The Strength of Instability: Voter Volatility in Slovak General Election, 2016

Electoral behavior in Slovakia is characterized by high instability. The study identifies the level of aggregated and individual volatility from a historical perspective, focusing specifically on the 2016 general election. Based on exit-poll data, it argues that the traditional mainstream parties (KDH, SDKU, which failed to surpass the 5% threshold, and also Smer-SD) have lost many of their loyal core voters. The beneficiaries of voter mobility were the new anti-system parties – above all, We Are A Family and the extreme-right People’s Party Our Slovakia (ĽSNS). The paper identifies a specific segment of the electorate – voters who abstained in 2012 but were mobilized for the more recent election. It argues that as the turnouts were about the same in 2012 and 2016, other segments of voters were mobilized in the 2016 election. The fact that a large proportion of these voters decided for the parties We Are A Family and ĽSNS means that they were effectively addressed by a protest, anti-establishment alternative. Based on exit-poll data, the study argues that the level of abstention in the 2012 general election (excluding first-time voters) was the strongest predictor of voter preference for these two parties. Moreover, the extreme-right ĽSNS has been very successful in attracting first-time voters

The Electoral Success of the Extreme Right: Is the Presence of a Minority Important?

Anti-minority rhetoric as an almost universal feature of extremeright parties is often analytically and empirically linked to their electoral success. This article tests the link between the presence of an outgroup and the vote for the extreme right in an attempt to explain the electoral success of the first openly anti-system extreme-right party to enter the Slovak parliament in 2016. A multilevel approach is used to analyse the connection between Roma presence in a municipality and extreme-right support while controlling for the individual characteristics of voters. Analysis using exit-poll data covering 161 municipalities and 20 128 voters reveals no relationship between the presence of Roma in a municipality and support for the extreme right. A partial exception seems to be observed for older voters and the university-educated, who are generally the least inclined to far-right support. Interaction effects suggest that, for these groups, Roma presence might be connected to a higher probability to cast a vote for the extreme right. However, a notably higher chance of voting for the extreme right was associated with young, male, manual labourers and people without university education

Medzi ideovou sebaidentifikáciou a expertným zaradením: metóda latentných ideových typov =Between Self-Identifi cation and Expert Evaluation of Ideological Preferences: The Method of Latent Ideological Types

The aim of this article is to present the method of latent ideological types and its possible uses. Two dominant approaches to measuring the ideological orientations of the public are self-identification and expert evaluation of attitudes and value orientations. Both approaches are also a common ingredient in international comparative research. In this article the authors first focus on the strengths and methodological weaknesses of those approaches. They then introduce their method of latent ideological types as a different approach. They present the principles of the method, the necessary sequence of steps, and conclude with its concrete application using CSES Slovakia 2010 data. The method of latent ideological types is based on subjective placements on a given set of ideological orientations or scales. The non-manifest ideological inclinations of the respondents are then determined from their attitudes and opinions. Using attitude variables, definitional patterns and cluster analysis the authors proceed from manifest ideological types to latent ideological types. The resulting latent ideological positions of the respondents may differ from their manifest self-identifications. The advantages of knowing the latent positions are discussed.19122

CESSDA SaW D3.2: Country report on development potentials

The report identifies gaps for further development of data archives services (DAS) in each country by exploring the wider ecosystem of data sharing culture, organisational setting and service operational profile. Where now the research data infrastructure is only emerging, it identifies promising candidate services

International Social Survey Programme: Religion IV - ISSP 2018

Attitudes towards religion and religious practice Topics: Assessment of personal happiness; satisfaction with relationships with family members; attitudes towards extramarital sex; attitudes towards homosexual relationships between adults; attitudes towards abortion if family has very low income; gender roles in marriage; institutional trust (parliament, business and industry, churches and religious organisations, courts and legal system, schools and educational system); attitudes towards the influence of religious leaders on voters; attitudes towards science and religion (too much trust in science and too little religious faith, more conflicts through religions than peace, intolerance of people with strong religious convictions); assessment of the power of churches and religious organisations in the country; acceptance of a person from different religion as spouse of a relative (social distance); attitudes towards freedom of expression for religious extremists in public meetings, on the Internet and in social media; doubt or firm belief in God (scale deism); past or present belief in God; belief in life after death, heaven, hell, religious miracles and supernatural powers of deceased ancestors; attitude towards a higher truth and the meaning of life (God concerns himself with human beings, people can do little to change life (fatalism), life is meaningful because God exists, life does not serve any purpose, own actions give meaning to life, own way in connecting with God without church or worship services); Opinion on gender equality in one´s own religion; religion of mother and father in the respondent´s childhood; religion the respondent raised in; frequency of church attendance by father and mother in the respondent´s childhood; personal frequency of church attendance at the age of 11-12; frequency of prayers; frequency of participation in church activities (apart from attending church services); read or listened to religious scriptures outside of church services in the last 12 months (e.g. Bible, Koran, Torah or other religious scriptures); shrine, altar or religious object (e.g. cross) in the respondent´s home; frequency of visiting a holy place (shrine, temple, church or mosque) for religious reasons; self-assessment of religiousness and spirituality; religion helps people to make friends and to gain comfort in difficult times; religions are a barrier to equality between women and men; opinion on the separation of state and religion (government should not interfere with attempts of religion to spread); opinion on the peaceful coexistence of people belonging to different religions; religion represents the past and not the future; religion is as relevant to life today as in the past; personal attitude towards different religious groups (Christians, Muslims, Hindus, Buddhists, Jews, atheists or non-believers); self-assessment of health status. Optional items (not in all countries): born-again experience; feelings about the Bible; new commitment to religion after a turning point; belief in lucky charms, fortune tellers, faith healers and horoscopes; decision criteria for personal actions (laws or religious principles); perceived threat of people belonging to different groups (Christians, Muslims, Hindus, Buddhists, Jews, non-believers); people can be trusted vs. can´t be too careful in dealing with people; belief in reincarnation and Nirvana; country’s laws should not be based on religion. Demography: sex; age; year of birth; years of full-time schooling; country specific highest completed degree of education; highest completed degree of education (derived from country specific degree) ; current or former employment status; hours worked weekly; employment relationship; supervision of other employees; number of other employees supervised; type of organisation: for-profit vs. non-profit and public vs. private; occupation (ISCO/ILO-08); main status; living in steady partnership; trade union membership; religious affiliation or denomination (country specific); groups of religious denomination (derived from country specific religion); attendance of religious services; top-bottom self-placement; vote participation in last general election; country specific party voted for in last general election; left-right scheme of party voted for in last general election (derived from country-specific parties); ethnic group 1 and 2 (country specific); household size; household composition: number of adults in the household; number of children above school entry age in the household; number of children below school age in the household; personal income (country specific); household income (country specific); legal partnership status; father´s and mother´s country of birth (migration background); place of living: urban – rural; region (country specific). Information about spouse/ partner on: current or former employment status; hours worked weekly; employment relationship; supervision of other employees; occupation (ISCO/ILO-08); main employment status. Additionally coded was: respondent-ID; case substitution flag; interview date (year, month, day); weight; mode of data-collection; country (ISO 3166, country/ Sample ISO 31666, country/ Sample Prefix ISO 3166)

International Social Survey Programme: Religion IV - ISSP 2018

Einstellungen zu Religion und religiöser Praxis Themen: Einschätzung des persönlichen Glücksgefühls; Zufriedenheit mit den Beziehungen zu Familienmitgliedern; Einstellung zu außerehelichem Geschlechtsverkehr; Einstellung zu homosexuellen Beziehungen zwischen Erwachsenen; Einstellung zur Abtreibung bei geringem Familieneinkommen; Geschlechterrollenverständnis in der Ehe; Institutionenvertrauen (Parlament, Unternehmen und Industrie, Kirche und religiöse Organisationen, Gerichte und Rechtssystem, Schulen und Bildungssystem); Einstellung zum Einfluss religiöser Führer auf Wähler; Einstellung zu Wissenschaft und Religion (zu viel Vertrauen in die Wissenschaft und zu wenig religiöser Glaube, mehr Konflikte durch Religionen als Frieden, Intoleranz von Menschen mit starken religiösen Überzeugungen); Beurteilung der Macht von Kirchen und religiösen Organisationen im Land; Akzeptanz einer Person anderen Glaubens oder mit sehr unterschiedlicher religiösen Ansichten als Ehepartner eines Verwandten (soziale Distanz); Einstellung zur Meinungsfreiheit für religiöse Extremisten bei öffentlichen Versammlungen, im Internet und in sozialen Medien; Zweifel oder fester Glaube an Gott (Skala Deismus); früherer oder derzeitiger Gottesglaube; Glaube an ein Leben nach dem Tod, Himmel, Hölle, religiöse Wunder und übernatürliche Kräfte verstorbener Vorfahren; Einstellung zu einer höheren Wahrheit und zum Sinn des Lebens (Gott kümmert sich um jeden Menschen persönlich, nur wenig persönlicher Einfluss auf das Leben möglich (Fatalismus), Leben hat nur einen Sinn aufgrund der Existenz Gottes, Leben dient keinem Zweck, eigenes Tun verleiht dem Leben Sinn, persönliche Verbindung mit Gott ohne Kirche oder Gottesdienste); Meinung zur Geschlechtergleichstellung in der eigenen Religion; Religion von Mutter und Vater in der Kindheit des Befragten; Religion, mit der der Befragte aufgewachsen ist; Kirchgangshäufigkeit des Vaters und der Mutter in der Kindheit des Befragten; persönliche Kirchgangshäufigkeit im Alter von 11 bis 12 Jahren; Häufigkeit von Gebeten; Häufigkeit der Teilnahme an kirchlichen Aktivitäten (abgesehen vom Besuch von Gottesdiensten); in den letzten 12 Monaten außerhalb des Gottesdienstes religiöse Schriften gelesen oder gehört (z.B. Bibel, Koran, Thora oder andere religiöse Schriften); Schrein, Altar oder religiöses Objekt (z.B. Kreuz) im Haushalt des Befragten; Häufigkeit des Besuchs eines heiligen Ortes (Schrein, Tempel, Kirche oder Moschee) aus religiösen Gründen; Selbsteinschätzung der Religiosität und Spiritualität; Vorteilhaftigkeit der Ausübung einer Religion um Freundschaften zu schließen und als Unterstützung in schwierigen Zeiten; Religionen als Hindernis für die Gleichstellung von Frauen und Männern; Meinung zur Trennung von Staat und Religion; Meinung zur friedlichen Koexistenz von Menschen unterschiedlicher Religionen; Religion steht für die Vergangenheit und nicht für die Zukunft; Religion ist für das Leben heute genauso relevant wie in der Vergangenheit; Einstellung gegenüber verschiedenen religiösen Gruppen (Christen, Muslime, Hindus, Buddhisten, Juden, Atheisten oder Nicht-Gläubige); Selbsteinschätzung des Gesundheitszustands. Optionale Items (nicht in allen Ländern durchgeführt): wiedergeborene Christen; Einstellung zur Bibel; Bekehrung zum Glauben nach einem Schlüsselerlebnis; Glaube an Glücksbringer, Wahrsager, Gesundbeter und Horoskope; Entscheidungskriterien für persönliches Handeln (Gesetze oder religiöse Prinzipien); wahrgenommene Bedrohung durch Angehörige verschiedener Gruppen (Christen, Muslime, Hindus, Buddhisten, Juden, Nicht-Gläubige); Personenvertrauen vs. Vorsicht im Umgang mit Menschen; die Gesetze eines Landes sollten nicht auf einer Religion basieren; Glaube an Reinkarnation und Nirvana. Demographie: Geschlecht; Alter (Geburtsjahr); Jahre der Schulbildung; Bildung (länderspezifisch); höchster Bildungsabschluss (abgeleitet vom länderspezifischen Bildungsgrad); derzeitiger oder früherer Erwerbsstatus; Wochenarbeitszeit; Arbeitsverhältnis; Vorgesetztenfunktion; Anzahl der Mitarbeiter, für die Weisungsbefugnis besteht; Art des Unternehmens: Gewinn vs. Gemeinnützigkeit bzw. öffentlich vs. privat; Beruf (ISCO/ ILO 2008); Hauptbeschäftigungsstatus; Zusammenleben mit einem Partner; Gewerkschaftsmitgliedschaft; Religionszugehörigkeit oder Konfession (länderspezifisch); Konfessionsgruppen (abgeleitet von der länderspezifischen Religion); Kirchgangshäufigkeit; subjektive Schichteinstufung (Selbsteinstufung auf einer Oben-Unten-Skala); Wahlbeteiligung bei der letzten allgemeinen Wahl und gewählte länderspezifische Partei; Einstufung der gewählten Partei auf einem Links-Rechts-Schema; ethnische Gruppenzugehörigkeit (länderspezifisch); Haushaltsgröße; Haushaltszusammensetzung: Anzahl der Erwachsenen im Haushalt; Anzahl der Kinder im Haushalt, die das Schuleintrittsalter überschritten haben; Anzahl der Kinder im Haushalt, die das Schulalter noch nicht erreicht haben; persönliches Einkommen des Befragten (länderspezifisch); Haushaltseinkommen (länderspezifisch); Familienstand; Geburtsland von Vater und Mutter (Migrationshintergrund); Urbanisierungsgrad des Wohnortes; Region (länderspezifisch). Informationen über den Ehegatten/ Partner zu folgenden Themen: derzeitiger oder früherer Erwerbsstatus, Wochenarbeitszeit, Arbeitsverhältnis, Vorgesetztenfunktion, Beruf (ISCO/ ILO 2008); Hauptbeschäftigungsstatus. Zusätzlich verkodet wurde: für einige Länder wörtliche Berufsnennungen (Befragter und Ehegatte/ Partner); Befragten-ID; Kennzeichnungsvariable für die Ersetzung von Fällen; Interviewdatum (Jahr, Monat, Tag); Gewicht; Erhebungsverfahren; Land der Datenerhebung (Ländercode ISO 3166, Ländercode/Sample ISO 3166; Ländercode Präfix ISO 3166)

International Social Survey Programme: Social Networks and Social Resources - ISSP 2017

Social relations and social network. Topics: People with selected jobs of different branches in circle of close friends, relatives and acquaintances (e.g. bus / lorry driver, senior executive of a large company, home or office cleaner, etc.); opinion on social justice (too large income differences in the country, differences in people´s standard of living should be small in fair societies, responsibility of the government to reduce income differences, social benefits cause laziness); responsibility for the provision of health care for the sick, and care for older people (government, private companies/ for-profit organisations, non-profit organisations/ charities/ cooperatives, religious organisations, family, relatives or friends); frequency of activities of groups for leisure, sports or culture, of politial parties, politicial groups or associations, and of charitable or religious organisations that do voluntary work; opinion on personal influence in government decisions; first contact person to ask for help in household or garden, in household when ill, in depression, in giving advice in family problems, in enjoying a pleasant social occasion with (close family member, more distant family member, close friend, neighbour, workmate, someone else, no one); contact person or organisation to borrow a large sum of money, to find a job with administrative problems or official paperwork, to find a place to live, to look after oneself if seriously ill (family members or close friends, other persons, private companies, public services, non-profit or religious organisations, other organisations, no person or organisation); frequency of feeling companionship lacking, of isolation from others, and of feeling left out (past four weeks); how often people try to take advantage and how often try to be fair; people can be trusted vs. can´t be too careful in dealing with people; trust in national courts and in major private companies; willingness to help (duty of adult children to look after their elderly parents, take care of yourself and your family first, before helping other people, people who are better off should help friends who are less well off); pressure from family members about the personal way of life; too many demands from family, relatives and friends; frequency of angry or upset reaction of important people in life. Social activities: frequency of going out with friends or acquaintances; frequency of making new friendships or acquaintances at these occasions; number of people in contact with on a typical weekday; frequency of face-to-face contacts with these people; frequency of contact with different relatives (parent, sibling, adult child, other family member), and close friend the respondent is most frequently in contact with; amount of contact with all family members and close friends via the internet; self-rating of general health status; frequency of impairments in the last 4 weeks (felt unhappy and depressed, felt difficulties unable to overcome); easy to accomplish own goals; life satisfaction. Optional questions: Friendship should be useful; favours should be reciprocated; frequency of domination of one person in conversations with friends; frequency of consideration who sits near whom at meetings with friends; frequency of contact with the person from home town or the region of origin most frequently in contact with; frequency of contact with the person from religious community most frequently in contact with. Demography: sex; age; year of birth; years in school; education (country specific); highest completed education level; work status; hours worked weekly; employment relationship; number of employees; supervision of employees; number of supervised employees; type of organisation: for-profit vs. non-profit and public vs. private; occupation (ISCO/ILO-08); main employment status; living in steady partnership; trade union membership; religious affiliation or denomination (country specific); groups of religious denominations; attendance of religious services; top-bottom self-placement; vote participation in last general election; country specific party voted for in last general election; party voted for (left-right); self-assessed affiliation to ethnic group 1 and 2 (country specific); number of children in the household; number of toddlers in the household; size of household; earnings of respondent (country specific); household income (country specific); father´s and mother´s country of birth; marital status; place of living: urban – rural; region (country specific). Additional obligatory background variables: difficulties to make ends meet from total houshold´s income; language skills: number of languages in how the respondent is able to hold a conversation. Information about spouse/ partner on: work status; hours worked weekly; employment relationship; supervision of employees; occupation (ISCO/ILO-08); main employment status. Supplementary optional background variable: highest completed education level of spouse/ partner. Additionally encoded: respondent-ID number; date of interview (year, month, day); case substitution flag; mode of data collection; weight; Country ISO 3166 Code, Country/Sample ISO 3166 Code, Country Prefix ISO 3166 Code