IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/p/cpr/ceprdp/16929.html

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

Author

Listed:
  • Ferrario, Beatrice
  • Stantcheva, Stefanie

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

  • Ferrario, Beatrice & Stantcheva, Stefanie, 2022. "Eliciting People's First-Order Concerns: Text Analysis of Open-Ended Survey Questions," CEPR Discussion Papers 16929, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
  • Handle: RePEc:cpr:ceprdp:16929
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://cepr.org/publications/DP16929
    Download Restriction: CEPR Discussion Papers are free to download for our researchers, subscribers and members. If you fall into one of these categories but have trouble downloading our papers, please contact us at subscribers@cepr.org
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to look for a different version below or

    for a different version of it.

    Other versions of this item:

    Citations

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


    Cited by:

    1. is not listed on IDEAS
    2. 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.
    3. Filippini, Massimo & Leippold, Markus & Wekhof, Tobias, 2024. "Sustainable finance literacy and the determinants of sustainable investing," Journal of Banking & Finance, Elsevier, vol. 163(C).
    4. 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.
    5. Kantorowicz, Jaroslaw & Metelska-Szaniawska, Katarzyna, 2025. "Debt beliefs and public support for restrictive fiscal rules," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 247(C).
    6. Brandts, Jordi & Busom, Isabel & Lopez-Mayan, Cristina, 2025. "Do giving voice and social information help in revising a misconception about rent–control?," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 117(C).
    7. 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).
    8. Link, Sebastian & Peichl, Andreas & Roth, Christopher & Wohlfart, Johannes, 2023. "Attention to the Macroeconomy," CEPR Discussion Papers 18699, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    9. An, Zidong & Binder, Carola & Sheng, Xuguang Simon, 2023. "Gas price expectations of Chinese households," Energy Economics, Elsevier, vol. 120(C).
    10. Jordi Brandts & Francesc Trillas Jané, 2024. "Opposing Views on Public Ownership and Their Influence on Citizens' Attitudes," Working Papers 1453, Barcelona School of Economics.
    11. Conti, Gabriella & Giannola, Michele & Toppeta, Alessandro, 2022. "Parental Beliefs, Perceived Health Risks, and Time Investment in Children: Evidence from COVID-19," IZA Discussion Papers 15765, Institute of Labor Economics (IZA).
    12. Hoy, Christopher & Kim, Yeon Soo & Nguyen, Minh Cong & Sosa, Mariano & Tiwari, Sailesh, 2026. "Attitudes towards reducing fossil fuel subsidies: Evidence across 12 middle-income countries," Journal of Development Economics, Elsevier, vol. 178(C).
    13. Lippmann, Quentin & Surana, Khushboo, 2025. "The evolution of partner preferences: Evidence using matrimonial ads from Canada, France, India and the United States," Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization, Elsevier, vol. 233(C).
    14. Duraj, Kamila & Laudenbach, Christine & Lindner, Vincent, 2025. "Hessenmonitor Finanzkompetenz: Was wissen junge Erwachsene in Hessen über Geld und Finanzen? Abschlussbericht," SAFE White Paper Series 110, Leibniz Institute for Financial Research SAFE.
    15. Kovács, Anna & Luckner, Katharina & Sekuła, Anna & Kantorowicz, Jarosław, 2024. "Beyond courts: Does strategic litigation affect climate change policy support?," International Review of Law and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 79(C).
    16. 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.
    17. 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).
    18. Dräger, Lena & Gründler, Klaus & Potrafke, Niklas, 2025. "Political shocks and inflation expectations: Evidence from the 2022 Russian invasion of Ukraine," Journal of International Economics, Elsevier, vol. 153(C).
    19. Quentin Lippmann & Khushboo Surana, 2022. "The Hierarchy of Partner Preferences," Discussion Papers 22/08, Department of Economics, University of York.
    20. Bruttel, Lisa & Nithammer, Juri, 2025. "Opinion Piece: How to pre-register experimental studies that involve machine learning for text data analysis," Journal of Behavioral and Experimental Economics (formerly The Journal of Socio-Economics), Elsevier, vol. 118(C).
    21. Tobias König & Renke Schmacker, 2022. "Preferences for Sin Taxes," CESifo Working Paper Series 10046, CESifo.

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    JEL classification:

    • H20 - Public Economics - - Taxation, Subsidies, and Revenue - - - General
    • 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

    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:cpr:ceprdp:16929. 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.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using 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://www.cepr.org .

    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.