The RRING Work Package 3 (WP3) objective was to clarify how Research Funding Organisations (RFOs) and Research Performing Organisations (RPOs) operated within region-specific research and innovation environments. It explored how they navigated the governance and regulatory frameworks for Responsible Research and Innovation (RRI), as well as offering their perspectives on the entities responsible for RRI-related policy and action in their locales.

This data set covers the global survey research part, which was designed to contextualise how RPOs and RFOs interacted within the research environment and with non-academic stakeholders. Countries were grouped according to the UNESCO regions of the world and key results per region are listed below. For a detailed analysis and further findings of the work completed under WP3 of the RRING project, please refer to the full deliverable document "State of the Art of RRI in the Five UNESCO World Regions" [link to be inserted].

European and North American States

• ‘Diverse and inclusive': Respondents were most attitudinally supportive of the importance of ensuring ethical principles were applied in R&I (92%), followed by diverse perspectives (88%), and gender equality (79%). Including ethnic minorities was the area which garnered the least attitudinal support (71%). Respondents took the most practical steps towards engaging with diverse perspectives (63%), and the least towards inclusion of ethnic minorities (24%).
• ‘Anticipative and reflective’: Respondents widely agreed (82%) with the importance of ensuring R&I work does not cause concerns for society, but only 37% confirmed they had taken practical steps to ensure this.
• ‘Open and transparent’: Vast majorities of respondents agreed on the importance of keeping R&I methods open and transparent (94%), with 65% also confirming they take practical steps to do this. An equally high number agreed on the importance of making the results of R&I work accessible to as wide a public as possible (94%), and 68% confirmed this through their reported actions. This indicated the smallest value-action gap of all RRI measures for respondents from European and North American countries. Attitudinal agreement on the importance of making data freely available to the public was lower (83%), as was the practical action aspect for this measure (45%).
• ‘Responsive and adaptive to change’: Most respondents agreed (89%) that it was important to ensure their work addresses societal needs, and 62% confirmed that they take practical steps towards this aim.

Latin American and Caribbean States

• ‘Diverse and inclusive': Respondents were most attitudinally supportive of the importance of gender equality in R&I (86%), followed by ensuring ethical principles are applied (85%), and diverse perspectives incorporated (83%). Including ethnic minorities was the area which garnered the least attitudinal support (77%). Respondents took the most practical steps towards ensuring ethical principles guide their work (50%), and the least towards including ethnic minorities (25%), but the smallest value action gap was found for gender equality.
• ‘Anticipative and reflective’: Respondents agreed (79%) that it is important to ensure R&I work does not cause concerns for society, but only 29% confirmed they had taken practical steps to ensure this.
• ‘Open and transparent’: The majority of respondents agreed on the importance of keeping R&I methods open and transparent (89%), with 45% indicating they had taken practical action. A majority also agreed on the importance of making the results of R&I work accessible to as wide a public as possible (88%), and 44% backed this up with practical action. Attitudinal agreement on the importance of making data freely available to the public was slightly lower (81%), as was the practical action aspect for this measure (35%).
• ‘Responsive and adaptive to change’: Most respondents agreed (84%) that it was important to ensure their work addresses societal needs, and 49% confirmed that they take practical steps towards this aim.

Asian and Pacific States

• ‘Diverse and inclusive': Respondents were most attitudinally supportive of the importance of ensuring ethical principles were applied in R&I (90%), followed by diverse perspectives (89%), and gender equality (86%). Including ethnic minorities was the area which garnered the least attitudinal support (76%). Respondents took the most practical steps towards engaging with diverse perspectives (65%), and the least towards including ethnic minorities (30%).
• ‘Anticipative and reflective’: Respondents widely agreed (78%) with the importance of ensuring R&I work does not cause concerns for society, and 42% confirmed they had taken practical steps to ensure this.
• ‘Open and transparent’: The majority of respondents agreed on the importance of keeping R&I methods open and transparent (91%), with 58% indicating they take practical steps to do this. A majority also agreed on the importance of making the results of R&I work accessible to as wide a public as possible (89%), and 64% backed this up with practical action. Attitudinal agreement on the importance of making data freely available to the public was lower (79%), as was the practical action aspect for this measure (40%).
• ‘Responsive and adaptive to change’: Most respondents agreed (92%) that it was important to ensure their work addresses societal needs, and 69% confirmed that they take practical steps towards this aim. This was the RRI measure with the smallest valueaction gap for respondents from the Asian and Pacific region.

Arab States

• ‘Diverse and inclusive': Respondents were most attitudinally supportive of the importance of ensuring ethical principles were applied in R&I (93%), followed by diverse perspectives (81%), and gender equality (85%). Including ethnic minorities was the area which garnered the least attitudinal support (74%). Respondents took the most practical steps towards engaging with diverse perspectives (66%), which equated to one of two equally small value-action gaps for respondents from Arab states, and the least practical steps towards inclusion of ethnic minorities (22%).
• ‘Anticipative and reflective’: A high proportion of respondents (85%) agreed that it is important to ensure R&I work does not cause concerns for society. However, only 38% confirmed they had taken practical steps to ensure this.
• ‘Open and transparent’: The majority of respondents agreed on the importance of keeping R&I methods open and transparent (89%), with 59% also confirming they take practical steps to do this. A majority also agreed on the importance of making the results of R&I work accessible to as wide a public as possible (90%), and 66% backed this up with practical action. Ensuring public accessibility of research results was the second of two measures with equally small value-action gaps. Attitudinal agreement on the importance of making data freely available to the public was much lower (78%), which also reflected the practical action aspect for this measure (49%).
• ‘Responsive and adaptive to change’: Most respondents agreed (96%) that it was important to ensure their work addresses societal needs, and 68% confirmed that they take practical steps to achieve this.

African States

• ‘Diverse and inclusive': Respondents were most attitudinally supportive of the importance of ensuring engagement with diverse perspectives and expertise in R&I (91%), followed by ensuring ethical principles are applied (90%), and gender equality (89%). Including ethnic minorities was the area which garnered the least attitudinal support (74%). Respondents took the most practical steps towards ensuring ethical principles guide their work (57%), and the least towards including ethnic minorities (32%).
• ‘Anticipative and reflective’: The majority of respondents (85%) agreed that it is important to ensure R&I work does not cause concerns for society, with 59% confirming that they take practical steps to ensure this.
• ‘Open and transparent’: A high proportion of respondents agreed on the importance of keeping R&I methods open and transparent (90%), with 54% also confirming they take practical steps to do this. A majority also agreed on the importance of making the results of R&I work accessible to as wide a public as possible (86%), and 56% backed this up with practical action. Attitudinal agreement on the importance of making data freely available to the public was significantly lower (73%), as was the practical action aspect for this measure (38%).
• ‘Responsive and adaptive to change’: Respondents mostly agreed (92%) that it was important to ensure their work addresses societal needs, and 64% confirmed that they take practical steps towards this aim. This was the RRI measure with the smallest valueaction gap for respondents from African states.

Note: Please refer to the "RRING WP3 - Survey Data Documentation" document for detailed instructions on how to use this dataset.

This is a mixed methods study, comprising both qualitative and quantitative material. The aim of this project was to use the opportunity afforded by the release of the final part of the film trilogy of Lord of the Rings to gather materials allowing an exploration of

• the role of fantasy, especially film fantasy, in the lives of different kinds of audience
• the understanding they have of the 'location' (real or imaginary) of the author J.R.R. Tolkien's world, and its relation to their lived world
• the role played in their responses by perceptions of the story's original 'Englishness', its New Zealand landscapes, and its Hollywood financing and marketing
• the part played by all kinds of prefigurative processes in shaping responses in advance

Within these broad aims, the objectives were to gather, over a fifteen month period, three large bodies of materials: three months of marketing, publicity, merchandising, and media coverage of the film prior to its release; responses from across the world to a questionnaire, available online with added paper-completed ones; and a set of follow-up interviews with individuals chosen for their exemplification of emergent patterns. This body of materials and data was to be organised in a way which permits both quantitative and qualitative exploration. The only materials currently deposited at the UK Data Archive (UKDA) are the questionnaire responses, which are held in a Microsoft 'Access 2000' database.

Further information about the study may be found at the Lord of the Rings Research Project web site.

Abstract

The World Bank Enterprise Survey (WBES) is a firm-level survey of a representative sample of an economy's private sector. The surveys cover a broad range of topics related to the business environment including access to finance, corruption, infrastructure, competition, and performance.

Geographic coverage

National

Analysis unit

The primary sampling unit of the study is the establishment. An establishment is a physical location where business is carried out and where industrial operations take place or services are provided. A firm may be composed of one or more establishments. For example, a brewery may have several bottling plants and several establishments for distribution. For the purposes of this survey an establishment must make its own financial decisions and have its own financial statements separate from those of the firm. An establishment must also have its own management and control over its payroll.

Universe

All formal (i.e., registered) private sector businesses (with at least 1% private ownership) and with at least five employees. In terms of sectoral criteria, all manufacturing businesses (ISIC Rev 4. codes 10-33) are eligible; for services businesses, those corresponding to the ISIC Rev 4 codes 41-43, 45-47, 49-53, 55-56, 58, 61-62, 69-75, 79, and 95 are included in the Enterprise Surveys. Cooperatives and collectives are excluded from the Enterprise Surveys. All eligible establishments must be registered with the registration agency. In the case of Taiwan, China, a business is defined as registered if it is registered with 營業執照申請機構 (Business License Application Organization). The universe table is the total number of eligible establishments, and the table is partitioned by the stratification groups (industry classification, establishment size, and subnational region) in a country.

Note: The universe table can be found in Table 1 of "The Taiwan, China 2024 World Bank Enterprise Survey Implementation Report."

Kind of data

Sample survey data [ssd]

Sampling procedure

The WBES use stratified random sampling, where the population of establishments is first separated into non-overlapping groups, called strata, and then respondents are selected through simple random sampling from each stratum. The detailed methodology is provided in the Sampling Note (https://www.enterprisesurveys.org/content/dam/enterprisesurveys/documents/methodology/Sampling_Note-Consolidated-2-16-22.pdf). Stratified random sampling has several advantages over simple random sampling. In particular, it:

• produces unbiased estimates of the whole population or universe of inference, as well as at the levels of stratification
• ensures representativeness by including observations in all of those categories
• produces more precise estimates for a given sample size or budget allocation, and
• may reduce implementation costs by splitting the population into convenient subdivisions.

The WBES typically use three levels of stratification: industry classification, establishment size, and subnational region (used in combination). Starting in 2022, the WBES bases the industry classification on ISIC Rev. 4 (with earlier surveys using ISIC Rev. 3.1). For regional coverage within a country, the WBES has national coverage.

Note: For detailed sampling methodology, refer to the Sampling Structure section in "The Taiwan, China 2024 World Bank Enterprise Survey Implementation Report."

Mode of data collection

Face-to-face [f2f]

Research instrument

The standard WBES questionnaire covers several topics regarding the business environment and business performance. These topics include general firm characteristics, infrastructure, sales and supplies, trade, management practices, competition, innovation, capacity, land and permits, finance, business-government relations, exposure to bribery, labor, and performance. Information about the general structure of the questionnaire is available in the Enterprise Surveys Manual and Guide (https://www.enterprisesurveys.org/content/dam/enterprisesurveys/documents/methodology/Enterprise-Surveys-Manual-and-Guide.pdf).

Response rate

Overall survey response rate was 5.9%.

Anonymised results of an international survey of Research Data Services provided by academic libraries.The survey was distributed Feb-April 2018 in the following countries: Australia, Canada, Germany, Ireland, Netherlands, New Zealand, UK, USA - primarily by direct invitation to a library director.A similar survey was distributed in 2014.Supports the following articles:-Cox, A., Kennan, M., Lyon, L., Pinfield, S. and Sbaffi, L. (2019), "Maturing research data services and the transformation of academic libraries", Journal of Documentation, Vol. 75 No. 6, pp. 1432-1462. https://doi.org/10.1108/JD-12-2018-0211Cox, A., Kennan, M., Lyon, L., Pinfield, S. and Sbaffi, L. "Progress in Research Data Services: An international survey of university libraries (2019), VOL 14 NO 1 (2019) http://www.ijdc.net/article/view/595

Link Function: information

Abstract copyright UK Data Service and data collection copyright owner. The BlueHealth International Survey was a deliverable of the Horizon 2020 BlueHealth project. It addressed the lack of coordinated and harmonised data across countries on people’s recreational visits to natural environments, in particular blue spaces (i.e. natural environments where water is a salient feature), and their effects on people’s physical and psychological health. The data was collected from nationally representative samples of adults from 11 European countries across the course of the years 2017-2018 by the market research company, YouGov. Along with the survey data, geographical exposures are supplied (e.g. land cover classes, air pollution) which were appended to the participant's given residence. Residential addresses have been removed from this dataset. Filtering variables and summary variables are also provided. The survey consists of the following modules of questions: subjective well-being items, items concerning frequencies of visits to natural environments, natural environment perceptions, recent bluespace visit characteristics, an experimental module on water quality, health and well-being items, and demographic items. Publications related to this data mention that data were collected in 18 countries. The data deposit herein refers to the 11 countries where the data collection was funded by the BlueHealth project. Data from the remaining 7 countries and territories was not funded by the same source and we do not have the permission to deposit these as a combined data file. We request that users acknowledge the use of this data in the following ways in any outputs they produce: Acknowledge the BlueHealth project protocol paper: https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2017-016188Acknowledge the technical report describing the methodology of the BlueHealth International Survey: https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/7AZU2Acknowledge this data deposit.Acknowledge the source of funding with the following text: "The BlueHealth International Survey data was created using funding from the European Union's Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme under grant agreement No. 666773." Main Topics: Recreation in the natural environment; neighbourhood nature; public health and wellbeing. Multi-stage stratified random sample

Research software is increasingly recognized as critical infrastructure in contemporary science. Research software spans a broad spectrum, including source code files, algorithms, scripts, computational workflows, and executables, all created for or during research. Research funders have developed programs, initiatives and policies to bolster research software’s role. However, there has been no empirical study of how research funders prioritize support for research software. This information is needed to clarify where current funder support is concentrated and where strategic gaps may exist. Here, we present data from a survey of research software funders (n=36) from around the world. The survey explored these funders’ priorities, finding a strong emphasis on developing skills, software sustainability, embedding open science, building community and collaboration, advancing research software funding, increasing software visibility and use, innovation and security.

Methods

This research was carried out using a survey combining qualitative and quantitative items. The survey was designed to investigate how research software funders support research software’s sustainability and impact.

The study was reviewed and given an exempt determination by the University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign Institutional Review Board (no. 24374).

Survey design

The survey designed for this study began by collecting profile information, including institutional affiliation and job title. The survey gathered information about respondents’ organization’s initiatives, policies, or programs to support research software. The range of questions yielded too much data for one article. In this article, we focus exclusively on the results generated via an open-ended question asking about the top priorities for the respondents’ organizations’ support for research software: “What are your organization's top priorities related to research software?”. Four open-response text boxes were provided for respondents to indicate and list these priorities.

Sampling

This survey was aimed at international research funders, including governmental and non-governmental (e.g., philanthropic) funders. A list of contacts to invite to participate in this survey was created based on participation in the Research Software Association (ReSA) and responsibility for research software funding known to the authors. This initial list of people was refined, with removals based on individuals having moved to unrelated professional roles or being unavailable long-term, for example, due to personal issues.

The final, refined contact list comprised 71 people. After removing individuals when a member of their organization already provided a complete answer or when the person turned out to no longer be working on a relevant topic or to be otherwise unavailable (total of n=30), 41 people remained. Five of these individuals did not complete the survey, while 36 people (representing 30 research funding organizations) did, yielding a response rate of 87.8%. Fully completed survey responses were not required for individuals to be retained in the sample, resulting in varied sample bases across survey questions.

The sample includes research funders in North and South America, Europe, Oceania and Asia, but over-represents North America and European funder representatives. Some participating funders cover a broad spectrum of disciplines, while others focus on a particular domain such as social science, health, environment, physical sciences or humanities.

Continent	Count
North America	15
South America	4
Europe	12
Oceania	3
Asia	1

The respondents represented research funders supported by governmental (n=26), philanthropic (n=6) and corporate (n=1) resources.

Respondents’ job titles span the following categories: Senior Leadership and Executive, such as a Vice President of Strategy; Program and Project Management, such as Senior Program Manager; Planning and Business Development; Scientific, Technical and IT, such as Scientific Information Lead.

Most respondents 72.7% (n=24) answered ‘Yes’ to the question, “Has your organization established any policies, initiatives or programs aimed at supporting research software?”, while 18.2% (n=6) said ‘No’ and 9.1% (n=3) ‘Unsure’.

Data collection, management and analysis

Data collection took place from December 2023 to May 2024. The mean completion time for the detailed survey was 28 minutes and 13 seconds.

The data were cleaned and prepared for analysis by removing any identifiable respondent details. The data analysis process followed a standard thematic qualitative analysis approach (e.g., Jensen & Laurie, 2016). This involved first identifying themes and organizing the data accordingly. Dimensions of each theme were identified where relevant. Then data extracts were selected from the survey responses associated with each theme and theme dimension.

Additional data: Evolving funding strategies for research software: Insights from an international survey of research funders

Data were uploaded in December 2024 to support another paper drawing on the same overall survey data. This one is entitled: 'Evolving funding strategies for research software: Insights from an international survey of research funders'. The survey data for this upload were generated using the following survey items.

Variable	Survey Item	Response Options
Policies, initiatives, or programs aimed at supporting research software	“Has your organization established any policies, initiatives or programs aimed at supporting research software?” (This could include grants, fellowships, funding policies, conference funding, or other kinds of support aimed at bolstering the sustainability or impact of research software)	Yes, No, Unsure (If ‘Yes’, then the next question was asked)
Number of policies or programs to be reported	“How many of your organization’s policies, initiatives or programs to support research software are you familiar with?”	1, 2, 3, 4, 5+
The following questions were asked for each policy, initiative, or program
Name of policy or program	“Please name the policy, initiative or program (starting with the one you are most familiar with):”	[Text line]
Status of policy or program	“What is the status of this policy, initiative or program?”	Completed/closed, In progress/open, Other (please specify)
Link(s)/description	“Please provide link(s) to the policy, initiative or program, upload or email to [the researcher’s contact details].” “Link(s)/Description:” (If there is no documentation available, please describe it here:)	[Textarea], [File upload]
Type of policy or program	“Which of the following best describes the policy, initiative or program you named above?”	Funding program, Policy that affects funding decision-making or outcomes (funder side), Policy that affects funding applicants or recipients (applicant/awardee side), Other (please specify)
If ‘Funding program’ was selected in the previous question, then the next question was asked
Type of funding	“Which of the following best describes the available funding?”	Funding that includes research software, Dedicated funding only for research software, Other (please specify)
For all categories of policy, initiative or program, the following questions were asked.
Problem(s) addressed	“Please summarize the problem(s) this policy, initiative or program is aiming to address from your organization’s perspective:”	[Text Area]
Perceived level of program success	“What factors have contributed to its success or lack of success?”	Very successful, Successful, Neutral, Unsuccessful, Very unsuccessful, Not applicable / No opinion

This document contains the raw data from an anonymous, cross-sectional, global online survey that aimed to identify the experiences and operation of research ethics review committees (ERCs) during the COVID-19 pandemic. Respondents were chairs (or their delegates) of ERCs who were involved in the review of COVID-19-related research protocols after March 2020. The 203 participants [130 from high-income countries (HICs) and 73 from low- and middle-income countries (LMICs)] came from diverse entities and organizations from 48 countries (19 HICs and 29 LMICs) in all World Health Organization regions.The survey questionnaire, administered through the Qualtrics Experience Management (XM) online platform, consisted of 50 items, with opportunities for open text responses. This document includes two Excel spreadsheets with the original data from Qualtrics, one for participants from HICs and the other for participants from LMICs.The study received approval from Western University’s Non-Medical Research Ethics Board (Protocol ID 120455). Additionally, it was evaluated by the World Health Organization Research Ethics Review Committee (Protocol ID CERC.0181) and was exempted from further review.

Abstract

The World Values Survey (WVS) is an international research program devoted to the scientific and academic study of social, political, economic, religious and cultural values of people in the world. The project’s goal is to assess which impact values stability or change over time has on the social, political and economic development of countries and societies. The project grew out of the European Values Study and was started in 1981 by its Founder and first President (1981-2013) Professor Ronald Inglehart from the University of Michigan (USA) and his team, and since then has been operating in more than 120 world societies. The main research instrument of the project is a representative comparative social survey which is conducted globally every 5 years. Extensive geographical and thematic scope, free availability of survey data and project findings for broad public turned the WVS into one of the most authoritative and widely-used cross-national surveys in the social sciences. At the moment, WVS is the largest non-commercial cross-national empirical time-series investigation of human beliefs and values ever executed.

The project’s overall aim is to analyze people’s values, beliefs and norms in a comparative cross-national and over-time perspective. To reach this aim, project covers a broad scope of topics from the field of Sociology, Political Science, International Relations, Economics, Public Health, Demography, Anthropology, Social Psychology and etc. In addition, WVS is the only academic study which covers the whole scope of global variations, from very poor to very rich societies in all world’s main cultural zones.

The WVS combines two institutional components. From one side, WVS is a scientific program and social research infrastructure that explores people’s values and beliefs. At the same time, WVS comprises an international network of social scientists and researchers from 120 world countries and societies. All national teams and individual researchers involved into the implementation of the WVS constitute the community of Principal Investigators (PIs). All PIs are members of the WVS.

The WVS seeks to help scientists and policy makers understand changes in the beliefs, values and motivations of people throughout the world. Thousands of political scientists, sociologists, social psychologists, anthropologists and economists have used these data to analyze such topics as economic development, democratization, religion, gender equality, social capital, and subjective well-being. The WVS findings have proved to be valuable for policy makers seeking to build civil society and stable political institutions in developing countries. The WVS data is also frequently used by governments around the world, scholars, students, journalists and international organizations such as the World Bank, World Health Organization (WHO), United Nations Development Program (UNDP) and the United Nations Headquarters in New York (USA). The WVS data has been used in thousands of scholarly publications and the findings have been reported in leading media such as Time, Newsweek, The New York Times, The Economist, the World Development Report, the World Happiness Report and the UN Human Development Report.

The World Values Survey Association is governed by the Executive Committee, the Scientific Advisory Committee, and the General Assembly, under the terms of the Constitution.

Strategic goals for the 7th wave included:

Expansion of territorial coverage from 60 countries in WVS-6 to 80 in WVS-7; Deepening collaboration within the international development community; Deepening collaboration within NGOs, academic institutions and research foundations; Updating the WVS-7 questionnaire with new topics & items covering new social phenomena and emerging processes of value change; Expanding the 7th wave WVS with data useful for monitoring the SDGs; Expanding capacity and resources for survey fieldwork in developing countries. The 7th wave continued monitoring cultural values, attitudes and beliefs towards gender, family, and religion; attitudes and experience of poverty; education, health, and security; social tolerance and trust; attitudes towards multilateral institutions; cultural differences and similarities between regions and societies. In addition, the WVS-7 questionnaire has been elaborated with the inclusion of such new topics as the issues of justice, moral principles, corruption, accountability and risk, migration, national security and global governance.

For more information on the history of the WVSA, visit https://www.worldvaluessurvey.org/WVSContents.jsp ›Who we are › History of the WVSA.

Geographic coverage

Kenya.

The WVS has just completed wave 7 data that comprises 64 surveys conducted in 2017-2022. With 64 countries and societies around the world and more than 80,000 respondents, this is the latest resource made available for the research community.

The WVS-7 survey was launched in January 2017 with Bolivia becoming the first country to conduct WVS-7. In the course of 2017 and 2018, WVS-7 has been conducted in the USA, Mexico, Brazil, Argentina, Chile, Ecuador, Peru, Andorra, Greece, Serbia, Romania, Turkey, Russia, Germany, Thailand, Australia, Malaysia, Indonesia, China, Pakistan, Egypt, Jordan, Nigeria, Iraq and over dozen of other world countries. Geographic coverage has also been expanded to several new countries included into the WVS for the first time, such as Bolivia, Greece, Macao SAR, Maldives, Myanmar, Nicaragua, and Tajikistan.

Analysis unit

Household, Individual

Sampling procedure

The sample type preferable for using in the World Values Survey is a full probability sample of the population aged 18 years and older. A detailed description of the sampling methodology is provided in the country specific sample design documentation available for download from WVS.

A detailed description of the sampling methodology is provided in the Kenya 2021 sample design documentation available for download from WVS and also from the Downloads section of the metadata.

Mode of data collection

Computer Assisted Personal Interview [capi]

Research instrument

The survey was fielded in the following language(s): Swahili. The questionnaire is available for download from the WVS website.

"https://www.pewresearch.org" Target="_blank">The Pew Research Center International Science Survey investigates attitudes towards scientific innovation, the relationship between religion and science, and environmental attitudes across a broad range of publics. Survey publics included Australia, Brazil, Canada, Czech Republic, France, Germany, Indian, Italy, Japan, Malaysia, the Netherlands, Poland, Russia, Singapore, South Korea, Spain, Sweden, Taiwan, United Kingdom, and the United States.

Abstract copyright UK Data Service and data collection copyright owner. The International Research Integrity Survey (IRIS) is a large, cross-national survey of researchers in all EU member states and selected OECD countries on the topic of research integrity. The survey was fielded online in 2021 with a sample frame derived from the ISI Web of Science citation index. The survey includes topics pertaining to questionable research practices, perception of organisational policies to support research quality, attitudes towards research integrity training, scientific norms and researcher motivation. The sample contains respondents from natural, medical and social science, as well as arts and humanities. Main Topics: The data include variables on values, beliefs and attitudes in relation to science practices, research integrity policies and the role of organisations in implementing them; the current research integrity landscape, including awareness of and satisfaction with current research integrity arrangements; personal efficacy and behaviour; and receptivity towards research integrity policies including specific examples of standard operating procedures. One-stage stratified or systematic random sample

The Global Party Survey, 2019 (GPS) is an international expert survey directed by Pippa Norris (Harvard University). Drawing on 1,861 party and election experts, the Global Party Survey, 2019 estimates key ideological values, issue positions, and populist rhetoric for 1,043 parties in 163 countries. The research project is designed to replicate the tried and tested methods of expert surveys, while simultaneously innovating and broadening the research agenda in several important ways. • By expanding the geographic scope of coverage, including parties and countries in all inhabited continents, it allows users to move beyond the traditional focus on Europe. • By incorporating continuous scaled measures of populist rhetoric, as well as ideological values, analysts can compare the degree to which all parties commonly adopt this discourse, not simply confining analysis to those designated a priori in binary categories as ‘populist’ parties. • By including party codes used in many other related cross-national studies, the dataset facilitates easy merger for multilevel analysis, such as by comparing party positions with their institutional characteristics or with the attitudes of their voters. • At the same time, however, sufficient continuity is preserved with prior research measuring party positions to facilitate comparison with these established datasets. Several robustness and validity tests increase confidence in the external validity of the new study. More: www.GlobalPartySurvey.org @PippaN15

Abstract

The Country Opinion Survey in Algeria assists the World Bank Group (WBG) in better understanding how stakeholders in Algeria perceive the WBG. It provides the WBG with systematic feedback from national and local governments, multilateral/bilateral agencies, media, academia, the private sector, and civil society in Algeria on 1) their views regarding the general environment in Algeria; 2) their overall attitudes toward the WBG in Algeria; 3) overall impressions of the WBG’s effectiveness and results, knowledge work and activities, and communication and information sharing in Algeria; and 4) their perceptions of the WBG’s future role in Algeria.

Geographic coverage

National

Analysis unit

Stakeholders of the World Bank Group in Algeria

Kind of data

Sample survey data [ssd]

Sampling procedure

From May 2023 to September 2023, a total of 258 stakeholders of the WBG in Algeria were invited to provide their opinions about the WBG’s work in the country by participating in a Country Opinion Survey (COS). Participants were drawn from the Office of the President, Prime Minister, Minister, Office of a Parliamentarian (National Assembly, Legislative body), Government Institutions, Local Governments, Bilateral/ Multilateral Agencies, Private Sector, Civil Society, Academia, and the Media.

Mode of data collection

Internet [int]

Research instrument

The survey was implemented in English and French. The English version of the questionnaire is provided as related material.

Response rate

The response rate was 29% The results of this year’s survey were compared to the FY17 COS Survey with a response rate of 24% (N=107). Comparing responses across years reflects changes in attitudes over time, but also changes in respondent samples, methodology, and the survey instrument itself. To reduce the influence of the latter factor, only those questions with similar response scales/options were analyzed. Additionally, this year, the COS project utilized the Pulse Survey format, which is a shorter version conducted online by the COS team. The list of respondents was provided solely by the country team, which indicates a shift in the stakeholder composition compared to FY17. Thus, this year’s survey saw an increased outreach to and response from government stakeholders and stakeholders from bilateral and multilateral agencies, but a decrease in civil society, academia, and media. These differences in stakeholder composition between the two years should be considered when interpreting the results of the past-year comparison analyses.

Abstract

The Country Opinion Survey in Chile assists the World Bank Group (WBG) in better understanding how stakeholders in Chile perceive the WBG. It provides the WBG with systematic feedback from national and local governments, multilateral/bilateral agencies, media, academia, the private sector, and civil society in Chile on 1) their views regarding the general environment in Chile; 2) their overall attitudes toward the WBG in Chile; 3) overall impressions of the WBG’s effectiveness and results, knowledge work and activities, and communication and information sharing in Chile; and 4) their perceptions of the WBG’s future role in Chile.

Geographic coverage

National coverage

Analysis unit

Stakeholders of the World Bank Group in Chile

Kind of data

Sample survey data [ssd]

Sampling procedure

From November 2023 to February 2024, 870 stakeholders in Chile were invited to provide their opinions on the WBG’s work by participating in a Country Opinion Survey. A list of potential participants was compiled by the WBG country team and the fielding agency. Participants were drawn from the offices of the President, Prime Minister, and minister, the office of a parliamentarian, government institutions, local governments, bilateral/ multilateral agencies, the private sector, civil society organizations, academia, and the media. A total of 301 stakeholders participated in the survey.

Mode of data collection

Internet [int]

Research instrument

English and Spanish languages. The English version is provided as related material.

Response rate

The response rate was 35%

The results of this year’s survey were compared to the FY20 Survey, which had a response rate of 22% (N=166). Comparing responses across Country Surveys reflects changes in attitudes over time but also changes in respondent samples, changes in methodology, and changes to the survey instrument itself. To reduce the influence of the latter factor, only those questions with similar response scales/options were analyzed. This year’s survey saw an increased outreach to and/or response from local government, but a decrease from government principals, media, and civil society. These differences in stakeholder composition between the two years should be taken into consideration when interpreting the results of the past-year comparison analyses.

In 2022, the research method with the highest share of market research spend worldwide was quantitative research, with roughly ** percent of the total share. Second in the list was reporting, with **** percent of the share.

This is the complete set of results from the survey of institutional research data management services conducted by the Research Data Architectures for Research Institutions (RDARI) Interest Group of the Research Data Alliance (RDA). The survey was conducted between July and November 2019. The dataset consists of 82 responses, deduplicated and with email addresses redacted where explicit consent to publish was not granted.The survey results are provided in two formats: as an Excel file, and as comma-separated values. The survey questions and answer formats are provided both in the Excel file and the accompanying readme.txt file.The RDARI International Survey of Institutional Research Data Services (2019) was intended to capture the contemporary state of research data management service provision in research institutions and in so doing establish grounds for benchmarking between institutions. In addition, it was intended to facilitate and encourage the exchange of useful information between institutions to help RDM service providers learn from each other's experiences. Besides questions relating to the scale and nature of each institution, the survey gathered data relating to technologies, governance, resourcing, costs models, uptake, and the perceived success (or otherwise) of a range of research data management services.

The Survey of International Air Travelers is an on-going primary research program which gathers statistical data about air passenger travelers in U.S. - overseas and U.S. - Mexican markets. Survey data provides information on passenger trip planning, travel patterns, demographics and spending for two separate populations – non-U.S. residents traveling to the U.S. and U.S. residents traveling from the U.S.

Many new websites and online tools have come into existence to support scholarly communication in all phases of the research workflow. To what extent researchers are using these and more traditional tools has been largely unknown. This 2015-2016 survey aimed to fill that gap.

https://101innovations.files.wordpress.com/2016/04/survey-demographics-doughnut.png" alt="Demographics of 20,663 survey respondents">

The survey captured information on tool usage for 17 research activities, stance towards open access and open science, and expectations of the most important development in scholarly communication. Respondents’ demographics included research roles, country of affiliation, research discipline and year of first publication. The online survey employed an open, non-probability sample. A largely self-selected group of 20,663 researchers, librarians, editors, publishers and other groups involved in research took the survey, which was available in seven languages. The survey was open from May 10, 2015 to February 10, 2016.

This data set contains:

• Full raw (anonymized) and cleaned data files (csv, each file containing 20,663 records and 178 variables)
• Variable lists for raw and cleaned data files (csv)
• Readme file (txt)

The dataset is also deposited in Zenodo: http://dx.doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.49583

The full description of survey methodology is in a data publication in F1000 Research: http://dx.doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.8414.1

More information on the project this survey is part of can be found here: http://101innovations.wordpress.com

[edited to add] For quick visual exploration of the data, check out the interactive dashboard on Silk: http://dashboard101innovations.silk.co/

Contact:

• Jeroen Bosman: http://orcid.org/0000-0001-5796-2727 / j.bosman@uu.nl
• Bianca Kramer: http://orcid.org/0000-0002-5965-6560 / b.m.r.kramer@uu.nl

Abstract

The Country Opinion Survey in Jamaica assists the World Bank Group (WBG) in gaining a better understanding of how stakeholders in Jamaica perceive the WBG. It provides the WBG with systematic feedback from national and local governments, multilateral/bilateral agencies, media, academia, the private sector, and civil society in Jamaica on 1) their views regarding the general environment in Jamaica; 2) their overall attitudes toward the WBG in Jamaica; 3) overall impressions of the WBG’s effectiveness and results, knowledge work and activities, and communication and information sharing in Jamaica; and 4) their perceptions of the WBG’s future role in Jamaica.

Geographic coverage

Kingston, Montego Bay, and other towns

Analysis unit

Stakeholder

Kind of data

Sample survey data [ssd]

Sampling procedure

From May 2023 to June 2023, 477 stakeholders of the WBG in Jamaica were invited to provide their opinions about the WBG’s work in the country by participating in a Country Opinion Survey. Participants were drawn from the Office of the Governor General, Prime Minister, Minister; Parliament of Jamaica, government institutions; local governments; bilateral / multilateral agencies; the private sector; civil society organizations; academia, research institutes, think tanks, and the media.

Mode of data collection

Internet [int]

Research instrument

The survey was conducted in English

Response rate

The response rate was 29% The results of this year’s Country Survey were compared to those of the Country Survey conducted in FY19 (response rate was 26%, N=114). Comparing responses across Country Surveys reflects changes in attitudes over time, as well as changes in respondent samples and the survey instrument itself. To reduce the influence of the latter factor, only those questions with similar response scales/options are analyzed.

This dataset contains the findings of a global survey conducted with the members of 4 international academic societies from the field of Operations Management & Operations Research (INFORMS, MSOM, POMS, EurOMA) on how scholars perceive the value of in-person and virtual conferences. The dataset is provided in both .csv and .xlsx formats. The dataset is linked to the article below, where all the details regarding data collection and analysis can be found.

Cavallin Toscani, A., Atasu, A., Van Wassenhove, L.N., & Vinelli, A. (2023). In-Person or Virtual? What Will Operations Management/Research Conferences Look Like?. Manufacturing & Service Operations Management. https://doi.org/10.1287/msom.2022.0591