As of January 2022, around 283 percent of Germans had very little trust in their government regarding the coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic. 4.5 percent had a lot of trust. The figures are based on a survey conducted in Germany throughout 2020, 2021 and 2022. Generally, trust in the government among the population has wavered and leaned towards decreasing during the specified time period.

Employing new and original survey data collected in three waves (May and November 2020 as well as May 2021) in Germany, this paper studies the dynamics of individual-level support for additional health care spending. A first major finding is that, so far, health care spending preferences have not radically changed during the Covid-19 pandemic, at least at the aggregate level. A more detailed analysis reveals, secondly, that individual-level support for additional spending on health care is strongly conditioned by performance perceptions and, to a lesser extent, general political trust. Citizens who regard the system as badly (well) prepared to cope with the crisis are more likely to support (oppose) additional spending. Higher levels of political trust are also positively associated with spending support, but to a lesser degree. The paper concludes by discussing the implications of these findings for policy-making and welfare state politics in the post-pandemic era.

This data set provides the data and Stata code used for the article. A detailed description of the variables is available from the corresponding publication. Please cite the paper if you use the data.

The PERITIA survey is the first major cross-national survey of public trust in expertise used to inform policy making on climate change and COVID-19.

While the main focus is on trust in national governments and scientists, the survey also contains measures capturing trust in a wide range of policy actors, including the European Commission, scientists in public, private and HE settings, climate charities and NGOs, news, media and social media organisations, as well as advisory groups such as the World Health Organization and the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC).

The data were collected online in January 2022 as part of the EC-funded Policy Expertise and Trust (PERITIA) study in Germany, Ireland, Italy, Norway, Poland and the United Kingdom. In Armenia CATI (Computer Assistant Telephone Interview) was used to collect data in February-May 2022.

The study was commissioned by the Federal Press Office.

How does enforcement affect citizens’ support for anti-Covid-19 policies? A survey conducted with 4,799 respondents towards the end of the first lockdown in Germany suggests that a substantial share of the population will support measures more under voluntary than under enforced implementation. Negative responses to enforcement – termed control aversion – vary across the nature of the policy intervention (e.g. they are rare for masks and frequent for vaccination and a cell phone tracing app) and are less common among those with greater trust in the government and the information it provides, and among those who were brought up under the coercive regime of East Germany.

This data set provides the data and Stata code used for the article. A detailed description of the variables is available from the corresponding publication. Please cite my paper if you use the data.

Political trust is one aspect that might be affected by the COVID-19 pandemic and the strict government-implemented measures to fight the virus. Previous studies report an increase in political trust at the onset of the pandemic in several European countries, followed by a marginal decline over the further course of the pandemic. However, it is unclear how political trust changes among first and second generation migrants in Germany compared to natives throughout the pandemic. To address this question, we use data from the adult cohort of the German National Educational Panel Study (NEPS) at one measurement point before, and two during the pandemic. Consistent with previous studies, our data show that pre-pandemic, political trust is higher among first generation migrants than among second generation migrants and natives. We examine how these previous differences evolve throughout the pandemic. Our results indicate that political trust increases significantly only for natives and second generation migrants, but not for first generation migrants at the beginning of the pandemic. Later in the first year of the pandemic, political trust is higher than pre-pandemic for all groups. Neither vulnerabilities nor sociodemographic control variables can explain the differences between the groups.

On behalf of the Press and Information Office of the Federal Government, the polling institute Forschungsgruppe Wahlen conducted a representative survey in March 2021 to examine respondents´ trust in the state and in society. The current survey wave builds on two survey waves in April 2020 and June/July 2020. The current survey focused on respondents´ attitudes towards the state and their trust in institutions and in actors, their assessment of the Corona measures and their expectations in the Corona crisis (COVID-19). The image of society, assessments of cohesion during the pandemic and experiences during the Corona crisis were also recorded.
Greatest personal burden or restriction in the context of the Corona crisis; further great burden or restriction; trust in institutions (courts, science and research, churches, police, federal government, politicians, parties, media); satisfaction with democracy; assessment of democracy as a form of government; social lines of conflict; lines of conflict between external parties; assessment of leaders in Germany; attitudes towards the role of the state in the Corona crisis; assessment of individual measures to combat the pandemic; responsibilities in the Corona crisis (federal government/ state/ city); assessment of the support measures of the federal government (for companies and businesses, for employees in health and care facilities, to protect the health of the population, for the economic situation of the population); assessment of people´s behaviour in the pandemic; assessment of people´s behaviour in the case of recommendations for action instead of rules; feeling of restriction due to the Corona crisis and the measures associated with it; effects on the financial situation; experiences with a health authority (e.g. because of a Corona test), with an employment agency, authorities, police/regulation office in the context of the Corona crisis; evaluation of these experiences; assessment of cohesion in society during the Corona crisis and afterwards; assessment of cohesion in personal surroundings; party sympathy; satisfaction with life; optimism about the future; trust in humanity.

Demography: sex; age; education: school-leaving qualification or school-leaving qualification aspired to; university degree; occupation; job security; type of occupation; professional position; public service; household size; number of persons in household aged 18 and over; German citizenship.

Additionally coded were: Respondent ID; federal state; Berlin East/West; city size; weighting factors (with and without linear correction); information for dual-frame weighting (reached via mobile or landline).

The representative survey examines the trust of the German-speaking population aged 18 and over in the state and society during the Corona crisis (COVID-19). The survey wave conducted in June/July builds on a first survey wave in April 2020.

The survey focused on the respondents´ attitudes towards the state and trust in institutions, towards actors, measures and expectations in the Corona crisis (COVID-19), their image of society and assessment of cohesion, their personal state of mind and experiences in the Corona crisis as well as media use.

Topics: Greatest personal burden or restriction due to the Corona crisis (1. naming, 2. naming); trust in institutions (courts, science and research, churches, police, federal government, politicians, media); satisfaction with democracy; democracy as the best form of government for Germany; attitude towards the welfare state principle; social lines of conflict: strength of conflicts between different social groups (rich and poor, employers and employees, young and old, foreigners and Germans, East Germans and West Germans, women and men); strength of conflicts between left-wing political forces and right-wing political forces in Germany; right persons in leading positions in Germany; agreement with statements about the state and politics (the state is interfering too much in our lives in the Corona crisis, citizens are well informed by politics about the current measures in the Corona crisis, politics in Germany is doing most things right in dealing with the Corona crisis, the state´s financial aid is distributed fairly overall, people no longer know which measures and rules are currently in place); advocacy of separate regulations in the Corona crisis by federal states, counties and independent cities vs. rather nationwide uniform regulations; assessment of the federal government´s support measures for companies and businesses, for employees in health and care facilities, to protect the health of the population as well as for the economic situation of the population; assessment of the various measures and regulations to limit the Corona pandemic (excessive, not tough enough, just right); assessment of others´ judgement of the Corona measures; expectation of a second wave with high infection figures; consequences for public life in the event of a second wave; extent of perceived restrictions in one´s own life due to the Corona crisis; effects of the Corona crisis on one´s own financial situation; personal experience with authorities and institutions in the context of the Corona crisis (health authorities, employment agency, authorities responsible for subsidies and support from the economy, police or public order office in the case of a check to ensure compliance with the Corona measures) and evaluation of this experience; assessment of the cohesion in society in the context of the Corona crisis; expected continuation of the greater or lesser cohesion in society even in the case of a second wave of Corona measures; assessment of the cohesion in society in the context of the Corona crisis; media use: frequency of use of TV, radio and newspapers for news and information about Corona; assessment of this information as rather correct or rather not correct; party sympathy; life satisfaction; optimism about the future.

Demography: sex; age (classified); education: school-leaving qualification or intended school-leaving qualification; university degree; occupation; job security; system-relevant occupation (police, security service, fire brigade, in the health sector or similar); occupational status; household size; number of persons in the household aged 18 and over; German citizenship.

Additionally coded were: Respondent ID; federal state; Berlin East/West; city size; weighting factors; information for dual-frame weighting: frame: reached via mobile or fixed network; number of fixed network numbers and mobile numbers via which one can be reached; mobile only: reached at home or elsewhere; reached via an additional fixed network number (home zone or home option) on the mobile phone; fixed network connection in the household; additional mobile phone number; fixed network only: mobile phone ownership.

Survey experiments are an important tool to measure policy preferences. Researchers often rely on the random assignment of policy attribute levels to estimate different types of average marginal effects. Yet, researchers are often interested in how respondents trade-off different policy dimensions. We use a conjoint experiment administered to more than 10,000 respondents in Germany, to study preferences over personal freedoms and public welfare during the COVID-19 crisis. Using a pre-registered structural model, we estimate policy ideal points and indifference curves to assess the conditions under which citizens are willing to sacrifice freedoms in the interest of public well-being. We document broad willingness to accept restrictions on rights alongside sharp heterogeneity with respect to vaccination status. The majority of citizens are vaccinated and strongly support limitations on freedoms in response to extreme conditions—especially when the vaccinated them- selves are exempted from these limitations. The unvaccinated minority prefers no restrictions on freedoms regardless of the severity of the pandemic. These policy packages also matter for reported trust in government, in opposite ways for vaccinated and unvaccinated citizens.

The crisis barometer on the COVID-19 pandemic in Germany was conducted by USUMA on behalf of the Konrad Adenauer Foundation. During the survey period from 30.03.2020 to 04.07.2020, 4228 respondents aged 18 and over living in private households in Germany were interviewed by telephone (CATI) on the following topics: pessimism/optimism; trust in institutions, crisis competence of political parties, effects of the Corona crisis, reception of news about Corona, Corona disease, Sunday question. Respondents were selected through multi-stage random sampling from an ADM selection frame including landline and mobile numbers (dual-frame sampling). The study was conducted week-by-week as a rolling cross-section survey.

On behalf of the Press and Information Office of the Federal Government, the opinion research institute forsa has regularly conducted representative population surveys on the subject of the ´Corona crisis´ (COVID-19) from calendar week 12/2020. The individual question areas were adapted according to the survey period. The present study is the overall cumulation of the 48 individual waves.
Interest in information on the Corona crisis; interest in information on various topics (climate protection, sustainability, digitization, German EU Council presidency, flight and asylum, pension policy, European policy and expansion of the mobile communications network); concerns about infection with the corona virus (self and family members or friends); concerns about infecting other people themselves; other worries in connection with the corona virus (open question); self-assessment of being informed about various aspects concerning the current corona crisis (protection against infection, behavior in case of infection, measures taken by the federal government to contain the corona virus, organizing everyday life with the current restrictions, behavior when feeling ill, measures taken by the federal state to contain the corona virus); information behavior: Media used in the last four weeks for information on the corona crisis; assessment of current political measures to contain the Corona virus (appropriate, go too far or do not go far enough); current place of work: workplace away from home, at home in home office, currently not at all (e.g., due to lack of orders, short-time work); credibility of information provided by the federal government on the Corona crisis; reasons for assessing information provided by the federal government on the Corona crisis as less credible or not credible at all (open question); evaluation of the scope of reports and information on the Corona crisis; willingness to install a Corona warning app on a smartphone to track contacts of Corona-infected people; reasons why the respondent would definitely not use such an app (open question); importance of various conditions for the use of this app (compliance with legal rules on data protection, automatic deletion of stored contacts with other people after two weeks, anonymity, no storage of location but only in whose vicinity, majority of the population also uses this app, no use of the app´s data to avoid fines for violations e. g. , to impose quarantine requirements, no behavioral control following notification of contact with a Corona-infected person, receiving useful information about the Corona virus); trust in various institutions as possible publishers of a Corona warning app (Federal Ministry of Health, Robert Koch Institute, municipal health department, a research institution (e.g. university), a company based in Germany, a global company such as Google or Apple); extent of perceived personal constraints due to the Corona crisis and related policies; assessment of various statements related to policy measures to contain the Corona virus as likely (the federal government exaggerates the risk posed by the Corona virus to public health, the Corona virus was intentionally used in circulation, if there is a Corona vaccine, everyone in Germany will be allowed to voluntarily decide whether to get vaccinated, if there is an app to track chains of infection, everyone in Germany will be allowed to voluntarily decide whether to install this app or to the use of the Corona warning app will remain voluntary, wearing mouth-nose masks in supermarkets or public transport is harmful to health); greatest exposure or restriction in the context of the Corona crisis (open question); knowledge of the Corona warning app published by the German government and the Robert Koch Institute for tracking risk encounters of Corona infected persons; installation of the Corona warning app on the smartphone; Bluetooth function switched on while on the move so that risk encounters could be registered; reasons why the Corona warning app has not yet been installed; likelihood of future use of the Corona warning app; Corona warning app installed and used on smartphone in recent weeks, app installed but deleted in the meantime or never installed; reasons why the Corona warning app was deleted again; reasons why the Corona warning app has not yet been installed; basic willingness to be vaccinated against the Corona virus as soon as a vaccine is approved in Germany or as soon as it is one´s turn to be vaccinated. as soon as it is one´s own turn; reasons why the respondent would (probably) not get vaccinated against the Corona virus; assessment of the current reaction of politics to the currently changing infection figures (reacts just right, too slowly or too hastily); expectation of further increasing infection figures in the fall and winter months; expectations regarding the restriction of public life as infection numbers rise (similarly restricted as in spring, less...

The survey focused on the attitudes of the respondents to the state and trust in institutions, to actors and measures in the corona crisis (COVID-19), their social image and current attitudes, their personal well-being and experiences in the corona crisis, and media use.

Topics: Greatest personal burden or restriction due to the corona crisis (1. mention, 2. mention); institutional trust (courts, science and research, churches, police, federal government, politicians, parties); satisfaction with democracy; opinion on democracy in Germany as the best form of government; attitude towards the principle of the welfare state; social conflict lines: strength of conflicts between different social groups (rich and poor, employers and employees, young and old, foreigners and Germans, East Germans and West Germans, women and men); right people in leading positions in Germany; agreement on statements about the state and politics (the state gets too involved in our lives in the corona crisis, citizens are well informed by politicians about the current measures in the corona crisis, concerns that many measures and restrictions will not be withdrawn after the corona crisis, politicians in Germany do most things right in coping with the corona crisis); assessment of the federal government´s cooperation with states and municipalities; opinion on the scope of laws and regulations because of the corona crisis; assessment of the support measures of the Federal Government for companies and businesses, for employees in health and care facilities, for the protection of the health of the population as well as for the economic situation of the population; extent of the perceived restriction in one´s own life due to the corona crisis; effects of the corona crisis on one´s own economic situation; personal experience with authorities and institutions in the context of the corona crisis (health authority, employment agency, authorities responsible for subsidies and support services for the economy, police or public order office in the event of an inspection to ensure compliance with the corona measures) and evaluation of this experience; assessment of cohesion in society in the context of the corona crisis; expected continuation of the greater or greater or lesser cohesion in society even after the corona crisis; assessment of the behaviour of people in the corona crisis as rather reasonable or rather unreasonable; assessment of the behaviour of people if there were only recommendations instead of rules and regulations by the state; sources of information and frequency of media use for news and information on Corona (television, radio or newspaper, official pages e.g. of the German government or the Robert Koch Institute on the Internet, social networks such as Facebook or Twitter); assessment of this information as rather correct or rather not correct; frequency of conversations with family and friends about Corona; assessment of the information about Corona in these conversations as rather correct or rather not correct; party sympathy; life satisfaction; optimism about the future.

Demography: sex; age (classified); education: school leaving certificate or intended school leaving certificate; university degree; occupation; job security; system-relevant activity; occupational status; household size; number of persons in household aged 18 and over; German citizenship.

Additionally coded: respondent ID; federal state; Berlin East/West; city size; weighting factors; information for dual-frame weighting: Frame: reached via mobile or fixed network; number of fixed and mobile phone numbers via which one can be reached; only mobile: reached at home or elsewhere; reached via an additional fixed network number (homezone or home option) on the mobile phone; fixed network connection in the household; additional mobile phone number; only fixed network: mobile phone ownership.

The aim of the special survey of the GESIS panel on the outbreak of the corona virus SARS-CoV-2 in Germany was to collect timely data on the effects of the corona crisis on people´s daily lives. The study focused on questions of risk perception, risk minimization measures, evaluation of political measures and their compliance, trust in politics and institutions, changed employment situation, childcare obligations, and media consumption. Due to the need for timely data collection, only the GESIS panel sub-sample of online respondents was invited (about three quarters of the sample). Since, due to time constraints, respondents could only participate in the online survey but not by mail, the results cannot be easily transferred to the overall population. Further longitudinal surveys on Covid-19 with the entire sample of the GESIS panel are planned for 2020.

Topics: Risk perception: Probability of events related to corona infection in the next two months (self, infection of a person from close social surrondings, hospital treatment, quarantine measures regardless of whether infected or not, infecting other people)

Risk minimization: risk minimization measures taken in the last seven days (avoided certain (busy) places, kept minimum distance to other people, adapted school or work situation, quarantine due to symptoms or without symptoms, washed hands more often, used disinfectant, stocks increased, reduced social interactions, worn face mask, other, none of these measures).

Evaluation of the effectiveness of various policy measures to combat the further spread of corona virus (closure of day-care centres, kindergartens and schools, closure of sports facilities, closure of bars, cafés and restaurants, closure of all shops except supermarkets and pharmacies, ban on visiting hospitals, nursing homes and old people´s homes, curfew for persons aged 70 and over or people with health problems or for anyone not working in the health sector or other critical professions (except for basic purchases and urgent medical care).

Curfew compliance or refusal: Willingness to obey a curfew vs. refusal; reasons for the compliance with curfew (social duty, fear of punishment, protection against infection, fear of infecting others (loved ones, infecting others in general, a risk group); reasons for refusal of curfew (restrictions too drastic or not justified, other obligations, does not stop the spread, not affected by the outbreak, boring at home, will not be punished).

Evaluation of the effectiveness of various government measures (medical care, restrictions on social life such as closure of public facilities and businesses, reduction of economic damage, communication with the population).

Trust in politics and institutions with regard to dealing with the coronavirus (physician, local health authority, local and municipal administration, Robert Koch Institute (RKI), Federal Government, German Chancellor, Ministry of Health, World Health Organization (WHO), scientists).

Changed employment situation: employment status at the beginning of March; change in occupational situation since the spread of coronavirus: dependent employees: number of hours reduced, number of hours increased, more home office, leave of absence with/ without continued wage payment , fired, no change; self-employed: working hours reduced, working hours increased, more home office, revenue decreased, revenue increased, company temporarily closed by the authorities, company temporarily voluntarily closed, financial hardship, company permanently closed or insolvent, no change.

Childcare: children under 12 in the household; organisation of childcare during the closure of day-care centres, kindergartens and schools (staying at home, partner stays at home, older siblings take care, grandparents are watching, etc.)

Media consumption on Corona: information sources used for Corona (e.g. nationwide public or private television or radio, local public or private television or radio, national newspapers or local newspapers, Facebook, other social media, personal conversations with friends and family, other, do not inform myself on the subject); frequency of Facebook usage; information about Corona obtained from regional Facebook page or regional Facebook group.

Demography: sex; age (categorized); education (categorized); intention to vote and choice of party (Sunday question); Left-right self-assessment; marital status; size of household.

Additionally coded: Respondent ID;...