The survey dataset for identifying Shiraz old silo’s new use which includes four components: 1. The survey instrument used to collect the data “SurveyInstrument_table.pdf”. The survey instrument contains 18 main closed-ended questions in a table format. Two of these, concern information on Silo’s decision-makers and proposed new use followed up after a short introduction of the questionnaire, and others 16 (each can identify 3 variables) are related to the level of appropriate opinions for ideal intervention in Façade, Openings, Materials and Floor heights of the building in four values: Feasibility, Reversibility, Compatibility and Social Benefits. 2. The raw survey data “SurveyData.rar”. This file contains an Excel.xlsx and a SPSS.sav file. The survey data file contains 50 variables (12 for each of the four values separated by colour) and data from each of the 632 respondents. Answering each question in the survey was mandatory, therefor there are no blanks or non-responses in the dataset. In the .sav file, all variables were assigned with numeric type and nominal measurement level. More details about each variable can be found in the Variable View tab of this file. Additional variables were created by grouping or consolidating categories within each survey question for simpler analysis. These variables are listed in the last columns of the .xlsx file. 3. The analysed survey data “AnalysedData.rar”. This file contains 6 “SPSS Statistics Output Documents” which demonstrate statistical tests and analysis such as mean, correlation, automatic linear regression, reliability, frequencies, and descriptives. 4. The codebook “Codebook.rar”. The detailed SPSS “Codebook.pdf” alongside the simplified codebook as “VariableInformation_table.pdf” provides a comprehensive guide to all 50 variables in the survey data, including numerical codes for survey questions and response options. They serve as valuable resources for understanding the dataset, presenting dictionary information, and providing descriptive statistics, such as counts and percentages for categorical variables.

GENERAL INFORMATION

Title of Dataset: A dataset from a survey investigating disciplinary differences in data citation

Date of data collection: January to March 2022

Collection instrument: SurveyMonkey

Funding: Alfred P. Sloan Foundation

SHARING/ACCESS INFORMATION

Licenses/restrictions placed on the data: These data are available under a CC BY 4.0 license

Links to publications that cite or use the data:

Gregory, K., Ninkov, A., Ripp, C., Peters, I., & Haustein, S. (2022). Surveying practices of data citation and reuse across disciplines. Proceedings of the 26th International Conference on Science and Technology Indicators. International Conference on Science and Technology Indicators, Granada, Spain. https://doi.org/10.5281/ZENODO.6951437

Gregory, K., Ninkov, A., Ripp, C., Roblin, E., Peters, I., & Haustein, S. (2023). Tracing data:
A survey investigating disciplinary differences in data citation. Zenodo. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.7555266

DATA & FILE OVERVIEW

File List

• Filename: MDCDatacitationReuse2021Codebook.pdf
  Codebook
• Filename: MDCDataCitationReuse2021surveydata.csv
  Dataset format in csv
• Filename: MDCDataCitationReuse2021surveydata.sav
  Dataset format in SPSS
• Filename: MDCDataCitationReuseSurvey2021QNR.pdf
  Questionnaire

Additional related data collected that was not included in the current data package: Open ended questions asked to respondents

METHODOLOGICAL INFORMATION

Description of methods used for collection/generation of data:

The development of the questionnaire (Gregory et al., 2022) was centered around the creation of two main branches of questions for the primary groups of interest in our study: researchers that reuse data (33 questions in total) and researchers that do not reuse data (16 questions in total). The population of interest for this survey consists of researchers from all disciplines and countries, sampled from the corresponding authors of papers indexed in the Web of Science (WoS) between 2016 and 2020.

Received 3,632 responses, 2,509 of which were completed, representing a completion rate of 68.6%. Incomplete responses were excluded from the dataset. The final total contains 2,492 complete responses and an uncorrected response rate of 1.57%. Controlling for invalid emails, bounced emails and opt-outs (n=5,201) produced a response rate of 1.62%, similar to surveys using comparable recruitment methods (Gregory et al., 2020).

Methods for processing the data:

Results were downloaded from SurveyMonkey in CSV format and were prepared for analysis using Excel and SPSS by recoding ordinal and multiple choice questions and by removing missing values.

Instrument- or software-specific information needed to interpret the data:

The dataset is provided in SPSS format, which requires IBM SPSS Statistics. The dataset is also available in a coded format in CSV. The Codebook is required to interpret to values.

DATA-SPECIFIC INFORMATION FOR: MDCDataCitationReuse2021surveydata

Number of variables: 94

Number of cases/rows: 2,492

Missing data codes: 999 Not asked

Refer to MDCDatacitationReuse2021Codebook.pdf for detailed variable information.

Citizen Science (CS) projects play a crucial role in engaging citizens in conservation efforts. While implicitly mostly considered as an outcome of CS participation, citizens may also have a certain attitude toward engagement in CS when starting to participate in a CS project. Moreover, there is a lack of CS studies that consider changes over longer periods of time. Therefore, this research presents two-wave data from four field studies of a CS project about urban wildlife ecology using cross-lagged panel analyses. We investigated the influence of attitudes toward engagement in CS on self-related, ecology-related, and motivation-related outcomes. We found that positive attitudes toward engagement in CS at the beginning of the CS project had positive influences on participants’ psychological ownership and pride in their participation, their attitudes toward and enthusiasm about wildlife, and their internal and external motivation two months later. We discuss the implications for CS research and practice. Dataset for: Greving, H., Bruckermann, T., Schumann, A., Stillfried, M., Börner, K., Hagen, R., Kimmig, S. E., Brandt, M., & Kimmerle, J. (2023). Attitudes Toward Engagement in Citizen Science Increase Self-Related, Ecology-Related, and Motivation-Related Outcomes in an Urban Wildlife Project. BioScience, 73(3), 206–219. https://doi.org/10.1093/biosci/biad003: Codebook (CSV format) of the variables of all field studies

This file contains the SPSS codebook and workflow for the data analysis of the OptiBreech Care IRAS 303028 study. Variables are described by their original database title, SPSS variable name, and explanatory label. Subset variable descriptions are provided. Code for transforming variables is provided. This codebook will enable replication of the data analysis within SPSS.

Codebook for the analysis of the data set in SPSS

Project description: This two-year research project, funded by the Institute of Museum and Library Sciences (funding number: IMLS LG-252338-OLS-22), develops assessment tools to capture the undergraduate students’ academic engagement including library use, psychological factors, and their own academic success. It explores how students define success, the library’s role in their achievement, and factors correlating with GPA.During the second year of the research project, the Student Academic Engagement and Success (SAES) Survey was revised and implemented at UIC and NIU. The SAES survey, conducted in January–February, had 1,899 respondents at UIC (9.8% of 19,371) and 577 at NIU (6.9% of 8,423).Required software: SPSS or ExcelDownloads: Datasets (SPSS, and Excel), codebooks.Scoulas, Jung Mi; De Groote, Sandra; Shotick, Kimberly; Osorio, Nestor (2024). Student Success Data and Codebooks. University of Illinois at Chicago. Collection. https://doi.org/10.25417/uic.c.7241047Student Academic Engagement and Success (SAES) SurveyScoulas, Jung Mi; De Groote, Sandra; Shotick, Kimberly; Osorio, Nestor (2024). Student Academic Engagement and Success (SAES) survey. University of Illinois at Chicago. Educational resource. https://doi.org/10.25417/uic.26828848The Assessment Tools are licensed under CC BY-NC-SA-4.0.Instructional Videos: https://libscholar.digital.uic.edu/assessment-tools/recordings/Questions about dataset, please contact at assessmenttools@uic.eduFunding: IMLS LG-252338-OLS-22 (https://www.imls.gov/grants/awarded/lg-252338-ols-22)

Replication dataset for: Kramer, Stefan, Selected differences between directors and other personnel in assessment of their own U.S. academic library (March 2, 2021). Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3915735 or http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3915735. The ZIP file downloadable here contains the dataset in SPSS and CSV formats and the SPSS-generated codebook in PDF format.

This dataset contains almost all of the variables from the 2019 "Survey of academic and research librarians in Germany and the USA" (http://doi.org/10.17606/7vas-4p59). Several open-ended questions in the original data were coded into new variables in this dataset by the P.I., and the open-ended question variables removed. The ZIP file made available here contains: 1.) the dataset in SPSS data file (.sav) format; 2.) the dataset in comma-separated values (.csv) format; 3.) the dataset codebook in SPSS output file (.spv) format; 4.) the dataset codebook in portable document format (.PDF). A subset of this dataset is also available - the replication dataset (http://doi.org/10.3886/E111106V1) for the first published article that resulted from the survey: Kramer, S. and Horstmann, W., 2020. Perceptions and beliefs of academic librarians in Germany and the USA: a comparative study. LIBER Quarterly, 29(1), pp.1–18. DOI: http://doi.org/10.18352/lq.10314

Abstract (en): The purpose of this data collection is to provide an official public record of the business of the federal courts. The data originate from 94 district and 12 appellate court offices throughout the United States. Information was obtained at two points in the life of a case: filing and termination. The termination data contain information on both filing and terminations, while the pending data contain only filing information. For the appellate and civil data, the unit of analysis is a single case. The unit of analysis for the criminal data is a single defendant. ICPSR data undergo a confidentiality review and are altered when necessary to limit the risk of disclosure. ICPSR also routinely creates ready-to-go data files along with setups in the major statistical software formats as well as standard codebooks to accompany the data. In addition to these procedures, ICPSR performed the following processing steps for this data collection: Performed consistency checks.; Standardized missing values.; Checked for undocumented or out-of-range codes.. All federal court cases, 1970-2000. 2012-05-22 All parts are being moved to restricted access and will be available only using the restricted access procedures.2005-04-29 The codebook files in Parts 57, 94, and 95 have undergone minor edits and been incorporated with their respective datasets. The SAS files in Parts 90, 91, 227, and 229-231 have undergone minor edits and been incorporated with their respective datasets. The SPSS files in Parts 92, 93, 226, and 228 have undergone minor edits and been incorporated with their respective datasets. Parts 15-28, 34-56, 61-66, 70-75, 82-89, 96-105, 107, 108, and 115-121 have had identifying information removed from the public use file and restricted data files that still include that information have been created. These parts have had their SPSS, SAS, and PDF codebook files updated to reflect the change. The data, SPSS, and SAS files for Parts 34-37 have been updated from OSIRIS to LRECL format. The codebook files for Parts 109-113 have been updated. The case counts for Parts 61-66 and 71-75 have been corrected in the study description. The LRECL for Parts 82, 100-102, and 105 have been corrected in the study description.2003-04-03 A codebook was created for Part 105, Civil Pending, 1997. Parts 232-233, SAS and SPSS setup files for Civil Data, 1996-1997, were removed from the collection since the civil data files for those years have corresponding SAS and SPSS setup files.2002-04-25 Criminal data files for Parts 109-113 have all been replaced with updated files. The updated files contain Criminal Terminations and Criminal Pending data in one file for the years 1996-2000. Part 114, originally Criminal Pending 2000, has been removed from the study and the 2000 pending data are now included in Part 113.2001-08-13 The following data files were revised to include plaintiff and defendant information: Appellate Terminations, 2000 (Part 107), Appellate Pending, 2000 (Part 108), Civil Terminations, 1996-2000 (Parts 103, 104, 115-117), and Civil Pending, 2000 (Part 118). The corresponding SAS and SPSS setup files and PDF codebooks have also been edited.2001-04-12 Criminal Terminations (Parts 109-113) data for 1996-2000 and Criminal Pending (Part 114) data for 2000 have been added to the data collection, along with corresponding SAS and SPSS setup files and PDF codebooks.2001-03-26 Appellate Terminations (Part 107) and Appellate Pending (Part 108) data for 2000 have been added to the data collection, along with corresponding SAS and SPSS setup files and PDF codebooks.1997-07-16 The data for 18 of the Criminal Data files were matched to the wrong part numbers and names, and now have been corrected. Funding insitution(s): United States Department of Justice. Office of Justice Programs. Bureau of Justice Statistics. (1) Several, but not all, of these record counts include a final blank record. Researchers may want to detect this occurrence and eliminate this record before analysis. (2) In July 1984, a major change in the recording and disposition of an appeal occurred, and several data fields dealing with disposition were restructured or replaced. The new structure more clearly delineates mutually exclusive dispositions. Researchers must exercise care in using these fields for comparisons. (3) In 1992, the Administrative Office of the United States Courts changed the reporting period for statistical data. Up to 1992, the reporting period...

Aharoni et al. study data in both csv and SPSS format. See codebook for coding value/label assignments. Dataset for: Aharoni, E., Simpson, D., Nahmias, E., & Gollwitzer, M. (2022). A painful message: Testing the effects of suffering and understanding on punishment judgments. Zeitschrift für Psychologie, 230(2), 138–151. https://doi.org/10.1027/2151-2604/a000460: data - vertical format

The SPSS exported Codebook for the RAAAP-2 Main Dataset. It contains some small explanations on how differences from RAAAP-1 have been dealt wth.

Abstract (en): Roll call voting records for both chambers of the United States Congress through the second session of the 105th Congress are presented in this data collection. Each data file in the collection contains information for one chamber of a single Congress. The units of analysis in each part are the individual members of Congress. Each record contains a member's voting action on every roll call vote taken during that Congress, along with variables that identify the member (e.g., name, party, state, district, uniform ICPSR member number, and most recent means of attaining office). In addition, the codebook provides descriptive information for each roll call, including the date of the vote, outcome in terms of nays and yeas, name of initiator, the relevant bill or resolution number, and a synopsis of the issue. ICPSR data undergo a confidentiality review and are altered when necessary to limit the risk of disclosure. ICPSR also routinely creates ready-to-go data files along with setups in the major statistical software formats as well as standard codebooks to accompany the data. In addition to these procedures, ICPSR performed the following processing steps for this data collection: Checked for undocumented or out-of-range codes.. All roll call votes in the United States Congress. 2010-05-06 Data for the 105th Congress, House, and Senate (Parts 209-210), have been added to this collection, along with the standard ICPSR full product suite of files.2004-06-17 Variables were added to Part 110, Senate (55th Congress), and data within certain variables were corrected. SAS and SPSS data definition statements and the codebook have been modified to reflect these changes.2001-08-24 Logical record length data for the 8th session of the Senate, Part 16, is being made available along with SAS and SPSS data definition statements. The codebook has been modified to reflect these changes.1998-12-17 Data for the 104th Congress, House and Senate (Parts 207-208), have been added to this collection, along with corresponding machine-readable documentation and SAS and SPSS data definition statements.1997-02-24 Data for the 102nd and 103rd Congresses, House, and Senate (Parts 203-206) have been added to this collection, along with corresponding machine-readable documentation and SAS and SPSS data definition statements. The technical format has been standardized for all Congresses. Each file contains data for one chamber of a single Congress.

Abstract (en): The major focus of this Euro-Barometer is the respondent's knowledge of and attitudes toward the nations of the Third World. Topics covered include the culture and customs of these nations, the existence of poverty and hunger, and the respondent's opinions on how best to provide assistance to Third World countries. Individuals answered questions on social and political conditions as well as on the level of economic development in these countries. Additionally, respondents were asked to assess the state of relations between the respondent's country and various Third World nations. Another focus of this data collection concerns energy problems and resources in the countries of the European Economic Community. Respondents were asked to choose which regions of the world are considered to be reliable suppliers of fossil fuel for the future and to evaluate the risks that various industrial installations such as chemical and nuclear power plants pose to people living nearby. Respondents were also asked about solutions to the need for additional energy supplies in the future. Possible solutions included the development or continued development of nuclear power, the encouragement of research into producing renewable energy sources such as solar energy, and the conservation of energy. As in previous surveys in this series, respondents' attitudes toward the Community, life satisfaction, and social goals continued to be monitored. The survey also asked each individual to assess the advantages and disadvantages of the creation of a single common European market and whether they approved or disapproved of current efforts to unify western Europe. In addition, the respondent's political orientation, outlook for the future, and socioeconomic and demographic characteristics were probed. Please review the "Weighting Information" section located in the ICPSR codebook for this Eurobarometer study. ICPSR data undergo a confidentiality review and are altered when necessary to limit the risk of disclosure. ICPSR also routinely creates ready-to-go data files along with setups in the major statistical software formats as well as standard codebooks to accompany the data. In addition to these procedures, ICPSR performed the following processing steps for this data collection: Checked for undocumented or out-of-range codes.. Persons aged 15 and over residing in the 12 member nations of the European Community: Belgium, Denmark, France, Greece, Ireland, Italy, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, Portugal, Spain, United Kingdom, and West Germany (including West Berlin). Smallest Geographic Unit: country Multistage probability samples and stratified quota samples. 2009-04-13 The data have been further processed by GESIS-ZA, and the codebook, questionnaire, and SPSS setup files have been updated. Also, SAS and Stata setup files, SPSS and Stata system files, a SAS transport (CPORT) file, and a tab-delimited ASCII data file have been added. Funding insitution(s): National Science Foundation (SES 85-12100 and SES 88-09098). The original data collection was carried out by Faits et Opinions on request of the Commission of the European Communities.The GESIS-ZA study number for this collection is ZA1713, as it does not appear in the data.References to OSIRIS, card-image, and SPSS control cards in the ICPSR codebook for this study are no longer applicable as the data have not been provided in OSIRIS or card-image file formats.Please disregard any reference to column locations, width, or deck in the ICPSR codebook and questionnaire files as they are not applicable to the ICPSR-produced data file. Correct column locations and LRECL for the ICPSR-produced data file can be found in the SPSS and SAS setup files, and Stata dictionary file. The full-product suite of files produced by ICPSR have originated from an SPSS portable file provided by the data producer.Question numbering for Eurobarometer 28 is as follows: Q128-Q180, Q211-Q280, Q313-Q359, and Q60-Q80 (demographic questions). Some question numbers are intentionally skipped, however neither questions nor data are missing.For country-specific categories, filter information, and other remarks, please see the corresponding variable documentation in the ICPSR codebook.V465 (VOTE INTENTION - DENMARK): Danish respondents who declared for political party "Venstre" had been coded as falling into the missing value category during the raw data processing for Eurobarometer 28. The original coding for Eurobarome...

Data was collected for a PhD research project. The project investigated factors related to academic help-seeking behaviour in higher education using quantitative and qualitative methods. Quantitative data was collected via an online survey. Qualitative data was collected via semi-structured interviews. These were conducted via video calls.

It was found that reducing stigma, increasing positive attitudes and subjective norm, ensuring satisfaction, and providing timely and targeted promotion increase engagement with academic support. Universities can use these findings to improve academic support and ultimately student success.

The data methods are available in the Open Access publications from the Related publications link below.

The de-identified quantitative dataset is stored as an SPSS file (.sav). The SPSS files have also been exported in MS Excel (.xlxs) and CSV formats with the value labels. These files are available via conditional access i.e. negotiation with the Data Manager. The SPSS variable information and labels (codebook) are saved as a PDF file and can be downloaded and viewed (for context) via the link below.

The interview recordings (.m4a) and transcripts (MS Word and PDF), SPSS Amos files (.amw) and Nvivo project (.nvp) have been archived in secure storage. Access to these files is restricted.

Software/equipment used to create/collect the data: Qualtrics, Zoom

Software/equipment used to manipulate/analyse the data: SPSS, SPSS Amos, NVivo

Codebook for the RAAAP-3 Survey Data 12th April 2023 Note that these are exports from the RAAAP-3_MainDataset SPSS file There are some additional text fields in some of the associated datafiles Where there have been slight changes to questions / options from the RAAAP-1/2 surveys, and where it is sensible to do so, some additional computed fields have been added. For example in RAAAP-1 the question on gender identity only had 3 options; {female, male, prefer not to provide} For RAAAP-2 we added {non binary} as an option; this is retained in RAAAP-3 GenderExtended Gender All of the backcoding is described in the SPSS syntax files Variable Information tab is produced from SPSS: File --> Display Data File Information Variable Values tab is produced from SPSS: File --> Display Data File Information (at the same time as Variable Information)

I attach data and code to reproduce analyses for manuscript - Personality and Team Identification Predict Violent Intentions Among Soccer Supporters. I have attached the following data files: - Soccer_supporters_raw.sav - Soccer_data_raw.csv - Soccer_data.xlsx - Soccerpathmodel.txt

Codebook: - CodeBook_soccersupportersdata.csv*Note that this codebook applies to the raw data.

And code: Syntax_soccer_supporters.sps (to be opened in SPSS)*Note that this code is also available in non-proprietary .txt format: Syntax_soccer_supporters.txt

Soccerpathmodel.inp (to be opened in MPLUS (Muthén & Muthén, 2012, see also https://www.statmodel.com/ ).

@font-face {font-family:"Cambria Math"; panose-1:2 4 5 3 5 4 6 3 2 4; mso-font-charset:0; mso-generic-font-family:roman; mso-font-pitch:variable; mso-font-signature:3 0 0 0 1 0;}@font-face {font-family:Calibri; panose-1:2 15 5 2 2 2 4 3 2 4; mso-font-charset:0; mso-generic-font-family:swiss; mso-font-pitch:variable; mso-font-signature:-536859905 -1073732485 9 0 511 0;}p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal {mso-style-unhide:no; mso-style-qformat:yes; mso-style-parent:""; margin-top:6.0pt; margin-right:0cm; margin-bottom:12.0pt; margin-left:0cm; mso-pagination:widow-orphan; font-size:12.0pt; mso-bidi-font-size:11.0pt; font-family:"Times New Roman",serif; mso-fareast-font-family:Calibri; mso-fareast-theme-font:minor-latin; mso-bidi-font-family:"Times New Roman"; mso-bidi-theme-font:minor-bidi; mso-ansi-language:EN-US; mso-fareast-language:EN-US;}.MsoChpDefault {mso-style-type:export-only; mso-default-props:yes; font-size:11.0pt; mso-ansi-font-size:11.0pt; mso-bidi-font-size:11.0pt; font-family:"Cambria",serif; mso-ascii-font-family:Cambria; mso-ascii-theme-font:major-latin; mso-fareast-font-family:Calibri; mso-fareast-theme-font:minor-latin; mso-hansi-font-family:Cambria; mso-hansi-theme-font:major-latin; mso-bidi-font-family:"Times New Roman"; mso-bidi-theme-font:minor-bidi; mso-ansi-language:EN-US; mso-fareast-language:EN-US;}.MsoPapDefault {mso-style-type:export-only; margin-bottom:10.0pt; line-height:115%;}div.WordSection1 {page:WordSection1;} *Note that this code is also available in non-proprietal .txt format: soccerpathmodelcode.txt

To reproduce the results for this manuscript, please first open the file “Soccer_supporters_raw.sav” in SPSS (ideally version 25, with PROCESS add-on), and run the accompanying syntax: “Syntax_soccer_supporters.sps”. I also attach a non-proprietary version of this raw data - Soccer_data_raw.csv

Note that the code/syntax to run mediation analyses with PROCESS, is not available, since PROCESS does not allow for the pasting of syntax. So this part of the analyses needs to be completed manually through the point-and-click interface.

The remaining analyses were conducted in MPLUS. To do so, the original raw SPSS file was saved (after recoding and computing index variables), as a text file. We have also included this data in .xlsx format - see file Soccer data.xlsx

To reproduce the path model tested in MPLUS, run the input file “soccerpathmodel.inp” ensuring that the accompanying file - Soccerpathmodel.txt is located in the same folder.

The project aimed to understand whether young adults who take care of a loved-one (young adult caregivers; YACs) differ in their perceived life balance and psychosocial functioning as compared to young adults without care responsibilities (non-YACs). In addition, this project aimed to understand how YACs evaluated a tool to support informal careg

ivers. This tool (“Caregiver Balance”; https://balans.mantelzorg.nl) is specifically designed to support informal caregivers taking care of a loved-one in the palliative phase and could potentially be adapted to meet the needs of YACs.

In this project, we collected data of 74 YACs and 246 non-YACs. Both groups completed questionnaires, and the YACs engaged in a usability test. The questionnaire data was used to compare the perceived life balance and psychological functioning between YACs and non-YACs, aged 18-25 years, and studying in the Netherlands (study 1). Furthermore, we examined the relationship between positive aspects of caregiving and relational factors, in particular, relationship quality and collaborative coping among YACs (study 2). Finally, we conducted a usability study where we interviewed YACs to understand the needs and preferences towards a supportive web-based solution (study 3).

Table: Study details and associated files

    Number
    Study Name
    Study Aim
    Study Type
    Type of data
    Associated Files


    1
    Perceived life balance among young adult students: a comparison between caregivers and non-caregivers
    Compare the perceived life balance and psychological functions among student young adult caregivers aged 18-25 years (YACs) with young adult without care responsibilities
    Survey study
    Quantitative

ENTWINE_YACs_nonYACsSurvey_RawData

ENTWINE_PerceivedLifeBalanceSurvey_YACs_nonYACs_CleanedData

ENTWINE_ PerceivedLifeBalanceSurvey _Syntax

ENTWINE_YACs_nonYACsSurvey_codebook

    2
    Examining the relationship of positive aspects of caregiving with relational factors among young adult caregivers
    Examine the relationship of positive aspects of caregiving with relational factors, in particular, relationship quality and collaborative coping among a particular group of ICGs, young adult caregivers (YACs), aged 18-25 years.
    Survey study
    Quantitative

ENTWINE_YACs_nonYACsSurvey_RawData

ENTWINE_PositiveAspectsCaregiving_Survey_YACs_cleanedData

ENTWINE_PositiveAspectsCaregiving_Survey_Syntax

ENTWINE_YACs_nonYACsSurvey_codebook

    3
    Exploring the support needs of young adult caregivers, their issues, and preferences towards a web-based tool
    Explore (i) challenges and support needs of YACs in caregiving, (ii) their needs towards the content of the ‘MantelzorgBalans’ tool, and (iii) issues they encountered in using the tool and their preferences for adaptation of the tool.
    Usability study

Qualitative and Quantitative

ENTWINE_Needs_Web-basedTools_YACs_Interview_Usability_RawData [to be determined whether data can be shared]

ENTWINE_Needs_Web-basedTools_YACs_Questionnaires_RawData

Description of the files to be uploaded

Study 1: Perceived life balance among young adult students: a comparison between caregivers and non-caregivers

ENTWINE_YACs_nonYACsSurvey_RawData: SPSS file with the complete, raw, pseudonomyzed survey data. The following cleaned dataset ‘ENTWINE_PerceivedLifeBalanceSurvey_YACs_nonYACs_CleanedData’ was generated from this raw data.

ENTWINE_PerceivedLifeBalanceSurvey_YACs_nonYACs_CleanedData: SPSS file with the cleaned dataset having the following metadata -

Population: young adult caregivers and young adult non-caregivers aged 18-25 years studying in the Netherlands;

Number of participants: 320 participants in total (74 young adult caregivers and 246 young adult non-caregivers)

Time point of measurement: Data was collected from December 2020 till March 2022

Type of data: quantitative

Measurements included, topics covered: perceived life balance (based on the Occupational balance questionnaire [1]), burnout (Burnout Assessment Tool [2]), negative and positive affect (Positive and Negative Affect Schedule [3]), and life satisfaction (Satisfaction with Life Scale [4])

Short procedure conducted to receive data: online survey on Qualtrics platform

SPSS syntax file ‘ENTWINE_ PerceivedLifeBalanceSurvey _Syntax’ was used to clean and analyse ENTWINE_PerceivedLifeBalanceSurvey_YACs_nonYACs_CleanedData dataset

ENTWINE_YACs_nonYACsSurvey_codebook: Codebook having the variable names, variable labels, and the associated code values and code labels for ENTWINE_PerceivedLifeBalanceSurvey_YACs_nonYACs_CleanedData dataset

Study 2: Examining the relationship of positive aspects of caregiving with relational factors among young adult caregivers

ENTWINE_YACs_nonYACsSurvey_RawData: SPSS file with the complete, raw survey data. The following cleaned dataset ‘ENTWINE_PositiveAspectsCaregiving_Survey_YACs_cleanedData’ was generated from this raw data.

ENTWINE_PositiveAspectsCaregiving_Survey_YACs_cleanedData: SPSS file with the cleaned dataset having the following metadata -

Population: young adult caregivers aged 18-25 years studying in the Netherlands;

Number of participants: 74 young adult caregivers

Time point of measurement: Data was collected from December 2020 till March 2022

Type of data: quantitative

Measurements included, topics covered: positive aspects of caregiving (positive aspects of caregiving scale [5]), relationship quality (Relationship Assessment Scale [6]), collaborative coping (Perception of Collaboration Questionnaire [7] )

Short procedure conducted to receive data: online survey on Qualtrics platform.

SPSS syntax file ‘ENTWINE_PositiveAspectsCaregiving_Survey_Syntax’ was used to clean and analyse ‘ENTWINE_PositiveAspectsCaregiving_Survey_YACs_cleanedData’ dataset.

ENTWINE_YACs_nonYACsSurvey_codebook: Codebook having the variable names, variable labels, and the associated code values and code labels for ENTWINE_PositiveAspectsCaregiving_Survey_YACs_cleanedData dataset.

Study 3: Exploring the support needs of young adult caregivers, their issues, and preferences towards a web-based tool

ENTWINE_Needs_Web-basedTools_YACs_Interview_Usability_RawData: Pseudonymized word file including 13 transcripts having the qualitative data from interview and usability testing with the following metadata –

Population: young adult caregivers aged 18-25 years studying in the Netherlands; 13 participants in total

Time point of measurement: data was collected from October 2021 till February 2022

Type of data: qualitative and quantitative

Measurements included, topics covered: Caregiving challenges, support needs and barriers, usability needs, preferences and issues towards eHealth tool

Short procedure conducted to receive data: Online interviews

ENTWINE_Needs_Web-basedTools_YACs_Questionnaires_RawData: Excel sheet having the quantitative questionnaire raw data with the following metadata

Population: young adult caregivers aged 18-25 years studying in the Netherlands; 13 participants in total

Time point of measurement: data was collected from October 2021 till February 2022

Type of data: qualitative and quantitative

Measurements included, topics covered: User experience (user experience questionnaire [8]), satisfaction of using the web-based tool (After scenario questionnaire [9]), Intention of use and persuasive potential of the eHealth tool (persuasive potential questionnaire [10])

Short procedure conducted to receive data: Online questionnaire

Data collection details

All data was collected, processed, and archived in accordance with the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) and the FAIR (Findable, Accessible, Interoperable, Reusable) principles under the supervision of the Principal Investigator.

The principal researcher and a team of experts (supervisors) in the field of health psychology and eHealth (University of Twente, The Netherlands) reviewed the scientific quality of the research. The studies were piloted and tested before starting the collection of the data. For the survey study, the researchers monitored the data collection weekly to ensure it was running smoothly.

The ethical review board, Centrale Ethische Toetsingscommissie of the University Medical Center Groningen, The Netherlands (CTc), granted approval for this research (Registration number: 202000623).

Participants digitally signed informed consent for participating in the study.

Terms of use

Interested persons can send a data request by contacting the principal investigator (Prof. dr. Mariët Hagedoorn, University Medical Center Groningen, the Netherlands mariet.hageboorn@umcg.nl).

Interested persons must provide the research plan (including the research question, methodology, and analysis plan) when requesting for the data.

The principal investigator reviews the research plan on its quality and fit with the data and informs the interested person(s).

(Pseudo)anonymous data of those participants who agreed on the reuse of their data is available on request for 15 years from the time of completion of the PhD project.

Data will be available in Excel or SPSS format alongside the variable codebook after the completion of this PhD project and publication of the study results.

References

1. Wagman P, Håkansson C. Introducing the Occupational Balance Questionnaire (OBQ). Scand J Occup Ther 2014;21(3):227–231. PMID:24649971

2. Schaufeli WB, Desart S, De Witte H. Burnout assessment tool (Bat)—development, validity, and reliability. Int J Environ Res Public Health 2020;17(24):1–21. PMID:33352940

3. Watson D, Clark LA, Tellegen A. Development and Validation of Brief Measures of Positive and Negative Affect: The

SPSS Dataset and Codebook for survey of LGBT people conducted December 22, 2021 - January 17, 2022. The survey was approved by California Polytechnic State University IRB on November 14, 2021. IRB #2021-221-OL. Funding to conduct this survey was awarded through the California Polytechnic State University Research Scholarly and Creative Activities (RSCA) Grant Program administered by the Cal Poly division of Research, Economic Development & Graduate Education. The material contained in this collection include an anonymized dataset and codebook, a methodological appendix, statistical appendix, and supplemental online appendix for the book Yes Gawd! How Faith Shapes LGBT Identity and Politics (Temple University Press).

The Current Population Survey Civic Engagement and Volunteering (CEV) Supplement is the most robust longitudinal survey about volunteerism and other forms of civic engagement in the United States. Produced by AmeriCorps in partnership with the U.S. Census Bureau, the CEV takes the pulse of our nation’s civic health every two years. The data on this page was collected in September 2023. The next wave of the CEV will be administered in September 2025. The CEV can generate reliable estimates at the national level, within states and the District of Columbia, and in the largest twelve Metropolitan Statistical Areas to support evidence-based decision making and efforts to understand how people make a difference in communities across the country. Click on "Export" to download and review an excerpt from the 2023 CEV Analytic Codebook that shows the variables available in the analytic CEV datasets produced by AmeriCorps. Click on "Show More" to download and review the following 2023 CEV data and resources provided as attachments: 1) 2023 CEV Dataset Fact Sheet – brief summary of technical aspects of the 2023 CEV dataset. 2) CEV FAQs – answers to frequently asked technical questions about the CEV 3) Constructs and measures in the CEV 4) 2023 CEV Analytic Data and Setup Files – analytic dataset in Stata (.dta), R (.rdata), SPSS (.sav), and Excel (.csv) formats, codebook for analytic dataset, and Stata code (.do) to convert raw dataset to analytic formatting produced by AmeriCorps. These files were updated on January 16, 2025 to correct erroneous missing values for the ssupwgt variable. 5) 2023 CEV Technical Documentation – codebook for raw dataset and full supplement documentation produced by U.S. Census Bureau 6) 2023 CEV Raw Data and Read In Files – raw dataset in Stata (.dta) format, Stata code (.do) and dictionary file (.dct) to read ASCII dataset (.dat) into Stata using layout files (.lis)

Abstract (en): This study is part of a time-series collection of national surveys fielded continuously since 1952. The election studies are designed to present data on Americans' social backgrounds, enduring political predispositions, social and political values, perceptions and evaluations of groups and candidates, opinions on questions of public policy, and participation in political life. In addition to core items, new content includes questions on values, political knowledge, and attitudes on racial policy, as well as more general attitudes conceptualized as antecedent to these opinions on racial issues. The Main Data File also contains vote validation data that were expanded to include information from the appropriate election office and were attached to the records of each of the respondents in the post-election survey. The expanded data consist of the respondent's post case ID, vote validation ID, and two variables to clarify the distinction between the office of registration and the office associated with the respondent's sample address. The second data file, Bias Nonresponse Data File, contains respondent-level field administration variables. Of 3,833 lines of sample that were originally issued for the 1990 Study, 2,176 resulted in completed interviews, others were nonsample, and others were noninterviews for a variety of reasons. For each line of sample, the Bias Nonresponse Data File includes sampling data, result codes, control variables, and interviewer variables. Detailed geocode data are blanked but available under conditions of confidential access (contact the American National Election Studies at the Center for Political Studies, University of Michigan, for further details). This is a specialized file, of particular interest to those who are interested in survey nonresponse. Demographic variables include age, party affiliation, marital status, education, employment status, occupation, religious preference, and ethnicity. ICPSR data undergo a confidentiality review and are altered when necessary to limit the risk of disclosure. ICPSR also routinely creates ready-to-go data files along with setups in the major statistical software formats as well as standard codebooks to accompany the data. In addition to these procedures, ICPSR performed the following processing steps for this data collection: Performed consistency checks.; Standardized missing values.; Checked for undocumented or out-of-range codes.. Response Rates: The response rate for this study is 67.7 percent. The study was in the field until January 31, although 67 percent of the interviews were taken by November 25, 80 percent by December 7, and 93 percent by December 31. All United States households in the 50 states. National multistage area probability sample. 2015-11-10 The study metadata was updated.2009-01-09 YYYY-MM-DD Part 1, the Main Data File, incorporates errata that were posted separately under the Fourth ICPSR Edition. Part 2, the Bias Nonresponse Data File, has been added to the data collection, along with corresponding SAS, SPSS, and Stata setup files and documentation. The codebook has been updated by adding a technical memorandum on the sampling design of the study previously missing from the codebook. The nonresponse file contains respondent-level field administration variables for those interested in survey nonresponse. The collection now includes files in ASCII, SPSS portable, SAS transport (CPORT), and Stata system formats.2000-02-21 The data for this study are now available in SAS transport and SPSS export formats in addition to the ASCII data file. Variables in the dataset have been renumbered to the following format: 2-digit (or 2-character) year prefix + 4 digits + [optional] 1-character suffix. Dataset ID and version variables have also been added. Additionally, the Voter Validation Office Administration Interview File (Expanded Version) has been merged with the main data file, and the codebook and SPSS setup files have been replaced. Also, SAS setup files have been added to the collection, and the data collection instrument is now provided as a PDF file. Two files are no longer being released with this collection: the Voter Validation Office Administration Interview File (Unexpanded Version) and the Results of First Contact With Respondent file. Funding insitution(s): National Science Foundation (SOC77-08885 and SES-8341310). face-to-face interviewThere was significantly more content in this post-election survey than ...