Public Opinion - Science topic

public opinion polls

How can we understand the nature of the hidden roles of the multimedia in creating cultural and societal participants and their impact on global public opinion?

Hello,

Do you know of any available public opinion data from Europe (or OECD countries) that asks about opinions on women's place in society? Gender Quotas? Perception of women in the work place? Women's performance in leadership positions?

I am looking for this kind of data for my Master's thesis and am working to construct my own panel dataset with it.

I would appreciate any tips and advice.

Thank you!

Teresa Taylor

And if so, which types of media are central to this issue?

Please reply.

Are there any studies (large or small) that show the impact of fake news (or real news) on people's opinions towards a specific subject? Sort of like an experiment with control groups that exposes people (or users) to information, and measures their views before and after said exposure?

are there any research papers/articles/etc that examines the differences of what various media says about a particular topic.. and compares it to local/public opinion, which may differ from what is being said in the media?

For example:

News: People in X city support Oranges

People in X City: Most of us actually support Apples

As you all know, this pandemic has taken a major toll on the entire global community. In some societies, people do abide by COVID protective measures. Yet, in other societies people are resistant (or do not want to abide).What sort of messaging and media material or campaigns would convince the public to abide by the measures? Let's please discuss this!

Ideas I have:

What ideas do you have?

So for example, we have the following polls:

First poll: People who said they like orange juice for breakfast are as follows: Texas (50%), NY (25%), North Carolina (20%), and Florida (5%)

Second poll: People who said they prefer netflix to watch movies are as follows: Texas (10%), NY (70%), (North Carolina (15%), and Florida (5%)

How can we aggregate these polls to say that, for instance, the average person in Texas is likely to be interested in orange juice for breakfast, but likely does not like netflix for movies.

So aggregating data sources to reflect them onto an individual

i am looking for a questionnaire that i can adapt to focus on seasonal affective disorder to collect data to establish the general publics opinion on SAD

We often perceive that policymakers (and sometimes other practitioners too) understand problems and solutions to policy issues in a way that's very different to that of people 'on the ground'. This is problematic and I have the feeling that there must be literature discussing this gap or disconnect. But I cannot find a good lead to start discovering such literature.

Can you think of a paper that discusses this disconnect?

It doesn't have to be in the sustainability or environmental domains, it can be elsewhere in political science etc.

What would be the cheapest option for getting survey responses?

I looked at Google Surveys (limited countries), Poll fish and Qualtrics (a tad bit expensive), and Survey Monkey (sample is too small/expensive).

Any ideas?

More good science is needed. Some have sampling data that indicates increased macro- and micro-nutrients in grain produced with regenerative ag practices (not organic) vs. convention production. Tangentially, a study on beef production (pasture vs. grainfed) which may have relation to soil health as well as forage, begins to compare the nutrient content of the beef. https://www.green-acres.org/download/a-nutritional-survey-of-commercially-available-grass-finished-beef/

Some believe in some things or matters as facts while others consider it mere opinions. How can those who consider them facts understand them as opinion/s and how can those who claim things or matters as opinions understand something as fact/s?

Is reconciliation possible and how?

I know some may consider it obsolete and clear but many indeed fail to understand the root differences and similarities that ultimately leads to tension and conflict.

Appreciate your insights in advance.

Professor and author Carol Martin has had an ongoing fascination, exploring the theatre of the real, where the most authentic and accurate stories are those told from multiple narratives and perspectives, not ones that are merely accepted as commonplace. She cites David Hare's Via Delorosa (1998 premiere) which was a one-person play / travelogue of Hare's journey (1997) through Israel and Palestine dealing with the Israeli–Palestinian conflict.

Where Martin noticed discrepancies in his piece was the lack of multiple viewpoints and narratives: "Significantly, Hare says little about radical Islam in relation to the Palestinians" (Theatre of the Real, 112). She goes on to say, "The devastating effect of Britain's own colonial past in the Middle East is absent in Via Dolorosa" (112).

Martin was not taking a side, she was simply pointing to the fact if artists are to tell a somewhat accurate story, even if from their viewpoint and lens, other perspectives need to be included.

Another example of using multiple perspectives was last night on "Saturday Night Live," where ensemble member Pete Davidson tacked the issue of separating the "art" from the "artist" when it comes to controversy. If we are to accept one narrative of the person we might respect and admire for their body of work, we need to acknowledge the other ones.

Are you able to separate the "art" from the "artist"?

I think new citation of my own published work surely inspire me to publish more and more works. What is your opinion about it?

How important online discussions (forums, social media, microblogging etc.) are in the process of shaping the public agenda and political participation? We have already know that media coverage affects peoples' perception about particular socio-political issues. Thanks to the media outlets one can deepen knowledge, fulfill the information gap and look "beyond the box" . Nevertheless, users comments are no less important. Interesting here is to what extent users' comments/opinions (malicious, substantive etc.) can affect the degree of political views and participation (particularly voting act) of other users? Does offended comments have more impact on that ? Does the spiral of silence still applicable? I'd love to know your opinions on that matter!

Sometimes during preparing for a specific research, the results which obtained may be unsatisfactory or negative, what will you do in such case?

Please, share us your sincerely opinions

Identifying the best and comprehensive tool for analyzing data and factors is an important issue in recent years. As an expert, please write your comment in this context including the name of tool and also significant reasons for your selection.

Best regards.

Hello everyone,

My research group is interested in finding suppliers of deuterated polymers for use as an internal standard in analytical polymer decomposition method.

We are already aware of two: Polymer Source, Inc. in Canada and Polymer Standards Service in the USA.

Does anyone have advice or recommend another supplier?

Thank you in advance!

Dear RG colleagues,

The majority of researchers in my country publish their works on journals. In my opinion the publications of research results at high-level conferences are more credible!! Can I have your suggestions??

Best Regards

I have pre and post test repeated measures (public opinion) on same sample. Data is in Likert scale. Is there any way to apply chi square on data ?

I'm initiated a study on public opinion in Europe during the Napoleon era. I notice a close interaction between the Confederation of the Rhine, Austria, Prussia and Russia around 1808-1813. I'm looking for archival and bibliographic references and, if possible, trying to discuss this concept of public opinion in the earlier 19th century.

For several years, there are commercially-operating companies that collect data collected, for example, from social media portals.

This data contains information collected from posts, entries, comments, recordings, etc. posted by millions of users of social media portals.

Data is collected and processed in Big Data database systems. Sentiment analysis carried out on these data allows you to generate reports that are used in business, for example in marketing.

From these reports, the clients of the above-mentioned technology companies learn, for example, about how the recognition of their brand changes over time, what opinions about the products and services offered, etc., dominate.

But if the Big Data database resources analyzed in this way are mainly information collected from social media portals, do the generated reports have the advantages of objectivity?

Considering the current resources of the Internet, are the majority of comments on products, services, companies, institutions, etc. being entered on various websites at the moment? Are comments posted on social media portals?

I am interested in finding reliable and already empirically tested instrument/questionnaire (Cronbach alpha under 0.7), with which it would be possible to do empirical research on attitudes of public opinion towards specific country, and its foreign policy.

The idea is to investigate the perception and/or "public image" of a specific state within the IR.

The results should imply outcomes such as the ones from Pew Research Centre: http://www.pewglobal.org/2017/06/26/u-s-image-suffers-as-publics-around-world-question-trumps-leadership/

I express my gratitude for all dedicated answers.

Can any one name existing and under planning use cases of BlockChain Technology?

Like

1) Electronic voting in literature it is available but does it really exist

2) Banking Gross Settlement  like RTGS

3) Cross border payments

4) Supply Chain

Good Day Everyone,

I am currently doing a literature review on the roles Mainstream Media and Alternative Media in shaping public opinion. Are there any recommendation of such journal articles from the year 2012- now? All journal articles are preferably be in English. Thanks!

Both the information and the omission of information can influence the behavior of people after reading a news item in a media outlet.

In the case of fatal accidents due to external causes, it is evident that news about traffic accidents with color photographs, impact much more than news about accidental falls, choking or suicides that barely occupy a few lines.

This treatment of the information does not seem to accompany to transmit to the public opinion a message of prevention and warning about the accidents, unless they are of traffic.

After this reality, the media should consider a responsibility that makes them rethink their deontological codes?

Any difference between outcome, output and result?

Many universities raise this nicely written slogan "XYZ University is an equal employment opportunity/affirmative action employer and intends to recruit, hire, train & promote without regard to race, color, gender, age, religion, national & ethnic origin, disability, marital status, or sexual orientation ".

Scientists usually seek truth but most of them shun from talking honestly about what is actually going on in many universities which is utter discrimination practiced either "guardedly" or "bluntly".

In many parts of the world, unfairness is done “from what texts are read, to who is admitted, employed, and promoted, to who does research & who is denied, to what knowledge is valued & what is dismissed or ignored”. In 3rd world countries, the situation worsens to nepotism according to political affiliation or to belonging to a certain secretive group or to being an inhabitant in a particular city or to being a son or daughter of an influential person or a family.

Isn't time to confront this disastrous policy of discrimination at a global scale? The continuation of implicit & explicit discrimination will eventually lead to the downfall of academic institutions whatever resilience is "assumed" to be.

There has been an increasing attempt towards highlighting the impact of social media in the outcome of an election. However, it really needs to be understood that impacting the outcome of the election and spreading awareness about the political parties and leaders are two different aspects which normally people consider same. It is much difficult to gauge the impact of social media on the outcome of the election for the simple reason that there are other factors, including offline campaigning, which play a crucial role in the final outcome. Question is, does their exist a mechanism by which one can measure the impact of social media on the outcome of an election?

I have recently read the book The Retreat of Western Liberalism (2017), written by the Financial Times columnist Edward Luce. The author coincides with the growing group of analysts and scholars concerned about the prospects of liberal democracy around the world.

Adding to the rise of populism in many West’s countries, at least 25 democracies have failed since the turn of the millennium, the work underlines. In January, Francis Fukuyama –who claimed in 1989 that Western liberal democracy was “the final form of human government”- told Luce that “it is an open question whether this is a market correction in democracy or a global depression”.

The work highlights the “dramatic” shift of global economic power to Asia and the inadequate responses to the impact it has had on Western economies.  

“The backlash of the West’s middle classes, who are the biggest losers in a global economy that has been rapidly converging (…) has been brewing since the early 1990s. In Britain we call them the ‘left-behinds’. In France, they are the ‘couches moyennes’. In America, they are the ‘squeezed middle’. A better term is the ‘precariat’ – those whose lives are dominated by economic insecurity. Their weight of numbers is growing. So, too, is their impatience. Barrington Moore, the American sociologist, famously said, ‘No bourgeoisie, no democracy.’ In the coming years we will find out if he was right.”

Following Theresa May's unexpectedly poor performance in the British parliamentary election in June, Luce published an article in the Financial Times about “The Anglo-American democracy problem” (FT, June 14.). He argues that populism has been more successful in the UK and the US than in other industrialized nations due to the fact that both have become the more unequal OECD’s countries –measuring through the Gini index- excluding Chile and Mexico. According to the analyst, the main culprit of this situation is the zeal with which both have implemented the economic policies launched in the Reagan-Thatcher era of the early 1980s.

In the cited book, the author claims that “at some point during the 2008 global financial crisis, the Washington Consensus died. [It] prescribed open trading systems, free movement of capital and central bank monetary discipline. Countries that swallowed the prescription suffered terribly” during the 1990s. “The destabilizing effects of the hot money that flooded into those economies and then out again was almost instant. Most of the world has since chosen China’s more pragmatic path of opening slowly and on its own terms (…) Call it the Beijing Consensus.”

The writer stresses how the global gatherings in Davos look every year a little more puzzled about what is happening in the world outside. “Buzz terms, such as resiliency, global governance, multi-stakeholder collaboration and digital public square, are the answer to every problem, regardless of its nature.” Their “lexicon betrays a worldview that is inherently wary of public opinion. Democracy is never a cure (…) Democracies must listen more to multinational companies. Pursuing national economic self-interest is always a bad thing.” In other words, “Davos is not fan club for democracy.”

The book cites the former US Secretary of the Treasury in the Clinton administration, Lawrence Summers, once a champion of the Washington Consensus, who complained in 2008 of “the development of stateless elites whose allegiance is to global economic success and their own prosperity rather than the interests of the nation where they are headquartered”.

The “crux of the West’s crisis”, concludes the analyst, is that “our societies are split between the will of the people and the rule of the experts”. The election of Trump and Britain’s exit from Europe would be “a reassertion of the popular will”, but in the way the Dutch political scientist Cas Mudde has defined Western populism: an “illiberal democratic response to undemocratic liberalism”.

As the work notes, many of these paradoxes were advanced a decade ago by Dani Rodrik’s “Globalization Trilemma”, which I try to summarize below (see link to Rodrik’s blog article [2007] and his book The Gloablization Paradox, 2011).

The trilemma states that “democracy, national sovereignty and global economic integration are mutually incompatible: we can combine any two of the three, but never have all three simultaneously and in full”.

“Deep economic integration requires that we eliminate all transaction costs traders and financiers face in their cross-border dealings. Nation-states are a fundamental source of such transaction costs.” They generate sovereignty risk and are the main cause of the malfunctioning of the global financial system.

The tension between democracy and globalization is not an automatic consequence of the fact that the latter constrains national sovereignty. Through democratic delegation, external constraints can even enhance democracy. But in many circumstances external rules do not satisfy the conditions of democratic delegation.

Since global democracy is not a realistic solution today, nation states should be “responsive only to the needs of the international economy”, at the expense of other domestic objectives. A historical example is the nineteenth century gold standard. “The collapse of the Argentine convertibility experiment of the 1990s provides a contemporary illustration of its inherent incompatibility with democracy”, says Rodrik.

The alternative is “a limited version of globalization, which is what the post-war Bretton Woods regime was about (with its capital controls and limited trade liberalization). It has unfortunately become a victim of its own success.”

So “any reform of the international economic system must face up to this trilemma. If we want more globalization, we must either give up some democracy or some national sovereignty.”

Hello:

Could you please advise some seminal papers theorizing about or empirically testing the effect of public opinion on domestic policy-making in democracies?

Many thanks,

Best

Measurement tool is unipolar 5 points Likert scale, Question: In your opinion, how influential is each of the following factors (i.e. appearance, price, performance … so on (nominal data)) in consumer decision-making when buying a product? (Answer options: Not influential, slightly influential … so on). Aim: determination of hierarchical rank between different factors (e.g. X>Y>Z (X=2Y, X=3Z)), to conclude factor X is the most important factor and X=2Y in consumer decision-making when buying a product. If you can suggest a similar study example also ı will be really thankful.

I recently read the following in an issue of Current History:

I then took a look at the Corruption Perceptions Index (which is established, in part, from public opinion) to see how public perception did/did not match up with the public opinion data from Vanderbilt University.  This then led me to the question I pose to you here:

Obviously I am interested in El Salvador, Honduras, and Guatemala and how these three countries compare to one another, but I'd also be interested in knowing how they compare to Central America, Latin America, and other regions of the world.

Thanks in advance for any insight you can provide or recommendations for further reading/relevant resources.

Hi all, this is a research question I have in my mind and I will like to seek opinions on it.

I want to know whether citizens will lose trust in government when they see low performance or gain trust when the see high performance. (Or whether they don't care.) And to see whether there is a greater effect caused (amt of low trust vs amt of high trust based on the respective performance)

I received opinions thatI cannot link subjective perceptions to objective data. Anyone know why is that so?

The question specifically refers to this query: Does the DM establish his preferences from the very beginning or at the end of the model processing data, which is, following a top down, intermediate or bottom up approach?

MCDM is without a doubt an activity with a good deal of subjectivity in certain criteria (for instance, those related with uncertainty, such as data on public opinion or working with an estimated demand), but also with reliable and exact data on others (for instance, tested and approved values for equipment performance). In addition, criteria in type, areas, or fields are usually unknown and must be established, as well as limited in number, mostly for practical restrictions imposed by the MCDM model and work load. To complete the scenario, the DM makes subjective appreciations such as determining weights for criteria, establishing acceptance thresholds, determining preferential type of distances, etc.

Consequently, subjectivity is unavoidable.

The question is: Should subjectivity in the mentioned areas exerted at the very beginning of the process, that is affecting actual values (the top down approach), or is it preferable to run the model with the initial reliable data and apply judgment at the end (the bottom up approach)?

I prefer the second because once reliable or approximate data is processed, there is a result expressed as a ranking, which can be examined, tested, and changed by the DM as per his preferences and judgment and know how.

The DM is in condition to apply his common sense, perception and expertise to modify what he considers is not acceptable for whatever reasons, or that could be improved.  Assume for instance that selecting equipment the ranking is D>A>B>C. This is a purely mathematical approach, and then the DM can say, “OK the best equipment selected by the model is D, but in my opinion I would reverse the ranking and select equipment A. Why? Because I have worked with equipment A and I know it is reliable, sturdy, and with reasonable maintenance costs, while equipment D incorporates a new technology that I don’t know if it has been sufficiently tested”.

I teach and research in the area of Indigenous studies. Repeatedly I have conversations with individuals from all walks of life about Indigenous issues. These conversations occur after they ask what I do for a living, as is typical in the US and Canada. Almost invariably, I then find myself embroiled in a long and heated discussion about the indigenous topic du jour or am quizzed on my knowledge: "What do you mean, you don't know the word for (fill in the blank) in Arawak/Ojibwe/Navajo/Mohawk/"Indian?" I have become hesitant to tell people what I teach and will sometimes say, truthfully, "I'm an anthropologist." It recently struck me that I am not quizzed or confronted when I claim anthropology as my field but Indigenous studies leaves me open for all kinds of conversations, most of which I don't enjoy. So what is the difference? Why is Indigenous studies as a field open for critique by non-specialists while other fields are not? What about your fields, colleagues? Are you questioned, quizzed, subjected to opinions that are often ill-informed? Or does your field get a "pass?" I am considering an article/opinion piece on this topic but am not sure if there is really anything to this, other than my personal experience. 

Is there any international research that measures public attitudes towards FDI? 

And especially the role of the media, creating them?

Opinion leaders can be used in information dissemination in remote communities. I would like to find out the areas they have been used and with what success.

In spite of the good  intentions of the CRO in the public sector,  sh/e is quite often coerced to submission through orchestrated blackmail , insults, and sometimes physical threats especially in the developing world. What is the situation in the DCs and how can the CRO be more operationally functional?

I am researching the role of the Holocaust within a distinct timeframe and population subgroup. It occurred to me that if I posit a set of question, the results may differ on account of a variable defined by my stated question: what is difference between public memory and public opinion.

I believe that some major flaws in the peer-review process are involved with anonymity. I believe our current review process opens up areas for abuse in the part of the reviewers in two main ways:

A) By knowing who the authors of a study are, the reviewers can be biased. especially if the authors are in direct competition with the reviewer's lab. Also, knowing the identity of the authors can make it harder for first time grad-students to get their work published as these people may be unfairly targeted as inexperienced based not on the merits of their science (and the models they propose) but based on their scientific status.

B) By remaining anonymous these reviewers can be far more critical to one's work without necessarily being constructive as they do not have to fear criticism from the wider scientific community for being, perhaps, too one-sided/biased.

I believe that a fair review process would be one that fosters diplomacy at all levels. This can be accomplished by either allowing both the authors of a study and the reviewers to be anonymous so that a review can focus solely on the science, or by eliminating the anonymity status from the reviewers so that the authors and the scientific community know who is reviewing what, which would prevent unfair and biased reviews.

What percentage of people in the UK support stem cell research?

Does the UK's population support scientists in the UK?

I am teaching a political communication & Media Lobbying course to undergraduate students. Can anybody suggest me a good handbook on this course which covers both political communication and media lobbying.

I would like to know if there are researchers conducting studies on public opinion on regional integration - whether in the European Union or in other regions.

Name of the types, please!

There are a few institutes that provide their summaries and reports about surveys, but I need data sets (just like the ones provided by Arab Barometer or WVS) for Lebanon and Palestine. I am looking for political attitudes and values. 

Thank you all in advance!

I am looking for empirical studies in public opinión and foreign policy in European and Asian countries.

In particular, I am interested in perceived legitimacy of CSOs

This should be related to shifts in public opinion due to excessive coverage on any issue.

I observe that different political parties often use conflicting information/data to back up their position. Usually this data is information that would not stand up in a peer reviewed journal. Rarely do UK politicians refer to a scientific peer reviewed journal. Often the mainstream political party’s become the servants of public opinion and re-shape their policies to match the populist view.

I would like to know if there are researchers conducting studies on nationalist sentiment of the public involving public opinion surveys?

Types, please.

Opinion dynamics seeks to model both exchange and processing of information in a population of individuals. However, I haven't found evidence that validates the predictions of these models in real populations.