Methodology of the 1996 ISJP Survey
Table of Contents
Germany .................................................................................. 2
1. Overview ......................................................................................................................................................... 2
2. Sampling Method ........................................................................................................................................... 3
3. Completion and Response Rates ................................................................................................................... 4
3.1 Sampling Points......................................................................................................................................... 4
4. Interviewers .................................................................................................................................................... 6
5. Field Dates, Length of Interview ................................................................................................................... 7
6. Weights............................................................................................................................................................ 7
6.1 Institute Weights ....................................................................................................................................... 7
6.2 Alternative Weight Construction ..............................................................................................................10
Czech Repbulic ..................................................................... 15
1. Overview ........................................................................................................................................................15
2. Sampling ........................................................................................................................................................15
3. Country Specific Codes................................................................................................................................17
3.1 Monetary Unit Information ......................................................................................................................17
Hungary ................................................................................. 19
1. Overview ........................................................................................................................................................19
2. Sampling Method ..........................................................................................................................................19
2.1 The three-leveled, accidental walk sampling method. ..............................................................................19
2.2. Insert Sampling regulations .....................................................................................................................20
3. Type of Interviewers .....................................................................................................................................21
4. Weighting .......................................................................................................................................................21
5. Country Specific Coding...............................................................................................................................22
5.1 Income and Monetary Unit Information ..................................................................................................22
5.2 Education..................................................................................................................................................22
5.3 Political Parties.........................................................................................................................................22
5.4 Other Country Specific Codes .................................................................................................................23
Russia .................................................................................... 26
1. Overview ........................................................................................................................................................26
2. Sampling Method .........................................................................................................................................26
2.1. Response Rates .......................................................................................................................................26
2.2. Number of Respondents in Sampling Area ............................................................................................27
3. Interviewers and Fieldwork Method ...........................................................................................................27
4. Weights..........................................................................................................................................................28
4.1 Characteristics of National Population ....................................................................................................28
5. Country Specific Codes................................................................................................................................29
6. Methodological Issues in Russia...................................................................................................................35
Bulgaria ................................................................................. 37
1. Overview ........................................................................................................................................................37
2. Sampling Method ..........................................................................................................................................37
3. Completion and Response Rates ..................................................................................................................37
4. Interviewers ..................................................................................................................................................39
5. Weights..........................................................................................................................................................39
6. Quality Control ............................................................................................................................................40
6.1.Direct Control ...........................................................................................................................................40
6.2.Logical Review of the Questionnaires and Data Entry ............................................................................40
7. Field Log Summary and Comments ...........................................................................................................41
8. Country Specific Coding..............................................................................................................................45
Additional Comments .......................................................... 50
METHODS OF THE 1996 ISJP
2
Germany
1. Overview
Responsible researcher:
Bernd Wegener, Humboldt University of Berlin
Sponsor:
Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft
DFG We 1019/9-1
Survey organization:
GFM-GETAS, Hamburg
Sampled respondents:
German citizens aged 18 and above who have permanent
residency in the Federal Republic of Germany
Sample size:
N = 1.337 in the East
Proportionally weighted
sample size (V2139):
Proportionally re-weighted
sample size (V2145):
N = 250 East
Sample selection method:
Three-stage random probability household sample using 210
sampling points in the East and the West respectively (stage 1), a
random-route procedure to locate households (stage 2), and a
random selection method to determine a person within a
household (stage 3).
Completion rate:
West: 67.2 %
East: 72.0 %
Response rate:
West: 86.4 %
East: 90.7 %
Questionnaire method:
Face-to-face interview with completely standardized
questionnaire
N = 1.704 West
N = 421 East
Questionnaire construction: In both East and West an identical questionnaire was used, some
questions however had East-West split versions; a pretest of the
survey, in particular for time estimates, was carried out on 20
quota-sampled respondents; questions not included in the 1991
survey were translated into English and back into German.
Language:
German
Interviewers:
151 trained professional interviewers carried out the interviews in
the East and the West respectively; of these, two interviewers
worked in both parts of the country
Field dates:
November 16 to December 31, 1996;
121 interviews between January 1 and January 15, 1997 (106
METHODS OF THE 1996 ISJP
3
in the West, 15 in the East)
Mean length of interview:
West: 62.8 minutes
East: 60.2 minutes
2. Sampling Method
Sampled respondents were German citizens aged 18 years and older who have permanent
residency in the Federal Republic of Germany and live in private households. It was decided
to aim at 1.000 completed interviews in West and East Germany respectively, i.e. to have a
disproportional sample design with the total of 2.000 analyzable cases. Given the actual
number of inhabitants in East and West Germany this amounts to oversampling East Germany
by a factor of about 2.5.
The sampling frame was the stratified three-stage ”ADM Master Sample Plan” which, in its
first stage, randomly selects 210 voting districts that are used as sampling points and
constitute a ”net”.1 The present study used two ”nets,” i.e. 210 sampling points in the West
and 210 sampling points in the East.2 To achieve 2  1.000 interviews, five interviews had to
be carried out in each sampling point.
The second selection stage called for determining the households within voting districts. This
was done by a random-route procedure. Interviewers were given a randomly selected starting
address from which they had to walk on according to a specified ”walking rule” and had to
list every third household address on an ”address matrix sheet” until 23 addresses were listed.
Eight of these addresses, which fell on randomly pre-marked cells in the matrix, had to be
contacted. Thus eight times the number of sampling points (8  210 for East and West
Germany respectively) is the total sample size of addresses.
Finally, in the third selection stage, the interviewer had to decide which person in each
household was to be the one interviewed. In households with more than one person, this was
determined through a ”Kish grid”, that gives each member of a household an equal chance of
being selected.
1
Sampling points in the ADM design are drawn in a stratified random selection process that involves three
regional types of districts (Länder, Bezirke, Kreise), size of community and urban districts, and number of
households within voting districts (Kirschner 1984: 121).
Usually one ”net” is thought to be sufficient for sampling 1.000 respondents. Note that in the 1991 German
ISJP survey two ”nets” were used in East Germany to cover an N of 1.000 because sampling information was
sketchy at that time. It could be assumed that in 1996 this situation had changed and that the number of sampling
points could safely be reduced.
2
METHODS OF THE 1996 ISJP
4
3. Completion and Response Rates
3.1 Sampling Points
West Germany
East Germany
West and East
1
210
1.680
1
210
1.680
2
420
3.360
Number of ”nets”
Sampling points
Total sample of addresses
As is usually the case, not every sampling point lead to a minimum of one interview.
West Germany
Available sampling points
Sampling points without
successful interview
Sampling points with at
least one interview
East Germany
West and East
N
%
N
%
N
%
210
100.0
210
100.0
420
100.0
7
3.3
2
1.0
9
2.1
203
208
411
Number of interviews per
sampling point
1 Interview
2 Interviews
3 Interviews
4 Interviews
5 Interviews
6 Interviews
7 Interviews
5
4
26
36
71
30
31
2.5
2.0
12.8
17.7
35.0
14.8
15.3
2
7
11
19
51
69
49
1.0
3.4
5.3
9.1
24.5
33.2
23.6
7
11
37
55
122
99
80
1.7
2.7
9.0
13.4
29.7
24.1
19.5
Total number of interviews
203
100.0
208
100.0
411
100.0
Mean number of interviews
per sampling point
4.9
5.5
5.2
METHODS OF THE 1996 ISJP
5
3.2 Addresses
West Germany
East Germany
N
%
N
%
Total sample size (number of issued
addresses)
1.680
100.0
1.680
100.0
Number of cases out of sample
because household was not a dwelling
unit, or no eligible individual, or for
other reasons
211
12.6
101
6.0
1.469
100.0
1.579
100.0
Nobody at home (after three attempts)
40
2.7
33
2.1
Household refuses to take part
Selected person in household not at
home
120
8.2
133
8.4
104
7.1
94
6.0
Selected person in household sick
62
4.2
66
4.2
Total number of cases not contacted
326
22.2
326
20.6
Selected person refuses to take part
150
10.2
110
7.0
Total of noninterviews
476
32.4
437
27.7
Completed interviews
993
67.6
1.142
72.3
6
0.4
5
0.3
987
67.2
1.137
72.0
Net sample size
Dispensation of net sample
Non-analyzable interviews
Total of analyzable interviews
(Completion rate)
The completion rate is therefore 67.2 % in the West and 72.0 % in the East.
We define the response rate as the number analyzable cases divided by the sample size of
contacted individuals, i.e. the net sample size minus the total of noncontacted individuals. The
response rate is 86.4 % in the West and 90.7 % in the East.
METHODS OF THE 1996 ISJP
6
4. Interviewers
Trained professional interviewers were used – 151 in the West and the same number in the
East. Of these, two interviewers worked in both parts of the country. Interviewers were given
written guidelines specifically for this study.
West Germany
Interviewers
Sex
Male
Female
Age
29 years and younger
30 to 39
40 to 49
50 to 59
60 and older
Education
Primary
Medium level
Secondary
College/University
East Germany
West and East
N
%
N
%
N
%
82
69
54.3
45.7
76
75
50.3
49.7
156
144
52.0
48.0
16
47
44
23
21
151
10.9
31.3
29.3
15.0
13.6
100.0
13
24
37
46
31
151
8.7
16.1
24.2
30.2
20.8
100.0
29
71
79
69
52
300
9.9
23.7
26.4
22.7
17.3
100.0
27
57
35
32
151
17.9
37.7
23.2
21.2
100.0
4
10
60
77
151
2.6
6.6
39.7
51.0
100.0
31
67
95
107
300.
10.3
22.3
31.7
35.7
100.0
Interviewers conducted an average of 7.1 Interviews – 6.5 % in the West and 7.5 % in the
East. 20 Interviewers in the West and 21 in the East conducted over 11 interviews.
83 % of interviewers covered either one or two sampling points.
The survey institute (GFM-GETAS) routinely performs interviewer controls by contacting
respondents having them fill out a written questionnaire about the interview. This is done
each time after an interviewer has participated in a maximum of 10 different studies or after a
nine months interval has elapsed since the last control. A control run involves all of the
interviews an interviewer has conducted. On the basis of these controls, two interviews were
decided to be not analyzable; unfortunately, these two interviews had been conducted in two
sampling points in which no other interview had taken place. These two sampling points
could not be replaced.
METHODS OF THE 1996 ISJP
7
5. Field Dates, Length of Interview
West Germany
16.11.-30.11.
01.12.-15.12.
16.12.-31.12.
01.01.-15.01.
N
280
558
43
106
987
%
28.4
56.5
4.4
10.7
East Germany
N
632
351
139
15
1.137
%
55.6
30.9
12.2
1.3
West and East
N
912
909
182
121
2.124
%
42.9
42.8
8.6
5.7
The mean interview time was 60.2 minutes in the East and 62.8 minutes in the West.
6. Weights
6.1 Institute Weights
The survey institute provided a weight variable for the data set (V2139). This weight variable
accomplishes two things: it corrects for the selection bias due to household size (respondents
within large households have a smaller chance of being selected than respondents from small
households) and it corrects for distribution skewness produced by refusals and other nonneutral reasons for not completing an interview. For this latter correction the weight
construction uses an iterative proportional fitting procedure by which observed combinations
of respondent attributes are fitted to tables of combined attributes of other large data sets, e.g.
census data.
Based on census data of 1995 (December 31, 1995) the following variables were employed in
the fitting procedure: länder, community size, and respondent’s sex and age. Based on the
East's six länder and the West's 11 (counting West and East Berlin as two separate länder), on
five classes of community size and on five age groups, the Western weight matrix contains
223 and the Eastern matrix 122 cells.
METHODS OF THE 1996 ISJP
8
. by v1: su v2139 if v0==1, de
-> v1=
East
aq65. analysis weights
------------------------------------------------------------Percentiles
Smallest
1%
.059
.033
5%
.087
.042
10%
.105
.046
Obs
1137
25%
.144
.046
Sum of Wgt.
1137
50%
75%
90%
95%
99%
-> v1=
.194
.261
.379
.438
.61
Largest
.699
.716
.775
.775
Mean
Std. Dev.
.2200721
.1122308
Variance
Skewness
Kurtosis
.0125958
1.470031
5.927332
West
aq65. analysis weights
------------------------------------------------------------Percentiles
Smallest
1%
.167
.1
5%
.295
.108
10%
.394
.151
Obs
987
25%
.566
.151
Sum of Wgt.
987
50%
75%
90%
95%
99%
.862
1.234
1.857
2.266
3.47
Largest
4.284
4.304
4.456
4.804
Mean
Std. Dev.
1.013171
.6512465
Variance
Skewness
Kurtosis
.4241221
1.836716
7.962081
. su v2139 if v0==1, de
aq65. analysis weights
------------------------------------------------------------Percentiles
Smallest
1%
.076
.033
5%
.102
.042
10%
.128
.046
Obs
2124
25%
.187
.046
Sum of Wgt.
2124
50%
75%
90%
95%
99%
.348
.805
1.366
1.776
2.841
Largest
4.284
4.304
4.456
4.804
Mean
Std. Dev.
.5886168
.6002157
Variance
Skewness
Kurtosis
.3602589
2.261093
10.07354
In order to confirm the validity of the weight, we can compare weighted results with census
results and nonweighted results. (Of course, in order to be precise, the complete matrices of
the attributes combined should be compared.)
West Germany
Länder
Schleswig-Holstein
Hamburg
Lower Saxony
Bremen
North Rhine Westfalia
Weighted
Sample %
Census
%
Unweighted
Sample %
4.3
2.6
12.2
1.0
26.9
4.3
2.6
12.1
1.1
26.9
4.2
2.8
12.4
1.2
28.5
METHODS OF THE 1996 ISJP
Hesse
Rhineland Palatinate
Baden-Württemberg
Bavaria
Saarland
Berlin (West)
Community size
Smaller than
5.000
5.000 up to
20.000
20.000 up to 100.000
100.000 up to 500.000
500.000 and more
9
8.9
6.2
15.1
17.9
1.7
3.3
100.0
8.9
6.1
15.0
17.9
1.7
3.3
100.0
8.9
6.0
13.8
17.3
1.3
3.6
100.0
13.3
25.9
26.9
17.2
16.7
100.0
13.9
25.2
26.9
17.2
16.8
100.0
11.1
20.0
26.3
21.2
21.4
100.0
Weighted
Sample %
Census
%
Unweighted
Sample %
16.0
11.8
29.8
17.6
16.4
8.4
100.0
16.0
11.8
29.8
17.6
16.4
8.4
100.0
16.4
12.0
31.8
16.7
15.1
8.0
100.0
32.6
17.6
22.1
19.3
8.4
100.0
32.6
17.6
22.1
19.3
8.4
100.0
32.4
16.4
22.1
19.0
8.1
100.0
East Germany
Länder
Brandenburg
Mecklenburg-West Pomerania
Saxony
Saxony-Anhalt
Thuringia
Berlin (East)
Community size
Smaller than
5.000
5.000 to
20.000
20.000
to 100.000
100.000
to 500.000
500.000 and more
METHODS OF THE 1996 ISJP
10
West Germany
Sex
Male
Female
Age groups
18 to 29 years
30 to 39 years
40 to 49 years
50 to 59 years
60 years and older
Weighted
Sample %
Census
%
Unweighted
Sample %
47.1
52.9
100.0
47.2
52.8
100.0
46.8
53.2
100.0
19.3
18.8
15.5
18.4
28.0
100.0
19.2
18.8
15.5
18.4
28.1
100.0
20.4
21.1
17.0
13.8
27.8
100.0
Weighted
Sample %
Census
%
Unweighted
Sample %
46.7
53.3
100.0
46.7
53.3
100.0
47.7
52.8
100.0
18.3
20.0
16.1
19.5
26.1
100.0
18.3
20.0
16.1
19.5
26.1
100.0
16.3
18.1
17.3
18.5
29.8
100.0
East Germany
Sex
Male
Female
Age groups
18 to 29 years
30 to 39 years
40 to 49 years
50 to 59 years
60 years and older
6.2 Alternative Weight Construction
After the 1996 data set had been produced an alternative weight variable was created that
would be applicable to both the 1991 and the 1996 surveys. It should be noted that in 1991 a
different survey institute (infas, Bonn) was involved. This meant that statisticians of both
institutes had possibly used different fitting procedures and different break-down categories
for the tables. Another problem was that it could not be reconstructed whether in 1991 a table
of all possible combinations of attributes was used for an iterative simultaneous fit,
considering all possible interactions, or whether independent runs for some of the attributes
were made. Finally, in working with the data from the two different years consideration had
to be given to the fact that in 1991 the East had been overrepresented by about 1.5, whereas as
in 1996 the overrepresentation was 2.5.
Joining the 1991 and 1996 data sets, therefore, a new weighting variable for the East and the
West was constructed (V2145), also based on iterative proportional fitting involving länder,
METHODS OF THE 1996 ISJP
11
community sizes, sex, and age.3 The new weighting scores for 1991 and 1996 are distributed
in the following manner.
The new weighting scores should be used when comparing East and West Germany across the
two time points of measurements. The following results validate the weighting results for
some combinations of attributes.
1991 (East and West)
Länder
Schleswig-Holstein
Hamburg
Lower Saxony
Bremen
North Rhine Westfalia
Hesse
Rhineland Palatinate
Baden-Württemberg
Bavaria
Saarland
Berlin
3
Weighted
Sample %
Census
%
Unweighted
Sample %
3.52
2.09
9.61
0.85
21.49
7.12
4.93
11.94
14.31
1.38
4.37
3.46
2.11
9.60
0.86
21.62
7.11
4.88
11.95
14.36
1.39
4.24
3.19
2.38
6.83
0.77
17.75
5.43
3.47
10.29
10.36
1.23
5.57
Community size and länder were estimated separately, however, because of not available tables for very small
communities as a consequence of German data protection laws.
METHODS OF THE 1996 ISJP
Brandenburg
Mecklenburg-West Pomerania
Saxony
Saxony-Anhalt
Thuringia
Community size
Smaller than
5.000
5.000 up to
20.000
20.000 up to 100.000
100.000 up to 500.000
500.000 and more
North Rhine Westfalia,
Mecklenburg-West Pomerania,
Saxony-Anhalt, Thuringia: less
than 20.000
Saarland, Brandenburg,
Mecklenburg-West Pomerania:
20.000 up to 500.000
Bremen
Berlin (East)
12
3.18
2.33
6.05
3.59
3.23
100.0
3.18
2.33
6.04
3.63
3.27
100.0
5.39
4.76
10.61
6.55
5.43
100.0
14.93
19.54
23.57
15.40
13.15
14.93
19.55
23.58
15.42
13.01
14.08
13.24
12.75
17.26
13.90
8.02
8.07
20.17
2.98
2.99
4.90
0.85
1.57
100.0
0.86
1.59
100.0
0.77
2.94
100.0
Weighted
Sample %
Census
%
Unweighted
Sample %
11.38
8.95
7.85
8.78
10.09
11.39
8.94
7.84
8.79
10.08
10.70
9.79
8.42
8.42
11.16
10.95
8.91
7.81
8.97
16.31
100.0
10.96
8.91
7.81
8.98
16.29
100.0
10.46
11.90
8.91
6.94
13.31
100.0
1991 (East and West)
Male
Age 18 – 29
Age 30 – 39
Age 40 – 49
Age 50 – 59
Age 60 and older
Female
Age 18 – 29
Age 30 – 39
Age 40 – 49
Age 50 – 59
Age 60 and older
METHODS OF THE 1996 ISJP
13
1996 (East and West)
Länder
Schleswig-Holstein
Hamburg
Lower Saxony
Bremen
North Rhine Westfalia
Hesse
Rhineland Palatinate
Baden-Württemberg
Bavaria
Saarland
Berlin
Brandenburg
Mecklenburg-West Pomerania
Saxony
Saxony-Anhalt
Thuringia
Community size
Smaller than
5.000
5.000 up to
20.000
20.000 up to 100.000
100.000 up to 500.000
500.000 and more
North Rhine Westfalia,
Mecklenburg-West Pomerania,
Saxony-Anhalt, Thuringia: less
than 20.000
Saarland, Brandenburg,
Mecklenburg-West Pomerania:
20.000 up to 500.000
Bremen
Berlin (East)
Weighted
Sample %
Census
%
Unweighted
Sample %
3.53
2.03
9.75
0.84
21.34
7.18
4.96
12.05
14.59
1.35
4.24
3.18
2.31
5.90
3.52
3.22
100.0
3.51
2.03
9.74
0.84
21.41
7.17
4.95
12.03
14.57
1.36
4.23
3.18
2.29
5.89
3.55
3.24
100.0
1.93
1.32
5.74
0.56
13.23
4.14
2.78
6.40
8.05
0.61
5.98
8.76
6.40
17.04
8.95
8.10
100.0
14.06
17.38
22.09
14.76
11.90
14.08
17.35
22.11
14.75
11.91
13.65
12.43
12.38
15.77
9.51
11.56
11.57
27.26
5.74
5.74
4.14
0.84
1.67
100.0
0.84
1.65
100.0
0.56
4.28
100.0
Weighted
Sample %
Census
%
Unweighted
Sample %
9.57
9.70
7.94
9.09
11.11
9.59
9.69
7.93
9.07
11.10
8.85
8.66
8.95
8.00
12.81
1996 (East and West)
Male
Age 18 – 29
Age 30 – 39
Age 40 – 49
Age 50 – 59
Age 60 and older
METHODS OF THE 1996 ISJP
Female
Age 18 – 29
Age 30 – 39
Age 40 – 49
Age 50 – 59
Age 60 and older
14
9.18
9.51
7.90
9.24
16.78
100.0
9.20
9.50
7.90
9.22
16.79
100.0
9.32
10.83
8.24
8.29
16.05
100.0
METHODS OF THE 1996 ISJP
15
Czech Repbulic
1. Overview
Responsible researcher:
Sponsor:
Survey organization:
Sampled respondents:
Sample size:
Proportionally weighted
sample size:
Sample selection method:
Response rate:
Questionnaire method:
Questionnaire construction:
Petr Mateju
Institute of Sociology, Academy of Sciences, Prague
STEM
Population of the Czech Republic older 18 years of age
1,246
No weights created
Language:
Interviewers:
Field dates:
Mean length of interview:
Czech
307 interviewers took part in the survey
September 15 - October 29, 1995.
Not reported
Three stage random sampling.
78%
Face to face interview
The ISJP 1995 survey was designed and carried out as a separate
survey, i.e. the ISJP questionnaire was not made part of a larger
survey. A special section on political attitudes and voting
behavior was added at the end of the questionnaire.
2. Sampling
Three stage random sampling. In the first step, locality was chosen by random, in the second
step a particular address and apartment was chosen by random. The selection of the
respondent was made from the list of all members of the household older than 18 years (the
list was prepared by an interviewer) using the date of birth as a selection criterion (a person
on the list with the closest birthday).
Total sample: 1 600 addresses
Total received:
1 246 completed interviews
Response rate: 78%
METHODS OF THE 1996 ISJP
16
Selected characteristics of the Czech population (Census 1991)
compared to ISJP 1991 and 1995 data file
Census
(older than 18)
SEX
male
female
AGE
18 - 29
30 - 44
45 - 59
60 and more
EDUCATION
primary
secondary without diploma
secondary with diploma
tertiary
SIZE OF THE COMMUNITY
- 999
1 000 - 1 999
2 000 - 4 999
5 000 - 19 999
20 000 - 99 999
100 000+
REGIONS
Prague
Central Bohemia
South Bohemia
West Bohemia
North Bohemia
East Bohemia
South Moravia
North Moravia
ISJP 1991
ISJP 1995
48.1
51.9
47.6
52.4
44.5
55.5
22.4
29.5
24.2
23.9
19.5
29.6
24.3
26.5
17.8
28.7
26.6
26.9
23.8
35.9
29.0
11.3
16.5
44.3
30.1
9.0
13.6
40.1
33.6
12.7
13.8
8.9
11.3
19.0
20.1
26.9
14.7
5.3
14.1
20.0
24.2
21.6
12.6
12.7
10.5
18.7
23.1
22.4
11.8
10.8
6.8
8.3
11.4
12.0
19.9
19.0
12.2
13.5
6.8
8.9
8.8
14.0
17.8
18.1
10.7
10.4
7.1
7.1
11.2
12.6
20.2
20.7
METHODS OF THE 1996 ISJP
17
3. Country Specific Codes
3.1 Monetary Unit Information
Czech Republic
Monetary unit: CZK - Czech crown
Variable
V151,
V157
household income, needed
household income
V159,
job income,
V163
just job income
V167,
actual and just income of
chairman and worker
V169,
V170,
V172
Actual and just incomes of some
professions:
INC1QWRK, INC1DOC, INC1SHP,
INC1LO, INC1BUS, INC1AGR,
INC1FAB, INC1JUD, INC1MIN,
INC2QWRK, INC2DOC, INC2SHP,
INC2LO, INC2BUS, INC2AGR,
INC2FAB, INC2JUD, INC2MIN
Income period
measured
monthly
monthly
Kind of income
total net income of all members of
household -after deduction of taxes,
including all social benefits and additional
incomes
net income of respondent - after deduction
of taxes, all social benefits and allowances
monthly
total growth income (before taxation)
monthly
total growth income (before taxation)
METHODS OF THE 1996 ISJP
18
3.2 Information on coding of Czech political parties
PARTY
in 1995
CZ_V189, CZ_V695
33 LB - Left Block (party)
52 KSCM - Communist Party of Bohemia and Moravia
3 CSSD - Czech Social Democratic Party
5 DZJ - Age Pensioners for Life Certainties
10 LDS - Liberal Democratic Party
4 HSDMS+CMSS - Movement for Self-Administration
of Moravia and Silesia - CMSS
17 KDU - CSL - Christian and Democratic Union Czech Peoples Party
22 LSU - Liberal Social Union
24 SD (OH) - Free Democrats (Civic Movement)
50 LSNS - Liberal National Social Party
1 ODA - Civil Democratic Aliance
31 KAN - Club of Engaged Non-Party Men
43 ODS - Civil Democratic Party
44 KDS - Christian Democratic Party
54 DEU - Democratic Union
28 SPR - RSC - Republican Party
19 SPZR-Party of Entrepreneurs, Traders and Farmers
23 SZ-Green Party
38 SPP-Party of Friends of Bier
58 ZS-Traders Party
63 non party individuals
70 other party
PARTY
in 1992 (last election before the survey)
CZ_V231
19 LB - Left Block (coalition)
2 CSSD - Czech Social Democratic Party
4 HDZJ - Mov Pensioners for Life Certainties
3 HSDMS+CMSS - Mov forSelf-Adm
ofMorSil+CMSS
13 LSU - Liberal Social Union
1 ODA-Civil Democr Aliance
10 KDU - CSL - Christian and Democratic Union Czech Peoples Party
17 KAN - Club of Engaged Non-Party Men
22 ODS - KDS CivilDemocrPrty-ChristDemocrP
16 SPR - RSC - Republican Party
5 SPI
6 NSSN - CSNS
7 D 92 - Democrats for 92
11 SCSPZR
14 SZ - Green Party
15 OH - Civic Movement
20 SPP - Party of Friends of Bier
21 NEI - Indipendent Erotic Initiative
70 other party
LEFT - RIGHT
ISJP
SCALE
V189, V695
1 - Extreme left
1 - Liberal
2 - Left
2
3 - Center
3
4 - Right
4
5 - Extreme right
6 - Other, not coded
5 - Conservative
6 - Other
LEFT - RIGHT
SCALE
1 - Extreme left
2 - Left
ISJP
V231
1 - Liberal
2
3 - Center
3
4 - Right
4
5 - Extreme right
6 - Other, not coded
5 - Conservative
6 - Other
METHODS OF THE 1996 ISJP
19
Hungary
1. Overview
Responsible researcher:
Sponsor:
Survey organization:
Sampled respondents:
Sample size:
Proportionally weighted
sample size:
Sample selection method:
Response rate:
Minority Research Institute
age 18 or older adult population
1089 respondents had completed the questionnaire
1089
The three-leveled, accidental walk sampling method
Refusal were less than 5 percent. If somebody was not available
or rejected the interview, the interviewer had to replace him/her
by following the instructions based on the Kish key.
face to face interviews
Questionnaire method:
Questionnaire construction:
Language:
Hungarian
The new items were tested and backtranslated into English
Interviewers:
102 professional interviewers and 9 instructors
Field dates:
September 15 - September 30, 1996
Mean length of interview: 40 minutes
2. Sampling Method
2.1 The three-leveled, accidental walk sampling method.
This method provides a quick and economical way to select the respondent, precluding
possible subjective points, and forming the sample on all levels. This method does not
provide a representative sample from the point of view of age, gender or education. In order
to achieve a greater representation, the given data has to be weighed with the exact values of
the above mentioned variables, gained in a census.
2.1.1 Level I.
The choice of sampling points
We could term this level "creation of a settlement sample". The differentiation in the title
shows that there are different possible sampling points in a given settlement. In this case for a
national sample of 1000 (persons) we chose 100 sampling points, in a way that during each
accidental walk, starting from the sampling point, 10 questionnaires had to be completed.
This level of sampling is done by the help of a computer program. It uses a datafile, which
contains the names of all the settlements in Hungary and the number of their inhabitants.
Within the file the settlements are organized according to their region and their Central
Statistical Office (CSO) identifier. This organizational arrangement makes it possible for the
regions to be represented in the sample according to their population size, as well as the CSO
identifier, as normally its definition does not provide any order to the listing of settlements.
The algorithm works in a way that the rate of probability of being chosen is related to the size
of the population of the given settlement.
METHODS OF THE 1996 ISJP
20
2.1.2 Level II.
The choice of the starting point of the accidental walk
The starting point of the accidental walk is a junction or a concrete address. The description
of the walk can be found in the second insert. These are the directions for the researchers
conducting the questionnaires. This phase of sampling proceeds with the help of a map. Yet
there are no maps for public use for the majority of villages. In these settlements we usually
choose a public building as a starting point. In the given example we have chosen a random
address from the telephone book. This method is better than the commonly used one, but
because of the limited spread of telephones we were not able to select from all of the
households within the settlement.
2.1.3 Level III.
Selection of one person from the members of a household
Our aim is to represent all the members of a household with the same probability. This can be
realised with the aid of a series of tables worked out by an American statistician, Leslie Kish.
Of course, the use of Leslie Kish's key reaches its goal only when the questionnaires are
numbered. The rule of repeated visits and other regulations are observed and in this way the
mobile respondent, who can rarely be found at home, has the same chance of selection
as the immobile ones. The detailed regulations of the choice can be found in the second insert,
and the tables of Leslie Kish in the third insert. The output in the fifth insert, which is given
on a disk in a separate file, contains the settlements chosen by the help of the program, and
also the starting points belonging to them. In the first column of the table there is the four
CSO identifiers. The second is the code of the county (see the first insert). We indicated the
code of the extent of the settlement with TN. Its description is in the fourth insert. The
column which is marked with T3 contains a simple settlement-type code. 1- the capital, 2 city, 3 - village. In the sixth column the size of the population can be found. The seventh
column contains the codes of regions described in the first insert. Finally, the last data is the
starting point.
2.2. Insert Sampling regulations
The sampling method in the given research is the usual three-leveled accidental walk method.
Its aim is to provide a representative sample with the help of chance. It can be fulfilled only
if the person conducting the questionnaire completely follows the method described below,
and does not choose a nicer house if the selected according to the procedures is a run-down
hut with a barking dog. The first level is to choose the settlements with the help of a
computer program. At the second level we choose starting points in the settlement by chance.
The third level is to choose the person who will be interviewed from the marked household
with the help of the Kish key. The researcher starts his/her work at a given starting point. It
can be a junction or a concrete address. In the event it is a junction, start to walk on a street
which was mentioned first, in any direction. If it is a concrete address or building, face it and
go right. In villages and in certain parts of cities where houses have gardens (where one
house usually means one household, ) try to find a person to be interviewed at every fifth
house. If it is clear that there is more than one family living in the house, take it into
METHODS OF THE 1996 ISJP
21
account. In the densely built up regions go to every 15 households. This can be done if you
continuously count the post-boxes or the list of tenants. Start counting with the first flat on
the ground floor. During the accidental walk, move only on one side of the street. Turn at
each junction. First to the right, then to the left. You have to change direction to avoid going
in a circle. In case of any hindrances - no more houses, a dead-end, a factory gate, etc. - make
a U-turn to the other side of the street and continue your walk in the same way.
Before beginning the questioning process, please arrange the questionnaires according to
ascending numbers. They must be given in this order. How should adults from the same
household be chosen? To do this, you need three data. On the title page of the questionnaire
there is a circled, sample code to indicate which key has to be used out of the six. In the
intersection of the column corresponding to adults and the line corresponding to the number
of men you can find the right person. For example: On the next questionnaire the circled,
sample code is 4. In the given flat there is a young couple with two children in nursery school
and a grandmother. So, the number of adults is three, and there is only one man. According to
Key 4, in the intersection of column 3 and line 2 the man has to be given the questionnaire.
He has to be interviewed, even if he is not at home. You can arrange a time with the other
members of the family and return - in this case you have to store away this questionnaire
because you have chosen him with the given sample code; with the other sample code of
another questionnaire another person would have been chosen. It is also possible that he is
not accessible during the questionnaire process. (Soldiers, students living in a dormitory, etc.
who are temporarily away are also parts of the household!) In this case do not ask anybody
else from the family! You have to follow the regulations. If not, it can lead to the deformation
of proportions in the sample - i.e. too many pensioners and mothers on maternity care. If the
person is not accessible, you have to continue the procedure in the following 15th or 5th
household. It is possible that you will find nobody in the given flat. You have to try two more
times at different times of the day, but it is always good to ask the neighbors about their
habits. You need the name and address of the people being questioned because it must be
checked. The data is processed by strictly guaranteeing anonymity and is used only for
statistical purposes. Please consider your colleagues and be careful with your handwriting.
3. Type of Interviewers
The survey institute is working with part time interviewers. They have been
working for the company for a long time and before the employment they had to take
an intensive training and pass an exam. This network of the interviewers has been
working for more than 20 years. The instructors are responsible for the different
regions of Hungary are in full time positions. The number of regions are 20.
Instructors randomly selected names from the sample (the average was one
from six) and checked the interviews after it was completed. The control covered the
following problems:
- selection of respondents were correct or not according to the Leslie Kish key
- they checked some socio-economic factor
- the length of the interviews
4. Weighting
Weight variable is provided (v4100) which adjusts for differences in occupation status. As
finally inactives were over-represented in the sample, following the 1990’s Hungarian census
data we developed a weight variable calculated by cross-classification of gender and
employment status.
METHODS OF THE 1996 ISJP
22
5. Country Specific Coding
Hungary has not asked the following questions:
- curr.job month start (v38)
- last job month start (v50)
- partner’s job month start ()
- set of questions concerning previous job (v55-v66)
5.1 Income and Monetary Unit Information
HUNGARY
V151, v158, v159,
V167, v169, v170, v172
income period measured
current monthly income
monthly income
kind of income asked
income after taxation
income after taxation
The unemployment duration (v54) has appears as categorical variable among the country
specific codes
In those questions like experienced injustice, satisfaction, household financial situation
(v154), own social status (v216), winners and losers (v229) the context was the time of
transition (1990)
In questions v217 to v223 Hungary used a five point scale
v168 and v171 have not asked in Hungary
In the occupation coding only the four digits 1988 version of ISCO was available in Hungary
(see v403, v413, v433, v4090, v4091
4 people were doing the coding process. In the occupational coding they
followed the method suggested by the Hungarian Statistical Office, called FEOR system
5.2 Education
0. less than general primary education (in Hungary: someone who did not attend school at all
or 4-6 years at school)
1. general primary school (in Hungary: 8 years in elementary school)
2. general formal education with basic vocational training (in Hungary: elementary school
with technical school training)
3. medium vocational with medium formal (in Hungary vocational training with maturitas)
4. secondary formal education (in Hungary: high school - gimnazium, with maturitas)
5. lower tertiary (in Hungary: academies, 4 years long)
6. higher tertiary (in Hungary: universities, 5 years long)
5.3 Political Parties
1. liberal parties: SZDSZ (Alliance of Free Democrats)
2. MSZP (Hungarian Socialist Party - social democrats)
METHODS OF THE 1996 ISJP
23
3. FIDESZ (Young Democrats - centrist liberal party with conservative political orientations
4. MDF (Hungarian Democratic Forum, conservative party) and KDNP (Christian
Democratic Party, also conservative)
5. conservative parties FKGP (Smallholders Party which is a populist right-wing conservative
one)
If you want to have a scale from socialism to conservativism, simple recode 1 to 2 and 2 to 1.
Than the Hungarian Socialist Party will be the first and the Alliance of Free Democrats will
be the second.
5.4 Other Country Specific Codes
val lab v702
1'RomCath'2'Prot'3'Unit'4'GreekCath'5'Ortod'6'Izr'7'Other' 8'Nonrelig'.
v4000'spause last job:type of organization'
see in core codebook
v4001'spause last.job:employment status'
see in core codebook
v4002'spause last.job:Berufsstellung'
see in core codebook
v4003'spause last.job:kind of ISCO'
see in core codebook
v4004'spause last.job:industry branch'
see in core codebook
v4005'spause curr.job:industry branch'
var lab v4005'spause curr.job:industry branch'.
v4006'respondent type of education'
val lab v4006 0'INAP'1'FULL-TIME STUDENT'2'EVENING SCHOOL'
3'CORRESPONDANCE SCHOOL'8'DK'9'NA'.
v4007'spause type of education'
val lab v4007 0'INAP'1'FULL-TIME STUDENT'2'EVENING SCHOOL'
3'CORRESPONDANCE SCHOOL'8'DK'9'NA'.
v4008'age respondent'
val lab v4008 1'-25'2'26-35'3'36-45'4'46-55'5'56-65'6'66-75'7'76-'.
v4009'MQ31i.discrim.<89:money'
val lab v4009 v4010 v4011 v4012 1'VERY OFTEN'2'OFTEN'3'SOMETIMES'
4'RARELY'5'NEVER'8'DK'9'NA'0'INAP'.
v4010'MQ31j.discrim.<89:other'
val lab v4009 v4010 v4011 v4012 1'VERY OFTEN'2'OFTEN'3'SOMETIMES'
4'RARELY'5'NEVER'8'DK'9'NA'0'INAP'.
METHODS OF THE 1996 ISJP
v4011'MQ31i.discrim.:money'
val lab v4009 v4010 v4011 v4012 1'VERY OFTEN'2'OFTEN'3'SOMETIMES'
4'RARELY'5'NEVER'8'DK'9'NA'0'INAP'.
v4012'MQ31j.discrim.:other'
val lab v4009 v4010 v4011 v4012 1'VERY OFTEN'2'OFTEN'3'SOMETIMES'
4'RARELY'5'NEVER'8'DK'9'NA'0'INAP'.
v4013'MQ36a.satisfaction:community'
VAL LAB v4013 v4014 v4015 v4016 1'COMPLETELY DISSATISFIED'4'NEUTRAL'
7'COMPLETELY SATISFIED'8'DK'9'NA'.
v4014'MQ36b.satisfaction:family'
VAL LAB v4013 v4014 v4015 v4016 1'COMPLETELY DISSATISFIED'4'NEUTRAL'
7'COMPLETELY SATISFIED'8'DK'9'NA'.
v4015'MQ*36+a.satisf.<89:community'
VAL LAB v4013 v4014 v4015 v4016 1'COMPLETELY DISSATISFIED'4'NEUTRAL'
7'COMPLETELY SATISFIED'8'DK'9'NA'.
v4016'MQ*36+b.satisf.<89:family'
v4017'MQ*37h.inc.source:tip'
val lab v4017 v4018 v4019 v4020 1'YES'2'NO'7'REFUSED'8'DK'9'NA'0'INAP'.
v4018'MQ*37i.inc.source:agrar'
val lab v4017 v4018 v4019 v4020 1'YES'2'NO'7'REFUSED'8'DK'9'NA'0'INAP'.
v4019'MQ*37j.inc.source:capital'
val lab v4017 v4018 v4019 v4020 1'YES'2'NO'7'REFUSED'8'DK'9'NA'0'INAP'.
v4020'MQ*37k.inc.source:other'
val lab v4017 v4018 v4019 v4020 1'YES'2'NO'7'REFUSED'8'DK'9'NA'0'INAP'.
v4021'MQ*46i.action:refuse tax'
val lab v4021 1'OFTEN'2'SOMEIMES'3'RARELY'4'NEVER'8'DK'9'NA'.
v4022'MQ56*a.Inglehart:gorder'
val lab v4022 v4023 v4024 v4025 1'FIRST'2'SECOND'3'THIRD'4'FOURTH'.
v4023'MQ56*b.Inglehart:gmoresay'
val lab v4022 v4023 v4024 v4025 1'FIRST'2'SECOND'3'THIRD'4'FOURTH'.
v4024'MQ56*c.Inglehart:gprices'
val lab v4022 v4023 v4024 v4025 1'FIRST'2'SECOND'3'THIRD'4'FOURTH'.
v4025'MQ56*d.Inglehart:gspeech'
val lab v4022 v4023 v4024 v4025 1'FIRST'2'SECOND'3'THIRD'4'FOURTH'.
v4026'MQ job father:type of organization'
24
METHODS OF THE 1996 ISJP
see in core codebook
v4027'father educ:type'
see in core codebook
v4028'father type of education'
val lab v4028 0'INAP'1'FULL-TIME STUDENT'2'EVENING SCHOOL'
3'CORRESPONDANCE SCHOOL'8'DK'9'NA'.
v4029'county'
v4030'region'.
val lab v4030 1'BUDAPEST'2'REGIONAL CAPITAL'3'OTHER CITIES'4'VILLAGES'.
v4031'MQ*47+a.which party next sunday/original'
val lab v4031 v4032 v4033 0'INAP'1'MDF'2'MSZP'3'SZDSZ'
4'FKGP'5'FIDESZ'6'KDNP'7'OTHER'8'DK'9'NA'.
v4032'MQ63b.party voted for/original'
val lab v4031 v4032 v4033 0'INAP'1'MDF'2'MSZP'3'SZDSZ'
4'FKGP'5'FIDESZ'6'KDNP'7'OTHER'8'DK'9'NA'.
v4033'MQ47a party ID/original'.
val lab v4031 v4032 v4033 0'INAP'1'MDF'2'MSZP'3'SZDSZ'
4'FKGP'5'FIDESZ'6'KDNP'7'OTHER'8'DK'9'NA'.
v4100 'WEIGHT'
v4090 spause last ISCO88 codes
v4091 father ISCO88 codes
v4092 to v4096 original Hungarian occupational codes (FEOR) like ISCO
25
METHODS OF THE 1996 ISJP
26
Russia
1. Overview
Responsible researcher:
Sponsor:
Survey organization:
Sampled respondents:
Sample size:
Sample selection method:
Response rate:
Questionnaire method:
Language:
Interviewers:
Field dates:
Mean length of interview:
The entire population of Russia of 18 years and older
1585
3-stage random probability sample (missing most details)
67.1%
face-to-face interview
Russian
In the fieldwork employees and part-time interviewers of VCIOM
regional offices were engaged.
1 hour 10 min
2. Sampling Method
r living in them:
1) Moscow and St.-Petersburg
2) Central cities of krais (territories) and
regions
3) Capitals of autonomies
4) Peripheral cities in krais and regions
5) Peripheral cities in autonomies
6) Rural settlements
At the third stage interviewers made route search of private households. The selection of
respondents was made randomly (a member of HU whose day and month of birthday was
closer to the day of the interview was selected). In case of absence of the needed member of
the household, after two callbacks the interviewer selected a new household by the same
method.
2.1. Response Rates
Total issued
2,830
Ineligible
467
Total eligible
2,363
Total received
1,585
Total non-response
Refusals
778
714
METHODS OF THE 1996 ISJP
Non-contact
Other non-response
27
64
-
2.2. Number of Respondents in Sampling Area
St.-Petersburg
Petrozavodsk
Tikhvin
Archangel region
Komi-Permyatskaya autonomous region
Smolensk region
Moscow
Moscow region
Vladimir region
N.Novgorod region
Kirov
Voronezh region
Stavropol' kraj
Karachaevo- Cherkesskaya auton.republic
Saratov region
Tatar autonomous republic
Chuvash autonomous republic
Samara region
Bashkirskaya autonomous republic
Perm region
Kemerovo region
Novosibirsk region
Krasnoiarsk kraj
Khabarovsk kraj
Khakasskaya autonomous region
Evreiskaya autonomous region
50
17
39
60
45
44
99
8
101
42
10
83
79
37
87
44
26
48
41
45
81
82
85
75
14
13
3. Interviewers and Fieldwork Method
The work of every interviewer was controlled by telephone or a callback in the proportion of
1 per 10 interviews. No interviews have been excluded as a result of the control.
Occupational coding was done by the trained staff in the fieldwork department in VCIOM’s
central office.
Backtranslation was done only for the new variables (not in the 1991 questionnaire). Pretest
(20 respondents) was made to test the average length of the interview. The survey was
METHODS OF THE 1996 ISJP
28
conducted by the Russian Centre for Public Opinion and Market Research (VCIOM).
4. Weights
Reference on the distribution of respondents' totality and corrected sampling by controlled
social groups
Weight coefficients are defined as extreme ones for the sum of squares of deviations of
weighed estimates from corresponding precise values of proportions of the following social
groups within the surveyed population
4.1 Characteristics of National Population
Data of 1995, Goskomstat of Russia
The entire population of Russia of 18 years and older - 108,835 th. peoples, incl.:
GENDER
Male
Female
45.5%
54.5%
AGE
18 - 24 years
12.7%
25 - 39 years
32.5%
40 - 54 years
24.5%
55 years and older 30.4%
EDUCATION
Higher and non-complete
higher
Secondary and secondary
specialized
Below secondary
EMPLOYMENT
Employed
Non-employed
14.5%
47.7%
37.7%
62%
38%
A - actual distribution; W-after being weighted; S - in statistics. In per
cent.
1 - male
2 - female
3 - age less than 25
4 - age less than 40
5 - age less than 55
6 - age more than 55
7 - higher education
METHODS OF THE 1996 ISJP
29
8 - secondary education
9 - primary education
1
45.05
45.47
45.48
A
W
S
2
54.95
54.53
54.52
3
14.89
15.79
15.90
4
28.77
30.83
30.88
5
26.75
23.68
23.63
6
29.59
29.70
29.59
7
17.10
14.65
14.51
8
46.75
46.70
46.79
2-5
108
>5
0
9
36.15
38.65
38.70
Weight coefficients of respondents are distributed as follows:
Value
Quantity
0
0
0-0.1
20
0.1-0.2
38
0.2-0.5
225
0.5-1
686
1-2
508
The deviation in distribution makes on the average by controlled social groups 0.08% .
5. Country Specific Codes
V3 ‘96’ - country specific code for ‘council flat’.
V67. R Education
In the Russian questionnaire it was asked in the following format:
1 UNIVERSITY COMPLETED
2 UNIVERSITY INCOMPLETE
3 MEDIUM VOCATIONAL TRAINING AND MEDIUM SECONDARY
EDUCATION
4 LOWER VOCATIONAL TRAINING AND MEDIUM FORMAL EDUCATION
5 SECONDARY FORMAL EDUCATION
6 SECONDARY FORMAL EDUCATION AND PROFESSIONAL COURSES
7 INCOMLETE SECONDARY A
ND
PROFESSIONAL COURSES
8 INCOMPLETE SECONDARY
9 PRIMARY COMPLETED
10 INCOMPLETE PRIMARY
11 NONE
For ISJP data file it was recoded as:
RECODED EDUCATION
recoded
original
1 LEVEL 1a =10,11
2 LEVEL 1b = 9
3 LEVEL 1c =8
4 LEVEL 2a and 2b =7,4
METHODS OF THE 1996 ISJP
30
5 LEVEL 3a = 6,5
6 LEVEL 3b = 3,2
7 LEVEL 3c = 1
9 NA
V74 In subjective social class we used additional category
"lower middle class" (between "working class" and
"middle class").
1 LOWER CLASS
2 WORKING CLASS
3 LOWER MIDDLE CLASS
4 MIDDLE CLASS
5 UPPER MIDDLE CLASS
6 UPPER CLASS
7 NONE
97 REFUSED CLASS CONCEPT
98 DK
99 NA
For the joint datafile we merged 3 and 4 into
is now V800.
middle class.
The original Russian variable
Time periods in V97-V103 How often have *you* personally
experienced injustice *BEFORE PERESTROIKA*?
V104-V110 How often have *you* personally experienced injustice
*SINCE THE BEGINNING OF PERESTROIKA* ?
Due to a technical error question 36d "How satisfied are you with
your own income" was not asked.
V138-V143: Now thinking back to *1989*. Using the same scale,
how satisfied or dissatisfied were you with these things in your
life then?
V144-V150. *In last 12 months* did you receive income from ...
V151. Please tell me the total income you (and your family) had
*LAST MONTH, BEFORE TAXES*.
V152. Categories for the total family income
1
2
3
4
5
6
LE
LESS THAN 200 THOUSAND RUBLES
FROM 201 THOUSAND TO 400 THOUSAND RUBLES
FROM 401 THOUSAND TO 600 THOUSAND RUBLES
FROM 601 THOUSAND TO 800 THOUSAND RUBLES
FROM 801 THOUSAND TO 1 MLN RUBLES
FROM 1 MLN 1 THOUSAND TO 1 MLN 200 THOUSAND RUB
METHODS OF THE 1996 ISJP
S
7 FROM 1 MLN 201 THOUSAND TO 1 MLN 400 THOUSAND RUBLES
8 FROM 1 MLN 401 THOUSAND TO 1 MLN 600 THOUSAND RUBLES
9 FROM 1 MLN 600 THOUSAND TO 1 MLN 800 THOUSAND RUBLES
10 FROM 1 MLN 800 THOUSAND TO 2 MLN RUBLES
11 FROM 2 MLN TO 2 MLN 200 THOUSAND RUBLES
12 FROM 2 MLN 201 THOUSAND TO 2 MLN 400 THOUSAND RUBLES
13 FROM 2 MLN 401 THOUSAND TO 2 MLN 600 THOUSAND RUBLES
14 FROM 2 MLN 601 THOUSAND TO 2 MLN 800 THOUSAND RUBLES
15 FROM 2 MLN 801 THOUSAND TO 3 MLN RUBLES
16 FROM 3 MLN TO 5 MLN RUBLES
17 FROM 5 MLN TO 7 MLN RUBLES
18 FROM 7 MLN TO 10 MLN RUBLES
19 FROM 10 MLN TO 15 MLN RUBLES
20 MORE THAN 15 MLN RUBLES
97.
98.
99.
00.
REFUSED
DK
NA
INAP
V154 Comparing to *1991*
V163 Categories for respondent's income
1 LESS THAN 200 THOUSAND RUBLES
2 FROM 201 THOUSAND TO 400 THOUSAND RUBLES
3 FROM 401 THOUSAND TO 600 THOUSAND RUBLES
4 FROM 601 THOUSAND TO 800 THOUSAND RUBLES
5 FROM 801 THOUSAND TO 1 MLN RUBLES
6 FROM 1 MLN 1 THOUSAND TO 1 MLN 200 THOUSAND RUBLES
7 FROM 1 MLN 201 THOUSAND TO 1 MLN 400 THOUSAND RUBLES
8 FROM 1 MLN 401 THOUSAND TO 1 MLN 600 THOUSAND RUBLES
9 FROM 1 MLN 600 THOUSAND TO 1 MLN 800 THOUSAND RUBLES
10 FROM 1 MLN 800 THOUSAND TO 2 MLN RUBLES
11 FROM 2 MLN TO 2 MLN 200 THOUSAND RUBLES
12 FROM 2 MLN 201 THOUSAND TO 2 MLN 400 THOUSAND RUBLES
13 FROM 2 MLN 401 THOUSAND TO 2 MLN 600 THOUSAND RUBLES
14 FROM 2 MLN 601 THOUSAND TO 2 MLN 800 THOUSAND RUBLES
15 FROM 2 MLN 801 THOUSAcND TO 3 MLN RUBLES
16 FROM 3 MLN TO 5 MLN RUBLES
17 FROM 5 MLN TO 7 MLN RUBLES
18 FROM 7 MLN TO 10 MLN RUBLES
19 FROM 10 MLN TO 15 MLN RUBLES
20 MORE THAN 15 MLN RUBLES
97. REFUSED
98. DK
31
METHODS OF THE 1996 ISJP
99. NA
00. INAP
V167-V172. We would like your estimate of the income which people in
some occupations *actually* earn per *MONTH*
V174-V187 *Since 1991*
V188 was asked as
Are you going to take part in the presidential elections on
June 16, 1996?
1 YES
2 NO
8 DK
9 NA
The following question is now V801:
(*47+a) If the following candidates take part in the elections, who
would you vote for, or you will vote against everybody?
1 VLADIMIR BRYNTSALOV
2 YURI VLASOV
3 MICHAIL GORBACHEV
4 BORIS ELTSIN
5 VLADIMIR ZHIRINOVSKIY
6 GENNADIY ZYUGANOV
7 AMAN TULEEV
8 ALEKSANDER LEBED
9 SVYATOSLAV FYODOROV
10 MARTIN SHAKKUM
11 GRIGORIY YAVLINSKIY
12 AGAINST EVERYBODY
98 DK
99 NA
It was recoded in V189 as
recoded
original
1 FAR LEFT (COMMUNIST) = 6
2 LEFT (CENTER LEFT) = 7,9
3 CENTER = 2,3,10,11
4 RIGHT =4,8
5 FAR RIGHT = 1,5
6 NO PREFERENCE=12
8 DK = 98
32
METHODS OF THE 1996 ISJP
33
9 NA = 99
V230 was asked as: Did you vote in the ELECTIONS TO THE RUSSIAN PARLIAMENT
ON 17 DECEMBER 1995?
1 YES
2 NO
8 DK, Don't remember
9 NA
0 INAP
The answers are in the country-specific section:
D28. WHICH PARTY did you vote for?
1 "WOMEN OF RUSSIA"
2 "DERZHAVA"
3 "OUR HOME RUSSIA"
4 "BLOK PAMPHILOVA-GUROV-LYSENKO"
5 "YABLOKO"
6 "VPERED, ROSSIYA"
7 "KEDR"
8 "DEMOCRATIC CHOICE OF RUSSIA - UNITED DEMOCRATS"
9 PARTY OF THE RUSSIAN UNITY AND AGREEMENT
10 COMMUNIST PARTY OF RUS
SI
AN FEDERATION
11 "BLOC S.GOVORUKHINA"
12 "SOCIAL DEMOCRATIC UNION"
13 "POWER TO THE PEOPLE"
14 THE CONGRESS OF RUSSIAN COMMUNITIES
15 LIBERAL-DEMOCRATIC PARTY OF RUSSIA
16 PARTY OF SELF-GOVERNMENT OF THE WORKERS
17 "COMMUNISTS - WORKING RUSSIA"
96 OTHER
97 AGAINST EVERYBODY;DAMAGED, THREW AWAY THE BALLOT
SHEET
98 DK
Other country specific questions:
V702. Which religion would that be?
01 ORTHODOX
02 CATHOLIC
03 MUSLIM
04 JEWISH
METHODS OF THE 1996 ISJP
05 CHRISTIANITY "IN GENERAL"
06 OTHER
07 REFUSED
98 DK
99 NA
00 INAP
V704. With what nationality do you identify yourself?
1 RUSSIANS
2 UKRANIANS
3 BELORUSSIANS
4 BALIC NATIONS
5 CENTRAL ASIAN NATIONS
6 TRANSCAUCASIAN NATIONS
7 MOLDAVIANS
8 TATARS
9 JEWS
10 OTHERS
97 REFUSED
98 DK
Vd1
How many years in your life did you study?
96 NO FORMAL SCHOOLING
98 DK
00 NA
Vd2
How many hours a week do you normally work at your main job?
98 DK
Vd3
How many hours a week do you normally work at your additional job?
97 REFUSED
98 DK
Vro
REGIONAL DEPARTMENT (VCIOM)
1 NORTH-WESTERN
2 CENTRAL
3 NORTH-CAUCASIAN
4 VOLGA-VYATKA
5 SARATOV
6 URALS
7 WEST-SIBERIAN
8 EAST-SIBERIAN
9 FAR EASTERN
10 MOSCOW
34
METHODS OF THE 1996 ISJP
11
12
13
14
35
UDMURTIAN
VOLGA REGION
KEMEROVO
CAUCASIAN
15 VOLGA AUTONOMIES
16 ZHIGULEVSKOYE
17 VLADIMIR
18 ROSTOV-ON-DON
19 ALTAJ
20 KRASNODAR
21 SMOLENSK
22 BASHKIRIJA
23 MOSCOW REGION
24 ARCHANGELSK
99 NA
Vsize
SIZE OF COMMUNITY
01 urban, less than 10000
02 urban, 10000-20000
03 urban, 20000-50000
04 urban, 50000-70000
05 urban, 75000-100000
06 urban, 100000-250000
07 urban, 250000-500000
08 urban, 500000-750000
09 urban, 750000-1 mln
10 urban, more than 1 mln
11 rural
99 NA
6. Methodological Issues in Russia
1. The Russian data in 1991 was NOT weighted.
2. The differences between the sample design in the two Russian survey is that in 1996 at the
last stage interviewers made route search of private households. The selection of
respondents was made randomly (a member of houseunit whose day and month of birthday
was closer to the day of the interview was selected). In 1991 the selection was made on the
basis of militia registration books (at present they are unavailable).
3. The question wordings were different in the following cases:
26e. ‘Prejudice and discrimination against certain groups of people’ (in payment for work,
applying for jobs) The part in brackets was added in 1996 to make the question clearer.
26f. Lack of equal opportunities’ . In 1991 the wording was ‘the fact that different groups of
METHODS OF THE 1996 ISJP
36
people don’t have the same opportunities to get good education and work’. In 1996 it was
changed to ‘the fact that not everybody have the same opportunities to get good education and
work’.
31f. ‘The part of the country you are from’ (whether you are from a village and not a city, if
you are a refugee etc.) The part in brackets was added in 1996.
32b. ‘There is an incentive for individual effort only if differences in income are large
enough’. In 1996 ‘incentive’ was translated as ‘stimuli’, in 1996 – ‘the will to work well’.
33g. ‘Being a man and not a woman in 1996 was translated as ‘Sex of the employee (male
or female).’
35a. ‘The government should guarantee everyone a minimum standard of living’ in 1991 was
translated as ‘guaranteed standard of life’, in 1996 it was changed to ‘a minimum standard of
living’ since the later expression became, contrary to 1991, a part of standard vocabulary.
35b. ‘The government should place an upper limit on the amount of money any one person
can make’. In 1996 it was supplemented by (and not allow anybody to make more than this
limit).
35c. ‘The government should provide a job for everyone who wants’ one formulated in 1996
as ‘The government should provide a job for everyone who can and wants to work’.
46d. ‘Attended a public meeting’ was translated in 1991 ‘attended unofficial public meetings’.
In 1996 ‘unofficial’ was deleted (as such a phenomenon as official public meetings
disappeared).
46e. ‘Joined an unofficial (wildcat) strike’ in 1991 was translated as ‘joined a strike’, in 1996
– ‘participated in a strike’.
46h. ‘Written to your member of legislature’ was changed into ‘applied to your member of
legislature’.
48c. ‘In (COUNTRY) a poor person has the same chance of a fair trial as a wealthy person
does’ was put in 1991 as ‘in our country a poor person has the same chances of a fair
treatment in court, as the rich person does’. This was changed in 1996 into ‘in our country a
poor person can rely on the same fair treatment in court, as the rich person does’.
50b. ‘In (COUNTRY) people get rewarded for their effort’ was translated in 1996 as ‘In our
country effort is rewarded’.
50d. ‘In (COUNTRY) people get rewarded for their intelligence and skill’ was translated in
1996 as ‘In our country effort and skill are rewarded’.
51e. ‘People are entitled to pass on their wealth to the children’. Since the concept of
entitlement does not have a direct translation into Russian, in 1991 it was translated as
‘People have the right to pass on their wealth to their children’. In 1996 it was formulated as
‘People must have the right to pass on their wealth to their children’ to make it look like a
normative statement and not the observation about the real state of things.
52e. ‘The way things are these days, it is hard to know what is just anymore’ was translated in
1996 as ‘These days it is hard to judge what is just, and what isn’t’.
E1. ‘Based on your experience in (COUNTRY) of socialism , would you say that you are very
much in favour ...’In 1996 ‘of the socialism that existed in our country before 1985’ was
inserted after ‘in favour’.
METHODS OF THE 1996 ISJP
37
Bulgaria
1. Overview
Responsible researcher:
Sponsor:
Survey organization:
Vitosha Reseach with the Center for the Study of
Democracy, Open Society Fund
Vitosha Research, Center for the Study of Democracy, Sofia
Sampled respondents:
The sample is representative of the population of Bulgaria
aged 18 and over.
Sample size:
1636
Proportionally weighted No weights included for 1996 data
sample size:
Weights are included for 1991 data – variable w1
Sample selection method: Two-stage cluster sample with preliminary stratification of
clusters by two technical variables: the region and the type of
settlement
Completion rate:
74.5%
Response rate:
89.4%
Questionnaire method:
Face-to-face interview
Questionnaire
construction:
Language:
Bulgarian
Interviewers:
Field dates:
November 30, 1996 - December 14, 1996
Mean length of
55 minutes
interview:
2. Sampling Method
The sample size is N = 1636 (Planned N = 1750). It is a two-stage cluster sample with
preliminary stratification of clusters by two technical variables: the region and the type of
settlement. The sample is based on the list of the electoral sections used in the last municipal
elections of October 29, 1995, which total 13,082, and out of which 250 primary units
(clusters) were chosen at random, with probability proportional to the size of sections. Within
each cluster the plan was to interview 7 persons, to yield a total sample of 1750 persons. The
respondents within the clusters are chosen at random. Each interviewer was supplied with the
names and the addresses of 10 possible respondents per cluster (electoral section), out of
which up to 7 were to be interviewed, but in cases where less than 5 from the list were found,
interviewers sought out appropriate replacements (of similar sex and age) within the unit. The
interviewers were instructed to record the necessary information for all inaccessible
respondents.
3. Completion and Response Rates
N
ns
n
nc
nr
= 2500
= 2197
= 1636
= 367
= 194
Response rate:
89.4 %
METHODS OF THE 1996 ISJP
Completion rate:
38
74.5 %
As a whole the number of inaccessible respondents did not affect the
representativeness of the real sample. The average number of interviews per each interviewer
is 12.
The distribution of the sample by regions (former counties), number of clusters, number
of effective interviews and the number of interviewers is as follows:
Table A:
¹
01
02
03
04
05
06
07
08
09
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28
Region
SOFIA-CITY
BOURGAS
SLIVEN
YAMBOL
VARNA
DOBRITCH
SHUMEN
VELIKO TARNOVO
GABROVO
LOVETCH
PLEVEN
MONTANA
VIDIN
VRATZA
PLOVDIV
PAZARDJIK
SMOLIAN
ROUSSE
RAZGRAD
SILISTRA
TARGOVISTE
BLAGOEVGRAD
KJUSTENDIL
PERNIK
SOFIA-REGION
HASKOVO
KARDJALI
STARA ZAGORA
Total:
Number of
clusters
001 - 036
037 - 050
051 - 056
057 - 062
063 - 075
076 - 082
083 - 090
091 - 099
100 - 104
105 - 109
110 - 119
120 - 125
126 - 129
130 - 137
138 - 159
160 - 168
169 - 173
174 - 181
182 - 187
188 - 191
192 - 196
197 - 206
207 - 212
213 - 216
217 - 224
225 - 233
235 - 240
241 - 250
Questionnaires
Received
222
96
41
41
83
45
54
63
34
35
70
40
21
54
138
60
35
51
41
26
33
62
42
24
56
60
44
65
1636
Number of
interviewers
15
8
3
5
8
5
7
6
3
3
5
4
1
4
11
2
2
5
3
4
4
3
3
2
3
5
5
3
132
There were three inaccessible clusters in the sample which were replaced by quota (16
interviews). Two clusters from Plovdiv region, very difficult to penetrate due to large Gypsy
population, and 1 cluster in Kardjali region, inaccessible due to flooded roads. One other
METHODS OF THE 1996 ISJP
39
cluster was simply missing because of complications with the interviewer (No 027 - Sofia
region).
The average interview length is 55 minutes.
No pretest was conducted.
4. Interviewers
The survey was conducted employing the national interviewer net of VR. The net
consists of 28 regional teams, each having a team head experienced in fieldwork. All the
interviewers have undergone the necessary training and have a considerable experience. For
the solution of specific problems interviewers were instructed to contact the head of the
regional team or the staff members of Vitosha Research, Sofia.
The majority of interviewers have a university education in the social sciences
(sociologists, psychologists, etc.), and rich fieldwork experience. The remaining part also has
rich fieldwork experience, and has passed various fieldwork training courses.
The briefing session with the heads of the regional teams and part of the interviewers
was held on November 30, 1996. It included an overview of survey methodology, specific
features of the questionnaire and of specific questions, sampling methodology, specific
fieldwork requirements, and the reconstruction of a fieldwork situation. The interviewers
were supplied with written instructions and show-cards. The fieldwork started on November
30, 1996 and finished on December 14, 1996.
5. Weights
There is a minimal diversion of data from the basic socio-demographic parameters of
the population (a provided by the National Statistical Institute). In this case no weighting is
necessary and no weights have been provided for the 1996 data.
1991 weights have been calculated using 1992 Bulgarian Census data below.
EDUCATION
Sex / Age
Total
Number
Higher
%
Number
College / High school
%
Number
%
Males
Total
63517
6776
18-30
14614
23
913
13
10110
36
31-50
23330
37
3387
50
12059
43
51 and over
25573
40
2476
37
5990
100
28159
100
21
100
Females
Total
67243
5910
18-30
14234
21
1226
21
9894
34
31-50
23608
35
3448
58
12787
44
51 and over
29401
44
1236
21
6477
100
29158
100
22
100
METHODS OF THE 1996 ISJP
40
Education (continued)
Grammar school
Number
Primary
%
20986
Number
Unfinished primary
%
5916
Number
%
1680
3031
14
401
7
159
9
6897
33
738
12
249
15
53
4777
81
1272
11058
100
19434
100
9104
76
100
3637
2480
13
414
5
220
6
5881
30
1057
12
435
12
57
7633
84
2982
11073
100
100
82
100
6. Quality Control
6.1.
Direct Control
The direct fieldwork control was conducted by VR supervisors. The principal tasks of
the supervisors were to control the fulfilment of the sampling plan and the work of the
interviewers. The overall impression is that the sample was covered according to the plan,
except for some minor deviations.
6.2.
Logical Review of the Questionnaires and Data Entry
All questionnaires were subjected to a logical review before data entry. The logical
review was carried out by VR staff and included:
- fulfilment of all questionnaire instructions
- logical correspondence between answers of different questions
- control for accuracy in the cases where there is objective information (e.g.
questions on size of the city/village, administrative region).
Coding of open-ended questions was completed simultaneously with logical review.
Questionnaires were processed using double entry procedure (employing a specialised
DBASE program).
The final data file was further processed to re-check for matching the requirements of
filter questions.
Coding for all variables in the data file follows the enclosed codebook. All “0” values
should be treated as “missing”, except if the “0” is not defined with a specific label. This
applies to filter questions where answers of respondents skipping a question are coded with
“0”.
METHODS OF THE 1996 ISJP
41
7. Field Log Summary and Comments
1.
As a whole, no serious or unusual problems were encountered during the different
stages of the survey.
2.
Interviewers’ opinion
The field log included a questionnaire focusing on specific difficulties during the
fieldwork. The remarks of the interviewers concerning the attitudes of the respondents
towards the questionnaire as a whole and towards some questions are as follows:
2.1. Only some old men (over 70 years), inhabitants of villages and respondents of
Turkish and Gypsy ethnic origin faced difficulties in understanding certain questions.
2.2.
As a whole the number of the refusals was low and in most cases occurred in
towns.
2.3. Some respondents aged 65 and over and living in smaller settlements were
afraid to express what they really thought, because of fear of bad consequences for them.
METHODS OF THE 1996 ISJP
42
Comparative Tables
Table 1: Population of Bulgaria Aged 20 and over
by December 31, 1995
Age
Total
20-24
25-29
30-34
35-39
40-44
45-49
50-54
55-59
60-64
65-69
70-74
75-79
80 +
Total
Men
Women
6,284,412
100.0 %
3,026,034
100.0 %
3,258,378
100.0 %
9.7
9.0
8.7
9.1
9.4
9.9
8.1
7.6
8.2
7.5
6.3
3.0
3.5
10.3
9.5
9.1
9.4
9.6
10.1
8.1
7.6
8.0
7.1
5.7
2.6
2.9
9.2
8.5
8.4
8.8
9.2
9.7
8.0
7.7
8.4
7.9
6.9
3.3
4.0
Percent of Urban
Population out of
Total Population
66.6
----74.7
72.4
72.9
74.6
75.4
73.7
68.1
62.4
56.6
54.7
50.7
48.7
47.2
Source: Statistical Handbook of the National Statistical Institute (Printing House of NSI,
Sofia, 1996), p. 30.
METHODS OF THE 1996 ISJP
43
Table 2: Population 20 Years and over by Marital Status by 4.12.1992
Marital Status
Total
Single
Married
Divorced
Widow (-er)
Percent
100.0
11.0
73.9
4.1
11.0
Source: Demographic Characteristics of Bulgaria (Census of Population by 4.12.1992)
Table 3: Population by Education by 4.12.1992
Education
Total
University
Secondary and semi-higher
Primary
Elementary
Uncompleted elementary
Percent
100.00
9.9
43.4
30.6
11.6
4.5
Source: Demographic Characteristics of Bulgaria (Census of Population by 4.12.1992)
METHODS OF THE 1996 ISJP
44
Table 4: Population 20 Years and over by Administrative Regions by 31.12.1993
Regions
Total
1. Sofia - city
2. Bourgas
3. Varna
4. Lovetch
5. Montana
6. Plovdiv
7. Rousse
8. Sofia
9. Haskovo
Percent
100.0
14.3
9.8
10.6
12.3
7.7
14.2
9.0
11.6
10.5
Source: Demographic Characteristics of Bulgaria (Census of Population by
4.12.1992), p. 336.
Table 5: Population 20 years and over by Ethnic Origin by 4.12.1992
Ethnic origin
Total
Bulgarian
Turkish
Gypsy
Other
Percent
100.0
87.9
8.3
2.6
1.2
Source: Demographic Characteristics of Bulgaria (Census of Population by
p. 195.
4.12.1992),
Share of the registered unemployed by the Labour Offices from the total employed and
unemployed by 31.12.1995 - 11.1 %.
Source: Statistical Handbook of the National Statistical Institute (1995), p.66.
METHODS OF THE 1996 ISJP
45
8. Country Specific Coding
Variables in the new file could be grouped in the following categories:
1. Variables that do
not exist in the
Bulgarian
questionnaire and
have been assigned
“0” and the same
length.
V38-V41, V50-V51, V55-V66, V153, V161,
V402-V410, V412-V430,
V432-V440, V517-V549, V553-V691,
V693, V801-V930, V932-V940
2. Specific recoding
cases and exclusions
V32 (variable replicated in V1003), V44,
V72, V699:
Categories 10 through 14 have remained
unchanged because it is impossible to
change. 1 dekar = 1000 square meters.
V189(repl V1045), V231 (repl V1048), V695
(repl V1044).
The recoding scheme employed does not
match classic criteria. The principle used
is to label “conservative” those parties
which are more or less trying to preserve
the socialist past (i.e. former communist
parties), and to label as “liberal” those
who are aiming at fast and far reaching
market reforms. In this way the
classification becomes:
BSP = 5
UDF = 2
MRF = 3
DAR = 4
PU = 2
BBB = 2
FKB = 3
V29 and V69
The categories “working pensioners (full
time and part-time)” does not exit in the
Core Codebook. For these variables the
above categories have been recoded into
option 6 “retired”. However, as this
affects the following questions (this is a
filter question) the values for the
affected variables have been changed and
this will affect the respective
distributions. The unchanged versions are
replicated in the Bulgarian section.
V43, V71: Please note that the original
filter in the Bulgarian questionnaire is
at option 6 (on training scheme….).
METHODS OF THE 1996 ISJP
3. Variables that
have been recoded in
accordance with the
Core Codebook:
46
All expect the above listed specific
cases.
METHODS OF THE 1996 ISJP
INCOME
47
AND
MONETARY UNIT INFORMATION
Different kinds of income have been documented below:
Country
monetary
unit
Bulgaria
Asked for in
variable
Income period
measured
Kind of income
asked about
V151, V152
Last monthly income
(November 1996)
Total income of
household (before
tax reductions)
V159, V160
Last monthly income
(November 1996)
Total personal
income from main
job (before taxes)
V158
Average monthly
income needed
Total household
income
V163
Average monthly
income deserved
Total personal
income
V167, V170
Average monthly
income earned
Total income of
different job
positions
V169, V172
Fair average
monthly income
Total income of
different job
positions
1 Lev
METHODS OF THE 1996 ISJP
INCOME
CATEGORIES USED IN VARIABLES
Bulgaria
Household Income (V152)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
97
98
99
Up to 4000 levs
4001- 8000 levs
8001 - 12000 levs
12001 - 16000 levs
16001 - 20000 levs
20001 - 24000 levs
24001 - 28000 levs
28001 - 32000 levs
32001 - 36000 levs
36001 - 40000 levs
40001 - 44000 levs
44001 - 48000 levs
48001 - 52000 levs
52001 - 56000 levs
56001 - 60000 levs
60001 - 64000 levs
64001 - 70000 levs
70001 - 74000 levs
74001 - 78000 levs
Over 78001 levs
Refused to answer
DK
No answer
Individual Income (V160)
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
Up to 2000 levs
2001 - 4000 levs
4001 - 6000 levs
6001 - 8000 levs
8001 - 10000 levs
10001 - 12000 levs
12001 - 14000 levs
14001 - 16000 levs
16001 - 18000 levs
18001 - 20000 levs
20001 - 22000 levs
22001 - 24000 levs
24001 - 26000 levs
26001 - 28000 levs
28001 - 30000 levs
30001 - 32000 levs
32001 - 34000 levs
34001 - 36000 levs
36001 - 38000 levs
Over 38001 levs
48
V152
AND
V160
METHODS OF THE 1996 ISJP
97
98
99
Refused to answer
DK
No answer
49
METHODS OF THE 1996 ISJP
50
Additional Comments
The variable weight has been computed after the merging of all files, and contains relevant
weights from any countries that included weights in their data. It is the appropriate weighting
variable to use. It was constructed by combining v2139 (German 96 weight), v4100
(Hungarian 96 weight), v11009 (Russian 96 weight) and w1 (Bulgarian 91 weight).