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 2012 ANES was divided between questions necessary for tracking long-term trends and questions necessary to understand the particular political moment of 2012. 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. For the first time in the ANES Time Series history, face-to-face interviewing was supplemented in 2012 with data collection on the Internet. Data collection was conducted in the two modes independently, using separate samples. While face-to-face (FTF) respondents were administered the single pre-election interview and single post-election interview traditional to Time Series presidential-election-year studies, for the internet sample the same questions were administered over a total of four shorter online interviews, two pre-election and two post-election. Web-administered cases constituted a representative sample separate from the face-to-face sample and were drawn from panel members of GfK Knowledge Networks. The face-to-face (FTF) sample of fresh cross-section cases featured oversamples of African-Americans and Hispanics. For the first time in the ANES Time Series, FTF respondents were administered CAPI interviews programmed as instruments on handheld tablets, which were employed by interviewers using touchscreen, stylus, attached keyboard or any combination of entry modes according to interviewer preference. In both the pre-election and post-election FTF interviews a special CASI (Computer Assisted Self-Interviewing) segment was conducted. In addition to content on electoral participation, voting behavior, and public opinion, the 2012 ANES Time Series Study contains questions about areas such as media exposure, cognitive style, and values and predispositions. Several items were measured on the ANES for the first time, including "Big Five" personality traits using the Ten Item Personality Inventory (TIPI), skin tone observations made by interviewers in the face-to-face study, and a vocabulary test from the General Social Survey called "Wordsum." The Post-Election interview also included Module 4 from the Comparative Study of Electoral Systems (CSES). Demographic variables include respondent age, education level, political affiliation, race/ethnicity, marital status, and family composition.

The ANES 2012 Time Series Study is the 29th study in a series of election studies conducted during years of Presidential elections since 1948 (the "ANES Time Series"). 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).

For the first time in Time Series history, face-to-face interviewing was supplemented with data collection on the Internet. Data collection was conducted in the two modes independently, using separate samples. For the face-to-face mode, all sampled persons were interviewed in person using Computer-Assisted Personal Interviewing (CAPI), which also incorporated an interview segment in each wave that was self-administered (CASI). For the Internet mode, all study participants were members of the KnowledgePanel, a panel of regular survey participants administered by GfK (formerly Knowledge Networks).

(ANES. 2014. User's Guide and Codebook for the ANES 2012 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 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 collection pools common variables from each of the biennial National Election Studies conducted since 1948 up until 2012. The 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. The data provided in this cumulative file include a series of demographic variables and measures of social structure, partisanship, candidate evaluation, retrospective and incumbent presidential evaluation, public opinion, ideological support for the political system, mass media usage, and egalitarianism and post-materialism. Additional items provide measures of political activity, participation, and involvement, and voting behavior and registration, including results of voter validation efforts.

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.

Replication of a portion of the 2012 American National Election Study using respondents from the pool of CCES participants.

This collection pools common variables from each of the biennial National Election Studies conducted since 1948 up until 2012. The 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. The data provided in this cumulative file include a series of demographic variables and measures of social structure, partisanship, candidate evaluation, retrospective and incumbent presidential evaluation, public opinion, ideological support for the political system, mass media usage, and egalitarianism and post-materialism. Additional items provide measures of political activity, participation, and involvement, and voting behavior and registration, including results of voter validation efforts.

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 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.

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

This dataset tracks annual overall school rank from 2012 to 2023 for Vicente Pales Anes

'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 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.

Replication code and data for "Anger and Declining Trust in Government in the American Electorate." There are three replication files: 1) a replication file for the analysis of the American National Election Studies (ANES) data; 2) a replication file for the experimental analysis; and, 3) a replication file for the sentiment analysis. Datasets posted here include the 2012 ANES, the experimental data ("aap.csv"), and a series of five datasets that contain the results of the sentiment analysis ("anger_only_results," "anger_politics_results," "salience_results," "control_results," and "angerid").

Voting Behavior: The 2012 Election is an instructional module designed to offer students the opportunity to analyze a dataset drawn from the 2012 American National Election Study (ANES). This instructional module is part of the SETUPS (Supplementary Empirical Teaching Units in Political Science) series and is featured online.

Documentation and data for replication in the three data sets analyzed in "It's Nothing Personal: The Decline of the Incumbency Advantage in U.S. House Elections." Contains data sets incorporating variables from the ANES Cumulative Data File, the 2012 ANES Time Series Study, and a set of aggregate data compiled by the author. Data are in Stata format and documentation describes the variables and gives the State commands necessary to replicate the data used in the figures in the paper.

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.

Data and code for four studies: 1) MTurk Experiment; 2) Content Analysis of 2008 Political Ads; 3) 2012 ANES-EGSS Survey; 4) 2012 ANES Times Series Survey

CONTEXT AND OBJECTIVE: Taking the outcome of mortality into consideration, there is controversy about the beneficial effects of neuraxial anesthesia for orthopedic surgery. The aim of this study was to compare the effectiveness and safety of neuraxial anesthesia versus general anesthesia for orthopedic surgery. DESIGN AND SETTING: Systematic review at Universidade Federal de Alagoas. METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (Issue 10, 2012), PubMed (1966 to November 2012), Lilacs (1982 to November 2012), SciELO, EMBASE (1974 to November 2012) and reference lists of the studies included. Only randomized controlled trials were included. RESULTS: Out of 5,032 titles and abstracts, 17 studies were included. There were no statistically significant differences in mortality (risk difference, RD: -0.01; 95% confidence interval, CI: -0.04 to 0.01; n = 1903), stroke (RD: 0.02; 95% CI: -0.04 to 0.08; n = 259), myocardial infarction (RD: -0.01; 95% CI: -0.04 to 0.02; n = 291), length of hospitalization (mean difference, -0.05; 95% CI: -0.69 to 0.58; n = 870), postoperative cognitive dysfunction (RD: 0.00; 95% CI: -0.04 to 0.05; n = 479) or pneumonia (odds ratio, 0.61; 95% CI: 0.25 to 1.49; n = 167). CONCLUSION: So far, the evidence available from the studies included is insufficient to prove that neuraxial anesthesia is more effective and safer than general anesthesia for orthopedic surgery. However, this systematic review does not rule out clinically important differences with regard to mortality, stroke, myocardial infarction, length of hospitalization, postoperative cognitive dysfunction or pneumonia.