Showing 1 – 16 of 16 results.
Curated
ABC News Bush National Intelligence Poll, May 2002 (ICPSR 3566)
Released/updated on: 2003-03-11
Geographic coverage: United States
This special topic poll was undertaken to assess respondents reactions to and feelings about intelligence reports regarding terrorist threats on the United States before and after the September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks in New York City and Washington, DC. Respondents were asked to give their views of President George W. Bush, his handling of the presidency, and the United States campaign against terrorism. Those polled also expressed their level of confidence in the government's ability to prevent further terrorist attacks against Americans in the United States. Respondents' opinions were elicited on the actions the government took or could have taken to prevent the September 11 terrorist attacks, and to prevent further terrorist attacks. In addition, respondents were queried about their knowledge of past news stories regarding intelligence reports, and they also gave their opinions on the Bush administration's follow-up on those intelligence reports. Other questions focused on the Federal Bureau of Investigation's response to a proposed investigation of Arabs taking flight-school training in the United States, and the United States Congress's investigation of the Bush administration's knowledge of terrorist threats before September 11, 2001, and its handling of that knowledge. Background information includes respondents' political affiliation, education, age, race, and gender.
Curated
ABC News Personal Liberty Poll, April 1995 (ICPSR 3842)
Released/updated on: 2007-07-06
Geographic coverage: United States
This special topic poll was undertaken to assess respondents' opinions on the extent of their personal liberties. Respondents were asked whether they felt federal laws improperly intruded on their personal liberties and if so, whether the government was trying to take away more of their personal liberties. Respondents' indicated whether they felt that their personal liberties had been intruded on by taxes or a ban on assault weapons, whether these intrusions were major or minor, and whether they were justified. Respondents were polled on whether the United Nations had too much, not enough, or the right amount of power and influence in the United States. Respondents were asked to give their opinions of how the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) handled the standoff with the Branch Davidian cult in Waco, Texas, and whether the amount of force used by the FBI was justified or excessive. Background information includes sex, political orientation, and political ideology.
Curated
ABC News/Washington Post Poll, December 2006 (ICPSR 22165)
Released/updated on: 2008-08-04
Geographic coverage: United States
This poll, conducted December 7-11, 2006, is part of a continuing series of monthly polls that solicit public opinion on various political and social issues. Respondents were asked whether they approved of the way George W. Bush was handling his job as president and issues such as the economy, whether they approved of the way members of United States Congress and their own representative were handling their jobs, and to rate the condition of the national economy. Views were sought on the upcoming switch to Democratic control of Congress, what was the most important problem for President Bush and Congress to deal with in the next year and whether they trusted President Bush or Congress more to handle these problems. Several questions asked whether Congress should hold hearings on how the Bush Administration handled issues related to the war with Iraq and the United States' campaign against terrorism, whether the war with Iraq was worth fighting, whether the number of United States military casualties in Iraq was acceptable, and whether the war in Iraq has contributed to the long-term security of the United States. A series of questions asked whether the United States should keep its military forces in Iraq until civil order is restored there, whether the United States was winning the war in Iraq, whether respondents would describe the situation in Iraq as a civil war, and whether the United States should hold direct talks with Syria and Iran about the situation in Iraq. Respondents were asked whether they supported certain plans and decisions, such as the Iraq Study Group report, changing the primary mission of United States forces to supporting and training the Iraqi army, or reducing United States military and financial support of the Iraqi government. Several questions asked for respondents' opinions of current political leaders and the 2008 presidential candidates, which candidate they would vote for if the 2008 Democratic and Republican primaries were held that day, and whether a presidential candidate's gender, race, or religion would affect their vote. Additional topics included immigration, privacy rights, and whether respondents were hopeful about the upcoming year for themselves and the world. Demographic variables include sex, age, religion, race, education level, household income, whether anyone in the household was a military veteran, voter registration and participation history, political party affiliation, political philosophy, and type of residential area (e.g., urban or rural).
Curated
Partially restricted
American Terrorism Study, 1980-2002 (ICPSR 4639)
Released/updated on: 2007-07-30
Geographic coverage: United States
Time period: 1980-01-01--2002-08-01
This study was conducted in response to a lack of existing data collections relating specifically to acts of American terrorism. A primary goal of the study was to create an empirical database from which criminological theories and governmental policies could be effectively evaluated. The American Terrorism Study began in 1989 when the Federal Bureau of Investigation's (FBI) Terrorist Research and Analytical Center released a list of persons indicted as a result of investigation under the FBI's Counterterrorism Program. Since that time, FBI has released additional lists to the principal investigators. After receiving a list of persons indicted in federal criminal court as a result of an official terrorism investigation, the researchers reviewed the cases at either the federal district court where the cases were tried or at the federal regional records center where the cases were archived. The researchers divided the dataset into five distinct datasets. Part 1, Counts Data, provides data on every count for each indictee in each indictment. This is the basic dataset. There were 7,306 counts from 1980 to 2002. Part 2, Indictees Data, provides data on each of the 574 indictees from 1980-2002. Part 3, Persons Data, provides data on the 510 individuals who were indicted by the federal government as a result of a terrorism investigation. Part 4, Cases Data, provides one line of data for each of the 172 criminal terrorism cases that resulted from a federal terrorism investigation. Part 5, Group Data, provides one line of case data for each of the 85 groups that were tried in federal court for terrorism-related activity. Each of the five datasets includes information on approximately 80 variables divided into four major categories: (1) demographic information, (2) information about the terrorist group to which the individual belongs, (3) prosecution and defense data, and (4) count/case outcome and sentencing data.
Curated
Assessment of Defense and Prosecutorial Strategies in Terrorism Trials in the United States, 1980-2004 (ICPSR 26241)
Released/updated on: 2014-11-11
Geographic coverage: United States
Time period: 1980-01-01--2004-01-01
This study created a flat-file database of information regarding defendants who were referred to United States Attorneys by the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) following official terrorism investigations between 1980 and 2004. Its ultimate goal was to provide state and federal prosecutors with empirical information that could assist federal and state prosecutors with more effective strategies for prosecution of terrorism cases. The results of this study enhanced the existing 78 variables in the AMERICAN TERRORISM STUDY, 1980-2002 (ICPSR 4639) database by adding the 162 variables from the Prosecution and Defense Strategies (PADS) database. The variables in the PADS database track information regarding important pleadings, motions, and other key events that occur in federal terrorism trials; the PADS variables measure the strategies used by legal counsel as well as other legal nuances.
Curated
CBS News Call-Back Poll, June 2001 (ICPSR 3348)
Released/updated on: 2009-04-29
Geographic coverage: United States
This poll, fielded June 9, 2001, is part of a continuing series of monthly surveys that solicit public opinion on the presidency and on a range of other political and social issues. This survey was a call-back of the May 10-12, 2001, cohort (CBS NEWS MONTHLY POLL, MAY 2001 [ICPSR 3350]), and was conducted to assess respondent views regarding the upcoming June 11, 2001, execution of Timothy McVeigh, who was sentenced to death for bombing the Oklahoma City federal building. Respondents were queried on how closely they had been following the upcoming execution and whether they favored the death penalty for McVeigh. A second set of questions asked respondents whether they agreed with the Justice Department's decision to delay the execution until June 11 so McVeigh's lawyers had time to review newly discovered FBI documents, whether these new documents would shed any new light on the case, and how often they felt legal documents in court cases were not turned over to defense lawyers, as the law requires. Respondents were also asked whether the criminal justice system had worked the way it should for a death penalty case and whether any questions about who committed the bombing would remain after McVeigh's execution. A final set of questions asked respondents whether it was a good idea for the victims of the Oklahoma City bombing and their families to be able to watch McVeigh's execution, whether everyone should be allowed to watch the execution, and whether the media had spent too much time on the upcoming execution. Opinions were also solicited on the FBI, the criminal justice system, and George W. Bush's handling of his job as president. Background information on respondents includes age, sex, race, education, religion, voter registration and participation history, political party, political orientation, Hispanic descent, marital status, age of children in household, economic investments in the stock market, and family income.
Curated
CBS News/New York Times Monthly Poll #1, July 1996 (ICPSR 2302)
Released/updated on: 2010-04-30
Geographic coverage: United States
This poll is part of a continuing series of monthly surveys that solicit public opinion on the presidency and on a range of other political and social issues. Respondents were asked to give their opinions of President Bill Clinton, Bob Dole, Ross Perot, Richard Lamm, Hillary Clinton, and Elizabeth Dole. Those queried were also asked for their opinions regarding the 1996 presidential elections, the state of the national economy, Whitewater, tobacco use, and the White House requests for FBI files on Republican officials. In addition, respondents were asked to compare Bill Clinton's and Bob Dole's campaign platforms, political orientations, honesty and integrity, concern for the needs of the people, and potential handling of international crises. Other topics covered abortion, aging, New York City's image, late-night comedians, and the concerns of high school students. Background information on respondents includes ages of children in the household, political party affiliation, political orientation, voter registration and participation history, religion, marital status, education, age, labor union membership, cigarette use, 1992 and 1994 election choices, race, and family income.
Curated
CBS News/New York Times Monthly Poll #2, April 1995 (ICPSR 2072)
Released/updated on: 2009-06-11
Geographic coverage: United States
This poll is part of a continuing series of monthly surveys that solicit public opinion on the presidency and on a range of other political and social issues. Respondents were asked to give approval ratings of President Bill Clinton and the National Rifle Association (NRA) and to respond to a series of questions on the Oklahoma City bombing and the handling of the situation by Clinton and the Federal Bureau of Investigation. Other issues such as a ban on assault weapons, terrorism, and the growth of militia organizations were examined. Background information on respondents includes voter registration status, political party, political orientation, education, age, sex, race, and family income.
Curated
CBS News/New York Times Monthly Poll #2, May 2002 (ICPSR 3696)
Released/updated on: 2009-04-29
Geographic coverage: United States
This poll is part of a continuing series of monthly surveys that solicit public opinion on the presidency and on a range of other political and social issues. Respondents were asked to give their opinions of President George W. Bush and his handling of the presidency, the campaign against terrorism, foreign policy, and international crises. They also expressed their opinions on the Federal Bureau of Investigation and the Central Intelligence Agency and answered a series of questions on the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001. Respondents were asked whether information the intelligence agencies might have held before September 11, 2001, could have prevented the terrorist attacks, how much influence and responsibility the President had with regard to terrorism, and Congress's hearings investigating the Bush administration's prior knowledge of the attacks. Those queried also presented their views on what the White House knew prior to September 11, 2001, about possible terrorist attacks and government-issued warnings. Background information includes respondents' political affiliation, marital status, income, religion, education, age, race, and gender.
Curated
CBS News/New York Times Persian Gulf War Polls, January-February 1991 (ICPSR 9619)
Released/updated on: 2006-01-12
Geographic coverage: United States
Time period: 1991-01-11--1991-02-25
This series of interviews tracks public opinion regarding the Persian Gulf War from the period immediately prior to the initiation of bombing in January 1991 to the ensuing ground combat in February. In addition to monitoring the evolving war, these data also provide an ongoing evaluation of the Bush presidency during that time period. Part 1 (January 5-7) examines sending troops to Saudi Arabia vs. staying out, the likelihood of war, Bush's efforts to find diplomatic solutions, negotiating with Saddam Hussein vs. forcing Iraq to leave Kuwait, the possibility of terrorist attacks in the United States, how closely the respondent followed the news of the Persian Gulf situation, military action against Iraq vs. waiting for sanctions to work, requiring a congressional declaration of war, Congress voting on a declaration of war before or after the January 15 deadline for Iraq's withdrawal, the January 9 meeting between Secretary of State James Baker and Iraq's foreign minister, attempting to meet with Hussein before January 15, and what might happen in the Persian Gulf in the event of war or otherwise. Part 2 (January 11-13) poses questions identical to Part 1 and addresses new issues, including whether Bush had already decided prior to the January 15 deadline to send troops into battle, whether a Kuwaiti offer to trade part of its territory in exchange for Iraq's withdrawal would be an acceptable resolution to the crisis, whether congressional authorization of the use of force would increase the likelihood of war, how congressmen should vote concerning the authorization of force, what Bush should do if only one house of Congress votes in favor of the use of force, whether the failure of the meeting between Secretary Baker and Iraq's foreign minister on January 9 made war more likely, and more questions related to what might happen in the Persian Gulf in the event of war or otherwise. Part 3 (January 5-7, 17 Panel) replicates both Part 1, the January 5-7 survey, and Part 5, the January 17 survey. It also examines new issues, including whether the United States did the right thing in initiating military action against Iraq, whether the war would last weeks or months, the number of expected American casualties in the war, whether the United States should remove Saddam Hussein from power in addition to driving Iraqi troops out of Kuwait, bombing military targets in heavily populated civilian areas vs. targets not in heavily populated areas, impressions of how the war was proceeding for the United States, how the respondent first heard about the war, perceptions of the main reason why United States forces were fighting in the Persian Gulf, and the reliability of Israel as an ally of the United States. Part 4 (January 17-20 Combined) replicates questions from Part 3, the January 17 survey, and probes new areas, including whether the war to defeat Iraq would be worth the cost in human life and financial resources, whether news that the war had begun made the respondent feel more worried or relieved, whether members of Congress who voted against the use of military force were viewed more/less favorably, FBI interviews of Arab-American business/community leaders, Arab-American sympathy for Iraq, Israeli retaliation for future Iraqi missile attacks, opposition to the war via protest marches/rallies and their effect on the war effort, military/economic aid to Israel, whether the United States military was holding back information about the war, if following the war news had affected the respondent's schedule, and whether the United States was correct to enter the Vietnam War. Questions unique to Part 5 (January 17) include whether the respondent felt proud about the United States' actions in the Persian Gulf, and whether getting Saddam Hussein out of Kuwait or the outcome of the struggle for freedom in the Soviet Union was of more importance to the United States. Questions unique to Part 6 (January 18) include whether Israel should retaliate for future Iraqi missile attacks. Part 7 (January 19) repeats questions from Part 6. Questions asked in Part 8 (January 20) include whether military/economic aid to Israel should be increased. Questions unique to Part 9 (February 12-13) consider whether Iraqi troops could be forced out of Kuwait by continued bombing or if a ground war would be necessary, the timing of the start of a ground war, whether a ground war would be worth the loss of thousands of American troops, the targeting of civilian as well as military locations for bombing, Israel's involvement in the war, continuing to fight until Hussein was removed from power vs. ending the war when Iraqi troops left Kuwait, whether removing Hussein from power would be worth the cost of thousands of American troops, effects of the war on the respondent, the timing of negotiations to end the war, the United States' inflicting excessive damage on Iraq, paying the cost of rebuilding Iraq after the war, the effect of the war on government's ability to function in other areas, and satisfaction with the accuracy and quantity of war-related information. Questions unique to Part 10 (February 24) involve whether the United States was correct to begin the ground war, the anticipated length of the ground war, whether Bush tried hard enough to reach a diplomatic solution before beginning the ground war, whether the United States and Iraq were close to a negotiated settlement before the ground war began, and opinions of Mikhail Gorbachev and his motives in trying to negotiate an end to the war. Questions unique to Part 11 (February 25) examine whether the United States should set up a new government in Iraq if Saddam Hussein was removed from power, whether United States troops should remain in the Gulf after the war to insure stability in the region, the extent to which the people of Iraq were to blame for allowing Saddam Hussein to remain in power, and whether the United States should allow the Kuwaiti royal family to return to its position leading Kuwait after the war.
Curated
Creating Data Visualizations to Understand the Impact of Structural Racism on Anti-Asian Hate Crime During COVID-19 and to Mitigate Its Effects, United States, 2023-2025 (ICPSR 39503)
Released/updated on: 2025-09-17
Geographic coverage: United States
Time period: 2023-09-01--2025-02-28
The COVID-19 pandemic has resulted in the scapegoating of Asians, leading to a rise in hate crimes against them and adversely affecting their mental health and well-being. This project seeks to visualize the connection between structural racism, health, and anti-Asian Hate Crime (AHC) incidents reported in both the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) and news and social media collected by the the Asian American Foundation (TAAF) during the period of 2020-2021. The project will first visualize the pattern of AHC incidents reported in FBI and media data, considering variations by states, counties, and months. This project will then identify state- or county-factors associated with AHC incidents and visualize them. The project will further examine changes in mental health and coping behaviors, following AHC incidents. The project will finally explore whether community-level AAPI organizations availability can mitigate the adverse effects of AHC incidents on mental health and coping behaviors.
The project's target audience includes social change networks, media outlets, academic society, federal/state legislators, and national-level professional organizations. The resulting visualizations will facilitate policy debates surrounding various aspects, such as addressing underlying risk factors related to AHC, improving data collection and reporting methods within law enforcement agencies to accurately document AHC incidences in Federal/State archives, implementing policies and interventions to mitigate adverse effects on people's health, promoting understanding of cultural differences and inclusivity.
Curated
FBI Oral History Collection (ICPSR 29885)
Released/updated on: 2010-12-07
The FBI Oral History Collection, housed on the National Law Enforcement Museum Web site, is a special collection of oral history interviews of former agents of the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI). Each interview contains information about the former agent's training and career with the FBI, and their reflections on various assignments and cases they worked on.
Curated
National Neighborhood Crime Study (NNCS), 2000 (ICPSR 27501)
Released/updated on: 2010-05-05
Geographic coverage: United States
The primary purpose of the National Neighborhood Crime Study (NNCS) was to assemble tract-level crime and sociodemographic data for cities across the United States in order to permit analyses of the sources of crime for "communities" of different racial-ethnic and class composition. The NNCS also sought to examine the extent to which the causes of crime in communities are contingent on the types of geographic region, labor market, or other contextual characteristics. To fulfill these purposes, the NNCS compiled crime and sociodemographic data for census tracts in a representative sample of large United States cities for 2000. The dataset includes: (1) tract-level crime data pertaining to seven of the FBI's crime index offenses; (2) tract-level information on social disorganization, structural disadvantage, socioeconomic inequality, mortgage lending, and other control variables garnered from the 2000 United States Census of Population and Housing Summary File 3 (SF3) and other publicly available sources; (3) city-level information for the city in which the tract is located, focused on labor market structure, socioeconomic inequality, population change, and other control variables; and (4) metropolitan area data for the Metropolitan Statistical Area (MSA) or Primary Metropolitan Statistical Area (PMSA) in which the tract is located, focused on labor market structure, socioeconomic inequality, population change, and other control variables (also taken from the 2000 Census and other publicly available sources). The NNCS contains data for 9,593 census tracts in 91 cities in 64 metropolitan areas. (Please see the collection note section for additional information about variable naming.)
Curated
Simple Crosstabs
National Neighborhood Crime Study, Wave 2 (NNCS2), [United States], 1999-2013 (ICPSR 38483)
Released/updated on: 2023-01-25
Geographic coverage: United States
Time period: 1999-01-01--2013-12-31, 2010-01-01--2013-12-31
The primary purpose of the second wave of the National Neighborhood Crime Study (NNCS2) was to develop a panel dataset of serious reported crimes in urban neighborhoods circa two time points - 2000 and 2010. These data offer the opportunity to assess the sources and consequences of neighborhood crime change for "communities" of different ethno-racial and economic compositions across the United States. The study also sought to examine the role of a neighborhood's broader ecology on crime levels and crime change by integrating indicators of city and/or metropolitan conditions. The NNCS2 includes two datasets. The first dataset, the NNCS2-Panel file (NNCS2-P), contains information on the Federal Bureau of Investigation's (FBI) Part 1 Index crimes (except arson), socioeconomic and demographic characteristics, and a variety of other neighborhood and city level controls for circa 2000 and 2010 for tracts in 81 of the 91 cities in the NNCS, wave 1. The second dataset, the NNCS2-Cross-Sectional file (NNCS2-CS), allows for examination of the local and contextual sources of neighborhood crime inequality circa 2010. The NNCS2-CS incorporates parallel data for census tracts and cities as in the Panel file, but includes a few additional cities for which panel data could not be compiled, as well information on the metropolitan areas within which cities are located.
Curated
National Neighborhood Data Archive (NaNDA): Crimes by County, United States, 2002-2014 (ICPSR 38649)
Released/updated on: 2023-01-30
Geographic coverage: United States
Time period: 2002-01-01--2014-01-01
This dataset contains county-level totals for the years 2002-2014 for eight types of crime: murder, rape, robbery, aggravated assault, burglary, larceny, motor vehicle theft, and arson. These crimes are classed as Part I criminal offenses by the United States Federal Bureau of Investigations (FBI) in their Uniform Crime Reporting (UCR) program. Each record in the dataset represents the total of each type of criminal offense reported in (or, in the case of missing data, attributed to) the county in a given year.
Curated
New York Times Monthly Poll #2, June 1996 (ICPSR 2301)
Released/updated on: 2011-05-11
Geographic coverage: United States
This poll is part of a continuing series of monthly surveys that solicit public opinion on the presidency and on a range of other political and social issues. Respondents were asked to give their opinions of President Bill Clinton and his handling of the economy, the presidency, the armed forces, and foreign policy, as well as their opinions of Senator Bob Dole, First Lady Hillary Clinton, and Congress. Attitudes were also solicited regarding the 1996 presidential and congressional elections, the media's treatment of Hillary Clinton, and the greatest achievement and disappointment of the Clinton administration. Questions specifically related to President Clinton queried respondents for their views on his honesty and integrity, economic policy, health insurance reform plans, welfare reform policy, and goals for reducing crime, improving the environment, and reducing the budget deficit, as well as whether he had kept his 1992 campaign promises. President Clinton's foreign policy record was addressed, including his handling of the situation in Bosnia, foreign relations with Russia and Israel, potential handling of international crises, and his ability to command international respect. Other topics covered the Whitewater investigations, 1993 White House FBI file requests, the role of the United States military in maintaining world order, and the role of Hillary Clinton in public policy decision-making processes. Respondents were also asked to identify who was responsible for health care reform, protection of the environment, the war on illegal drugs, crime reduction, welfare reform, minimum wage reform, and the reduction of the federal deficit. Background information on respondents includes age, race, sex, ethnicity, education, religion, family income, political party, political orientation, voter registration and participation history, age of children in household, and labor union membership.