| Abstract | |
| Survey Number | 1097 |
| Survey Title | Denounce and Self-promotion Survey Experiment - Japan Data, 2014 |
| Depositor | Collaborative Research on Political Information Transmission (Atsushi Tago, Shoko Kohama, & Kazunori Inamasu) (Former Name:Collaborative Research on Political Information Transmission (Atsushi Tago, Shoko Kohama, and Kazunori Inamasu)) |
| Restriction of Use |
For detailed information, please refer to 'For Data Users' on the SSJDA website.
- Apply to SSJDA. SSJDA's approval is required. |
| Educational Purpose | Available for both research and instructional purposes. |
| Period of Data Use Permission | One year |
| Access to Datasets | Download |
| SSJDA Data Analysis | Not available |
| Summary |
The objective of this survey, which was conducted in the format of a survey experiment, was to verify the effect of public diplomacy, a diplomatic activity that appeals to the citizens and public opinion of other countries through public relation activities and private exchanges by the government. This survey focused on public diplomacy in a verbal dispute that does not involve the use of military force. The situation given in the survey is that during a dispute between countries A and B over land and territorial waters, a "near-miss incident" took place, with two fighter planes of both countries flying dangerously close to each other. The survey verified how the reaction of other countries would change if the government of each country chose to "Remain in silence," "Criticize the other country," or "Justify its own actions." [Questionnaire design] "Countries A and B are engaged in a dispute over land and territorial waters. The conflict extends to the sky (airspace), with fighter planes of both countries repeatedly flying over the same section. As a result, a 'near-miss incident' occurred a few days ago, with two fighter planes coming very close to each other. Following this incident, the government of each country made a statement as below." After this scenario, the comments of each country are presented according to the six patterns as shown below: 1) Government of country A: No comment. Government of country B: No comment. 2) Government of country A: Our country's behavior is consistent with our regular monitoring activities and therefore justifiable. Government of country B: No comment. 3) Government of country A: Our country's behavior is consistent with our regular monitoring activities and therefore justifiable. Government of country B: Our country's behavior is consistent with our regular monitoring activities and therefore justifiable. 4) Government of country A: The behavior of country B's fighter plane was extremely dangerous and unprecedented, and it could have resulted in a serious accident. Government of country B: No comment. 5) Government of country A: The behavior of country B's fighter plane was extremely dangerous and unprecedented, and it could have resulted in a serious accident. Government of country B: Our country's behavior is consistent with our regular monitoring activities and therefore justifiable. 6) Government of country A: The behavior of country B's fighter plane was extremely dangerous and unprecedented, and it could have resulted in a serious accident. Government of country B: The behavior of country A's fighter plane was extremely dangerous and unprecedented, and it could have resulted in a serious accident. After reading these scenarios and comments, the respondent was asked about their support for countries A and B and how the information was transmitted. The questionnaire also included items that measured the trust in main governments and international institutions, demographic factors such as trust, age, gender, educational background, and household income, as well as contact with the media and political ideology. |
| Data Type | quantitative research: micro data |
| Universe |
Registered monitors of Nikkei Research, Inc. One of the multiple-choice questions of this survey said, "In this question, please choose the first option from the right," which can be used to exclude distracted respondents from the survey. A total of 156 respondents chose a different option in this question. The design of this survey allowed the analyst to decide whether to exclude these surveyees from the analysis. The data of this survey also include the time of response in each part, which makes it possible to exclude the surveyees that responded too quickly. |
| Unit of Observation | Individual |
| Sample Size | 2,059 people |
| Date of Collection |
2014-11 ~ 2014-11 2014/11/1 |
| Time Period |
2014 ~ 2014 |
| Spatial Unit | |
| Sampling Procedure | Other |
| Mode of Data Collection | Self-administered questionnaire: Web-based (CAWI) Web survey |
| Investigator |
Collaborative Research on Political Information Transmission (by Atsushi Tago, Shoko Kohama, and Kazunori Inamasu) Field survey by Nikkei Research, Inc. |
| DOI | 10.34500/SSJDA.1097 |
| Sponsors (Funds) | This survey was conducted with the support of the JSPS Grants-in-Aid for Scientific Research "Topic-Setting Program to Advance Cutting-Edge Humanities and Social Sciences Research" (Global Development Program.) |
| Related Publications (by the Investigator) | Please refer to the abstract in Japanese. |
| Related Publications (based on Secondary Analysis) | List of related publications (based on Secondary Analysis) |
| Documentation | [Questionnaire] |
| Major Survey Items |
(1) Thoughts on politics ・Views on voting ・Views on members of the National Diet (2) Scenario experiment * See also "Survey outline." ・Level of support for countries A and B ・Impressions on information transmission (feels like they are hiding something, the actions are appropriate for self-defense, and so on) ・Credibility in organizations (the federal government, the United Nations, mass media, and others) ・Concrete assumptions regarding countries A and B ・Pair of countries involved in the near-miss incident involving fighter planes (2014) [Face items] ・Birth year, gender, prefecture of residence ・Highest level of educational attainment, annual household income ・Political ideology ・Frequency of watching the news on TV ・Frequency of reading physical newspapers ・Frequency of watching the news through Internet services (electronic version of newspapers, internet portals, and aggregation websites) |
| Date of Release | 2017/07/03 |
| Topics in CESSDA |
Click here for details Conflict, security and peace International politics and organisations |
| Topics in SSJDA | International Comparison/Diplomacy |
| Version | 1 ： 2017-07-03 |
| Notes for Users |