welfare {paths}

Issue Framing and Support for Welfare Reform

Description

A dataset of 213 Danish students containing variables on gender, education, political interest, ideology, political knowledge, extremity of political values, treatment assignment (job/poor frame), beliefs about why some people receive welfare benefits, perceived importance of different considerations related to welfare policy, and support for a proposed welfare reform (Slothuus 2008; Imai and Yamamoto 2013).

Usage

welfare

Format

A data frame with 213 rows and 15 columns:

gender1

Gender. 0: Female; 1: Male.

educ1

Level of education. 1: the municipal primary and lower secondary school before ninth form; 2: the municipal primary and lower secondary school after ninth or tenth form; 3: Basic schooling; 4: Vocational education; 5: Higher preparatory examination course student 6: Upper secondary school student; 7: Higher commercial examination student 8: Higher technical examination student; 9: Short-term further education; 10: Medium-term further education; 11: Long-term further education; 12: Foreign education; 13: Else.

polint1

Political interest, measured on a 0-4 scale.

ideo1

Ideological self-placement on a 1-8 scale. A larger value denotes a more right-wing position.

know1

Political knowledge. 1: low; 2: medium; 3: high.

value1

Extremity of political values. 0: moderate. 1: extreme.

ttt

Treatment assignment. Whether the respondent read a newspaper article that highlighted the positive effect of welfare reform on job creation (1) versus one emphasizing its negative effect on the poor (0).

W1

The degree to which the respondent attributes welfare recipiency to internal factors, measured on a 0-1 scale.

W2

The degree to which the respondent attributes welfare recipiency to external factors, measured on a 0-1 scale.

M1

How important the respondent thinks that there should always be an incentive for people to take a job instead of receiving welfare benefits, measured on a 0-1 scale.

M2

How important the respondent thinks that nobody should live in poverty, measured on a 0-1 scale.

M3

How important the respondent thinks that government expenditures on welfare benefits should not be too expensive, measured on a 0-1 scale.

M4

How important the respondent thinks that no defrauder should receive welfare benefits, measured on a 0-1 scale.

M5

How important the respondent thinks that the unemployed should have benefit rates making it possible to maintain a decent standard of living conditions, measured on a 0-1 scale.

Y

Support for the proposed welfare reform, measured on a seven-point scale.

References

Slothuus, Rune. 2008. "More than Weighting Cognitive Importance: A Dual-process Model of Issue Framing Effects." Political Psychology 29(1):1-28.

Imai, Kosuke and Teppei Yamamoto. 2013. "Identification and Sensitivity Analysis for Multiple Causal Mechanisms: Revisiting Evidence from Framing Experiments." Political Analysis 21(2):141-171.