IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/nbr/nberwo/29686.html
   My bibliography  Save this paper

Eliciting People's First-Order Concerns: Text Analysis of Open-Ended Survey Questions

Author

Listed:
  • Beatrice Ferrario
  • Stefanie Stantcheva

Abstract

This paper illustrates the design and use of open-ended survey questions as a way of eliciting people's first-order concerns on policies. Multiple choice questions are the backbone of most surveys, but they may prime respondents to select answer options that they would not naturally have thought about, and they may omit relevant options. Open-ended questions that do not constrain respondents with specific answer choices are a valuable tool for eliciting first-order thinking. We discuss three text analysis methods to analyze open-ended questions' answers. To illustrate how to apply these methods, we provide evidence from large-scale surveys on income and estate taxation. We show the that key concerns relate mostly to distribution issues, fairness, and government, rather than to efficiency concerns. There are large partisan gaps in the first-order concerns on policies.

Suggested Citation

  • Beatrice Ferrario & Stefanie Stantcheva, 2022. "Eliciting People's First-Order Concerns: Text Analysis of Open-Ended Survey Questions," NBER Working Papers 29686, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    • Handle: RePEc:nbr:nberwo:29686
    Note: EFG LS PE POL
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.nber.org/papers/w29686.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    Other versions of this item:

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Stefanie Stantcheva, 2021. "Understanding Tax Policy: How do People Reason?," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 136(4), pages 2309-2369.
    2. Matthew Gentzkow & Jesse M. Shapiro, 2010. "What Drives Media Slant? Evidence From U.S. Daily Newspapers," Econometrica, Econometric Society, vol. 78(1), pages 35-71, January.
    3. Margaret E. Roberts & Brandon M. Stewart & Dustin Tingley & Christopher Lucas & Jetson Leder‐Luis & Shana Kushner Gadarian & Bethany Albertson & David G. Rand, 2014. "Structural Topic Models for Open‐Ended Survey Responses," American Journal of Political Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 58(4), pages 1064-1082, October.
    4. Scott Deerwester & Susan T. Dumais & George W. Furnas & Thomas K. Landauer & Richard Harshman, 1990. "Indexing by latent semantic analysis," Journal of the American Society for Information Science, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 41(6), pages 391-407, September.
    5. Margaret Roberts & Brandon Stewart & Tingley, Dustin & Edoardo Airoldi, 2013. "The structural topic model and applied social science," Working Paper 132666, Harvard University OpenScholar.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Demgensky, Lisa & Fritsche, Ulrich, 2023. "Narratives on the causes of inflation in Germany: First results of a pilot study," WiSo-HH Working Paper Series 77, University of Hamburg, Faculty of Business, Economics and Social Sciences, WISO Research Laboratory.
    2. Sebastian Link & Andreas Peichl & Christopher Roth & Johannes Wohlfart, 2023. "Attention to the Macroeconomy," ECONtribute Discussion Papers Series 256, University of Bonn and University of Cologne, Germany.
    3. An, Zidong & Binder, Carola & Sheng, Xuguang Simon, 2023. "Gas price expectations of Chinese households," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 120(C).
    4. Jordi Brandts & Francesc Trillas, 2024. "Opposing Views on Public Ownership and Their Influence on Citizens’ Attitudes," Working Papers 1453, Barcelona School of Economics.
    5. Gabriella Conti & Michele Giannola & Alessandro Toppeta, 2022. "Parental Beliefs, Perceived Health Risks, and Time Investment in Children: Evidence from COVID-19," Working Papers 2022-045, Human Capital and Economic Opportunity Working Group.
    6. Tobias Wekhof & Sébastien Houde, 2023. "Using narratives to infer preferences in understanding the energy efficiency gap," Nature Energy, Nature, vol. 8(9), pages 965-977, September.
    7. Quentin Lippmann & Khushboo Surana, 2022. "The Hierarchy of Partner Preferences," Discussion Papers 22/08, Department of Economics, University of York.
    8. Filippini, Massimo & Leippold, Markus & Wekhof, Tobias, 2024. "Sustainable finance literacy and the determinants of sustainable investing," Journal of Banking & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 163(C).
    9. Jiang, Lingqing & Zhu, Zhen, 2022. "Information exchange and multiple peer groups: A natural experiment in an online community," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 203(C), pages 543-562.
    10. Burgstaller, Lilith & Pfeil, Katharina, 2024. "You don’t need an invoice, do you? An online experiment on collaborative tax evasion," Journal of Economic Psychology, Elsevier, vol. 101(C).
    11. Fabienne Cantner & Geske Rolvering, 2022. "Does information help to overcome public resistance to carbon prices? Evidence from an information provision experiment," Working Papers 219, Bavarian Graduate Program in Economics (BGPE).
    12. Tobias König & Renke Schmacker, 2022. "Preferences for Sin Taxes," CESifo Working Paper Series 10046, CESifo.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Matthew Gentzkow & Bryan T. Kelly & Matt Taddy, 2017. "Text as Data," NBER Working Papers 23276, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    2. Mohamed M. Mostafa, 2023. "A one-hundred-year structural topic modeling analysis of the knowledge structure of international management research," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 57(4), pages 3905-3935, August.
    3. Valérie Mignon & Celso Brunetti & Marc Joëts, 2023. "Reasons Behind Words: OPEC Narratives and the Oil Market," EconomiX Working Papers 2023-24, University of Paris Nanterre, EconomiX.
    4. Ulrich Fritsche & Johannes Puckelwald, 2018. "Deciphering Professional Forecasters’ Stories - Analyzing a Corpus of Textual Predictions for the German Economy," Macroeconomics and Finance Series 201804, University of Hamburg, Department of Socioeconomics.
    5. van Loon, Austin, 2022. "Three Families of Automated Text Analysis," SocArXiv htnej, Center for Open Science.
    6. Kohei Kawaguchi & Toshifumi Kuroda & Susumu Sato, 2021. "Merger Analysis in the App Economy: An Empirical Model of Ad-Sponsored Media," HKUST CEP Working Papers Series 202103, HKUST Center for Economic Policy.
    7. Keith Carlson & Michael A. Livermore & Daniel N. Rockmore, 2020. "The Problem of Data Bias in the Pool of Published U.S. Appellate Court Opinions," Journal of Empirical Legal Studies, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 17(2), pages 224-261, June.
    8. Sebastian Blesse & Friedrich Heinemann & Tommy Krieger, 2021. "Ökonomische Desinformation — Ursachen und Handlungsempfehlungen [Economic Disinformation — Causes and Recommendations for Action]," Wirtschaftsdienst, Springer;ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, vol. 101(12), pages 943-948, December.
    9. Sergio Davalos & Ehsan H. Feroz, 2022. "A textual analysis of the US Securities and Exchange Commission's accounting and auditing enforcement releases relating to the Sarbanes–Oxley Act," Intelligent Systems in Accounting, Finance and Management, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 29(1), pages 19-40, January.
    10. Blesse, Sebastian & Heinemann, Friedrich & Krieger, Tommy, 2021. "Informationsdefizite als Hindernis rationaler Wirtschaftspolitik: Ausmass, Ursachen und Gegenstrategien. Eine Studie mit Unterstützung der Brigitte Strube Stiftung," ZEW Expertises, ZEW - Leibniz Centre for European Economic Research, number 241989.
    11. Hong Huang & Hua Zhu & Wenshi Liu & Hua Gao & Hai Jin & Bang Liu, 2024. "Uncovering the essence of diverse media biases from the semantic embedding space," Palgrave Communications, Palgrave Macmillan, vol. 11(1), pages 1-12, December.
    12. David Ardia & Keven Bluteau & Mohammad‐Abbas Meghani, 2024. "Thirty years of academic finance," Journal of Economic Surveys, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 38(3), pages 1008-1042, July.
    13. Mortenson, Michael J. & Vidgen, Richard, 2016. "A computational literature review of the technology acceptance model," International Journal of Information Management, Elsevier, vol. 36(6), pages 1248-1259.
    14. Nuccio Ludovico & Marc Esteve Del Valle & Franco Ruzzenenti, 2020. "Mapping the Dutch Energy Transition Hyperlink Network," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(18), pages 1-24, September.
    15. Nuccio Ludovico & Federica Dessi & Marino Bonaiuto, 2020. "Stakeholders Mapping for Sustainable Biofuels: An Innovative Procedure Based on Computational Text Analysis and Social Network Analysis," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(24), pages 1-22, December.
    16. Fabrizio Gilardi & Charles R. Shipan & Bruno Wüest, 2021. "Policy Diffusion: The Issue‐Definition Stage," American Journal of Political Science, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 65(1), pages 21-35, January.
    17. Rose, Rodrigo L. & Puranik, Tejas G. & Mavris, Dimitri N. & Rao, Arjun H., 2022. "Application of structural topic modeling to aviation safety data," Reliability Engineering and System Safety, Elsevier, vol. 224(C).
    18. Imran Ali & Devika Kannan, 2022. "Mapping research on healthcare operations and supply chain management: a topic modelling-based literature review," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 315(1), pages 29-55, August.
    19. Leonardo Cei & Edi Defrancesco & Gianluca Stefani, 2022. "What topic modelling can show about the development of agricultural economics: evidence from the Journal Citation Report category top journals," European Review of Agricultural Economics, Oxford University Press and the European Agricultural and Applied Economics Publications Foundation, vol. 49(2), pages 289-330.
    20. Berk Wheelock, Lauren & Pachamanova, Dessislava A., 2022. "Acceptable set topic modeling," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 299(2), pages 653-673.

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • D72 - Microeconomics - - Analysis of Collective Decision-Making - - - Political Processes: Rent-seeking, Lobbying, Elections, Legislatures, and Voting Behavior
    • D91 - Microeconomics - - Micro-Based Behavioral Economics - - - Role and Effects of Psychological, Emotional, Social, and Cognitive Factors on Decision Making
    • H1 - Public Economics - - Structure and Scope of Government
    • H2 - Public Economics - - Taxation, Subsidies, and Revenue

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:nbr:nberwo:29686. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: the person in charge (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/nberrus.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.