The EUI-YouGov dataset on European solidarity is built on a large survey designed by the 'Solidarity in Europe' and the SOLID ERC research teams at the EUI, and implemented by YouGov. The data aims to empirically assess public opinion on the willingness to redistribute resources within the EU and to examine political attitudes that might explain these preferences. The survey design covers a number of issues, particularly concerning attitudes towards European solidarity; preferences for solidarity in the scope of different types of crises (including COVID-19 and the war in Ukraine); satisfaction and trust in national and European institutions; attitudes towards European integration, identity, value of democracy, world politics, security and defence, Russia, NATO and a European army; preferences concerning taxes and policy priorities; the relative salience of different issues and threats facing individuals, countries and the EU; political ideology, religion and voting preferences; as well as other individual attributes such as gender, age and occupation. The survey inquired 24.261 adults over 16 EU countries and the United Kingdom, from 16 March to 24 April 2023. YouGov implemented the survey online using a randomised panel sampling mechanism to ensure it is nationally representative concerning age, gender, social class, region, level of education, voting preference and level of political interest.

taken from https://yougov.co.uk/topics/entertainment/survey-results/daily/2023/03/21/6595b/3

Survey Question: When you’ve finished reading a physical copy of a book that you own, what are you most likely to do with it?

2979 adults from Great Britain Surveyed.

Data was intended to make a simple pie chart in Excel

Two public opinion surveys were conducted. For the first, main survey, data was collected by YouGov from 1,517 participants between 17th and 21st November 2017. Participants were identified through YouGov's pre-existing panel of survey participants and were selected to produce a nationally representative sample for the UK population. This process involved panel members being sent a link to complete the survey. Only participants who answered all questions were included in the survey data. Participants who completed the questions in a time shorter than it would take to read the questions were excluded, resulting in a valid sample of 1,497 people (out of an initial sample of 1,517). The first survey comes in 4 parts: 1- Attitudes to parties, 2- Views and desires for party representation, 3- Views and desires for party participation, 4- Views and desires for party governance. A range of explanatory variables are also included for statistical analysis. A second, shorter survey was fielded via YouGov on 8th-9th of April 2019, and gained 1,692 valid responses. This was composed of 10 questions that explored views of specific political parties. The link between citizens and the state is the crux of democratic politics, yet it is crumbling. Numerous studies have diagnosed a crisis in representative politics with decreased participation and growing levels of distrust bringing the legitimacy of democratic institutions into doubt. For many a solution has been offered by digital technology, leading parties to embrace new digital campaigning software. To explore the capacity of digital innovations to renew democracy this study argues that we need to understand the nature of the 'disconnect' between parties and the people. As such, this study departs from traditional analyses of 'digital democracy' by focusing on public attitudes. Adapting the methodological approach used by Allen and Birch (2015) the project will discern how the public and parties conceive democratic linkage in practice and as an ideal, highlighting contradictions and convergence to diagnose the problem. Correlating these insights to the functions of digital software and theories of democratic linkage (Dalton, Farrell and McAllister, 2011) the capacity of digital innovations to renew party politics is considered. To enable analysis 3 work packages (WP) are conducted. WP1: How do parties perceive democratic linkage, and how have parties used digital management systems since 2010? WP1 will first identify available forms of the type of digital innovation of interest to this project - namely 'digital management software' - and will categorise the functions they perform. Second, it will explore and develop theories of democratic linkage to provide a framework for subsequent analysis. Then, using interviews, internal party data and 3 case studies of constituency parties (1 from Labour, the Conservatives and Scottish National Party) the PI and RA will map perceptions of democratic linkage and usage of digital technology. This data will provide new insight on developments in party politics and will be used to produce case study accounts and articles that trace the form of change and consider the impact of digital technology on party organisation. WP2: How do citizens perceive democratic linkage, and how does parties' use of digital management systems affect public attitudes? WP 2 explores the impact of new technology. Working with YouGov the PI will commission 2 surveys. The first will assess public attitudes towards parties', seeking to discern how the public want parties to engage and how they perceive this to work in practice. Data will be analysed to identify conceptions of democratic linkage (WP1) and then compared with party attitudes to identify synergies and incongruities in public and party conceptions. This analysis offers a diagnosis of the state of current linkage, and will identify areas of 'disconnect' to be further examined in WP3. This WP will also probe public attitudes towards parties' use of digital campaigning techniques. Utilising a split sample survey, designed in collaboration with Dr Chris Jones, the PI will assess whether practices such as social media data mining are compatible with public notions of democratic linkage. This will inform an article, infographics and practitioner briefing papers. WP3: Can digital campaigning methods resolve the disconnect between citizens and the state? In collaboration with the think tank Involve, the PI will use 3 deliberative events to explore parties' and citizens' attitudes towards democratic linkage and test the capacity of different forms of digital technology to reconcile these perceptions. Building on survey data these events will test attitudes; exploring whether sustained reflection affects how public and party desires are conceived (drawing on work by Stoker, Hay and Barr, forthcoming). Events will identify ideal forms of linkage - findings that will be used, returning to WP1, to consider the capacity of different forms of digital technology to promote linkage and hence renew party politics. Two public opinion surveys were conducted. For the first, main survey, data was collected by YouGov from 1,517 participants between 17th and 21st November 2017. Participants were identified through YouGov's pre-existing panel of survey participants and were selected to produce a nationally representative sample for the UK population. This process involved panel members being sent a link to complete the survey. Only participants who answered all questions were included in the survey data. Participants who completed the questions in a time shorter than it would take to read the questions were excluded, resulting in a valid sample of 1,497 people (out of an initial sample of 1,517). A second, shorter survey was fielded via YouGov to panel participants on 8th-9th of April 2019, and gained 1,692 valid responses. This was composed of 10 questions that explored views of specific political parties.

United States The Economist YouGov Polls: 2024 Presidential Election: Donald Trump data was reported at 46.000 % in 29 Oct 2024. This stayed constant from the previous number of 46.000 % for 22 Oct 2024. United States The Economist YouGov Polls: 2024 Presidential Election: Donald Trump data is updated weekly, averaging 43.000 % from May 2023 (Median) to 29 Oct 2024, with 61 observations. The data reached an all-time high of 46.000 % in 29 Oct 2024 and a record low of 38.000 % in 31 Oct 2023. United States The Economist YouGov Polls: 2024 Presidential Election: Donald Trump data remains active status in CEIC and is reported by YouGov PLC. The data is categorized under Global Database’s United States – Table US.PR004: The Economist YouGov Polls: 2024 Presidential Election (Discontinued). If an election for president were going to be held now and the Democratic nominee was Joe Biden and the Republican nominee was Donald Trump, would you vote for...

The survey experiment data was collected by the polling company YouGov Denmark, who have access to large panels of respondents in each of the two countries. 1000 respondents in each country who identified as Christian, Protestant or Catholic when asked what religion, if any, they belong to in a screening question were entered into the full questionnaire. YouGov collects information on the gender, age, geographic region and education of their panel respondents, and the sample is representative, and weighted according to these characteristics. The questionnaire was designed in English and translated and back translated to Dutch and Danish respectively to ensure the similarity of meaning in the different languages. The survey experiment was conducted as a 2x2x2 design, with Country, Prime and Frame being the distinguishing variables. Prime: In each country participants were divided into two equally sized groups. Each group was primed with a brief statement about either the Uncontrollability of their financial future, or their Control over their financial future. In each condition they were also asked to provide three reasons (in their own words) why they were either in control or not in control of their financial future. Frame: The participants were then given 10 statements about their religiosity to answer on a scale from (0) "Do not agree at all" to (10) "Completely agree". Each participant was presented with one of two different frames:The collective identity frame includes statements such as: "I consider myself a Christian because: I am Danish / Dutch, I celebrate Christmas, I was Baptised, My mother and/or father are Christian". The personal identity frame includes statements such as: "I consider myself a Christian because I have a personal relationship with God, I believe in an afterlife, I am a spiritual person". A number of sociological and psychological studies have shown that situations of insecurity and threat could increase religious in-group identification. The proposed research project investigates whether between-country differences in Christian identity, would be strengthened by priming participants with salience of threat to the national economy. A survey experiment will be conducted on a large representative sample of self-defined Christians from the Netherlands and Denmark, two countries with marked difference in the relationship between religious and national identity. Our hypothesis is that these differences would be heightened in a situation of threat salience. Specifically, we predict that people primed with control threat will describe their religion more in terms of collective identity in Denmark, and personal identity in the Netherlands. The method of data collection is Online survey. The respondents were members of the YouGov Panel in Denmark, or the partner organisation's panel in the Netherlands. The target group of the survey was Christians 18-74 years old, national representative on gender, age, geography and education. Invitations were sent out via email to people who meet these conditions in The YouGov Panel. The survey was selected to a sampling frame that ensured correct population proportions according to the target group. In Denmark, a total of 2113 interviews were conducted, of which 1006 are within the target group. In the Netherlands, A total of 1317 interviews were conducted, of which 1008 are within the target group.

This is a late July 2013 YouGov political tracker survey combining data on attitudes to race and immigration with questions on mobility history as well as voting intention, media consumption and other background variables. Data is also geocoded to ward level and ward-level census variables appended. The quantitative research will be based on ONS longitudinal survey and census data, as well the large-scale Citizenship Surveys and Understanding Society surveys. We will identify individual respondents from the quantitative research and explore their responses through qualitative work, in the form of three focus groups - two in Greater London, one in Birmingham. These will probe connections between respondents' local and national identities, their intentions to move neighbourhood, and their opinions on immigration, interethnic relations, community cohesion and voting behaviour.In the past decade in Britain, the 'white working-class' has been the focus of unprecedented media and policy attention. While class is a longstanding discursive category, the prefix 'white' is an important rider. We live in an era of global migration. Population pressure from the global South, and demand for workers in the developed North, will power what some term a 'third demographic transition' involving significant declines in the white majority populations of the western world (Coleman 2010). In the UK, the upsurge in diversity arguably presents a greater challenge for the working-class part of the white British population than for the middle class. Why? First, because for lower-status members of dominant groups, their ethnic identity tends to be their most prestigious social identity (Yiftachel 1999). Second, minorities tend to be from disadvantaged backgrounds and are therefore more likely to compete for housing and jobs with the white working class. Finally, because the white working-class is less comfortable navigating the contours of the new global knowledge economy than the middle class, it is more attached to existential securities rooted in the local and national context (Skey 2011). How might the white working class respond to increasing diversity? Drawing upon Albert O. Hirschman's classic book Exit, Voice and Loyalty (1970), we posit three possible responses: 'exit', 'voice' and 'accommodation.' The first possibility is white 'exit': geographic segregation, or, in the extreme, 'white flight'. A second avenue is 'voice': spearheading an identity politics based on opposition to immigration and voting for white nationalist parties. A third possibility is accommodation, in which members of the white working-class become more comfortable with elevated levels of ethnic diversity in their neighbourhood and nation. From exploratory research and existing literature, we suggest that a three-stage pattern of voice, exit and accommodation may be a useful way of thinking about white working-class responses to diversity in the UK. In other words, initial diversity meets strong white working-class resistance, expressed in attitudes and voting. This is followed by a degree of white out-migration, and then by a decline in anti-immigration sentiment and far right voting. Yet these broad patterns require finer-grained analysis that takes both individual characteristics and local context into account. This project will test these propositions through quantitative and qualitative research. There are three major dimensions of white working class attitudes and behaviour we seek to explain. Namely, whether members of the white working-class: 1) are more likely than other groups to leave or avoid areas with large or growing minority populations; 2) oppose immigration more strongly if they reside in diverse or ethnically changing wards and local authorities; and 3) support far right parties more if they reside in diverse or ethnically changing wards and local authorities. A central question we seek to answer is whether inter-ethnic contact reduces white working-class antagonism toward minorities (the contact hypothesis), or whether increased diversity leads to white flight, leaving relatively tolerant whites remaining in diverse neighbourhoods. The latter, 'hydraulic' process mimics the contact hypothesis but does not signify increased accommodation. Telephone interview of 1869 individuals (YouGov) in Britain. Further details available in the YouGov Archive Birbeck results pdf which is available in the related resources section of this project record.

All figures, unless otherwise stated, are from YouGov Plc. Total sample size was 2035 adults. Fieldwork was undertaken between 14th - 22nd May 2020. The survey was carried out online. The figures have been weighted and are representative of all Scotland adults (aged 18+).

The BlueHealth International Survey was a deliverable of the Horizon 2020 BlueHealth project. It addressed the lack of coordinated and harmonised data across countries on people’s recreational visits to natural environments, in particular blue spaces (i.e. natural environments where water is a salient feature), and their effects on people’s physical and psychological health.

The data was collected from nationally representative samples of adults from 11 European countries across the course of the years 2017-2018 by the market research company, YouGov. Along with the survey data, geographical exposures are supplied (e.g. land cover classes, air pollution) which were appended to the participant's given residence. Residential addresses have been removed from this dataset. Filtering variables and summary variables are also provided.

The survey consists of the following modules of questions: subjective well-being items, items concerning frequencies of visits to natural environments, natural environment perceptions, recent bluespace visit characteristics, an experimental module on water quality, health and well-being items, and demographic items.

Publications related to this data mention that data were collected in 18 countries. The data deposit herein refers to the 11 countries where the data collection was funded by the BlueHealth project. Data from the remaining 7 countries and territories was not funded by the same source and we do not have the permission to deposit these as a combined data file.

We request that users acknowledge the use of this data in the following ways in any outputs they produce:

• Acknowledge the BlueHealth project protocol paper: https://doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2017-016188
• Acknowledge the technical report describing the methodology of the BlueHealth International Survey: https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/7AZU2
• Acknowledge this data deposit.
• Acknowledge the source of funding with the following text: "The BlueHealth International Survey data was created using funding from the European Union's Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme under grant agreement No. 666773."

The current dataset is a subset of a large data collection based on a purpose-built survey conducted in seven middle-income countries in the Global South: Chile, Colombia, India, Kenya, Nigeria, Tanzania, South Africa and Vietnam. The purpose of the collected variables in the present dataset aims to understanding public preferences as a critical way to any effort to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. There are many studies of public preferences regarding climate change in the Global North. However, survey work in low and middle-income countries is limited. Survey work facilitating cross-country comparisons not using the major omnibus surveys is relatively rare.
We designed the Environment for Development (EfD) Seven-country Global South Climate Survey (the EfD Survey) which collected information on respondents’ knowledge about climate change, the information sources that respondents rely on, and opinions on climate policy. The EfD survey contains a battery of well-known climate knowledge questions and questions concerning the attention to and degree of trust in various sources for climate information. Respondents faced several ranking tasks using a best-worst elicitation format. This approach offers greater robustness to cultural differences in how questions are answered than the Likert-scale questions commonly asked in omnibus surveys. We examine: (a) priorities for spending in thirteen policy areas including climate and COVID-19, (b) how respiratory diseases due to air pollution rank relative to six other health problems, (c) agreement with ten statements characterizing various aspects of climate policies, and (d) prioritization of uses for carbon tax revenue. The company YouGov collected data for the EfD Survey in 2023 from 8400 respondents, 1200 in each country. It supplements an earlier survey wave (administered a year earlier) that focused on COVID-19. Respondents were drawn from YouGov’s online panels. During the COVID-19 pandemic almost all surveys were conducted online. This has advantages and disadvantages. Online survey administration reduces costs and data collection times and allows for experimental designs assigning different survey stimuli. With substantial incentive payments, high response rates within the sampling frame are achievable and such incentivized respondents are hopefully motivated to carefully answer the questions posed. The main disadvantage is that the sampling frame is comprised of the internet-enabled portion of the population in each country (e.g., with computers, mobile phones, and tablets). This sample systematically underrepresents those with lower incomes and living in rural areas. This large segment of the population is, however, of considerable interest in its own right due to its exposure to online media and outsized influence on public opinion. The data includes respondents’ preferences for climate change mitigation policies and competing policy issues like health. The data also includes questions such as how respondents think revenues from carbon taxes should be used. The outcome provide important information for policymakers to understand, evaluate, and shape national climate policies. It is worth noting that the data from Tanzania is only present in Wave 1 and that the data from Chile is only present in Wave 2.

This is the first release of the 2016 ANES parallel survey created by the CCES team. This is a survey of 1,000 nationally representative American adults asked a subset of the full ANES battery both before and after the 2016 election. We selected questions from the ANES battery that represent the core of the ANES questionnaires. This data was produced by YouGov. A future release will include vote validation. Methodology: YouGov interviewed 1643 respondents who were then matched down to a sample of 1000 to produce the final dataset. The respondents were matched to a sampling frame on gender, age, race, education, ideology, region, and political interest. The frame was constructed by stratified sampling from the full 2010 American Community Survey (ACS) sample with selection within strata by weighted sampling with replacements (using the person weights on the public use file). Data on voter registration status and turnout were matched to this frame using the November 2010 Current Population Survey. Data on interest in politics and ideology were then matched to this frame from the 2007 Pew Religious Life Survey. The matched cases were weighted to the sampling frame using propensity scores. The matched cases and the frame were combined and a logistic regression was estimated for inclusion in the frame. The propensity score function included age, gender, race/ethnicity, years of education, ideology, and region. The propensity scores were grouped into deciles of the estimated propensity score in the frame and post-stratified according to these deciles.

Replication data and R code for Ahlquist, Mayer, & Jackman (2014). Data are two original YouGov surveys along with supplementary State-level covariates

In July of 2017, the Deseret News and The Center for the Study of Elections and Democracy at Brigham Young University fielded a survey on the family in America. This survey was administered by YouGov to a sample of 3,000 adult respondents whose characteristics mirror those of the general population. Each version of the American Family Survey has different in-depth module. The 2017 AFS explores government supporting families and family experience across several issues including addiction, technology, and healthcare.

Survey data on public attitudes towards Brexit in the United Kingdom from 2017-2020. 10-wave survey tracker data on how attitudes towards Brexit developed in the aftermath of the 2016 Brexit referendum, including questions on identification as "Leavers" and "Remainers", consequences of Brexit for the country and the individual, as well as the government's handling of Brexit. Respondents in each wave of the tracker are a nationally-representative sample of the British adult population. The 10 tracker surveys were conducted between 25 April 2017- 10 January 2020. The surveys were conducted by YouGov.In the referendum on 23 June 2016 voters gave the British government a mandate for Britain to be the first country to ever leave the EU. Yet, the options of 'leave' or 'remain' do not give clear guidance as to what kind of Brexit people want or will accept. At the heart of this research project is a question of huge importance to policy-makers: which negotiation outcomes will be considered legitimate by the British public? The negotiations ahead involve an array of complex policy questions, including the much debated trade-off over whether the government should prioritise controlling the inflow of EU immigrants or preferential trade agreements with the EU. But there are many other policy choices that relate to EU budget contributions, EU subsidies, financial services, jurisdiction of the European Court of Justice and so on. None of these featured on the referendum ballot, nor are they issues that most people gave much thought to in advance of the referendum. This project therefore aims to shed light on the question of what the Prime Minister's repeated dictum - 'Brexit Means Brexit' - actually means to ordinary people. What expectations do voters, both Leavers and Remainers, have of Brexit, what process do they want the negotiations to take and ultimately what outcome do they want? We also aim to advance our broader knowledge of how people form policy attitudes. Alongside self-interest, the dominant explanation of attitude formation is that people rely on informational short-cuts, typically cues from political parties. But the EU referendum is a situation in which the two largest parties - Labour and the Conservatives - were openly split internally before the vote and are still divided on the nature of Brexit. We argue that people are also responsive to other cues. These are both social and political in nature. The former are cues about what other types of people in similar social groups think. The latter are based around political divisions based on new opinion based groups formed around the distinction between Leavers and Remainers. Our aim is to thus gather new information on people's views about the Brexit negotiations, but also shed light on what types of social and political cues shape these opinions. In close collaboration with the 'UK in a Changing Europe' programme, we will disseminate information on people's expectations of Brexit by focusing on three crucial questions: What, Why and With What Consequence. i) What do people expect of Brexit, what process do they want the negotiations to take and what are their preferred outcomes? ii) Why, and how, do people arrive at positions on these complex policy issues? iii) What are the consequences of these expectations and preferences for the negotiation positions of policy-makers and the legitimacy of the Brexit outcome? To address these three core questions, we make use of state-of-the-art survey and experimental methods in collaboration with YouGov, a leading online polling company. These methods include 1) conjoint analysis, an innovative experimental design that enables us to determine how people value different features of complex Brexit trade-offs; 2) survey experiments that allow us to causally examine how different in-group cues affect opinions, and 3) a three-wave survey panel, with an oversample of Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland, that allows us to study the dynamics of public opinion over the course of the Brexit negotiations, as well as heterogeneity in opinions by social group and national identity. We aim to contribute to the public debate on Brexit, through a series of on-going public events, briefings, blog posts and media appearances, and also contribute to the scholarly debate on how citizens form opinions on complex policy issues. The surveys were conducted by YouGov using online polling. YouGov conducts its public opinion surveys online using Active Sampling, using quota sampling of its panel of over 1 registered British users. The panel includes of over 1 million British adults to take part in their surveys, recruited from a host of different sources, including via standard advertising, and strategic partnerships with a broad range of websites. For nationally representative samples, such as the ones used in this dataset, YouGov draws a sub-sample of the panel that is representative of British adults in terms of age, gender, social class and education, and invites this sub-sample to complete a survey. The final data is statistically weighted to the national profile of all adults aged 18+ including by how respondents voted at the previous election, how respondents voted at the EU referendum and their level of political interest.

Underlying data from annex B for the report that uses data from the YouGov DebtTrack surveys to update trend information about credit use and the extent of consumer indebtedness in Britain. The analysis suggests a continued decrease in the proportion of households using unsecured credit, but little change in the average amount of unsecured debt among credit users. The data also indicated a decline in the incidence of financial difficulty.

Young Germany during COVID-19 is a youth study, which focuses on young people aged 16 to 26 years living in Germany. The study has been conducted in September 2020 and is part of a larger series called Young Europe – The Youth Study of TUI Foundation which aims to shed light on the lifeworld, identity, and attitudes of young Europeans. In the September 2020 wave, 1.011 young adults (age 16-26) participated via an online survey provided by the opinion research institute YouGov. Further, an additional sample of 2.025 older adults has answered specific questions to create comparability. The survey’s main focus is the situation of young adults in Germany during the Coronavirus pandemic, especially their compliance with the restrictions and measurements taken by the government and the youth’s individual motivations to comply. The survey asks which measurements are particularly difficult and where do young people see the potential for societal conflict. These specific questions regarding the pandemic have then been supplemented by questions regarding the political representation of the youth, opinions on European integration and EU issues, as well as on the EU’s joint debt borrowing (Next Generation EU).

The SiE survey on solidarity in Europe, developed by the EUI and YouGov, is implemented yearly since 2018. This trendfile compiles the most relevant variables repeated over the five wave datasets (2018, 2019, 2020, 2021, 2022); please consult GESIS for the individual yearly datasets. The trendfile indicators cover a number of topics such as support for solidarity amongst EU countries and beyond; political attitudes concerning European integration; trust in EU and national institutions; response to different crises through various instruments, including the Covid-19 outbreak and the war in Ukraine; preferences concerning EU policy, European security and defence policy, Russia, NATO and a European army; identity; value of democracy; importance and salience of various issues and threats; position concerning world politics; and individual attributes such as left-right self-placement; gender, age, ocupation, religion, past vote in national elections, among other indicators. Kombination aus Wahrscheinlichkeit- und Nicht- Wahrscheinlichkeitsauswahl Selbstausfüller:CAWI(Computerunterstütztes Web-Interview)

Opinions of Londoners are at the heart of policy making at the Greater London Authority (GLA). City Hall conducts regular research with Londoners to provide evidence and insight into public opinion and behaviours, in order to support effective and impactful policy making and the development of strategies and programmes of work. These pages detail the latest research conducted by the GLA on public attitudes and behaviours in relation to the cost of living in 2022. All figures, unless otherwise stated, are from YouGov Plc on behalf of the GLA. The surveys were carried out online. The figures have been weighted and are representative of all London adults (aged 18+).

Representative survey of Londoners, to understand awareness of and attitudes towards retrofitting. All figures, unless otherwise stated, are from YouGov Plc. Total sample size was 1122 adults. Fieldwork was undertaken between 31st January – 4th February 2022. The survey was carried out online. The figures have been weighted and are representative of all London adults (aged 18+).

Abstract copyright UK Data Service and data collection copyright owner. It has been demonstrated that gender has a subtle and pervasive influence upon attitudes and behaviour that should be included in any comprehensive model of vote choice. This study was designed to provide further understanding of the way gender effects political attitudes and voting behaviour. The survey was administered to 6,000 members of the YouGov internet survey panel. In total, 2,890 people responded to the survey. Yougov's weighting variable (encompassing age, gender, social class, region, newspaper readership and past vote) is included in the dataset. The dataset includes the usual measures of political attitudes such as left/right position, socialist/laissez-faire position, liberal/authoritarianism, egalitarianism and partisanship. Also included are psychological measures of gendered attributes, which is very unusual for political science data, and permits an analysis that looks beyond biological sex and considers the social construction of gender. The dataset also includes basic demographic measures, alongside measures of parenthood and caring responsibilities, which allow a detailed analysis of how the realities of people's lives impact upon their political attitudes and behaviour. Further information about the study can be found on the ESRC award page and the project web page. Main Topics: Respondents were asked about their interest in politics, partisan identification, vote choice and general political attitudes. The dataset also includes basic demographic measures, as well as measures of parenthood and caring responsibilities, and psychological measures of gendered attributes. A number of the items on the questionnaire were measured on five-point Likert scales. Volunteer sample A random sample was taken from YouGov's panel of respondents Self-completion Email survey

Abstract copyright UK Data Service and data collection copyright owner. The Scottish Election Study (SES), 2016 was carried out by a collaboration between the University of Edinburgh, University of Glasgow and University of Essex, to look at the 2016 Scottish parliament election which was held on Thursday, 5 May 2016. A pre-election survey and a post-election survey were completed by YouGov, with the same respondents interviewed in each wave. The pre-election survey was used to identify factors influencing voting intention and the post-election survey was used to identify how and why people voted the way they did. Via this panel design, researchers can determine how intentions translate into behaviour and see how expectations influence reactions to the election result.Further information can be found on the UK Research and Innovation (UKRI) project webpage.