Public Opinion and Foreign Policy in the United States, China, India, Australia, and South Korea, 2006 (ICPSR 4650)

Version Date: Jul 18, 2008 View help for published

Principal Investigator(s): View help for Principal Investigator(s)
Chicago Council on Global Affairs; Asia Society; East Asia Institute (EAI)

Version V1

The Chicago Council undertakes a large-scale public opinion study every two years that compares American and international public opinion on a wide range of important international issues. A significant part of each biennial survey is additionally dedicated to examining a timely theme. The theme of the 2006 survey was, "The Rise of China and India."

This data collection presents a unique comparison of international attitudes on how the emergence of China and India as economic dynamos and claimants to great power status will affect the global economy, international security, and politics. Moreover, this study sought to assess American public opinion (Part 1, Public Opinion Survey, United States) on a variety of challenges facing the United States today including international terrorism, nuclear proliferation, conflict in the Middle East, the rising economic and political power of Asia, economic competition from abroad, and threats to energy supplies and the environment. This data collection also provides an understanding of how the Chinese (Part 2, Public Opinion Survey, China) and Indian (Part 3, Public Opinion Survey, India) publics view their nations' international challenges and opportunities and their respective roles as emerging great powers. Parallel surveys were also conducted in Australia (Part 4, Public Opinion Survey, Australia) in conjunction with the Lowy Institute for International Policy, and in South Korea (Part 5, Public Opinion Survey, South Korea) in conjunction with the East Asia Institute.

Demographic variables include race, age, gender, religious affiliation, highest level of education, and political identification.

Chicago Council on Global Affairs, Asia Society, and East Asia Institute (EAI). Public Opinion and Foreign Policy in the United States, China, India, Australia, and South Korea, 2006. Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research [distributor], 2008-07-18.

Export Citation:

  • RIS (generic format for RefWorks, EndNote, etc.)
  • EndNote
John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation (06-87067-000-GSS), Robert R. McCormick Foundation, Korea Foundation
Annan, Kofi   arms trade   Asia Pacific Economic Cooperation   attitudes   beliefs   biological weapons   cultural influences   democracy   economic aid   economic conditions   economic growth   energy supplies   environment   European Union   foreign aid   foreign policy   free trade   genocide   global warming   globalization   human rights   immigration   international conflict   international cooperation   International Court of Justice   international development   international monetary system   international trade   Iraq War   jobs   leadership   military intervention   military strength   nuclear energy   nuclear fuels   nuclear weapons   oil industry   peace keeping forces   political influences   public opinion   social influences   tariffs   technological change   technology transfer   terrorist threat   torture   trade agreements   treaties   United Nations   war   war crimes   World Bank   World Health Organization   World Trade Organization
Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research
2006-06-23 -- 2006-07-09 (United States Public Opinion Survey), 2006-07-10 -- 2006-07-21 (China Public Opinion Survey), 2006-07-09 -- 2006-07-27 (India Public Opinion Survey), 2006-06-19 -- 2006-07-06 (Australia Public Opinion Survey), 2006-06-16 -- 2006-07-07 (South Korea Public Opinion Survey)
  1. The field report, located in the User Guide, is for the United States only. For additional information, users can refer to the Web sites for the Chicago Council of Global Affairs and the Asia Society.
  2. The full question text can be found in the User Guide.


The survey for the United States was fielded using a randomly selected sample from a large-scale, nationwide research panel. This panel was, itself, randomly selected from the national population of households having telephones and subsequently was provided Internet access for the completion of surveys (but the sample was not limited to those who already had Internet access). The distribution of the sample in the Web-enabled panel closely tracked the distribution of United States Census counts for the United States population on age, race, Hispanic ethnicity, geographical region, employment status, income, education, etc. The panel was recruited using stratified random-digit-dial (RDD) telephone sampling. Households that agreed to participate in the panel were provided with free Web access and an Internet appliance, which used a telephone line to connect to the Internet and used the television as a monitor.

The sample for China was nationally representative of adults aged 18 or older, and was drawn by a stratified multistage sampling method. All 31 provinces were divided into three strata according to their geographical location and their Human Development Index (HDI). The sample was weighted to represent the 2005 China Census. Individuals who were illiterate or who had no formal education were excluded.

The sample for India was a representative stratified random sample of all adults, aged 18 or older. Individuals who were illiterate or who had no formal education were excluded. The sample drew from 97 percent of the population geographically and 98 percent demographically across 526 parliamentary areas of the country. Due to issues concerning inaccessibility, respondents in the northeastern part of the country, representing 2 percent of the population and 3 percent of parliamentary areas, were not polled.

The Australian sample was a nationally representative stratified sample of all adults, aged 18 or older, drawn using an RDD sampling method. Quotas were set for each state, age group, and sex. Interviews were conducted by telephone using an RDD sampling method until all sample quotas were filled.

The South Korean sample was drawn from 15 of the 16 administrative divisions of South Korea based on a multistage quota sampling method. The national population was categorized into 16 groups by administrative divisions, 5 groups by age, and 2 groups by sex. The quota of samples was then calculated by region, age, and sex, based on the 2005 Korean Census. Households were randomly selected in every region according to the quota. In the final step, weights were applied to the dataset in order to match the sampling quota by region, sex, and age more precisely.

Adults, aged 18 and older living in the United States, China, India, and Australia, and aged 19 and older living in South Korea.



2018-02-15 The citation of this study may have changed due to the new version control system that has been implemented. The previous citation was:
  • Chicago Council on Global Affairs, Asia Society, and East Asia Institute (EAI). Public Opinion and Foreign Policy in the United States, China, India, Australia, and South Korea, 2006. ICPSR04650-v1. Ann Arbor, MI: Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research [distributor], 2008-07-18.

2008-07-18 The East Asia Institute has been added as a principal investigator.

2008-01-23 ICPSR data undergo a confidentiality review and are altered when necessary to limit the risk of disclosure. ICPSR also routinely creates ready-to-go data files along with setups in the major statistical software formats as well as standard codebooks to accompany the data. In addition to these procedures, ICPSR performed the following processing steps for this data collection:

  • Standardized missing values.
  • Checked for undocumented or out-of-range codes.

All five datasets contain multiple weights. Please see the User Guide for details regarding the weights used in the United States, China, and India datasets. Additional information may be found via the Web site for the Chicago Council on Global Affairs.



  • Curation and dissemination of this study is provided by the institutional members of ICPSR, and data is available only to users at ICPSR member institutions. To determine if you are at a member institution, check the list of ICPSR member institutions, or learn more about becoming a member.