These data are being released as a preliminary version to facilitate early access to the study for research purposes. This collection has not been fully processed by ICPSR at this time, and data are released in the format provided by the principal investigators. As the study is processed and given enhanced features by ICPSR in the future, users will be able to download the updated versions of the study. Please report any data errors or problems to user support, and we will work with you to resolve any data-related issues. The American National Election Study (ANES): 2016 Pilot Study sought to test new instrumentation under consideration for potential inclusion in the ANES 2016 Time Series Study, as well as future ANES studies. Much of the content is based on proposals from the ANES user community submitted through the Online Commons page, found on the ANES home page. The survey included questions about preferences in the presidential primary, stereotyping, the economy, discrimination, race and racial consciousness, police use of force, and numerous policy issues, such as immigration law, health insurance, and federal spending. It was conducted on the Internet using the YouGov panel, an international market research firm that administers polls that collect information about politics, public affairs, products, brands, as well as other topics of general interest.

This study is part of the American National Election Studies (ANES), a time series collection of national surveys fielded since 1948. The American National Election Studies are designed to present data on Americans' social backgrounds, political predispositions, social and political values, perceptions and evaluations of groups and candidates, opinions on questions of public policy, and participation in political life. The files included in this study are restricted-use due to the income data contained in them for the year listed in the title.

The "https://electionstudies.org/data-center/2020-time-series-study/" Target="_blank">American National Election Studies (ANES) 2020 Time Series Study is a continuation of the series of election studies conducted since 1948 to support analysis of public opinion and voting behavior in U.S. presidential elections. This year's study features re-interviews with "https://electionstudies.org/data-center/2016-time-series-study/" Target="_blank">2016 ANES respondents, a freshly drawn cross-sectional sample, and post-election surveys with respondents from the "https://gss.norc.org/" Target="_blank">General Social Survey (GSS). All respondents were assigned to interview by one of three mode groups - by web, video or telephone. The study has a total of 8,280 pre-election interviews and 7,449 post-election re-interviews.

New content for the 2020 pre-election survey includes variables on sexual harassment and misconduct, health insurance, identity politics, immigration, media trust and misinformation, institutional legitimacy, campaigns, party images, trade tariffs and tax policy.

New content for the 2020 post-election survey includes voting experiences, attitudes toward public health officials and organizations, anti-elitism, faith in experts/science, climate change, gun control, opioids, rural-urban identity, international trade, sexual harassment and #MeToo, transgender military service, perception of foreign countries, group empathy, social media usage, misinformation and personal experiences.

(American National Election Studies. 2021. ANES 2020 Time Series Study Full Release [dataset and documentation]. July 19, 2021 version. "https://electionstudies.org/" Target="_blank">https://electionstudies.org/)

This study is part of the American National Election Studies (ANES), a time series collection of national surveys fielded since 1948. The American National Election Studies are designed to present data on Americans' social backgrounds, political predispositions, social and political values, perceptions and evaluations of groups and candidates, opinions on questions of public policy, and participation in political life. The files included in this study are restricted-use due to the data on arriving in the United States contained in them for the year listed in the title.

This study is part of the American National Election Studies (ANES), a time series collection of national surveys fielded since 1948. The American National Election Studies are designed to present data on Americans' social backgrounds, political predispositions, social and political values, perceptions and evaluations of groups and candidates, opinions on questions of public policy, and participation in political life. The files included in this study are restricted-use due to the geocodes contained in them for the year listed in the title. Please review the contents of the ZIP file ANES_RDS_Documentation_Geocodes.zip for helpful information about the meanings of variables and changes to geocoding over time. Should you need to merge datasets across the 1992-1997 or 2000-2004 panel, ID bridging files for those panels are also included in the same ZIP file.

The ANES is a nationally representative, cross-sectional survey used extensively in political science. This is a dataset from the 2016 pilot study, consisting of responses from 1200 voting-age U.S. citizens.

'The ANES 2016 Time Series is a continuation of the series of election studies conducted by the ANES since 1948 to support analysis of public opinion and voting behavior in U.S. presidential elections. This year's study features a dual-mode design with both traditional face-to-face interviewing (n=1,181) and surveys conducted on the Internet (n=3,090), and a total sample size of 4,271. 'Study Content Highlights: Data collection for the ANES 2016 Time Series Study began in early September and continued into January 2017. Pre election interviews were conducted with study respondents during the two months prior to the 2016 elections and were followed by post-election re-interviewing beginning November 9, 2016. 'As in 2012, face-to-face interviewing was complemented with data collection on the Internet. Data collection was conducted in the two modes independently, using separate samples but substantially identical questionnaires. Web-administered cases constituted a representative sample separate from the face-to-face. (ANES. 2017. User's Guide and Codebook for the ANES 2016 Time Series Study. Ann Arbor, MI and Palo Alto, CA: the University of Michigan and Stanford University.)

This study is part of the American National Election Study (ANES), a time-series collection of national surveys fielded continuously since 1948. The American National Election Studies are designed to present data on Americans' social backgrounds, enduring political predispositions, social and political values, perceptions and evaluations of groups and candidates, opinions on questions of public policy, and participation in political life. As with all Time Series studies conducted during years of presidential elections, respondents were interviewed during the two months preceding the November election (Pre-election interview), and then re-interviewed during the two months following the election (Post-election interview). Like its predecessors, the 2016 ANES was divided between questions necessary for tracking long-term trends and questions necessary to understand the particular political moment of 2016. The study maintains and extends the ANES time-series 'core' by collecting data on Americans' basic political beliefs, allegiances, and behaviors, which are so critical to a general understanding of politics that they are monitored at every election, no matter the nature of the specific campaign or the broader setting. This 2016 ANES study features a dual-mode design with both traditional face-to-face interviewing (n=1,181) and surveys conducted on the Internet (n=3,090), and a total sample size of 4,271. In addition to content on electoral participation, voting behavior, and public opinion, the 2016 ANES Time Series Study contains questions about areas such as media exposure, cognitive style, and values and predispositions. Several items first measured on the 2012 ANES study were again asked, including "Big Five" personality traits using the Ten Item Personality Inventory (TIPI), and skin tone observations made by interviewers in the face-to-face study. For the first time, ANES has collected supplemental data directly from respondents' Facebook accounts. The post-election interview also included Module 5 from the Comparative Study of Electorial Systems (CSES), exploring themes in populism, perceptions on elites, corruption, and attitudes towards representative democracy. Face-to-face interviews were conducted by trained interviewers using computer assisted personal interviewing (CAPI) software on laptop computers. During a portion of the face-to-face interview, the respondent answered certain sensitive questions on the laptop computer directly, without the interviewer's participation (known as computer assisted self-interviewing (CASI)). Internet questionnaires could be completed anywhere the respondent had access to the Internet, on a computer or on a mobile device. Respondents were only eligible to compete the survey in the mode for which they were sampled. Demographic variables include respondent age, education level, political affiliation, race/ethnicity, marital status, and family composition.

This is the first release of the 2016 ANES parallel survey created by the CCES team. This is a survey of 1,000 nationally representative American adults asked a subset of the full ANES battery both before and after the 2016 election. We selected questions from the ANES battery that represent the core of the ANES questionnaires. This data was produced by YouGov. A future release will include vote validation. Methodology: YouGov interviewed 1643 respondents who were then matched down to a sample of 1000 to produce the final dataset. The respondents were matched to a sampling frame on gender, age, race, education, ideology, region, and political interest. The frame was constructed by stratified sampling from the full 2010 American Community Survey (ACS) sample with selection within strata by weighted sampling with replacements (using the person weights on the public use file). Data on voter registration status and turnout were matched to this frame using the November 2010 Current Population Survey. Data on interest in politics and ideology were then matched to this frame from the 2007 Pew Religious Life Survey. The matched cases were weighted to the sampling frame using propensity scores. The matched cases and the frame were combined and a logistic regression was estimated for inclusion in the frame. The propensity score function included age, gender, race/ethnicity, years of education, ideology, and region. The propensity scores were grouped into deciles of the estimated propensity score in the frame and post-stratified according to these deciles.

These files contain all data and code necessary to replicate the analyses in "The Differential Effects of Economic Conditions and Racial Attitudes in the Election of Donald Trump." The primary analyses are based on the February 2018 release of the 2016 Cooperative Congressional Election Survey, which includes updated/corrected vote validation, with geographic economic indicators merged to it. Ancillary analyses using the 2016 ANES and 2011-2016 VOTER panel survey are also included. Please consult _ReadMe.txt (the first file in the unzipped folder) for a full description of all files and how they fit together in analysis.

Descriptive statistics of all relevant measures in the 2012 and 2016 ANES datasets calculated with applying survey weights.

This includes three appendix tables from our article. Table 1 includes a list of variables measures and survey questions from the 2016 and 2020 American National Election Studies (ANES). Table 2 contains a list of variable codings from the 2016 and 2020 ANES surveys. Table 3 is a correlation matrix of the variables from the 2020 ANES survey.

This 2024 announcement updates prior releases of Lau and Redlawsk’s operationalization of “correct voting” in U.S. presidential elections utilizing the quadrennial ANES surveys, now extending available data to the 2020 election. This folder contains 13 relatively small spss system files (e.g., CorVt72.sav, CorVt76.sav, etc.), one for each presidential year election study from 1972 through 2020 – plus one big combined system file including data from all 13 elections. Each file contains 11 variables: (Election) Year, CaseID (from the ANES survey), (survey) Mode, four slightly different estimates of which candidate we calculate is the correct choice for each respondent (USCorCand, UMCorCand, WSCorCand, and WMCorCand), and four slightly different estimates of whether the respondent reported voting for that “correct” candidate (CorrVtUS, CorrVtUM, CorrVtWS, and CorrVtWM). The US, UM, WS, and WM prefixes and suffixes refer to Unweighted Sums, Unweighted Means, Weighted Sums, and Weighted Means, respectively. As in the past, we only provide estimates for respondents with both pre- and post-election surveys. Unlike past releases, however, the data now includes an indicator of survey mode, and we now provide estimates for respondents interviewed with all available survey modes, not just the tradition face-to-face mode. This greatly increases the number of respondents with correct voting estimates from the 2000, 2012, 2016, and of course 2020 studies (when because of covid no face-to-face interviews were conducted). Fortunately, eyeballing this new data (see Correct Voting Summary Data.docx), there do not appear to be any significant mode differences beyond what can be explained by sampling error.

Voting Behavior, The 2016 Election is an instructional module designed to offer students the opportunity to analyze a dataset drawn from the American National Election (ANES) 2016 Time Series Study [ICPSR 36824]. This instructional module is part of the SETUPS (Supplementary Empirical Teaching Units in Political Science) series and differs from previous modules in that it is completely online, including the data analysis system components.

The General Social Surveys (GSS) have been conducted by the "https://www.norc.org/Pages/default.aspx" Target="_blank">National Opinion Research Center (NORC) annually since 1972, except for the years 1979, 1981, and 1992 (a supplement was added in 1992), and biennially beginning in 1994. The GSS are designed to be part of a program of social indicator research, replicating questionnaire items and wording in order to facilitate time-trend studies. The 2016-2020 GSS consisted of re-interviews of respondents from the 2016 and 2018 Cross-Sectional GSS rounds. All respondents from 2018 were fielded, but a random subsample of the respondents from 2016 were released for the 2020 panel. Cross-sectional responses from 2016 and 2018 are labelled Waves 1A and 1B, respectively, while responses from the 2020 re-interviews are labelled Wave 2.

The 2016-2020 GSS Wave 2 Panel also includes a collaboration between the General Social Survey (GSS) and the "https://electionstudies.org/" Target="_blank">American National Election Studies (ANES). The 2016-2020 GSS Panel Wave 2 contained a module of items proposed by the ANES team, including attitudinal questions, feelings thermometers for presidential candidates, and plans for voting in the 2020 presidential election. These respondents appear in both the ANES post-election study and the 2016-2020 GSS panel, with their 2020 GSS responses serving as their equivalent pre-election data. Researchers can link the relevant GSS Panel Wave 2 data with ANES post-election data using either ANESID (in the GSS Panel Wave 2 datafile) or V200001 in the ANES 2020 post-election datafile.

The ANES 2019 Pilot Study was conducted for the purpose of testing new questions and conducting methodological research to inform the design of the ANES 2020 Time Series study, and to provide public opinion data in December 2019. Much of the content was based on ideas sent by the ANES user community in response to the most recent call for ideas. The 30 minute questionnaire includes questions about voting in 2016 and 2018, validated voter turnout, preferences for the Democratic presidential primaries and vote intentions in 2020, misinformation, and many topical issues including impeachment.

Political surveys often include multi-item scales to measure individual predispositions such as authoritarianism, egalitarianism, or racial resentment. Scholars use these scales to examine group differences in these predispositions, comparing women to men, rich to poor, or Republicans to Democrats. Such research implicitly assumes that, say, Republicans' and Democrats' responses to the egalitarianism scale measure the same construct in the same metric. This research rarely evaluates whether the data possess the characteristics necessary to justify this equivalence assumption. We present a framework to test this assumption and correct scales when it fails to hold. Examining 13 commonly used scales on the 2012 and 2016 ANES, we find widespread violations of the equivalence assumption. These violations often bias the estimated magnitude or direction of theoretically important group differences. These results suggest we must reevaluate what we think we know about the causes and consequences of authoritarianism, egalitarianism, and other predispositions.

This memo announces the availability of operationalizations of Lau and Redlawsk’s “correct voting” measure from the 2012, 2016, and 2020 CCES surveys. This folder contains three SPSS system files -- CCES2012PresCorrVote.sav, CCES2016PresCorrVote.sav, and CCES2020PresCorrVote.sav -- one for each presidential year election study from 2012 through 2020 – plus one big combined system file (CCESPresCorrVote2012-2020.sav) including data from all three CCES election studies. Each system file contains 18 variables: · Year (of the election), CaseID (from the CCES common core survey); · four slightly different estimates of which candidate I calculate is the correct choice for each respondent, based only on data available from the CCES survey (USCorCand1, UMCorCand1, WSCorCand1, and WMCorCand1), · four slightly different estimates of whether the respondent reported voting for that “correct” candidate (CorrVtUS1, CorrVtUM1, CorrVtWS1, and CorrVtWM1); · and then four slightly different alternative estimates of the correct vote choice for each respondent (USCorCand4, UMCorCand4, WSCorCand4, and WMCorCand4), and four alternative indications of whether respondents reported voting for that “correct” candidate (CorrVtUS4, CorrVtUM4, CorrVtWS4, and CorrVtWM4), enhanced by data that were originally estimated from the ANES survey from that election year (explained further below). The US, UM, WS, and WM prefixes and suffixes refer to Unweighted Sums, Unweighted Means, Weighted Sums, and Weighted Means, respectively. I only provide estimates for respondents with both pre- and post-election surveys.

This dataset contains cleaned and recoded variables from ANES-2012 and 2016 used in the study. Associated Stata codes are also included. See the paper for more details.

President Trump is often at odds with the conservative establishment over a range of issues, not least of which is foreign policy. Yet, it remains unclear whether supporting “Trumpism” is commensurate with coherent foreign policy views that are distinct from conventionally conservative positions. This paper evaluates whether the foreign policy views of Trump’s supporters, both in the voting public and among activists, differ from those of other Republicans. We use the 2016 ANES to examine Republican primary voters and the new 2016 State Convention Delegate Study to assess Republican activists. In doing so, we reveal systematic differences in foreign policy preferences between Trump supporters and more establishment conservatives. This paper demonstrates that the status-threat model need not be confined to domestic politics. Indeed, it may be extended to explain foreign policy preferences on the political right, that of Trump’s supporters in the present case. In doing so, we also find evidence that status threat may well be the source of fracture in the Republican Party.