THIS FILE IS:    anes_2002prepost_app.txt  (codebook appendix file)
RELEASE VERSION: 20051116 (Nov 16, 2005)

DEFAULT DIRECTORY:  C:\ANES\anes_2002prepost\20051116\


2002 APPENDICES
---------------

>> 2002 CANDIDATE NUMBER MASTER CODE

Note:  the candidate number Master Code has been revised in 2002.


SENATE
------
  RACE IN STATE                    
   01.  Democratic candidate in open Senate race
   02.  Republican candidate in open Senate race
   03.  Democratic Senate running incumbent
   04.  Republican Senate running incumbent
   05.  Democratic Senate challenger
   06.  Republican Senate challenger
   07.  Independent/3rd-party Senate candidate -  nonincumbent
   08.  Independent/3rd-party Senate candidate  - 2nd nonincument
   09.  Independent/3rd-party Senate incumbent
   21.  Retiring Democratic Junior Senator in state with open race
   22.  Retiring Republican Junior Senator in state with open race
   23.  Retiring Independent/3rd Party Junior Senator in state with open race
   27.  Retiring Democratic Senior Senator in state with open race
   28.  Retiring Republican Senior Senator in state with open race
   29.  Retiring Independent/3rd Party Senior Senator in state with open race
 SENATOR WITH TERM NOT UP (NOT RUNNING FOR RETIRING)
   11.  Democratic Junior Senator
   12.  Republican Junior Senator
   13.  Independent/3rd-Party Junior Senator
   17.  Democratic Senior Senator
   18.  Republican Senior Senator
   19.  Independent/3rd Party Senior Senator

HOUSE
-----
   31.  Democratic candidate in open House race
   32.  Republican candidate in open House race
   33.  Democratic House running incumbent
   34.  Republican House running incumbent
   35.  Democratic House challenger
   36.  Republican House challenger
   37.  Independent/3rd-party House candidate -  nonincumbent
   38.  Independent/3rd-party House candidate  - 2nd nonincument
   39.  Independent/3rd-party House incumbent
   41.  Retiring Democratic House Representative
   42.  Retiring Republican House Representative
   43.  Retiring Independent/3rd-Party House Representative


>>2002 TYPE RACE MASTER CODE


HOUSE TYPE RACE

    INCUMBENT RUNNING
12. Democratic incumbent running - Republican challenger
13. Democratic incumbent running - other challenger
14. Democratic incumbent running - unopposed
19. Democratic incumbent running - Repub and other challengers
21. Republican incumbent running - Democratic challenger
23. Republican incumbent running - other challenger
24. Republican incumbent running - unopposed
29. Republican incumbent running - Dem and other challengers
31. Other incumbent running - Democratic challenger
32. Other incumbent running - Republican challenger
34. Other incumbent running - unopposed
35. Other incumbent running - Dem and Repub challengers

    SPECIAL TYPE RACE DUE TO REDISTRICTING
40. Dem and Repub incumbents running - no other candidate
41. 2 Democratic incumbents running - no other candidate
42. 2 Republican incumbents running - no other candidate
43. Dem and Repub incumbents running - other candidate(s)
44. Dem non-incumbent only - no retiree/unclear who is retiree
45. Repub non-incumbent only - no retiree/unclear who is retiree
46. Dem and Rep candidates - no retiree/unclear who is retiree
47. Dem and other candidates - no retiree/unclear who is retiree
48. Rep and other candidates - no retiree/unclear who is retiree
49. Dem, Rep and other cands - no retiree/unclear who is retiree

    NO INCUMBENT RUNNING
51. Dem incumbent not running - Democratic cand unopposed
52. Dem incumbent not running - Republican cand unopposed
53. Dem incumbent not running - Other cand unopposed
55. Dem incumbent not running - Democratic and Republican cands
56. Dem incumbent not running - Republican and other candidates
57. Dem incumbent not running - Democratic and other candidates
59. Dem incumbent not running - Democr, Repub, other cands
61. Rep incumbent not running - Democratic cand unopposed
62. Rep incumbent not running - Republican cand unopposed
63. Rep incumbent not running - Other cand unopposed
65. Rep incumbent not running - Democratic and Republican cands
66. Rep incumbent not running - Republican and other candidates
67. Rep incumbent not running - Democratic and other candidates
69. Rep incumbent not running - Democr, Repub, other cands

    LOUISIANA DISTRICT 05 ONLY
80. Rep incumbent not running - Democr and 2 Repub candidates
                                                       
97. Washington DC



                                             SENATE TYPE RACE

   INCUMBENT RUNNING
12. Democratic incumbent running - Republican challenger
13. Democratic incumbent running - other challenger
14. Democratic incumbent running - unopposed
19. Democratic incumbent running - Repub and other challengers
21. Republican incumbent running - Democratic challenger
23. Republican incumbent running - other challenger
24. Republican incumbent running - unopposed
29. Republican incumbent running - Dem and other challengers
31. Other incumbent running - Democratic challenger
32. Other incumbent running - Republican challenger
34. Other incumbent running - unopposed
35. Other incumbent running - Dem and Repub challengers

    NO INCUMBENT RUNNING
51. Dem incumbent not running - Democratic cand unopposed
52. Dem incumbent not running - Republican cand unopposed
53. Dem incumbent not running - Other cand unopposed
55. Dem incumbent not running - Democratic and Republican cands
56. Dem incumbent not running - Republican and other candidates
57. Dem incumbent not running - Democratic and other candidates
59. Dem incumbent not running - Democr, Repub, other cands
61. Rep incumbent not running - Democratic cand unopposed
62. Rep incumbent not running - Republican cand unopposed
63. Rep incumbent not running - Other cand unopposed
65. Rep incumbent not running - Democratic and Republican cands
66. Rep incumbent not running - Republican and other candidates
67. Rep incumbent not running - Democratic and other candidates
69. Rep incumbent not running - Democr, Repub, other cands

    LOUISIANA ONLY
80. Democratic incumbent running - 2 Republican challengers

    NO RACE IN STATE
81. Democratic incumbents, no race in state
82. Republican incumbents, no race in state
83. Democratic and other incumbent, no race in state
84. Republican and other incumbent, no race in state
85. Democratic and Republican incumbents, no race in state
86.  2 Other incumbents - no race
                                                       
97. Washington DC

>> 2000 NATIONAL ELECTION STUDY SAMPLE DESIGN

>> STUDY POPULATION

     The study population for the 2000 Pre- and Post-Election Study is defined
to include all United States citizens of voting age on or before the 2000
Election Day.  Eligible citizens must have resided in housing units in the
forty-eight coterminous states.  This definition excludes persons living in
Alaska or Hawaii and requires eligible persons to have been both a United
States citizen and eighteen years of age on or before the 7th of November
2000.

>> DUAL FRAME SAMPLE DESIGN

The 2000 NES is a dual frame sample with both an area sample and an RDD 
component.  The RDD frame provides coverage of telephone households while the 
area sample provides full coverage of all U.S. households including those 
without telephones.  Each of these sample designs will be described in the 
following sections.  The 2000 NES data set contains 1006 area sample cases 
and 801 telephone sample cases.

>> FTF SAMPLE DESIGN - MULTI-STAGE AREA PROBABILITY

The area sample is based on a multi-stage area probability sample selected 
from the Survey Research Center's (SRC) 1990 National Sample design. 
Identification of the 2000 NES sample respondents was conducted using a four 
stage sampling process--a primary stage sampling of U.S. Metropolitan
Statistical Areas (MSAs) or New England County Metropolitan Areas (NECMAs) 
and non-MSA 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 1990 SRC National Sample, 
from which the 2000 NES sample was drawn, is provided in the SRC publication 
titled 1990 SRC National Sample: Design and Development.  

The 2000 NES sample design called for an entirely new cross-section sample to 
be drawn from the 1990 SRC National Sample; no panel component was included 
in 2000.    The 1990 SRC National Sample is a multi-stage area probability 
sample.  The 2000 NES sample was drawn from both the 1990 SRC National Sample 
strata (MSA PSUs) and the 1980 SRC National Sample strata  (non-MSA PSUs). 
The modification of the 1990 design in which the 1980 strata definitions were 
used for the non-MSA counties fully represents the non-MSA domain of the 48 
contiguous states.  This modification was made for cost and interviewing 
efficiency reasons related to the availability of interviewers in these areas 
who work on some of SRC's large panel studies.  The following sections will 
focus on the 1990 SRC National Sample design.


Selection Stages for the 2000 NES FTF Sample: 1990 SRC National Sample
------------------------------------------------------------------

Primary Stage Selection

The selection of primary stage sampling units (PSUs) for the 1990 SRC 
National Sample, which depending on the sample stratum are either MSAs, New 
England County Metropolitan Areas (NECMAs), single counties, independent 
cities, county equivalents or groupings of small counties, is based on the 
county-level 1990 Census Reports of Population and Housing (1).  Primary stage 
units were assigned to 108 explicit strata based on MSA/NECMA or non-
MSA/NECMA status, PSU size, Census Region and geographic location within 
region.  Twenty-eight of the 108 strata contain only a single self-
representing PSU, each of which is included with certainty in the primary 
stage of sample selection.  The remaining 80 nonself-representing strata 
contain more than one PSU.  From each of these nonself-representing strata, 
one PSU was sampled with probability proportionate to its size (PPS) measured 
in 1990 occupied housing units. 

The full 1990 SRC National Sample of 108 primary stage selections was 
designed to be optimal for surveys roughly three to five times the size of 
the 2000 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 PSUs such as a one-half sample or a 
three-quarter sample partition.  Each of the partitions represents a 
stratified subselection from the full 108 PSU design.  The 2000 NES sample of 
44 PSUs is a stratified random subsample of PSUs from the "A" half-sample 
partition of the 1990 SRC National Sample.  Because of the small size of this 
NES sample, both the number of PSUs (selected primary areas) and the 
secondary stage units (area segments) in the National half-sample were 
reduced by subselection for the 2000 NES sample design.  The 18 self-
representing areas in the 1990 SRC National half-sample were all retained for 
the 2000 NES sample (8 of these remained self-representing in the 2000 NES 
and 10 represent not only their own MSA but their "pair" among the twenty 
additional self-representing primary areas of the full 1990 SRC National 
Sample design).  Nineteen of the 26 nonself-representing half-sample MSAs and 
7 of the 14 half-sample non-MSAs were retained by the subselection for the 
2000 NES sample (or 26 of 40 NSR PSUs).

Table 1 identifies the 44 PSUs in the 2000 NES sample by MSA status and 
Region and also indicates the number of area segments used for the 2000 NES 
sample (see next section on second stage selection). 


      Table 1: PSU Name and Number of Area Segments in the 2000 NES Sample
      Showing 1990 SRC National-Sample Stratum and MSA Status.

==============================================================================
National Sample PSU      National Sample PSU Name    # of 2000 NES
                                                        Segments
==============================================================================

                  Eight Largest Self-representing PSUs
                  ------------------------------------
120              New York, NY MSA                           12
190              Los Angeles-Long Beach, CA MSA130          12
130              Chicago, IL MSA                             9
121              Philadelphia, PA-NJ MSA                     7
131              Detroit, MI MSA                             6
150              Washington DC-MD-VA MSA                     6
110              Boston, MA NECMA                            6
171              Dallas and Ft Worth, TX CMSA                6

                  Ten Remaining Largest MSA PSUs
                  ------------------------------
170              Houston, TX MSA                             6
191              Seattle-Tacoma, WA CMSA                     6
141              St Louis, MO-IL MSA                         6
152              Baltimore, MD MSA                           6
122              Nassau-Suffolk, NY MSA                      6
194              Anaheim-Santa Ana, CA MSA                   6
132              Cleveland, OH MSA                           6
154              Miami-Hialeah, FL MSA                       5(2)
181              Denver, CO MSA                              6
196              San Francisco, CA MSA                       6


                  Nonself-representing MSAs:  Northeast
                  -------------------------------------
211              New Haven-Waterbury-Meriden, CT NECMA       6
213              Manchester-Nashua NH NECMA                  6
220              Buffalo, NY MSA                             6
226              Atlantic City, NJ MSA                       6

                  Nonself-representing MSAs:  Midwest
                  -----------------------------------
230              Milwaukee, WI MSA                           6
434              Saginaw, MI MSA                             6
239              Steubenville-Wheeling, OH  (3)              6
240              Des Moines, IA MSA                          6

                  Nonself-representing MSAs:  South
                  ---------------------------------
250              Richmond-Petersburg, VA MSA                 6
255              Columbus, GA-AL MSA                         6
257              Jacksonville, FL MSA                        6
258              Lakeland, FL MSA                            6
260              Knoxville TN MSA                            6
262              Birmingham, AL MSA                          6
273              Waco, TX MSA                                6
274              McAllen-Edinburg-Mission, TX MSA            6

                  Nonself-representing MSAs:  West
                  --------------------------------
280              Salt Lake City-Ogden etc, UT MSA            6
292              Fresno, CA MSA                              6
293              Eugene-Springfield, OR MSA                  6

                  Nonself-representing Non-MSAs:  Northeast 
                  -----------------------------------------
464              Gardner, MA                                 6

                  Nonself-representing Non-MSAs: Midwest
                  --------------------------------------
466              Decatur County, IN                          6
470              Mower County, MN                            6

                  Nonself-representing Non-MSAs:  South
                  -------------------------------------
474              DeSoto Parish, LA                           6
477              Chicot County, AR                           6
480              Montgomery County, VA                       6

                  Nonself-representing Non-MSAs:  West
                  ------------------------------------
482              ElDorado County, CA                         6

                            Total Number of Segments       279


(1)  Office of Management and Budget (OMB) June 1990 definitions of MSAs,
NECMAs, counties, parishes, independent cities.  These, of course, differ in
some respects from the primary stage unit (PSU) definitions used in the 1980
SRC National Sample so will not be strictly comparable to the 1996 NES Panel
PSUs--particularly in New England where MSAs were used as PSUs in the 1980
National Sample and NECMAs were used as PSUs in the 1990 National Sample.

(2)  One selected segment (023) was in a former trailer park that had no 
housing units to be listed in January 1996. All had been destroyed in 1992 by 
hurricane Andrew and there were no plans to rebuild.

(3) In the 1990 SRC National Sample, U.S. Census Region boundaries were 
maintained for purposed of stratification at the Primary State of selection. 
Since some MSA definitions cross Region boundaries, such MSAs were split and 
the MSA counties recombined in ways that maintained the Region boundary. This 
PSU actually contains the Ohio counties from both the Steubenville-Wierton, 
OH-WV MSA (Jefferson County, OH) and the Wheeling, WV-OH MSA (Belmont County, 
OH) and although it is made up of MSA counties -- it is not a cohesive MSA by 
OMB 1990 definition.


Second Stage Selection Area Segments

The second stage of the 1990 SRC National Sample, used for the 2000 NES 
sample, was selected directly from computerized files that were extracted for 
the selected PSUs from the 1990 U.S. Census summary file series STF1-B.  
These files (on CD Rom) contain the 1990 Census total population and housing 
unit (HU) data at the census block level.  The designated second-stage 
sampling units (SSUs), termed "area segments", are comprised of census blocks 
in both the metropolitan (MSA) primary areas and in the rural areas of non-
MSA primary areas.  Each SSU block or block combination was assigned a 
measure of size equal to the total 1990 occupied housing unit count for the 
area.  SSU block(s) were assigned a minimum measure of 72 1990 total HUs per 
MSA SSU and a minimum measure of 48 total HUs per non-MSA SSU.  Second stage 
sampling of area segments was performed with probabilities proportionate to 
the assigned measures of size (PPS).  

For the 2000 NES sample the number of area segments used in each PSU varies. 
In the self-representing (SR) PSUs the number of area segments varies in 
proportion to the size of the primary stage unit, from a high of 12 area 
segments in the self-representing New York and Los Angeles MSA PSUs, to a low 
of 6 area segments in the smaller self-representing PSUs such as Cleveland, 
Miami-Hialeah or Nassau-Suffolk MSAs.  All nonself-representing (NSR) PSUs 
were represented by 6 area segments each. A total of 279 NES area segments 
were selected as shown in Table 1.

Third Stage Selection Housing Units

For each area segment selected in the second sampling stage, a listing had 
been 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 2000 NES sample was 
systematically selected from the housing unit listings for the sampled area 
segments.

The 2000 NES sample design was selected from the 1990 SRC National Sample to 
yield an equal probability sample of 2269 listed housing units.  This total 
included 1972 housing units for the main sample and three reserve replicates 
of 99 cases each.  Table 2 below shows the assumptions that were used to 
determine the number of sample housing units.  The overall probability of 
selection for 2000 NES cross-section sample of households was f=0.00002116 or 
0.2116 in 10,000.  The equal probability sample of households was achieved 
for the 2000 NES sample 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 used to select the PSU 
and area segment (Kish, 1965).

Fourth Stage Selection - Respondent Selection

Within each sampled 2000 NES occupied housing unit, the SRC interviewer 
prepared a complete listing of all eligible household members.  Using an 
objective procedure described by Kish (1949) a single respondent was then 
selected at random to be interviewed.  Regardless of circumstances, no 
substitutions were permitted for the designated respondent.


>> AREA SAMPLE DESIGN ASSUMPTIONS, SPECIFICATIONS AND OUTCOMES

The 2000 National Election Study sought a total of 1000 in-person interviews. 
It was estimated that this would require a NES sample draw of 1972 housing 
units.  This assumed an occupancy/growth rate of 0.83, an eligibility rate of 
0.94 and a response rate of 0.65.  These assumptions were based on the 1998 
NES field experience.  The overall 2000 NES area sample design 
specifications, assumptions and outcomes are set out in Table 2, below.  A 
sample of 2269 listed housing units was actually selected for the 2000 NES 
study.  This allowed for three reserve replicates of 99 cases each. There was 
no panel component in 2000.  

A comparison of the 2000 NES sample outcome figures to the design 
specifications and assumptions in Table 2 shows that the actual occupancy, 
eligibility, and response rates were very close to the expected rates. The 
actual response rate for the Post-Election Telephone sample was 0.86, which 
was slightly higher than the assumed rate of 0.85.


      Table 2:  2000 NES Area Sample Pre and Post-Election Design
      Specifications and Assumptions Compared to Sample Outcome.

==============================================================================
              2000 NES         2000 NES          2000 NES         2000 NES
            Pre-Election     Pre-Election     Post-Election     Post-Election
               Design           Sample            Design            Sample 
            Specification       Outcome       Specification        Outcome
==============================================================================

Completed       1000             1006             847                693
Interviews

Response Rate   0.65             0.64             .85               0.86

Eligible        1538             1564            1000                805 (4)
Sample
Households

Eligibility     0.94            0.95
Rate

Occupied        1634            1639
Households

Occupancy/      0.83            0.82
growth Rate

Total Sample    1972            1986
Lines


(4) Initial sample lines (FTF and Phone) are different from the Pre-Election 
completed interviews because of the switch in mode for randomly selected 
sample cases.
