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 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.

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 2020 ANES was divided between questions necessary for tracking long-term trends and questions necessary to understand the particular political moment of 2020. 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 2020 ANES study features a fresh cross-sectional sample, with respondents randomly assigned to one of three sequential mode groups: web only, mixed web (i.e., web and phone), and mixed video (i.e., video, web, and phone). The new content for the 2020 pre-election survey includes coronavirus pandemic, election integrity, corruption, impeachment, immigration and democratic norms. The pre-election survey also includes protests and unrest over policing and racism. The new content for the 2020 post-election survey includes voting experiences, anti-elitism, faith in experts or science, climate change, gun control, opioids, rural-urban identity, international trade, transgender military service, social media usage, misinformation, perceptions of foreign countries and group empathy. Phone and video interviews were conducted by trained interviewers using computer-assisted personal interviewing (CAPI) software on computers. Unlike in earlier years, the 2020 ANES did not use computer-assisted self interviewing (CASI) during any part of the interviewer-administered modes (video and phone). Rather, in interviewer-administered modes, all questions were read out loud to respondents, and respondents also provided their answers orally. Demographic variables include respondent age, education level, political affiliation, race/ethnicity, marital status, and family composition.

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/)

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.

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.

We use data from the American National Election Studies from 1996 to 2016 to study the role of the internet in the 2016 U.S. presidential election outcome. We compare trends in the Republican share of the vote between likely and unlikely internet users, and between actual internet users and non-users. Relative to prior years, the Republican share of the vote in 2016 was as high or higher among the groups least active online.

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.

How did anxiety influence voters' decisions in the 2016 presidential election? This study tests the hypothesis that voters who were anxious about their own party's candidate were less likely to vote based on partisanship and more likely to vote based on issue positions and candidate personal qualities. As part of the Election Research Preacceptance Competition 2016, this study was designed with the 2016 American National Election Study codebook before the data were released. Hence, the documentation of this study showed how the analysis of anxiety's conditioning effect on vote choice was to be completed once the data were gathered.

The 2016 Latino Immigrant National Election Study (LINES) is a panel study of Latino foreign-born residents of the United States, with telephone surveys of nationally representative samples of respondents fielded in 3 waves over 2016-2017. The first survey in the 2016 LINES took place during the general election campaign (August and September of 2016). Interviews (N = 1,800) were conducted in English and Spanish, although nearly all respondents opted for Spanish. Because many of the initial telephone numbers dialed were either out of service or otherwise unusable, the American Association for Public Opinion Research (AAPOR) "Response Rate 1" calculation is low (.034). However, in cases when an eligible immigrant was identified based on the initial screening questions, only 12 percent opted not to complete the survey. On average, an interview that fall lasted approximately 25 minutes. After the 2016 election, 576 immigrants took part in the second survey wave, which was fielded during the presidential transition period (a 32 percent re-contact rate). At this time, an additional fresh sample of 260 Latino immigrants was added to the study, again to help gauge and ameliorate any potential respondent attrition biases. Finally, in the summer of 2017 (July through early-September), a third wave was conducted, with all 1,800 immigrants from the pre-election baseline survey being eligible for interviewing. In this period, 31 percent of these immigrants (N = 554) were surveyed; this included 321 respondents who had taken part in the second wave and 233 who had not. To increase the sample size at this time and address attrition over time, 500 fresh immigrants were surveyed. In total, 2,560 immigrants took part in the 2016-2017 LINES: 1,800 from before the election, 260 during the presidential transition period, and 300 in the summer of 2017. The questionnaire instrumentation used in the study was largely adapted from item wordings in the 2012 American National Election Study (ANES). The survey focuses on immigrant civic engagement and political socialization, including items on immigrant attitudes, opinions and electoral and non-electoral political behavior.

Votes for Republican presidential candidate by alternative measures of predicted internet, 2012–2016.

Votes for Republican presidential candidate by online activity, 2012–2016.

Despite ideological sorting among partisans, as of 2012, gender gaps over policy preferences persist within political parties—particularly among Republicans. Republican women report more moderate views than Republican men across a range of policy areas. These gaps are largely attributed to gender differences in beliefs about the appropriate scope of government and attitudes toward gender-based inequality. Nonetheless, we argue that gender became an even more salient feature of politics between the 2016 and 2012 elections. This raises questions about whether the within party gaps are stable over time. Using survey data from the 2012 and 2016 American National Election Study we evaluate whether gender gaps in policy preferences are stable across elections, or if the 2016 context affected the magnitude of gender differences in policy preferences. We find that despite the increased salience of gender in 2016, within party gender gaps are fairly stable across the two periods.

Predicted internet, 1996.

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.

This dataset contains a subset (Approx 17000 voter data) of the ANES 2012, 2016 and 2020. It contains the prompts used to generate persona's for the human voters using llama 2 and GPT3.5 and parsed outputs.

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.

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.

Scholarship on women voters in the United States has focused on the gender gap showing that women are more likely to vote for Democratic Party candidates than men since the 1980s. The persistence of the gender gap has nurtured the conclusion that women are Democrats. This article presents evidence upending that conventional wisdom. Data from the American National Election Study are analyzed to demonstrate that white women are the only group of female voters who support Republican Party candidates for president. They have done so by a majority in all but 2 of the last 18 elections. The relevance of race for partisan choice among women voters is estimated with data collected in 2008, 2012, and 2016, and the significance of being white is identified after accounting for political party identification and other predictors.

Measurement invariance is a necessary condition for meaningful comparisons across populations. Previous studies argue that authoritarianism between Blacks and Whites in the United States cannot be compared due to the lack of measurement invariance in the American National Election Studies child-rearing values index. This paper challenges this claim. I analyze ANES data from 1992 to 2016 and identify partial measurement invariance in the 1992–2008 surveys (only one item, respect for elders, displays differential item functioning across groups) and full invariance in the 2012 and 2016 data. It is demonstrated that the child-rearing scale is comparable across Black and White respondents once partial measurement invariance is modeled accordingly, and that group comparisons are methodologically sound. I advanced a hypothesis for the non-invariance of respect for elders and suggest that future work should use measurement models that accommodate differential item functioning and further develop the child-rearing scale.