German Internet Panel, Wave 48 (July 2020)

Version
1.0.0
Resource Type
Dataset : Survey and aggregate data
Creator
  • Blom, Annelies G. (Universität Mannheim)
  • Fikel, Marina (Universität Mannheim)
  • Friedel, Sabine (Universität Mannheim)
  • Krieger, Ulrich (Universität Mannheim)
  • Rettig, Tobias (Universität Mannheim)
  • SFB 884 ´Political Economy of Reforms´, Universität Mannheim
Publication Date
2021-02-02
Contributor
  • forsa.main, Frankfurt am Main (Data Collector)
Language
German
Classification
  • ZA:
    • International Institutions, Relations, Conditions
    • Political Parties, Organizations
    • Technology, Energy
    • Natural Environment, Nature
  • CESSDA Topic Classification:
    • Information society
    • Government, political systems and organisation
    • Environmental degradation/pollution and protection
Description
  • Abstract

    The German Internet Panel (GIP) is an infrastructure project. The GIP serves to collect data about individual attitudes and preferences which are relevant for political and economic decision-making processes. The questionnaire contains numerous experimental variations in the survey instruments. For more information, see the study documentation. Subjects: Social status: top-bottom self-assessment on a ladder/pyramid scale (experiment); Smartphone use: ownership of mobile phone, computer or laptop and tablet computer; smartphone as mobile phone; smartphone type; devices used to access the internet; social media: Use of selected applications (e.g. Facebook, Instagram, etc. ) on the internet or as a mobile app; sole use of the smartphone or sharing with another person; persons with whom the smartphone is shared (spouse), children, other family members, friends, work colleagues, others); frequency of use of the smartphone besides making phone calls or sending text messages; self-assessment of skills in using the smartphone (beginner or advanced); Indication of the number of hours the smartphone is typically switched on; taking the smartphone out of the house; carrying the smartphone in a pocket or on a belt/ in a holder on the body, in a jacket or waistcoat pocket, in a handbag, rucksack or other bag, in the hand when out and about; places or situations outside the home where the respondent uses the smartphone. situations outside the home where the respondent does not have the smartphone directly with him or her (in church, mosque, synagogue, etc.) in the mosque, synagogue or other place of worship, at the theatre, concert, cinema and other cultural events, at school, university and other educational institutions, at work, while running or at the gym, during other sports (e.g. team sports), during very short journeys (to the shops, etc.), other place/other situation, smartphone always with them); setting of the smartphone at night (completely switched off, silent/ mute/ please do not disturb/ flight mode, smartphone remains switched on); storage location of the smartphone at night (in bed, within reach next to the bed, in the same room not within direct reach, in another room); storage location of the smartphone during the day at home (trouser pocket or on the belt, not on the body, but within reach and taken along when changing rooms, in a fixed place in the home, in another place). Experiment on the attention of the respondent (Attention check): Voting behaviour in a referendum on Germany´s membership in the EU (Sunday question), whereby some of the respondents were asked to click on the Society in Transition logo and the text length was varied. Lobbying: Estimated influence of lobbying on EU climate policy; assessment of the influence of lobbying on EU climate policy; influence of lobbying on the European Union´s level of climate protection. Climate protection: mankind´s ability to influence the earth´s climate; agreement with the statement: global level of climate protection is sufficient to limit global warming and prevent serious impacts; opinion on the fair distribution of the effort for climate protection among the social actors in the EU; agreement with the various statements: most EU citizens contribute to climate protection, financial support of climate protection and environmental organisations is effective in advancing climate protection; weekly car use (as driver or passenger); frequency of the following activities in the last 6 months (paid attention to the sustainability of a product when buying it, volunteered for an environmental project, participated in a demonstration for more environmental protection or climate protection, own shopping bag, signed a petition for more environmental protection or climate protection, donated to an environmental organisation, bought regional organic products, flew by plane, none of the activities); the Court of Justice of the European Union (ECJ) favours measures that advance European unification vs. protects parties or groups that oppose European unification; agreement with statement: if the ECJ made many decisions that most people disagreed with, it would be better to abolish the ECJ altogether; opinion on the rule of law (sometimes it is better to ignore the law and solve problems immediately rather than wait for a legal solution); agreement with statement: it is very important to reduce emissions of carbon dioxide and pollutants from vehicles, even at the expense of economic growth; willingness to give up something useful today in exchange for benefiting more from it in the future. Experiment on EU decisions regarding legislative reform to address air pollution with different scenarios regarding the transposition of EU law into national law and the initiation of legal action against Germany by the EU Commission in the absence of transposition of EU law into national law. Satisfaction with the way the German government or the EU is handling this situation; understanding of the process read by selecting applicable answers (the Commission may take legal action against an EU state that fails to implement EU law, the German government will introduce a bill reforming the current immigration/air pollution policy). Party experiment: sympathy scalometer for the current party leaders of the parties mentioned by name under a photo (CDU: Annegret Kramp-Karrenbauer, CSU: Markus Söder, SPD: Saskia Esken, Norbert Walter-Borjans, FDP: Christian Lindner, Bündnis90/ Die Grünen: Robert Habeck, Annalena Baerbock, Die Linke: Katja Kipping, Bernd Riexinger, AfD: Jörg Meuthen); problem-solving competence of the parties CDU, CSU, SPD, FDP, Bündnis90/ Die Grünen, Die Linke and AfD; influence of the aforementioned parties on the legislative process since the last Bundestag election; left-right classification of the aforementioned parties (11-point scale); perception of the parties CDU, CSU, SPD, FDP, Bündnis90/ Die Grünen, Die Linke and AfD as divided versus united (11-point scale); Perception of statements by the aforementioned parties on intended policies as vague versus accurate (11-point scale); likelihood of ever voting for the CDU, CSU, SPD, FDP, Bündnis90/ Die Grünen, Die Linke and AfD parties (11-point scale); knowledge of the current party leaders of the CDU, CSU, SPD, FDP, Bündnis90/ Die Grünen, Die Linke and AfD parties; party preference in the next federal election (Sunday question). Demography: sex; age (year of birth, categorised); education: highest school-leaving certificate; highest professional qualification; marital status; household size; employment status; German citizenship; frequency of private internet use; federal state. Additionally coded were: Respondent ID; household ID, GIP; person ID (within household); year of recruitment (2012, 2014, 2018); interview date; current online status; assignment to experimental groups; randomisations; society in transition logo was clicked. Questionnaire evaluation (interesting, varied, relevant, long, difficult, too personal); assessment of the survey overall; respondent made further comments on the questionnaire.
Temporal Coverage
  • 2020-07-01 / 2020-07-31
Geographic Coverage
  • Germany (DE)
Sampled Universe
Persons between 16 and 75 years of age who lived in private households at the time of recruitment.
Time Dimension
  • Longitudinal: Panel
Collection Mode
  • Self-administered questionnaire: Web-based
Data and File Information
  • Number of Variables: 263
Availability
Delivery
C - Data and documents are only released for academic research and teaching after the data depositor’s written authorization. For this purpose the Data Archive obtains a written permission with specification of the user and the analysis intention.
Rights
All metadata from GESIS DBK are available free of restriction under the Creative Commons CC0 1.0 Universal Public Domain Dedication. However, GESIS requests that you actively acknowledge and give attribution to all metadata sources, such as the data providers and any data aggregators, including GESIS. For further information see https://dbk.gesis.org/dbksearch/guidelines.asp
Alternative Identifiers
  • ZA7645 (Type: ZA-No.)
Publications
  • Felderer, B., & Blom, A. G. (2019). Acceptance of the automated online collection of geographical information. Sociological Methods & Research, 1-21. https://doi.org/10.1177/0049124119882480
  • Herzing, J. M. E., & Blom, A. G. (2019). The Influence of a Person’s Digital Affinity on Unit Nonresponse and Attrition in an Online Panel. Social Science Computer Review, 37(3), 404–424. doi.org/10.1177/0894439318774758
  • Blom, A. G., Herzing, J. M. E., Cornesse, C., Sakshaug, J. W., Krieger, U., & Bossert, D. (2017). Does the Recruitment of Offline Households Increase the Sample Representativeness of Probability-Based Online Panels? Evidence From the German Internet Panel. Social Science Computer Review, 35(4), 498–520. https://doi.org/10.1177/0894439316651584
  • Blom, A. G., Gathmann, C., & Krieger, U. (2015). Setting Up an Online Panel Representative of the General Population: The German Internet Panel. Field Methods, 27(4), 391–408. https://doi.org/10.1177/1525822X15574494
  • Blom, A. G., Bosnjak, M., Cornilleau, A., Cousteaux, A. S., Das, M., Douhou, S. & Krieger, U. (2016). A Comparison of Four Probability-Based Online and Mixed-Mode Panels in Europe. Social Science Computer Review, 34(1), 8-25. doi: 10.1177/0894439315574825
  • Steinacker, G.; Schmidt, S.; Schneekloth, U. (2012): German Internet Panel (GIP): Stichprobenziehung und Rekrutierung der Teilnehmer. München: TNS Infratest Sozialforschung, Feldbericht zur Erhebung 2012
  • Steinacker, G.; Schmidt, S. (2014): German Internet Panel (GIP): Stichprobenziehung und Rekrutierung der Teilnehmer. München: TNS Infratest Sozialforschung, Feldbericht zur Erhebung 2014

Update Metadata: 2021-04-07 | Issue Number: 3 | Registration Date: 2021-02-02