Institution for Social and Policy Studies

Advancing Research • Shaping Policy • Developing Leaders

Getting Out the Vote in Local Elections: Results from Six Door-to-Door Canvassing Experiments

ISPS Data Archive: Terms of Use

By using, contributing, and/or downloading files associated with scholarly studies available on the ISPS Data Archive, you agree to these terms and conditions.

Please read the ISPS Data Archive Terms of Use.

Author(s): 

Donald P. Green, Alan S. Gerber, David W. Nickerson

ISPS ID: 
D017
Research design: 
Data type: 
Administrative
Data source(s): 

Authors (list of registered voters  from CT, OH, MI, MN, NC)

Data source information: 

Suggested citation: “Green, Donald P., Alan S. Gerber, David W. Nickerson (2003) Replication Materials for: ‘Getting Out the Vote in Local Elections: Results from Six Door-to-Door Canvassing Experiments,’ http://hdl.handle.net/10079/sf7m0md; http://hdl.handle.net/10079/np5hqkv; http://hdl.handle.net/10079/4qrfjfj; http://hdl.handle.net/10079/0zpc8f3; http://hdl.handle.net/10079/d51c5js; http://hdl.handle.net/10079/hx3ffk9; http://hdl.handle.net/10079/8cz8wjb. ISPS Data Archive.”

Field date: 
June 1, 2000
Location: 
Location details: 
CT, OH, MI, MN, NC
Unit of observation: 
Individuals
Sample size: 
18,933
Inclusion/exclusion: 
Using official lists of voters gathered immediately after the close of registration, we compiled a database of registered voters’ names and addresses. Names of individuals residing at the same address were grouped into households, which were in turn grouped geographically into walk lists... We restricted our attention to households with fewer than five registered voters, and in two sites, Raleigh and St. Paul, the population was restricted to households with at least two voters.
Randomization procedure: 
The procedures by which subjects were assigned at random to treatment and control groups varied slightly across sites. Subjects in Detroit, Minneapolis, and St. Paul were stratified into walk lists before random assignment, while Bridgeport and Columbus were not, but in each of these sites subjects were assigned the same probability of receiving a treatment. In Raleigh, the proportion of subjects assigned to the treatment condition varied across walk lists.
Treatment: 
Door-to-door canvassing treatment (see Supplemental materials for script)
Treatment administration: 
face-to-face
Outcome measures: 
Turnout rate in 2001 local elections
Archive date: 
2010
Archive contributor: 
Limor Peer
Owner: 
Donald P. Green, Alan S. Gerber, David W. Nickerson
Owner contact: 

isps(at)yale(dot)edu

Terms of use: 

Academic, non-commercial; see ISPS Terms of Use /data/data/login/isps-data-archive/

Discipline: 
Area of study: 
Data file numbersort descending Description File format Size File url
D017F01 Dataset Stata (10.0) .dta 152192 Download file
D017F02 Dataset Excel .csv 164864 Download file
D017F03 Program file Stata (10.0) .do 1152 Download file
D017F04 Program file R (2.9.1.) .R 896 Download file
D017F05 Treatment materials Adobe (8.0) .pdf 2944 Download file
D017F06 Codebook XML (1.1) .xml 3840 Download file
D017F07 Metadata record Adobe (8.0) .pdf 26496 Download file