The purpose of this multicity, multiethnic, and multilingual survey was to provide a preliminary attempt to gauge the political attitudes and behavior of Asian Americans on a national scale. Major areas of investigation include ethnic identity, acculturation, homeland politics, voting and other types of political participation, political ideology, political partisanship, opinions on various social issues, social connectedness, racial integration, and group discrimination. Respondents were asked whether people of Asian descent had a great deal in common culturally, what they thought were the most important problems facing their own ethnic group, whether they belonged to any organization that represented the interest of their group, and their knowledge of the Wen Ho Lee case, the 8-20 Initiative, and other news stories and information about Asians in the United States. Political questions probed respondents' general interest in politics, whether and for whom they voted in the 2000 presidential election, their general knowledge of the presidential election process, the kinds of political activity in which they participated, their feelings about Asian-American candidates, their involvement with political parties, their level of trust in local, state, and federal government officials, self-identity with regard to a liberal vs. conservative stance on political matters, party affiliation, and how active they were in political parties or organizations in their home country if born outside of the United States. Respondents were also asked about their attitudes on such topics as immigration, affirmative action, job training, educational assistance, preferences in hiring and promotion, marriage outside of their ethnic group, and incidents of discrimination that they encountered. Demographic variables include language spoken in the home, religious preference, home ownership, ethnic origin of spouse, level of education, income, employment, age, and sex.

This panel data set includes survey waves between October 2012 and October 2020 measuring various attitudes and political behaviors among a population-based panel of Americans who were at least 18 in 2008. The waves were administered by Knowledge Networks/GfK/Ipsos.

The January 2008 Political Survey, sponsored by the "https://www.pewresearch.org/" Target="_blank">Pew Research Center for the People and the Press, obtained telephone interviews with a nationally representative sample of 1,515 adults living in continental United States telephone households. The survey was conducted by Princeton Survey Research International. The interviews were conducted in English by Princeton Data Source, LLC from January 9-13, 2008. Statistical results are weighted to correct known demographic discrepancies. The margin of sampling error for the complete set of weighted data is +/-2.9 percent. Topics include politics, policy, economic conditions, election 2008, issue priorities, U.S. elections/voters and George W. Bush.

By means of a split-ballot survey experiment, we study whether a normative instruction not to use the internet when answering political knowledge questions reduces cheating in web surveys. The knowledge questions refer to basic facts about the European Union and the data come from the Italian National Election Study web panel carried out in Italy before the 2014 European Election. Our analysis shows that a simple normative instruction significantly reduces cheating. We also show that reducing cheating is important to achieve a correct assessment of reliability of knowledge scales, while a decrease of cheating leaves unaltered the knowledge gap between lower and higher educated respondents. These results invite caution when including political knowledge questions in an online survey. Our advice is to include a normative instruction not to search the internet to reduce cheating and obtain more genuine answers. More generally, we conclude by stressing the need to consider the implications of online data collection when building questionnaires for public opinion research.

Follow-up survey of a study from the early 70´s on structures and determinants of political ideology in three industrial countries.

Topics: assessment of current, earlier and future material standard of living; contentment with life; personal problems in daily life and greatest current problem; personal ability to solve problems; organization, government institutions or parties as perceived solution authorities; political interest; perception of over- or underprivileged groups; attitude to the fight against terrorism at the cost of individual freedom, to nuclear energy, social equality, social equal status for the sexes, extension of the government sphere of influence in economy and society, abortion and environmental protection; attitude to change of society; readiness for political activities at local and national level (Almond-Verba activity index); self-assessment on a left-right continuum; left-right understanding; postmaterialism (two index versions); evaluation of government task fulfillment in the areas of care for old people, equal rights, job market policies, instruction, medical care, housing policies, environmental protection, the fight against crime, policies on minorities, balance of social inequality, fighting inflation and provision of energy; classification of the importance of these problems; good and bad sides of the parties; sympathy scale for social groupings, organizations and parties as well as for the political system; attitude to the current government and the political system; attitude to selected political forms of protest; political participation; point in time, goals and initiator of the protest; attitude to government repression against protest measures; party identification; behavior at the polls in the last and voting intent in the coming national election; extent, point in time, goals and initiator of personal political activities; assessment of political effectiveness and feeling of political representation; attitude to youth protest; influence on the government through interests of the powerful; trust in the government; month and year of birth; description of financial and family situation in parental home during personal childhood and youth; social origins; party preference of parents; assessment of personal social class; superior function at work; unemployment and assessment of personal job security; union membership and participation in trade union meetings; memberships.

Demography: age; sex; marital status; religiousness; frequency of church attendance; employment; income; household income; household size; respondent is head of household; party preference; voting behavior at the last election; degree of urbanization;

Interviewer rating: assessment of ethnic group affiliation; presence of third persons during interview and frequency of intervention in the interview; willingness and reliability of respondent; building type; date of interview; length of interview; interviewer identification; city size.

Indices: conventional political participation; protest readiness and protest activities; protest potential; repression potential; typology of political participation and political activity; ideological thinking; left-right understanding; level of ideological conceptionalization; postmaterialism index; political efficiency; political trust; readiness to react to the system; left-right behavior at the polls; left-right party preference; election and party preference for government or opposition party; party identification; expectations of the youth; dimension of party orientation and social orientation; perception of group privileges; education.

In 2023, there were around **** million people in the German-speaking population, aged 14 years and older, who were particularly interested in politics. Around **** million people saw themselves as somewhat of an expert and often gave advice on political topics. In contrast, around ** percent stated that they were barely interested in politics at all. However, in total, almost half of the respondents were somewhat interested in politics. The Allensbach Market and Advertising Media Analysis (Allensbacher Markt- und Werbeträgeranalyse or AWA in German) determines attitudes, consumer habits and media usage of the population in Germany on a broad statistical basis.

Our codes provide a tool for researchers using any part of the integrated datasets of the European Social Survey (European Social Survey Cumulative File, ESS 1-9, 2020) project to easily differentiate between respondents based on their political affiliation, dividing them into pro-government and pro-opposition groups. Individuals are coded as “government supporters”, “opposition supporters” and “non-identifiers” according to their survey response, while we excluded refusals. The database includes data for 422 985 respondents from eight data rounds between 2002 and 2020 from 33 European countries, organized all in all in 215 country-years.

There are two data files attached.

1. The “European Government-Opposition Voters (EGOV) Data Set” is a comma-separated values table (.csv format file) that includes three variables.

a. The variable “votedforwinner” differentiates between government voters (1), opposition voters (0) and non-voters (missing values); thus it defines the government-opposition status of European voters based on their last vote on the previous election.

b. The variable “closetowinner” differentiates between government partisans (1), opposition partisans (0) and non-partisans (missing values); thus it defines the government-opposition status of European party identifiers based on their partisan attachment.

c. The variable “cseqno” is a unique identification number for European Social Survey (ESS) respondents included in the integrated data sets of the ESS project.

1. The “EGOV – do file” is a do file that can be used to reproduce the content of the above table. These codes are annotated, that is, unusual changes in government composition and overlaps of elections and fieldwork periods are indicated.

The European Government-Opposition Voters Data Set has been produced by using the following pieces of information coming from the (European Social Survey Cumulative File, ESS 1-9, 2020), Comparative Political Data Sets (Armingeon, Isler, Knöpfel, Weisstanner, et al., 2016) and ParlGov (Döring and Manow, 2019) data sets.

•    partisan
  

  preferences, that is, respondents’ vote on the last general election (164 variables, ESS) and respondents’ partisan identity (167 variables, ESS)

•    date of
  

  the interview (year, month, day, ESS)

•    date of
  

  national elections and investitures in each country-case (CPDS and ParlGov)

•    cabinet
  

  composition (CPDS and ParlGov)

•    official
  

  sites on information on national elections for clarification, if necessary

The first ECPR-IPSA World of Political Science survey (WPS-2019), conducted in conjunction with the European Consortium of Political Research (ECPR) and the International Political Science Association (IPSA), was implemented by Pippa Norris in spring 2019. This second study, WPS-2023, seeks to update the evidence, to pursue new themes, and to provide a representative profile of the political science profession across the globe. It has been designed to gather information about multiple aspects within the discipline, including 1. Nation of current work or study; 2. Academic work experiences, satisfaction, and perceptions; 3. Ideological values; 4. Equality, diversity and inclusion within the discipline; 5. Experience and perceptions of academic freedom; 6. Preferences for in-person or online communications; 7. Their background characteristics, including socio-demographic, educational qualifications, institutional contexts, methods and sub-fields; 8. Academic geographic mobility; and 9. The macro-level national context of academic and media freedom within each society of work or study, from V-Dem 13.0. Overall 1,989 valid responses were collected online between 29 November 2022 and 31 January 2023. This included replies from respondents who were political scientists currently studying or working in 103 countries worldwide.

The religion and politics survey is part of the larger Public Role of Mainline Protestantism Project, which is coordinated through "http://www.princeton.edu/main/" Target="_blank">Princeton University's Survey Research Center. The survey addresses respondents' views on political, social, and religious issues, their political actions, beliefs, and affiliations, and their religious actions, beliefs, and affiliations.

The January 2016 Political Survey, fielded for the Pew Research Center for the People & the Press by Abt SRBI, obtained telephone interviews with a representative sample of 2,009 adults living in the United States (504 respondents were interviewed on a landline telephone and 1,505 were interviewed on a cell phone). Interviewing was conducted from January 7th to 14th, 2016 in English and Spanish. Samples were drawn from both the landline and cell phone RDD frames. Persons with residential landlines were not screened out of the cell phone sample. Both the landline and cell phone samples were provided by Survey Sampling International. The combined sample is weighted to match demographic parameters from the American Community Survey and telephone status parameters from the National Health Interview Survey. The weighting procedure also accounts for the fact that respondents with both a landline and cell phone had a greater probability of selection. The margin of sampling error for weighted estimates based on the full sample is +/- 2.46 percentage points.

This survey was conducted following the 1972 parliamentary elections in Italy. A representative stratified national sample was drawn from lists of voters in electoral precincts across the country. The interviews focused on respondents' political interest, behavior and attitudes, their party identification and organizational memberships, trust, in government, reaction to the multi-party system, and views on left-right political differences. Demographic information about respondents includes age, occupation, full-time work status, and profession and political beliefs of father.

This dataset contains the microdata file and the technical documentation of the UNTWIST survey. The survey was conducted between 21 October 2024 and 9 January 2025 in six European countries: Denmark, Germany, Hungary, Switzerland, and the UK. The technical documentation includes the fieldwork description, the variable harmonization and weighting report, the annotated description of the appended country-variables, and the unified codebook.

The dataset consists of the following files:

DATASET
* Appended_Main+Boost_wgt_pooled.csv

TECHNICAL SHEET

* Technical Sheet.pdf
This document provides a summary of the survey technical information and highlight the key aspects of the fieldwork, which are relevant to understand how the collection of data has been out in practice.

WEIGHTING APPENDIX

* Weighting Appendix.pdf
This appendix expands the description of the weighing procedure, that was followed to ensure the maximum quality of representativeness of the target population.

HARMONIZATION APPENDIX

* Harmonization Appendix.pdf
This document describes in detail the harmonization procedure of the country specific categories of two variables: the education level and religious belonging.

CODEBOOK

* UNTWIST Survey Codebook.pdf
This document presents the unified dataset codebook of both individual and country-level variables.

COUNTRY-VARIABLE DATA APPENDIX

* Country-Variable Data Appendix.pdf
This document provides further details of the appended country-level variables, such as concepts, measurement scales, codes and sources.

Abstract copyright UK Data Service and data collection copyright owner.The NOP National Political Surveys were designed principally to ascertain public opinion on political parties, leaders and government, and to record voting intention. In addition, the majority of the surveys included data of topical interest and of social importance. Main Topics:The surveys vary, but topics covered over time include: voting intention; satisfaction with: the Government, the Prime Minister, the Leader of the Opposition, the political system and institutions; opinions on problems facing Government; the political parties; voting and electoral behaviour; foreign affairs and defence; economic and industrial affairs; social issues (e.g. welfare, education, health, housing, environment); law, crime and justice; religious beliefs; role of women; race relations; attitudes to pornography, birth control, family planning, marriage, abortion, drugs, gambling, leisure; special issues and events. Please note that not every topic is covered in all surveys. Classification details include: constituency, age and sex, terminal education age, marital status, social class, trade union membership and employment status. Two-stage stratified, area cluster sample. For details see the National Opinion Polls publication Political, social and economic review, 30, April 1981.

Politics. This study number comprises the data collected during the so called main studies. The main studies represent three surveys which have partially been used for methodic experiments. The questions are identical in every survey except for the described differences. Topics: satisfaction with democracy in Germany; attitude towards various political issues and value orientation; political interest; tax cut vs. social benefits; altruistic attitude; pessimism; trust in politicians and institutions; self-assessment and evaluation of parties on a left-right continuum; political knowledge (knowledge test: five percent hurdle, meaning of first and second vote); turnout intention; party preference (opinion poll); political participation; contact with public authorities; voluntary work; participation in a citizens´ initiative or a referendum; participation in last federal election; voting behaviour in last federal election; if applicable: reasons for different voting behaviour in case of vote splitting; most important political issue in Germany and the parties ability to solve it. Demography: German as mother tongue; self-reported knowledge of the German language in speech and writing; knowledge of the home coutry´s language/the parents´ language in speech and writing; self-reported diligence in answering the questionnaire; evaluation of the survey (interesting, rich in variety, important for sciences, long, difficult, too personal); interruption of the survey; personal remarks about the survey. Additionally encoded: amount of the respondent´s incentive. Politik und politische Einstellungen. Unter dieser Studien-Nr. sind die Daten der drei sog. Hauptstudien archiviert. Die Hauptstudien stellen drei Befragungsdurchgänge dar, die z.T. für methodische Experimente genutzt wurden. Die Fragen sind in allen Befragungen identisch, bis auf die beschriebenen Unterschiede. Themen: Demokratiezufriedenheit in Deutschland; Einstellung zu verschiedenen politischen Streitfragen und Wertorientierung; Politikinteresse; Steuersenkung versus Sozialleistungen; altruistische Einstellung; Pessimismus; Politiker- und Institutionenvertrauen; Selbsteinschätzung und Einschätzung von Parteien auf einem Links-Rechts-Kontinuum; politische Informiertheit (Wissenstest: Fünf-Prozent-Hürde, Bedeutung von Erst- und Zweitstimme); Wahlbeteiligungsabsicht; Parteipräferenz (Sonntagsfrage); politische Partizipation; Behördenkontakt; ehrenamtliche Tätigkeit; Teilnahme an Bürger- oder Volksbegehren; Wahlbeteiligung bei der letzten Bundestagswahl; Wahlverhalten bei der letzten Bundestagswahl; Sofern zutreffend: Gründe für unterschiedliches Verhalten bei Stimmensplitting; wichtigstes politisches Problem in Deutschland und Issue-Kompetenz der Parteien. Demographie: Deutsch als Muttersprache; Selbsteinschätzung der Deutschkenntnisse in Wort und Schrift; Kenntnisse der Sprache des Herkunftslandes/der Sprache der Eltern in Wort und Schrift; Selbsteinstufung der Sorgfältigkeit bei der Beantwortung des Fragebogens; Beurteilung der Befragung (interessant, abwechslungsreich, wichtig für die Wissenschaft, lang, schwierig, zu persönlich); Unterbrechung der Befragung; persönliche Anmerkungen zur Befragung. Zusätzlich vercoded wurde: Höhe des Incentives für den Befragten. Telephone sampling with online follow-up surveys: Respondents willing to participate subsequent to a prior telephone interview and who provided an e-mail address (Dual-Frame Gabler/Häder procedure, last-birthday method, mobile and landline sample) Telefonstichprobe mit nachfolgenden Online Befragungen. Alle Befragungsbereiten Personen nach einem telefonischen Erst-Interview, die eine Emailadresse angaben (Dual-Frame nach Gabler/Häder-Verfahren, Last-Birthday-Methode, Mobil- und Festnetzstichprobe)

This statistic shows the results of a survey on the most important factor to consider when deciding which party to vote for in the upcoming parliamentary election on ******************, by party. For ** percent of voters who intend to vote for Miljøpartiet De Grønne, the ideology and values of the party are considered as the most important factor. Individual factors are only important for ***** percent of the MDG voters. Norwegian Parliament (Stortinget) is elected every four years. The next parliamentary election is set for ******************.

The survey focused on the 2011 parliamentary elections in Finland. Main themes included political participation, political attitudes, party support, candidate and party choice and voting behaviour. Data were collected after the elections through face-to-face interviews and a self-administered drop-off questionnaire. The interview data contain Finland's contribution to the international CSES study. The same CSES module was fielded in Finland in 2007 (see FSD2269).

First questions covered interest in politics, attention to media coverage of the elections (including social media), Internet use frequency, willingness to discuss politics with others, party identification and self-perceived social class. The respondents were asked to what extent they agreed with some statements relating to voting, democracy, holding referendums and tolerance of people with different values or views. Willingness to influence things by own activity (for instance, by participating in a demonstration or joining a consumer boycott) was charted. Further questions covered membership in a political party, participation in election campaign work and opinions on whom a MP should represent. The survey also carried a set of attitudinal statements on voting, politics, political parties, politicians and public political influence. For instance 'I have no say in what the government and parliament decide' or 'By voting people can have a say how things are run'.

The CSES module explored what issues had been important to the respondents in these elections, what they thought were the most important political problems facing Finland and whether it made a difference who was in power or who people voted for. Views were probed on government performance, political parties, political leaders and whether any party or political leader represented R's views well. The respondents were asked to place themselves, the parties and party leaders on a left-right axis. Questions also covered differences between parties, the extent to which the respondents had followed election campaigning, satisfaction with democracy in Finland and whether they felt close to any party. Voting behaviour was studied with questions on whether the respondents had voted, the candidate of which party they had voted for, whether they had considered voting for a candidate of any other party and if yes, which party, whether they had voted in the previous parliamentary elections and which party they voted for. Finally, the respondents' factual knowledge was tested with a few questions.

Non-voters were asked why they had not voted and how self-evident not voting had been to them. Those who had voted for the True Finns were asked to what extent a number of issues had influenced their decision to vote for a candidate of that party and what had been the main reason. All those who had voted were asked what had influenced their choice of party, to what extent various issues had influenced their candidate choice, whether they had voted for the same candidate before and when had they decided whom and which party to vote for. One question explored how the respondents wanted MPs to vote in Parliament in cases where there was a conflict of opinion between them, their party or their voters. One theme pertained to trust in government and other institutions, groups and people.

The self-administered questionnaire surveyed what issues had been decisive for the respondents' party choice in the elections, opinions on what kind of policies Finland should focus on and what kind of political decision-making the respondents would prefer. Views were probed on work-related immigration to Finland and the policies of different parties on the issue. One question focused on information sources used for making voting choice. Political activities carried out on the Internet and type of activities generally engaged in when using social media and the Internet were charted. Other topics covered online voting, views on the importance of the candidate's gender and how easy it had been for the respondents to find a suitable party and candidate. The respondents were also asked to what extent they agreed with a number of statements relating to Members of Parliament, the government and political decision-making. Opinions on Finland's membership in the EU and NATO were surveyed as well as whether it was more important to let the majority decide or protect the needs and rights of minorities. Other topics included views on own financial situation and the Finnish economy and employment situation, left-right scale of certain concepts (e.g. being pro-immigration) and influence of a number of actors on the Finnish society. The effects of the debate on election campaign funding were charted as well as how the debate had influence the respondents' views of each political party. Finally, personality traits of the respondents were surveyed using the Ten-item personality inventory (TIPI).

Variables beginning with 'k' are national electi

This study represents one component of a five-nation comparative data collection effort undertaken in Great Britain, Germany, Japan, Spain, and the United States during the early 1990s. The data were collected to study political communication and voting behavior during an election campaign. While the Main Respondent Data (Part 1) provide the central database, these data are supplemented by other data sources. The data collection combines three related surveys: a survey of 1,318 main respondents (Part 1), a survey of 271 spouses of the main respondents (Part 2), and a survey of 841 non-spouse discussion partners of the main respondents (Part 3). Part 4 supplies the text of open-ended question responses given by respondents to all three surveys. Part 5 provides information coded from articles in major local newspapers on issues dealing with the 1992 election campaign. Topics of investigation in this study concerned factors that influenced respondents' level of information about politics and public affairs, political awareness, and voting behavior, such as the kinds of newspapers and magazines respondents read, what national network news they watched, and whether they watched talk shows. Additional questions addressed candidate evaluations, general attitudes toward public offices and election campaigns, and participation in special interest groups, including political parties. The study also queried respondents about their feelings on topics such as affirmative action, foreign imports, using military force to overthrow Saddam Hussein, the budget deficit, medical insurance, abortion, minority aid, and the environment. Demographic characteristics of respondents include educational level, occupational status, income level, age, gender, race and ethnicity, marital status, religious preference, group affiliation, and social status.

According to a survey from late December 2024, the two most important issues among Republican voters in the United States were inflation and immigration, with ** and ** percent ranking it their primary political concerns respectively. In contrast, only *** percent of Democrats considered immigration their most important issue. Inflation and healthcare were the leading issues among democrats in the U.S.

The Electoral Integrity Project at Harvard University and the University of Sydney (www.electoralintegrityproject.com) developed the AVE data, release 1.0. The dataset contains information from a three-wave panel survey designed to gather the views of a representative sample of ordinary Australians just before and after the 2nd July 2016 Australian federal elections. The survey monitored Australian voters’ experience at the polls, perceptions of the integrity and convenience of the registration and voting process, patterns of civic engagement, public confidence in electoral administration, and attitudes towards reforms, such as civic education campaigns and convenience voting facilities. Respondents were initially contacted in the week before the election between 28 June and 1 July and completed an online questionnaire lasting approximately 15 minutes. This forms the pre-election base line survey (wave 1). The same individuals were contacted again after the election to complete a longer survey, an average of 25 minutes in length. Respondents in wave 2 were contacted between 4 July and 19 July, with two thirds completing the survey after the first week. About six weeks later, the same respondents were interviewed again (wave 3) beginning on 23 August and ending on 13 September. The initial sample contains 2,139 valid responses for the first wave of questionnaires, 1,838 for the second wave (an 86 percent retention rate), and 1,543 for the third wave (84 percent retention rate). Overall, 72 percent of the respondents were carried over from the pre-election wave to the final wave. The following files can be accessed: a) dataset in Stata and SPSS formats; b) codebook; c) questionnaire. The EIP acknowledges support from the Kathleen Fitzpatrick Australian Laureate from the Australian Research Council (ARC ref: FL110100093). **** EIP further publications: BOOKS • LeDuc, Lawrence, Richard Niemi and Pippa Norris. Eds. 2014. Comparing Democracies 4: Elections and Voting in a Changing World. London: Sage Publications. • Nai, Alessandro and Walter, Annemarie. Eds. 2015 New Perspectives on Negative Campaigning: Why Attack Politics Matters. Colchester: ECPR Press. • Norris, Pippa, Richard W. Frank and Ferran Martínez i Coma. Eds. 2014. Advancing Electoral Integrity. New York: Oxford University Press. • Norris, Pippa, Richard W. Frank and Ferran Martínez i Coma. Eds. 2015. Contentious Elections: From Ballots to the Barricades. New York: Routledge. • Norris, Pippa. 2014. Why Electoral Integrity Matters. New York: Cambridge University Press. • Norris, Pippa. 2015. Why Elections Fail. New York: Cambridge University Press. • Norris, Pippa and Andrea Abel van Es. Eds. 2016. Checkbook Elections? Political Finance in Comparative Perspective. Oxford University Press. ARTICLES AND CHAPTERS • W. Frank. 2013. ‘Assessing the quality of elections.’ Journal of Democracy. 24(4): 124-135.• Lago, Ignacio and Martínez i Coma, Ferran. 2016. ‘Challenge or Consent? Understanding Losers’ Reactions in Mass Elections’. Government and Opposition doi:10.1071/gov.3015.31 • Martínez i Coma, Ferran and Lago, Ignacio. 2016. 'Gerrymandering in Comparative Perspective’ Party Politics DOI: 10.1177/1354068816642806 • Norris, Pippa. 2013. ‘Does the world agree about standards of electoral integrity? Evidence for the diffusion of global norms.’ Special issue of Electoral Studies. 32(4):576-588. • Norris, Pippa. 2013. ‘The new research agenda studying electoral integrity’. Special issue of Electoral Studies. 32(4): 563-575.57 • Norris, Pippa. 2014. ‘Electoral integrity and political legitimacy.’ In Comparing Democracies 4. Lawrence LeDuc, Richard Niemi and Pippa Norris. Eds. London: Sage. • Norris, Pippa, Richard W. Frank and Ferran Martínez i Coma. 2014. ‘Measuring electoral integrity: A new dataset.’ PS: Political Science & Politics. 47(4): 789-798. • Norris, Pippa. 2016 (forthcoming). ‘Electoral integrity in East Asia.’ Routledge Handbook on Democratization in East Asia. Tun-jen Cheng and Yun-han Chu. Eds. Routledge: New York. • Norris, Pippa. 2016 (forthcoming). ‘Electoral transitions: Stumbling out of the gate.’ In Rebooting Transitology – Democratization in the 21st Century. Mohammad-Mahmoud Ould Mohamedou and Timothy D. Sisk. Eds. • Pietsch, Juliet; Michael Miller and Jeffrey Karp. 2015. ‘Public support for democracy in transitional regimes.’ Journal of Elections, Public Opinion and Parties. 25(1): 1–9. DOI: 10.1080/17457289.2014. • Smith, Rodney. 2016 (forthcoming). ‘Confidence in paper-based and electronic voting channels: Evidence from Australia.’ Australian Journal of Political Science. ID: 1093091 DOI: 10.1080/10361146.2015.1093091 dx.doi.org/10.1080/07907184.2015.1099097 • Van Ham, Carolien and Staffan Lindberg. 2015. ‘From sticks to carrots: Electoral manipulation in Africa, 1986-2012’, Gover... Visit https://dataone.org/datasets/sha256%3A9efcfe40123531a7f785369bae96a30beb0f41c1ce7334bc7c398a54be5e69f5 for complete metadata about this dataset.

This survey is part of the research programme ´Demokrati i förändring´. The main purpose was to look into changes in the idea of the role as a local politician and in the working conditions of local politicians taking place since the corresponding survey in 1980, ´Local Politicians, 1979-80´ (SSD 0101). The changes are related to ´the local authority reorganisation´ in shape of ´privatisation´ and ´new democratic structures´. The questionnaire, addressed to local authority and county council politicians, contained background information such as age, place of residence, marital status, education, citizenship, occupation, political party and for how long time one had been a member of the party, and time for first assignment. Other questions dealt with the opinion of the general public regarding local politicians; the attitude of people around the respondent towards the political commitment; and contacts with the general public, mass media, associations, organisations, and companies concerning local issues during the last year. For a number of local authority areas the respondent had to state if it is important to increase the local authority commitment, if it is enough as it is, or if it could be reduced. For a number of statements about how it ought to come about in politics the respondents had to state if they agreed or not. A number of questions concerned conflicts between different activities of the elected representative; time required for different activities; membership of the party organisation council, and other organisation commissions; and how to vote when there is a conflict between the opinion of the councillor, the party, and the general public. The respondents also had to state how important the various moments in the decision-making process are in their own municipality; how much the opinions of the other political parties usually differs from their own party; qualities the parties ought to consider when nominating candidates; and to what extent the space of action is influenced by external circumstances. For a number of statements about the role of local politicians and local government officers in the decision-making process, and about the conditions for men and women in society, the respondents had to state if they agreed or not. The respondents also had to decide on a number of proposals discussed to make the local authority organisation and the decision-making process more efficient; and if they agreed or not in a number of statements about political cooperation between countries, and local consequences of a Swedish approach toward the European Union.