CODEBOOK INTRODUCTION FILE ANES 1956-1960 PANEL STUDY AMERICAN NATIONAL ELECTION STUDIES 1956-1960 PANEL STUDY CONDUCTED BY THE SURVEY RESEARCH CENTER Principal Investigators Angus Campbell Philip Converse Warren Miller Donald Stokes The University of Michigan ICPSR ARCHIVE NUMBER 7252 SRC STUDY S449 ACKNOWLEDGMENT OF ASSISTANCE All manuscripts utilizing data made available through the Consortium should acknowledge that fact as well as identify the original collector of the data. The ICPSR Council urges all users of ICPSR data facilities to follow some adaptation of this statement with the parentheses indicating items to be filled in appropriately or deleted by the individual user. The data (and tabulations) utilized in this (publication) were made available (in part) by the Inter-University Consortium for Political and Social Research. The data for the ANES 1956-1960 Panel Study were originally collected by Angus Campbell, Philip Converse, Warren Miller, and Donald Stokes. Neither the original collectors of the data nor the Consortium bear any responsibility for the analyses or interpretation presented here. In order to provide funding agencies with essential information about the use of archival resources. and to facilitate the exchange of information about ICPSR participants' research activities, each user of the ICPSR data facilities is expected to send two copies of each completed manuscript or thesis abstract to the Consortium. Please indicate in the cover letter which data were used. CONTENTS Note: >>sections in the codebook introduction and codebook appendix can be navigated in the machine-readable files by searching ">>". INTRODUCTORY MATERIAL (file anes_panel_1956to1960_intro_codebook.txt) --------------------- >> 1956 STUDY DESCRIPTION >> 1956 PUBLICATIONS >> 1956 SAMPLING INFORMATION >> 1956 PROCESSING INFORMATION >> 1958 STUDY DESCRIPTION >> 1958 SAMPLING INFORMATION >> 1958 PROCESSING INFORMATION >> 1960 STUDY DESCRIPTION >> 1960 SAMPLING INFORMATION >> 1960 FILE STRUCTURE >> 1960 PROCESSING INFORMATION >> CODEBOOK INFORMATION CODEBOOK (file anes_panel_1956to1960_vardoc_codebook.txt) -------- 1956 variables 1958 variables 1960 variables APPENDICES (file anes_panel_1956to1960_appendix_codebook.txt) ---------- >> 1956 PARTY MASTER CODE >> 1956 CANDIDATE MASTER CODE >> 1956 PSU CODE >> 1956 OCCUPATION CODE >> 1956 INDUSTRY CODE >> 1956 UNION CODE >> QUESTIONS 3-10 NOTE, 1956 >> IWR INSTRUCTING NOTE, 1956 >> REF. NOS. 184-187 NOTE, 1956 >> STATE CODE NOTE, 1956 >> 1956 STATE AND COUNTRY CODE >> INAP NOTE, 1956 >> 1956 NEWSPAPER CODE >> Q17 INTRO NOTE, 1956 >> FARM HOUSEHOLD NOTE, 1956 >> INCOME NOTE, 1956 >> Q58/Q59 NOTE, 1956 >> 1956 SENATORIAL, GUBERNATORIAL, CONGRESSIONAL RETURNS FROM AMERICA VOTES (1958) >> REF. NOS. 271-294 NOTE, 1956 >> IWR INSTRUCTION (UNION) NOTE, 1956 >> REF. NOS. 29-76 NOTE, 1956 >> 1958 CONGRESSIONAL CANDIDATE CODE, POSITIVE REFERENCES >> 1958 CONGRESSIONAL CANDIDATE CODE, NEGATIVE REFERENCES >> 1958 PARTY MASTER CODE >> 1958 PSU AND COUNTY CODE >> REF. NO. 14 NOTE, 1958 >> REF. NOS. 21-38 NOTE, 1958 >> 1958 INTERVIEWERS >> 1958 CONGRESSIONAL CANDIDATE LIST >> 1958 GUBERNATIORIAL AND SENATORIAL CANDIDATE LIST >> VAR 580077 NOTE >> REF. NO. 78 NOTE, 1958 >> REF. NO. 81 NOTE, 1958 >> REF. NO. 39 NOTE, 1958 >> REF. NO. 68/69 NOTE, 1958 >> REF. NO. 71 NOTE, 1958 >> REF. NO. 81 NOTE, 1958 >> REF. NO. 83 NOTE, 1958 >> VAR 580094 NOTE >> Q. 47B NOTE, 1958 >> VAR 580197 NOTE >> VAR 580205 NOTE >> 1958 UNION CODE >> 1958 STATE AND COUNTRY CODE >> VAR 580222 NOTE >> VAR 580223 NOTE >> COUNTRY NUMBERING NOTE, 1958 >> TYPE-OF-PLACE CODE NOTE, 1958 >> 1958 OCCUPATION CODE >> 1958 INDUSTRY CODE >> 1958 COUNTY CODE >> VAR 580233 NOTE >> REF. NO. 95 NOTE, 1958 >> R INDEPENDENT NOTE, 1958 >> 1960 PARTY MASTER CODE >> 1960 CANDIDATE MASTER CODE >> 1960 PSU CODE >> 1960 PSU PLACE CODE >> 1960 STATE AND COUNTY CODE - POPULATION SIZE >> 1960 STATE AND COUNTY CODE - TYPE OF PLACE >> 1960 COUNTY CODE >> 1960 INTERVIEWER >> 1960 STATE AND COUNTRY CODE >> 1960 MAJOR PROBLEMS CODE >> REF.NO.128 NOTE, 1960 >> 1960 OCCUPATION CODE >> 1960 INDUSTRY CODE >> FARMING NOTE, 1960 >> 1960 UNION CODE >> 1960 NEWSPAPER CODE >> 1960 EFFECT OF TELEVISION DEBATES >> 1960 PARTY DIFFERENCES >> 1960 RELIGION CODE >> REF. NOS. 107, 108, 111 AND 114 NOTE, 1960 >> REF. NOS. 19 AND 98 NOTE, 1960 >> 1956 STUDY DESCRIPTION THE SURVEY RESEARCH CENTER 1956 TIME SERIES STUDY WAS CONDUCTED BY ANGUS CAMPBELL, PHILIP CONVERSE, WARREN MILLER, AND DONALD STOKES IN SEPTEMBER 1956 THROUGH JANUARY OF 1957. THE INTERVIEW SCHEDULES CONTAINED BOTH CLOSED AND OPEN-END- ED QUESTIONS ASCERTAINING A WIDE RANGE OF INFORMATION. THE STUDY IS BASICALLY CONCERNED WITH GENERAL POLITICAL ATTITUDES AND WITH ATTITUDES AND BEHAVIORS PERTINENT TO THE 1956 PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION. EACH RESPONDENT WAS INTERVIEWED BOTH BEFORE AND AFTER THE DATE OF THE ELECTION. IN THE PRE-ELECTION SURVEY, ATTITUDES TOWARD POLITICAL PARTIES, CANDIDATES, AND SPECIFIC ISSUES WERE OBTAINED, AS WELL AS PERSONAL DATA AND SOME POLITICAL HISTORY. THE POST-ELECTION INTERVIEW CONCENTRATED ON THE ACTUAL VOTE AND REASONS FOR THE VOTE, OBTAINED FUR- THER PERSONAL DATA, AND IN ADDITION ASKED NON-POLITICAL ATTITUDINAL QUESTIONS (FORM C; REF.NOS. 271-294) OF A SUBSAMPLE NUMBERING 579. THIS STUDY IS ALSO THE FIRST OF THREE TIME SERIES STUDIES (1956,1958,1960) HAVING A PORTION OF STUDY SAMPLE CASES IN COMMON; RESPONDENTS FROM THE 1956 TIME SERIES STUDY COMPRISED A PORTION OF BOTH THE 1958 AND 1960 (CROSS-SECTION) TIME SERIES SAMPLES, AND FRESH CASES FROM THE THE 1958 TIME SERIES STUDY WERE ALSO INCLUDED IN THE 1960 TIME SERIES STUDY SAMPLE. >> 1956 PUBLICATIONS CAMPBELL, ANGUS, "WHO REALLY SWITCHED IN THE LAST ELECTION?" U.S. NEWS & WORLD REPORT, MARCH 29, 1957, PP. 62-67. CAMPBELL, CONVERSE, MILLER, AND STOKES, THE AMERICAN VOTER, NEW YORK, JOHN WILEY AND SONS, 1960. CAMPBELL, ANGUS, AND MILLER, WARREN E., THE MOTIVATIONAL BASIS OF STRAIGHT AND SPLIT TICKET VOTING. AMERICAN POLITICAL SCIENCE REVIEW, LI, 1 (JUNE, 1957), PP. 293- 312. CAMPBELL, ANGUS, AND STOKES, DONALD E., "PARTISAN ATTITUDES AND THE PRESIDENTIAL VOTE." AMERICAN VOTING BEHAVIOR. EDITED BY EUGENE BRUDICK AND ARTHUR J. BRODBECK, GLENCOE, ILL. THE FREE PRESS, 1959,PP.353-71. CONVERSE, PHILIP E., AND DUPEUX, GEORGES. "EISENHOWER ET DE GAULLE: LES GENERAUX DEVANT L'OPINION." REVUE FRANCAISE DE SCIENCE POLITIQUE, XII, (MARS, 1962), PP. 54-92. ENGLISH VERSION IS ENTITLED "DE GAULLE AND EISENHOWER: THE PUBLIC IMAGE OF THE VICTORIOUS GENERAL." CONVERSE, PHILIP E., AND DUPEUX, GEORGES. "DE GAULLE AND EISENHOWER: THE PUBLIC IMAGE OF THE VICTORIOUS GENERAL." A CHAPTER IN CAMPBELL, CONVERSE, MILLER, AND STOKES, ELECTIONS AND THE POLITICAL ORDER. NEW YORK: N.Y.: JOHN WILEY & SONS, INC., 1966, PP. 292-345. FRENCH VERSION IS ENTITLED "EISENHOWER ET DE GAULLE: LES GENERAUX DEVANT L'OPINION." PUTNAM, ROBERT D., "POLITICAL ATTITUDES AND THE LOCAL COMMUNITY." AMERICAN POLITICAL SCIENCE REVIEW, LX, (SEPTEMBER, 1966), PP. 640-54. REPRINTED IN BETTY H. ZISK, ED., AMERICAN POLITICAL INTEREST GROUPS: READINGS IN THEORY AND RESEARCH (1969) AND FRED W. GRUPP, JR. AND MARVIN MAURER, EDS., POLITICAL BEHAVIOR IN THE UNITED STATES, 1972. ROBINSON, JOHN P., AND CONVERSE, PHILIP E., "THE IMPACT OF TELEVISION ON MASS MEDIA USAGE: A CROSS-NATIONAL COMPARISON." PAPER PRESENTED AT THE SIXTH WORLD CONGRESS OF SOCIOLOGY, EVIAN, FRANCE, SEPTEMBER, 1966, 27 PP. STOKES, DONALD E., "VOTING RESEARCH AND THE BUSINESSMAN IN POLITICS." ANN ARBOR, MICHIGAN, FOUNDATION FOR RESEARCH ON HUMAN BEHAVIOR, 1960, 39 PP. STOKES, DONALD E., "SOME DYNAMIC ELEMENTS OF CONTESTS FOR THE PRESIDENCY." AMERICAN POLITICAL SCIENCE REVIEW, LX, 1 (MARCH, 1966),PP. 19-28. STOKES, DONALD E., CAMPBELL, ANGUS, AND MILLER, WARREN E., "COMPONENTS OF ELECTORAL DECISION." AMERICAN POLITICAL SCIENCE REVIEW, LII, 2 (JUNE, 1958), PP. 367-87. >> 1956 SAMPLING INFORMATION THE INDIVIDUALS INTERVIEWED WERE A REPRESENTATIVE CROSS- SECTION OF PERSONS OF VOTING AGE LIVING IN PRIVATE HOUSE- HOLDS IN THE UNITED STATES. THE 12 LARGEST METROPOLITAN AREAS OF THE UNITED STATES WERE DRAWN WITH CERTAINTY TO REPRESENT THEMSELVES. THE REST OF THE COUNTRY WAS FORMED INTO 54 STRATA, FROM EACH OF WHICH A PRIMARY SAMPLING UNIT CONSISTING OF A COUNTY OR GROUP OF COUNTIES WAS DRAWN WITH PROBABILITY PROPORTIONAL TO SIZE. THE SELECTION PROCEDURE WITHIN THESE 66 PRIMARY SAMPLING UNITS ULTIMATELY YIELDED A SAMPLE OF PRIVATE HOUSEHOLDS WITHIN WHICH RESPONDENTS WERE DESIGNATED FOR INTERVIEW BY AN OBJECTIVE PROCEDURE OF SELECTION WHICH ALLOWED NO SUBSTITUTIONS. THE RESPONSE RATE WAS 85%. THE FINAL DATA COMPRISES 1762 RESPONDENTS; THE REDUCTION FROM THE ORIGINAL SAMPLE OF 2475 INCLUDES EXPECTED LOSSES IN INTERVIEWING PLUS ABOUT 200 RESPONDENTS WHO WERE INTERVIEWED ONLY ONCE AND HENCE WERE NOT INCLUDED IN THE FINAL DATA. >> 1956 PROCESSING INFORMATION THE STUDY WAS PROCESSED ACCORDING TO ICPSR STANDARD PROCESSING PROCEDURES; THE CODE CATEGORIES WERE RECODED TO ELIMINATE AMPS AND DASHES AND TO CONFORM TO ICPSR STANDARD- ARDIZED CODES WHERE APPLICABLE, AND THE DATA WERE CHECKED FOR INCONSISTENT AND ILLEGAL CODES. THESE WERE CORRECTED BY REFERRING BACK TO THE ORIGINAL INTERVIEW SCHEDULES. IN USING THIS CODEBOOK SEVERAL FEATURES SHOULD BE NOTED. THE FIRST IS THAT THE HUNDREDS AND TENS DIGITS OF MOST TWO AND THREE DIGIT CODES CAN BE MEANINGFULLY USED ALONE. (THE GAPS THAT APPEAR IN SOME OF THE TWO AND THREE DIGIT STAND- ARDIZED CODES REPRESENT CODES NOT USED IN THIS STUDY.) ANOTHER IS THAT IN MANY CASES, BOTH IN THE BODY OF THE CODE- BOOK AND IN THE FOOTNOTES, TEXT IS BRACKETED IN SIGNS. ALL TEXT SO BRACKETED WAS NOT CONTAINED IN THE ORIGINAL CODEBOOK BUT WAS ADDED BY THE PROCESSOR, EITHER FOR EXPLANA- TORY PURPOSES OR IN ORDER TO MAKE VARIABLES INDEPENDENT OF ONE ANOTHER BY MAKING IT UNNECESSARY TO REFER BACK TO ONE IN ORDER TO UNDERSTAND THE TEXT OF ANOTHER. VARIABLE NAMES IN THE TABLE OF CONTENTS FOLLOWED BY AN ASTERISK HAVE SPECIAL ICPSR STANDARDIZED CODES. THOSE PRECEDED BY AN X DESIGNATE A VARIABLE DEPENDENT ON SOME OTHER VARIABLE DUE TO THE STRUCTURE OF THE INTERVIEW SCHEDULE. ALSO NOTE THAT FRE- QUENCIES FOR MULTIPLE RESPONSE VARIABLES ARE CUMULATIVE. >> 1958 STUDY DESCRIPTION THE SURVEY RESEARCH CENTER 1958 AMERICAN NATIONAL ELECTION STUDY WAS CONDUCTED BY ANGUS CAMPBELL, PHILIP CONVERSE, WARREN MILLER, AND DONALD STOKES IN NOVEMBER AND DECEMBER OF 1958. THE 1958 STUDY IS ITSELF A NATIONAL CROSS SECTION SAMPLE OF AMERICAN CITIZENS OF VOTING AGE. THE INTERVIEW SCHEDULES OF THE STUDY CONTAINED BOTH CLOSED AND OPEN-ENDED QUESTIONS ASCERTAINING A WIDE RANGE OF INFORMATION. THE STUDY IS ABOUT POLITICAL ATTITUDES IN GENERAL AND ALSO ABOUT MORE SPECIFIC ATTITUDES AND BEHAVIORS PERTINENT TO THE 1958 CONGRESSIONAL ELECTION. EACH RESPONDENT WAS INTERVIEWED ONCE AFTER THE ELECTION. THE SURVEY OBTAINED DATA ON THE RESPONDENT'S ACTUAL VOTE AND THE REASONS FOR THE VOTE, INCLUDING ATTITUDES TOWARD POLITICAL PARTIES AND CANDIDATES, AS WELL AS THE RESPONDENT'S POLITICAL HISTORY. IT ALSO OBTAINED DATA ON SPECIFIC DOMESTIC AND FOREIGN POLICY ISSUES SUCH AS GOVERNMENT INVOLVEMENT IN HOUSING AND PUBLIC UTILITIES, AND UNITED STATES AID TO ANTI-COMMUNIST NATIONS. THE STUDY ALSO ASCERTAINED THE FINANCIAL SITUATION OF THE FAMILY UNIT AND OTHER DEMOGRAPHIC INFORMATION. RESULTS FROM THE 1958 SURVEY ARE INCLUDED IN CAMPBELL, CONVERSE, MILLER AND STOKES, THE AMERICAN VOTER, NEW YORK JOHN WILEY AND SONS, 1960. >> 1958 SAMPLING INFORMATION THE INDIVIDUALS INTERVIEWED IN THE 1958 TIME SERIES STUDY WERE A REPRESENTATIVE CROSS-SECTION OF PERSONS OF VOTING AGE LIVING IN PRIVATE HOUSEHOLDS IN THE UNITED STATES. COMPLICATIONS WERE INTRODUCED TO THE SAMPLE BY THE FACT THAT THE STUDY DID NOT REPRESENT THE FIRST WAVE OF INTERVIEWING FOR RESPONDENTS WHO HAD BEEN PREVIOUSLY INTERVIEWIED IN THE 1956 TIME SERIES STUDY AND CONSTITUTED A PANEL COMPONENT OF THE 1958 SAMPLE. WITHIN THIS COMPONENT, HOWEVER, SOME RESPONDENTS HAD MOVED SINCE 1956 AND COULD NOT BE RE-INTERVIEWED BECAUSE THE CROSS-SECTION SAMPLE IS A SAMPLE OF A SPECIFIC SET OF HOUSEHOLDS. THESE PANEL MOVERS ARE NOT INCLUDED IN THE 1958 TIME SERIES CROSS- SECTION SAMPLE BUT THEY ARE PRESENT AS SEPARATE 1958 'PANEL-ONLY' CASES IN THE 1956-1960 PANEL STUDY. ON THE OTHER HAND, IN THE 1958 TIME-SERIES CROSS-SECTION SAMPLE, IN ORDER TO COMPENSATE FOR THE LOSS OF THE PANEL MOVERS, A NEW GROUP WAS SELECTED FROM THE CURRENT DWELLERS IN THE HOUSEHOLDS FROM WHICH THE FORMER RESPONDENTS HAD MOVED, ALTHOUGH (TO REDUCE FIELD COSTS) ONLY HALF AS MANY SUCH ADDITIONAL RESPONDENTS WERE ADDED AS WOULD HAVE BEEN SELECTED IF THEIR PROBABILITY OF SELECTION HAD BEEN IDENTICAL TO THAT OF THE REINTERVIEW CASES. TO ADJUST FOR THE DIFFERENCE IN SAMPLING FRACTIONS, THESE ADDITIONAL RESPONDENTS WERE GIVEN DOUBLE WEIGHT; HENCE THE WEIGHTED N OF THE 1958 ELECTION STUDY IS 1822, ALTHOUGH THE UNWEIGHTED N IS ONLY 1450. IN OTHER RESPECTS, HOWEVER, THE 1958 STUDY SHARES THE SAME SAMPLE DESIGN AS THAT OF 1956. THE TWELVE LARGEST METROPOLITAN AREAS OF THE UNITED STATES WERE DRAWN WITH CERTAINTY TO REPRESENT THEMSELVES. THE REST OF THE COUNTRY WAS FORMED INTO 54 STRATA, FROM EACH OF WHICH A PRIMARY SAMPLING UNIT CONSISTING OF A COUNTY OR GROUP OF COUNTIES WAS DRAWN WITH PROBABILITY PROPORTIONAL TO SIZE. THE SE- LECTION PROCEDURE WITHIN THESE 66 PRIMARY SAMPLING UNITS ULTIMATELY YIELDED A SAMPLE OF PRIVATE HOUSEHOLDS WITHIN WHICH RESPONDENTS WERE DESIGNATED FOR INTERVIEW BY AN OBJECTIVE PROCEDURE OF SELECTION WHICH ALLOWED NO SUBSTI- TUTIONS. >> 1958 PROCESSING INFORMATION THE STUDY WAS PROCESSED ACCORDING TO ICPSR STANDARD PROCESSING PROCEDURES; THE CODE CATEGORIES WERE RECODED TO ELIMINATE AMPS AND DASHES AND TO CONFORM TO ICPSR STANDARDIZED CODES WHERE APPLICABLE, AND THE DATA WERE CHECKED FOR INCONSISTENT AND ILLEGAL CODES. THE LATTER WERE CORRECTED BY REFERRING BACK TO THE ORIGINAL INTERVIEW SCHEDULES. >> 1960 STUDY DESCRIPTION THE SURVEY RESEARCH CENTER 1960 AMERICAN NATIONAL ELEC- TION STUDY WAS DIRECTED BY ANGUS CAMPBELL, PHILIP CONVERSE, WARREN MILLER, AND DONALD STOKES. CONDUCTED IN SEPTEMBER THROUGH DECEMBER OF 1960, THE STUDY WAS DESIGNED TO PROVIDE INFORMATION ABOUT THE POLITICAL ATTITUDES AND BEHAVIOR OF A REPRESENTATIVE CROSS-SECTION OF UNITED STATES VOTERS. THE STUDY ALSO COMPRISES THE LAST WAVE(S) OF INTERVIEWING FOR SOME RESPONDENTS PREVIOUSLY INTERVIWED IN 1956 OR 1958, OR BOTH. RESPONDENTS WERE INTERVIEWED BOTH BEFORE AND AFTER THE 1960 ELECTION. IN THE PRE-ELECTION INTERVIEW THE INVESTIGATORS WERE CONCERNED WITH OBTAINING INFORMATION ABOUT THE LONG-TERM INFLUENCES UPON ELECTORAL CHOICE AND ABOUT THE ELECTION-SPECIFIC SHORT-TERM FORCES THAT WERE IN OPERATION IN 1960. IN THE POST-ELECTION INTERVIEW THE EMPHASIS WAS PLACED UPON ASCERTAINING BEHAVIOR WITH RESPECT TO THE ELECTION AND THE REASONS FOR THAT BEHAVIOR. THE LONG-TERM INFLUENCES ON THE RESPONDENT'S ELECTORAL BEHAVIOR WHICH WERE EXPLORED IN THE PRE-ELECTION INTERVIEW INCLUDED A NUMBER OF FACTORS IMPORTANT IN POLITICAL SOCIALIZATION, SUCH AS THE RESPONDENT'S EDUCATION, OCCUPATION, FINANCIAL SITUATION, LIFE CYCLE STATUS, GEOGRAPHIC AND SOCIAL MOBILITY, AND MILITARY SERVICE. THE DIRECTION AND INTENSITY OF THE RESPONDENT'S PARTY IDENTIFICATION AND THE REASONS FOR ANY PAST CHANGES IN THIS IDENTIFICATION WERE ALSO THE SUBJECT OF QUESTIONS DESIGNED TO TAP THESE LONG-TERM INFLUENCES ON BEHAVIOR. IN ORDER TO DETERMINE THE NATURE OF THE SHORT-TERM FORCES WHICH MIGHT INFLUENCE VOTING BEHAVIOR, RESPONDENTS IN THE PRE- ELECTION INTERVIEW WERE ASKED THEIR OPINIONS ON POLITICAL ISSUES WHICH WERE IMPORTANT IN 1960, SUCH AS CIVIL RIGHTS, DOMESTIC SPENDING FOR SOCIAL SERVICES, AND FOREIGN AID. QUESTIONS ABOUT AGRICULTURAL MATTERS AND LABOR CONCERNS WERE ASKED OF FARMERS AND LABOR UNION MEMBERS, RESPECTIVELY. THE RESPONDENT'S PERCEPTIONS AND EVALUATIONS OF THE PRESIDENTIAL AND VICE-PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATES AND THE TWO MAJOR PARTIES WERE OBTAINED. IN ADDITION, QUESTIONS DESIGNED TO REVEAL CHANGES IN THE RESPONDENT'S ATTITUDES TOWARD THE CANDIDATES AND PARTIES WERE INCLUDED. THE SURVEY INSTRUMENT CONTAINED A SERIES OF QUESTIONS USED TO MEASURE THE RESPONDENT'S SENSE OF POLITICAL EFFICACY AND CITIZEN DUTY. ALSO INCLUDED WAS A SERIES OF ITEMS DESIGNED TO MEASURE THE EXTENT TO WHICH THE RESPONDENT WOULD TRUST CERTAIN GROUPS TO ENDORSE AN ACCEPTABLE CANDIDATE FOR OFFICE. FINALLY, THE PRE-ELECTION INTERVIEW ASKED THE RESPONDENT TO PREDICT THE 1960 PRESIDENTIAL ELECTION OUT- COME, TO PREDICT HIS LIKELIHOOD OF VOTING, TO IDENTIFY THE CANDIDATE FOR WHOM HE WOULD VOTE, AND TO GIVE THE REASON FOR THAT ELECTORAL PREFERENCE. THE POST-ELECTION INTERVIEW WAS PRIMARILY CONCERNED WITH THE RESPONDENT'S VOTE AND THE PARTY-, CANDIDATE-, AND ISSUE- ORIENTED REASONS FOR THAT VOTE. THE RESPONDENT'S INTEREST IN THE ELECTION AND HIS EXPOSURE TO MEDIA WERE EXPLORED. IN PARTICULAR, RESPONDENTS WERE ASKED QUESTIONS ABOUT THEIR PARTICIPATION IN POLITICAL ACTIVITIES, AND ABOUT THEIR REAC- TIONS TO THE TELEVISED KENNEDY-NIXON DEBATES. IN ORDER TO ASSESS THE EFFECT OF KENNEDY'S RELIGION ON ELECTORAL CHOICE, A SERIES OF QUESTIONS ABOUT THE RESPONDENT'S RELIGIOUS PREFERENCES AND BACKGROUND WERE INCLUDED, IN ADDITION TO QUESTIONS WHICH DIRECTLY ASKED THE RESPONDENT ABOUT RELIGION AS A FACTOR IN THE 1960 ELECTION. FINALLY, THE POST-ELEC- TION QUESTIONNAIRE INCLUDED A SERIES OF QUESTIONS DESIGNED TO MEASURE THE RESPONDENT'S SENSE OF PERSONAL COMPETENCE. THE PRIMARY REPORT ON THE FINDINGS OF THE SURVEY RESEARCH CENTER 1960 AMERICAN NATIONAL ELECTION STUDY IS BY ANGUS CAMPBELL, PHILIP CONVERSE, WARREN MILLER, AND DONALD STOKES, "STABILITY AND CHANGE IN 1960: A REINSTATING ELECTION," AMERICAN POLITICAL SCIENCE REVIEW, JUNE 1961. FURTHER ARTICLES USING THE 1960 DATA ARE FOUND IN ANGUS CAMPBELL, ET AL., ELECTIONS AND THE POLITICAL ORDER (NEW YORK: JOHN WILEY & SONS, INC., 1966). >> 1960 SAMPLING INFORMATION THE INDIVIDUALS INTERVIEWED IN 1960 WERE A REPRESENTATIVE CROSS-SECTION OF PERSONS OF VOTING AGE LIVING IN PRIVATE HOUSEHOLDS IN THE UNITED STATES. COMPLICATIONS WERE INTRODUCED TO THE SAMPLE BY THE FACT THAT THE STUDY DID NOT REPRESENT THE FIRST WAVE OF INTERVIEWING FOR RESPONDENTS WHO HAD BEEN PREVIOUSLY INTERVIEWIED IN THE 1956 OR 1958 TIME SERIES STUDY (OR BOTH) AND WHO CONSTITUTED A PANEL COMPONENT OF THE 1960 TIME SERIES SAMPLE. WITHIN THE PANEL COMPONENT IN 1958, SOME RESPONDENTS PREVIOUSLY INTERVIEWED IN THE 1956 TIME SERIES STUDY HAD MOVED SINCE 1956 AND COULD NOT BE RE-INTERVIEWED (BECAUSE THE 1958 CROSS-SECTION SAMPLE WAS A SAMPLE OF A SPECIFIC SET OF HOUSEHOLDS). 1958 PANEL MOVERS WERE NOT INCLUDED IN THE 1958 TIME SERIES CROSS-SECTION SAMPLE BUT THEY ARE PRESENT AS SEPARATE 1958 'PANEL-ONLY' CASES IN THE 1956-1960 PANEL STUDY. ON THE OTHER HAND, IN THE 1958 TIME-SERIES CROSS-SECTION SAMPLE, IN ORDER TO COMPENSATE FOR THE LOSS OF THE PANEL MOVERS, A NEW GROUP WAS SELECTED FROM THE CURRENT (1958) DWELLERS IN THE HOUSEHOLDS FROM WHICH THE FORMER RESPONDENTS HAD MOVED, ALTHOUGH (TO REDUCE FIELD COSTS) ONLY HALF AS MANY SUCH ADDITIONAL RESPONDENTS WERE ADDED AS WOULD HAVE BEEN SELECTED IF THEIR PROBABILITY OF SELECTION HAD BEEN IDENTICAL TO THAT OF THE REINERVIEW CASES. THE BASIC RATE OF SELECTION OF THOSE INTERVIEWED AT THEIR 1956 ADDRESSES IN BOTH 1956 AND 1958 WAS 1 IN 20,571. THE RATE OF SELECTION OF THOSE RESPONDENTS FIRST INTERVIEWED IN 1958 WAS HALF OF THAT. ACCORDINGLY, THESE GROUPS ARE WEIGHTED "ONE" AND "TWO", RESPECTIVELY, FOR BOTH THE 1958 AND 1960 TIME SERIES STUDIES. IN ADDITION, FOR THE 1960 TIME-SERIES STUDY CROSS-SECITON, A TOTAL OF 166 NEW RESPONDENTS WERE SELECTED FROM NEWLY CONSTRUCTED DWELLING UNITS AND FROM AN ASSORTMENT OF 1956 ADDRESSES. THESE GROUPS WERE SELECTED AT A RATE OF ONE-FOURTH THE BASIC RATE, AND THEREFORE ARE WEIGHTED IN THE 1960 TIME SERIES DATASET AS "FOUR". FINALLY, TO MAINTAIN REPRESENTATIVENESS OF THE 1960 SAMPLE, ONE HUNDRED 1956 RESPONDENTS WHO WERE ALSO INTERVIEWED IN BOTH 1958 AND 1960 WERE SELECTED TO REPRESENT THE SET OF 1956 RESPONDENTS LOST THROUGH PANEL ATTRITION. NINETY-FOUR OF THESE RESPONDENTS WERE WEIGHTED BY A FACTOR OF TWO AND THE REMAINING SIX WERE WEIGHTED BY A FACTOR OF THREE. THE UNWEIGHTED N OF THE 1960 TIME SERIES STUDY IS 1181 AND THE WEIGHTED N IS 1954. IN OTHER RESPECTS, HOWEVER, THE 1960 STUDY SHARES THE SAME SAMPLE DESIGN AS THAT OF THE 1956 AND 1958 STUDIES. THE SAMPLE WAS DRAWN AS FOLLOWS: THE TWELVE LARGEST METROPOLITAN AREAS OF THE UNITED STATES WERE DRAWN WITH CERTAINTY TO REPRESENT THEMSELVES. THE REST OF THE COUNTRY WAS FORMED INTO FIFTY-FOUR STRATA, FROM EACH OF WHICH A PRIMARY SAMPLING UNIT (CONSISTING OF A COUNTY OR GROUP OF COUNTIES) WAS DRAWN WITH PROBABILITY PROPORTIONAL TO SIZE. THE SELECTION PROCEDURE WITHIN THESE SIXTY-SIX PRIMARY SAMPLING UNITS ULTIMATELY YIELDED A SAMPLE OF PRIVATE HOUSEHOLDS. RESPONDENTS WERE SELECTED FROM THESE HOUSE- HOLDS BY AN OBJECTIVE PROCEDURE OF SELECTION WHICH ALLOWED NO SUBSTITUTIONS. >> 1960 FILE STRUCTURE IN THE SURVEY RESEARCH CENTER 1960 AMERICAN NATIONAL ELECTION STUDY, ONE PRE-ELECTION INTERVIEW AND ONE POST- ELECTION INTERVIEW WERE CONDUCTED WITH EACH RESPONDENT, WITH THE EXCEPTION OF 125 RESPONDENTS WHO WERE GIVEN ONLY THE PRE-ELECTION INTERVIEW, AND 22 RESPONDENTS WHO WERE GIVEN ONLY THE POST-ELECTION INTERVIEW. RESPONDENTS WHO WERE GIVEN ONLY ONE INTERVIEW HAVE BEEN CODED "NA" OR "INAP" IN THOSE VARIABLES FOR WHICH NO DATA WERE AVAILABLE. THE DATA ARE WEIGHTED; VARIABLE V600003 IS THE WEIGHT VARIABLE. THE UNWEIGHTED STUDY N IS 1181 AND THE WEIGHTED N IS 1954. SEE THE "SAMPLING INFORMATION" SECTION OF THIS INTRODUCTION FOR FURTHER INFORMATION ABOUT THE WEIGHTING PROCEDURES. WEIGHTING AND FREQUENCIES THE FREQUENCIES PROVIDED IN THIS CODEBOOK ARE WEIGHTED BY AN INTEGER WEIGHT VARIABLE (VARIABLE V600003), WHICH SHOULD ALWAYS BE USED IN DATA ANALYSIS PROCEDURES TO OBTAIN A REPRESENTATIVE SAMPLE. SEE THE "SAMPLING INFORMATION" SECTION OF THIS INTRODUCTION FOR AN EXPLANATION OF THE ASSIGNMENT OF WEIGHTS TO THE VARIOUS CATEGORIES OF RESPONDENTS. >> 1960 PROCESSING INFORMATION THE CODEBOOK WAS PROCESSED ACCORDING TO STANDARD ICPSR PROCESSING PROCEDURES. THE DATASET WAS CHECKED FOR INCON- SISTENT AND ILLEGAL CODES. WHEN ANY SUCH CODES WERE FOUND, THE INTERVIEW PROTOCOLS WERE CONSULTED TO OBTAIN THE CORRECT CODE VALUES. THE SYMBOLS < AND > ARE USED TO ENCLOSE COM- MENTS OR EXPLANATIONS ADDED BY THE PROCESSOR TO PROVIDE FURTHER CLARIFICATION OF INFORMATION IN THE ORIGINAL CODE- BOOK. IN THE TABLE OF CONTENTS, AN ASTERISK APPEARS AFTER EACH VARIABLE HAVING A SPECIAL ICPSR STANDARDIZED CODE. >> 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.