Institution for Social and Policy Studies

Advancing Research • Shaping Policy • Developing Leaders

Cognitive Biases and the Strength of Political Arguments

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.


Kevin Arceneaux

Research design: 
Data type: 
Data source(s): 


Field date: 
May 1, 2006
Location details: 
Study 1: United States - PA, Study 2: International
Unit of observation: 
Sample size: 
Study 1: 210, Study 2: 300
Study 1: Most of the subjects were students at Temple University, but a handful (n=10) was drawn fromthe broader community. Study 2: Mechanical Turk panel
Randomization procedure: 
Random Assignment
Study 1: Reading mock newspapers articles. Bias-congruent condition read a one-sided argument in support of the risky choice framed negatively, counterargument condition read a one-sided argument in support of the risk-averse choice, and it was framedmore positively, competing arguments condition were presented with both arguments and saw both frames. (+control group) Study 2: A two-sided argument about a political controversy surrounding a proposal to ban high school students from forming gay-straight alliance clubs, where they confronted both a pro and anti argument that was framed either in terms of losses or gains. Emotion was manipulated by asking subjects to view a series of pictures under the pretext that they were to “provide a descriptive tag for each image,” which is a common task in the Mechanical Turk environment.
Treatment administration: 
Study 1: Mock newspaper article, Study 2: Text argument and image
Outcome measures: 
Study 1: Attitudes toward developing a new flu vaccine, Study 2: Support for banning gay-straight alliance clubs
Archive date: 
Archive contributor: 
Limor Peer
Owner contact: 


Terms of use: 

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

Area of study: 
Data file numbersort descending Description File format Size File url
D079F01 Dataset - Study 1 Stata (12.0) .dta 22528 Download file
D079F02 Dataset - Study 2 Stata (12.0) .dta 26624 Download file
D079F03 Dataset - Fig 2-3 Stata (12.0) .dta 1024 Download file
D079F04 Dataset - Fig 5-6 Stata (12.0) .dta 2048 Download file
D079F05 Dataset - Study 1 Excel .csv 21504 Download file
D079F06 Dataset - Study 2 Excel .csv 28672 Download file
D079F07 Dataset - Fig 2-3 Excel .csv 6144 Download file
D079F08 Dataset - Fig 5-6 Excel .csv 6144 Download file
D079F09 Codebook - Study 1 DDI-XML 22528 Download file
D079F10 Codebook - Study 2 DDI-XML 26624 Download file
D079F11 Codebook - Fig 2-3 DDI-XML 10240 Download file
D079F12 Codebook - Fig 5-6 DDI-XML 11264 Download file
D079F13 Program file - Tables Stata (12.0) .do 2048 Download file
D079F14 Program file - Figures Stata (12.0) .do 1024 Download file
D079F15 Program file - Tables R 6144 Download file
D079F16 Program file - Figures R 3072 Download file
D079F17 Output file .txt 30720 Download file
D079F18 Metadata record Adobe acrobat (8.0) .pdf 199680 Download file