Showing 1 – 17 of 17 results.
Curated
Simple Crosstabs
2017 Chicago Council Survey of American Public Opinion on U.S. Foreign Policy (ICPSR 37970)
Released/updated on: 2021-06-21
Geographic coverage: United States
Time period: 2017-01-01--2017-12-31
The 2017 Chicago Council Survey continues the Chicago Council on Global Affairs' series of investigations into American public opinion on United States foreign policy. These studies were conducted quadrennially from 1974 to 2002, biennially from 2002 to 2014, and are now conducted annually. They are designed to investigate the opinions and attitudes of the general public on matters related to foreign policy, and to define the parameters of public opinion within which decision-makers must operate. This public opinion study of the United States focused on respondents' opinions of the United States' leadership role in the world and the challenges the country faces domestically and internationally. Data were collected on a wide range of international topics, including: United States' relations with other countries, role in foreign affairs, possible threats to vital interests in the next ten years, foreign policy goals, international trade, the United States' participation in potential treaties, the United States' commitment to NATO, the basing of American troops abroad, policy towards the conflict in Syria, and the United States' relations with other countries. Respondents were also asked their opinion on US institutions, the US president, and federal government programs. Demographic information collected includes age, gender, race/ethnicity, marital status, left-right political self-placement, political affiliation, employment status, highest level of education, religious preference, household income, state of residence, and living quarters ownership status.
Curated
Simple Crosstabs
2016 Chicago Council Survey of American Public Opinion on U.S. Foreign Policy (ICPSR 36806)
Released/updated on: 2018-04-13
Geographic coverage: United States
Time period: 2016-01-01--2016-12-31
The 2016 Chicago Council Survey continues the Chicago Council on Global Affairs' series of investigations into American public opinion on US foreign policy. These studies were conducted quadrennially from 1974 to 2002, biennially from 2002 to 2014, and are now conducted annually. They are designed to investigate the opinions and attitudes of the general public on matters related to foreign policy, and to define the parameters of public opinion within which decision-makers must operate. This public opinion study of the United States focused on respondents' opinions of the United States' leadership role in the world and the challenges the country faces domestically and internationally. Data were collected on a wide range of international topics, including: United States' relations with other countries, role in foreign affairs, possible threats to vital interests in the next ten years, foreign policy goals, international trade, the United States' participation in potential treaties, the United States' commitment to NATO, the basing of American troops abroad, policy towards the conflict in Syria, and the United States' relations in Asia. Respondents were also asked their opinion on domestic issues including climate change and US immigration policy. Demographic information collected includes age, gender, race/ethnicity, marital status, left-right political self-placement, political affiliation, employment status, highest level of education, religious preference, household income, state of residence, living quarters ownership status, and specifics about the metropolitan area in which they live.
Curated
Simple Crosstabs
Euro-barometer 14: Trust in the European Community, October 1980 (ICPSR 7958)
Released/updated on: 2017-03-23
Geographic coverage: Greece, Netherlands, Great Britain, Belgium, Europe, Luxembourg, Ireland, Denmark, Italy, France, Germany, Global
Time period: 1980-10-01--1980-10-31
This round of Euro-Barometer surveys queried respondents on standard Euro-Barometer measures, such as how satisfied they were with their present life, whether they attempted to persuade others close to them to share their views on subjects they held strong opinions about, whether they discussed political matters, what their country's goals should be for the next ten years, and how they viewed the need for societal change. Additional questions focused on the respondents' knowledge of and opinions on the European Community (EC). Another major focus of the surveys was trust in the European Community. Respondents were asked for their attitudes (on a scale of trustworthiness) toward citizens of each EC country as well as citizens of Japan, the United States, Portugal, Switzerland, Russia, and China. The survey also measured attitudes about political and military ties with the United States, NATO, and Japan. A series of questions asked only of Greek respondents measured opinions of the potential impact of entry into the EC on Greek industry, agriculture, commerce, tourism, employment, the standard of living, military security, democracy, relations with Turkey, and culture. Demographic information about respondents includes age, sex, marital status, age at completion of education, family income, number of persons and children living in respondent's home, income, occupation, size of town where respondent resides, and number of people working at respondent's workplace. Indices are included as created by the original investigators. Euro-Barometer 14 contains data gathered from representative samples of respondents who were interviewed in each of the nine nations of the EC (Germany, Great Britain, Denmark, Italy, France, Belgium, Luxembourg, Ireland, and the Netherlands) in October 1980. Additionally, in order to reflect the admission of Greece to the European Community in early 1980, the study included a Greek sample for the first time.
Curated
Simple Crosstabs
2015 Chicago Council Survey of American Public Opinion and U.S. Foreign Policy (ICPSR 36437)
Released/updated on: 2016-07-29
Geographic coverage: United States
Time period: 2015-01-01--2015-12-31
The Chicago Council Surveys are part of a long-running series of public opinion surveys conducted by The Chicago Council on Global Affairs beginning in 1974. They were conducted quadrennially from 1974 to 2002, biennially from 2002 to 2014, and are now conducted annually. The surveys are designed to investigate the opinions and attitudes of the general public on matters related to foreign policy, and to define the parameters of public opinion within which decision-makers must operate. This public opinion study of the United States focused on respondents' opinions of the United States' leadership role in the world and the challenges the country faces domestically and internationally. Data were collected on a wide range of international topics, including: United States' relations with other countries, role in foreign affairs, possible threats to vital interests in the next ten years, foreign policy goals, situations that might justify the use of United States troops in other parts of the world, international trade, United States' participation in potential treaties, U.S. policy towards Russia in Ukraine, the embargo on Cuba and the effects of renewed diplomatic relations with Havana, views of the nuclear deal with Iran and what effects that deal is likely to have, and United States' relations with allies in Asia. Respondents were also asked their opinion on domestic issues including climate change, measures to improve the United States' economic competitiveness, and their views on US immigration policy. Demographic information collected includes age, gender, race/ethnicity, marital status, left-right political self-placement, political affiliation, employment status, highest level of education, and religious preference, household income, state of residence, and living quarters ownership status.
Curated
Simple Crosstabs
2012 Chicago Council Survey on American Public Opinion and Foreign Policy (ICPSR 36230)
Released/updated on: 2015-12-07
Geographic coverage: United States
Time period: 2012-01-01--2012-12-31
The Chicago Surveys are part of a long-running series of public opinion surveys conducted by The Chicago Council on Global Affairs every two years. This study is the 2012 Chicago Council Survey, designed to investigate the opinions and attitudes of the general public on matters related to foreign policy, and to define the parameters of public opinion within which decision-makers must operate.
The 2012 Chicago Council Survey focuses on respondents' opinions of the United States' leadership role in the world and the challenges the country faces domestically and internationally.
The survey covers the following international topics: relations with other countries, role in foreign affairs, possible threats to vital interests in the next ten years, foreign policy goals, benefits or drawbacks of globalization, situations that might justify the use of United States troops in other parts of the world, the number and location of United States military bases overseas, respondent feelings toward people of other countries, opinions on the influence of other countries in the world and how much influence those countries should have, United States participation in potential treaties, the United States' role in the United Nations and NATO, which side the United States should take in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, what measures should be taken to deal with Iran's nuclear program, the military effort in Afghanistan, opinions on efforts to combat terrorism, and the rise of China as a global power.
Domestic issues include economic prospects for American children when they become adults, funding for government programs, the fairness of the current distribution of income in the United States, climate change, greenhouse gas emissions, and United States dependence on foreign energy sources.
Demographic and other background information include age, gender, race/ethnicity, marital status, left-right political self-placement, political affiliation, employment status, highest level of education, and religious preference. Also included are household size and composition, whether the respondent is head of household, household income, housing type, ownership status of living quarters, household Internet access, Metropolitan Statistical Area (MSA) status, and region and state of residence.
Curated
Simple Crosstabs
Euro-barometer 13: Regional Development and Integration, April 1980 (ICPSR 7957)
Released/updated on: 2015-06-08
Geographic coverage: Europe, Portugal, Global, Spain, Greece, Netherlands, Great Britain, Belgium, Luxembourg, Ireland, Denmark, Italy, France, Germany
Time period: 1980-04-01--1980-04-30
This round of Euro-Barometer surveys queried respondents on standard Euro-Barometer measures, such as how satisfied they were with their present life, whether they attempted to persuade others close to them to share their views on subjects they held strong opinions about, whether they discussed political matters, what their country's goals should be for the next ten years, and how they viewed the need for societal change. Additional questions focused on the respondents' knowledge of and opinions on the European Community (EC), including how well-informed they felt about the EC, what sources of information about the EC they used, whether their country had benefited from being an EC member, and the extent of their personal interest in EC matters. Another major focus of the surveys was regional development and integration. Respondents were asked questions about regional development within the EC and preferences for political and military ties with the United States, NATO, and the Eastern European bloc. Questions on the inclusion of Greece, Spain, and Portugal in the EC were also asked. Demographic information about the respondents includes age, sex, financial situation, age at completion of education, number of persons and children living in respondent's home, occupation, language spoken, religion, family income, marital status, age upon completion of full-time education, occupation of head of household, composition of household, number of people working at respondent's workplace, objective and subjective size of town, and region and province of interview. Indices are included as created by the original investigators. Euro-Barometer 13 contains data gathered from representative samples of respondents who were interviewed in each of the nine nations of the EC (Germany, Great Britain, Denmark, Italy, France, Belgium, Luxembourg, Ireland, and the Netherlands) in April 1980.
Curated
Simple Crosstabs
Transatlantic Trends Survey, 2007 (ICPSR 28187)
Released/updated on: 2013-04-26
Geographic coverage: Romania, United States, United Kingdom, Portugal, Global, Spain, Netherlands, Turkey, Poland, Italy, Slovakia, France, Bulgaria, Germany
Time period: 2007-06-04--2007-06-23
The aim of the Transatlantic Trends Survey is to identify the attitudes of the public in the United States and in several European countries toward foreign policy issues and transatlantic issues. A project of the German Marshall Fund of the United States and the Compagnia di San Paolo (Italy), this survey has been conducted annually since 2003. The 2007 survey queried respondents on topics such as United States and European Union (EU) relations, leadership, security, and military operations, EU accession of Turkey, issues of concern with China, Iran, and Russia, attitudes toward certain countries, institutions, and people, economic versus military power, and the promotion of democracy in other countries. Several questions solicited views on politics and voting habits, including assessments of the current president of the United States and the upcoming presidential election, political party attachment and left-right political self-placement, voting intentions, whether respondents discussed political matters with friends, and whether they attempted to persuade others to share their views on politics. Demographic and other background information includes age, gender, race, religious affiliation, education, occupation, type of locality, region of residence, and prior travel to the United States or Europe.
Curated
Correlates of War Project: Militarized Interstate Dispute (MID) Data, 1816-2001 (ICPSR 24386)
Released/updated on: 2010-03-05
Geographic coverage: Benin, Papua New Guinea, Angola, Cambodia, Sudan, Paraguay, Kazakhstan, Portugal, Syria, Solomon Islands, North Korea, Bahamas, Grenada, Greece, Mongolia, Latvia, Morocco, Iran, Mali, Bosnia-Hercegovina, Panama, Guatemala, Guyana, Iraq, Chile, Laos, Nepal, Argentina, Ukraine, Tanzania, Zambia, Ghana, Belize, Bahrain, India, Canada, Guinea-Bissau, Maldives, Turkey, Belgium, Namibia, Taiwan, Finland, Comoros, South Africa, Trinidad and Tobago, Central African Republic, Jamaica, Peru, Turkmenistan, Germany, Yemen, Vietnam (Socialist Republic), Eritrea, United States, Guinea, China (Peoples Republic), Chad, Somalia, Madagascar, Ivory Coast, Thailand, Libya, Equatorial Guinea, Costa Rica, Sweden, Malawi, Liechtenstein, Poland, Kuwait, Jordan, Nigeria, Bulgaria, Tunisia, Croatia, Uruguay, Sri Lanka, United Kingdom, United Arab Emirates, Kenya, Switzerland, Spain, Lebanon, Djibouti, Liberia, Azerbaijan, Cuba, Venezuela, Czech Republic, Burkina Faso, Mauritania, Saint Lucia, Swaziland, Palau, Israel, Australia, Tajikistan, Estonia, Myanmar, Cameroon, Cyprus, Malaysia, Iceland, Global, Oman, Armenia, Gabon, South Korea, Austria, Yugoslavia, Mozambique, El Salvador, Luxembourg, Brazil, Algeria, Slovenia, Lesotho, Antigua and Barbuda, Ecuador, Colombia, Hungary, Japan, Moldova, Belarus, Albania, New Zealand, Senegal, Italy, Honduras, Macedonia, Ethiopia, Haiti, Afghanistan, Burundi, Egypt, Sierra Leone, Bolivia, Russia, Malta, Saudi Arabia, Netherlands, Pakistan, Gambia, Ireland, Qatar, Slovakia, France, Lithuania, Kyrgyzstan, Romania, Togo, Niger, Philippines, Rwanda, Uzbekistan, Bangladesh, Nicaragua, Barbados, Norway, Democratic Republic of Congo, Botswana, Saint Vincent and the Grenadines, Denmark, Dominican Republic, Mexico, Uganda, Zimbabwe, Suriname, Indonesia, Dominica
Time period: 1816-01-01--2001-12-31
The Militarized Interstate Dispute (MID) (v3.10) data, compiled by the Correlates of War Project, provides information about conflicts in which one or more states threaten, display, or use force against one or more other states between 1816 and 2001. Five datasets are included with this collection. The first dataset comprises essential attributes of each militarized interstate dispute from January 1, 1816, through December 31, 2001, while the second dataset includes participants in each of these disputes. The third dataset comprises essential elements of each militarized interstate incident from January 1, 1993, through December 31, 2001, including incidents that belong to disputes that began in 1992 and continued into 1993, while the fourth dataset includes participants in each of these incidents. The fifth dataset contains dyadic militarized interstate disputes, of which each dyadic MID has exactly two states involved, on opposite sides of the MID. Generated from the incident-level data, these data are from the years 1993 through 2001, and additionally are provided for MIDs that were ongoing as of December 31, 1992.
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
Global Views 2004: South Korean Public Opinion and Foreign Policy (ICPSR 4135)
Released/updated on: 2005-02-11
Geographic coverage: South Korea, Global
Time period: 2004-07-05--2004-07-16
The 2004 Global Views Study is the first time the Chicago Council on Foreign Relations (CCFR) has partnered with the East Asia Institute (EAI) to study the relationship between the United States public's and the Korean public's views on foreign policy. This comprehensive study is the joint effort of CCFR and EAI to highlight perceptions of security, use of force, economics, international rules, and other international issues. The study seeks to contribute to the current debate on the United States-South Korea alliance by providing new data and analyses. In an attempt to capture and compare American and South Korean public opinion in the new international setting after the events of September 11 and the Iraq War, the surveys posed many of the same questions in both countries on a broad range of international and bilateral issues. In particular, this study covers global perspectives and United States-South Korea security relations. Regarding global perspectives, respondents were asked to give their opinions on their country taking an active role in the world, threat perceptions, the use of force, international institutions, globalization and trade, and other countries. On the topic of United States-South Korea security relations, respondents were asked to provide their opinions regarding bilateral relations and the strategic alliance with the United States, United States military presence in South Korea, attitudes toward North Korea, the North Korean nuclear crisis, and reunification with North Korea. Background information on respondents includes age, gender, occupation, education, income, and ideological inclination.
Curated
Transatlantic Trends Survey, 2003 (ICPSR 3972)
Released/updated on: 2004-07-30
Geographic coverage: Netherlands, Great Britain, United States, Poland, Italy, France, Portugal, Germany, Global
Time period: 2003-01-01--2003-12-31
This survey, conducted June 10-25, 2003, was designed to assess respondents' opinions on their own and other countries' involvement in world affairs and events. Respondents were asked whether they approved of the way United States President George W. Bush was handling international policies, whether their respective countries should be involved in world affairs, whether the United States should be the only superpower, whether the European Union should become a superpower, or whether there should be no superpowers. On the issue of whether the European Union should become a superpower, respondents were asked whether they would make the same decision if it required an increase in military expenditures. Additional questions included whether the relationship between Europe and the United States had grown closer, further apart, or stayed the same, whether the United States or the European Union was more important to the respondent's own country, whether the war in Iraq was worth the human and economic costs, and whether the respondent could name five countries that were permanent members of the United Nations Security Council. Opinions were gathered on how desirable it was that the United States and/or the European Union exert strong leadership in world affairs, the appropriateness of spending on defense, economic foreign aid, and social welfare and health by respondents' governments, the proper role of the European Union in the world, and the level of potential threat to the United States and/or the European Union by a variety of events and issues. Additional opinions were elicited on countries other than the respondent's own country, on the United Nations, on support for military action or economic sanctions against countries with weapons of mass destruction or nuclear weapons, and on proposals to aid in the resolution of the Arab or Palestinian conflict with Israel. Background variables include age, sex, education, ethnicity, the number of people aged 18 and over in the household, occupation, party preference, and residential region.
Curated
Asia and Major Powers Dyadic Interactions, 1956-1968 (ICPSR 5406)
Released/updated on: 1992-02-16
Geographic coverage: Afghanistan, Cambodia, United States, Sri Lanka, Japan, China (Peoples Republic), United Kingdom, Malaysia, Thailand, Global, India, New Zealand, South Korea, Pakistan, Asia, Taiwan, Australia, France, Laos, Soviet Union, Indonesia, Vietnam (Socialist Republic)
Time period: 1956-01-01--1968-12-31
This data collection provides information on the dyadic interactions between the Asian states and the major powers in the period 1956-1968. Information is provided for the measure of cooperative and conflictual behavior between the major powers and the Asian states. Variables that focus on positive interaction include imports to the Asian states from the major powers countries and exports from Asian states to the major powers countries, Asian states' military personnel, civil technicians, and students trained in the major powers countries, major powers' military aid, military personnel, and economic aid to the Asian states, and state visits, formal defense treaties, and shared United Nations votes between the two sets of states. Variables that indicate conflictual interaction include minority and territorial disputes between the Asian states and the major powers, and the intensity of conflicts between them. The data are aggregated annually for each of the years 1956 to 1968.
Curated
Dimensionality of Nations Project: Attributes of Nations and Behavior of Nation Dyads, 1950-1965 (ICPSR 5409)
Released/updated on: 1992-02-16
Geographic coverage: Global
Time period: 1950-01-01--1965-12-31
This study contains data on the economic, diplomatic, military, and social dyadic interactions among a selected sample of 182 nation-dyads in the years 1950, 1955, 1960, 1963, and 1965. Originally collected by the Dimensionality of Nations (DON) Project at the University of Hawaii, these data provide information on the behavioral dimensions of the interactions between the nations in the dyads. The dyads represent all of the paired relationships for 14 nations. Variables such as economic aid, official visits, treaties, co-participation in international conferences, exports, tourist visits, intergovernmental organizations, common membership in nongovernmental organizations, common blocs membership, and military alliances measure positive interactions or cooperative behavior between the nations. Other variables such as military actions, negative behavior, severance of diplomatic relations, expulsion or recall of diplomats and lesser officials, boycott or embargo, aid to subversive groups or enemies, accusations, protests, attacks on embassy, and lost territory from one nation to the other measure conflictual interactions. The variables are arranged by year and within year by dyad number.
Curated
International Military Alliance Data, 1920-1957 (ICPSR 5601)
Released/updated on: 1992-02-16
Geographic coverage: Global
Time period: 1920-01-01--1957-12-31
This study contains data on 137 international alliances signed in the period 1920-1957. Data are provided for the background of the alliance, year the alliance was signed, and type, terms, length, and cause of termination of the alliance. Also provided is information on the ratio of the total population of each alliance member to the total population of the world, average distance between the capitals of the alliance members, positions of alliance members in relation to each another when war occurred while the alliance was operative, and whether any member of the alliance established military bases on the territory of another member, gave or received military or economic aid, or faced any specific threat from a particular region or nation. Demographic information on alliance members includes race, languages, and religion.
Curated
Annual Alliance Membership Data, 1815-1965 (ICPSR 5602)
Released/updated on: 1992-02-16
Geographic coverage: Global
Time period: 1815-01-01--1965-12-31
This data collection comprises one of four companion datasets produced by the Correlates of War Project at the University of Michigan. It consists of information on annual symmetric matrices of international alliance bonds for 157 nations in the period 1815-1965. For each alliance bond, data are coded for the type of alliance, such as defense, neutrality, or entente, according to explicit national commitments.
Curated
ICPSR Instructional Subset: American Public Opinion and United States Foreign Policy, 1975 (ICPSR 7518)
Released/updated on: 1992-02-16
Geographic coverage: United States, Global
Time period: 1975-01-01--1975-12-31
This study contains data on the attitudes of the American public toward American foreign policy in 1975. The study derives from surveys on the attitudes of the American public and national leaders toward foreign policy conducted by Louis Harris and Associates, commissioned by the Chicago Council on Foreign Relations in November 1974. ICPSR provides instructional subsets based on both the public and the leadership surveys. See the related collection, ICPSR INSTRUCTIONAL SUBSET: AMERICAN LEADERSHIP OPINION AND UNITED STATES FOREIGN POLICY, 1975 (ICPSR 7519). This public survey used a stratified systematic national sample of 1,513 Americans aged 18 years and older. The leadership sample included 329 individuals in positions that made them likely to have influence upon and knowledge of foreign relations. Leaders were drawn in roughly equal proportions from among those in responsible positions in politics, government, business, communications, and education. Somewhat fewer respondents were interviewed from the fields of labor, religion, and voluntary and ethnic organizations. In general, the questions in both surveys examined attitudes in a number of related areas, including the role and extent of United States' involvement in world affairs, the amount of domestic support for such involvement, and the relationship between domestic and foreign policies. The initial 71 variables in each subset reflect identical substantive questions asked of both populations, so that public and leadership attitudes on the same questions can be easily compared. These questions queried respondents on topics such as the value and effectiveness of United States' economic and military aid and its effect on the American economy and national security, prevention of the spread of communism, and improvement of American foreign relations. Also asked were questions on the role of the United States in world affairs, its status compared to the previous ten years, its world military involvement, and lessons learned from the Vietnam War. Respondents were also asked to rate the president and Congress on foreign policy formulation achievements and to specify the appropriate responses to a number of possible future world developments. Demographic items specify age, race, sex, education, occupation, income, political orientation, religion, and region of the country.
Curated
ICPSR Instructional Subset: American Leadership Opinion and United States Foreign Policy, 1975 (ICPSR 7519)
Released/updated on: 1992-02-16
Geographic coverage: United States, Global
Time period: 1975-01-01--1975-12-31
This study contains data on the attitudes of American national leaders toward American foreign policy in 1975. The study derives from surveys on the attitudes of the American public and national leaders toward foreign policy conducted by Louis Harris and Associates, commissioned by the Chicago Council on Foreign Relations in November 1974. ICPSR provides instructional subsets based on both the public and the leadership surveys. See the related collection, ICPSR INSTRUCTIONAL SUBSET: AMERICAN PUBLIC OPINION AND UNITED STATES FOREIGN POLICY, 1975 (ICPSR 7518). This leadership sample included 330 individuals in positions that made them likely to have influence upon and knowledge of foreign relations. Leaders were drawn in roughly equal proportions from among those in responsible positions in politics, government, business, communications, and education. Somewhat fewer respondents were interviewed from the fields of labor, religion, and voluntary and ethnic organizations. The public survey used a stratified systematic national sample of 1,513 Americans aged 18 years and older. In general, the questions in both surveys examined attitudes in a number of related areas, including the role and extent of United States' involvement in world affairs, the amount of domestic support for such involvement, and the relationship between domestic and foreign policies. The initial 71 variables in each subset reflect identical substantive questions asked of both populations, so that public and leadership attitudes on the same questions can easily be compared. These questions queried respondents on topics such as the value and effectiveness of the United States' economic and military aid and its effect on the American economy and national security, prevention of the spread of communism, and improvement of American foreign relations. Also asked were questions on the role of the United States in world affairs, its status compared to the previous ten years, its world military involvement, and lessons learned from the Vietnam War. Respondents were also asked to rate the president and Congress on foreign policy formulation achievements and to specify the appropriate responses to a number of possible future world developments. Demographic items specify age, sex, ethnicity, religion, political party affiliation, political philosophy, and leadership categories.