The purpose of the study: assess Lithuanian population political attitudes and tendencies of electoral behaviour in election of Seimas of the Republic of Lithuania in 2020. Major investigated questions: the research aims to systematically look at the trends and factors of the electoral behavior in Lithuania. The survey included the international CSES Module V questionnaire, which consists of three main parts: 1) standard internationally widely used electoral behavior variables, such as party identification, left - right scale questions, like - dislike of parties and party leaders, etc .; 2) specific topics of the CSES Module V: populist attitudes and out-group attitudes; 3) standard socio-demographic characteristics of respondents. In addition, the survey questionnaire included variables relevant to Lithuania, compatible with 2012 and 2016 post-election survey variables (election campaign, media consumption variables, etc.), as well as items on public policy issues aligned with the 2020 manobalsas.lt questionnaire. In addition, the questionnaire took into account the situation of the COVID-19 pandemic and included specific questions on the origins and threats of COVID-19 and pandemic management. Socio-demographic characteristics: gender, age, religion, nationality, education, duration of learning (studying), occupation, working position, nature of work of father and mother, respondent's and his/hers family's position in society, respondent's dwelling type, monthly expenditures on hobbies, description of financial situation of respondent's family, size of household, family's income per month, etc. Post-election survey is a part of the "Lithuanian National Election Study" implemented in 2020 for third time in Lithuania by researchers of the Institute of International Relations and Political Science of Vilnius University together with partners.

The Economy was seen as the most important issue facing Germany as of June 2025, selected by 20 percent of people as a problem that month. Immigration was seen by 18 percent of people in Germany as a major issue, and was the second most-common response in the most recent survey. Germany's economic struggles Once the economic powerhouse of Europe, the Germany economy has been struggling for several years, and even shrank in 2023 and 2024. In part, this is due to external factors, such as the War in Ukraine putting an end to Germany's supply of cheap Russian gas, and a more protectionist global trade environment harming Germany's export-driven businesses. On the other hand, there has been a chronic lack of investment in the country, in part due to fiscal restraints built into the German constitution. Collapse of the traffic light coalition The issue of removing these fiscal restraints, in particular the "debt-brake", was the eventual reason that brought down the government of Olaf Scholz in late 2024. In power since the 2021 election, Scholz's government consisted of three political parties, Scholz's own SPD, the German Greens, and the pro-businesses FDP. The contradictions inherent in a three-party coalition eventually rose to the surface in late 2024, when the FDP leadership split with the government over economic policy, causing the collapse of the government. All three parties saw their vote share decline considerably, in the subsequent election in February 2025, with the FDP unable to clear the five percent threshold required to win seats in parliament.

DOI The Dutch Parliamentary Election Study 2021 has been an enterprise of the Foundation of Electoral Studies in The Netherlands (Stichting Kiezers Onderzoek Nederland; SKON) and Statistics Netherlands (CBS).The Dutch Parliamentary Election Studies (DPES) are a series of national surveys carried out under the auspices of the Dutch Electoral Research Foundation (SKON). These surveys have been conducted since 1970. Many questions are replicated across studies, although each has questions not asked in the others. The major substantive areas consistently covered include the respondents' attitudes toward and expectations of the government and its effectiveness in both domestic and foreign policy, the most important problems facing the people of the Netherlands, the respondents' voting behavior and participation history, and his/her knowledge of and faith in the nation's political leaders.The DPES data were collected by two different organizations and consists of five different surveys: a pre-election survey and post-election survey on a CBS sample collected by I&O research, and a pre-election and two post-election surveys within the LISS-panel collected by CentERdata.Several variables have been excluded from the public data file in order to protect the privacy of individual respondents. Examples are municipality, zip code and information that identifies the respondent or their region in the open answers. These variables are available for scientific purposes only at CentERdata.This dataset was updated with the files from the December 2022 v2.0 release and republished on February 2nd, 2023. The files from the v2.0 version are found in the subfolder '2022-12_v2''. Date: 26-01-2021 - 17-05-2021

The Dutch Parliamentary Election Study 2021 has been an enterprise of the Foundation of Electoral Studies in The Netherlands (Stichting Kiezers Onderzoek Nederland; SKON) and Statistics Netherlands (CBS).The Dutch Parliamentary Election Studies (DPES) are a series of national surveys carried out under the auspices of the Dutch Electoral Research Foundation (SKON). These surveys have been conducted since 1970. Many questions are replicated across studies, although each has questions not asked in the others. The major substantive areas consistently covered include the respondents' attitudes toward and expectations of the government and its effectiveness in both domestic and foreign policy, the most important problems facing the people of the Netherlands, the respondents' voting behavior and participation history, and his/her knowledge of and faith in the nation's political leaders.The DPES data were collected by two different organizations and consists of five different surveys: a pre-election survey and post-election survey on a CBS sample collected by I&O research, and a pre-election and two post-election surveys within the LISS-panel collected by CentERdata.Several variables have been excluded from the public data file in order to protect the privacy of individual respondents. Examples are municipality, zip code and information that identifies the respondent or their region in the open answers. These variables are available for scientific purposes only at CentERdata.This dataset was updated with the files from the December 2022 v2.0 release and republished on February 2nd, 2023. The files from the v2.0 version are found in the subfolder '2022-12_v2''. Date: 26-01-2021 - 17-05-2021 Issued: 2021

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.

The study on the 2021 state election in Rhineland-Palatinate was conducted by the Forschungsgruppe Wahlen. During the survey period 08.03.2021 to 12.03.2021, 1117 eligible voters in Rhineland-Palatinate were interviewed by telephone (CATI) on the following topics: Political opinion: Parties. Top candidates. Problems and competencies. Electoral decision in the context of candidate preference and party competence. The respondents were selected by a multi-stage random sample. Most important political issues in Rhineland-Palatinate; intention to vote in the state election in Rhineland-Palatinate; preference for polling station or absentee ballot; party preference (first vote, second vote); certainty of one´s own voting decision; importance of federal politics for one´s own voting decision in the state election in Rhineland-Palatinate; interest in the state election; voting behavior in the last state election; coalition preference; attitude towards various coalition constellations: Government of SPD and Greens, of CDU and Greens, of SPD, Greens and FDP, of CDU, Greens and FDP, of SPD and CDU led by SPD, and of CDU and SPD led by CDU; sympathy scalometer for selected parties at federal and state level (SPD, CDU, Greens, AfD, FDP and Free Voters); Satisfaction scalometer on the performance of the state government consisting of the SPD, FDP and Greens, the SPD, FDP and Greens in the state government, the performance of the CDU and AfD in opposition in the state parliament, and the performance of the federal government consisting of the CDU/CSU and SPD; Sympathy scalometer for selected top politicians at the state level and for Angela Merkel; party sympathy; preference for Malu Dreyer or Christian Baldauf as Minister President; Split B: Comparison of credibility, likability and expertise of Malu Dreyer and Christian Baldauf (end of Split B); assessment of the current economic situation in Rhineland-Palatinate and the respondent´s own economic situation; party competencies: Split A: Most competent party to solve the economic problems in the state as well as in the areas of foreigner policy and transport policy in Rhineland-Palatinate (end of split A); split B: Most competent party in the areas of school and education policy and climate protection in Rhineland-Palatinate (end of split B); most competent party in the area of Corona; now more important: Strict Corona measures to reduce infection rates vs, far-reaching relaxations to strengthen the economy; future viability of the state and most competent party to solve future problems in Rhineland-Palatinate; assessment of the work of Minister President Malu Dreyer; assessment of the commitment of the state government in Rhineland-Palatinate to the energy transition; Split A: Satisfaction with progress in Rhineland-Palatinate on digitization and fast Internet (end of Split A); Preference for an SPD-led state government or a CDU-led state government; role of CDU leader in the federal government Armin Laschet with regard to the CDU´s performance in the state election in Rhineland-Palatinate; Split A: More important, which parties will form the government after the state elections or who will become Minister President (end of Split A); opinion on the spread of right-wing extremist ideas in the AfD; Corona: Satisfaction with Corona crisis management in Rhineland-Palatinate in general and in the area of schools and education; satisfaction with vaccination progress in Rhineland-Palatinate; assessment of current relaxations in Corona measures; assessment of recent decisions by the federal and state governments on regionally different relaxations or tightenings in Corona measures depending on the level of infection figures; preference in elections in general and in times of Corona for polling station, absentee voting or not voting; fair share of standard of living. Demograpy: sex; age (classified); school-leaving qualification or targeted school-leaving qualification; university degree; employment; job security; occupational position; leading position; public service employment; household size; number of persons in household 18 years and older; union member in the household; religious denomination; church attendance; party affiliation; party identification; city size; voting eligibility. Additionally coded were: ID; weighting factor. Die Studie zur Landtagswahl 2021 in Rheinland-Pfalz wurde von der Forschungsgruppe Wahlen durchgeführt. Im Erhebungszeitraum 08.03.2021 bis 12.03.2021 wurden 1117 Wahlberechtige in Rheinland-Pfalz in telefonischen Interviews (CATI) zu folgenden Themen befragt: Politisches Meinungsbild: Parteien. Spitzenkandidaten. Probleme und Kompetenzen. Wahlentscheidung im Kontext von Kandidatenpräferenz und Parteikompetenz. Die Auswahl der Befragten erfolgte durch eine mehrstufige Zufallsstichprobe. Wichtigste politische Probleme in Rheinland-Pfalz; Wahlbeteiligungsabsicht bei der Landtagswahl in Rheinland-Pfalz; Präferenz für Wahllokal oder Briefwahl; Parteipräferenz (Erststimme, Zweitstimme); Sicherheit der eigenen Wahlentscheidung; Wichtigkeit der Bundespolitik für die eigene Wahlentscheidung bei der Landtagswahl in Rheinland-Pfalz; Interesse an der Landtagswahl; Wahlverhalten bei der letzten Landtagswahl; Koalitionspräferenz; Einstellung zu verschiedenen Koalitionskonstellationen: Regierung aus SPD und Grünen, aus CDU und Grünen, aus SPD, Grünen und FDP, aus CDU, Grünen und FDP, aus SPD und CDU unter Führung der SPD sowie aus CDU und SPD unter Führung der CDU; Sympathie-Skalometer für ausgewählte Parteien auf Bundes- und Landesebene (SPD, CDU, Grüne, AfD, FDP und Freie Wähler); Zufriedenheits-Skalometer zu den Leistungen der Landesregierung aus SPD, FDP und Grünen, der SPD, der FDP und der Grünen in der Landesregierung, den Leistungen der CDU und der AfD in der Opposition im Landtag sowie zu den Leistungen der Bundesregierung aus CDU/CSU und SPD; Sympathie-Skalometer für ausgewählte Spitzenpolitiker auf Landesebene sowie für Angela Merkel; Parteisympathie; Präferenz für Malu Dreyer oder Christian Baldauf als Ministerpräsidentin bzw. Ministerpräsident; Split B: Vergleich der Glaubwürdigkeit, der Sympathie und des Sachverstands von Malu Dreyer und Christian Baldauf (Ende Split B); Beurteilung der derzeitigen wirtschaftlichen Lage in Rheinland-Pfalz und der eigenen wirtschaftlichen Lage; Parteikompetenzen: Split A: kompetenteste Partei zur Lösung der wirtschaftlichen Probleme im Land sowie in den Bereichen Ausländerpolitik und Verkehrspolitik in Rheinland-Pfalz (Ende Split A); Split B: kompetenteste Partei in den Bereichen Schul- und Bildungspolitik und Klimaschutz in Rheinland-Pfalz (Ende Split B); kompetenteste Partei im Bereich Corona; jetzt wichtiger: strenge Corona-Maßnahmen zur Senkung der Infektionszahlen vs, weitgehende Lockerungen zur Stärkung der Wirtschaft; Zukunftsfähigkeit des Landes und kompetenteste Partei zur Lösung der zukünftigen Probleme in Rheinland-Pfalz; Beurteilung der Arbeit von Ministerpräsidentin Malu Dreyer; Bewertung des Engagements der Landesregierung in Rheinland-Pfalz für die Energiewende; Split A: Zufriedenheit mit den Fortschritten in Rheinland-Pfalz im Bereich Digitalisierung und schnelles Internet (Ende Split A); Präferenz für eine von der SPD geführte Landesregierung oder eine von der CDU geführte Landesregierung; Rolle des CDU-Vorsitzenden im Bund Armin Laschet im Hinblick auf das Abschneiden der CDU bei der Landtagswahl in Rheinland-Pfalz; Split A: wichtiger, welche Parteien nach der Landtagswahl die Regierung bilden oder wer Ministerpräsident bzw. Ministerpräsidentin wird (Ende Split A); Meinung zur Verbreitung von rechtsextremem Gedankengut in der AfD; Corona: Zufriedenheit mit dem Corona-Krisenmanagement in Rheinland-Pfalz allgemein und im Bereich Schule und Bildung; Zufriedenheit mit den Impffortschritten in Rheinland-Pfalz; Bewertung der geltenden Lockerungen bei den Corona-Maßnahmen; Bewertung der neuesten Beschlüsse von Bund und Ländern zu regional unterschiedlichen Lockerungen oder Verschärfungen bei Corona-Maßnahmen abhängig von der Höhe der Infektionszahlen; Präferenz bei Wahlen generell und in Zeiten von Corona für Wahllokal, Briefwahl oder nicht wählen; gerechter Anteil am Lebensstandard. Demographie: Geschlecht; Alter (klassiert); Schulabschluss bzw. angestrebter Schulabschluss; Hochschulabschluss; Berufstätigkeit; Sicherheit des Arbeitsplatzes; Haupttätigkeit; Leitungsfunktion; Beschäftigung im öffentlichen Dienst; Haushaltsgröße; Anzahl der Personen im Haushalt ab 18 Jahren; Gewerkschaftsmitglied im Haushalt; Konfession; Kirchgangshäufigkeit; Parteineigung; Parteiidentifikation; Ortsgröße; Wahlberechtigung. Zusätzlich verkodet wurde: ID; Gewichtungsfaktor.

The survey charted the identity of Swedish-speaking Finns and their opinions on politics and society. The survey also included questions on party affiliations, electoral behaviour, social trust, future prospects, health and well-being. The data was collected as part of the Citizen Panel of Swedish-speaking Finns (Barometern), which is part of The Finnish Research Infrastructure for Public Opinion (FIRIPO). The data is particularly comprehensive and is part of the second major Barometer survey, which is carried out every two years. The first major Barometer survey (B1) was conducted in 2019. Respondents were first asked about their identity, before moving on to ask questions related to politics. For example, respondents were asked how satisfied they were with the way democracy works. Respondents were then asked to place themselves on a right-left spectrum based on their political opinions. Further questions were asked about parliamentary elections and voting behaviour. They were asked which party they usually vote for and which issues are important when deciding which party to vote for. Respondents were also asked what they thought about other political parties. They were also asked about the 2022 Finnish county elections and about voting in them. Next, respondents were asked about their trust in research results, politicians and institutions. They were also asked about their views on the extent of corruption. Respondents were then asked about their opinions on various current political issues. Finally, respondents were asked about their views on the future prospects of social issues and society, their own health and their satisfaction with life. Background variables included the respondent's NUTS3 region of residence, mother tongue, gender, year of birth, age, highest level of education, religious affiliation, political party preference, social class, occupational status and marital status.

Most representatives of Generation Y in Russia were worried about income inequality and distribution of wealth, according to the survey conducted in early 2021. The second major concern of Russian millennials was political and business corruption.

Nearly ******** of Generation Z representatives in Russia were worried about corruption within business or politics, according to the survey conducted in early 2021. The second major concern of Russian Gen Z was unemployment.

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

Armenia.

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 Armenia 2021 sample design documentation available for download from WVS and also from the Downloads section of the metadata.

Mode of data collection

Mail Questionnaire [mail]

Research instrument

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

The CDU is expected to win 208 seats in the German Parliament (Bundestag), based on provisional results from the German election held on February 23, 2025. Although this would make the CDU the biggest party, they would still have too few seats to form a government, and would therefore have to enter into a coalition with one or more of the other parties. While the AfD are predicted to win 152 seats, the CDU has already ruled out working with them, and would likely look to the SPD or Green Party to form a potential government. Economy and migration the main issues heading into election When polled about what they thought were the most important issues facing Germany, the top two issues just before the election were the economy, and immigration / integration, selected by 43 percent, and 42 percent of respondents respectively. In the months after the 2021 election, the issue of energy supply and the climate was consistently seen as the most pressing issue, with this eventually overtaken by the War in Ukraine in February 2022. The issues of wages and prices was also seen important issue throughout 2022 and 2023, although this has since subsided as wider concerns about the state of the German economy have overtaken it. Possible coalitions for the next government Barring a surprise collapse in support, the CDU are likely to head the next German government. What that will look like depends on how many parties can clear the five percent threshold and ultimately win seats in the German Parliament. With just five major parties predicted to receive the required vote share, this will make the matter of forming a coalition slightly easier. The most likely coalition is probably one that consists of the CDU and SPD, although if they win enough seats, the CDU may be able to form one with the Greens.

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

Venezuela.

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 Venezuela 2021 sample design documentation available for download from WVS and also from the Downloads section of the metadata.

Mode of data collection

Paper Assisted Personal Interview [papi]

Research instrument

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

The study on the 2021 state election in Saxony-Anhalt was conducted by Forschungsgruppe Wahlen. During the survey period from May 31, 2021 to June 3, 2021, 1471 eligible voters in Saxony-Anhalt were interviewed by telephone (CATI) on the following topics: Political opinion: Parties. Top candidates. Problems and competencies. Electoral decision in the context of candidate preference and party competence. Respondents were selected by a multistage random sample. Most important political issues in Saxony-Anhalt; intention to vote in the state election in Saxony-Anhalt; preference for polling station or absentee ballot; party preference (first vote, second vote); certainty of one´s voting decision; importance of federal politics for one´s voting decision in the state election in Saxony-Anhalt; interest in the state election; voting behavior in the last state election; coalition preference; attitude towards various coalition constellations: Government of CDU, SPD and Greens, of CDU, SPD and FDP, of CDU, Greens and FDP, and of CDU and AfD; sympathy scalometer for selected parties at federal and state level (CDU, AfD, Left Party, SPD, Greens, FDP and Free Voters); Satisfaction scalometers on the performance of the state government consisting of the CDU, SPD and Greens, the CDU, SPD and Greens in the state government, the performance of the AfD and the Left in opposition in the state parliament, and the performance of the federal government consisting of the CDU/CSU and SPD; Sympathy scalometers for selected top politicians at the state and federal levels; party sympathy; interest in politics; preference for Reiner Haseloff or Oliver Kirchner as prime minister; Split A: Comparison of credibility, likability, and expertise of Reiner Haseloff and Oliver Kirchner (end of Split A); Split B: Evaluation of Reiner Haseloff´s credibility, sympathy and expertise (end of Split B); evaluation of the current economic situation in Saxony-Anhalt; comparison of the economic situation in Saxony-Anhalt with that in the other eastern German states; evaluation of one´s own economic situation; party competencies: most competent party to solve the economic problems in the state, in the areas of school and education policy and on the issue of Corona; Split A: most competent party with regard to better infrastructure in the areas of fast Internet, local public transport, medical care and shopping facilities, in policies on foreigners and with regard to the concerns and problems of East Germans; future viability of the state and most competent party to solve future problems in Saxony-Anhalt (end of split A); split B: Most competent party to create new jobs in Saxony-Anhalt and in the areas of climate protection and social justice (end of split B); assessment of the work of Minister President Reiner Haseloff; assessment of Minister President Reiner Haseloff´s announcement that there will be no political cooperation between the CDU and the AfD after the state election; role of the chancellor candidates from the CDU/CSU (Armin Laschet), SPD (Olaf Scholz) and Greens (Annalena Baerbock) in the respective party´s performance in the state election in Saxony-Anhalt; better or worse policies as a result of AfD participation in the state government in Saxony-Anhalt; opinion on the spread of right-wing extremist ideas in the AfD; agreement with various statements: Split A: the Left does not care enough about the interests of East Germans today, the AfD is the only party that calls the important problems by their names (end of Split A); Split B: In Saxony-Anhalt, there are much more important issues than climate change; East Germans are treated like second-class citizens (end of Split B); outcome of the state election in Saxony-Anhalt says nothing about the outcome of the next federal election; opinion on the consideration of the interests of foreigners living in Germany by politicians; opinion on the Corona measures in force; satisfaction with the Corona crisis management of the federal government and the state government in Saxony-Anhalt; Split B: Satisfaction with Corona crisis management in Saxony-Anhalt in the area of schools and education; satisfaction with vaccination progress in Saxony-Anhalt (end of Split B); fair share of standard of living; preference in elections in general and in times of Corona for polling place, absentee ballot, or not voting. Demography: sex; age (classified); school-leaving qualification or targeted school-leaving qualification; university degree; employment; job security; occupational position; leading position; public service employment; household size; number of persons in household 18 years and older; union member in the household; religious denomination; party affiliation; party identification; city size; voting eligibility. Additionally coded were: ID; weighting factor. Die Studie zur Landtagswahl 2021 in Sachsen-Anhalt wurde von der Forschungsgruppe Wahlen durchgeführt. Im Erhebungszeitraum 31.05.2021 bis 03.06.2021 wurden 1471 Wahlberechtige in Sachsen-Anhalt in telefonischen Interviews (CATI) zu folgenden Themen befragt: Politisches Meinungsbild: Parteien. Spitzenkandidaten. Probleme und Kompetenzen. Wahlentscheidung im Kontext von Kandidatenpräferenz und Parteikompetenz. Die Auswahl der Befragten erfolgte durch eine mehrstufige Zufallsstichprobe. Wichtigste politische Probleme in Sachsen-Anhalt; Wahlbeteiligungsabsicht bei der Landtagswahl in Sachsen-Anhalt; Präferenz für Wahllokal oder Briefwahl; Parteipräferenz (Erststimme, Zweitstimme); Sicherheit der eigenen Wahlentscheidung; Wichtigkeit der Bundespolitik für die eigene Wahlentscheidung bei der Landtagswahl in Sachsen-Anhalt; Interesse an der Landtagswahl; Wahlverhalten bei der letzten Landtagswahl; Koalitionspräferenz; Einstellung zu verschiedenen Koalitionskonstellationen: Regierung aus CDU, SPD und Grünen, aus CDU, SPD und FDP, aus CDU, Grünen und FDP sowie aus CDU und AfD; Sympathie-Skalometer für ausgewählte Parteien auf Bundes- und Landesebene (CDU, AfD, Linke, SPD, Grüne, FDP und Freie Wähler); Zufriedenheits-Skalometer zu den Leistungen der Landesregierung aus CDU, SPD und Grünen, der CDU, der SPD und der Grünen in der Landesregierung, den Leistungen der AfD und der Linken in der Opposition im Landtag sowie zu den Leistungen der Bundesregierung aus CDU/CSU und SPD; Sympathie-Skalometer für ausgewählte Spitzenpolitiker auf Landes- und auf Bundesebene; Parteisympathie; Politikinteresse; Präferenz für Reiner Haseloff oder Oliver Kirchner als Ministerpräsident; Split A: Vergleich der Glaubwürdigkeit, der Sympathie und des Sachverstands von Reiner Haseloff und Oliver Kirchner (Ende Split A); Split B: Bewertung der Glaubwürdigkeit, der Sympathie und des Sachverstands von Reiner Haseloff (Ende Split B); Beurteilung der derzeitigen wirtschaftlichen Lage in Sachsen-Anhalt; Vergleich der wirtschaftlichen Lage in Sachsen-Anhalt mit der in den übrigen ostdeutschen Bundesländern; Beurteilung der eigenen wirtschaftlichen Lage; Parteikompetenzen: kompetenteste Partei zur Lösung der wirtschaftlichen Probleme im Land, in den Bereichen Schul- und Bildungspolitik sowie beim Thema Corona; Split A: kompetenteste Partei im Hinblick auf bessere Infrastruktur in den Bereichen schnelles Internet, öffentlicher Nahverkehr, ärztliche Versorgung und Einkaufsmöglichkeiten, in der Ausländerpolitik sowie im Hinblick auf die Sorgen und Probleme der Ostdeutschen; Zukunftsfähigkeit des Landes und kompetenteste Partei zur Lösung der zukünftigen Probleme in Sachsen-Anhalt (Ende Split A); Split B: kompetenteste Partei zur Schaffung neuer Arbeitsplätze in Sachsen-Anhalt und in den Bereichen Klimaschutz und soziale Gerechtigkeit (Ende Split B); Beurteilung der Arbeit von Ministerpräsident Reiner Haseloff; Bewertung der Ankündigung von Ministerpräsident Reiner Haseloff, dass es nach der Landtagswahl keine politische Zusammenarbeit der CDU mit der AfD geben wird; Rolle der Kanzlerkandidaten von CDU/CSU (Armin Laschet), SPD (Olaf Scholz) und Grünen (Annalena Baerbock) für das Abschneiden der jeweiligen Partei bei der Landtagswahl in Sachsen-Anhalt; bessere oder schlechtere Politik durch eine Beteiligung der AfD an der Landesregierung in Sachsen-Anhalt; Meinung zur Verbreitung von rechtsextremem Gedankengut in der AfD; Zustimmung zu verschiedenen Aussagen: Split A: die Linke kümmert sich heute nicht mehr genug um die Interessen der Ostdeutschen, die AfD ist die einzige Partei, die die wichtigen Probleme beim Namen nennt (Ende Split A); Split B: in Sachsen-Anhalt gibt es viel wichtigere Themen als den Klimawandel; die Ostdeutschen werden wie Bürger zweiter Klasse behandelt (Ende Split B); Ausgang der Landtagswahl in Sachsen-Anhalt sagt nichts über den Ausgang der nächsten Bundestagswahl aus; Meinung zur Berücksichtigung der Interessen der in Deutschland lebenden Ausländer durch die Politik; Meinung zu den geltenden Corona-Maßnahmen; Zufriedenheit mit dem Corona-Krisenmanagement der Bundesregierung und der Landesregierung in Sachsen-Anhalt; Split B: Zufriedenheit mit dem Corona-Krisenmanagement in Sachsen-Anhalt im Bereich Schule und Bildung; Zufriedenheit mit den Impffortschritten in Sachsen-Anhalt (Ende Split B); gerechter Anteil am Lebensstandard; Präferenz bei Wahlen generell und in Zeiten von Corona für Wahllokal, Briefwahl oder nicht wählen. Demographie: Geschlecht; Alter (klassiert); Schulabschluss bzw. angestrebter Schulabschluss; Hochschulabschluss; Berufstätigkeit; Sicherheit des Arbeitsplatzes; Haupttätigkeit; Leitungsfunktion; Beschäftigung im öffentlichen Dienst; Haushaltsgröße; Anzahl der Personen im Haushalt ab 18 Jahren; Gewerkschaftsmitglied im Haushalt; Konfession; Parteineigung; Parteiidentifikation; Ortsgröße; Wahlberechtigung. Zusätzlich verkodet wurde: ID; Gewichtungsfaktor.

The cumulative data set contains data on the topics listed below. While a core set of questions was asked in each survey, many other questions were only asked in a limited number of surveys or only once.

Elections: Willingness to vote and voting intention in the next federal election (Sunday question, party vote); conceivable to vote for the following parties: SPD, CDU/CSU, Bündnis 90Die Grünen, FDP, AfD and Die Linke; recollection of party vote in the 2021 federal election; current coalition preference; assessment of a coalition of SPD and Bündnis 90Die Grünen led by the SPD, a coalition of SPD, Bündnis 90Die Grünen and FDP led by the SPD, a coalition of SPD and CDU/CSU led by the SPD, a coalition of CDU/CSU and SPD led by the CDU/CSU, a coalition of CDU/CSU and Bündnis 90Die Grünen led by the CDU/CSU, a coalition of CDU/CSU, Bündnis 90Die Grünen and FDP led by the CDU/CSU and a coalition of CDU/CSU and AfD led by the CDU/CSU; expected impact of the state election in Berlin on the governing coalition.

Political Parties and Politicians: Likability scalometer for the parties SPD, CDU, CSU, Bündnis 90Die Grünen, FDP, AfD and Die Linke; most important politicians in Germany; likability scalometer for selected top politicians (Annalena Baerbock, Nancy Faeser, Robert Habeck, Karl Lauterbach, Christian Lindner, Friedrich Merz, Boris Pistorius, Olaf Scholz, Markus Söder, Sarah Wagenknecht, Alice Weidel and Frank-Walter Steinmeier); Ranking of the parties according to sympathy; left-right ranking of the parties SPD, CDU, CSU, Bündnis 90Die Grünen, FDP, AfD and Die Linke; will Die Linke split; is the emphasis on traditional conservative values good for the CDU; would you vote for the Wagenknecht party (BSW); BSW closer to Afd or to Die Linke; questions about the AfD: Genuine support or protest vote; will poll ratings remain high; how far-right is the party and does the party endanger democracy; assessment of CDU´s policy of distancing from the AfD; assessment of AfD´s isolation by other parties in general and by the CDU in particular; most competent party in the areas of economy, jobs, social justice, securing pensions; preferred party in the areas of social policy, energy policy, climate protection, refugees.

Federal government and government members: Satisfaction scalometer for the governing coalition as a whole and for the individual parties in that coalition; assessment of Olaf Scholz´s work as Federal Chancellor; assessment of Olaf Scholz´s work in the Ukraine crisis and in uncertain times in uncertain times; does Chancellor Olaf Scholz show leadership; is Olaf Scholz asserting himself as Federal Chancellor; is Scholz too hesitant; is Christian Lindner successfully leading the FDP into the future; should Christina Lambrecht resign as Minister of Defense; assessment of Boris Pistorius as Minister of Defense; assessment of Robert Habeck as Minister for Economic Affairs; suitability of Friedrich Merz as Federal Chancellor; which CDU/CSU politician would be the best candidate for Federal Chancellor; suitability of Boris Pistorius as Federal Chancellor; assessment of the work of the Federal Government consisting of SPD, Bündnis 90Die Grünen and FDP; which party is hindering the government´s work; assessment of the respective assertiveness of the SPD, Bündnis 90Die Grünen and FDP in governing coalition; will the FDP prevail in cutting social benefits; will the FDP remain at a polling low; will Bündnis 90Die Grünen make too many concessions on climate protection, can they prevent cuts; how good is the relationship between the governing parties and which party is responsible for this; likelihood of the continuation of the governing coalition until the next Bundestag election in 2025; assessment of a possible break-up of the coalition; assessment of early Bundestag elections; expectation of a better government with the participation of the CDU/CSU.

Current political issues: Most important political problems in Germany; assessment of the current economic situation (personal and general); expected development of the economic situation (personal and general); budgetary policy preference for debt, tax increases or cuts in spending; assessment of the “Schuldenbremse” (a limit on the ability to incur debt anchored in the constitution); education: is spending on education adequate, should the federal government have more influence; social justice: how fair is own standard of living, assessment of social justice in general, assessme...

The economy was seen by 52 percent of people in the UK as one of the top three issues facing the country in July 2025. The ongoing cost of living crisis afflicting the UK, driven by high inflation, is still one of the main concerns of Britons. Immigration has generally been the second most important issue since the middle of 2024, just ahead of health, which was seen as the third-biggest issue in the most recent month. Labour's popularity continues to sink in 2025 Despite winning the 2024 general election with a strong majority, the new Labour government has had its share of struggles since coming to power. Shortly after taking office, the approval rating for Labour stood at -2 percent, but this fell throughout the second half of 2024, and by January 2025 had sunk to a new low of -47 percent. Although this was still higher than the previous government's last approval rating of -56 percent, it is nevertheless a severe review from the electorate. Among several decisions from the government, arguably the least popular was the government withdrawing winter fuel payments. This state benefit, previously paid to all pensioners, is now only paid to those on low incomes, with millions of pensioners not receiving this payment in winter 2024. Sunak's pledges fail to prevent defeat in 2024 With an election on the horizon, and the Labour Party consistently ahead in the polls, addressing voter concerns directly was one of the best chances the Conservatives had of staying in power in 2023. At the start of that year, Rishi Sunak attempted to do this by setting out his five pledges for the next twelve months; halve inflation, grow the economy, reduce national debt, cut NHS waiting times, and stop small boats. A year later, Sunak had at best only partial success in these aims. Although the inflation rate fell, economic growth was weak and even declined in the last two quarters of 2023, although it did return to growth in early 2024. National debt was only expected to fall in the mid to late 2020s, while the trend of increasing NHS waiting times did not reverse. Small boat crossings were down from 2022, but still higher than in 2021 or 2020. .

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

Maldives.

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 Maldives 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): Dhivehi. The questionnaire is available for download from the WVS website.

Tutkimuksessa kartoitettiin suomenruotsalaisten identiteettiä ja mielipiteitä liittyen politiikkaan ja yhteiskuntaan. Kyselylomakkeeseen sisältyi kysymyksiä lisäksi esimerkiksi puoluesympatioista, vaalikäyttäytymisestä, yhteiskunnallisesta luottamuksesta, tulevaisuudennäkymistä, terveydestä ja hyvinvoinnista. Aineisto on kerätty osana Suomenruotsalaista barometriä (Barometern), joka kuuluu kansalliseen yleisen mielipiteen mittaamisen infrastruktuuriin (The Finnish Research Infrastructure for Public Opinion, FIRIPO). Aineisto on erityisen kattava, ja se on osa toista suurta Barometri-tutkimusta, joka toteutetaan joka toinen vuosi. Ensimmäinen suuri Barometri-tutkimus (B1) tehtiin vuonna 2019. Aluksi vastaajilta tiedusteltiin heidän identiteetistä, minkä jälkeen siirryttiin esittämään kysymyksiä liittyen politiikkaan. Vastaajilta kysyttiin esimerkiksi, kuinka tyytyväisiä he ovat demokratian toimintaan. Tämän jälkeen vastaajien tuli asettaa itsensä oikeisto-vasemmisto-akselille poliittisten mielipiteidensä perusteella. Edelleen tiedusteltiin eduskuntavaaleista ja äänestyskäyttäytymisestä. Kysyttiin, mitä puoluetta he yleensä äänestävät, ja mitkä kysymykset ovat merkittäviä puoluetta valittaessa. Kysyttiin myös, mitä mieltä vastaajat ovat muista poliittisista puolueista. Edelleen kysyttiin Suomen aluevaaleista 2022 ja niissä äänestämisestä. Seuraavaksi vastaajilta tiedusteltiin luottamuksesta tutkimustuloksiin, poliitikkoihin ja erilaisiin instituutioihin. Lisäksi tiedusteltiin näkemyksiä korruption suuruudesta. Tämän jälkeen kysyttiin vastaajien mielipiteitä erilaisista ajankohtaisista poliittisista aiheista. Lopuksi kysyttiin mielipiteitä yhteiskunnallisten aiheiden ja yhteiskunnan tulevaisuudennäkymistä, omasta terveydentilasta sekä elämään tyytyväisyydestä. Taustamuuttujina ovat asuinalue maakuntatasolla, äidinkieli, sukupuoli, syntymävuosi, ikä, koulutusaste, uskontokunta, puoluekanta, yhteiskuntaluokka, ammattiasema ja siviilisääty. The survey charted the identity of Swedish-speaking Finns and their opinions on politics and society. The survey also included questions on party affiliations, electoral behaviour, social trust, future prospects, health and well-being. The data was collected as part of the Citizen Panel of Swedish-speaking Finns (Barometern), which is part of The Finnish Research Infrastructure for Public Opinion (FIRIPO). The data is particularly comprehensive and is part of the second major Barometer survey, which is carried out every two years. The first major Barometer survey (B1) was conducted in 2019. Respondents were first asked about their identity, before moving on to ask questions related to politics. For example, respondents were asked how satisfied they were with the way democracy works. Respondents were then asked to place themselves on a right-left spectrum based on their political opinions. Further questions were asked about parliamentary elections and voting behaviour. They were asked which party they usually vote for and which issues are important when deciding which party to vote for. Respondents were also asked what they thought about other political parties. They were also asked about the 2022 Finnish county elections and about voting in them. Next, respondents were asked about their trust in research results, politicians and institutions. They were also asked about their views on the extent of corruption. Respondents were then asked about their opinions on various current political issues. Finally, respondents were asked about their views on the future prospects of social issues and society, their own health and their satisfaction with life. Background variables included the respondent's NUTS3 region of residence, mother tongue, gender, year of birth, age, highest level of education, religious affiliation, political party preference, social class, occupational status and marital status.

As of May 2025, 36 percent of people in Great Britain thought that Keir Starmer was better for the job of Prime Minister than the Leader of the Opposition, Kemi Badenoch, with 25 percent believing she would be better for the job. Although Starmer is currently seen as better suited for the job as Prime Minister, the approval ratings for his government have declined considerably since winning the election, sinking to a low of -54 percent in March 2025. Sunak vs Starmer Shortly after succeeding Truss as Prime Minister, Rishi Sunak was seen by 30 percent of people as the best person for the job, just four percentage points behind Keir Starmer. Twenty months later, however, on the eve of the 2024 general election, just 19 percent of people thought Sunak was the best choice, compared with 35 percent for Starmer. Despite pledging to address the main issues facing the country at the start of 2023, Sunak struggled to convince voters. Although inflation peaked in 2022, and declined throughout 2023, the cost of living crisis afflicting people in the UK lingered on, while progress on improving the NHS proved elusive. The Conservatives suffered a clear defeat in the 2024 election, winning just 121 seats, compared with 365 in 2019. Scandals and mini budgets After becoming Prime Minister in late 2019, a series of controversies harmed the popularity of Boris Johnson among voters, and eventually forced his resignation. The Partygate scandal, which revealed that senior government officials held parties at Downing Street, during the COVID-19 lockdown, was the most severe. When the issue came to a head in Summer 2022, Johnson survived the initial political backlash, including an attempted vote of no-confidence in his leadership, but he was forced to resign his position after a wave of senior ministers resigned from his government between July 5-7, 2022. Although Liz Truss won the leadership contest that followed the resignation of Johnson, her time in office was by far the shortest of any Prime Minister. After an unorthodox mini-budget resulted in an acute economic crisis, she resigned her position after less than 50 days in the job

Approximately 21 percent of Irish adults intended to vote for Fianna Fáil according to a survey conducted between November 20 and 23, 2024. This survey was conducted a week before the Irish general election, which saw Fianna Fáil win 48 of the 174 contested seats, just ahead of Sinn Féin on 39, and Fine Gael on 38. With 88 seats needed for a majority, no single party won enough seats to form a government, and coalition talks between Fianna Fáil and Fine Gael were ongoing of January 2025. Election tightens in the final stretch Following the 2020 general election, Ireland has been governed by a coalition government consisting of Fianna Fáil, Fine Gael, and the Irish Green Party. Although they won the highest share of the vote, Sinn Féin came behind Fianna Fáil in terms of seats won, and became the main opposition party. After leading the polls between 2021 and 2023, support for Sinn Féin fell throughout most of 2024. Since the election campaign began, however, Sinn Féin has managed to recuperate, while support for Fianna Fáil has remained relatively stable. By contrast, there has been a noticeable dip in support for Fine Gael following a bad election campaign for the party. Top issues heading into the election For several years, Ireland has struggled with an enduring housing crisis, with the issue identified by 64 percent of people as one of the top two issues facing the country. Although inflation and the cost of living was selected by 40 percent of people as a top-two issue, this was down from a high of 65 percent of people in July 2022. More recently, the issues that were getting the attention of voters in the run-up to the election concerned government spending. With the country running a budget surplus, in part due to a windfall of tax revenue from Apple, Ireland has recently been able to avoid tax rises and spending cuts.

The Panel Study of Income Dynamics–Social, Health, and Economic Longitudinal File (PSID-SHELF) provides an easy-to-use and harmonized longitudinal file for the Panel Study of Income Dynamics (PSID), the longest-running nationally representative household panel survey in the world.The first major benefit of PSID-SHELF is that it provides users with a longitudinal data file that features the complete sample of the PSID's multigenerational panel. The current version of PSID-SHELF includes 42 waves of survey data, ranging from 1968 to 2021. Every individual who has ever been observed in the PSID Main Study is included in PSID-SHELF. There are over 8,000 sample families, comprising more than 900,000 observations from roughly 53,000 sample members (and an additional 30,000 nonsample individuals who have ever lived in a PSID family unit). The second major benefit of PSID-SHELF is that it features a novel set of harmonized measures on a wide range of substantive topics, including: (1) social characteristics (e.g., demographics, family type, education, race and ethnicity); (2) health characteristics (e.g., chronic conditions, COVID-19, dementia, disability); (3) economic characteristics (e.g., earnings, family income, occupations, wealth)—as well as a list of the PSID's essential administrative variables (e.g., survey identifiers, panel status, sample weights, household relationship records). Consequently, PSID-SHELF covers some of the most central variables in the PSID that have been collected for up to five decades.PSID-SHELF can be used as a standalone data file, or it can easily be merged with other PSID data products to add additional public-use variables, by linking variables to a participant’s individual and family unit identifiers. The harmonized longitudinal file accentuates the PSID's strengths through its household panel structure that follows the same families over multiple decades and its multigenerational genealogical design that follows the descendants of PSID families that were originally sampled in 1968, with immigrant refresher samples in 1997–1999 and 2017–2019.Although the PSID strives to ensure longitudinally consistent measurement, there are a number of variables that have changed across waves (e.g., because of new code frames, top-codes, question splitting, or other changes to the survey interview). But data harmonization, by necessity, involves analytic decisions that users may or may not agree with. These decisions are described at a high level in the PSID-SHELF User Guide and Codebook, but only a close review of the construction files that were used to generate PSID-SHELF can fully reveal each analytic decision. The Stata code underlying PSID-SHELF is publicly available not only to allow for such review but also to encourage users, as they become more comfortable with PSID, to use and alter the full code or selected code snippets for their own analytic purposes.Despite multiple code reviews, it is possible that the files used to produce PSID-SHELF contain errors. As such, we encourage users to review the code carefully. If identified, please report any mistakes or errors to us (psidshelf.help@umich.edu). The authors wish to underscore that PSID-SHELF is currently being shared as a data product, in beta, and users are responsible for any errors arising from the provided code and files. Current Version 2025-01 (data release number).Permanent DOIDOI:10.3886/E194322 (data).DOI:10.7302/25205 (documentation).Recommended CitationsPlease cite PSID-SHELF in any product that makes use of the data or documentation. Anyone who uses PSID-SHELF should cite the data or the PSID-SHELF User Guide and Codebook—and, as required by the PSID user agreement, the PSID Main Study.PSID-SHELF data:Pfeffer, Fabian T., Davis Daumler, and Esther Friedman. PSID-SHELF, 1968–2021: The PSID’s Social, Health, and Economic Longitudinal File (PSID-SHELF), Beta Release. Ann Arbor, MI: Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research [distributor],