Das von der VolkswagenStiftung geförderte Forschungsprojekt untersucht die Konsequenzen der Online-Medienpräsenz für politische Präferenzen und Verhaltensweisen. Die Studie wurde von YouGov USA durchgeführt. Im Erhebungszeitraum 23. April 2018 bis 15. Oktober 2019 wurden amerikanische Staatsbürger ab 18 Jahren mit Internetzugang in Onlineinterviews (CAWI) zu folgenden Themen befragt: Politische Präferenzen und politisches Verhalten, Nutzung sozialer Medien, Mediennutzung, Einstellungen zu bestimmten Themen, politisches Wissen, Meinungen zur Regulierung von Online-Belästigung. Die Auswahl der Befragten erfolgte durch eine Quotenstichprobe aus einem Online-Access-Panel.
Das von der VolkswagenStiftung geförderte Forschungsprojekt untersucht die Konsequenzen der Online-Medienpräsenz für politische Präferenzen und Verhaltensweisen. Die Studie wurde von YouGov Deutschland durchgeführt. Im Erhebungszeitraum 13. Juli 2017 bis 14. Oktober 2019 wurden deutsche Staatsbürger ab 18 Jahren mit Internetzugang in Onlineinterviews (CAWI) zu folgenden Themen befragt: Politische Präferenzen und politisches Verhalten, Nutzung sozialer Medien, Mediennutzung, Einstellungen zu bestimmten Themen, politisches Wissen, Meinungen zur Regulierung von Online-Belästigung. Die Auswahl der Befragten erfolgte durch eine Quotenstichprobe aus einem Online-Access-Panel.
Die Studie Media Exposure and Opinion Formation (MEOF) ist eine Mehrländer- und -wellen-Panelbefragung, die zwischen Juli 2017 und Oktober 2019 in Deutschland und April 2018 und Oktober 2019 in den USA durchgeführt wurde. Die Befragung ermöglicht es, politische Einstellungen und Verhaltensweisen, Wissen, Online-Medienkonsum und Einstellungen zu verschiedenen Themen zu untersuchen. Zusätzlich zu den Umfragedaten wurde eine passive Messtechnologie (Tracking-Software) auf den Desktop- und Mobilgeräten der Befragten eingesetzt, um mit Einverständnis der Befragten Echtzeitdaten über Webbesuche und die Nutzung mobiler Apps zu sammeln.
We publish a dataset of raw tweets collected via the Twitter Streaming API in the context of the onset of the war, which Russia started in Ukraine on February 24, 2022. In total, we gathered 8.7 million original tweets between February 17 and March 3, 2022, produced by 2.3 million individual user accounts.
We collected the data using Twitter's streaming API (represents 1% of the total traffic on Twitter) and filtered for all English Tweets containing at least one of the hashtags #ukraine, #russia, and #conflict. In addition, the data has been annotated with availability tags, resulting from rehydration attempts at two points in time: directly after data acquisition and shortly before manuscript submission. This may provide information on Twitter moderation policies. We share only the Tweet IDs with the corresponding availability information in this repository.
These data come from several web surveys among the German population 18 years and older who live in Germany and were eligible to vote in the 2021 federal election. Respondents were recruited from the German nonprobability online panel of Respondi/Bilendi.
In August of 2021, members of the online panel were invited through a survey-router system. For Wave 1 (30.8.2021-7.9.2021), 3,530 people were invited to the survey and 2,221 ended the survey successfully. For Wave 1B (8.9.2021-14.9.2021), only respondents from Wave 1 who reported owning a smartphone were invited. 1,803 completed the survey. For Wave 2 (14.9.2021-20.9.2021), 3,761 individuals were invited of which 2,451 completed the survey. For Wave 3 (27.9.2021-4.10.2021), 3,565 individuals were invited and 2,261 completed the survey. For Wave 4 (01.12.2021-16.12.2021), 1,945 individuals were invited and 1,092 completed the survey. The full data set includes 2,756 individuals who completed at least one of the four survey waves. For a detailed view of the longitudinal response structure, variables indicating participation in each wave are part of the dataset.
Quotas for gender, age, and state (Bundesland) were employed to generate a sample with sufficient diversity.
The questionnaire included items on political attitudes, voting preferences, political identities, news media consumption on- and offline, smartphone and social media use. The questionnaire was programmed in EFS Survey. Respondents could complete the questionnaire on a PC, tablet or smartphone.
These data come from several web surveys among the German population 18 years and older who live in Germany and were eligible to vote in the 2021 federal election. Respondents were recruited from the German nonprobability online panel of Respondi/Bilendi.
In August of 2021, members of the online panel were invited through a survey-router system. For Wave 1 (30.8.2021-7.9.2021), 3,530 people were invited to the survey and 2,221 ended the survey successfully. For Wave 1B (8.9.2021-14.9.2021), only respondents from Wave 1 who reported owning a smartphone were invited. 1,803 completed the survey. For Wave 2 (14.9.2021-20.9.2021), 3,761 individuals were invited of which 2,451 completed the survey. For Wave 3 (27.9.2021-4.10.2021), 3,565 individuals were invited and 2,261 completed the survey. For Wave 4 (01.12.2021-16.12.2021), 1,945 individuals were invited and 1,092 completed the survey. The full data set includes 2,756 individuals who completed at least one of the four survey waves. For a detailed view of the longitudinal response structure, variables indicating participation in each wave are part of the dataset.
Quotas for gender, age, and state (Bundesland) were employed to generate a sample with sufficient diversity.
The questionnaire included items on political attitudes, voting preferences, political identities, news media consumption on- and offline, smartphone and social media use. The questionnaire was programmed in EFS Survey. Respondents could complete the questionnaire on a PC, tablet or smartphone.
Replication code for presentation at the EGU24, using ISSP 2020 data: see https://meetingorganizer.copernicus.org/EGU24/EGU24-3191.html
Attitudes on climate change and the protection of the environment have been found to relate in different ways to the current economic and social situation of the respondents. This presentation will describe people's attitudes by analyzing surveys on the topic of climate change and the protection of the environment, including the recent International Social Survey Programme (ISSP) and the Swiss Environmental Panel Study (due to time restrictions, the presentation only shows ISSP data results). A closer look will be taken at the economic opinions and willingness to pay higher prices or taxes and their relationship to climate change attitudes. In addition, respondent's trust in people and different institutions will be analyzed. A structural equation analysis is performed to highlight the relations between those concepts. The results will show that support for a better economy and private enterprises are related to lower environmental and climate change concerns, support for paying higher prices or taxes is related to more environmental concerns and higher trust in people and institutions is related to deeper environmental concerns. After that, several demographic characteristics will be used to show if the results are stable when controlling for these. Demographic variables used are age, gender, education level, employment status, income, and political left-right placement. It can be shown that the factors of economic opinions, willingness to pay, and trust in people and institutions all relate to the environmental and climate change attitudes.
Selects 2003 was financed by the Federal Chancellery, the Swiss Academy for the Human and Social Sciences SAGW, and the Swiss National Science Foundation.
Post-election Survey A national telephone survey was conducted immediately after the October elections, and correspondent contextual data was collected. The survey included 5900 interviews, of which 2000 were from a national representative sample. In addition, the number of interviews was increased to 600 in the cantons of Zurich, Bern, Luzern, Schaffhausen, Aargau, Ticino, Vaud, and Geneva, allowing for the effects of the variety of the electoral systems, parties, as well as differences in the political culture between cantons, to be taken into account in the analysis of electoral behavior. Additional interviews were also conducted to ensure at least 30 respondents in smaller cantons.
Panel Study 1999-2003 In Selects 1999, a panel study was conducted in the cantons of Zurich, Luzern, and Geneva, so as to study the opinion formation processes during the campaign. In 2003, 898 of the 2048 respondents from the national sample of Selects 1999 were interviewed, which permitted, for the first time in Switzerland, to study the stability and change in individual opinion and behavior between elections.
Selects 2003 was financed by the Federal Chancellery, the Swiss Academy for the Human and Social Sciences SAGW, and the Swiss National Science Foundation.
Post-election Survey A national telephone survey was conducted immediately after the October elections, and correspondent contextual data was collected. The survey included 5900 interviews, of which 2000 were from a national representative sample. In addition, the number of interviews was increased to 600 in the cantons of Zurich, Bern, Luzern, Schaffhausen, Aargau, Ticino, Vaud, and Geneva, allowing for the effects of the variety of the electoral systems, parties, as well as differences in the political culture between cantons, to be taken into account in the analysis of electoral behavior. Additional interviews were also conducted to ensure at least 30 respondents in smaller cantons.
Panel Study 1999-2003 In Selects 1999, a panel study was conducted in the cantons of Zurich, Luzern, and Geneva, so as to study the opinion formation processes during the campaign. In 2003, 898 of the 2048 respondents from the national sample of Selects 1999 were interviewed, which permitted, for the first time in Switzerland, to study the stability and change in individual opinion and behavior between elections.
Selects 2003 was financed by the Federal Chancellery, the Swiss Academy for the Human and Social Sciences SAGW, and the Swiss National Science Foundation.
Post-election Survey A national telephone survey was conducted immediately after the October elections, and correspondent contextual data was collected. The survey included 5900 interviews, of which 2000 were from a national representative sample. In addition, the number of interviews was increased to 600 in the cantons of Zurich, Bern, Luzern, Schaffhausen, Aargau, Ticino, Vaud, and Geneva, allowing for the effects of the variety of the electoral systems, parties, as well as differences in the political culture between cantons, to be taken into account in the analysis of electoral behavior. Additional interviews were also conducted to ensure at least 30 respondents in smaller cantons.
Panel Study 1999-2003 In Selects 1999, a panel study was conducted in the cantons of Zurich, Luzern, and Geneva, so as to study the opinion formation processes during the campaign. In 2003, 898 of the 2048 respondents from the national sample of Selects 1999 were interviewed, which permitted, for the first time in Switzerland, to study the stability and change in individual opinion and behavior between elections.
Selects 2003 was financed by the Federal Chancellery, the Swiss Academy for the Human and Social Sciences SAGW, and the Swiss National Science Foundation.
Post-election Survey A national telephone survey was conducted immediately after the October elections, and correspondent contextual data was collected. The survey included 5900 interviews, of which 2000 were from a national representative sample. In addition, the number of interviews was increased to 600 in the cantons of Zurich, Bern, Luzern, Schaffhausen, Aargau, Ticino, Vaud, and Geneva, allowing for the effects of the variety of the electoral systems, parties, as well as differences in the political culture between cantons, to be taken into account in the analysis of electoral behavior. Additional interviews were also conducted to ensure at least 30 respondents in smaller cantons.
Panel Study 1999-2003 In Selects 1999, a panel study was conducted in the cantons of Zurich, Luzern, and Geneva, so as to study the opinion formation processes during the campaign. In 2003, 898 of the 2048 respondents from the national sample of Selects 1999 were interviewed, which permitted, for the first time in Switzerland, to study the stability and change in individual opinion and behavior between elections.
Genetic engineering has the potential to become a key technology of the 21st century. However, the introduction of genetic engineering is socially controversial and is met with mistrust, concern and rejection from the population in a number of applications. The research project consists of several parts. On the one hand, it is a media content analysis in which the thematization and framing of genetic engineering is examined in daily newspapers and television broadcasts. On the other hand, public opinion on genetic engineering is collected by means of standardised surveys (Eurobarometer). The data from this survey is available on FORSbase. These two methods are supplemented by in-depth qualitative procedures in focus groups through in-depth interviews. Finally, the results of the study are to be verified and diffused in round tables with key actors. By using several instruments - method triangulation - the complexity of the topic and the dynamics of public opinion formation can be taken into account. In addition, this sophisticated design makes it possible to develop methodical innovations at the intersections between the various components. Switzerland is a particularly interesting field of research for such an investigation, since in this country there is an intensive public discussion of genetic engineering in international comparison. At the same time, intensive media coverage and a high level of public knowledge interact with a pronounced degree of ambivalence or scepticism towards genetic engineering. The project aims to examine the significant cultural differences between German and French-speaking Switzerland by consistently parallelizing the methods. The project is conceived as a continuation and deepening of a European comparative, interdisciplinary project in which the applicants have already participated in a first phase (see project nr. 6332). The integration into this international framework guarantees the intercultural comparability of the data as well as a longitudinal perspective. This study can make an important contribution to basic research on processes of opinion- and confidence-building in the dynamic field of future technologies. In addition, this project aims to gain insights that will be of importance for the communicative practice of science and journalism, but also for politics and business in the field of risk communication via genetic engineering. The representative surveys on the level of knowledge and the attitudes of the population towards genetic engineering were carried out analogously to the two so-called Eurobarometer surveys, which were carried out in a first wave in October/November 1996 and for the second time in the winter of 1999 in 15 European countries. Unfortunately, for financial and logistical reasons, the field work in Switzerland could only be carried out six months later between 20 May and 10 June 1997 and the second time - three years later - between the end of May and mid-June 2000. In contrast to the international Eurobarometer Survey, in the first Swiss survey the media coverage of the "Dolly" case, critical of genetic engineering, on the one hand, was noticeable. On the other hand, it played an important role that the Swiss population had to vote on the so-called "Gene Protection" initiative on June 7, 1998, and media coverage was therefore already very intensive a year earlier. The situation before and during the second survey, on the other hand, was completely different, as the "gene protection" initiative had been rejected with a two-thirds majority a year earlier and genetic engineering was therefore only given a rather low priority by the media. The Swiss Eurobarometer Surveys are a personal survey of two representative samples of approximately 1000 citizens aged 18 and over. Because of the three language regions, three questionnaire variants had to be used, but they were largely identical to the Eurobarometer questionnaires of Germany, France and Italy. In addition, however, some new questions were included in the Swiss questionnaire. The two surveys also differ in that in the second wave, in coordination with the international project, certain questions were asked anew and others from the first wave were no longer used. FORS archives the data of both Eurobarometer surveys. This document refers to Eurobarometer 2000 and the data from the 1997 survey are archived and described under FORSbase nr. 6332.
Familienbezogene Leitbilder. Panel, zwei Wellen, Erst- und Wiederholungsbefragung derselben Personen (2012, 2016). Erfassung von sowohl individuellen Leitbildern als auch von den wahrgenommenen kollektiven Leitbildern. Der Fragebogen umfasst verschiedene Themen aus den Bereichen Partnerschaft, Familie, Kinder und Elternschaft. Zudem wurden über reine soziodemographische Merkmale hinaus ausführliche Fragen zur Lebenssituation der Zielpersonen gestellt.
1. Partnerschaft Persönliche Einstellung zum Thema Partnerschaft (nur glücklich in stabiler Partnerschaft, dauerhaft zusammenlebendes Paar sollte heiraten, nur zeitlich begrenzt funktionierende Partnerschaften, Ziele des Paares wichtiger als die des Einzelnen, schlecht, wenn der Mann niedrigere Bildung hat als die Frau); perzipierte Meinung der Allgemeinheit zum Thema Partnerschaft; persönliche Meinung und perzipierte Meinung der Allgemeinheit zu einer gut funktionierenden Partnerschaft (Liebe, erfüllte Sexualität, Freiräume lassen, der Mann entscheidet, wo es lang geht, finanzielle Absicherung, gemeinsame Kinder); persönliche Meinung zum Thema Ehe (überholte Einrichtung, Frau sollte den Namen des Mannes annehmen, Paare mit getrennten Haushalten sind keine richtigen Paare); perzipierte Meinung der Allgemeinheit zum Thema Ehe (zusätzlich zu den vorgenannten Items: dauerhaftes Zusammenleben ohne Trauschein ist in Ordnung, Paar sollte vor der Heirat erst ein paar Jahre unverheiratet zusammenleben); Überhöhte Ansprüche an den Partner (muss gut aussehen, gut verdienen, Kinder haben wollen, darf noch keine Kinder haben).
2. Familiengründung und Familienerweiterung
a) Leitbild Kinderhaben: Persönliche Bedeutung eigener Kinder und perzipierte Bedeutung eigener Kinder für die Allgemeinheit.
b) Leitbild für das ideale Alter, Kinder zu bekommen: ideales Alter für eine Frau und für einen Mann für das erste Kind, ab wann kein Kind mehr.
c) Leitbild Kinderlosigkeit: Meinung zum Thema Kinderlosigkeit und perzipierte Meinung der Allgemeinheit zu diesem Thema (keine Kinder zu haben ist ganz normal, egoistisches Verhalten von Kinderlosen, Kinderlose sollten höhere Steuern und Abgaben leisten als Eltern); Gründe, die bei der Entscheidung gegen Kinder eine Rolle spielen (z.B. schlechte Vereinbarkeit von Kindern und Beruf, Belastung der Partnerschaft durch Kinder, Kinder groß zu ziehen ist viel zu kompliziert, etc.).
e) Leitbild Elternschaft: Gründe für die Entscheidung für Kinder (z.B. gehören einfach zum Leben dazu, Leben wird durch Kinder bunter und vielfältiger, Einsamkeit im Alter ohne Kinder, etc.).
f) Leitbild Kinderreichtum: Kinderzahl, ab der eine Familie persönlich als kindereich definiert wird; Meinung zu kinderreichen Familien (Kinder sind etwas Wundervolles, Kinderreiche gelten als asozial); nur persönliche Meinung perzipierte Meinung der Allgemeinheit zu kinderreichen Familien (zusätzlich zu den vorgenannten Items: nur Familien mit genügend Geld sollten sich viele Kinder leisten, wer viele Kinder hat, kann sich um das einzelne Kind nicht mehr richtig kümmern).
g) Leitbild Bedingungen für Elternschaft: persönliche Meinung und perzipierte Meinung der Allgemeinheit, welche Bedingungen als Grundvoraussetzung für Elternschaft erfüllt sein müssen (Paar muss verheiratet sein, genügend Geld, Frau muss im Beruf Fuß gefasst haben, unabhängig von der Berufstätigkeit des Partners).
h) Leitbild Geschwisterkinder: persönliche Meinung und perzipierte Meinung der Allgemeinheit, (schlecht, wenn ein Kind als Einzelkind aufwächst, Familie braucht einen Jungen als Stammhalter, am besten ein Junge und ein Mädchen).
3. Eltern-Kind-Beziehung
a) Verantwortete Elternschaft: persönliche Meinung zu verantworteter Elternschaft und perzipierte Meinung der Allgemeinheit (eigene Bedürfnisse zurückstellen für die Kinder, weniger Gedanken, da Kinder sowieso groß werden, Eltern können bei der Kindererziehung viel falsch machen, daher gut informieren).
b) Mutterleitbilder: persönliche Meinung zur Mutterrolle und perzipierte Meinung der Allgemeinheit (Mütter sollten nachmittags Zeit haben, um ihren Kindern beim Lernen zu helfen, Mütter sollten berufstätig sein, um unabhängig vom Mann zu sein, Mutter, die nur zuhause ist und sich um die Kinder kümmert, wird unzufrieden, Mutter sollte möglichst nicht erwerbstätig sein).
c) Vaterleitbilder: persönliche Meinung zur Vaterrolle und perzipierte Meinung der Allgemeinheit (nicht gut für das Kind, wenn der Vater die Kindererziehung allein der Mutter überlässt, Väter sollten für ihre Kinder beruflich kürzer treten, Hausmann zu sein, liegt nicht in der Natur des Mannes, der Mann muss seine Familie allein ernähren können).
d) Intensität des Eltern-Kind-Kontaktes: Meinung zur Betreuung von Kindern zwischen 1 und 3 Jahren durch die Mutter bzw. zur Fremdbetreuung durch Großeltern, Tagesmutter, Kindertagesstätte oder Krippe; perzipierte Meinung der Allgemeinheit zu diesem Thema; Meinung zu Inanspruchnahme der Elternzeit durch Väter; Anzahl Vätermonate, Arbeitsteilung zwischen Vätern und Müttern 2-jähriges Kind: in welchem Umfang sollte Mutter bzw. Vater arbeiten.
Demographie: Geschlecht; Alter (in Jahren bzw. gruppiert); Geburt in Deutschland; Staatsangehörigkeit; ausländische Staatsangehörigkeit der Eltern; Eltern in Deutschland geboren; Vater oder Mutter im Ausland geboren; Anzahl Geschwister; Bundesland der Kindheit und Jugend; Erwerbstätigkeit der Mutter während der Grundschulzeit; Familienstand; Dauer der Ehe bzw. eingetragenen Lebenspartnerschaft oder Beziehung; gemeinsamer Haushalt mit dem Partner bzw. der Partnerin; Dauer des gemeinsamen Haushalts; Zufriedenheit mit der Beziehung (Skalometer); Anzahl der festen Beziehungen insgesamt; frühere Ehe bzw. eingetragene Lebenspartnerschaft; Kinder (eigene und Adoptivkinder); Kinderzahl; Geburtsjahr des Kindes bzw. des ersten und des jüngsten Kindes; Kinder stammen aus der gegenwärtigen Beziehung; Betreuungssituation des jüngsten Kindes; Antizipierte Folgen einer weiteren Geburt (würde problemlos Betreuungsplatz bekommen, Eltern/Schwiegerelter/Verwandte würden bei Betreuung helfen, würde langfristig berufliche Nachteile haben, es würde finanziell eng werden); Haushalt: Befragter lebt in einer Wohngemeinschaft; Personenzahl im Haushalt (Haushaltsgröße); Gesamtzahl der Kinder im Haushalt; Konfession; Selbsteinschätzung der Religiosität; Parteiidentifikation; höchster Schulabschluss und beruflicher Bildungsabschluss; Beschäftigungssituation; Beschäftigungsstatus bei Erwerbstätigkeit: angestellt oder selbständig; Dauer der Aktivität bzw. der aktuellen Beschäftigungssituation; befristeter oder unbefristeter Arbeitsvertrag; Wochenarbeitszeit; Haushaltsnettoeinkommen; zurechtkommen mit dem Einkommen. Angaben zum Partner bzw. zur Partnerin: Geschlecht; Geburtsjahr; Familienstand; frühere Ehe des Partners; Kinder des Partners aus einer früheren Beziehung; höchster Schulabschluss und beruflicher Bildungsabschluss; Beschäftigungssituation; Beschäftigungsstatus bei Erwerbstätigkeit: angestellt oder selbständig; Dauer der Aktivität bzw. der aktuellen Beschäftigungssituation; befristeter oder unbefristeter Arbeitsvertrag; Wochenarbeitszeit.
Zusätzlich vercodet wurde: Interview-ID; Bundesland; Gewichtungsfaktor; Wohnort Gebiet West- und Ostdeutschland; Region während der Kindheit; ISCED97-Klassifikation nach Destatis (2002); Erwerbsstatus; Haushaltseinkommen (kategorisiert); Befragter hat einen Migrationshintergrund; Migrationserfahrung; Zahl eigener oder adoptierter Kinder, Kinderwunsch von Kinderlosen, von Eltern, von Schwangeren, alle Befragten; Partnerschaftsformen; sexuelle Orientierung in bestehender Partnerschaft; Alter des einzigen eigenen Kindes bzw. des ersten eigenen Kindes und des jüngsten eigenen Kindes; Kinderlosigkeit ohne Kinderwunsch und Kindeszahl zusammen; Bildung (binär); ledig versus verheiratet; Anzahl fester Beziehungen (zusammengefasst).
The Swiss Election Study (Selects) 2019 consists of four complementary components: The Post-Election Survey (PES), the Panel Survey, the Candidate Survey, and the (Social) Media Analysis. The main difference compared to previous studies relates to the mode of data collection; the main emphasis was moved towards web questionnaires. The mode for the Post-Election Survey 2019 was web/paper whereas in 2015, it was web/telephone. As in previous election studies, novel thematic modules of particular salience to researchers were included in the different surveys, while keeping the necessary continuity in the core questionnaire of the Post-Election Survey for comparison with previous waves.
Post-Election Survey (PES): The Post-Election Survey consists of 6664 respondents. The survey was conducted in a sequential mixed mode with web offered as the first option: 82% responded in this way, while 18% responded by returning the paper questionnaire that was sent out later to those not having completed the web questionnaire. The sampling was based on a representative sample of around 2'600 Swiss citizens with an oversampling of small cantons to have at least 50 respondents in every canton. An additional oversampling was done in the cantons of Zurich, Geneva, and Ticino thanks to additional funding from these cantons.
Panel Survey: The Panel Survey studies the evolution of opinion and vote intention/choice during the different phases of the election cycle. In 2019, three waves were conducted: the first before the main campaign period (Mai/June), the second during the election campaign (September/October), and the third after the elections (October-December). 7939 individuals responded to the first wave, 5577 to the second wave, and 5125 to the third wave. 4654 individuals responded to all three waves.
Candidate Survey: The Candidate Survey was carried out among all candidates for the National Council and the Council of States in the framework of the international Comparative Candidate Survey (CCS) project, based on the Round III questionnaire. The survey collects data on the biography, campaign activities, and policy position of the candidates. Among others, the information gathered makes possible the study of underlying factors of candidates' electoral success, as well as of issues of representation and linkage between voters and elites. In 2019, 2158 out of 4736 candidates participated in the Candidate Survey. This survey was conducted by Politools.net on behalf of Selects.
(Social) Media Analysis: On behalf of Selects, the Digital Democracy Lab of the University of Zurich conducted a Media Analysis. The Media Analysis is a supplement to the Panel Survey and makes it possible to analyse the election campaign in the media and its influence on the formation of voters' opinions. In addition to the content analysis of the coverage of traditional media (print and online), which has been carried out in the context of Selects since 2003, the Media Analysis 2019 also includes, for the first time, the election campaign communication of parties and candidates on social media. For this Social Media Analysis, the Twitter accounts of 1284 candidates, parties and organizations were taken into account, as well as the Facebook pages of 261 candidates.
