Find research datasets worth reusing
Search datasets from major research repositories and use ShareScore to quickly assess how well each record supports discovery, access, and reuse.
17
datasets available to search
ShareScore release 0.9.0
Dataset results
17 results for “voters”
Polidoc.net CODEBOOK: National and Regional Manifestos and other Political Documents Collected for the Research Projects "Representation in Europe: Congruence between Preferences of Elites and Voters" (REPCONG) and "The Impact of EU Cohesion Policy on European Identification" (COHESIFY)
<p>The Political Documents Archive http://www.polidoc.net/ contains election manifestos, coalition agreements, government declarations and various other documents of political actors from developed democracies. Currently, the archive builds on a stock of more than 3000 political documents from 20 European countries. The aim of the repository is to provide political texts in order to facilitate scholarly research in different areas of comparative politics such as party competition, coalition politics, legislative decision-making or electoral behavior.</p> <p>National electoral manifestos have been collected in the course of the REPCONG project ("Representation in Europe: Policy Congruence between Citizens and Elites"), and the archive includes party manifestos for regional elections in several European democracies. Because the process of European integration resulted in a strengthening of regions in EU member states and in countries that want to join the European Union, the relevance of the regional level for political decision-making has increased during the last decades. Therefore, also the policy profiles of regional parties are required to get a full picture of democratic responsiveness in European states across all levels of the political system. The collection of regional manifestos was supported by the COHESIFY project (www.cohesify.eu), funded under the Horizon 2020 Framework Programme for Research and Innovation. The aim of COHESIFY is to study whether the European Structural and Investment Funds affect people’s support for and identification with the European project.</p> <p>The archive is freely accessible (after a simple registration) and meant to foster rigorous research in these areas by enabling scholars to produce valid and reliable findings from empirical studies of textual data rather than unnecessarily struggling to obtain and process texts.</p>
Anonymised transcriptions (local and translated versions) of 18 Focus Groups with RWPP voters in Spain, UK, Denmark, Germany, Hungary, Switzerland
<p><strong>Anonymised transcriptions (local and translated versions) of 18 Focus Groups with RWPP voters in Spain, UK, Denmark, Germany, Hungay, Switzerland</strong></p> <p>In the UNTWIST project, we have carried out a total of 18 focus groups in Denmark, Germany, Hungary, Spain, Switzerland and the United Kingdom. They explore RWPP voters’ subjective perceptions of their needs and demands, their horizon of expectations, and their level of ‘gender fatigue’. Groups’ design followed two minimum criteria: same-sex composition (with a minimum of two same sex -male and female- groups per country) and voting behaviour (current voters of RWPP who have previously voted for mainstream parties or abstained or have doubts about RWPP and mainstream or abstain in case of voting for the first time).</p> <p> The composition of the groups varied between 6 and 10 participants per group in all but one partner’s country. In Denmark, all focus groups experienced dropouts. These unforeseen issues led to conducting the focus groups with fewer participants than was initially designed.</p> <p> In 83% of countries, the empirical composition of focus groups was considered and controlled for participants’ age, social class position and level of education.</p> <p>Finally, groups were same-sex moderated.</p> <p>Two comprised folders are provided. One contains the anonymised transcriptions of 18 Focus Groups carried out for WP2 of the UNTWIST project in their local languages. The other contains the IA-translated (Deepl) version of the same focus groups. Please note that the translations have not been human-supervised. </p> <p>FG_CHE_1 Female <br>Female Group, Switzerland</p> <p>FG_CHE_2 Male<br>Male Group, Switzerland </p> <p>FG_DEN_1 Female <br>Female Groups, Denmakr</p> <p>FG_DEN_2 Male<br>Male Group, Denmark </p> <p>FG_DEN_3 Male <br>Male Group, Denmark</p> <p>FG_DEN_4 Mixed <br>Mix Male and Female Group, Switzerland</p> <p>FG_ESP_1 Male<br>Male Group, Spain</p> <p>FG_ESP_2 Male<br>Male Group, Spain </p> <p>FG_ESP_3 Female <br>Female Group, Spain</p> <p>FG_ESP_4 Female<br>Female Group, Spain</p> <p>FG_GBR_1 Female <br>Female Group, UK</p> <p>FG_GBR_2 Male <br>Male Group, UK</p> <p>FG_GER_1 Female <br>Female Group, Germany</p> <p>FG_GER_2 Male<br>Male Group, Germany</p> <p>FG_HUN_1 Female <br>Female Group, Hungary</p> <p>FG_HUN_2 Female <br>Female Group, Hungary</p> <p>FG_HUN_3 Male<br>Male Group, Hungary </p> <p>FG_HUN_4 Male<br>Male Group, Hungary </p>
The Voter and the Propagandistic Discourse
<p><span>This study revealed patterns and strategies in digital political communication, and highlighted the importance of the clarity, relevance and emotional tone of social media messages in influencing the perception and decisions of the electorate. </span></p>
Verify My Vote: Voter Experience Questionnaire Results
<p><strong>Summary</strong></p> <p> </p> <p><strong><em>Dataset Information</em></strong></p> <p> </p> <p>This dataset contains responses of voters who had verified their vote using Verify My Vote (VMV) system after participating in in Royal College of Nursing and College of Podiatrists elections in August and October 2019 respectively. The data is used in research paper “Verify My Vote: Voter Experience” by Mohammed Alsadi and Steve Schneider and published in the proceedings of E-VOTE-ID 2020.</p> <p> </p> <p><strong>Dataset Characteristics</strong></p> <p>Multivariate</p> <p><strong>Number of Instances</strong></p> <p>196</p> <p><strong>Area</strong></p> <p>E-voting</p> <p><strong>Attribute Characteristics</strong></p> <p>Categorical</p> <p><strong>Number of Attributes</strong></p> <p>17</p> <p><strong>Missing Values</strong></p> <p>Yes</p> <p> </p> <p><strong><em>Questionnaire Information</em></strong></p> <p>The questionnaire consisted of fourteen 6-point Likert scale statements about the VMV system, two categorical questions representing Gender and Age range and one open-ended question asking voters about their feedback or any further comments.</p> <p>The questionnaire statements are:</p> <ol> <li>I was pleased with the opportunity to check my vote.</li> <li>I don't see the point of checking my vote.</li> <li>It was easy to check my vote.</li> <li>If given the choice I would prefer to vote on paper rather than over the Internet.</li> <li>I wouldn't usually bother with checking my vote.</li> <li>Checking my vote gave me confidence that the election result is correct.</li> <li>All elections should offer the opportunity to vote electronically.</li> <li>It was difficult to check my vote.</li> <li>This checking system keeps my vote private.</li> <li>The vote checking system is quite complicated.</li> <li>I would check my vote next time if I could.</li> <li>With this system other people cannot tell which vote is mine.</li> <li>I think everyone should check their vote if the facility is available.</li> <li>With this system I can tell how a particular person has voted.</li> <li>Please provide any further comments you may have. For example, what do you think of the vote checking system? Do you have any suggestions for how it could be improved? How easy was it to use? Any other comments?</li> <li>What is your gender? <em>(1 = Female; 2 = Male; 3 = Other; 4 = Prefer not to say)</em></li> <li>What is your age range? <em>(1 = under 25; 2 = 25-34; 3 = 35-44; 4 = 45-54; 5 = 55-64; 6 = 65 or over; 7 = Prefer not to say)</em></li> </ol> <p> </p> <p>The agreement levels used in Likert scale are:</p> <ul> <li>1 : Strongly Agree</li> <li>2 : Agree</li> <li>3 : Weakly Agree</li> <li>4 : Weakly Disagree</li> <li>5 : Disagree</li> <li>6 : Strongly Disagree</li> </ul>
Voter Autrement 2022 - The Online Experiment ("Un Autre Vote'')
<p> In April 2022, we have run a voting experiment during the French presidential election. During this experiment, participants were asked to test several alternative voting methods to elect the French president, like scoring methods, instant-runoff voting, Borda with partial rankings, majority judgement and pairwise comparisons. The experiment was both carried out <em>in situ </em>in polling stations during the first round of the presidential election (using paper ballots), and online between April 8th (two days before the first round of the election) and May 7th (using a web application). A total of 2308 participants took part in the online experiment. This dataset contains the answers provided by the participants to the online experiment, with no other processsing than a basic transformation to a set of CSV files.</p> <p>The companion paper available on this repository describes the experimental protocol, the format of the files, and summarizes the precise conditions under which this dataset is available.</p>
Voter Autrement 2024 - The Online Experiment
<div> <div> <div>The election of the French representative to the European Parliament is based on a proportional representation system with a 5% threshold. Due to this threshold, votes for parties that do not reach this threshold are lost, and the corresponding voters are not represented, and not taken into account for the allocation of seats. In this context, we wanted to test alternative voting methods that could mitigate this issue by allowing voters to rank more than one list. We conducted an online voting experiment during the election of the French representative to the European Parliament in June 2024. In this experiment, participants were asked to vote with the alternative voting methods, and give their opinion. We ran the experiment on two sample of participants, a self-selected one in which every voter could participate, and a representative one, collected through a poll institute.</div> <div> </div> <div> <div> <div>If you are using this dataset in a scientific paper, please cite our paper <em><strong>Reallocating Wasted Votes in Proportional Parliamentary Elections with Thresholds</strong></em> <em>(Théo Delemazure, Rupert Freeman, Jérôme Lang, Jean-François Laslier, Dominik Peters).</em></div> </div> </div> </div> </div> <div> <div> </div> <ul> <li><em>V2.0:</em> Added the representative dataset and updated the documentation.</li> <li><em>V1.2:</em> same bug but in "participants.csv" for voting intentions.</li> <li><em>V1.1: </em>there was a bug in the data of the "vote_two_choices.csv" file => NaN values were replaced by "ESPERANTO LANGUE COMMUNE".</li> </ul> </div>
Voter Autrement 2017 - Online Experiment
<p>In March and April 2017, we have run a voting experiment during the French presidential election. During this experiment, participants were asked to test several alternative voting methods to elect the French president, like scoring methods, instant-runoff voting, Borda with partial rankings. The experiment was both carried out <em>in situ</em> in polling stations during the first round of the presidential election (using paper ballots), and online during the month preceding the first round, and until the second round of the election (using a web application). A total of 6358 participants took part to the <em>in situ</em> experiment and 37739 participants took part to the online experiment. This dataset contains the answers provided by the participants to the online experiment, with no other processsing than a basic transformation to a set of CSV files.</p> <p> </p> <p>The companion paper available on this repository describes the experimental protocol, the format of the files, and summarizes the precise conditions under which this dataset is available.</p>
Finnish National Election Study 2011: Telephone Interviews among Finnishspeaking Voters (example assignm.)
<p>xx</p>
BakerRipley and League of Women Voters Houston GOTV
<p>This is a file updated for a pre-registration created on OSF. The pre-registration is titled: "BakerRipley and League of Women Voters Houston GOTV."</p>
Replication package for `How Do Voters Respond to Welfare vis-a-vis Public Good Programs? Theory and Evidence of Political Clientelism'
<p>Contents of Replication Package:</p> <p>Readme file, Data Dictionary, Household Codes (do, csv and dta files), VillageYear Codes (do, csv and data files), folders containing maps, survey details and replication output</p>
Dataset for paper: How Twitter Data Sampling Biases U.S. Voter Behavior Characterizations
<p>This repository contains the data and code for the paper "How Twitter Data Sampling Biases U.S. Voter Behavior Characterizations."</p>
Voter Autrement, données Allevard 2017
<p>Données de l'expérience Voter Autrement, Allevard 2017</p>
Voter Autrement, données Strasbourg 2017
<p>Data set from the 2017 Voter Autrement experiment in Strasbourg</p>
Voter Autrement, données Crolles 2017
<p>Données de l'expérience Voter Autrement, Crolles 2017</p>
Party Realignment and Single-Issue Voters
Open the record for dataset details and reuse information.
Vertebral Artery Origin Treatment Via Endovascular Techniques Registry (VOTER)
ClinicalTrials.gov study NCT03999983. IPD Sharing: UNDECIDED. Countries: 1. Publications: 0.
Voter Autrement, données Hérouville-St-Clair 2017
<p>Donées de l'expérience Voter Autrement, Hérouville-St-Clair 2017</p>
ScienceDex guides
Understand access before you commit
These curated guides explain access requirements, typical timelines, costs, and reuse considerations for widely used research datasets.
Allen Brain Atlas
Allen Brain Atlas is an Allen Institute collection of brain map atlases, datasets, APIs, and analysis tools covering mouse, human, and non-human primate brain resources.
Annotated Behaviour and Observability Dataset (ABODe)
ABODe is a University of Edinburgh DataShare dataset for behavior classification in group-housed mice using home-cage video, identities, bounding boxes, ground-plate positions, and annotator labels.
DANDI Archive for NWB datasets
DANDI is a BRAIN Initiative archive for publishing and sharing neurophysiology data, including electrophysiology, optophysiology, and behavioral data packaged as NWB and related standards.
International Brain Laboratory public data
The International Brain Laboratory public data releases expose standardized mouse decision-making experiments, including Neuropixels recordings, widefield calcium imaging, behavior, and session metadata accessed through the ONE API.
OpenNeuro
OpenNeuro is a free, open platform for sharing neuroimaging datasets, with public search, dataset pages, and download paths for web, S3, DataLad, and the OpenNeuro CLI.