GESIS Archive
Not a member yet
7693 research outputs found
Sort by
Self-regulation in the Everyday Life of Students (SriAS) - Location Bielefeld University
No full textThe study is part of the SriAS joint project (Self-regulation in the Everyday Life of Students), funded by the Federal Ministry of Education and Research (BMBF) and conducted at the University of Bielefeld, Karlsruhe Institute of Technology, and the University of Augsburg. The joint project is part of the funding research initiative for the Quality Pact for Teaching. At the three locations, the self-regulation competence of students during the examination phase is being investigated, using the Experience Sampling Method (ESM) to study students directly in their everyday lives. This method involves participants carrying an electronic device, typically a smartphone, during the data collection period and responding to short questionnaires when prompted by alarms. In total, nine studies are being conducted using this method at the project locations.
The present study is based on data from the first of three survey periods collected at the Bielefeld site. First year Law students at a university in North Rhine-Westphalia were surveyed before, during, and shortly after their examination periods.
At the Bielefeld site, the focus of the research is primarily on the motivational aspects of self-regulated learning, particularly on the constructs of motivational action conflicts and multitasking. Motivational action conflicts arise when an individual has multiple attractive options available due to various goals (e.g., academic and leisure goals) competing for the individual´s limited resources. These conflicts typically result in performance and well-being losses, summarized as motivational interference.
In Augsburg, the emphasis is on learning strategic processes, while in Karlsruhe, research is being conducted to determine whether and how specific interventions can reduce the occurrence of procrastination in everyday life.Die Studie ist Teil des Verbundprojekts SriAS (Selbstregulation im Alltag von Studierenden), das vom Bundesministerium für Bildung und Forschung (BMBF) gefördert wird und an den Standorten Universität Bielefeld, Karlsruher Institut für Technologie und Universität Augsburg durchgeführt wird. Das Verbundprojekt ist Teil der Förderinitiative Begleitforschung zum Qualitätspakt Lehre. An den drei Standorten wird die Selbstregulationskompetenz von Studierenden in der Prüfungsphase untersucht, wobei die Methode des Experience Sampling (ESM) angewendet wird, um Studierende direkt in ihrem Alltag zu untersuchen. Diese Methode involviert die Versuchspersonen, die während der Erhebungszeit ein elektronisches Gerät, meist ein Smartphone, bei sich tragen müssen, und daraufhin aufgefordert werden, kurze Fragebögen zu beantworten, wenn sie von Alarmen benachrichtigt werden. Insgesamt werden an den Projektstandorten neun Studien unter Verwendung dieser Methode durchgeführt.
Die vorliegende Studie basiert auf den Daten des ersten von drei Erhebungszeiträumen, die am Standort Bielefeld erhoben wurden. Dabei wurden Studierende der Rechtswissenschaften an einer Universität in Nordrhein-Westfalen vor, während und kurz nach ihren Prüfungsterminen befragt.
Am Standort Bielefeld liegt der Schwerpunkt der Forschung hauptsächlich auf den motivationalen Aspekten des selbstregulierten Lernens. Dabei stehen insbesondere die Konstrukte der motivationalen Handlungskonflikte und des Multitaskings im Mittelpunkt. Motivationale Handlungskonflikte treten auf, wenn einem Individuum aufgrund mehrerer Handlungsziele (z. B. Studien- und Freizeitziele) mehrere attraktive Handlungsoptionen zur Verfügung stehen, die um die begrenzten Ressourcen des Individuums konkurrieren. Diese Konflikte gehen typischerweise mit Einbußen in Leistung und Wohlbefinden einher, die unter dem Begriff motivationale Interferenz zusammengefasst werden.
Am Standort Augsburg wird hingegen der Schwerpunkt auf lernstrategische Prozesse gelegt. In Karlsruhe wird untersucht, ob und wie spezifische Interventionen das Auftreten von Prokrastination im Alltag reduzieren können
Self-regulation in the everyday life of students (SriAS) - Location University of Augsburg
No full textThe project, funded by the Federal Ministry of Education and Research (BMBF), is a joint project involving Bielefeld University, the Karlsruhe Institute of Technology and the University of Augsburg. As part of the funding initiative accompanying research for the Quality Pact for Teaching of the Federal Ministry of Education and Research (BMBF), researchers at the three locations looked at the self-regulation skills of students in the examination phase and used the method of experience sampling to examine students directly in their everyday study life. The Augsburg site specifically investigated learning and performance emotions and emotion regulation strategies over several days before an important exam in the first semester. The aim of the study was to find out which conditions contribute to successful self-regulation during the examination phase.
The project builds on measures to promote self-regulation from projects of the „Qualitätspakt Lehre“ at Bielefeld University, the Karlsruhe Institute of Technology and the University of Ulm. The aim of the project is to investigate whether and to what extent these measures support students´ self-regulated learning. In Bielefeld, additional questions on the conditions under which motivational conflicts occur and their effects are to be clarified. In Ulm, the focus is on learning strategy processes. In Karlsruhe, the project is investigating whether and how specific interventions reduce the occurrence of procrastination in everyday life.
A total of nine studies will be conducted at the project locations. The common element of all planned studies is the use of ambulatory assessment. It allows both the recording of self-regulatory competences in real time and the targeted promotion of self-regulation through the implementation of appropriate instructions. In addition, questionnaires will be used to determine possible conditioning factors and effects of self-regulated learning.Das vom Bundesministerium für Bildung und Forschung (BMBF) geförderte Projekt ist ein Verbundprojekt mit den Standorten Universität Bielefeld, dem Karlsruher Institut für Technologie und der Universität Augsburg. Als Teil der Förderinitiative Begleitforschung zum Qualitätspakt Lehre des Bundesministeriums für Bildung und Forschung (BMBF) beschäftigten sich Forscher*innen an den drei Standorten mit den Kompetenzen zur Selbstregulation bei Studierenden in der Prüfungsphase und nutzen hierbei die Methode des Experience Sampling, um Studierende direkt in ihrem Studienalltag zu untersuchen. Der Standort Augsburg untersuchte im speziellen Lern- und Leistungsemotionen und Emotionsregulationsstrategien über mehrere Tage vor einer wichtigen Prüfung im ersten Semester. Ziel der Studie war es herauszufinden, welche Bedingungen zu einer gelingenden Selbstregulation in der Prüfungsphase beitragen.
Das Vorhaben knüpft an Maßnahmen zur Förderung der Selbstregulation aus Projekten des „Qualitätspakt Lehre“ an der Universität Bielefeld, dem Karlsruher Institut für Technologie und der Universität Ulm an. Ziel des Vorhabens ist die Untersuchung, ob und inwiefern diese Maßnahmen das selbstregulierte Lernen von Studierenden unterstützen. In Bielefeld sollen zusätzlich Fragen zu den Auftretensbedingungen und Wirkungen motivationaler Konflikte geklärt werden. In Ulm wird der Fokus auf lernstrategische Prozesse gelegt. In Karlsruhe wird untersucht, ob und wie spezifische Interventionen das Auftreten von Prokrastination im Alltag reduzieren.
Insgesamt werden an den Projektstandorten neun Studien durchgeführt. Verbindendes Element aller geplanter Studien ist die Nutzung von Ambulantem Assessment. Es erlaubt sowohl die Erfassung selbstregulativer Kompetenzen in Echtzeit als auch eine gezielte Förderung der Selbstregulation durch die Implementierung entsprechender Hinweise. Des Weiteren werden mittels Fragebogenverfahren mögliche Bedingungsfaktoren und Auswirkungen selbstregulierten Lernens erhoben
ALLBUS 2021 - Sociodemographic Standard Variables (KonsortSWD)
No full textALLBUS (GGSS - the German General Social Survey) is a biennial trend survey based on random samples of the German population. Established in 1980, its mission is to monitor attitudes, behavior, and social change in Germany. Each ALLBUS cross-sectional survey consists of one or two main question modules covering changing topics, a range of supplementary questions and a core module providing detailed demographic information. Additionally, data on the interview and the interviewers are provided as well. Key topics generally follow a 10-year replication cycle, many individual indicators and item batteries are replicated at shorter intervals. The present data set contains socio-demographic variables from the ALLBUS 2021, which were harmonized to the standards developed as part of the KonsortSWD sub-project “Harmonized Variables” (Schneider et al., 2023). While there are already established recommendations for the formulation of socio-demographic questionnaire items (e.g. the “Demographic Standards” by Hoffmeyer-Zlotnik et al., 2016), there were no such standards at the variable level. The KonsortSWD project closes this gap and establishes 32 standard variables for 19 socio-demographic characteristics contained in this dataset.Die Allgemeine Bevölkerungsumfrage der Sozialwissenschaften (ALLBUS) ist eine Trenderhebung, in der seit 1980 alle zwei Jahre eine Zufallsstichprobe der deutschen Bevölkerung befragt wird. Das primäre Ziel des Umfrageprogramms ist die Beobachtung von Einstellungen, Verhalten und sozialen Wandel in Deutschland. Jede ALLBUS-Querschnittserhebung besteht aus ein oder zwei Schwerpunktmodulen zu wechselnden Themen. Diese werden ergänzt durch weitere inhaltliche Fragen und ein Kernmodul mit detaillierten demografischen Informationen. Zudem werden Zusatzinformation zum Interview und den Interviewern bereitgestellt. Die Schwerpunktmodule folgen in der Regel einem 10-jährigen Replikationszyklus, viele Einzelindikatoren und Itembatterien werden aber auch in kürzeren Abständen repliziert.
Der vorliegende Datensatz enthält soziodemographische Variablen des ALLBUS 2021, die auf die im Rahmen des KonsortSWD-Teilprojekts „Harmonisierte Variablen“ entwickelten Standards (Schneider et al., 2023) harmonisiert wurden. Während es für die Formulierung von soziodemographischen Fragebogenitems bereits etablierte Empfehlungen gibt (z.B. die “Demographischen Standards” von Hoffmeyer-Zlotnik et al., 2024), fehlten solche Standards auf Variablenebene. Das Projekt des KonsortSWD schließt diese Lücke und etabliert 32 Standardvariablen zu 19 soziodemographischen Merkmalen, die in diesem Datensatz enthalten sind
Value Conflicts in a Differentiated Europe: The Impact of Digital Media on Value Polarisation in Europe (ValCon)
No full textThe ValCon project examines the role of digital social & news media in creating political value polarization among citizens and in promoting the rise of populism in Europe. The study was conducted by Ipsos Public Affairs. In the survey period from April to May 2021, people between the ages of 18 and 65 with internet access in 6 European countries (Germany, France, Ireland, Italy, Poland, Spain) were surveyed in online interviews (CAWI) on the following topics: social media, democratic values, political participation and alignment. The respondents were selected using a quota sample from the Ipsos Online Access Panel with the following quota characteristics: Age, sex, region, education.Social Media: frequency of use of the following sources in the last month: print newspapers, digital news outlets, TV or Radio Programs, voice/video calls, internet private messaging, You Tube, Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, other social media); hours of active use of these sources on an average day; frequency of different ways of meeting and communicating socially in the last month (face-to-face meetings, letters through regular mail, voice/ video calls, private messages on the internet, Facebook posts or comments, Twitter tweets or replies, Instagram posts or comments, other (open)); estimated number of friends on Facebook; estimated number of followers on Twitter; estimated number of accounts the respondent follows on Twitter; estimated number of followers on Instagram; estimated number of accounts the respondent follows on Instagram; frequency of how often people brought politics into the conversation in the following situations (people whom the respondent meets and visits, people with whom the respondent exchanges letters through regular mail, people whose comments the respondent encounters in digital news outlets, people with whom the respondent communicates through Voice/ Video calls, people with whom the respondent exchanges private messages on the internet, people in YouTube videos and/or comments, people whose posts or comments the respondent encounters on Facebook and Instagram, people whose tweets or replies the respondent encounters on Twitter, people the respondent encounters on other media, people with whom the respondent communicates or interacts socially on different ways); frequency of starting a political discussion in the last month in the afore mentioned situations; frequency of agreement or disagreement with the political views expressed or conveyed during last month in the different settings or situations; frequency of involvement in a political argument in different settings or situations (last month); frequency of becoming attacked for political views in different settings; reaction after being confronted with a strongly disliked political opinion in different settings or situations (did not say anything but broke contact with this person, I argued and then broke contact with this person, I argued with this person but remained in touch afterward, I ignored the comment and moved on to talk about or do other things, I tried to find common ground with this person).
Democratic Values: opinion on governing a country (should be governed by a powerful leader who does not have to bother with parliament and elections, should be governed by experts who are not elected by the population or by people elected in free and competitive elections and who are controlled by parliament and the courts); attitudes towards the following principles government in the country should be based on: judges should be appointed and reach decisions without interference from the government, when the national interest demands it, the government should be entitled to overrule the courts, people should choose their leaders in free elections, women should be treated equally to men in the labor market, lesbian, gay, transgender and bisexual people should have the same rights as the rest of the population, the government should restrict the rights of citizens belonging to ethnic, racial, or religious minorities (e.g., Roma, Jewish, Muslim), no limits to what people and the press can say in public, political parties that cross certain ideological or programmatic limits should be banned from competing in elections, the human rights of immigrants should be fully respected, the government should never stand above the law, European Union law and policy should be implemented in the country only when our national government agrees with them, one of the government’s priorities should be to redistribute wealth in the population); general trust; institutional trust (political parties, national parliament, courts, national government, European Commission, European Parliament, mainstream/ traditional media, Social media); identity (as only national, national first and then European, European first and then national, only European); agreement with different statements (many feminists just hate men, there will be no justice in the country until an elected government dares to challenge the power of economic elites, ethnic/ religious minorities and immigrants are destroying all that is good about this country, the law is too permissive with fascists in this country, the country must be prepared to fight against the enemies of private property, society must mobilize against the dominance of men in the country, the Covid-19 policies unduly violate our personal freedom, the Covid-19 pandemic is an invention by big pharmaceutical companies and the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation, the Covid-19 virus was artificially produced in a Chinese lab, people like me are being systematically neglected, whereas other groups receive more than they deserve).
Political participation and alignment: political interest; rating of the influence that people can have on how the country is governed; rating how democratic the country is today; frequency of voting in elections; voted in the last national election; political party the respondent would vote for if next week a national election took place; closeness to this party; likeliness the respondent would ever vote for selected parties; kinds of political participation during the last 12 months (contacted a politician, government or local government official, worked in a political party or action group, worked in another organization or association, worn or displayed a campaign badge/sticker, changed your profile picture on social media in support of a cause, signed a paper (non-electronic) petition, signed an electronic petition, taken part in a lawful public demonstration, boycotted certain products, donated to a group or campaign, donated to a group or campaign on the internet, encouraged others to take action about political issues, encouraged others on the internet/social media to take action about political issues, encouraged others to vote, encouraged others on the internet/social media to vote, used the internet and social media tools to organize political activities, events, protests, used the internet/social media tools to criticize a politician or a political organization, used the internet/ social media tools to criticize a particular social group).
Demography: sex; age; age groups; region; country; nationality; born in the country of interview or in another country; education: highest level of education (ISCED); education low, midium, high; main occupation in the last week; if not in paid work: last time the respondent had a paid job; respondent still lives in the household he/ she grew up in; primary source of household’s income; other sources of regular income in the household; place of living: bought property/ rented property; financial situation of the household when the respondent was 14 years old; household’s current economic and financial situation and in 10 years; living together with a partner; number of children; number of these children depending on the respondent for most of their financial needs; size of household; computer at home; frequency of use of the internet on different devices for personal use; degree of urbanization; number of friends and relatives outside the household, the respondent did have social contact with last month; agreement with the following statements (It’s not wise to tell your secrets, people see me as a natural leader, one should wait for the right time to get back at people, I’ll say anything to get what I want, people often say I’m out of control, I like to use clever manipulation to get my way, I hate being the center of attention, I enjoy getting revenge on the authorities); feelings when thinking about the current political situation in the country (anger, anxiety, hope, sadness, contempt).
Additionally coded: weight; respondent ID; date of interview (day, month, year); population density; month and year of interview.Das ValCon-Projekt untersucht, ob und wie digitale und soziale Medien die zunehmende gesellschaftliche Wertepolarisierung und den Aufstieg des Populismus in Europa fördern. Die Studie wurde von Ipsos Public Affairs durchgeführt. Im Erhebungszeitraum April bis Mai 2021 wurden Personen zwischen 18 und 65 Jahren mit Internetzugang in 6 europäischen Ländern (Deutschland, Frankreich, Irland, Italien, Polen, Spanien) in Onlineinterviews (CAWI) zu folgenden Themen befragt: Soziale Medien, demokratische Werte, politische Partizipation und Ausrichtung. Die Auswahl der Befragten erfolgte durch eine Quotenstichprobe aus dem Ipsos Online-Access-Panel mit folgenden Quotenmerkmalen: Alter, Geschlecht, Region, Bildung.Soziale Medien: Häufigkeit der Nutzung der folgenden Medienquellen im letzten Monat: gedruckte Zeitungen, digitale Nachrichten, Fernseh- oder Radioprogramme, Sprach-/Videoanrufe, private Nachrichten im Internet, YouTube, Facebook, Twitter, Instagram, andere soziale Medien); Stunden der aktiven Nutzung dieser Quellen an einem durchschnittlichen Tag; Häufigkeit der verschiedenen Arten von Treffen und sozialer Kommunikation im letzten Monat (persönliche Treffen, Briefe per Post, Sprach-/Videoanrufe, private Nachrichten im Internet, Facebook-Posts oder -Kommentare, Twitter-Tweets oder -Antworten, Instagram-Posts oder -Kommentare, andere (offen)); geschätzte Anzahl der Freunde auf Facebook; geschätzte Anzahl der Follower auf Twitter; geschätzte Anzahl der Konten, denen der Befragte auf Twitter folgt; geschätzte Anzahl der Follower auf Instagram; geschätzte Anzahl der Konten, denen der Befragte auf Instagram folgt; Häufigkeit, mit der Menschen in den folgenden Situationen Politik ins Gespräch brachten (Personen, die der Befragte trifft und besucht, Personen, mit denen er Briefe per Post austauscht, Personen, deren Kommentare er in digitalen Nachrichtenkanälen liest, Personen, mit denen er per Sprach-/Videoanruf kommuniziert, Personen, mit denen er private Nachrichten im Internet austauscht, Personen in YouTube-Videos und/oder Kommentaren, Personen, deren Beiträge oder Kommentare er auf Facebook und Instagram liest, Personen, deren Tweets oder Antworten er auf Twitter liest, Personen über die er in anderen Medien liest, Personen, mit denen er auf unterschiedliche Weise kommuniziert oder sozial interagiert); Häufigkeit des Beginns einer politischen Diskussion im letzten Monat in den vorgenannten Situationen; Häufigkeit der Zustimmung oder Ablehnung der politischen Ansichten, die im letzten Monat in den verschiedenen Umgebungen oder Situationen geäußert oder vermittelt wurden; Häufigkeit der Verwicklung in eine politische Auseinandersetzung in verschiedenen Umgebungen oder Situationen (im letzten Monat); Häufigkeit, wegen politischer Ansichten in verschiedenen Umgebungen angegriffen zu werden; Reaktion, nachdem man mit einer stark missliebigen politischen Meinung in verschiedenen Umgebungen oder Situationen konfrontiert wurde (ich habe nichts gesagt, aber den Kontakt zu dieser Person abgebrochen, ich habe mit dieser Person gestritten und dann den Kontakt abgebrochen, ich habe mit dieser Person gestritten, bin aber danach in Kontakt geblieben, ich habe die Bemerkung ignoriert und mich anderen Dingen zugewandt, ich habe versucht, eine gemeinsame Basis mit dieser Person zu finden).
Demokratische Werte: Präferenz im Hinblick auf das Regieren eines Landes (sollte von einem mächtigen Führer regiert werden, der sich nicht um das Parlament und Wahlen kümmern muss, sollte von Experten regiert werden, die nicht von der Bevölkerung gewählt werden, oder von Personen, die in freien und kompetitiven Wahlen gewählt werden und vom Parlament und den Gerichten kontrolliert werden); Einstellung zu den folgenden Grundsätzen, auf denen die Regierung des Landes beruhen sollte: Richter sollten ernannt werden und Entscheidungen ohne Einmischung der Regierung treffen, wenn das nationale Interesse es erfordert, die Regierung sollte das Recht haben, die Gerichte zu überstimmen, die Menschen sollten ihre Führer in freien Wahlen wählen, Frauen sollten auf dem Arbeitsmarkt gleich behandelt werden wie Männer, Lesben, Schwule, Transgender und Bisexuelle sollten die gleichen Rechte haben wie der Rest der Bevölkerung, die Regierung sollte die Rechte von Bürgern einschränken, die ethnischen, rassischen oder religiösen Minderheiten angehören (z. B. Roma, Juden, Muslime), keine Beschränkung der öffentlichen Meinungsäußerung von Menschen und der Presse, Verbot der Teilnahme an Wahlen für Parteien, die bestimmte ideologische oder programmatische Grenzen überschreiten, uneingeschränkte Achtung der Menschenrechte von Einwanderern, die Regierung sollte sich niemals über das Gesetz stellen, Gesetze und politische Maßnahmen der Europäischen Union sollten im Land nur dann umgesetzt werden, wenn unsere nationale Regierung damit einverstanden ist, eine der Prioritäten der Regierung sollte die Umverteilung des Wohlstands in der Bevölkerung sein); allgemeines Vertrauen; Institutionenvertrauen (politische Parteien, nationales Parlament, Gerichte, nationale Regierung, Europäische Kommission, Europäisches Parlament, mainstream/traditionelle Medien, soziale Medien); Identität (nur national, erst national und dann europäisch, erst europäisch und dann national, nur europäisch); Zustimmung zu verschiedenen Aussagen (viele Feministinnen hassen Männer, es wird keine Gerechtigkeit im Land geben, bis eine gewählte Regierung es wagt, die Macht der wirtschaftlichen Eliten herauszufordern, ethnische/ religiöse Minderheiten und Immigranten zerstören alles, was gut ist an diesem Land, das Gesetz ist zu freizügig mit Faschisten in diesem Land, das Land muss bereit sein, gegen die Feinde des Privateigentums zu kämpfen, die Gesellschaft muss sich gegen die Vorherrschaft der Männer im Land mobilisieren, die Covid-19-Politik verletzt unsere persönliche Freiheit in unzulässiger Weise, die Covid-19-Pandemie ist eine Erfindung der großen Pharmakonzerne und der Bill & Melinda Gates Stiftung, das Covid-19-Virus wurde in einem chinesischen Labor künstlich hergestellt, Menschen wie ich werden systematisch benachteiligt, während andere Gruppen mehr erhalten, als ihnen zusteht).
Politische Beteiligung und Ausrichtung: Politisches Interesse; Einschätzung des Einflusses, den die Menschen auf die Art und Weise, wie das Land regiert wird, haben können; Einschätzung, wie demokratisch das Land heute ist; Häufigkeit der Teilnahme an Wahlen; Teilnahme an der letzten nationalen Wahl; politische Partei, für die der Befragte stimmen würde, wenn nächste Woche eine nationale Wahl stattfände; Nähe zu dieser Partei; Wahrscheinlichkeit, dass der Befragte jemals für ausgewählte Parteien stimmen würde; Arten der politischen Beteiligung in den letzten 12 Monaten (Kontaktaufnahme mit einem Politiker, Regierungs- oder Kommunalbeamten, Mitarbeit in einer politischen Partei oder Aktionsgruppe, Mitarbeit in einer anderen Organisation oder Vereinigung, Tragen oder Zeigen eines Wahlkampfabzeichens/-aufklebers, Änderung des Profilbildes in den sozialen Medien zur Unterstützung einer Sache, Unterzeichnung einer Petition auf Papier (nicht elektronisch), Unterzeichnung einer elektronischen Petition, Teilnahme an einer rechtmäßigen öffentlichen Demonstration, Boykott bestimmter Produkte, Spende an eine Gruppe oder Kampagne, an eine Gruppe oder Kampagne im Internet gespendet, andere dazu ermutigt, Maßnahmen zu politischen Themen zu ergreifen, andere im Internet/sozialen Medien dazu ermutigt, Maßnahmen zu politischen Themen zu ergreifen, andere im Internet/sozialen Medien dazu ermutigt, zur Wahl zu gehen, das Internet und die sozialen Medien genutzt, um politische Aktivitäten, Veranstaltungen, Proteste zu organisieren, das Internet/soziale Medien genutzt, um einen Politiker oder eine politische Organisation zu kritisieren, das Internet/soziale Medien genutzt, um eine bestimmte gesellschaftliche Gruppe zu kritisieren).
Demografie: Geschlecht; Alter; Altersgruppen; Region; Land; Staatsangehörigkeit; im Land der Befragung oder in einem anderen Land geboren; Bildung: höchster Bildungsabschluss (ISCED); niedrige, mittlere, hohe Bildung; Hauptbeschäftigung in der letzten Woche; falls nicht erwerbstätig: letzte bezahlte Tätigkeit des Befragten; Befragter lebt noch in dem Haushalt, in dem er/sie aufgewachsen ist; Haupteinkommensquelle des Haushalts; andere regelmäßige Einkommensquellen im Haushalt; Wohnort: gekaufte/gemietete Immobilie; finanzielle Situation des Haushalts, als der Befragte 14 Jahre alt war; derzeitige wirtschaftliche und finanzielle Situation des Haushalts und in 10 Jahren; Zusammenleben mit einem Partner; Anzahl der Kinder; Anzahl dieser Kinder, die in Bezug auf den Großteil ihrer finanziellen Bedürfnisse vom Befragten abhängig sind; Haushaltsgröße; Computer zu Hause; Häufigkeit der Internetnutzung auf verschiedenen Geräten für den persönlichen Gebrauch; Urbanisierungsgrad; Anzahl der Freunde und Verwandten außerhalb des Haushalts, mit denen der Befragte im letzten Monat sozialen Kontakt hatte; Zustimmung zu den folgenden Aussagen (Es ist nicht klug, seine Geheimnisse zu verraten, die Leute sehen mich als natürlichen Anführer, man sollte den richtigen Zeitpunkt abwarten, um es anderen heimzuzahlen, ich sage alles, um zu bekommen, was ich will, die Leute sagen oft, ich sei außer Kontrolle, ich setze gerne geschickte Manipulationen ein, um meinen Willen durchzusetzen, ich hasse es, im Mittelpunkt zu stehen, ich räche mich gerne an den Behörden); Gefühle hinsichtlich der aktuellen politischen Situation im Land (Wut, Angst, Hoffnung, Traurigkeit, Verachtung).
Zusätzlich verkodet: Gewicht; Befragten ID; Datum des Interviews (Tag, Monat, Jahr); Bevölkerungsdichte; Monat und Jahr des Interviews
The ENTRA Survey: Recent Immigration Processes and Early Integration Trajectories in Germany
No full textThe main objective of the ENTRA (Recent Immigration Processes and Early Integration Trajectories in Germany) Survey was to collect data on new immigrants in Germany that capture immigration and settlement dynamics as well as integration trajectories. The study consists of a two-wave panel survey of four different immigrant groups: Italians, Poles, Syrians, and Turks. In the first wave, new immigrants were interviewed in the first years of their stay in Germany. About a year and a half later, they were interviewed a second time to track their early integration progress. During the survey period from 10.05.2019 to 31.10.2019 (Wave 1) und 20.11.2020 to 21.04.2021 (Wave 2), immigrants from Italy, Poland, Syria, and Turkey between the ages of 18 and 40 were surveyed in online interviews (CAWI), telephone interviews (CATI), and in-person interviews (CAPI) about various aspects of immigrant integration, including language skills and use, ethnic and national identities, ethnic boundaries, political participation, religious affiliation and practices, social contacts and networks, educational attainment, labor market participation, and health. Respondents were selected through a two-stage sampling procedure. In the first step, the five cities with the largest immigration flows were selected for each group based on data from migration statistics and the Central Register of Foreigners (AZR). In the second step, again separately for each immigrant group, a random sample of target individuals was drawn from the cities´ population registers. The panel study was designed as a multimodal survey conducted in the national language of each immigrant group. A total of 4,448 immigrants and refugees participated in the first wave of the survey, and longitudinal data from both panel waves are available for 3,366 cases. The additional COVID-19 survey was conducted in May/June 2020. Only a small sample of questions from the main survey was included in the questionnaire, while several questions about the COVID-19 situation were added. Unlike the first and second waves, the COVID-19 survey was conducted as an online survey only.I. Waves 1 and 2:
A. Demography: Migration Biography: date of leaving the country; date of arrival in Germany (year, month, day); lived in a refugee camp; respondent knew people in Germany before moving (from own country, from Germany or from other countries, did not know people in Germany); spent time in Germany before; first time in Germany (month and year); number of trips to Germany before moving; time spent in Germany before (in years and months); visited the country since moving/ wave 1; number of trips to the country since moving/ wave 1.
Migration motives: reasons for moving to Germany; family members the respondent joined.
Current Situation: future migration expectancies; intention to stay in Germany (in years).
Legal situation: residential status (temporary, permanent or no residence permit); kind of temporary residence permit; residence permit until year and month; work permit; applied for asylum in Germany; joined a family member whose asylum request has been accepted in Germany.
Relationship: marital status; in relationship; same partner as last survey; information on partner: age, country of origin; place of residence; year and month of arrival Germany; expect partner to move to Germany in the next twelve months.
Children: number of children; age of these children; place of residence of these children; expect children to move to Germany in the next twelve months; children six years or younger living in the household; use of public childcare (day nursery, Kindergarten, none of this).
Parents: place of birth of mother and father; place of residence; expect mother and father to move to Germany in the next twelve months.
People in household: size of household; number of household members related to the respondent by birth, marriage, partnership, or adoption; number of rooms in the household.
Relatives from the country: expect relatives to move to Germany in the next twelve months; number of relatives expected to move to Germany in the next twelve months; relatives moved to Germany since last survey; number of children that moved to Germany since last survey; number of relatives that moved to Germany since last survey; expect relatives to move to Germany in the next twelve months; expect own children, mother, father or other relatives to move to Germany in the next 12 months; number of children expected to move to Germany in the next twelve months; number of relatives expected to move to Germany in the next twelve months; schoolkids; plans on German citizenship application.
B. Language:
Speaking and understanding: country language proficiency (reading and writing); German language proficiency before moving; German language proficiency at present (understanding, speaking, reading, writing); German skills in everyday life (reading and understanding the main points in simple newspaper articles on familiar topics, speaking about familiar topics and expressing personal opinions in a conversation); learned German in school before moving to Germany; years of learning German before moving; actively tried to improve German language skills before moving; kind of investment in German language before moving (language classes, self-study, other); actively tried to improve German language skills since moving/ wave 1; investment in German language since moving/ wave 1 (integration course, language classes, self-study, other); participation in German language course or integration course; highest German language level certificate received; language certificate received for language since moving/ wave 1.
Language use: frequency of German language use with partner, children, friends and with others; frequency of German language use in media consumption.
English skills: speaking English for at least some degree; English language proficiency.
C: Identity and exclusion: belonging and experiences:
Identification and belonging: belonging to group; closeness to this group, to country people to members of own ethnic group, to inhabitants of the resident city, to Germans, to Europeans, to a religious group.
Feelings of acceptance and perceived discrimination: agreement with the following statements: in general, Germany is a welcoming country for country people, in general, country people can get ahead in Germany if they work hard; expectation to become truly German one day; importance to become truly German; rating of unfair treatment of country people in Germany; treated unfairly in Germany since moving/ wave 1; reasons for unfair treatment (born in a different country, strong accent, different religion, jobless, different cultures and traditions, foreign citizenship.
Satisfaction with migration decision and current situation:
connection felt with Germany; frequency of feeling like an outsider in Germany; rating of the current living situation compared with the living situation before leaving the country and compared to first survey; life satisfaction in Germany; how difficult/ easy is it to see a doctor in Germany, to search for a job in Germany.
Perceived compatibility of cultures and acculturation attitude:
Contact preferences for social activities; the values of Germans and country people are irreconcilable/ totally different; both the husband and wife should contribute to the household income; men should take as much responsibility as women for the home and children; On the whole, men make better political leaders than women do; when jobs are scarce, men should have more right to a job than women; a university education is more important for a boy than for a girl; approvement if a woman wants to have a child as a single parent but no stable relationship with a man; a woman has to have children in order to be fulfilled.
Politics and attitudes about democracy:
Understanding of important political issues facing the country; interest in country politics; time spent on news about politics and current affairs in country (hours and minutes); frequency of political discussions about major political issues facing the country in the last twelve months; understanding of important political issues facing Germany; political interest in German politics; time spent on news about politics and current affairs in Germany (hours and minutes); frequency of political discussions about major political issues facing Germany in the last twelve months; political party which isn’t in the German Parliament; age when country people can vote in Germany (Syrians only); preferred political party in Germany; kind of political participation in Germany since last survey; kind of political participation in the country since last survey.
D: Religion and faith:
Religious belonging: Religious affiliation; religious affiliation in detail (Christians, Muslims, other).
Religious practices before migration: frequency of attending religious worship before moving to Germany; how often pray outside of communal prayers before migration; how often fast during Ramadan, Muharrem, Lenten season before migration; how often ware a headscarf before migration.
Religious practices after migration: frequency of religious worship; how many adults speak own native language in place of religious worship; religiosity; frequency of praying outside of communal prayers; frequency of praying outside of religious worship; fasted during last Ramadan, last Muharrem, last Lenten season; frequency of wearing a headscarf outside of home.
E: Social integration: friends and contacts:
Social integration: bonding and bridging ethnic ties: time spend with country people, with Germans and with other people (frequency); frequency of eating dinner with Germans who are not part of the family in the last twelve months; number of Germans contacted via phone, chat, or text in the last four weeks; number of people outside of Germany contacted via phone, messenger chat, or text; place of living of these contacted people outside of Germany.
Social Integration: Core Network – Strong Ties:
Number of people in Germany important personal matters are discussed with; number of these people who are originally from the country of origin; information on up to three persons: country of birth; country of origin of the family; country where the respondent first met the person; educational level; main activity; how did the respondent meet this person; relationship between the mentioned people: friends; frequency of contact with these persons; person helped with challenges in everyday life.
F: Education: learning and education:
Years of education (total); years of education in the country of origin; years of education in Germany.
Education in the country of origin: highest degree of education in Poland/ Italy/ Turkey/ Syria; continued education in the country of origin after completing this degree; type of school last attended; highest degree completed in Poland/ Italy/ Turkey/ Syria (ISCED 2011); education (ISCED 1997 und 2011; type of study program last attended; reason for leaving school without degree; month and year the respondent last attended school in the country; tried to get educational degree accepted by official German institution; educational degree accepted by official German institution.
Education since leaving the country: currently in education (no language classes or integration classes); type of school; type of study program; type of vocational school; plan to complete a degree in Germany; highest degree aiming for in Germany; plan to complete vocational training in Germany; educational degree completed in Germany; highest educational degree completed in Germany; completed degree in another country; highest degree completed in this other country.
Education Partner: Years of education; highest education degree; main activity.
G: Labor market: jobs and household:
Employment situation: main activity before moving to Germany; information on last job before moving: job position; number of employees (self-employed); job title (KldB2010, ISCED-08, EGP, ISEI-08, SIOPS-08); work hours; end of job (year and month).
Last job before move: job position; permanent or fixed-term employment contract; last job before moving: public sector;
Current employment situation: currently working; current main activity if not working; ever worked in Germany before moving to Germany; time worked in Germany before moving to Germany (years and months).
Current job in Germany: job position; first job since moving; ever worked in Germany since moving/ wave 1); end (year and month) of wave 1 job (if not worked since wave 1); last job since wave 1 same as in wave 1; employment contract; work hours; end of job (year and month).
Current Job wave 2 same as in wave 1; employment contract; work hours; number of jobs since moving/ wave 1; time worked in total since moving/ wave 1 (years and months); time worked in total in Germany (years and months).
Current job wave 1/ wave 2 is a new job: job position; employment contract; working in public sector; job position if self-employed; number of employees; job title (KldB2010, ISCED-08, EGP, ISEI-08, SIOPS-08); start of job (year and month); how did the respondent find the job; work hours.
Information on employment situation of partner.
Labor market: remittance: household net income; sent money to the country of origin since moving/ wave 1; sent money for personal savings, to family, to friends; received money from relatives or friends living in the country of origin since moving to Germany/wave 1.
H: Health: personality and well-being:
Health: resilience: I tend to bounce back quicky after hard times; it does not take me long to revocer from a stressful event; I often set a goal but later choose to pursue a different one, I have difficulty maintaining my focus on projects that take more than a few months to complete; I have been obsessed with a certain idea or project for a short time but later lost interest; I finish what ever I begin; I am diligent; I am a hard worker.
Health: self-rated health; loneliness and perceived social isolation: I experience a general sense von emptiness; there are many people I can trust completely; there are plenty of people I can rely on when I have problems; there are enough people I feel close to; I miss having people around; I often feel rejected.
Mental health: mental condition in the past twelve months: frequency of feeling nervous, hopeless, restless or fidgety, depressed, that everything was an effort, worthless; trauma: ever witnesses or feared a situation of serious violence (someone else, self); relative or friend died violently.
Reasons for leaving Germany; reasons why others recognize foreign roots; skin color (tone); relatives moved to Germany since last survey; religiosity; religious affiliation; religious affiliation in detail: Christians, Muslims, other); residence permit until month and year; resident status of sample population; residential status; residential status (detailed); same day as arrival, same partner as last survey.
Self-assed likelihood of problems in the next twelve months (children problems at school, drastically lowered standard of living, loose apartment, loose job, no longer support for relatives/ friends in the country of origin, payment difficulties).
Demography: sex; age; country of birth; country of growing up; citizenship; native language; region and province the respondent grew up (NUTS2-2016 Italy, NUTS3-2016 Italy, NUTS 2-2016 Poland, NUTS3-2016 Poland, region Syria (semi NUTS1, NUTS2-2016 Turkey, NUTS3-2016 Turkey); origin of partner.
II. COVID-19 survey
A: Basic and remigration: country of residence; remigration due to the coronavirus pandemic; plan to return to Germany when the situation allows; children who usually go to school.
B: COVID-19:
Hardship: likeliness of: lose job, run into payment difficulties, drastically lower standard of living, lose the apartment, won’t be able to support relatives or friends anymore, children will get problems at school; experiences like lost job or ran into payment difficulties are related to the coronavirus pandemic.
Burden: experience of the following during the coronavirus pandemic: problems finding/ understanding information about the coronavirus pandemic and behavioral guidelines, having COVID-19 symptoms, COVID-19 symptoms in family members or friends, being at increased risk for an infection, problems with access to healthcare, mediation, or sanitation, being unable to pursue private travel plans, feeling restricted to leave home, being unable to visit sick family members or friends, problems with childcare of home schooling, tensions at home or family conflict; rating how burdensome this was.
C: Social integration:
Social integration: Bonding and Bridging ethnic ties: daily life experiences under measures to combat the coronavirus: frequencies of spending time with people from the country, with Germans, and with people who are neither from the country nor from Germany; number of people outside of Germany the respondent has a conversation with; where to most of these people live.
D: Language:
Language use: frequency of speaking German with friends, with other people in everyday life; frequency of media consumption in German language.
Language: German skills: rating of German skills at present (understanding, speaking, reading, writing).
E: identity and exclusion:
Identity: voluntary activities during the coronavirus pandemic; received any help from volunteers.
Identification and belonging: closeness to the inhabitants of the city, to Germans, to country people, and to Europeans.
F: Religion:
Religious practices: religiosity; frequency of praying outside of communal prayers and outside of religious worship.
G: Labor market:
Changes in employment situation due to COVID19: current main activity; employment situation has changed due to the coronavirus pandemic (lost my job, quitted my job); concrete changes of the employment situation; change of working hours due to the coronavirus pandemic.
H: Health and personality:
Self-rated health; loneliness and perceived social isolation: general sense of emptiness; plenty people I can rely on when I have problems; many people I can trust completely; enough people I feel close to; I miss having people around; I often feel rejected.
Mental health: mental condition during the past month: frequency of feeling nervous, hopeless, restless or fidgety, depressed, that everything was an effort, worthless.
COVID-19 - affected: ever tested positive for the coronavirus; member of household or family ever tested positive for the coronavirus; household member or family member with a positive test.
Demography: sex; age; household size.
Additionally coded were: respondent ID; interviewer ID; wave; group country of origin; mode of interview; recruitment batch (wave 1); date of interview; date and time of interview; interview duration; other people present while survey; interference of others during the interview; participation in wave 2; percentage of Balkan households, of Eastern European households, of ethnic German resettlers households, of German households, of Greek households, Hispanic, Portuguese/ Latino households, at municipality level, postcode level, and postcode8 level; percentage of households with a Hauptschulabschluss, with a Realschulabschluss, with Abitur, with Fachhochschulabschluss, with no/ other school qualification , at municipality level, postcode level, and postcode8 level; percentage of Italian household, of non-European Islamic households, of other country-specific households, of South/East/Southeast Asian households, of sub-Saharan African households, of Turkish households, at different municipality level, postcode level, and postcode8 level); percentage of unemployment at municipality level, postcode level, and postcode8 level; percentage of foreigners at municipality level, postcode level, postcode8 level, and at street segment level; socio-economic status distribution at municipality level, postcode level, postcode8 level, and at street segment level; family structures at street segment level (ordinal); time to complete the interview; duration of stay (months); resident status of sample population; immigration date: month and year of leaving the country; same day as arrival; land, house, or apartment in the country of origin; owner or investor of store or business in the country; gave money for collective projects in the country;
knowledge of other people who participated in the survey; number of household members that also participated in the survey; Digit-Symbol-Test – correct items (score); Digit-Symbol-Test – No. of items processed.Hauptziel des ENTRA (Recent Immigration Processes and Early Integration Trajectories in Germany) Surveys war die Erhebung von Daten über Neuzuwanderer in Deutschland, die die Zuwanderungs- und Ansiedlungsdynamik sowie die Integrationsverläufe erfassen. Die Studie besteht aus einer zweiwelligen Panelbefragung von vier verschiedenen Zuwanderergruppen: Italiener, Polen, Syrer und Türken. In der ersten Welle wurden die Neuzuwanderer in den ersten Jahren ihres Aufenthalts in Deutschland befragt. Etwa eineinhalb Jahre später wurden sie ein zweites Mal befragt, um ihren frühen Integrationsverlauf zu verfolgen. Im Befragungszeitraum vom 10.05.2019 bis 31.10.2019 (Welle 1) und 20.11.2020 bis 21.04. 2021 (Welle 2) wurden Zuwanderer aus Italien, Polen, Syrien und der Türkei im Alter zwischen 18 und 40 Jahren in Online-Interviews (CAWI), Telefoninterviews (CATI) und persönlichen Interviews (CAPI) zu verschiedenen Aspekten der Integration von Zuwanderern befragt, darunter Sprachkenntnisse und -gebrauch, ethnische und nationale
System of Social Indicators for the Federal Republic of Germany: Housing
No full textThe system of social indicators for the Federal Republic of Germany - developed in its original version as part of the SPES project under the direction of Wolfgang Zapf - provides quantitative information on levels, distributions and changes in quality of life, social progress and social change in Germany from 1950 to 2013, i.e. over a period of more than sixty years. With the approximately 400 objective and subjective indicators that the indicator system comprises in total, it claims to measure welfare and quality of life in Germany in a differentiated way across various areas of life and to monitor them over time. In addition to the indicators for 13 areas of life, including income, education and health, a selection of cross-cutting global welfare measures were also included in the indicator system, i.e. general welfare indicators such as life satisfaction, social isolation or the Human Development Index. Based on available data from official statistics and survey data, time series were compiled for all indicators, ideally with annual values from 1950 to 2013. Around 90 of the indicators were marked as "key indicators" in order to highlight central dimensions of welfare and quality of life across the various areas of life. The further development and expansion, regular maintenance and updating as well as the provision of the data of the system of social indicators for the Federal Republic of Germany have been among the tasks of the Center for Social Indicator Research, which is based at GESIS, since 1987. For a detailed description of the system of social indicators for the Federal Republic of Germany, see the study description under "Other documents".Level of housing supply: Dwelling per household; Vacancy rate; Living space per person; Living space per person.
Quality of housing facilities: Dwellings without standard furnishings; Dwellings without standard amenities (SOEP).
Quality of living environment: Noisy dwellings. Cost of housing provision: Average rent burden; Households with high rent burden. Home ownership: Households in home ownership. Inequality in home ownership: Home ownership of self-employed and employees in comparison; Comparison of home ownership by blue-collar and white-collar workers. Subjective assessment of housing conditions; Housing satisfaction.Das System sozialer Indikatoren für die Bundesrepublik Deutschland – in seiner ursprünglichen Version im Rahmen des SPES-Projekts unter der Leitung von Wolfgang Zapf entwickelt – bietet quantitative Informationen zu Niveaus, Verteilungen und Veränderungen der Lebensqualität, gesellschaftlichen Fortschritt und sozialen Wandel in Deutschland von 1950 bis 2013, also über einen Zeitraum von mehr als sechzig Jahren. Mit den ca. 400 objektiven und subjektiven Indikatoren, die das Indikatorensystem insgesamt umfasst, wird beansprucht, Wohlfahrt und Lebensqualität in Deutschland über verschiedene Lebensbereiche hinweg differenziert zu messen und im Zeitverlauf zu beobachten. Neben den Indikatoren für 13 Lebensbereiche, u.a. Einkommen, Bildung und Gesundheit, wurde zudem eine Auswahl von bereichsübergreifenden globalen Wohlfahrtsmaßen in das Indikatorensystem einbezogen, d.h. allgemeine Wohlfahrtsindikatoren, wie z.B. die Lebenszufriedenheit, soziale Isolierung oder der Human Development Index. Basierend auf verfügbaren Daten der amtlichen Statistik und Umfragedaten wurden für sämtliche Indikatoren Zeitreihen zusammengestellt, im Idealfall mit jährlichen Werten von 1950 bis 2013. Von den Indikatoren wurden ca. 90 als “Schlüsselindikatoren” markiert, um zentrale Dimensionen von Wohlfahrt und Lebensqualität über die verschiedenen Lebensbereiche hinweg hervorzuheben. Die Weiterentwicklung und Erweiterung, die regelmäßige Pflege und Aktualisierung sowie die Bereitstellung der Daten des Systems sozialer Indikatoren für die Bundesrepublik Deutschland gehörte seit 1987 zu den Aufgaben des bei GESIS angesiedelten Zentrums für Sozialindikatorenforschung. Für eine ausführliche Darstellung des Systems sozialer Indikatoren für die Bundesrepublik Deutschland vgl. die Studienbeschreibung unter „Andere Dokumente“.Die Daten zu dem Lebensbereich ‚Wohnung‘ setzen sich wie folgt zusammen:
Versorgungsniveau mit Wohnraum: Wohnung pro Haushalt, Leerwohnungsziffer, Wohnraum pro Person, Wohnfläche pro Person. Qualität der Wohnungsausstattung: Wohnungen ohne Standardausstattung, Wohnungen ohne Standardausstattung (SOEP). Qualität der Wohnumwelt: Lärmbelastete Wohnungen. Kosten der Wohnungsversorgung: Durchschnittliche Mietbelastung, Haushalte mit hoher Mietbelastung. Wohnungseigentum: Haushalte im Wohneigentum. Ungleichheit beim Wohnungseigentum: Wohnungseigentum von Selbständigen und Arbeitern im Vergleich, Wohnungseigentum von Arbeitern und Angestellten im Vergleich. Subjektive Bewertung der Wohnbedingungen: Wohnzufriedenheit
Social Cohesion Radar 2023 - Germany
No full textThe study on social cohesion in Germany was conducted by pollytix strategic research on behalf of the Bertelsmann Stiftung. During the survey period from October 4 to 17, 2023, 5,055 people aged 16 and over were surveyed nationwide in online interviews (CAWI) on the following topics: media use and media trust, social cohesion, dealing with disinformation, combating disinformation. The respondents were selected using a quota sample from an online access panel from Bilendi & respondi. The data was collected on a quota basis according to age, gender, federal state and education. The study is part of the Radar project, which has been investigating various aspects of social cohesion both nationally and internationally since 2013.1. Media use and media confidence: Knowledge of different social media (e.g. Facebook, Instagram, etc.), frequency of use of these social media; media confidence.
2. Social relationships: Connectedness with the neighborhood, place of residence, region and state; size of circle of friends and acquaintances; frequency of meetings with friends, acquaintances or privately with work colleagues; help from friends in case of difficulties; financial support from friends or acquaintances in an emergency.
Trust in fellow human beings and institutions: general trust in people; trust in strangers; trust in institutions (political parties, courts, police, federal government, Bundestag, public broadcasting (ARD, ZDF), daily newspapers, social media, science); sense of justice (e.g. social differences in the country are fair, pay according to performance, etc.).
3. Orientation towards the common good:
Solidarity and willingness to help: monetary donation to social or charitable causes in the last 12 months; frequency of volunteering.
Social participation: Type of political involvement in the last twelve months (e.g. participation in a demonstration or collection of signatures for political causes, etc.); membership in a non-profit association or organization.
Tolerance and diversity: Life in Germany threatened vs. enriched by increasing diversity; acceptance of diversity in the neighborhood (people with a completely different lifestyle, people with a different religion, foreigners/migrants, homosexuals and people with different political opinions); feeling of safety in the neighborhood; feeling of safety at night in the neighborhood; various problems in the neighborhood (e.g. dog excrement on the street, parking offenders, etc.).
4. Dealing with disinformation: uncertainty with regard to the truthfulness of information on the internet; knowledge of the term disinformation; assessment of disinformation (e.g. manipulated content (deep fakes), statements taken out of context, etc.); frequency of perception of deliberately disseminated false information on the internet; source of perceived disinformation; frequency of perception of disinformation in various social media; frequency of disinformation via messenger or text message by people in the community; topics of perceived disinformation on the internet; frequency of dissemination of disinformation on the internet by various actors (politicians and parties in Germany, media and journalists in Germany, bloggers and influencers, foreign governments, foreign media and journalists, protest groups and activists, individuals, commercial enterprises, federal government); reasons for the dissemination of disinformation on the internet ( e.g. to weaken trust in politics and democracy, etc.); disinformation with the aim of influencing political opinions more frequently by actors from the political right, actors from the political left or both to the same extent; disinformation in Germany more frequently by actors from Germany, actors from abroad or both to the same extent; assessment of the risk of influencing opinions through disinformation (self and others); perception of disinformation on the Internet as a problem for society; extent of attention paid to the topic of disinformation on the Internet; concerns regarding disinformation in Germany (e.g. trust in politics and democracy declining, credibility of the media declining, society becoming divided, etc.); personal approach to disinformation); personal handling of disinformation (accidentally liking or spreading false information on the Internet, reporting a post or account on social media containing disinformation, alerting someone to the spread of false information with a comment or message, actively researching whether a message is true, deliberately liking or spreading false information on the Internet, asking the sender of the message about the source and truthfulness of dubious messages, using the services of a fact-checking organization).
5. Combating disinformation: importance of different actors in combating disinformation (platforms, politics in Germany, European Union, media, citizens, schools and other educational institutions); actors most likely to be obliged to combat disinformation; most competent actor in combating disinformation; evaluation of proposals on how to prevent the spread of disinformation on the Internet (deletion of demonstrably false claims, correction of demonstrably false claims, etc.); opinion on disinformation (citizens should only have access to correct information and be protected from disinformation vs. ); opinion on disinformation (citizens should only have access to correct information on the internet and be protected from disinformation vs. citizens have a right to freedom of expression, even if disinformation remains on the internet; disinformation is a real problem and poses a threat to social cohesion and democracy vs. disinformation is just a term used to denigrate alternative opinions and portray them as untrustworthy; priority of freedom of expression vs. protection of citizens from disinformation on various topics (corona, war in Ukraine, immigration/refugee, climate change/ natural disasters, elections); agreement with various demands to politicians in Germany regarding disinformation (existing regulations for platform operators should be enforced more consistently and violations should be punished more severely, police and judiciary should be given more staff to take action against disinformation and hate on the Internet, fact-checking organizations should receive more money, media literacy of all citizens should be promoted, an independent, non-governmental institution should be founded to deal with the issue).
Demography: sex; age (years and age groups); net household income, highest school-leaving qualification; employment; interest in politics; left-right scale; probability of own participation in the next elections; party preference (Sunday question); voting behavior in the last federal election; children under 18 in the household; university degree; born in Germany; parents immigrated to Germany (migration background).
Additionally coded were: Respondent ID; interview date; weighting factor; federal state; district or district-free city; settlement structure.Die Studie über gesellschaftlichen Zusammenhalt in Deutschland wurde von pollytix strategic research im Auftrag der Bertelsmann Stiftung durchgeführt. Im Erhebungszeitraum 4. bis 17. Oktober 2023 wurden bundesweit 5.055 Personen ab 16 Jahren in Onlineinterviews (CAWI) zu folgenden Themen befragt: Mediennutzung und Medienvertrauen, gesellschaftlicher Zusammenhalt, Umgang mit Desinformation, Bekämpfung von Desinformation. Die Auswahl der Befragten erfolgte durch eine Quotenstichprobe aus einem Online-Access-Panel von Bilendi & respondi. Die Datenerhebung erfolgte quotiert nach Alter, Geschlecht, Bundesland und Bildung. Die Studie ist Bestandteil des Projektes Radar, das seit 2013 national und international verschiedene Aspekte des gesellschaftlichen Zusammenhaltes untersucht.1. Mediennutzung und Medienvertrauen: Kenntnis verschiedener sozialer Medien (z.B. Facebook, Instagram, etc.), Nutzungshäufigkeit dieser sozialen Medien; Medienvertrauen.
2. Soziale Beziehungen: Verbundenheit mit der Nachbarschaft, dem Wohnort, der Region und dem Bundesland; Größe des Freundes- und Bekanntenkreises; Häufigkeit von Treffen mit Freunden, Bekannten oder privat mit Arbeitskollegen; bei Schwierigkeiten Hilfe von Freunden; im Notfall finanzielle Unterstützung durch Freunde oder Bekannte.
Vertrauen in Mitmenschen und Institutionen: allgemeines Personenvertrauen; Vertrauen in Fremde; Institutionenvertrauen (politische Parteien, Gerichte, Polizei, Bundesregierung, Bundestag, öffentlich-rechtlicher Rundfunk (ARD, ZDF), Tageszeitungen, Soziale Medien, Wissenschaft); Gerechtigkeitsempfinden (z.B. soziale Unterschiede im Land sind gerecht, Vergütung entsprechend der Leistung, etc.).
3. Gemeinwohlorientierung:
Solidarität und Hilfsbereitschaft: Geldspende für soziale oder gemeinnützige Zwecke in den letzten 12 Monaten; Häufigkeit von ehrenamtlichem Engagement.
Gesellschaftliche Teilhabe: Art des politischen Engagements in den letzten zwölf Monaten (z.B. Beteiligung an einer Demonstration bzw. Unterschriftensammlung für politische Zwecke, etc.); Mitgliedschaft in einem gemeinnützigen Verein oder einer gemeinnützigen Organisation.
Toleranz und Vielfalt: Leben in Deutschland durch zunehmende Vielfalt bedroht vs. bereichert; Akzeptanz von Diversität in der Nachbarschaft (Menschen mit einem ganz anderen Lebensstil, Menschen mit anderer Religion, Ausländer/ Migranten, Homosexuelle und Menschen mit anderer politischer Meinung); Sicherheitsgefühl in der Nachbarschaft; Sicherheitsgefühl nachts in der Umgebung; verschiedene Probleme in der Nachbarschaft (z.B. Hundekot auf der Straße, Falschparker, etc.).
4. Umgang mit Desinformation: Unsicherheit in Bezug auf den Wahrheitsgehalt von Informationen im Internet; Kenntnis des Begriffs Desinformation; Einschätzung von Desinformation (z.B. manipulierte Inhalte (Deep Fakes), aus dem Kontext gerissene Aussagen, etc.); Häufigkeit der Wahrnehmung von absichtlich verbreiteten falschen Informationen im Internet; Quelle wahrgenommener Desinformation; Häufigkeit der Wahrnehmung von Desinformationen in verschiedenen Sozialen Medien; Häufigkeit von Desinformationen per Messenger oder SMS durch Personen aus dem Umfeld; Themen der wahrgenommenen Desinformation im Internet; Häufigkeit der Verbreitung von Desinformationen im Internet durch verschiedene Akteure (Politiker und Parteien in Deutschland, Medien und Journalisten in Deutschland, Blogger und Influencer, ausländische Regierungen, ausländische Medien und Journalisten, Protestgruppen und Aktivisten, Einzelpersonen, Wirtschaftsunternehmen, Bundesregierung); Gründe für die Verbreitung von Desinformationen im Internet (z.B. um das Vertrauen in Politik und Demokratie zu schwächen, etc.); Desinformationen mit dem Ziel, politische Meinungen zu beeinflussen häufiger von Akteuren aus dem politisch rechten Spektrum, Akteuren aus dem politisch linken Spektrum oder von beiden im gleichen Maße; Desinformationen in Deutschland häufiger von Akteuren aus Deutschland, Akteuren aus dem Ausland oder von beiden im gleichen Maße; Einschätzung des Risikos der Meinungsbeeinflussung durch Desinformation (selbst und andere); Wahrnehmung von Desinformation im Internet als Problem für die Gesellschaft; Ausmaß der Aufmerksamkeit für das Thema Desinformation im Internet; Sorgen in Bezug auf Desinformation in Deutschland (z.B. Vertrauen in Politik und Demokratie sinkt, Glaubwürdigkeit der Medien sinkt, Gesellschaft wird gespalten, etc.); persönlicher Umgang mit Desinformationen (versehentlich falsche Informationen im Internet geliked oder weiterverbreitet, einen Beitrag oder Account in den Sozialen Medien mit Desinformationen gemeldet, jemanden mit einem Kommentar oder einer Nachricht auf die Verbreitung von falschen Informationen aufmerksam gemacht, aktiv recherchiert ob eine Nachricht der Wahrheit entspricht, absichtlich falsche Informationen im Internet geliked oder weiterverbreitet, bei zweifelhaften Nachrichten den Absender der Nachricht nach der Quelle und dem Wahrheitsgehalt gefragt, Angebot einer Fact-Checking-Organisation genutzt).
5. Bekämpfung von Desinformation: Wichtigkeit verschiedener Akteure zur Bekämpfung von Desinformation (Plattformen, Politik in Deutschland, Europäische Union, Medien, Bürger, Schulen und andere Bildungseinrichtungen); Akteure, die am ehesten zur Bekämpfung von Desinformation verpflichtet sind; kompetentester Akteur zur Bekämpfung von Desinformation; Bewertung von Vorschlägen wie die Verbreitung von Desinformation im Internet verhindert werden könnte (Löschen von nachweislich falschen Behauptungen, Richtigstellen von nachweislich falschen Behauptungen, etc.); Meinung zu Desinformation (Bürger sollten im Internet nur Zugang zu korrekten Informationen haben und vor Desinformationen geschützt werden vs. Bürger haben ein Recht auf Meinungsfreiheit, auch wenn dafür Desinformationen im Internet stehen bleiben; Desinformation ist ein reales Problem und stellt eine Gefahr für den gesellschaftlichen Zusammenhalt und die Demokratie dar vs. Desinformation ist nur ein Begriff, der genutzt wird, um alternative Meinungen schlecht zu machen und als unglaubwürdig darzustellen; Vorrang von Meinungsfreiheit vs. Schutz der Bürger vor Desinformation bei verschiedenen Themen (Corona, Krieg in der Ukraine, Einwanderung/ Flucht, Klimawandel/ Naturkatastrophen, Wahlen); Zustimmung zu verschiedenen Forderungen an die Politik in Deutschland bezüglich Desinformationen (bestehende Vorschriften für Plattform-Betreiber sollten konsequenter durchgesetzt werden und Verstöße stärker bestraft werden, Polizei und Justiz sollten mehr Personal bekommen, um gegen Desinformation und Hass im Internet vorzugehen, Fact-Checking-Organisationen sollten mehr Geld bekommen, Medienkompetenz aller Bürger sollte gefördert werden, es sollte eine unabhängige, staatsferne Einrichtung gegründet werden, die sich dem Thema widmet).
Demographie: Geschlecht; Alter (Jahre und Altersgruppen); Haushaltsnettoeinkommen, höchster Schulabschluss; Erwerbstätigkeit; Politikinteresse; Links-Rechts-Skala; Wahrscheinlichkeit der eigenen Beteiligung an den nächsten Wahlen; Parteipräferenz (Sonntagsfrage); Wahlverhalten bei der letzten Bundestagswahl; Kinder unter 18 Jahren im Haushalt; Hochschulabschluss; in Deutschland geboren; Eltern sind nach Deutschland eingewandert (Migrationshintergrund).
Zusätzlich verkodet wurde: Befragten-ID; Interviewdatum; Gewichtungsfaktor; Bundesland; Landkreis bzw. kreisfreie Stadt; Siedlungsstruktur
SDCCP 1 - Survey Design and Quality During the Covid-19 Pandemic
No full textThe data set "SDCCP 1 - Survey Design and Quality During the Covid-19 Pandemic" was generated by the project entitled "Survey Data Collection and the Covid-19 Pandemic" (SDCCP). The aim of the project was to describe the survey design and data quality of surveys conducted in Germany in the context the Covid-19 pandemic. The data set "SDCCP 1 - Survey Design and Quality During the Covid-19 Pandemic" contains rich metadata and information about survey design and quality aspects for social and behavioral science surveys that were conducted in Germany in the first two years of the Covid-19 pandemic (March 2020 to December 2021).The data set "SDCCP 1 - Survey Design and Quality During the Covid-19 Pandemic" was generated by the project entitled "Survey Data Collection and the Covid-19 Pandemic" (SDCCP). The aim of the project was to describe the survey design and data quality of surveys conducted in Germany in the context the Covid-19 pandemic. The data set "SDCCP 1 - Survey Design and Quality During the Covid-19 Pandemic" contains rich metadata and information about survey design and quality aspects for social and behavioral science surveys that were conducted in Germany in the first two years of the Covid-19 pandemic (March 2020 to December 2021)