IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/zbw/espost/277563.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Trading Liberties: Estimating COVID-19 Policy Preferences from Conjoint Data

Author

Listed:
  • Hartmann, Felix
  • Humphreys, Macartan
  • Geissler, Ferdinand
  • Klüver, Heike
  • Giesecke, Johannes

Abstract

Survey experiments are an important tool to measure policy preferences. Researchers often rely on the random assignment of policy attribute levels to estimate different types of average marginal effects. Yet, researchers are often interested in how respondents trade-off different policy dimensions. We use a conjoint experiment administered to more than 10,000 respondents in Germany, to study preferences over personal freedoms and public welfare during the COVID-19 crisis. Using a pre-registered structural model, we estimate policy ideal points and indifference curves to assess the conditions under which citizens are willing to sacrifice freedoms in the interest of public well-being. We document broad willingness to accept restrictions on rights alongside sharp heterogeneity with respect to vaccination status. The majority of citizens are vaccinated and strongly support limitations on freedoms in response to extreme conditions—especially, when they vaccinated themselves are exempted from these limitations. The unvaccinated minority prefers no restrictions on freedoms regardless of the severity of the pandemic. These policy packages also matter for reported trust in government, in opposite ways for vaccinated and unvaccinated citizens.

Suggested Citation

  • Hartmann, Felix & Humphreys, Macartan & Geissler, Ferdinand & Klüver, Heike & Giesecke, Johannes, 2023. "Trading Liberties: Estimating COVID-19 Policy Preferences from Conjoint Data," EconStor Open Access Articles and Book Chapters, ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics, issue First Vie, pages 1-9.
    • Handle: RePEc:zbw:espost:277563
    DOI: 10.1017/pan.2023.25
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.econstor.eu/bitstream/10419/277563/1/Full-text-article-Hartmann-et-al-Trading-Liberties.pdf
    Download Restriction: no
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1017/pan.2023.25?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Graham, Matthew H. & Svolik, Milan W., 2020. "Democracy in America? Partisanship, Polarization, and the Robustness of Support for Democracy in the United States," American Political Science Review, Cambridge University Press, vol. 114(2), pages 392-409, May.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    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. Luis Guirola & Gonzalo Rivero, 2022. "Polarization contaminates the link with partisan and independent institutions: evidence from 138 cabinet shifts," Working Papers 2237, Banco de España.
    2. Gabriele Gratton & Barton E Lee, 2024. "Liberty, Security, and Accountability: The Rise and Fall of Illiberal Democracies," The Review of Economic Studies, Review of Economic Studies Ltd, vol. 91(1), pages 340-371.
    3. Voelkel, Jan G. & Stagnaro, Michael & Chu, James & Pink, Sophia Lerner & Mernyk, Joseph S. & Redekopp, Chrystal & Ghezae, Isaias & Cashman, Matthew & Adjodah, Dhaval & Allen, Levi, 2023. "Megastudy identifying effective interventions to strengthen Americans’ democratic attitudes," OSF Preprints y79u5, Center for Open Science.
    4. Marcella Alsan & Luca Braghieri & Sarah Eichmeyer & Minjeong Joyce Kim & Stefanie Stantcheva & David Y. Yang, 2023. "Civil Liberties in Times of Crisis," American Economic Journal: Applied Economics, American Economic Association, vol. 15(4), pages 389-421, October.
    5. Robert Mickey, 2022. "Challenges to Subnational Democracy in the United States, Past and Present," The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, , vol. 699(1), pages 118-129, January.
    6. Brent Simpson & Bradley Montgomery & David Melamed, 2023. "Reputations for treatment of outgroup members can prevent the emergence of political segregation in cooperative networks," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 14(1), pages 1-14, December.
    7. Eugen Dimant, 2020. "Hate Trumps Love: The Impact of Political Polarization on Social Preferences," ECONtribute Discussion Papers Series 029, University of Bonn and University of Cologne, Germany.
    8. James N. Druckman & Donald P. Green & Shanto Iyengar, 2023. "Does Affective Polarization Contribute to Democratic Backsliding in America?," The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, , vol. 708(1), pages 137-163, July.
    9. Robert C. Lieberman & Suzanne Mettler, 2023. "The Crisis of American Democracy in Historical Context," The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, , vol. 708(1), pages 122-136, July.
    10. Sara Wallace Goodman, 2022. "“Good Citizens†in Democratic Hard Times," The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, , vol. 699(1), pages 68-78, January.
    11. Ashley Jardina & Robert Mickey, 2022. "White Racial Solidarity and Opposition to American Democracy," The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, , vol. 699(1), pages 79-89, January.
    12. Fulya Apaydin & Ferit Serkan Öngel & Jonas W. Schmid & Erol Ülker, 2022. "When do workers support executive aggrandizement? Lessons from the recent Turkish experience," Industrial Relations Journal, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 53(2), pages 142-159, March.
    13. Arandjelović, Ognjen, 2023. "A Modest Proposal for Preventing the Votes of People with Short Life Expectancy From Being a Long-Term Burden to Their Country," SocArXiv qkg4f, Center for Open Science.
    14. Geoffrey Layman & Frances Lee & Christina Wolbrecht, 2023. "Political Parties and Loser’s Consent in American Politics," The ANNALS of the American Academy of Political and Social Science, , vol. 708(1), pages 164-183, July.
    15. Michael Becher & Daniel Stegmueller & Sylvain Brouard & Eric Kerrouche, 2021. "Ideology and compliance with health guidelines during the COVID‐19 pandemic: A comparative perspective," Social Science Quarterly, Southwestern Social Science Association, vol. 102(5), pages 2106-2123, September.
    16. Lichtin, Florian & Smith, E. Keith & Axhausen, Kay W. & Bernauer, Thomas, 2024. "How much should public transport services be expanded, and who should pay? Experimental evidence from Switzerland," OSF Preprints 2m6a7, Center for Open Science.
    17. Gilad, Sharon & Sulitzeanu-Kenan, Raanan & Levi-Faur, David, 2024. "Partisan Alignment and the Propensity to Choose a Job in a Government Ministry," SocArXiv ufzcj, Center for Open Science.
    18. Michael Kurschilgen, 2023. "Moral awareness polarizes people’s fairness judgments," Social Choice and Welfare, Springer;The Society for Social Choice and Welfare, vol. 61(2), pages 339-364, August.
    19. Ognjen Arandjelović, 2023. "A Modest Proposal for Preventing the Votes of People with Short Life Expectancy from Being a Long-Term Burden to Their Country," Social Sciences, MDPI, vol. 12(3), pages 1-8, March.
    20. Jana Lasser & Segun T. Aroyehun & Fabio Carrella & Almog Simchon & David Garcia & Stephan Lewandowsky, 2023. "From alternative conceptions of honesty to alternative facts in communications by US politicians," Nature Human Behaviour, Nature, vol. 7(12), pages 2140-2151, December.

    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:zbw:espost:277563. 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: ZBW - Leibniz Information Centre for Economics (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/zbwkide.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.