Find researchers

This study was conducted as a part of the Open Probability-Based Panel Alliance (OPPA) and is about the perception of sexual harassment.
The codebook files codebook_qc19a_EN_1.0.pdf and codebook_qc19a_EN_1.0.pdf and data files qc19a_EN_1.0p.sav and qc19a_EN_1.0p.dta only apply to the data collected in the LISS panel. The harmonized data files Harmonized_OPPA_Schwarz_qc19a_EN_1.0p.sav and Harmonized_OPPA_Schwarz_qc19a_EN_1.0p.dta contains the data collected in all 4 panels.

This study aims to understand citizens’ perception of inequalities in wealth and income.

In February 2012, a questionnaire consisting of 5 parts was fielded in the LISS panel. Part 4 consisted of 5 different versions. The respondents were presented one of these versions, which version the respondent received, was determined at random. In the first 4 versions, the respondent had the possibility of earning money (with the exception of 1 conditional group, which was unable to earn money in part 4). Each time, the amount of money depended on the respondent’s decision and a die or coin tossed by the computer. One of the questionnaire parts was selected for actual payment of the sum earned. This amount was shown directly upon completion of the questionnaire.

In February a questionnaire about dealing with risks was presented to the LISS panel. Some additional questions were included in the Health Core questionnaire in November and December.

The present research aims to determine what withholds eligible households from claiming benefits.

The project explores how interactive features in web surveys can influence respondent behavior. In August 2008, the LISS panel was presented a questionnaire on the effect of including motivational statements and follow-up probes on response length and response quality of the responses to open-ended questions. The questionnaire included four open-ended questions and several closed-ended questions about the current situation in Dutch society. Respondents to the internet survey were randomly assigned to one of the four versions of the open-ended questions. The control version simply displayed the open-ended question, no motivating statement was included with the question and respondents were not branched to a follow-up probe. In the second version the open-ended question included the motivational statement ‘This question is very important to our survey’, but similar to the control version, respondents were not asked a follow-up probe. In the third version respondents were asked the open-ended question and after they submitted their initial response, they were branched to a follow-up probe screen. This screen displayed the respondent’s answer to the initial open-ended question and a follow-up probe (e.g., ‘Is there anything else you would like to add?’). Respondents to the fourth version were also asked the initial open-ended question and then branched to a follow-up probe with a motivational statement. In addition, people who did not answer the initial open-ended question (or who provided an answer like ‘don’t know’ or other answers that were less than four characters) were routed to a nonrespondent version that displayed the text ‘Please provide a response. This question is very important to our survey” and repeated the open-ended question.