My da|ra Login

Detailed view

metadata language: German English

Eurobarometer 60.1 (2003)

Version
1.0.0
Resource Type
Dataset
Creator
  • Papacostas, Antonis (European Commission, Brussels DG Communication Public Opinion Analysis Sector)
  • Soufflot de Magny, Renaud (European Commission, Brussels DG Communication Public Opinion Analysis Sector)
Publication Date
2004
Contributor
  • MARKETING UNIT-INRA BELGIUM, Brüssel (Data Collector)
  • MARKETING UNIT-INRA BELGIUM, Brüssel (Data Collector)
  • GFK Danmark, Kopenhagen (Data Collector)
  • GFK Danmark, Kopenhagen (Data Collector)
  • INRA DEUTSCHLAND, Mölln (Data Collector)
  • INRA DEUTSCHLAND, Mölln (Data Collector)
  • Market Analysis, Athen (Data Collector)
  • Market Analysis, Athen (Data Collector)
  • CIMEI-INRA ESPANA, Madrid (Data Collector)
  • CIMEI-INRA ESPANA, Madrid (Data Collector)
  • CSA-TMO, Paris (Data Collector)
  • CSA-TMO, Paris (Data Collector)
  • LANSDOWNE Market Research, Dublin (Data Collector)
  • LANSDOWNE Market Research, DublinUlster Marketing Surveys, Nordirland (Data Collector)
  • Ulster Marketing Surveys, Nordirland (Data Collector)
  • Ulster Marketing Surveys, Nordirland (Data Collector)
  • INRA Demoskopea, Rom (Data Collector)
  • INRA Demoskopea, Rom (Data Collector)
  • ILRES, Luxemburg (Data Collector)
  • ILRES, Luxemburg (Data Collector)
  • INTOMART , Hilversum, Niederlande (Data Collector)
  • INTOMART, Hilversum, Niederlande (Data Collector)
  • METRIS, Lissabon (Data Collector)
  • METRIS, Lissabon (Data Collector)
  • RAS - INRA UK, London (Data Collector)
  • RAS - INRA UK, London (Data Collector)
  • GfK SVERIGE, Lund, Schweden (Data Collector)
  • GfK SVERIGE, Lund , Schweden (Data Collector)
  • MDC MARKETING RESEARCH Ltd, Espoo, Finnland (Data Collector)
  • MDC MARKETING RESEARCH Ltd, Espoo, Finnland (Data Collector)
  • SPECTRA, Linz, Österreich (Data Collector)
  • SPECTRA, Linz, Österreich (Data Collector)
  • European Opinion Research Group (EORG), Brüssel (internationale Kooperation, Consortium made out of INRA and GfK Worldwide) (Data Collector)
  • European Opinion Research Group (EORG), Brüssel (internationale Kooperation, Consortium made out of INRA and GfK Worldwide) (Data Collector)
Language
English
Classification
  • ZA:
    • International Institutions, Relations, Conditions
Description
  • Abstract

    Standard questions of Eurobarometer. Citizenship and feeling of belonging. Traud and tax fraud. European Parliament. Topics: Satisfaction of interviewees with their present life, whether they attempted to persuade others close to them to share their views on subjects they held strong opinions about, whether they discussed political matters, and what the European Union´s priorities should be. Additional questions focused on the respondents´ knowledge of and opinions about the European Union (EU), including sources of information about the EU and whether their country had benefited from being an EU member. Respondents were asked questions concerning citizenship and their overall feeling of belonging, such as what was most important to them: family, friendship, work, the arts/culture, politics, health, or money. Respondents were asked how important the following values were to them: rule of law, respect for human life, human rights, individual freedom, democracy, tolerance, peace, or solidarity. Respondents were asked if they agreed that the State intervened too much in their lives, criminals needed help and understanding, immigrants were a threat to their way of life, economic growth must be a priority even if it affects the environment, and that free competition was the best guarantee for economic prosperity. Respondents were also asked if they´d be willing to learn one or more foreign language and what would be the motivation for doing so (i.e., to use on holidays abroad, to get a better job, to be able to understand people from other cultures, or for personal satisfaction),if they´d be interested or involved in the sports, arts and culture, music, and lifestyles of other countries in the EU and in countries outside of the EU, toward which country they felt the greatest affinity, whether the United States and the EU played a positive or negative role regarding peace in the world, fighting terrorism, growth of the world´s economy, the fight against poverty in the world, and the protection of the environment. Additional questions focused on fraud and whether respondents had read or seen anything about fraud, tax evasion, money laundering, or counterfeiting of goods in their country, in other countries of the EU, in the countries which are candidates to join the EU, or elsewhere in the world. Respondents were asked what type of fraud worried them the most (e.g., hacking, pirating software, illegal data trading, counterfeiting of goods, commercial fraud like cheating on prices, weights, and goods, customs fraud, VAT fraud, or misappropriation of aids and grants), how well the media informed those in the EU about various types of fraud in the other countries of the EU as well as in their respective country, and whether using the police force, customs services, taxation authority, courts, private auditing firms, or the media was the most effective way to fight the EU and its budget from being defrauded. Respondents were also asked questions regarding the European Parliament, specifically how many European Parliament elections they voted in and if they were going to vote in the next one, how much impact the European Parliament had on their everyday lives, and whether the European Parliament election campaign should mainly focus on agriculture, environment, employment, immigration, education, foreign policy, enlargement of the EU, or the rights of the EU citizen. Those queried were also asked if they were interested in knowing more about the European Parliament whether via the television, radio, Internet, or newspapers. Demography: Gender, age, marital status, level of education, current occupation, household income, who contributed most to the household income, whether the respondent resided in a rural area or village, a small town, or a large town, and how much toward the left or right did the respondent consider their political views.
Temporal Coverage
  • 2003-10-09 / 2003-10-27
    France
  • 2003-10-09 / 2003-10-27
  • 2003-10-07 / 2003-11-07
    Belgium
  • 2003-10-07 / 2003-11-07
  • 2003-10-07 / 2003-11-04
    Netherlands
  • 2003-10-07 / 2003-11-04
  • 2003-10-04 / 2003-10-24
    Germany
  • 2003-10-04 / 2003-10-24
  • 2003-10-01 / 2003-10-28
    Italy
  • 2003-10-01 / 2003-10-28
  • 2003-10-03 / 2003-11-07
    Luxembourg
  • 2003-10-03 / 2003-11-07
  • 2003-10-09 / 2003-11-05
    Denmark
  • 2003-10-09 / 2003-11-05
  • 2003-10-06 / 2003-10-30
    Ireland (Republic)
  • 2003-10-06 / 2003-10-30
  • 2003-10-01 / 2003-11-05
    Great Britain
  • 2003-10-01 / 2003-11-05
  • 2003-10-07 / 2003-10-28
    Northern Ireland
  • 2003-10-07 / 2003-10-28
  • 2003-10-06 / 2003-11-02
    Greece
  • 2003-10-06 / 2003-11-02
  • 2003-10-06 / 2003-11-01
    Spain
  • 2003-10-06 / 2003-11-01
  • 2003-10-03 / 2003-10-28
    Portugal
  • 2003-10-03 / 2003-10-28
  • 2003-10-09 / 2003-11-05
    Finland
  • 2003-10-09 / 2003-11-05
  • 2003-10-01 / 2003-11-03
    Sweden
  • 2003-10-01 / 2003-11-03
  • 2003-10-03 / 2003-10-29
    Austria
  • 2003-10-03 / 2003-10-29
Geographic Coverage
  • Austria (AT)
  • Austria (AT)
  • Belgium (BE)
  • Belgium (BE)
  • Germany (DE)
  • Germany (DE)
  • Denmark (DK)
  • Denmark (DK)
  • Spain (ES)
  • Spain (ES)
  • Finland (FI)
  • Finland (FI)
  • France (FR)
  • France (FR)
  • Great Britain (GB-GBN)
  • Great Britain (GB-GBN)
  • Northern Ireland (GB-NIR)
  • Northern Ireland (GB-NIR)
  • Greece (GR)
  • Greece (GR)
  • Ireland (IE)
  • Ireland (IE)
  • Italy (IT)
  • Italy (IT)
  • Luxembourg (LU)
  • Luxembourg (LU)
  • Netherlands (NL)
  • Netherlands (NL)
  • Portugal (PT)
  • Portugal (PT)
  • Sweden (SE)
  • Sweden (SE)
Sampling
A multi-stage sampling design was used for this Eurobarometer. In the first stage, primary sampling units (PSU) were selected from each of the administrative regions in every country (i.e., Statistical Office of the European Community, EUROSTAT regions). PSU selection was systematic with probability proportional to population size, from sampling frames stratified by the degree of urbanization. In the next stage, a cluster of addresses was selected from each sampled PSU. Addresses were chosen systematically using standard random route procedures, beginning with an initial address selected at random. In each household, a respondent was selected, by a random procedure. Up to three recalls were made to obtain an interview with the selected respondent. No more than one interview was conducted in each household. All respondents were aged 15 and over. Separate samples were drawn for Northern Ireland and East Germany.
Data and File Information
  • Number of Variables: 728
Note
The regular sample size (in the sense of completed interviews) is 1000 respondents per country, except the United Kingdom with separate samples for Great Britain (1000) and Northern Ireland (300), Luxembourg (600) and Germany with separate samples for the Eastern and the Western part (1000 each). Effective number of realised interviews in this round: France 1015, Belgium 1022, Netherlands 1006, Germany-West 1016, Germany-East 1023, Italy 1008, Luxembourg 587, Denmark 1000, Ireland 1014, Great Britain 1055, Northern Ireland 307, Greece 1001, Spain 1000, Portugal 1000, Finland 1018, Sweden 1000, Austria 1010. The standard module and questions and EU institutions and policies have also been surveyed in Candidate Countries Eurobarometer 2003.4(ZA-Study-No. 3986), the questions on ´social values, participation and interests´ have been paralleled in the context of Candidate Countries Eurobarometer 2003.5 (ZA-Study-No. 4240).
Availability
Delivery
A - Data and documents are released for academic research and teaching.

Update Metadata: 2015-09-02 | Issue Number: 5 | Registration Date: 2010-07-22

Papacostas, Antonis; Soufflot de Magny, Renaud (2004): Eurobarometer 60.1 (2003). Version: 1.0.0. GESIS Data Archive. Dataset. https://doi.org/10.4232/1.3938