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.