The EUENGAGE Dataset collects data from the EUENGAGE Project, which ran from 2015 to 2018. For more information on the EUENGAGE Project, please visit the dedicated website: www.euengage.eu

It includes data from:

1. The EUENGAGE Mass and Businesspeople panel surveys, which were conducted in ten Member States of the European Union: Czech Republic, France, Germany, Greece, Italy, Netherlands, Poland, Portugal, Spain, and United Kingdom in 2016 and 2017.

2. The EUENGAGE elite surveys, which were conducted in the same ten Member States in 2016 and 2017.

3. The Pre- and Post- Deliberation surveys, which were conducted in October 2016, respectively before and after the online deliberation named “E-Voice”.

The EUENGAGE Dataset also includes Chapel Hill Expert Survey (CHES) data for party positioning. Values for each variable of CHES datasets have been matched to survey respondents’ voting intentions, party identifications (mass and B2B), or party of election (politicians).
For instance, for a respondent expressing the intention to vote for party XY (variable QG2_T1) in wave 1 (T1), there will be a set of CHES variables from CHES 2014 with values corresponding to the positioning of party XY on all the issues included in CHES 2014. Likewise, party preferences expressed in wave 2 (T4) will correspond to the values of party positioning measured by CHES 2017.

When using CHES data, please cite the following:

Polk, Jonathan, Jan Rovny, Ryan Bakker, Erica Edwards, Liesbet Hooghe, Seth Jolly, Jelle Koedam, Filip Kostelka, Gary Marks, Gijs Schumacher, Marco Steenbergen, Milada Vachudova and Marko Zilovic. 2017. "Explaining the salience of anti-elitism and reducing political corruption for political parties in Europe with the 2014 Chapel Hill Expert Survey data," Research & Politics (January-March): 1-9.

CHES codebooks are available here: https://www.chesdata.eu/2014-chapel-hill-expert-survey (CHES 2014) https://www.chesdata.eu/1999-2014-chapel-hill-expert-survey-ches-trend-file-1

Using survey vignettes and scaling techniques, we estimate common socio-cultural and European integration dimensions for political parties across the member states of the European Union. Previous research shows that party placements on the economic left-right dimension are cross-nationally comparable across the EU; however, the socio-cultural dimension is more complex, with different issues forming the core of the dimension in different countries. The 2014 wave of the Chapel Hill Expert Survey included anchoring vignettes which we use as “bridge votes” to place parties from different countries on a common liberal/authoritarian dimension and a separate common scale for European integration. We estimate the dimensions using the Bayesian Aldrich-McKelvey technique. The resulting scales offer cross-nationally comparable, interval-level measures of a party’s socio-cultural and EU ideological positions.

Existing research on political parties’ policy positions has traditionally relied on expert surveys and/or party manifesto data. More recently, Voting Advice Applications (VAAs) have been increasingly used as an additional method for locating parties in the policy space, with a closer focus on concrete policy issues. In this manuscript, we examine the reliability of party positions originated from a VAA, utilising the euandi longitudinal dataset, which provides data on positions of over 400 unique political parties across 28 EU member states from the European Parliament elections of 2009, 2014 and 2019. We cross-validate euandi data with the Comparative Manifesto Project (CMP) and the Chapel Hill Expert Survey (CHES). Our results attest the reliability of the euandi trend file vis-à-vis remaining data sources, demonstrating the validity of VAA-based methods to estimate the policy positions of European political parties. Convergence is especially high with CHES party placements. We also explore the sources of divergence in the estimation of policy positions across the three methods, finding little evidence of a systematic source of bias in the estimates between datasets. We conclude with an inventory of arguments in favour of party position measurements used by VAAs for the study of policy-making in European democracies.

This article investigates the link between attitude formation at the national and the supranational level of the European Union (EU). While the existing studies have provided strong evidence that attitudes towards national institutions fundamentally condition attitudes towards the EU, the mechanisms through which these spillovers occur are not clearly spelled out. Our main contribution is to theorize the complex ways in which the national politicization of the European integration process affects support for the EU by focusing on critical moments in the EU integration process and the electoral fortunes of the political parties doing the cuing. To test our theoretical claims, we employ multilevel models using six rounds of the European Social Survey combined with party-level data from Chapel Hill Expert Survey, and various country-level data. The analyses show that spillover effects are crucially conditioned by the level of politicization of European integration at the national level.

This PDF contains the results of a visual pavement condition assessment of the Town of Chapel Hill street system. The Town retained the consulting engineering firm LaBella Associates, P.C. to perform the assessment. The assessors traversed street segments and rated them based on eight common pavement surface distresses and their corresponding severity levels. The report lists streets based on Pavement Condition Ratings and categorizes them as serving either a low or high volume of traffic.

Expert surveys are a valuable, commonly used instrument to measure party positions. Some critics question the cross- national comparability of these measures, though, suggesting that experts may lack a common anchor for fundamental concepts such as economic left–right. Using anchoring vignettes in the 2010 Chapel Hill Expert Survey, we examine the extent of cross-national difference in expert ideological placements. We find limited evidence of cross-national differences; on the whole, our findings further establish expert surveys as a rigorous instrument for measuring party positions in a cross-national context.

This folder contains the csv, dta, and r data and syntax necessary to replicate the results of our paper.

Branding survey results for Chapel Hill, NC conducted by FlashVote

About this dataset

Context

The dataset tabulates the Chapel Hill population distribution across 18 age groups. It lists the population in each age group along with the percentage population relative of the total population for Chapel Hill. The dataset can be utilized to understand the population distribution of Chapel Hill by age. For example, using this dataset, we can identify the largest age group in Chapel Hill.

Key observations

The largest age group in Chapel Hill, NC was for the group of age 20-24 years with a population of 12,772 (20.97%), according to the 2021 American Community Survey. At the same time, the smallest age group in Chapel Hill, NC was the 80-84 years with a population of 757 (1.24%). Source: U.S. Census Bureau American Community Survey (ACS) 2017-2021 5-Year Estimates.

Content

When available, the data consists of estimates from the U.S. Census Bureau American Community Survey (ACS) 2017-2021 5-Year Estimates.

Age groups:

• Under 5 years
• 5 to 9 years
• 10 to 14 years
• 15 to 19 years
• 20 to 24 years
• 25 to 29 years
• 30 to 34 years
• 35 to 39 years
• 40 to 44 years
• 45 to 49 years
• 50 to 54 years
• 55 to 59 years
• 60 to 64 years
• 65 to 69 years
• 70 to 74 years
• 75 to 79 years
• 80 to 84 years
• 85 years and over

Variables / Data Columns

• Age Group: This column displays the age group in consideration
• Population: The population for the specific age group in the Chapel Hill is shown in this column.
• % of Total Population: This column displays the population of each age group as a proportion of Chapel Hill total population. Please note that the sum of all percentages may not equal one due to rounding of values.

Good to know

Margin of Error

Data in the dataset are based on the estimates and are subject to sampling variability and thus a margin of error. Neilsberg Research recommends using caution when presening these estimates in your research.

Custom data

If you do need custom data for any of your research project, report or presentation, you can contact our research staff at research@neilsberg.com for a feasibility of a custom tabulation on a fee-for-service basis.

Inspiration

Neilsberg Research Team curates, analyze and publishes demographics and economic data from a variety of public and proprietary sources, each of which often includes multiple surveys and programs. The large majority of Neilsberg Research aggregated datasets and insights is made available for free download at https://www.neilsberg.com/research/.

Recommended for further research

This dataset is a part of the main dataset for Chapel Hill Population by Age. You can refer the same here

This question is from the 2015 Chapel Hill Community Survey.

Which THREE of these items do you think should receive the most emphasis from Town leaders over the next TWO Years?

OVERALL SATISFACTION WITH TOWN SERVICES

1. Overall quality of services provided by the Town of Chapel Hill
2. Overallquality of public safety services (e.g., police, fire)
3. Overall quality of Town parks and recreation programs and facilities
4. Overall quality of customer service you receive from Town employees
5. Overall quality of Public Library services
6. Overall enforcement of Town codes/ordinances
7. Overall maintenance of major streets
8. Overall maintenance of neighborhood streets
9. Overall maintenance of Town buildings and facilities
10. Overall maintenance of public housing buildings and grounds
11. Overall flow of traffic and congestion management in the Town
12. Effectiveness of communication with public
13. Overall value for your tax dollars and fees
14. How well the Town is preparing for the future
15. How well the Town is managing change
16. Emergency preparedness
17. Quality of landscaping in parks, medians and other public areas
18. Quality of Chapel Hill Transit

Data has been geomasked to ensure privacy of the respondents.

Reference:

Catherine Lazorko, communications manager, at (919) 969-5055 or at info@townofchapelhill.org

Omnibus survey with background information and questions on the following topics: residential location, political participation, transportation, medical service, education policy, safety, police protection and recreation.

We evaluate whether ChatGPT can be used to estimate the ideological positions of parties in real time. Compared to other methods, ChatGPT can be used at all times, with minimal cost, no technical skills, and for all parties, including new ones. In a validation exercise, we asked ChatGPT and a group of local experts to simultaneously estimate the positions of French political parties in the context of the 2024 European election on a series of issues from the Chapel Hill Expert Survey. We find that ChatGPT’s estimations are generally close to those of the expert survey, especially for major and salient political issues (left-right, European integration, immigration). However, it provides less accurate estimates on fringe issues (free market, asylum policies, urban-rural interests) and specific party characteristics (within-party division, issue blurring). Thus, ChatGPT shows strong potential as an alternative data source for estimating parties' positions but should be used with caution.

The mailed survey was administered by ETC Institute using a random sample of households in the Town of Chapel Hill.

The 2024 European Election Study (EES) Voter Study is a post-election study conducted in all 27 European Union member states after the elections to the European Parliament were held between June 6 and 9, 2024. As in the previous EES 2019 round, data was predominantly collected via online interviews sampled from access panel databases. In each member state, a minimum of 1,000 interviews were conducted (with the exception of Cyprus, Luxembourg and Malta, where 500 interviews were envisaged). As in previous EES rounds, the questionnaire includes core traditional items included in previous EES voter studies (1989 - 2019), thus allowing for over-time as well as cross-national analysis. The study covers items on electoral behavior, such as questions on turnout and vote choice at the European and previous national elections, party preferences, propensity to vote questions, government approval, general political attitudes, interest in politics, demographics such as gender, age, education, religion etc. Innovations in the EES 2024 include questions about disinformation in the media regarding the EP election, military assistance to Ukraine, and democratic governance. The question on attitudes on the environment was replaced with a question on attitudes on climate change. To capture the debates on feminism, a well-tested question on gender roles was included. As in the case of the EES Study 2014 and 2019 Voter Studies, a number of the political attitude questions have the same wording as, and can hence be linked with, the Chapel Hill Expert Survey. An additional innovation is the offer of NUTS III-level regional information, which, after anonymization checks, will be offered at a later stage. Non-probability: QuotaNonprobability.Quota Nicht-Wahrscheinlichkeitsauswahl: QuotenstichprobeNonprobability.Quota Self-administered questionnaire: Web-based (CAWI)SelfAdministeredQuestionnaire.CAWI

About this dataset

Context

The dataset tabulates the New Chapel Hill population distribution across 18 age groups. It lists the population in each age group along with the percentage population relative of the total population for New Chapel Hill. The dataset can be utilized to understand the population distribution of New Chapel Hill by age. For example, using this dataset, we can identify the largest age group in New Chapel Hill.

Key observations

The largest age group in New Chapel Hill, TX was for the group of age 0-4 years with a population of 73 (9.63%), according to the 2021 American Community Survey. At the same time, the smallest age group in New Chapel Hill, TX was the 85+ years with a population of 7 (0.92%). Source: U.S. Census Bureau American Community Survey (ACS) 2017-2021 5-Year Estimates.

Content

When available, the data consists of estimates from the U.S. Census Bureau American Community Survey (ACS) 2017-2021 5-Year Estimates.

Age groups:

• Under 5 years
• 5 to 9 years
• 10 to 14 years
• 15 to 19 years
• 20 to 24 years
• 25 to 29 years
• 30 to 34 years
• 35 to 39 years
• 40 to 44 years
• 45 to 49 years
• 50 to 54 years
• 55 to 59 years
• 60 to 64 years
• 65 to 69 years
• 70 to 74 years
• 75 to 79 years
• 80 to 84 years
• 85 years and over

Variables / Data Columns

• Age Group: This column displays the age group in consideration
• Population: The population for the specific age group in the New Chapel Hill is shown in this column.
• % of Total Population: This column displays the population of each age group as a proportion of New Chapel Hill total population. Please note that the sum of all percentages may not equal one due to rounding of values.

Good to know

Margin of Error

Data in the dataset are based on the estimates and are subject to sampling variability and thus a margin of error. Neilsberg Research recommends using caution when presening these estimates in your research.

Custom data

If you do need custom data for any of your research project, report or presentation, you can contact our research staff at research@neilsberg.com for a feasibility of a custom tabulation on a fee-for-service basis.

Inspiration

Neilsberg Research Team curates, analyze and publishes demographics and economic data from a variety of public and proprietary sources, each of which often includes multiple surveys and programs. The large majority of Neilsberg Research aggregated datasets and insights is made available for free download at https://www.neilsberg.com/research/.

Recommended for further research

This dataset is a part of the main dataset for New Chapel Hill Population by Age. You can refer the same here

description:

This question is from the 2015 Chapel Hill Community Survey.

Using a scale of 1 to 5 where 5 means Very Satisfied and 1 means Very Dissatisfied, residents were asked to rate their satisfaction with each of the services listed below.

This is for question 5.

Q5: PUBLIC SAFETY Police Services

Data has been geomasked to ensure privacy of the respondents.

This question is from the 2015 Chapel Hill Community Survey.

Using a scale of 1 to 5 where 5 means Very Satisfied and 1 means Very Dissatisfied, residents were asked to rate their satisfaction with each of the services listed below.

This is for question 5.

Q5: PUBLIC SAFETY Police Services

Data has been geomasked to ensure privacy of the respondents.

Despite many innovative ideas generated in response to COVID-19, few studies have examined community preferences for these ideas. Our study aimed to determine university community members’ preferences for three novel ideas identified through a crowdsourcing open call at the University of North Carolina (UNC) for making campus safer in the pandemic, as compared to existing (i.e. pre-COVID-19) resources. An online survey was conducted from March 30, 2021 – May 6, 2021. Survey participants included UNC students, staff, faculty, and others. The online survey was distributed using UNC’s mass email listserv and research directory, departmental listservs, and student text groups. Collected data included participant demographics, COVID-19 prevention behaviors, preferences for finalist ideas vs. existing resources in three domains (graduate student supports, campus tours, and online learning), and interest in volunteering with finalist teams. In total 437 survey responses were received from 228 (52%) staff, 119 (27%) students, 78 (18%) faculty, and 12 (3%) others. Most participants were older than age 30 years (309; 71%), women (332, 78%), and white (363, 83.1%). Five participants (1%) were gender minorities, 66 (15%) identified as racial/ethnic minorities, and 46 (10%) had a disability. Most participants preferred the finalist idea for a virtual campus tour of UNC’s lesser-known history compared to the existing campus tour (52.2% vs. 16.0%). For graduate student supports, 41.4% of participants indicated no preference between the finalist idea and existing supports; for online learning resources, the existing resource was preferred compared to the finalist idea (41.6% vs. 30.4%). Most participants agreed that finalists’ ideas would have a positive impact on campus safety during COVID-19 (81.2%, 79.6%, and 79.2% for finalist ideas 1, 2 and 3 respectively). 61 (14.1%) participants indicated interest in volunteering with finalist teams. Together these findings contribute to the development and implementation of community-engaged crowdsourced campus safety interventions during COVID-19. Methods An online survey was distributed to members of the UNC Chapel Hill community using multiple digital strategies, including a mass informational email system (UNC’s Mass Mail system), circulation on 12 departmental listservs, UNC GroupMe text messages, and the Research For Me @ UNC database. Survey responses were collected via a Qualtrics survey form. Survey responses were collected online from March 30, 2021 to May 6, 2021. Survey participants completed electronic informed consent prior to answering the survey. All survey response data collected from participants were compiled using Microsoft Excel. Data collected include demographic information of participants, questions about COVID-19-related behaviors, and preferences for crowdsourced strategies for enhancing campus safety during the pandemic vs. existing comparable resources at UNC.

Graph and download economic data for Employed Persons in Durham-Chapel Hill, NC (MSA) (LAUMT372050000000005) from Jan 1990 to Jun 2025 about Durham, NC, household survey, personal, employment, and USA.

This is the 1979 survey of student opinion conducted annually by the sociology department by SOC 86-87.

Variables include: community, college expenses, housing, roommates, academics, honor code, media use, alcohol use, and demographics.

This is the 6th in a series of current interest surveys conducted by the SOC 86-87 class.Variables include: course changes, honor code, transportation, energy, and presidential preference.