OF CANDIDATES     
       WITH SPECIFIC NUMBERS.  SEE, FOR EXAMPLE, Q. B13, THE         
       FEELING THERMOMETER.  THE CANDIDATE LISTS USED BY THE         
       INTERVIEWERS, WHICH SHOW WHICH CANDIDATES ARE ASSOCIATED
       WITH WHICH CONGRESSIONAL DISTRICT AND WITH WHICH NUMBERS     
 
       THEY ARE TAGGED, CAN BE FOUND IN THE APPENDIX (NOTE 4) OF     
       THIS DOCUMENTATION.                                           
                                                                     
       1990 NOTES ON CONFIDENTIAL VARIABLES                               
                                                                     
       STARTING WITH THE 1986 ELECTION STUDY, OCCUPATION CODE        
       VARIABLES HAVE BEEN RELEASED IN SOMEWHAT LESS DETAIL THAN IN  
       YEARS PAST.  THE DATASET INCLUDES A TWO-DIGIT CODE WITH 71    
       CATEGORIES CORRESPONDING TO CENSUS BUREAU OCCUPATIONAL
       GROUPINGS.  THOSE WHO HAVE NEED OF THE FULL OCCUPATION CODE 
       FOR THEIR RESEARCH SHOULD CONTACT THE NES PROJECT STAFF FOR 
       INFORMATION ABOUT THE CONDITIONS UNDER WHICH ACCESS TO THESE  
       DATA MAY BE PROVIDED.                                         
                                                                     
       SIMILARLY, THE NATIONAL ELECTION STUDIES HAVE NOT INCLUDED    
       INFORMATION FOR CENSUS TRACTS OR MINOR CIVIL DIVISIONS SINCE  
       1978. PERMISSION TO USE THE MORE DETAILED GEOGRAPHIC    
       INFORMATION FOR SCHOLARLY RESEARCH MAY BE OBTAINED FROM THE   
       BOARD OF OVERSEERS. MORE INFORMATION ABOUT THIS IS AVAILABLE  
       FROM NES PROJECT STAFF.                                       
                                                                     
       CODING OF THE NEW RELIGIOUS DENOMINATION VARIABLE IS IN SOME  
       CASES BASED ON AN ALPHABETIC "OTHER, PLEASE SPECIFY"          
       VARIABLE (VARIABLE 900541).  THIS VARIABLE IS RESTRICTED FOR     
       REASONS OF CONFIDENTIALITY, BUT ACCESS MAY BE PROVIDED TO     
       LEGITIMATE SCHOLARS UNDER ESTABLISHED NES PROCEDURES.         
                                                                     
       1990 OPEN-ENDED MATERIALS                                          
                                                                     
       TRADITIONALLY, THE ELECTION STUDIES HAVE CONTAINED SEVERAL    
       MINUTES OF OPEN-ENDED RESPONSES (FOR EXAMPLE, THE             
       CONGRESSIONAL CANDIDATES LIKES AND DISLIKES).  THESE          
       QUESTIONS ARE PUT INTO MASTER CODES BY THE SRC CODING         
       SECTION.  OTHER SCHOLARS HAVE DEVELOPED ALTERNATIVE OR        
       SUPPLEMENTAL CODING SCHEMES FOR THE QUESTIONS (FOR EXAMPLE, 
  
       THE LEVELS OF CONCEPTUALIZATION, RELEASED AS ICPSR #8151).    
       THE BOARD OF OVERSEERS WISHES TO ENCOURAGE THESE EFFORTS BUT  
       IN WAYS THAT RESPECT THE NES AND SRC OBLIGATION TO PROTECT    
       THE PRIVACY AND ANONYMITY OF RESPONDENTS.  CIRCUMSTANCES      
       UNDER WHICH INDIVIDUALS MAY HAVE ACCESS TO TRANSCRIBED        
       VERSIONS OF THESE QUESTIONS HAVE BEEN WORKED OUT AND THOSE  
       INTERESTED SHOULD CONTACT THE NES PROJECT STAFF FOR FURTHER  
       DETAILS.                                                      
                                                                     
                                                                     
                                  TABLE 1                            
                                                                     
                     1990 FIELD ADMINISTRATION INFORMATION                
                                                                     
                      RESPONSE RATE:            71.4%                
                                                                     
                     LENGTH OF INTERVIEW:     78.0 MIN               
                                                                     
                       NO. OF RESPONDENTS:      2000                 
                                                                     
                                                                    
                                  TABLE 2                            
                                                                     
              NUMBER AND CUMULATIVE PERCENT OF INTERVIEWS IN         
                TWO-WEEK INTERVALS FROM ELECTION DAY, 1990           
                                                                     
                    NOV. 07-NOV. 17       836      42%               
                                                                     
                    NOV. 18-DEC. 01       594      72%               
                                                                     
                    DEC. 02-DEC. 22       413      92%               
                                                                     
                    DEC. 23-JAN. 05       106      97%               
                                                                     
                    JAN. 06-JAN. 26        51     100%               
                                                                              


       1990 SAMPLING INFORMATION                   

       STUDY POPULATION                                              
                                                                     
       THE STUDY POPULATION FOR THE 1990 NES IS DEFINED TO INCLUDE   
       ALL UNITED STATES CITIZENS OF VOTING AGE ON OR BEFORE THE     
       1990 ELECTION DAY.  ELIGIBLE CITIZENS MUST HAVE RESIDED IN    
       HOUSING UNITS, OTHER THAN ON MILITARY RESERVATIONS, IN THE    
       48 COTERMINOUS STATES.  THIS DEFINITION EXCLUDES PERSONS      
       LIVING IN ALASKA OR HAWAII AND REQUIRES ELIGIBLE PERSONS TO   
       HAVE BEEN BOTH A UNITED STATES CITIZEN AND 18 YEARS OF AGE    
       ON OR BEFORE THE 6TH OF NOVEMBER 1990.                        
                                                                     
       MULTI-STAGE AREA PROBABILITY SAMPLE DESIGN                    
                                                                     
       THE 1990 NES IS BASED ON A MULTI-STAGE AREA PROBABILITY       
       SAMPLE SELECTED FROM THE SURVEY RESEARCH CENTER'S (SRC)       
       NATIONAL SAMPLE DESIGN.  IDENTIFICATION OF THE 1990 NES       
       SAMPLE RESPONDENTS WAS CONDUCTED USING A FOUR-STAGE SAMPLING  
       PROCESS--A PRIMARY STAGE SAMPLING OF U.S. STANDARD            
       METROPOLITAN STATISTICAL AREAS (SMSA'S) AND COUNTIES,         
       FOLLOWED BY A SECOND STAGE SAMPLING OF AREA SEGMENTS, A       
       THIRD STAGE SAMPLING OF HOUSING UNITS WITHIN SAMPLED AREA     
       SEGMENTS, AND CONCLUDING WITH THE RANDOM SELECTION OF A       
       SINGLE RESPONDENT FROM SELECTED HOUSING UNITS.  A DETAILED    
       DOCUMENTATION OF THE SRC NATIONAL SAMPLE IS PROVIDED IN THE   
       SRC PUBLICATION TITLED 1980 SRC NATIONAL SAMPLE: DESIGN AND   
       DEVELOPMENT.                                                  
                                                                     
       PRIMARY STAGE SELECTION                                       
                                                                     
       THE SELECTION OF PRIMARY STAGE SAMPLING UNITS (PSU'S),[2]     
       WHICH DEPENDING ON THE SAMPLE STRATUM ARE EITHER SMSA'S,      
       SINGLE COUNTIES OR GROUPINGS OF SMALL COUNTIES, IS BASED ON   
       THE COUNTY-LEVEL 1980 CENSUS REPORTS OF POPULATION AND        
       HOUSING. PRIMARY STAGE UNITS WERE ASSIGNED TO 84 EXPLICIT     
       STRATA BASED ON SMSA/NON-SMSA STATUS, PSU SIZE, AND           
       GEOGRAPHIC LOCATION. SIXTEEN OF THE 84 STRATA CONTAIN ONLY A  
       SINGLE SELF-REPRESENTING PSU, EACH OF WHICH IS INCLUDED WITH  
       CERTAINTY IN THE PRIMARY STAGE OF SAMPLE SELECTION.  THE      
       REMAINING 68 NONSELF-REPRESENTING STRATA CONTAIN MORE THAN  
  
                                                                     
       ------------------                                            
                                                                     
       [1] TECHNICAL DESCRIPTION OF THE 1990 NATIONAL ELECTION       
       STUDY SAMPLE DESIGN PREPARED BY THE SAMPLING SECTION OF THE   
       SURVEY RESEARCH CENTER, INSTITUTE FOR SOCIAL RESEARCH,        
       UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN, FEBRUARY 1991.                        
                                                                     
       [2] IN SRC PUBLICATIONS AND SURVEY MATERIALS, THE TERM        
       "PRIMARY AREA" IS USED INTERCHANGEABLY WITH THE MORE COMMON   
       "PRIMARY STAGE UNIT" TERMINOLOGY.                             

       ONE PSU.  FROM EACH OF THESE NONSELF-REPRESENTING STRATA,     
       ONE PSU WAS SAMPLED WITH PROBABILITY PROPORTIONATE TO ITS     
       SIZE (PPS) MEASURED IN 1980 OCCUPIED HOUSING UNITS. THE FULL  
       SRC NATIONAL SAMPLE OF 84 PRIMARY STAGE SELECTIONS WAS        
       DESIGNED TO BE OPTIMAL FOR SURVEYS ROUGHLY TWO TIMES THE      
       SIZE OF THE 1990 NES.  TO PERMIT THE FLEXIBILITY NEEDED FOR   
       OPTIMAL DESIGN OF SMALLER SURVEY SAMPLES, THE PRIMARY STAGE 
  
       OF THE SRC NATIONAL SAMPLE CAN BE READILY PARTITIONED INTO    
       SMALLER SUBSAMPLES OF PSU'S.  EACH OF THE PARTITIONS          
       REPRESENTS A STRATIFIED SUBSELECTION FROM THE FULL 84 PSU     
       DESIGN.                                                       
                                                                     
       THE SAMPLE FOR THE 1990 NES IS SELECTED FROM THE "ONE-HALF"   
       PARTITION OF THE 1980 SRC NATIONAL SAMPLE.  THE "ONE-HALF     
       SAMPLE" INCLUDES 11 OF THE 16 SELF-REPRESENTING SMSA PSU'S    
       AND A STRATIFIED SUBSAMPLING OF 34 (OF THE 68)                
       NONSELF-REPRESENTING PSU'S OF THE SRC NATIONAL SAMPLE.        
       TABLE 3 IDENTIFIES THE PSU'S FOR THE 1990 NATIONAL ELECTION   
       STUDY BY SMSA STATUS AND REGION.                              
                                                                     
       SECOND STAGE SELECTION OF AREA SEGMENTS                       
                                                                     
       THE SECOND STAGE OF THE 1980 NATIONAL SAMPLE WAS SELECTED     
       DIRECTLY FROM COMPUTERIZED FILES THAT WERE PREPARED FROM THE  
       1980 CENSUS SUMMARY TAPE FILE SERIES (STF1-B).  THE           
       DESIGNATED SECOND-STAGE SAMPLING UNITS (SSU'S), TERMED "AREA  
       SEGMENTS," ARE COMPRISED OF CENSUS BLOCKS IN THE              
       METROPOLITAN PRIMARY AREAS AND ENUMERATION DISTRICTS (ED'S)  
 
       IN THE RURAL NON-SMSA'S AND RURAL AREAS OF SMSA PRIMARY       
       AREAS.  EACH SSU BLOCK, BLOCK COMBINATION OR ENUMERATION      
       DISTRICT WAS ASSIGNED A MEASURE OF SIZE EQUAL TO THE TOTAL    
       1980 OCCUPIED HOUSING UNIT COUNT FOR THE AREA (MINIMUM =      
       50).  SECOND STAGE SAMPLING OF AREA SEGMENTS WAS PERFORMED    
       WITH PROBABILITIES PROPORTIONATE TO THE ASSIGNED MEASURES OF  
       SIZE.                                                         
                                                                     
       A THREE-STEP PROCESS OF ORDERING THE SSU'S WITHIN THE         
       PRIMARY AREAS PRODUCED AN IMPLICIT STRATIFICATION OF THE      
       AREA SEGMENTS IN THE SECOND STAGE SAMPLING FRAME, STRATIFIED 
 
       AT THE COUNTY LEVEL BY GEOGRAPHIC LOCATION AND POPULATION.   
 
       AREA SEGMENTS WERE STRATIFIED WITHIN COUNTY AT THE MINOR      
       CIVIL DIVISION (MCD) LEVEL BY SIZE AND INCOME, AND AT THE     
       BLOCK AND ED LEVEL BY LOCATION WITHIN THE MCD OR COUNTY.      
       (FOR DETAILS, REFER TO THE SRC PUBLICATION, 1980 NATIONAL     
       SAMPLE: DESIGN AND DEVELOPMENT.)                              
                                                                     
       SYSTEMATIC PPS SAMPLING WAS USED TO SELECT THE AREA SEGMENTS  
       FROM THE SECOND STAGE SAMPLING FRAME FOR EACH COUNTY.  IN     
       THE SELF-REPRESENTING (SR) PSU'S THE NUMBER OF SAMPLE AREA    
       SEGMENTS VARIED IN PROPORTION TO THE SIZE OF THE PRIMARY      
       STAGE UNIT, FROM A HIGH OF B=18 AREA SEGMENTS IN THE SR NEW   
       YORK SMSA TO A LOW OF B=7 AREA SEGMENTS IN THE SMALLER SR     
       PSU'S SUCH AS SAN FRANCISCO. A TOTAL OF B=6 AREA SEGMENTS     
                                                                  
                                  TABLE 3                            
                                                                     
                PSU'S IN THE 1990 NES POST-ELECTION SURVEY           
                        BY: SMSA STATUS AND REGION                   
                                                                     
       REGION                        SMSA STATUS                     
                                                                     
                                         NON                         
              SELF-REPRESENTING   SELF-REPRESENTING   NON-SMSA'S     
                    SMSA'S              SMSA'S                       
       ------------------------------------------------------------  
                                                                     
       NORTH-    NEW YORK, NY-NJ   BOSTON, MA*       SCHUYLER, NY    
        EAST     PHILADELPHIA,     PITTSBURGH, PA*                   
                        PA-NJ      BUFFALO, NY                       
                                   NEW HAVEN, CT                     
                                   ATLANTIC CITY, NJ                 
                                   MANCHESTER, NH                    
                                                                     
       NORTH     CHICAGO, IL       ST. LOUIS, MO*     SANILAC, MI    
       CENTRAL   DETROIT, MI       MILWAUKEE, WI      PHILLIPS, KS   
                                   DAYTON, OH         MOWER, MN      
                                   DES MOINES, IA                    
                                   GRAND RAPIDS, MI                  
                                   FORT WAYNE, IN                    
                                   STEUBENVILLE, OH                  
                                                                     
       SOUTH                       HOUSTON, TX*       BULLOCH, GA    
                                   BALTIMORE, MD*     HALE, TX       
                                   BIRMINGHAM, AL     MONROE, AR     
                                   COLUMBUS, GA-AL    BEDFORD, TN    
                                   MIAMI, FL          ROBESON, NC    
                                   LAKELAND, FL                      
                                   MCALLEN, TX                       
                                   WHEELING, WV                      
                                   KNOXVILLE, TN                     
                                   RICHMOND, VA                      
                                                                     
       WEST    LOS ANGELES, CA     SEATTLE, WA        ELDORADO-      
               SAN FRANCISCO, CA   DENVER, WY           ALBINE, CA   
                                   ANAHEIM, CA        CARBON, WY     
                                   FRESNO, CA                        
                                   EUGENE, OR                        
                                                                     
       ------------------                                            
                                                                     
       NOTE:  THE PSU'S MARKED WITH AN ASTERISK (*) ARE              
       SELF-REPRESENTING FOR SAMPLE DESIGNS THAT USE THE TWO-THIRDS 
 
       OR LARGER PORTION OF THE SAMPLE.  FOR THE HALF-SAMPLE         
       DESIGN, ONLY 6 OF THE 16 SELF-REPRESENTING AREAS REMAIN       
       SELF-REPRESENTING.  THE OTHER TEN SELF-REPRESENTING PSU'S     
       ARE PAIRED AND ONLY FIVE ARE USED IN THE HALF-SAMPLE DESIGN,  
       EACH REPRESENTING BOTH ITSELF AND THE PSU IT IS PAIRED WITH.  
      ------------------                                             
  
       WAS SELECTED FROM EACH OF THE A=39 NONSELF-REPRESENTING       
       (NSR) PSU'S (EXCEPT HOUSTON THAT HAD 7 SEGMENTS SELECTED). A  
       TOTAL OF 303 SEGMENTS WERE SELECTED, 68 IN THE SIX            
       SELF-REPRESENTING PSU'S AND 235 IN THE NONSELF-REPRESENTING   
       PSU'S.                                                        
                                                                     
       THIRD STAGE SELECTION OF HOUSING UNITS               
                                                                     
       FOR EACH AREA SEGMENT SELECTED IN THE SECOND SAMPLING STAGE,  
       A LISTING WAS MADE OF ALL HOUSING UNITS LOCATED WITHIN THE    
       PHYSICAL BOUNDARIES OF THE SEGMENT. FOR SEGMENTS WITH A VERY  
       LARGE NUMBER OF EXPECTED HOUSING UNITS, ALL HOUSING UNITS IN  
       A SUBSELECTED PART OF THE SEGMENT WERE LISTED.  THE FINAL     
       EQUAL PROBABILITY SAMPLE OF HOUSING UNITS FOR THE 1990 NES    
       WAS SYSTEMATICALLY SELECTED FROM THE HOUSING UNIT LISTINGS    
       FOR THE SAMPLED AREA SEGMENTS.                                
                                                                     
       THE OVERALL PROBABILITY OF SELECTION FOR 1990 NES HOUSEHOLDS  
       WAS F=.00003761 OR .3761 IN 10,000.  THE EQUAL PROBABILITY    
       SAMPLE OF HOUSEHOLDS WAS ACHIEVED BY USING THE STANDARD       
       MULTI-STAGE SAMPLING TECHNIQUE OF SETTING THE SAMPLING RATE  
 
       FOR SELECTING HOUSING UNITS WITHIN AREA SEGMENTS TO BE        
       INVERSELY PROPORTIONAL TO THE PPS PROBABILITIES (SEE ABOVE)   
       USED TO SELECT THE PSU AND AREA SEGMENT.                      
                                                                     
       FOURTH STAGE RESPONDENT SELECTION                             
                                                                     
       WITHIN EACH SAMPLED HOUSING UNIT, THE SRC INTERVIEWER         
       PREPARED A COMPLETE LISTING OF ALL ELIGIBLE HOUSEHOLD         
       MEMBERS.  USING AN OBJECTIVE PROCEDURE DESCRIBED BY KISH[3]   
       (1949), A SINGLE RESPONDENT WAS THEN SELECTED AT RANDOM TO    
       BE INTERVIEWED.  REGARDLESS OF CIRCUMSTANCES, NO              
       SUBSTITUTIONS WERE PERMITTED FOR THE DESIGNATED RESPONDENT. 
       1990 SAMPLE DESIGN SPECIFICATIONS                                  
                                                                     
       THE TARGETED MINIMUM COMPLETED INTERVIEW SAMPLE SIZE FOR THE  
       1990 NES POST-ELECTION SURVEY WAS N=1,750 CASES.  IN THE      
       ORIGINAL SAMPLE SIZE COMPUTATION, THE FOLLOWING ASSUMPTIONS 
       WERE MADE: RESPONSE RATE = .68, COMBINED                      
       OCCUPANCY/ELIGIBILITY RATE = .83.  THESE ASSUMPTIONS WERE     
       DERIVED FROM SURVEY EXPERIENCE IN THE 1986 NES POST ELECTION  
       SURVEY.  TABLE 4 PROVIDES A FULL DESCRIPTION OF THE ORIGINAL  
       SAMPLE DESIGN SPECIFICATIONS.                                 
       ------------------                                            
                                                                    
       [3] L. KISH, "A PROCEDURE FOR OBJECTIVE RESPONDENT SELECTION  
       WITHIN THE HOUSEHOLD" JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN STATISTICAL     
       ASSOCIATION 44 (1949): 380-387.                               

                                  TABLE 4                            
                                                                     
                    1990 NATIONAL POST-ELECTION SURVEY               
           ORIGINAL SAMPLE DESIGN SPECIFICATIONS AND ASSUMPTIONS     
                     AND ACTUAL SAMPLE DESIGN OUTCOMES               
                                                                     
                                                                     
                                        ORIGINAL                     
                                     SPECIFICATIONS     ACTUAL       
                                     AND ASSUMPTIONS    OUTCOME      
                                                                     
                                                                     
       COMPLETED INTERVIEWS               1,750          2,004       
                                                                     
          RESPONSE RATE                     .68           .714       
                                                                     
       ELIGIBLE SAMPLE HOUSEHOLDS         2,573          2,808       
                                                                     
          OCCUPANCY/ELIGIBILITY RATE*       .87           .802       
                                                                     
       FINAL SAMPLE HU LISTINGS           3,256          3,503       
                                                                     
          SAMPLE GROWTH FROM UPDATE**      1.05          1.068       
                                                                     
       SAMPLE LISTINGS FROM FRAME         3,100          3,280       
                                                                     
                                                                     
       ----------------                                              
                                                                     
       * EXPECTED ELIGIBILITY (.97) X OCCUPANCY (.90)                
                                                                     
       ** SINCE THE UPDATING PROCESS PRODUCES ABOUT A 5% INCREASE    
       IN SAMPLE LINES OVER THE COUNT SELECTED FROM THE NATIONAL     
       SAMPLE SYSTEM, THE UPDATE INFLATION FACTOR WAS SET AT 1.05.   
                                                                     


       1990 SAMPLE DESIGN OUTCOMES                                        
                                                                     
       IN COMPARING THE DESIGN STAGE EXPECTATIONS IN THE FIRST       
       COLUMN OF TABLE 4 WITH THE ACTUAL SURVEY OUTCOMES IN THE      
       SECOND COLUMN, IT CAN BE SEEN THAT THE SAMPLE GROWTH FROM     
       THE UPDATE PROCEDURE WAS SLIGHTLY HIGHER THAN EXPECTED.       
       ALSO, THE ORIGINAL SAMPLE DESIGN SPECIFICATIONS               
       OVERESTIMATED THE OCCUPANCY/ELIGIBILITY RATES AND             
       UNDERESTIMATED THE RESPONSE RATE FOR THE ACTUAL SURVEY.       
       DESIGN STAGE ASSUMPTIONS FOR THE STUDY RESPONSE RATE AND      
       OCCUPANCY/ELIGIBILITY RATE WERE BASED ON THE RATES OBTAINED  
        IN THE 1986 POST-ELECTION SURVEY.                             

       THE ACTUAL OCCUPANCY/ELIGIBILITY RATE FOR THE 1990 NES POST-  
       ELECTION SURVEY (.802) WAS SOMEWHAT LOWER THAN THE RATE       
       OBTAINED IN THE 1986 NES POST-ELECTION SURVEY (.835). THE     
       RESPONSE RATE FOR 1990 (.714) WAS HIGHER THAN THE 1986 NES    
       POST-ELECTION SURVEY RESPONSE RATE OF .677 OR THE 1988 NES    
       PRE-ELECTION RESPONSE RATE OF .705.                           
                                                                     
       THE ORIGINAL AREA PROBABILITY SAMPLE FOR THE 1990 NES WAS     
       SELECTED AS A BASIC SAMPLE REPLICATE OF 3280 SAMPLE HU        
       LISTINGS. N THE POST-ELECTION SURVEYS THE ELAPSED TIME        
       BETWEEN ELECTION DAY AND THE DATE OF INTERVIEW IS A CRITICAL  
       DESIGN CONSIDERATION.  SINCE TIMING IS SO CRITICAL, THE       
       OPTION OF USING A REPLICATED SAMPLE APPROACH TO CONTROL       
       FINAL STUDY SAMPLE SIZE HAS LITTLE UTILITY.  IN ORDER TO      
       ENSURE THAT NO FEWER THAN A MINIMUM OF 1750 COMPLETED         
       INTERVIEWS WOULD BE OBTAINED WITHIN THE STUDY TIME FRAME,     
       THE INITIAL SIZE OF THE BASIC SAMPLE REPLICATE WAS INCREASED  
       FROM THE EXPECTED 3100 TO 3280 LISTINGS (APPROXIMATELY A 5%   
       INCREASE). IN ADDITION, 6.8% SAMPLE GROWTH FROM SRC'S         
       STANDARD SAMPLE UPDATE PROCEDURE INCREASED THE SIZE OF THE   
       FINAL SAMPLE TO N=3503 HOUSING UNITS LISTINGS.  DUE TO THE    
       DELIBERATE INCREASE IN SAMPLE SIZE AND HIGHER THAN EXPECTED   
       RESPONSE RATE, THE FINAL NUMBER OF COMPLETED INTERVIEWS       
       (N=2004) WAS APPROXIMATELY 14.5% HIGHER THAN THE MINIMUM      
       INTERVIEW TARGET SPECIFIED FOR THE SURVEY.                    
       WEIGHTED ANALYSIS OF 1990 NES DATA                            
                                                                     
       THE AREA PROBABILITY SAMPLE DESIGN FOR THE 1990 NES RESULTS   
       IN AN EQUAL PROBABILITY SAMPLE OF U.S. HOUSEHOLDS.  HOWEVER,  
       WITHIN SAMPLE HOUSEHOLDS A SINGLE ADULT RESPONDENT IS CHOSEN  
       AT RANDOM TO BE INTERVIEWED.  SINCE THE NUMBER OF ELIGIBLE    
       ADULTS MAY VARY FROM ONE HOUSEHOLD TO ANOTHER, THE RANDOM     
       SELECTION OF A SINGLE ADULT INTRODUCES INEQUALITY INTO        
       RESPONDENTS' SELECTION PROBABILITIES.  IN ANALYSIS, A         
       RESPONDENT SELECTION WEIGHT SHOULD BE USED TO COMPENSATE FOR  
       THESE UNEQUAL SELECTION PROBABILITIES.  THE VALUE OF THE      
       RESPONDENT SELECTION WEIGHT IS EXACTLY EQUAL TO THE NUMBER  
       OF ELIGIBLE ADULTS IN THE HOUSEHOLD FROM WHICH THE RANDOM 
       RESPONDENT WAS SELECTED. THE USE OF THE RESPONDENT SELECTION  
       WEIGHT IS STRONGLY ENCOURAGED, DESPITE PAST EVALUATIONS THAT  
       HAVE SHOWN THESE WEIGHTS TO HAVE LITTLE SIGNIFICANT IMPACT    
       ON THE VALUES OF NES ESTIMATES OF DESCRIPTIVE STATISTICS.     
                                                                     
       THE CURRENT POLICY OF THE NATIONAL ELECTION STUDIES IS NOT    
       TO INCLUDE IN PUBLIC USE DATA SETS SPECIAL ANALYSIS WEIGHTS   
       DESIGNED TO COMPENSATE FOR  NONRESPONSE OR TO POST-STRATIFY  
 
       THE SAMPLE TO KNOWN POPULATION DISTRIBUTION CONTROLS.         
       ANALYSTS INTERESTED IN DEVELOPING THEIR OWN NONRESPONSE OR  
       POST-STRATIFICATION ADJUSTMENT FACTORS MUST REQUEST ACCESS  
       TO THE NECESSARY SAMPLE CONTROL DATA FROM THE NES BOARD.      
       SAMPLING ERRORS OF 1990 NES ESTIMATES                         
                                                                     
       1990 SAMPLING ERROR CALCULATION PROGRAMS                           
                                                                     
       THE PROBABILITY SAMPLE DESIGN FOR THE 1990 NATIONAL ELECTION  
       STUDY PERMITS THE CALCULATION OF ESTIMATES OF SAMPLING ERROR  
       FOR SURVEY STATISTICS.  FOR CALCULATING SAMPLING ERRORS OF    
       STATISTICS FROM COMPLEX SAMPLE SURVEYS, THE OSIRIS            
       STATISTICAL ANALYSIS AND DATA MANAGEMENT SOFTWARE SYSTEM   
   
       OFFERS THE PSALMS AND REPERR PROGRAMS. PSALMS IS A GENERAL    
       PURPOSE SAMPLING ERROR PROGRAM THAT INCORPORATES THE TAYLOR   
       SERIES APPROXIMATION APPROACH TO THE ESTIMATION OF VARIANCES  
       OF RATIOS (INCLUDING MEANS, SCALE VARIABLES, INDICES,         
       PROPORTIONS) AND THEIR DIFFERENCES.  REPERR IS AN OSIRIS      
       PROGRAM THAT INCORPORATES ALGORITHMS FOR REPLICATED           
       APPROACHES TO VARIANCE ESTIMATION. BOTH BALANCED REPEATED   
  
       REPLICATION (BRR) AND JACKKNIFE REPEATED REPLICATION (JRR)    
       ARE AVAILABLE AS PROGRAM OPTIONS. THE CURRENT VERSION OF      
       REPERR IS BEST SUITED FOR ESTIMATING SAMPLING ERRORS AND      
       DESIGN EFFECTS FOR REGRESSION AND CORRELATION STATISTICS.     
                                                                     
       1990 SAMPLING ERROR CODES AND CALCULATION MODEL                    
                                                                     
       ESTIMATION OF VARIANCES FOR COMPLEX SAMPLE SURVEY ESTIMATES   
       REQUIRES A COMPUTATION MODEL. INDIVIDUAL DATA RECORDS MUST 
  
       BE ASSIGNED SAMPLING ERROR CODES THAT REFLECT THE COMPLEX
       STRUCTURE OF THE SAMPLE AND ARE COMPATIBLE WITH THE           
       COMPUTATION ALGORITHMS OF THE VARIOUS PROGRAMS.  THE          
       SAMPLING ERROR CODES FOR THE 1990 NES ARE INCLUDED AS A       
       VARIABLE IN THE ICPSR PUBLIC USE DATA SET.  THE ASSIGNED      
       SAMPLING ERROR CODES ARE DESIGNED TO FACILITATE SAMPLING      
       ERROR COMPUTATION ACCORDING TO A PAIRED SELECTION MODEL FOR   
       BOTH TAYLOR SERIES APPROXIMATION AND REPLICATION METHOD       
       PROGRAMS.                                                     
                                                                     
       TABLE 5 PROVIDES A DESCRIPTION OF HOW INDIVIDUAL SAMPLING     
       ERROR CODE VALUES ARE TO BE PAIRED FOR SAMPLING ERROR         
       COMPUTATIONS.  THIRTY (30) PAIRS OR STRATA OF SAMPLING ERROR  
       COMPUTATION UNITS (SECU'S) ARE DEFINED.  EACH SECU IN A       
       STRATUM PAIR INCLUDES CASES ASSIGNED TO A SINGLE SAMPLING     
       ERROR CODE VALUE.  THE EXCEPTIONS ARE THE SECOND SECU IN      
       STRATUM 27 THAT IS COMPRISED OF CASES ASSIGNED SAMPLING CODE  
       VALUES 36 AND 55 AND THE SECOND SECU IN STRATUM 29 THAT IS    
       COMPRISED OF CASES WITH SECU'S 61 AND 63.                     

                                  TABLE 5                            
                                                                     
                       1990 NES POST-ELECTION SURVEY                 
          PAIRED SELECTION MODEL FOR SAMPLING ERROR COMPUTATIONS     
                                                                     
                                                                     
                    PAIR         (SECU)         (SECU)               
                  (STRATUM)      1 OF 2         2 OF 2               
                                  CODES          CODES               
                                                                     
                      1            103            104                
                      2            105            106                
                      3             99            100                
                      4            101            102                
                      5             95             96                
                      6             97             98                
                      7             93             94                
                      8             91             92                
                      9             89             90                
                     10             83             84                
                     11             81             82                
                     12             77             78                
                     13             75             76                
                     14             73             74                
                     15              2              6                
                     16              7              8                
                     17             14             16                
                     18             17             18                
                     19             19             21                
                     20             24             28                
                     21             63             65                
                     22             30             33                
                     23             37             43                
                     24             40             48                
                     25             42             45                
                     26             50             51                
                     27             52          36 + 55              
                     28             57             64                
                     29             60          61 + 63              
                     30             67             68                


       GENERALIZED SAMPLING ERROR RESULTS FOR THE 1990 NES           
                                                                     
       TO ASSIST NES DATA ANALYSTS, THE OSIRIS PSALMS PROGRAM WAS    
       USED TO COMPUTE SAMPLING ERRORS FOR A WIDE-RANGING SET OF     
       MEANS AND PROPORTIONS ESTIMATED FROM NES SURVEY DATA SETS.   
 
       FOR EACH ESTIMATE, SAMPLING ERRORS WERE COMPUTED FOR THE      
       TOTAL SAMPLE AND FOR FIFTEEN DEMOGRAPHIC AND POLITICAL        
       AFFILIATION SUBCLASSES OF NES SAMPLES.  THE RESULTS OF THESE  
       SAMPLING ERROR COMPUTATIONS WERE THEN SUMMARIZED AND          
       TRANSLATED INTO THE GENERAL USAGE SAMPLING ERROR TABLE        
       PROVIDED IN TABLE 6.                                          
                                                                     
       INCORPORATING THE PATTERN OF "DESIGN EFFECTS" OBSERVED IN     
       THE EXTENSIVE SET OF EXAMPLE COMPUTATIONS, TABLE 6 PROVIDES   
       APPROXIMATE STANDARD ERRORS FOR PERCENTAGE ESTIMATES BASED    
       ON THE 1990 NES.  TO USE THE TABLE, EXAMINE THE COLUMN        
       HEADING TO FIND THE PERCENTAGE VALUE THAT BEST APPROXIMATES   
       THE VALUE OF THE ESTIMATED PERCENTAGE THAT IS OF              
       INTEREST.[4] NEXT, LOCATE THE APPROXIMATE SAMPLE SIZE BASE    
       (DENOMINATOR FOR THE PROPORTION) IN THE LEFT-HAND ROW MARGIN  
       OF THE TABLE. TO FIND THE APPROXIMATE STANDARD ERROR OF A     
       PERCENTAGE ESTIMATE, SIMPLY CROSS-REFERENCE THE APPROPRIATE 
 
       COLUMN (PERCENTAGE) AND ROW (SAMPLE SIZE BASE).  NOTE: THE    
       TABULATED VALUES REPRESENT APPROXIMATELY ONE STANDARD ERROR   
       FOR THE PERCENTAGE ESTIMATE.  TO CONSTRUCT AN APPROXIMATE     
       CONFIDENCE INTERVAL, THE ANALYST SHOULD APPLY THE             
       APPROPRIATE CRITICAL POINT FROM THE "Z" DISTRIBUTION (E.G.    
       Z=1.96 FOR A TWO-SIDED 95% CONFIDENCE INTERVAL HALF-WIDTH).   
       FURTHERMORE, THE APPROXIMATE STANDARD ERRORS IN THE TABLE   
       APPLY ONLY TO SINGLE POINT ESTIMATES OF PERCENTAGES, NOT TO   
       THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN TWO PERCENTAGE ESTIMATES.              
                                                                     
       THE GENERALIZED VARIANCE RESULTS PRESENTED IN TABLE 6 ARE A   
       USEFUL TOOL FOR INITIAL, CURSORY EXAMINATION OF THE NES       
       SURVEY RESULTS.  FOR MORE IN-DEPTH ANALYSIS AND REPORTING OF 
       CRITICAL ESTIMATES, ANALYSTS ARE ENCOURAGED TO COMPUTE EXACT  
       ESTIMATES OF STANDARD ERRORS USING THE APPROPRIATE CHOICE OF  
       A SAMPLING ERROR PROGRAM AND COMPUTATION MODEL.               

       [4] THE STANDARD ERROR OF A PERCENTAGE IS A SYMMETRIC         
       FUNCTION WITH ITS MAXIMUM CENTERED AT P=50%; I.E., THE        
       STANDARDS ERRORS OF P=40% AND P=60% ESTIMATES ARE EQUAL.      
                                                                     
                                  TABLE 6                            
                                                                     
                       1990 NES POST-ELECTION SURVEY                 
                        GENERALIZED VARIANCE TABLE                   
                APPROXIMATE STANDARD ERRORS FOR PERCENTAGES          
                                                                     
                                                                     
                       FOR PERCENTAGE ESTIMATES NEAR                 
                                                                     
       SAMPLE N   50%      40% OR    30% OR    20% OR    10% OR      
                            60%       70%       80%       90%        
                                                                     
           THE APPROXIMATE STANDARD ERROR OF THE PERCENTAGE IS:      
                                                                     
                                                                     
          100    5.385     5.277     4.933     4.308     3.231       
                                                                     
          200    3.912     3.824     3.581     3.128     2.343       
                                                                     
          300    3.278     3.210     3.006     2.260     1.962       
                                                                     
          400    2.905     2.846     2.661     2.324     1.743       
                                                                     
          500    2.663     2.603     2.437     2.128     1.593       
                                                                     
          750    2.294     2.244     2.094     1.657     1.250       
                                                                     
         1000    2.078     2.039     1.907     1.657     1.250       
                                                                     
         1500    1.846     1.803     1.688     1.474     1.102       
                                                                     
         2000    1.722     1.691     1.568     1.368     1.030       
                                                                     
         2040    1.716     1.685     1.561     1.298     1.020       



>>  1991 NES STAFF AND TECHNICAL PAPERS
                                                                     
       BREHM, JOHN. (1985A) "REPORT ON CODING OF ECONOMIC            
          CONDITIONS SERIES IN THE 1984 PRE-POST ELECTION STUDY: A   
          REPORT TO THE BOARD OF OVERSEERS, NATIONAL ELECTION        
          STUDIES."  WORKING PAPER NO. 8. ANN ARBOR: CPS, JUNE       
          1985.                                                      
                                                                     
       BREHM, JOHN. (1985B) "ANALYSIS OF RESULT CODE DISPOSITION     
          FOR CONTINUOUS MONITORING BY TIME IN FIELD: REPORT TO THE  
          BOARD OF OVERSEERS, NATIONAL ELECTION STUDIES." WORKING    
          PAPER NO. 7.  ANN ARBOR: CPS, AUGUST 1985.                 
                                                                     
       BREHM, JOHN. (1985C) "QUESTION ORDERING EFFECTS ON REPORTED   
          VOTE CHOICE." UNPUBLISHED MEMO, JULY 1985.                 
                                                                     
       BREHM, JOHN. (1987A) "HOW REPRESENTATIVE IS THE 1986          
          POST-ELECTION SURVEY?" MEMO TO BOARD OF OVERSEERS,         
          NATIONAL ELECTION STUDIES, MAY 1987.                       
                                                                     
       BREHM, JOHN. (1987B) "WHO'S MISSING? AN ANALYSIS OF           
          NONRESPONSE IN THE 1986 ELECTION STUDY: A REPORT TO THE    
          BOARD OF OVERSEERS, NATIONAL ELECTION STUDIES."  WORKING   
          PAPER NO. 10. ANN ARBOR: CPS, DECEMBER 1987.               
                                                                     
       BREHM, JOHN AND SANTA TRAUGOTT. (1986) "SIMILARITY AND        
          REPRESENTATIVENESS OF THE 1985 PILOT HALF-SAMPLES." MEMO   
          TO THE NES 1985 PILOT STUDY COMMITTEE MARCH, 1986.         
                                                                     
       LAKE, CELINDA. (1983A) "SIMILARITY AND REPRESENTATIVENESS OF  
          1983 PILOT SAMPLES." MEMO TO NATIONAL ELECTION STUDIES     
          1984 PLANNING COMMITTEE, SEPTEMBER 1983.                   
                                                                     
       LAKE, CELINDA. (1983B) "COMPARISON OF 3-POINT, 5-POINT, AND   
          7-POINT SCALES FROM THE CATI EXPERIMENT 1982 ELECTION      
          STUDY." MEMO TO NES BOARD OF OVERSEERS, NOVEMBER 1983.     
                                                                     
       LAKE, CELINDA. (1984) "CODING OF INDEPENDENT/INDEPENDENTS     
          AND APOLITICALS IN THE PARTY IDENTIFICATION SUMMARY CODE   
          AND APOLITICALS IN THE ROLLING CROSS-SECTION."  MEMO TO    
          BOARD OF OVERSEERS, NATIONAL ELECTION STUDIES. FEBRUARY    
          1984.                                                      
                                                                     
       MORCHIO, GIOVANNA. (1987) "TRENDS IN NES RESPONSE RATES."     
          MEMO TO NES BOARD OF OVERSEERS.                            
                                                                     
       MORCHIO, GIOVANNA AND MARIA SANCHEZ. (1984) "CREATION OF A    
          FILTER VARIABLE TO BE USED WHEN ANALYZING QUESTIONS ABOUT  
          CONGRESSIONAL CANDIDATES IN THE 1982 INTEGRATED            
          PERSONAL/ISR CATI/BERKELEY CATI DATASET:  A REPORT TO THE  
          BOARD OF OVERSEERS, NATIONAL ELECTION STUDIES." WORKING    
          PAPER NO. 1, ANN ARBOR: CPS, FEBRUARY 1984.                
                                                                     
       MORCHIO, GIOVANNA AND MARIA SANCHEZ. (1984) "COMPARISON OF    
          THE MICHIGAN METHOD OF DISTRICT ASSIGNMENT ON THE          
          TELEPHONE WITH THE PERSONAL INTERVIEW SIMULATED DATA:      
          A REPORT TO THE BOARD OF OVERSEERS, NATIONAL ELECTION      
          STUDIES." WORKING PAPER NO. 2.  ANN ARBOR: CPS, MARCH      
          1984.                                                      
                                                                     
       MORCHIO, GIOVANNA, MARIA SANCHEZ AND SANTA TRAUGOTT. (1985)   
          "MODE DIFFERENCES: DK RESPONSES IN THE 1984 POST-ELECTION  
          SURVEY: A REPORT TO THE BOARD OF OVERSEERS, NATIONAL       
          ELECTION  STUDIES." WORKING PAPER NO. 9.  ANN ARBOR: CPS,  
          NOVEMBER 1985.                                             
                                                                     
       MORCHIO, GIOVANNA AND SANTA TRAUGOTT. (1986)                  
          "CONGRESSIONAL DISTRICT ASSIGNMENT IN AN RDD SAMPLE:       
          RESULTS OF 1982 CATI EXPERIMENT." MEMO TO THE 1986 PILOT   
          PLANNING COMMITTEE.  FEBRUARY 1986.                        
                                                                     
       NES STAFF. (1984)  "QUESTIONS AND VERSIONS IN NES             
          CONTINUOUS MONITORING, 1984: A REPORT TO THE BOARD OF      
          OVERSEERS, NATIONAL ELECTION STUDIES."  WORKING PAPER NO.  
          3.  ANN ARBOR: CPS, AUGUST 1984.                           
                                                                     
       NES STAFF. (1984) "WEEKLY FIELD REPORT FOR THE NATIONAL       
          ELECTION  STUDIES CONTINUOUS MONITORING, JAN. 11-AUG. 3,   
          1984: A REPORT TO THE BOARD OF OVERSEERS, NATIONAL         
          ELECTION STUDIES."  WORKING PAPER NO. 4.  ANN ARBOR: CPS,  
          AUGUST 1984.                                               
                                                                     
       NES STAFF. (1985) "PROGRESS OF THE ROLLING CROSS SECTION."    
          MEMO TO NES BOARD OF OVERSEERS, FEBRUARY 1985.             
                                                                     
       NES STAFF. (UNDATED) "YEARS OF SCHOOLING." UNPUBLISHED STAFF  
          MEMO.                                                      
                                                                     
       NES STAFF. (UNDATED)  "NEWSPAPER CODE." UNPUBLISHED STAFF     
          MEMO.                                                      
                                                                     
       TRAUGOTT, SANTA. (1984) "TWO VERSIONS OF THE ABORTION         
          QUESTION." UNPUBLISHED STAFF MEMO TO THE NES BOARD OF      
          OVERSEERS, JUNE 1984.                                      
                                                                     
       TRAUGOTT, SANTA. (1985) "SAMPLE WEIGHTING IN NES CONTINUOUS   
          MONITORING, 1984.: A REPORT TO THE BOARD OF OVERSEERS,     
          NATIONAL ELECTION STUDIES," WORKING PAPER NO. 5.  ANN      
          ARBOR: CPS, APRIL 1985.                                    
                                                                     
       TRAUGOTT, SANTA. (1985) "SAMPLE WEIGHTING IN NES PRE-POST     
          ELECTION SURVEY, 1984: A REPORT TO THE BOARD OF            
          OVERSEERS, NATIONAL ELECTION STUDIES," WORKING PAPER       
          NO. 6.  ANN ARBOR: CPS, APRIL 1985.                        
                                                                     
       TRAUGOTT, SANTA. (1985) "ASSESSMENT OF MEDIA MEASURES IN      
          RXS." UNPUBLISHED STAFF MEMO, JULY 1985.                   
                                                                     
       TRAUGOTT, SANTA. (1985) "ASSESSMENT OF MEDIA MEASURES IN      
          PRE-POST" UNPUBLISHED STAFF MEMO, JULY 1985.               
                                                                     
       TRAUGOTT, SANTA. (UNDATED) "THE POLITICAL INTEREST VARIABLE   
          ON THE 1984 ELECTION STUDY." UNPUBLISHED STAFF MEMO TO     
          NES PLANNING COMMITTEE.                                    
                                                                     
       TRAUGOTT, SANTA. (1985) "SOME ANALYSIS OF HARD-TO-REACH       
          ROLLING THUNDER RESPONDENTS." UNPUBLISHED STAFF MEMO TO    
          NES BOARD OF OVERSEERS, FEBRUARY 1985.                     


                                                                               
>> 1989 NES PILOT STUDY REPORTS                  
                                                                     
       ABELSON, ROBERT. MESSAGE ON VOTE VALIDATION EXPERIMENT.       
                                                                     
       CALVO, MARIA ANTONIA AND STEVEN J. ROSENSTONE. THE            
          RE-FRAMING OF THE ABORTION DEBATE.                         
                                                                     
       KINDER, DONALD R. AND THOMAS NELSON. EXPERIMENTAL             
          INVESTIGATIONS OF OPINION FRAMES AND SURVEY RESPONSES: A   
          REPORT TO THE NES BOARD.                                   
                                                                     
       KNIGHT, KATHLEEN. COMPARISONS OF LIBERAL-CONSERVATIVE ITEMS  
 
          IN THE ANES 1989 PILOT STUDY.                              
                                                                     
       KROSNICK, JON AND MATTHEW K. BERENT. IMPACT OF VERBAL         
          LABELING ON RESPONSE ALTERNATIVES AND BRANCHING ON         
          ATTITUDE MEASUREMENT RELIABILITY.                          
                                                                     
       LEEGE, DAVID, KEN WALD AND LYMAN KELLSTEDT. RELIGION AND      
          POLITICS. A REPORT ON MEASURES OF RELIGIOSITY IN THE 1989  
          NES PILOT STUDY.                                           
                                                                     
       MARKUS, GREGORY. MEASURING POPULAR INDIVIDUALISM.             
                                                                     
       NES STAFF. POSSIBLE BIAS DUE TO ATTRITION AND SAMPLE          
          SELECTION IN THE 1989 PILOT STUDY.                         
                                                                     
       PRICE, VINCENT AND JOHN ZALLER. EVALUATION OF MEDIA EXPOSURE  
          ITEMS IN 1989.                                             
          APPENDIX 1: [PRICE & ZALLER] MEASURING INDIVIDUAL          
            DIFFERENCES...                                           
          APPENDIX 2: [ZALLER & PRICE] IN ONE EAR AND OUT THE        
            OTHER...                                                 
                                                                     
       ROSENSTONE, STEVEN J. AND GREGORY A. DIAMOND. MEASURING       
          PUBLIC OPINION ON POLITICAL ISSUES.                        
                                                                     
       TRAUGOTT, MICHAEL. MEMO TO PILOT STUDY COMMITTEE, INCLUDING 
  
          AS AN APPENDIX: UNDERSTANDING CAMPAIGN EFFECTS ON          
          CANDIDATE RECALL AND RECOGNITION.                          
                                                                     
       ZALLER, JOHN. EXPERIMENTAL TESTS OF THE QUESTION ANSWERING    
          MODEL OF THE MASS SURVEY RESPONSE.                         
                                                                     
   

>> CODEBOOK INFORMATION

The following example from the 1948 NES study provides the standard 
format for codebook variable documentation. 

Note that NES studies which are not part of the Time-Series usually
omit marginals and the descriptive content in lines 2-5 (except for
variable name).


Line

1  ==============================                                              
2  VAR 480026    NAME-R NOT VT-WAS R REG TO VT                                 
3                COLUMNS 61   - 61                                             
4                NUMERIC                                                       
5                MD=0 OR GE 8                                                  
6                                                                              
7                  Q. 17.  (IF R DID NOT VOTE)  WERE YOU REGISTERED (ELIGIBLE)
8                  TO VOTE.                                                   
9                  ...........................................................
10                                                                            
11            82       1.  YES                                                
12           149       2.  NO                                                 
13                                                                             
14             0       8.  DK                                                 
15             9       9.  NA                                                 
16           422       0.  INAP., R VOTED                                     
                                                                            


Line 2 - VARIABLE NAME.  Note that in the codebook the variable name
         (usually a 'number') does not include the "V" prefix which is 
         used in the release SAS and SPSS data definition files
         (.sas and .sps files) for all variables including those
         which do not have 'number' names.  For example the variable
         "VERSION" in the codebook is "VVERSION" in the data definition
         files.

Line 2 - "NAME".  This is the variable label used in the SAS and SPSS
         data definition files (.sas and .sps files).  Some codebooks 
         exclude this.

Line 3 - COLUMNS.  Columns in the ASCII data file (.dat file).

Line 4 - CHARACTER OR NUMERIC.  If numeric and the variable is a decimal
         rather than integer variable, the numer of decimal places is 
         also indicated (e.g. "NUMERIC  DEC 4")

Line 5 - Values which are assigned to missing by default in the Study's
         SAS and and SPSS data definition files (.sas and .sps files).

Line 7 - Actual question text for survey variables or a description of 
         non-survey variables (for example, congressional district).
         Survey items usually include the question number (for example
         "B1a.") from the Study questionnaire; beginning in 1996 
         non-survey items also have unique item numbers (for example
         "CSheet.1").

Line 9 - A dashed or dotted line usually separates question text from
         any other documentation which follows.

Line 10- When present, annotation provided by Study staff is presented
         below the question text/description and preceding code values.

Lines 11-16
         Code values are listed with descriptive labels.  Valid codes
         (those not having 'missing' status in line 5) are presented
         first, followed by the values described in line 5.  For
         continuous variables, one line may appear providing the range
         of possible values.  A blank line usually separates the 'valid'
         and 'missing' values.

Lines 11-16
         Marginals are usually provided for discrete variables.  The
         counts may be unweighted or weighted; check the Study codebook
         introductory text to determine weight usage.
