Showing 1 – 2 of 2 results.
Curated
Eurobarometer 60.0: Consumer Rights, Data Protection, Education Through Sport, Product Safety, E-Commerce, Attitudes Towards People With Disabilities, and the Euro, September 2003 (ICPSR 3951)
Released/updated on: 2010-06-14
Geographic coverage: Europe, Northern Ireland, Portugal, Global, Spain, Greece, Netherlands, Sweden, Great Britain, Austria, Belgium, Luxembourg, Ireland, Finland, Denmark, Italy, France, Germany
Time period: 2003-09-01--2003-09-30
This round of Eurobarometer surveys diverged from the standard trends questions, instead focusing on public opinion in the following major areas: consumer rights, personal data protection, education through sport, product safety, e-commerce, persons with disabilities, and national currency. Respondents were asked about opportunities to settle disputes with a seller or service provider including actions taken to settle dispute and type of product or service. A number of questions asked regarded the current justice system including the respondents' level of trust in the system, areas that need improvement, and what resources are available to protect consumer rights. Respondents were also asked about whether they were concerned with the privacy of their personal data. Questions sought the respondents' level of trust in national organizations, opinion of what data protection laws should entail, and whether they had used tools or technology to protect personal data. Respondents were also asked about their participation in sports activities. Questions included how often they perform recreational activities, where they exercise, what are the benefits and values of sports, and what are the anticipated outcomes due to the negative aspects of sports. Regarding safety instructions, respondents were asked if they purchase domestic electrical appliances. A number of questions focused on product safety information. Respondents were asked whether they read and obey the information provided on the product, whether the information impacted their purchase and/or use of the product, and the most effective way to provide product instructions. Several questions asked the respondent to recognize safety symbols labeled on the product, the symbol's effectiveness, and whether it impacted their purchase decision. Respondents were also asked whether they purchased products on the internet, how often, concerns regarding their internet transactions, why they purchased online, and from what Web sites they purchased. Other questions asked regarded the security of internet transactions including the respondents knowledge of consumer rights, internet security, protection laws concerning internet purchases, who they contacted if help was needed, and their past experience with complaints on internet transactions. Respondents were also asked questions about persons with disabilities including knowledge of European programs for persons with disabilities, their knowledge of various types of disabilities, and their view of persons with disabilities. Lastly, respondents in the euro-zone, were asked questions that pertained to national currency including how pleased they were with the establishment of the Euro as the universal currency. Demographic and other background information collected includes respondents' age, gender, marital status, nationality, left-right political self-placement, age at completion of education, occupation, household income group, type and size of locality, and region of residence.
Curated
National Survey of Miranda Warnings, 2005-2006 (ICPSR 23100)
Released/updated on: 2008-10-22
Geographic coverage: United States
Time period: 2005-01-01--2006-12-31
Miranda warnings given by police to criminal suspects before they are questioned, are heterogeneous in their language, length, and content. Past research has focused mostly on individual Miranda warnings. Lacking in generalizability, those studies have had limited applicability to both public policy and professional practice. This data collection contains the results of a large-scale survey that examined Miranda warnings from across the United States and documented differences in their length and content. The first wave of the survey involved systematically contacting sheriff and public defender offices across the United States. These data were augmented with additional warnings from other Miranda investigators. The first wave generated 532 unique Miranda warnings. The second wave surveyed prosecutors (i.e., district attorneys and state attorneys) across the United States using similar procedures. This survey focused on 28 states with low response rates (i.e., less than or equal to 20 percent of counties) in the first wave. This survey also included responses to the wave one survey that were received from public defenders months after the deadline for the first wave. The second wave generated an additional 358 unique Miranda warnings that were written in English and intended for general use.