|
Field
Abstract
|
Before
This pre-analysis plan outlines the design and proposed analysis of a survey experiment embedded in a multi-country study examining citizen discontent with political systems across seven Latin American countries. This large-scale study combines original survey data with the most up-to-date national household surveys conducted by the National Statistics Offices of each country. The experiment described in this pre-analysis plan is embedded in all the surveys. It is designed to investigate the effects of two key factors: (i) security concerns and (ii) economic expectations and anxiety on different expressions of political discontent. Respondents are randomly assigned to receive one of three questionnaire versions, where the order of the modules varies. One version presents a module on perceptions of security first, followed by outcome measures. The second version presents questions on economic anxiety and expectations first, followed by outcomes. The third version asks outcome-related questions first, followed by the treatment modules. Key outcomes include general sentiments of discontent, such as anti-establishment attitudes, trust in institutions, and support for democratic principles, along with expressions of discontent through exit (e.g., opting out of public services) and voice (e.g., protests). The findings aim to shed light on the sources of citizen discontent and inform debates on how two core problems in Latin America—insecurity and economic volatility—shape public perceptions of and relationships with political systems.
|
After
This pre-analysis plan outlines the design and proposed analysis of a survey experiment embedded in a multi-country study examining citizen discontent with political systems across seven Latin American countries. This large-scale study combines original survey data with national household surveys conducted by the National Statistics Offices in three countries, while in the other four countries it relies on our original survey with a new characterization module. The experiment described in this pre-analysis plan is embedded in both types of surveys—national household surveys in three countries and original surveys in the remaining four. It is designed to investigate the effects of two key factors: (i) security concerns and (ii) economic expectations and anxiety on different expressions of political discontent. Respondents are randomly assigned to receive one of three questionnaire versions, where the order of the modules varies. One version presents a module on perceptions of security first, followed by outcome measures. The second version presents questions on economic anxiety and expectations first, followed by outcomes. The third version asks outcome-related questions first, followed by the treatment modules. Key outcomes include general sentiments of discontent, such as anti-establishment attitudes, trust in institutions, and support for democratic principles, along with expressions of discontent through exit (e.g., opting out of public services) and voice (e.g., protests). The findings aim to shed light on the sources of citizen discontent and inform debates on how two core problems in Latin America—insecurity and economic volatility—shape public perceptions of and relationships with political systems.
|
|
Field
Last Published
|
Before
September 09, 2025 10:18 AM
|
After
September 09, 2025 11:41 AM
|
|
Field
Primary Outcomes (Explanation)
|
Before
In our questionnaire, we have included several questions that aim to measure different dimensions of our outcomes of interest. As such, we will aggregate some of these questions into indices by standardizing the variables (using control group statistics) and averaging them. Below, we provide a brief overview of each variable. A comprehensive Excel sheet in the appendix summarizes the outcome variables (indices), their components, the moderators, and our measures of treatment intensity.
1. Anti-elite discontent:
a. Q36.2 Agreement with: "The main division in society is between citizens and economic/political elites"
b. Q36.3 Agreement with: "The country's economy is manipulated to favor the rich and powerful"
2. Systemic disillusionment:
a. Q17.2 Level of anger or frustration regarding Colombia's current situation
b. Q17.3 Level of fear or anxiety regarding Colombia's current situation
c. Q24 Perceived fairness of access to justice in Colombia
d. Q25 Acceptability of inequality levels in Colombia
e. Q27 Perceived determinants of wealth in Colombia
f. Q34 Satisfaction with democratic function in Colombia
g. Q36.3 Agreement with: "The country's economy is manipulated to favor the rich and powerful"
3. Perceptions of inequality/meritocracy:
a. Q25 Acceptability of inequality levels in Colombia
b. Q27 Perceived determinants of wealth in Colombia
4. Strong leader sentiment:
a. Q36.4 Agreement with: "To fix the country, we need a strong leader willing to break the rules"
b. Q45 Justification frequency for law enforcement actions to control protests or demonstrations
c. (Peru only) Q38_new Preference for leaders who prioritize agreements vs. those who defend their positions
5. Belief in liberal democracy:
a. Q33 Perceived essentiality of democratic characteristics:
i. Freedom to criticize the government
ii. Existence of political parties
iii. Congressional checks on presidential power
iv. Regular, fair, and free elections
6. Support for democracy:
a. Q36.1 Agreement with: "Democracy may have problems, but it's better than any other form of government"
7. Satisfaction with democracy:
a. Q34 Satisfaction with democratic function in Colombia
8. Majoritarian preferences:
a. Q33 Perceived essentiality of "always fulfilling the will of the majority" for democracy
9. Service dissatisfaction:
a. Q24 Perceived fairness of access to justice in Colombia
b. Q47 Quality rating of state-provided services (education, healthcare, security, public transport)
10. Perception of primary national issues:
a. Q18 Perceived most serious problem facing the country
b. Q19 Most concerning problem for the individual and their family
11. Disengagement tendencies:
a. Q35 Voting intentions in hypothetical upcoming presidential elections (focus on non-voting)
b. Q49 Primary reason for considering living abroad (excluding those who haven't considered it)
12. Expression of discontent:
a. Q35 Voting intentions in hypothetical upcoming presidential elections (focus on opposition, outsiders, blank votes, and vote annulment)
b. Q44 Justification frequency for various protest actions
13. Preferences for redistribution:
a. Q42 Perceived appropriate recipients of government aid on a 10-step economic ladder
b. Q43 Perceived appropriate starting point for taxation on a 10-step economic ladder
|
After
In our questionnaire, we have included several questions that aim to measure different dimensions of our outcomes of interest. As such, we will aggregate some of these questions into indices by standardizing the variables (using control group statistics) and averaging them. Below, we provide a brief overview of each variable. A comprehensive word document and excel sheet in the appendix summarize the outcome variables (indices), their components, the moderators, and our measures of treatment intensity.
Outcomes
1. Most pressing problems: Insecurity
Q18: What do you think is the most serious issue facing the country today?
Q19: Now, thinking about yourself and your family, which problem worries you the most?
2. Most pressing problems: The economy
Q18: What do you think is the most serious issue facing the country today?
Q19: Now, thinking about yourself and your family, which problem worries you the most?
3. Discontent Index
a. Sub-index 1: Anti-elite sentiment
Q36.2: To what extent do you agree with the following statement? The main division in society is between ordinary citizens and the economic and political elites.
Q36.3: To what extent do you agree with the following statement? The country’s economy is rigged to favor the rich and powerful.
b. Sub-index 2: Feelings about the current situation
Q17.1: Optimism – When you think about Colombia’s current situation and what it means for you and your family, how optimistic do you feel?
Q17.2: Anger or frustration – When you think about Colombia’s current situation and what it means for you and your family, how angry or frustrated do you feel?
Q17.3: Fear or anxiety – When you think about Colombia’s current situation and what it means for you and your family, how fearful or anxious do you feel?
c. Sub-index 3: Perceptions of injustice and inequality
Q24: How fair or unfair do you think access to justice is in Colombia?
Q25: How acceptable do you find the current level of inequality in Colombia?
Q27: What do you think determines whether a person is wealthy in Colombia? (More advantages == 1)
d. Sub-index 4: Satisfaction with democracy
Q34: How satisfied are you with how democracy works in Colombia?
Q36.4: To what extent do you agree with the following statement? To fix the country, we need a strong leader willing to break the rules.
4. Liberal democracy preference index
Q36.1: To what extent do you agree with the following statement? Democracy may have its problems, but it’s better than any other form of government.
Q33: How essential do you think each of the following features is to democracy?
- Freedom to criticize the government
- Existence of political parties
- A Congress that can check the President’s power
- Regular, fair and free elections
5. Voice index
a. Sub-index 1: Within the system
Q35: If the next presidential election were this week, what would you do? (Vote for a new candidate outside the current political class, Vote blank, Nullify your vote, Not vote)
Q44: Considering the actions people take to protest, how often would you justify the following?
- Participation in peaceful protests or marches
b. Sub-index 2: Taking direct action
Q44: Considering the actions people take to protest, how often would you justify the following?
- Damaging infrastructure
- Blocking traffic
|
|
Field
Experimental Design (Public)
|
Before
We have embedded a survey experiment in a broader survey to subsamples of national household surveys conducted by the National Statistics Offices (NSOs) in participating countries. The experiment involves three versions of the survey questionnaire (A, B, and C), which contain identical questions but differ in the order in which key sections are presented.
• Survey A begins with questions about insecurity experiences, followed by sections on discontent and concerns; perceptions of inequality, injustice, and discrimination; political preferences and democracy; preferences for redistribution; expressions of discontent; and self-exclusion.
• Survey B starts with questions on economic anxiety and expectations, followed by the same sections as in Survey A.
• Survey C serves as the control group, presenting the sections on insecurity experiences and economic anxiety and expectations at the end of the survey.
We randomize which version individuals receive. This design allows us to measure how priming respondents to think about insecurity or economic anxiety shape their levels of discontent and democratic attitudes.
Detailed Account of Sampling, Survey Procedure, and Fieldwork
1. The Sample
1.1. Requirements for National Statistics Offices (NSOs):
- The survey must use a subsample drawn from the sample of the country’s National Household Survey, including sociodemographic characteristics and total household income. The subsample must be selected from the 2022 or 2023 wave of the National Household Survey and may include unipersonal households if they are randomly selected.
- The subsample must be representative of per capita income quintiles for the urban population, urban centers, or the country’s capital city. Survey respondents must be adults between the ages of 18 and 50, randomly selected from the household members in this age range. The random selection criteria must be verifiable (e.g., selecting the adult in the age range who most recently had a birthday).
- Participation is restricted to adults who perceive their household's socioeconomic conditions (household composition, occupations, and income) as being similar to the last time the household was contacted. This will be verified through a filter question at the beginning of the survey.
- The survey is designed to take approximately 20 minutes to complete.
- Each survey will yield around 2,500 effective observations.
1.2. Measures to Increase Response Rates:
- If the initially selected individual is unavailable, another individual from the same household in the same age range may be selected using the same randomization criteria. A maximum of two replacements is allowed. If the third randomly selected individual does not respond, the household will no longer be part of the sample.
- An individual is considered unavailable under the following circumstances: refusal to answer, absence (for in-person surveys), failure to answer the phone (in phone surveys), or health or disability conditions that prevent participation. Only one individual per household will be surveyed.
- For phone surveys, enumerators are required to make at least six contact attempts before considering an observation "lost." Contact attempts should be made at varying times of the day and on different days of the week, including weekends. An observation will only be classified as "lost" after exhaustive efforts to reach the respondent.
- A protocol will be implemented to minimize non-response rates and ensure quality data collection.
2. Fieldwork
2.1. The NSO receives the initial version of the questionnaire and adjusts it for local language usage. This is followed by a cognitive test and a pilot survey administered to a small number of households.
- The cognitive test ensures that the survey concepts are well understood across different contexts and socioeconomic backgrounds, independent of responses to the pilot survey.
- The pilot survey helps identify issues with survey flow and respondent comprehension.
2.2. Based on the findings of the cognitive test and pilot survey, the questionnaire is refined, and the official survey is launched.
2.3. Fieldwork is expected to last no longer than four weeks per country, though schedules vary based on contract start dates.
3. Current Progress
Colombia and Guatemala are currently in the field implementing the survey. Peru is set to begin in about a week. The exact start date for Ecuador remains unclear. Guatemala and Colombia are expected to complete data collection around mid-December.
|
After
We have embedded a survey experiment in a broader survey that, in three countries, is implemented on subsamples of national household surveys conducted by the National Statistics Offices (NSOs), while in four other countries it is implemented through private survey firms we contracted. The experiment involves three versions of the survey questionnaire (A, B, and C), which contain identical questions but differ in the order in which key sections are presented.
• Survey A begins with questions about insecurity experiences, followed by sections on discontent and concerns; perceptions of inequality, injustice, and discrimination; political preferences and democracy; preferences for redistribution; expressions of discontent; and self-exclusion.
• Survey B starts with questions on economic anxiety and expectations, followed by the same sections as in Survey A.
• Survey C serves as the control group, presenting the sections on insecurity experiences and economic anxiety and expectations at the end of the survey.
We randomize which version individuals receive. This design allows us to measure how priming respondents to think about insecurity or economic anxiety shape their levels of discontent and democratic attitudes.
Detailed Account of Sampling, Survey Procedure, and Fieldwork
1. The Sample
1.1. Requirements for National Statistics Offices (NSOs):
- The survey must use a subsample drawn from the sample of the country’s National Household Survey, including sociodemographic characteristics and total household income. The subsample must be selected from the 2022 or 2023 wave of the National Household Survey and may include unipersonal households if they are randomly selected.
- The subsample must be representative of per capita income quintiles for the urban population, urban centers, or the country’s capital city. Survey respondents must be adults between the ages of 18 and 50, randomly selected from the household members in this age range. The random selection criteria must be verifiable (e.g., selecting the adult in the age range who most recently had a birthday).
- Participation is restricted to adults who perceive their household's socioeconomic conditions (household composition, occupations, and income) as being similar to the last time the household was contacted. This will be verified through a filter question at the beginning of the survey.
- The survey is designed to take approximately 20 minutes to complete.
- Each survey will yield around 2,400 effective observations.
1.2 Requirements for private survey firms:
- The sample must be representative of per capita income quintiles for the urban population, urban centers, or the country’s capital city. Survey respondents must be adults between the ages of 18 and 50, randomly selected from the household members in this age range. The random selection criteria must be verifiable (e.g., selecting the adult in the age range who most recently had a birthday).
- The survey is designed to take approximately 25 minutes to complete.
- Each survey will yield around 2,400 effective observations.
1.3. Measures to Increase Response Rates:
- If the initially selected individual is unavailable, another individual from the same household in the same age range may be selected using the same randomization criteria. A maximum of two replacements is allowed. If the third randomly selected individual does not respond, the household will no longer be part of the sample.
- An individual is considered unavailable under the following circumstances: refusal to answer, absence (for in-person surveys), failure to answer the phone (in phone surveys), or health or disability conditions that prevent participation. Only one individual per household will be surveyed.
- For phone surveys, enumerators are required to make at least six contact attempts before considering an observation "lost." Contact attempts should be made at varying times of the day and on different days of the week, including weekends. An observation will only be classified as "lost" after exhaustive efforts to reach the respondent.
- A protocol will be implemented to minimize non-response rates and ensure quality data collection.
2. Fieldwork
2.1. The NSOs and firms receive the initial version of the questionnaire and adjusts it for local language usage. This is followed by a cognitive test and a pilot survey administered to a small number of households.
- The cognitive test ensures that the survey concepts are well understood across different contexts and socioeconomic backgrounds, independent of responses to the pilot survey.
- The pilot survey helps identify issues with survey flow and respondent comprehension.
2.2. Based on the findings of the cognitive test and pilot survey, the questionnaire is refined, and the official survey is launched.
2.3. Fieldwork is expected to last no longer than four weeks per country, though schedules vary based on contract start dates.
3. Current Progress
At the time of writing, data collection has been completed in Colombia, Peru, Guatemala, and Mexico. Surveys are currently being implemented in Chile, Ecuador, and Brazil, with September 30 as the approximate completion date.
|
|
Field
Planned Number of Clusters
|
Before
10000 individuals, 2500 in each country is the goal.
|
After
16,918 individuals, aprox. 2400 in each country.
Brasil: 3,371
Ecuador: 2,140
Chile: 2,500
Mexico: 2,528
Colombia: 2,590
Guatemala: 1,289
Peru: 2,500
|
|
Field
Planned Number of Observations
|
Before
10000 individuals
|
After
16,918 individuals, aprox. 2400 in each country.
|
|
Field
Sample size (or number of clusters) by treatment arms
|
Before
We expect approximately 3333.3 in each of the 3 treatments. But as it is randomized by a computer and it will also depend on phone response rates, this could vary in some degree.
|
After
We expect approximately 5,600 in each of the 3 treatments. But as it is randomized by a computer and it will also depend on phone response rates, this could vary in some degree.
|
|
Field
Power calculation: Minimum Detectable Effect Size for Main Outcomes
|
Before
We calculate the Minimum Detectable Effect (MDE) for each type of outcome variable. The MDE represents the smallest true effect size that can be detected with a specified level of power, given the study's sample size and design. We opted for this approach because we have already established a fixed sample size of N=2,500 with each National Statistical Office (NSO), rather than determining the sample size that maximizes statistical power.
Our analysis encompasses 25 outcome variables, distributed as follows:
- 14 binary variables
- 5 ordinal variables (scale: 1 to 5)
- 5 ordinal variables (scale: 0 to 10)
- 1 count variable
To accommodate this diverse set of outcomes, we calculated the MDE using each of the 4 types of outcomes. Furthermore, we simulated various potential distributions for these four types of variables, exploring different combinations of means and standard deviations. This comprehensive approach allows us to assess the study's sensitivity to detect effects across a range of plausible scenarios.
Notably, our calculations indicate that our study design has sufficient statistical power to detect even relatively small effect sizes. Our MDEs resulting from the most conservative assumptions are: for binary outcomes is 0.04, for ordinal variables (1 to 5) is 0.12, for ordinal variables (1 to 10) is 0.28, and for count variables is 0.18.
|
After
We calculate the Minimum Detectable Effect (MDE) for each type of outcome variable. The MDE represents the smallest true effect size that can be detected with a specified level of power, given the study's sample size and design. We opted for this approach because we have already established an approximate fixed sample size of N=2,400 in each country, rather than determining the sample size that maximizes statistical power.
Our analysis encompasses 25 outcome variables, distributed as follows:
- 14 binary variables
- 5 ordinal variables (scale: 1 to 5)
- 5 ordinal variables (scale: 0 to 10)
- 1 count variable
To accommodate this diverse set of outcomes, we calculated the MDE using each of the 4 types of outcomes. Furthermore, we simulated various potential distributions for these four types of variables, exploring different combinations of means and standard deviations. This comprehensive approach allows us to assess the study's sensitivity to detect effects across a range of plausible scenarios.
Notably, our calculations indicate that our study design has sufficient statistical power to detect even relatively small effect sizes. Our MDEs resulting from the most conservative assumptions are: for binary outcomes is 0.04, for ordinal variables (1 to 5) is 0.12, for ordinal variables (1 to 10) is 0.28, and for count variables is 0.18.
|
|
Field
Intervention (Hidden)
|
Before
What are the main drivers of citizen discontent in Latin America? How do economic distress and insecurity shape citizens' perceptions and legitimation of the social contract? To answer these research questions, we partnered with the National Statistics Offices (NSOs) of various countries in Latin America and the Caribbean to conduct an experimental study on subsamples of the national household surveys. This study received Institutional Review Board (IRB) or ethics committee approval from both The World Bank and Harvard University. An advance agreement with the implementation group ensures that all results can be published.
Each NSO will conduct the surveys using one of three modes: phone, hybrid, or in-person interviews. At the time of writing, significant progress has been made in Colombia, Peru, Guatemala, and Ecuador. While surveys in additional countries are under consideration, their feasibility remains uncertain. Collaboration with the NSOs is critical, as it allows us to leverage the detailed information collected in each country’s household survey.
For these subsamples, we developed a survey instrument called VOCES, designed to measure multiple aspects of respondents' lives through approximately 50 questions. The survey includes sections assessing trust, opinion contagion channels, perceptions of corruption, insecurity experiences, discontent and concerns, perceptions of inequality, injustice, and discrimination, political preferences and democracy, preferences for redistribution, expressions of discontent, self-exclusion from public services in favor of private services, and economic anxiety and expectations.
As part of the experimental design, we created three versions of the questionnaire (A, B, and C), each containing the same set of questions but differing in the order of sections:
• Survey A begins with questions on insecurity experiences, followed by sections on discontent and concerns, perceptions of inequality, injustice, and discrimination, political preferences and democracy, preferences for redistribution, expressions of discontent, and self-exclusion.
• Survey B starts with questions on economic anxiety and expectations, followed by the same sections as in Survey A.
• Survey C asks questions on insecurity experiences and economic anxiety and expectations last.
In this intervention, Survey C serves as the control group. Surveys A and B aim to prime respondents’ concerns about insecurity experiences and economic anxiety and expectations, respectively, to measure how these concerns influence levels of discontent and democratic attitudes.
Each version of the survey was randomized independently of any characteristics of the respondent, interviewer, region, or time of day. By comparing responses across the three versions, we aim to address our research questions regarding the drivers of discontent in Latin America.
We follow a complete randomization process. While we did not stratify based on any respondent covariate, the risk of imbalance in subgroup proportions is minimal given our sample size of over 2,000 observations per country (Kernan et al., 1999; Bruhn and McKenzie, 2009).
Each NSO uses different software platforms to collect and program the surveys, including tools such as MySurveySolutions and CSPro. Some platforms allow built-in randomization, ensuring that interviewers automatically receive one of the three survey versions when starting a new survey. For NSOs using less advanced software, we developed a manual randomization algorithm. This method involves storing participants’ contact information in an Excel sheet, re-ordering the table randomly, and assigning one of the three versions sequentially (A, B, C) in a repeating pattern.
Beyond the experiment, we will leverage the rich data from the NSO household surveys in each country to further characterize individuals’ socio-economic status and explore how these factors influence discontent. For instance, we are particularly interested in examining how both sociotropic and egotropic economic factors shape citizen discontent and its expressions. In Peru, we will take advantage of the availability of panel data from the household surveys to capture intertemporal variance, offering deeper insights into changes over time. Additionally, we will use this fine-grained socio-economic characterization to explore the extent to which the effects of our primes interact with socio-economic factors.
For Peru, we reordered six variables, enabling heterogeneous effects analysis for that country only. Additionally, each country has a unique question (Q38). In Peru, this question is included in our strong leader preference outcome index.
|
After
What are the main drivers of citizen discontent in Latin America? How do economic distress and insecurity shape citizens' perceptions and legitimation of the social contract? To answer these research questions, we partnered with the National Statistics Offices (NSOs) in three Latin American countries to embed the experiment in subsamples of national household surveys (for Colombia, Guatemala, and Peru), while in the remaining four countries we contracted private survey firms to implement the original surveys with a characterization module. This study received Institutional Review Board (IRB) or ethics committee approval from both The World Bank and Harvard University. An advance agreement with the implementation group ensures that all results can be published.
Each NSO and private survey firm will conduct the surveys using one of two modes: phone (in Chile, Ecuador and Brazil) or in-person interviews (for the rest). At the time of writing, data collection has been completed in Colombia, Peru, Guatemala, and Mexico. Surveys are currently being implemented in Chile, Ecuador, and Brazil. Collaboration with the NSOs is critical, as it allows us to leverage the detailed information collected in each country’s household survey. In the other four countries, private survey firms implement our original surveys, with an extra characterization module to provide comparable information.
We developed a survey instrument called VOCES, designed to measure multiple aspects of respondents' lives through approximately 50 questions. The survey includes sections assessing trust, opinion contagion channels, perceptions of corruption, insecurity experiences, discontent and concerns, perceptions of inequality, injustice, and discrimination, political preferences and democracy, preferences for redistribution, expressions of discontent, self-exclusion from public services in favor of private services, and economic anxiety and expectations.
As part of the experimental design, we created three versions of the questionnaire (A, B, and C), each containing the same set of questions but differing in the order of sections:
• Survey A begins with questions on insecurity experiences, followed by sections on discontent and concerns, perceptions of inequality, injustice, and discrimination, political preferences and democracy, preferences for redistribution, expressions of discontent, and self-exclusion.
• Survey B starts with questions on economic anxiety and expectations, followed by the same sections as in Survey A.
• Survey C asks questions on insecurity experiences and economic anxiety and expectations last.
In this intervention, Survey C serves as the control group. Surveys A and B aim to prime respondents’ concerns about insecurity experiences and economic anxiety and expectations, respectively, to measure how these concerns influence levels of discontent and democratic attitudes.
Each version of the survey was randomized independently of any characteristics of the respondent, interviewer, region, or time of day. By comparing responses across the three versions, we aim to address our research questions regarding the drivers of discontent in Latin America.
We follow a complete randomization process. While we did not stratify based on any respondent covariate, the risk of imbalance in subgroup proportions is minimal given our sample size of approximately 2,400 observations per country (Kernan et al., 1999; Bruhn and McKenzie, 2009).
Each NSO and firm uses different software platforms to collect and program the surveys, including tools such as MySurveySolutions and CSPro. Some platforms allow built-in randomization, ensuring that interviewers automatically receive one of the three survey versions when starting a new survey. For Guatemala, where its NSO is using a less advanced software, we developed a manual randomization algorithm. This method involves storing participants’ contact information in an Excel sheet, re-ordering the table randomly, and assigning one of the three versions sequentially (A, B, C) in a repeating pattern.
Beyond the experiment, we will leverage the rich data from the NSO household surveys in each country to further characterize individuals’ socio-economic status and explore how these factors influence discontent, while in the other four countries, the private survey firms administer our characterization module to capture comparable socio-economic factors. For instance, we are particularly interested in examining how both sociotropic and egotropic economic factors shape citizen discontent and its expressions. In Peru, we will take advantage of the availability of panel data from the household surveys to capture intertemporal variance, offering deeper insights into changes over time. Additionally, we will use this fine-grained socio-economic characterization to explore the extent to which the effects of our primes interact with socio-economic factors.
For Peru, México, Chile, Ecuador and Brazil, we reordered six variables, enabling heterogeneous effects analysis for those countries only. Additionally, each country has a unique question (Q38). For example, in Peru, this question is included in our strong leader preference outcome index.
|
|
Field
Secondary Outcomes (End Points)
|
Before
|
After
a. Satisfaction with government services
Q47: On a scale from 1 (Very bad) to 5 (Excellent), how would you rate the quality of the following public services?
b. Preferences for redistribution
Q42: On a scale of 1 to 10, where 1 is “poorest” and 10 is “richest,” which levels of families should receive government assistance?
Q43: On that same scale, starting from which step should families pay taxes?
|