Abstract

The COVID-19 web survey has been utilized to track American attitudes on topics related to the COVID-19 pandemic, including well-being. The survey began fielding on March 13, 2020, with daily random samples of U.S. adults, aged 18 and older, who are members of the Gallup Panel. Approximately 1,200 daily completes were collected from March 13 through April 26, 2020. From April 27 to August 16, 2020, approximately 500 daily completes were collected. Starting August 17, 2020, the survey moved from daily surveying to a survey conducted one time per month over a two-week field period (typically the last two weeks of the month). Beginning in 2022, the COVID survey moved to quarterly data collection.

The Gallup Panel COVID-19 Survey table includes survey responses from March 2020 through Q1 2023. Starting in Q2 2023, the original COVID-19 survey was narrowed down to serve as a wellbeing-focused survey (see Gallup Panel Wellbeing Survey table).

Methodology

Results for this Gallup poll are based on self-administered web surveys conducted with a random sample of U.S. adults aged 18 and older, who are members of the Gallup Panel. The survey was conducted in English. Individuals without Internet access were not covered by this study.

The Gallup Panel is a probability-based, nationally representative panel of U.S. adults. Members are randomly selected using random-digit-dial phone interviews that cover landline and cellphones and address-based sampling methods. The Gallup Panel is not an opt-in panel.

Gallup weights the obtained samples each day to adjust for the probability of select and to correct for nonresponse bias. Nonresponse adjustments are made by adjusting the sample to match the national demographics of gender, age, race, Hispanic ethnicity, education and region. Demographic weighting targets are based on the most recent Current Population Survey figures for the aged-18-and-older U.S. population. Respondents receive a small post-paid incentive of $1 incentive for completing the survey.

Bulk Data Access

Data access is required to view this section.

Contains Gallup data from countries that are home to more than 98% of the world's population through a state-of-the-art Web-based portal. Gallup Analytics puts Gallup's best global intelligence in users' hands to help them better understand the strengths and challenges of the world's countries and regions. Users can access Gallup's U.S. Daily tracking and World Poll data to compare residents' responses region by region and nation by nation to questions on topics such as economic conditions, government and business, health and wellbeing, infrastructure, and education.

The Gallup Analytics Database is accessed through the Cornell University Libraries here. In addition, a CUL subscription also allows access to the Gallup Respondent Level Data. For access please refer to the documentation below and then request the variables you need here.

Before requesting data from the World Poll, please see the Getting Started guide and the Worldwide Research Methodology and Codebook (You will need to request access). The Codebook will give you information about all available variables in the datasets. There are other guides available as well in the google folder. You can also access information about questions asked and variables using the Gallup World Poll Reference Tool. You will need to create your user account to access the tool. This will only give you access to information about the questions asked and variables. It will not give you access to the data.

For further documentation and information see this site from New York University Libraries. The Gallup documentation for the World Poll methodology is also available under the Data and Documentation tab.

In addition to the World Poll and Daily Tracking Poll, also available are the Gallup Covid-19 Survey, Gallup Poll Social Series Surveys, Race Relations Survey, Confidence in Institutions Survey, Honesty and Ethics in Professions Survey, and Religion Battery.

The process for getting access to respondent-level data from the Gallup U.S. Daily Tracking is similar to the World Poll Survey. There is no comparable discovery tool for U.S. Daily Tracking poll questions, however. Users need to consult the codebooks and available variables across years.

The COVID-19 web survey began on March 13, 2020 with daily random samples of U.S. adults, aged 18 and older who are members of the Gallup Panel. Before requesting data, please see the Gallup Panel COVID-19 Survey Methodology and Codebook.

The Gallup Poll Social Series (GPSS) dataset is a set of public opinion surveys designed to monitor U.S. adults’ views on numerous social, economic, and political topics. More information is available on the Gallup website: https://www.gallup.com/175307/gallup-poll-social-series-methodology.aspx As each month has a unique codebook, contact CCSS-ResearchSupport@cornell.edu to discuss your interests and start the data request process.

Starting in 1973, Gallup started measuring the confidence level in several US institutions like Congress, Presidency, Supreme Court, Police, etc. The included dataset includes data beginning in 1973 and data is collected once per year. Users should consult the list of available variables.

The Race Relations Poll includes topics that were previously represented in the GPSS Minority Relations Survey that ran through 2016. The Race Relations Survey was conducted November 2018. Users should consult the codebook for this poll before making their request.

The Honesty and Ethics in Professions Survey – Starting in 1976, Gallup started measuring US perceptions of the honesty and ethics of a list of professions. The included dataset was added to the collection in March 2023 and includes data ranging from 1976-2022. Documentation for this collection is located here and will require you to request access.

Religion Battery: Consolidated list of items focused on religion in the US from 1999-2022. Documentation for this collection is located here and will require you to request access.

Between March 2020 and May 2022, Gallup conducted a web survey on members of the Gallup Panel, a nationally representative sample of U.S. adults aged 18 and above, to assess attitudes and behaviors related to the COVID-19 pandemic.

From March 13 through April 26, 2020, approximately 1,200 responses were collected daily from a randomly selected sample of panel members. From April 27 to August 16, 2020, approximately 500 responses were collected daily. Between August 17, 2020 and December 5, 2021, the survey was conducted monthly with a two-week response period. From January to May 2022, the survey was conducted quarterly. Survey responses have been adjusted for the probability of selection and for nonresponse, with weights derived from data on gender, age, race, Hispanic ethnicity, education and region as reported in the latest Current Population Survey.

Abstract

Gallup Worldwide Research continually surveys residents in more than 150 countries, representing more than 98% of the world's adult population, using randomly selected, nationally representative samples. Gallup typically surveys 1,000 individuals in each country, using a standard set of core questions that has been translated into the major languages of the respective country. In some regions, supplemental questions are asked in addition to core questions. Face-to-face interviews are approximately 1 hour, while telephone interviews are about 30 minutes. In many countries, the survey is conducted once per year, and fieldwork is generally completed in two to four weeks. The Country Dataset Details spreadsheet displays each country's sample size, month/year of the data collection, mode of interviewing, languages employed, design effect, margin of error, and details about sample coverage.

Gallup is entirely responsible for the management, design, and control of Gallup Worldwide Research. For the past 70 years, Gallup has been committed to the principle that accurately collecting and disseminating the opinions and aspirations of people around the globe is vital to understanding our world. Gallup's mission is to provide information in an objective, reliable, and scientifically grounded manner. Gallup is not associated with any political orientation, party, or advocacy group and does not accept partisan entities as clients. Any individual, institution, or governmental agency may access the Gallup Worldwide Research regardless of nationality. The identities of clients and all surveyed respondents will remain confidential.

Kind of data

Sample survey data [ssd]

Sampling procedure

SAMPLING AND DATA COLLECTION METHODOLOGY With some exceptions, all samples are probability based and nationally representative of the resident population aged 15 and older. The coverage area is the entire country including rural areas, and the sampling frame represents the entire civilian, non-institutionalized, aged 15 and older population of the entire country. Exceptions include areas where the safety of interviewing staff is threatened, scarcely populated islands in some countries, and areas that interviewers can reach only by foot, animal, or small boat.

Telephone surveys are used in countries where telephone coverage represents at least 80% of the population or is the customary survey methodology (see the Country Dataset Details for detailed information for each country). In Central and Eastern Europe, as well as in the developing world, including much of Latin America, the former Soviet Union countries, nearly all of Asia, the Middle East, and Africa, an area frame design is used for face-to-face interviewing.

The typical Gallup Worldwide Research survey includes at least 1,000 surveys of individuals. In some countries, oversamples are collected in major cities or areas of special interest. Additionally, in some large countries, such as China and Russia, sample sizes of at least 2,000 are collected. Although rare, in some instances the sample size is between 500 and 1,000. See the Country Dataset Details for detailed information for each country.

FACE-TO-FACE SURVEY DESIGN

FIRST STAGE In countries where face-to-face surveys are conducted, the first stage of sampling is the identification of 100 to 135 ultimate clusters (Sampling Units), consisting of clusters of households. Sampling units are stratified by population size and or geography and clustering is achieved through one or more stages of sampling. Where population information is available, sample selection is based on probabilities proportional to population size, otherwise simple random sampling is used. Samples are drawn independent of any samples drawn for surveys conducted in previous years.

There are two methods for sample stratification:

METHOD 1: The sample is stratified into 100 to 125 ultimate clusters drawn proportional to the national population, using the following strata: 1) Areas with population of at least 1 million 2) Areas 500,000-999,999 3) Areas 100,000-499,999 4) Areas 50,000-99,999 5) Areas 10,000-49,999 6) Areas with less than 10,000

The strata could include additional stratum to reflect populations that exceed 1 million as well as areas with populations less than 10,000. Worldwide Research Methodology and Codebook Copyright © 2008-2012 Gallup, Inc. All rights reserved. 8

METHOD 2:

A multi-stage design is used. The country is first stratified by large geographic units, and then by smaller units within geography. A minimum of 33 Primary Sampling Units (PSUs), which are first stage sampling units, are selected. The sample design results in 100 to 125 ultimate clusters.

SECOND STAGE

Random route procedures are used to select sampled households. Unless an outright refusal occurs, interviewers make up to three attempts to survey the sampled household. To increase the probability of contact and completion, attempts are made at different times of the day, and where possible, on different days. If an interviewer cannot obtain an interview at the initial sampled household, he or she uses a simple substitution method. Refer to Appendix C for a more in-depth description of random route procedures.

THIRD STAGE

Respondents are randomly selected within the selected households. Interviewers list all eligible household members and their ages or birthdays. The respondent is selected by means of the Kish grid (refer to Appendix C) in countries where face-to-face interviewing is used. The interview does not inform the person who answers the door of the selection criteria until after the respondent has been identified. In a few Middle East and Asian countries where cultural restrictions dictate gender matching, respondents are randomly selected using the Kish grid from among all eligible adults of the matching gender.

TELEPHONE SURVEY DESIGN

In countries where telephone interviewing is employed, random-digit-dial (RDD) or a nationally representative list of phone numbers is used. In select countries where cell phone penetration is high, a dual sampling frame is used. Random respondent selection is achieved by using either the latest birthday or Kish grid method. At least three attempts are made to reach a person in each household, spread over different days and times of day. Appointments for callbacks that fall within the survey data collection period are made.

PANEL SURVEY DESIGN

Prior to 2009, United States data were collected using The Gallup Panel. The Gallup Panel is a probability-based, nationally representative panel, for which all members are recruited via random-digit-dial methodology and is only used in the United States. Participants who elect to join the panel are committing to the completion of two to three surveys per month, with the typical survey lasting 10 to 15 minutes. The Gallup Worldwide Research panel survey is conducted over the telephone and takes approximately 30 minutes. No incentives are given to panel participants. Worldwide Research Methodology and Codebook Copyright © 2008-2012 Gallup, Inc. All rights reserved. 9

Research instrument

QUESTION DESIGN

Many of the Worldwide Research questions are items that Gallup has used for years. When developing additional questions, Gallup employed its worldwide network of research and political scientists1 to better understand key issues with regard to question development and construction and data gathering. Hundreds of items were developed, tested, piloted, and finalized. The best questions were retained for the core questionnaire and organized into indexes. Most items have a simple dichotomous ("yes or no") response set to minimize contamination of data because of cultural differences in response styles and to facilitate cross-cultural comparisons.

The Gallup Worldwide Research measures key indicators such as Law and Order, Food and Shelter, Job Creation, Migration, Financial Wellbeing, Personal Health, Civic Engagement, and Evaluative Wellbeing and demonstrates their correlations with world development indicators such as GDP and Brain Gain. These indicators assist leaders in understanding the broad context of national interests and establishing organization-specific correlations between leading indexes and lagging economic outcomes.

Gallup organizes its core group of indicators into the Gallup World Path. The Path is an organizational conceptualization of the seven indexes and is not to be construed as a causal model. The individual indexes have many properties of a strong theoretical framework. A more in-depth description of the questions and Gallup indexes is included in the indexes section of this document. In addition to World Path indexes, Gallup Worldwide Research questions also measure opinions about national institutions, corruption, youth development, community basics, diversity, optimism, communications, religiosity, and numerous other topics. For many regions of the world, additional questions that are specific to that region or country are included in surveys. Region-specific questions have been developed for predominantly Muslim nations, former Soviet Union countries, the Balkans, sub-Saharan Africa, Latin America, China and India, South Asia, and Israel and the Palestinian Territories.

The questionnaire is translated into the major conversational languages of each country. The translation process starts with an English, French, or Spanish version, depending on the region. One of two translation methods may be used.

METHOD 1: Two independent translations are completed. An independent third party, with some knowledge of survey research methods, adjudicates the differences. A professional translator translates the final version back into the source language.

METHOD 2: A translator

The Research and Development Survey (RANDS) is a series of cross-sectional surveys from probability-sampled commercial survey panels which began in 2015. RANDS 1 was administered by Gallup using the Gallup Panel in the fall of 2015 and contains existing questions from the National Health Interview Survey (NHIS).

The Research and Development Survey (RANDS) is a series of cross-sectional surveys from probability-sampled commercial survey panels which began in 2015. RANDS 2 was administered by Gallup using the Gallup Panel in the spring of 2016 and contains existing questions from the National Health Interview Survey (NHIS) as well as embedded probe questions for cognitive evaluations.

2009 Romanian Presidential Elections Panel Survey. Research grant: 2009 Romanian Presidential Elections. Director: Mircea Comsa. CNCS-UEFISCDI code: PN-II-IDEI-2008-2174. Soros Foundation Romania, program Romanian Electoral Studies, coordinator Ovidiu Voicu. Data collection: Gallup. Three waves panel survey: before the electoral campaign (1, PAPI), during the electoral campaign (2, CATI), and after the elections (3, PAPI). The datasets and questionnaires are all in the Romanian language. 2012 Romanian Parliamentary Elections. Research grant: Change and stability of electoral behavior in Romania: 2009-2014. Director: Mircea Comsa. CNCS-UEFISCDI code: PN-II-ID-PCE-2011-3-0669. Data collection: Gallup. Panel survey: after the elections (4, PAPI). The datasets and questionnaires are all in the Romanian language.

The heading of each sub-table is the socio-demographic variable, with each column in the sub-table corresponding to a level of the variable. Each cell value contains the percentage of respondents within that level who responded positively to the vaccine acceptance question. For example, in the Gender sub-table, 73% of male participants responded positively to the vaccine acceptance question compared with 69% of female respondents. These results are based on the Gallup Panel COVID-19 Web Survey, which began fielding on March 13, 2020 (and last updated in our copy of the dataset on Feb 22, 2021) with daily random samples of the U.S. adults, aged 18 and older who are members of the Gallup Panel.

Abstract

The rapid and massive dissemination of mobile phones in the developing world is creating new opportunities for the discipline of survey research. The World Bank is interested in leveraging mobile phone technology as a means of direct communication with poor households in the developing world in order to gather rapid feedback on the impact of economic crises and other events on the economy of such households.

The World Bank commissioned Gallup to conduct the Listening to LAC (L2L) pilot program, a research project aimed at testing the feasibility of mobile phone technology as a way of data collection for conducting quick turnaround, self-administered, longitudinal surveys among households in Peru and Honduras.

The project used face-to-face interviews as its benchmark, and included Short Message Service (SMS), Interactive Voice Response (IVR) and Computer Assisted Telephone Interviews (CATI) as test methods of data collection.

The pilot was designed in a way that allowed testing the response rates and the quality of data, while also providing information on the cost of collecting data using mobile phones. Researchers also evaluated if providing incentives affected panel attrition rates. The Honduras design was a test-retest design, which is closely related to the difference-in-difference methodology of experimental evaluation.

The random stratified multistage sampling technique was used to select a nationally representative sample of 1,500 households. During the initial face-to-face interviews, researchers gathered information on the socio-economic characteristics of households and recruited participants for follow-up research. Questions wording was the same in all modes of data collection.

In Honduras, after the initial face-to-face interviews, respondents were exposed to the remaining three methodologies according to a randomized scheme (three rotations, one methodology per week). Panelists in Honduras were surveyed for four and a half months, starting in February 2012.

Geographic coverage

Includes the entire national territory, with the exception of neighborhoods where access of interviewers is extremely difficult, due to lack of transportation infrastructure or for situations that threaten the physical integrity of the interviewers and supervisors (i.e. extremely high crime rate, warfare, etc.)

Analysis unit

• Households

Universe

All the households that exist in the neighborhoods of Honduras, as reported by the 2001 Census. Institutions such as military, religious or educational living quarters are not included in the universe.

Kind of data

Sample survey data [ssd]

Sampling procedure

Honduras did not have an income oversample because the poverty rate is 60 percent, so oversampling 20 percent above the poverty rate would include a large portion of the middle class, which are not the most vulnerable in times of crisis.

The Honduras panel was built on a nationally representative sample of 1,500 households. The sample was drawn by means of a random, stratified, multistage design. The pilot used Gallup World Poll sampling frame.

Census-defined municipalities were classified into five strata according to population size: I. Municipalities with 500,000 to 999,000 inhabitants II. Municipalities with 100,000 to 499,000 inhabitants III. Municipalities with 50,000 to 99,000 inhabitants IV. Municipalities with 10,000 and 49,000 inhabitants V. Municipalities with less than 10,000 inhabitants

Interviews were then proportionally allocated to these five strata according to their share among the country's population.

• The first stage of the design consisted of a random selection of Primary Sampling Units (PSU's) within each of the five strata previously defined.

• In the second stage, in each PSU, one or more Secondary Sampling Units (SSU's) were then selected.

• Once SSU's were selected, interviewers were sent to the field to proceed with the third stage of the sample design, which consisted of selecting households using a systematic "random route" procedure. Interviewers started from the previously selected "random origin" and walked around the block in clockwise direction, selecting every third household on their right hand side. They were also trained to handle vacant, nonresponsive, non-cooperative households, as well as other failed attempts, in a systematic manner.

Mode of data collection

Other [oth]

Research instrument

The following survey instruments were used in the project:

1) Initial face-to-face questionnaire

In Peru, the starting point was the ENAHO (National Household Survey) questionnaire. Step-wise regressions were done to select the set of questions that best predicted consumption. For the purposes of robustness, the regressions were also done with questions that best predicted income, which yielded the same results. A similar procedure was done in Honduras, using the latest household survey deployed by the Honduran Statistics Institute, except that only best predictors of income were chosen, because Honduras did not have a recent consumption aggregate.

The survey gathered information on households' demographics, household infrastructure, employment, remittances, income, accidents, food security, self-perceptions on poverty, Internet access and cellphones use.

2) Monthly questionnaires (SMS, IVR, CATI)

The questionnaires were worded exactly the same way, regardless of the mode, which meant short questions, since SMS is limited to 160 characters. A maximum of 10 questions had to be chosen for the monthly questionnaire. In addition, two questions sought to ensure the validity of the responses by testing if the respondent was a member of the household. Most questions were time-variant and each questionnaire was repeated to observe if answers changed over time. All questions related to variables that strongly affect household welfare and are likely to change in times of crisis.

3) Final face-to-face questionnaire

Gallup conducted face-to-face closing surveys among 700 panelists. The researchers asked about issues the respondets had with mobile phones and coverage during the test. Panelists were also asked what would motivate them to keep on participating in a project like this in the future.

The questionnaires were worded exactly the same way, regardless of the mode, which meant short questions, since SMS is limited to 160 characters, unlike IVR and CATI.

Response rate

In Honduras, 41% of recruited households failed to answer the first round of follow-up surveys. The attrition rate from the initial face-to-face interview to the end of panel study was 50%.

As part of the survey administration process Gallup implemented a number of mechanisms to maximize the response rate and panelist retention. The following strategies were applied to respondents who did not replay first time:

• The surveys were left open for responses for up to 2 weeks after the original transmission of the survey (from original call in the case of IVR and CATI).
• First reminder was sent within 72 hours of first attempt (SMS and IVR).
• Second reminder was sent within 144 hours of first attempt (SMS and IVR).
• Call backs were made within 72 and 144 hours of first attempt (CATI); or
• Up to 2 call backs were made per appointment with respondent (CATI).

Also, in order to minimize non-response, three types of incentives were given. First, households that did not own a mobile phone were provided one for free. Approximately 127 phones were donated in Honduras. Second, all communications between the interviewers and the households were free to the respondents. Finally, households were randomly assigned to one of three incentive levels: one-third of households received US$1 in free airtime for each questionnaire they answered, one-third received US$5 in free airtime, and one-third received no financial incentive (the control group).

Abstract

The rapid and massive dissemination of mobile phones in the developing world is creating new opportunities for the discipline of survey research. The World Bank is interested in leveraging mobile phone technology as a means of direct communication with poor households in the developing world in order to gather rapid feedback on the impact of economic crises and other events on the economy of such households.

The World Bank commissioned Gallup to conduct the Listening to LAC (L2L) pilot program, a research project aimed at testing the feasibility of mobile phone technology as a way of data collection for conducting quick turnaround, self-administered, longitudinal surveys among households in Peru and Honduras.

The project used face-to-face interviews as its benchmark, and included Short Message Service (SMS), Interactive Voice Response (IVR) and Computer Assisted Telephone Interviews (CATI) as test methods of data collection.

The pilot was designed in a way that allowed testing the response rates and the quality of data, while also providing information on the cost of collecting data using mobile phones. Researchers also evaluated if providing incentives affected panel attrition rates. The Honduras design was a test-retest design, which is closely related to the difference-in-difference methodology of experimental evaluation.

The random stratified multistage sampling technique was used to select a nationally representative sample of 1,500 households. During the initial face-to-face interviews, researchers gathered information on the socio-economic characteristics of households and recruited participants for follow-up research. Questions wording was the same in all modes of data collection.

In Honduras, after the initial face-to-face interviews, respondents were exposed to the remaining three methodologies according to a randomized scheme (three rotations, one methodology per week). Panelists in Honduras were surveyed for four and a half months, starting in February 2012.

In Peru, households were randomly assigned to a communication mode (SMS, IVR, CATI), which stayed constant for all rounds (waves) of the survey.

Geographic coverage

Peru and Honduras - Includes the entire national territory, with the exception of neighborhoods where access of interviewers is extremely difficult, due to lack of transportation infrastructure or for situations that threaten the physical integrity of the interviewers and supervisors (i.e. extremely high crime rate, warfare, etc.)

Analysis unit

• Households

Universe

All the households that exist in the neighborhoods of Honduras, as reported by the 2001 Census. Institutions such as military, religious or educational living quarters are not included in the universe.

Kind of data

Sample survey data [ssd]

Sampling procedure

Honduras

Honduras did not have an income oversample because the poverty rate is 60 percent, so oversampling 20 percent above the poverty rate would include a large portion of the middle class, which are not the most vulnerable in times of crisis.

The Honduras panel was built on a nationally representative sample of 1,500 households. The sample was drawn by means of a random, stratified, multistage design. The pilot used Gallup World Poll sampling frame.

Census-defined municipalities were classified into five strata according to population size: I. Municipalities with 500,000 to 999,000 inhabitants II. Municipalities with 100,000 to 499,000 inhabitants III. Municipalities with 50,000 to 99,000 inhabitants IV. Municipalities with 10,000 and 49,000 inhabitants V. Municipalities with less than 10,000 inhabitants

Interviews were then proportionally allocated to these five strata according to their share among the country's population.

• The first stage of the design consisted of a random selection of Primary Sampling Units (PSU's) within each of the five strata previously defined.

• In the second stage, in each PSU, one or more Secondary Sampling Units (SSU's) were then selected.

• Once SSU's were selected, interviewers were sent to the field to proceed with the third stage of the sample design, which consisted of selecting households using a systematic "random route" procedure. Interviewers started from the previously selected "random origin" and walked around the block in clockwise direction, selecting every third household on their right hand side. They were also trained to handle vacant, nonresponsive, non-cooperative households, as well as other failed attempts, in a systematic manner.

Peru

The Peru panel was built on a nationally representative sample of 1,500 households. The sample was based on the sampling frame for the National Household Survey (ENAHO) conducted by the Peruvian National Statistics Office (INEI) every three months.

In Peru, the sample selection was guided by the following criteria: (i) the sample should be representative nationally, and in urban and rural areas, and (ii) households close to poverty line should be oversampled because policy decisions in time of crises need to be especially mindful of the poor and vulnerable. For the purposes of this project, "close to poverty line" was defined as 40 percent of consumption distribution that symmetrically band the national poverty line: 20 percent above and 20 percent below. In 27 percent of Peruvian households monthly per capita consumption was below the moderate poverty line in 2010 (ENAHO).Those households whose monthly per capita consumption falls between 7 and 47 percent of the national distribution were oversampled.

The L2L sample frame comprises all the panel conglomerados from the fourth trimester of ENAHO 2010, or 281 conglomerados.

Detailed information about the sampling procedure is available in "Listening to LAC: Using Mobile Phones for High Frequency Data Collection, Final Report" (p. 65-69) and "The World Bank Listening to LAC (L2L) Pilot Project Sample Design for Peru."

Mode of data collection

Other [oth]

Research instrument

The following survey instruments were used in the project:

1) Initial face-to-face questionnaire

In Peru, the starting point was the ENAHO (National Household Survey) questionnaire. Step-wise regressions were done to select the set of questions that best predicted consumption. For the purposes of robustness, the regressions were also done with questions that best predicted income, which yielded the same results. A similar procedure was done in Honduras, using the latest household survey deployed by the Honduran Statistics Institute, except that only best predictors of income were chosen, because Honduras did not have a recent consumption aggregate.

The survey gathered information on households' demographics, household infrastructure, employment, remittances, income, accidents, food security, self-perceptions on poverty, Internet access and cellphones use.

2) Monthly questionnaires (SMS, IVR, CATI)

The questionnaires were worded exactly the same way, regardless of the mode, which meant short questions, since SMS is limited to 160 characters. A maximum of 10 questions had to be chosen for the monthly questionnaire. In addition, two questions sought to ensure the validity of the responses by testing if the respondent was a member of the household. Most questions were time-variant and each questionnaire was repeated to observe if answers changed over time. All questions related to variables that strongly affect household welfare and are likely to change in times of crisis.

3) Final face-to-face questionnaire

Gallup conducted face-to-face closing surveys among 700 panelists. The researchers asked about issues the respondets had with mobile phones and coverage during the test. Panelists were also asked what would motivate them to keep on participating in a project like this in the future.

The questionnaires were worded exactly the same way, regardless of the mode, which meant short questions, since SMS is limited to 160 characters, unlike IVR and CATI.

Response rate

In Honduras, 41% of recruited households failed to answer the first round of follow-up surveys. The attrition rate from the initial face-to-face interview to the end of panel study was 50%.

In Peru, 67 percent of recruited households failed to answer the first round of follow-up surveys. Attrition slightly increased with each wave of the survey (between 1 and 3 percentage points per wave), reaching 75 percent in wave 6.

As part of the survey administration process Gallup implemented a number of mechanisms to maximize the response rate and panelist retention. The following strategies were applied to respondents who did not replay first time:

• The surveys were left open for responses for up to 2 weeks after the original transmission of the survey (from original call in the case of IVR and CATI).
• First reminder was sent within 72 hours of first attempt (SMS and IVR).
• Second reminder was sent within 144 hours of first attempt (SMS and IVR).
• Call backs were made within 72 and 144 hours of first attempt (CATI); or
• Up to 2 call backs were made per appointment with respondent (CATI).

Also, in order to minimize non-response, three types of incentives were given. First, households that did not own a mobile phone were provided one for free. Approximately 127 phones were donated in Honduras, and approximately 200 phones were donated in Peru. Second, all communications between the interviewers and the households were free to the respondents. Finally, households were randomly assigned to one of three incentive levels: one-third of households received US$1 in free airtime for each questionnaire they answered, one-third received US$5 in free

Since 1997, MedieAkademin has carried out an annual survey titled The Institutional Trust. The survey has focused on major social institutions, such as the parliament, big business, the daily press, and TV/radio, as well as some specific companies such as Sveriges Television, TV4, IKEA, Skandia, and Volvo. The number of institutions included has varied somewhat over the years. Some of the institutions and companies have been measured every year while others have been investigated more irregularly.

The survey was carried out by TNS Gallup and involved 250 individuals who were interviewed by telephone and 750 individuals randomly selected from TNS Gallup’s Online Panel who answered a web survey between October 15 and 29, 2007. The survey comprised 27 institutions/companies/media companies and political parties. The 2007 survey also included questions about morality in different groups of people and how it has changed over time, as well as what responsibilities large corporations have and to what extent they live up to these responsibilities.

Purpose:

To study the trust that Swedish people have in social institutions, political parties, media, brands/companies, and leaders.

The National Couples' Health and Time Study (NCHAT) is a population-based study of couples in America that contains representative samples of racial and ethnic diverse and sexual and gender diverse individuals. NCHAT entered the field on September 1, 2020, and data collection completed in April 2021. A follow-up survey (Wave 2) was fielded in 2022. The Wave 1 sample includes 3,642 main respondents. The sample frame included adults in the United States who ranged in age from 20-60 years old, who were married or cohabiting, and who were able to read English or Spanish. About 1,515 partners participated. NCHAT sample participants were recruited through the Gallup Panel. About 9 percent of the sample was non-Latinx Black, 6 percent non-Latinx Asian, 5 percent non-Latinx Multirace, 16 percent Latinx, and 1 percent another racial or ethnic identity. Approximately 55 percent of the sample identified as heterosexual, 20 percent as gay or lesbian, 10 percent as bisexual, and 15 percent as another sexual identity or multiple sexual identities. The sample was about evenly split between men and women, and almost 3 percent identified as another gender identity. 27 percent of couples were the same gender, and 4 percent were non-binary. About 75 percent were married and the remainder were cohabiting. The average age was 45. 65 percent of the sample had no children. One-third of the sample was in an interracial couple. 10 percent were born outside the US. Survey, time diary, experience sampling method, and geospatial data were collected. NCHAT is uniquely suited to address COVID, stress, family functioning, and physical and mental health and includes an abundance of contextual and acute measures of race and racism, sexism, and heterosexism.

Abstract

The rapid and massive dissemination of mobile phones in the developing world is creating new opportunities for the discipline of survey research. The World Bank is interested in leveraging mobile phone technology as a means of direct communication with poor households in the developing world in order to gather rapid feedback on the impact of economic crises and other events on the economy of such households.

The World Bank commissioned Gallup to conduct the Listening to LAC (L2L) pilot program, a research project aimed at testing the feasibility of mobile phone technology as a way of data collection for conducting quick turnaround, self-administered, longitudinal surveys among households in Peru and Honduras.

The project used face-to-face interviews as its benchmark, and included Short Message Service (SMS), Interactive Voice Response (IVR) and Computer Assisted Telephone Interviews (CATI) as test methods of data collection.

The pilot was designed in a way that allowed testing the response rates and the quality of data, while also providing information on the cost of collecting data using mobile phones. Researchers also evaluated if providing incentives affected panel attrition rates.

The random stratified multistage sampling technique was used to select a nationally representative sample of 1,500 households. During the initial face-to-face interviews, researchers gathered information on the socio-economic characteristics of households and recruited participants for follow-up research. Questions wording was the same in all modes of data collection.

In Peru, households were randomly assigned to a communication mode (SMS, IVR, CATI), which stayed constant for all rounds (waves) of the survey.

Geographic coverage

Includes the entire national territory, with the exception of neighborhoods where access of interviewers is extremely difficult, due to lack of transportation infrastructure or for situations that threaten the physical integrity of the interviewers and supervisors (i.e. extremely high crime rate, warfare, etc.)

Analysis unit

• Households

Kind of data

Sample survey data [ssd]

Sampling procedure

The Peru panel was built on a nationally representative sample of 1,500 households. The sample was based on the sampling frame for the National Household Survey (ENAHO) conducted by the Peruvian National Statistics Office (INEI) every three months.

In Peru, the sample selection was guided by the following criteria: (i) the sample should be representative nationally, and in urban and rural areas, and (ii) households close to poverty line should be oversampled because policy decisions in time of crises need to be especially mindful of the poor and vulnerable. For the purposes of this project, "close to poverty line" was defined as 40 percent of consumption distribution that symmetrically band the national poverty line: 20 percent above and 20 percent below. In 27 percent of Peruvian households monthly per capita consumption was below the moderate poverty line in 2010 (ENAHO).Those households whose monthly per capita consumption falls between 7 and 47 percent of the national distribution were oversampled.

The L2L sample frame comprises all the panel conglomerados from the fourth trimester of ENAHO 2010, or 281 conglomerados.

Detailed information about the sampling procedure is available in "Listening to LAC: Using Mobile Phones for High Frequency Data Collection, Final Report" (p. 65-69) and "The World Bank Listening to LAC (L2L) Pilot Project Sample Design for Peru."

Sampling deviation

A number of restive communities in Peru did not allow Gallup's interviewers to enter the area. Where possible, these were replaced following INEI's standard methodology. When confronted with a problem in a particular location, INEI moves to the next "Centro Poblado" in the same "Conglomerado."

Mode of data collection

Other [oth]

Research instrument

The following survey instruments were used in the project:

1) Initial face-to-face questionnaire

In Peru, the starting point was the ENAHO (National Household Survey) questionnaire. Step-wise regressions were done to select the set of questions that best predicted consumption. For the purposes of robustness, the regressions were also done with questions that best predicted income, which yielded the same results.

The survey gathered information on households' demographics, household infrastructure, employment, remittances, income, accidents, food security, self-perceptions on poverty, Internet access and cellphones use.

2) Monthly questionnaires (SMS, IVR, CATI)

The questionnaires were worded exactly the same way, regardless of the mode, which meant short questions, since SMS is limited to 160 characters. A maximum of 10 questions had to be chosen for the monthly questionnaire. In addition, two questions sought to ensure the validity of the responses by testing if the respondent was a member of the household. Most questions were time-variant and each questionnaire was repeated to observe if answers changed over time. All questions related to variables that strongly affect household welfare and are likely to change in times of crisis.

A maximum of 10 questions was chosen for the monthly questionnaire. In addition, two questions sought to ensure the validity of the responses by testing if the respondent was a member of the household. To accomplish this, the first two questions in each monthly questionnaire asked the respondent for their gender and year of birth, and the answers were compared to the household roster obtained during the face-to-face interview.

3) Final face-to-face questionnaire

Gallup conducted face-to-face closing surveys among 700 panelists. The researchers asked about issues the respondets had with mobile phones and coverage during the test. Panelists were also asked what would motivate them to keep on participating in a project like this in the future.

Response rate

In Peru, 67 percent of recruited households failed to answer the first round of follow-up surveys. Attrition slightly increased with each wave of the survey (between 1 and 3 percentage points per wave), reaching 75 percent in wave 6.

As part of the survey administration process Gallup implemented a number of mechanisms to maximize the response rate and panelist retention. The following strategies were applied to respondents who did not replay first time:

• The surveys were left open for responses for up to 2 weeks after the original transmission of the survey (from original call in the case of IVR and CATI).
• First reminder was sent within 72 hours of first attempt (SMS and IVR).
• Second reminder was sent within 144 hours of first attempt (SMS and IVR).
• Call backs were made within 72 and 144 hours of first attempt (CATI); or
• Up to 2 call backs were made per appointment with respondent (CATI).

Also, in order to minimize non-response, three types of incentives were given. First, households that did not own a mobile phone were provided one for free. Approximately 200 phones were donated in Peru. Second, all communications between the interviewers and the households were free to the respondents. Finally, households were randomly assigned to one of three incentive levels: one-third of households received US$1 in free airtime for each questionnaire they answered, one-third received US$5 in free airtime, and one-third received no financial incentive (the control group).

What the general public thinks about crime and punishment is a vexed question. In an effort to bring systematic data to bear on this question, I have assembled the largest compilation of aggregated survey data on attitudes to crime and punishment in England and Wales to date. The dataset contains 1,190 question-year pairs, which track popular attitudes across four areas: (i) Crime concern 1965-2023, (ii) Punitiveness 1981-2023, (iii) Support for the death penalty 1962-2023, and (iv) Prioritisation of crime/law-and-order as a social issue 1973-2023. For example, in 2014, 58% of respondents to the British Election Studies Internet Panel thought that the level of crime was increasing. By 2019, this number had increased to 83%, and by 2023 it had fallen back to 77%. For 16-24 year olds, the numbers are 38%, 69% and 65%. Harmonised latent trends for each area can be derived from the aggregated survey data using Stimson’s (2018) Dyad Ratio Algorithm for different demographic groups using the R script below. This deposit contains aggregate survey responses for four different dimensions of public opinion about crime and punishment: - Crime concern = perceptions of the crime rate and the degree to which the public is fearful or concerned about crime - Punitiveness = the degree to which public opinion supports being tougher on crime or supports less punitive and more rehabilitative policies - Prioritisation of crime as a social issue = the degree to which people prioritise crime as the number one most urgent or important issue facing the country - Support for the death penalty = support for capital punishment in any situation 1190 question-year pairs were collected from the following sources: - British Election Study (1963-2023, 15 post-election cross-sectional studies and 9 panel studies): - British Social Attitude Survey (1983-2021): NatCen Social Research (2023) British Social Attitudes Survey. [data series]. 3rd Release. UK Data Service. SN: 200006. - British Crime Survey / Crime Survey for England and Wales (1982-2021): Office for National Statistics (2021) Crime Survey for England and Wales. [data series]. 3rd Release. UK Data Service. SN: 200009. - YouGov Crime Trackers (2019-2023): - YouGov MII Tracker (2011-2023): - Ipsos Issues Tracker (1974-2023): - A. King, R. Wybrow, A. Gallup. (2001) British Political Opinion 1937-2000: The Gallup Polls. London: Portico's Publishing. - G. Gallup (ed.) (1976) The Gallup International Public Opinion Polls: Great Britain 1937-1975. New York: Random House. - W. Jennings, J. Kenny, A. Roescu, S. Smedley, N. Or, K. Weldon, P. Enns, K. Norek, J. Riggs (2022) UK Gallup Poll collection, 1956-1991. Ithaca, NY: Roper Center for Public Opinion Research. In each case, I calculate the weighted average response to each question per year for different demographic subgroups. For example, in 2014, 58% of respondents to the British Election Studies Internet Panel thought that the level of crime was increasing. By 2019, this number had increased to 83%, and by 2023 it had fallen back to 77%. For 16-24 year olds, the numbers are 38%, 69% and 65%.

Using micro-data on six surveys–the Gallup World Poll 2005–2023, the U.S. Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System, 1993–2022, Eurobarometer 1991–2022, the UK Covid Social Survey Panel, 2020–2022, the European Social Survey 2002–2020 and the IPSOS Happiness Survey 2018–2023 –we show individuals’ reports of subjective wellbeing in Europe declined in the Great Recession of 2008/9 and during the Covid pandemic of 2020–2021 on most measures. They also declined in four countries bordering Ukraine after the Russian invasion in 2022. However, the movements are not large and are not apparent everywhere. We also used data from the European Commission’s Business and Consumer Surveys on people’s expectations of life in general, their financial situation and the economic and employment situation in the country. All of these dropped markedly in the Great Recession and during Covid, but bounced back quickly, as did firms’ expectations of the economy and the labor market. Neither the annual data from the United Nation’s Human Development Index (HDI) nor data used in the World Happiness Report from the Gallup World Poll shifted much in response to negative shocks. The HDI has been rising in the last decade reflecting overall improvements in economic and social wellbeing, captured in part by real earnings growth, although it fell slightly after 2020 as life expectancy dipped. This secular improvement is mirrored in life satisfaction which has been rising in the last decade. However, so too have negative affect in Europe and despair in the United States.