Indianapolis-St. Louis Election Study, 1996-1997
- Huckfeldt, Robert (University of California-Davis)
- Sprague, John (Washington University-St. Louis)
- Version 1 (Subtitle)
AbstractThis study was conducted by the Indiana University Center for Survey Research in Bloomington, Indiana, and is primarily concerned with patterns of social communication and influence over the course of the 1996 United States presidential election campaign. Computer-assisted telephone interviewing (CATI) for the study began in March of 1996 and ended in early January of 1997, with a follow-up wave of interviews in the fall of 1997. A total of 4,352 interviews were completed from two separate samples: a sample of main respondents drawn from lists of registered voters in the St. Louis and Indianapolis metropolitan areas (2,612), plus a one-stage "snowball" sample of these main respondents' discussion partners (1,740). Data collection occurred in four waves: The first wave was conducted between March 3 and July 14, 1996, the second wave between July 1 and November 4, 1996, the third wave between November 6, 1996, and January 12, 1997, and the fourth wave between October 17 and December 12, 1997. Respondents were asked for their opinions of President Bill Clinton, Speaker of the House Newt Gingrich, Senate Majority Leader Bob Dole, former Tennessee Governor Lamar Alexander, conservative commentator Pat Buchanan, Reform Party founder Ross Perot, and publisher Steve Forbes were elicited. Other topics covered include respondents' perceptions of the quality of their personal lives and of the health of the national economy, exposure to newspaper and television news, preferences on how federal tax money should be spent, views on the country's most important problem, and opinions on trade barriers, the death penalty, United States aid for Latin America, equal rights for women, government aid for minorities, organized prayer in public schools, a woman's right to abortion, and reconciling the disparate goals of balancing the federal budget, cutting federal taxes, and maintaining government programs for the elderly and disadvantaged. Respondents were also asked to comment on their involvement in community groups and organizations and their contacts with political parties and campaigns during the 1996 election campaign, and to predict how named members of their social network ("discussants") would answer similar questions and how those discussants would be voting in 1996. The Discussant files contain the responses of these discussion partners, who were interviewed on the same topics. Background information on respondents includes age, sex, race, education, religion, employment status, home ownership, Hispanic descent, marital status, income, years of residence at present address, voter registration and participation history, political party, and political orientation. Part 25, Interviewer Data, consists of the ID number and gender of the interviewer for each case in the collection organized by respondent CASEID number.
MethodsResponse Rates: The rate of response across all four waves was approximately 63 percent.
Table of Contents
- DS0: Study-Level Files
- DS1: Wave 1, Main Respondent, Substantive
- DS2: Wave 1, Main Respondent, Latent Timers
- DS3: Wave 1, Main Respondent, Important Matters
- DS4: Wave 1, Discussant, Substantive
- DS5: Wave 1, Discussant, Latent Timers
- DS6: Wave 1, Discussant, Important Matters
- DS7: Wave 2, Main Respondent, Substantive
- DS8: Wave 2, Main Respondent, Latent Timers
- DS9: Wave 2, Main Respondent, Important Matters
- DS10: Wave 2, Discussant, Substantive
- DS11: Wave 2, Discussant, Latent Timers
- DS12: Wave 2, Discussant, Important Matters
- DS13: Wave 3, Main Respondent, Substantive
- DS14: Wave 3, Main Respondent, Latent Timers
- DS15: Wave 3, Main Respondent, Important Matters
- DS16: Wave 3, Discussant, Substantive
- DS17: Wave 3, Discussant, Latent Timers
- DS18: Wave 3, Discussant, Important Matters
- DS19: Wave 4, Main Respondent, Substantive
- DS20: Wave 4, Main Respondent, Latent Timers
- DS21: Wave 4, Main Respondent, Important Matters
- DS22: Wave 4, Discussant, Substantive
- DS23: Wave 4, Discussant, Latent Timers
- DS24: Wave 4, Discussant, Important Matters
- DS25: Interviewer Data
- DS26: Wave 1, Main Respondent, Substantive -- Restricted Data
- DS27: Wave 1, Discussant, Substantive -- Restricted Data
- DS28: Wave 2, Main Respondent, Substantive -- Restricted Data
- DS29: Wave 2, Discussant, Substantive -- Restricted Data
- DS30: Wave 3, Main Respondent, Substantive -- Restricted Data
- DS31: Wave 3, Discussant, Substantive -- Restricted Data
- DS32: Wave 4, Main Respondent, Substantive -- Restricted Data
- DS33: Wave 4, Discussant, Substantive -- Restricted Data
1996 / 1997Time period: 1996--1997
1996-03-03 / 1996-07-14Collection date: 1996-03-03--1996-07-14
1996-07-01 / 1996-11-04Collection date: 1996-07-01--1996-11-04
1996-11-06 / 1997-01-12Collection date: 1996-11-06--1997-01-12
1997-10-17 / 1997-12-12Collection date: 1997-10-17--1997-12-12
computer-assisted telephone interview (CATI)
(1) The data files in this collection do not contain value labels. Value labels can, however, be obtained from the codebooks which contain the actual questionnaires used in the interviews. (2) Previously unreleased Excel and text files containing respondent comments are now available in restricted form. Please see the RESTRICTIONS field for additional information.
- 2962 (Type: ICPSR Study Number)
Is previous version of
Vonnahme, Greg. Registration deadlines and turnout in context. Political Behavior.34, (4), 765-779.2012.
- ID: 10.1007/s11109-011-9174-9 (DOI)
Klofstad, Casey A., McClurg, Scott D., Rolfe, Meredith. Measurement of political discussion networks: A comparison of two 'name generator' procedures. Public Opinion Quarterly.73, (3), 462-483.2009.
- ID: 10.1093/poq/nfp032 (DOI)
Lin, Xu. Essays on Discrete Choice under Social Interaction: Methodology and Applications. Dissertation, Ohio State University. 2007.
Huckfeldt, Robert, Sprague, John, Levine, Jeffrey. The Dynamics of Collective Deliberation in the 1996 Election: Campaign Effects on Accessibility, Certainty, and Accuracy. American Political Science Review.94, (3), 641-651.2000.
- ID: http://www.jstor.org/stable/2585836 (URL)
Update Metadata: 2015-08-05 | Issue Number: 3 | Registration Date: 2015-06-30