Skip to contents

Variable reference

Source: vignettes/harmonization-reference.Rmd
harmonization-reference.Rmd

Version française

The harmonized variables (“targets”) of qes_harmonize(), study by study. The page is generated from the rules that ship with qesR, so it always describes what the installed version applies.

Jump to a variable

Survey design

Vote and turnout

Party identification

Attitudes

Issues

  • mip_issue: Most important issue of the election

Sociodemographics

Relaxed harmonization: qes_decon()

qes_spec() returns the same information as data frames, and qes_provenance(x, level = "spec") the version of the rules that produced harmonized data.

How to read this reference

Each target is one question stimulus: a different wording, scale, timing or format makes another target; a pooled variable (last chapter) combines targets into one column and records which one each value comes from. For each study, the coverage table of a target gives:

  • Source: the variable and the wave that asked it;
  • Grade and Reason: how comparable the study’s question is to the target’s anchor question, and why;
  • Instrument and Levels offered: the item format and the answers it offered (the others are structural zeros);
  • Wording: the question text, or the document and page that give it;
  • Filter: the filter question, and what each of its codes means;
  • Weight: the study’s recommended weight for that wave (marked when it is not usable yet: its weight columns are then NA);
  • Don’t know: whether “don’t know” was offered.

A row marked awaiting sign-off is checked but not yet approved, and not used by default: its values are missing. To use it anyway, pass include_draft = TRUE to qes_harmonize().

The wording and labels of qes2022 quoted on this page come from 2022 Quebec Election Study (Mahéo, Bélanger, Stephenson and Harell, 2023, https://doi.org/10.7910/DVN/PAQBDR) and keep its licence, CC BY-NC 4.0. See Citing qesR and the studies for the attribution.

Comparability grades

  • identical (Identical): the same stem in every language fielded, the same options, the same don’t-know option, universe and mode family as the anchor question;
  • comparable (Comparable): the same construct and stimulus; differences (a temporal adverb, option order, whether don’t know is offered, which minor parties are listed) are not expected to move the shares of the common levels;
  • approximate (Approximate): the same construct, but a format, filter or mode expected to move the shares; qes_harmonize(min_grade = "comparable") sets these cells to NA (reason below_grade);
  • not_comparable (Not comparable): another construct, or a source that must not be used: recorded here, never mapped.

Structural zeros

A level that a study’s question did not offer (a party missing from its list, say) is a structural zero: its share in that study is 0 because nobody could choose it, not because nobody supported it. In the coverage tables such levels are listed after “not offered”. qes_provenance(x, level = "cell")$levels_not_offered gives them for harmonized data.

Why a value is missing

Every missing value of a target carries one of these reasons (qes_harmonize(missing = "reasons") adds them as <target>__na columns):

Code Label
dk Don’t know
refused Refused
dk_refused Don’t know or refused (one code)
no_answer No answer (item nonresponse)
not_selected Not selected (multiple choice)
inapplicable Inapplicable (routed out)
not_voted Did not vote
spoiled Spoiled ballot
ineligible Not eligible to vote
not_registered Not on the list of electors
not_in_wave Not in this wave
not_mappable Source category straddles target levels
sysmis System missing
not_asked Not asked in this study
not_reviewed Crosswalk row not yet signed off by a reviewer
below_grade Below the requested grade
unmapped Code not mapped

Targets

Survey design

survey_mode: Interview mode

How the respondent was interviewed: web, telephone or mixed. A leading column of every result of qes_harmonize(), filled from the mode of each wave; crosswalk rows exist only for the waves whose mode varies by respondent.

Family interview_mode · type Categorical · timing Any time

Levels

Code Name Label
1 web Web
2 phone Telephone
3 mixed Mixed
Coverage by study
Study Source Grade Reason Instrument Levels offered Wording Filter Weight Don’t know
qes2018_panel method (pre) identical (anchor) Anchor row of the target. interview_mode web, phone; not offered: mixed document 341538, method weight Not offered
qes2007 type (post) identical The interview mode as the file records it. interview_mode web, phone; not offered: mixed document 425921, type pond Not offered

Vote and turnout

vote_prov_recall: Provincial vote (recall)

Party the respondent reports having voted for in the Quebec general election of the study, asked after that election. Nonvoters, spoiled ballots and respondents not eligible or not registered are missing values with a reason, never a party.

Family vote_prov · type Categorical · timing Post-election

Levels

Code Name Label
1 PLQ PLQ
2 PQ PQ
3 CAQ CAQ
4 QS QS
5 PVQ PVQ
6 PCQ PCQ
7 ON ON
8 ADQ ADQ
90 other Other party
Coverage by study
Study Source Grade Reason Instrument Levels offered Wording Filter Weight Don’t know
qes2022 pes_votechoice (pes) comparable Lists the four main parties and the Conservatives but not the Green party or Option nationale, no don’t-know option, spoiling is an option, and it follows a face-saving turnout question. vote_recall_list PLQ, PQ, CAQ, QS, PCQ, other; not offered: PVQ, ON, ADQ Which party did you vote for? pes_turnout: 2 = not_voted, 3 = not_voted, 4 = not_voted, 5 = not_registered, 6 = dk pes_weight_general Not offered
qes2018 q6 (post) comparable Only the four main parties are listed (no Green or Option nationale), there is no don’t-know option, spoiling is an option, and the item follows a face-saving turnout question. vote_recall_list PLQ, PQ, CAQ, QS, other; not offered: PVQ, PCQ, ON, ADQ Which party did you vote for? q5: 1 = not_voted, 2 = not_voted, 3 = not_voted, 5 = ineligible, 99 = refused, NA = inapplicable pond Not offered
qes2018_panel rts_q2 (post) comparable Party list with the leaders’ names, mixed telephone and web mode; the anchor is a web list without leaders. vote_recall_list_leaders PLQ, PQ, CAQ, QS, other; not offered: PVQ, PCQ, ON, ADQ Et pour qui avez-vous voté? rts_q1: 1 = not_voted, 2 = not_voted, 4 = dk_refused weight_rts Not documented
qes2014 Q3 (post) comparable Same party list as the anchor, but the stem does not name the election date and no don’t-know option is offered. vote_recall_list PLQ, PQ, CAQ, QS, PVQ, ON, other; not offered: PCQ, ADQ Which party did you vote for? Q2: 2 = not_voted, 9 = refused POND Not offered
qes2012 q25 (post) identical (anchor) Anchor row of the target. vote_recall_list PLQ, PQ, CAQ, QS, PVQ, ON, other; not offered: PCQ, ADQ How did you vote in the last Quebec provincial election of September 4th, 2012? q21: 2 = not_voted, 8 = dk, 9 = refused pond Offered explicitly
qes2012_panel voteprov (post) approximate Unprompted telephone recall (the options are not read) after a turnout question that probes election day or advance poll; the anchor is a web list. vote_recall_unprompted CAQ, PLQ, PQ, QS, PVQ, ON, other; not offered: PCQ, ADQ For which party did you vote for? (DO NOT READ) pond_post (not usable yet) Not offered
qes2008 q12a (post) comparable Same question (party voted for); the list names the ADQ and not the CAQ or ON, which did not exist; the turnout question has no don’t-know code; telephone by the deposit metadata, the anchor is web. vote_recall_list PLQ, PQ, ADQ, QS, PVQ, other; not offered: CAQ, PCQ, ON Which party did you vote for? q11: 2 = not_voted, 9 = refused Not documented
qes2007 q12 (post) comparable Same question (party voted for, the parties named in the stem); the list names the ADQ and not the CAQ or ON, which did not exist; the study mixes telephone and web interviews (only the telephone script is deposited), the anchor is web. vote_recall_list PLQ, PQ, ADQ, QS, PVQ, other; not offered: CAQ, PCQ, ON Which party did you vote for? The Liberal Party, Parti Québécois, ADQ, Québec solidaire, the Green Party or another party? q11: 2 = not_voted, 8 = dk, 9 = refused pond Not documented
qes2007_panel vote (post) approximate Unprompted telephone recall (options not read) after a two-step turnout question; the anchor is a web list. vote_recall_unprompted ADQ, PLQ, PQ, QS, PVQ, other; not offered: CAQ, PCQ, ON Whom did you vote for? pond_tot_am1 (not usable yet) Not offered
qes1998 q3post (post) comparable Same question (party voted for, from a list read) by telephone, with the same stem in both firms’ questionnaires; CREATEC’s own Q3 uses other codes (1 PLQ, 2 PQ, 3 ADQ, 4 another party) with no Parti Égalité, and the pooled file puts them on CROP’s codes, where the Parti Égalité is starred (not read) and never chosen; the list names the ADQ, not the CAQ; the anchor is web. vote_recall_list ADQ, PLQ, PQ, other; not offered: CAQ, QS, PVQ, PCQ, ON 3. Pour lequel des partis suivants avez-vous voté? ponder3 (not usable yet) Not offered

vote_prov_intent: Provincial vote intention

Party the respondent intends to vote for in the coming Quebec general election, asked before it, at the first question, without the push question for the undecided. Would not vote, none or would spoil is an answer (level no_party), not a missing value.

Family vote_prov · type Categorical · timing Pre-election

Levels

Code Name Label
1 PLQ PLQ
2 PQ PQ
3 CAQ CAQ
4 QS QS
5 PVQ PVQ
6 PCQ PCQ
7 ON ON
8 ADQ ADQ
90 other Other party
95 no_party Would not vote / none / would spoil
Coverage by study
Study Source Grade Reason Instrument Levels offered Wording Filter Weight Don’t know
qes2022 cps_votechoice1 (cps) approximate Web list with don’t know and refusal shown, asked only of respondents certain or likely to vote (the others were asked a separate item or none), with no would-not-vote option; the anchor is a telephone item asked of everyone. vote_intent_list PLQ, PQ, CAQ, QS, PCQ, other; not offered: PVQ, ON, ADQ, no_party Which party do you think you will vote for? cps_turnout: 3 = inapplicable, 4 = inapplicable, 5 = inapplicable, 6 = ineligible cps_weight_general Offered explicitly
qes2018_panel rv1a (pre) approximate Asks which party’s candidate the respondent would probably support in an election held tomorrow, and tells those who already voted in advance polls to give that vote, so part of the answers report a vote already cast; mixed mode (850 web, 400 telephone); the anchor asks which party they would vote for today, by telephone. vote_intent_list PLQ, PQ, CAQ, QS, other, no_party; not offered: PVQ, PCQ, ON, ADQ En pensant à ce que vous ressentez maintenant, si une élection PROVINCIALE était tenue demain, le candidat de quel parti appuieriez-vous probablement? Si vous avez déjà voté par anticipation, veuillez indiquer pour quel parti. weight Not documented
qes2012_panel intvoteprov1 (pre) approximate The stem asks which party the respondent would vote for ‘or would be tempted to vote for’, which softens the first question toward a lean; the pre-election questionnaire is not deposited (wording from the variable label and the codebook, file 654292); telephone, like the anchor. vote_intent_or_lean_list PLQ, PQ, CAQ, QS, PVQ, ON, other, no_party; not offered: PCQ, ADQ Si des élections provinciales devaient avoir lieu aujourd’hui, pour lequel des partis suivants voteriez-vous ou seriez-vous tenté de voter? pondam1 (not usable yet) Not documented
qes_crop_2007_2010 intvoteprova (each poll) comparable Same first question as the anchor, word for word, by the same firm (CROP) and telephone mode, with the same parties and leaders read in rotation, and would-not-vote and don’t know/refusal not read; the polls are monthly omnibus polls between elections, not a campaign panel, and the wording is documented for three of the 24 polls only (CROP reports of May 2008, January 2009 and March 2009; no questionnaire is deposited). vote_intent_list ADQ, PLQ, PQ, QS, PVQ, other, no_party; not offered: CAQ, PCQ, ON S’il y avait des élections provinciales aujourd’hui au Québec, pour lequel des partis suivants voteriez-vous? Voteriez-vous pour… XPOND (not usable yet) Volunteered only
qes2007_panel intvote1 (pre) identical (anchor) Anchor row of the target. vote_intent_list ADQ, PLQ, PQ, QS, PVQ, other, no_party; not offered: CAQ, PCQ, ON S’il y avait des élections provinciales aujourd’hui au Québec, pour lequel des partis suivants voteriez-vous? Voteriez-vous pour… pondam1 (not usable yet) Volunteered only

vote_prov_intent_push: Provincial vote intention, undecided pushed

Vote intention in which respondents who named no party at the first question (the undecided and, in some studies, also those who would not vote, would vote for none or refused) were asked which party they lean toward (a push question), combined into one variable. A different stimulus from vote_prov_intent, and a separate target; the pooled variable vote_choice uses it before vote_prov_intent, and vote_choice__type records which one a value comes from.

Family vote_prov · type Categorical · timing Pre-election

Levels

Code Name Label
1 PLQ PLQ
2 PQ PQ
3 CAQ CAQ
4 QS QS
5 PVQ PVQ
6 PCQ PCQ
7 ON ON
8 ADQ ADQ
90 other Other party
95 no_party Would not vote / none / would spoil
Coverage by study
Study Source Grade Reason Instrument Levels offered Wording Filter Weight Don’t know
qes2022 cps_votechoice1 + cps_votechoice2 + cps_votelean (cps) approximate Web list with don’t know and refusal shown: the first question (cps_votechoice1) asked of respondents certain or likely to vote, a conditional one (‘if you decide to vote’, cps_votechoice2) asked of those unlikely to vote, and the lean question (cps_votelean) asked of those who did not know at either; no would-not-vote option; the anchor is a telephone item asked of everyone. intent_lean_push PLQ, PQ, CAQ, QS, PCQ, other; not offered: PVQ, ON, ADQ, no_party Which party do you think you will vote for? [If unlikely to vote:] If you decide to vote, which party do you think you would vote for? [If don’t know:] Is there a party you are leaning towards? cps_turnout: 3 = inapplicable, 4 = inapplicable, 5 = inapplicable, 6 = ineligible cps_weight_general Offered explicitly
qes2018_panel rv1ab (pre) approximate Producer’s combination of rv1a with the push question rv1b, in mixed telephone and web mode; the anchor is a telephone push. The push filter is narrower than the anchor’s: respondents who said they would not vote or support no party (63) were not pushed, whereas the anchor pushed them, and 31 of the 233 undecided, all interviewed by telephone, were not asked rv1b and stay undecided. rv1a, whose answer rv1ab keeps for codes 1-6 (1,017 respondents), tells those who already voted in advance polls to give that vote, so part of the answers report a vote already cast. intent_lean_push PLQ, PQ, CAQ, QS, other, no_party; not offered: PVQ, PCQ, ON, ADQ En pensant à ce que vous ressentez maintenant, si une élection PROVINCIALE était tenue demain, le candidat de quel parti appuieriez-vous probablement? Si vous avez déjà voté par anticipation, veuillez indiquer pour quel parti. (relance, rv1b : Et pour quel parti diriez-vous que vous auriez tendance à voter?) weight Not documented
qes2012_panel intvoteprov (pre) approximate The producer’s combination of the first question (which already asks for a party the respondent ‘would be tempted to vote for’) and the push; the pre-election questionnaire is not deposited (wording from the variable label and the codebook, file 654292); telephone, like the anchor. intent_lean_push PLQ, PQ, CAQ, QS, PVQ, ON, other, no_party; not offered: PCQ, ADQ Q2+Q3 - Si des élections provinciales devaient avoir lieu aujourd’hui, pour lequel des partis suivants voteriez-vous ou seriez-vous tenté de voter? (relance : Peut-être que votre choix n’est pas définitif, mais y a-t-il tout de même un parti que vous seriez tenté d’appuyer?) pondam1 (not usable yet) Not documented
qes_crop_2007_2010 intvoteprov (each poll) comparable The producer’s combination of the first question and the push, as in the anchor, by the same firm and mode; CROP telephone polls; the deposited codebook (file 341537) gives only truncated labels, but CROP’s own La Presse reports (May 2008, January 2009) print the same stem and push as the anchor, with parties and leaders read in rotation and don’t know recorded only if volunteered; not identical because these are monthly omnibus polls, most fielded outside a campaign (the reference election is 2008 or 2012 depending on the poll), on a regionally stratified sample (500 Montréal, 200 Québec, 300 elsewhere). intent_lean_push ADQ, PLQ, PQ, QS, PVQ, other, no_party; not offered: CAQ, PCQ, ON S’il y avait des élections provinciales aujourd’hui au Québec, pour lequel des partis suivants voteriez-vous? Voteriez-vous pour… (relance : Peut-être n’êtes-vous pas complètement décidé(e), mais actuellement pour lequel de ces partis seriez-vous tenté(e) de voter? Est-ce…) XPOND (not usable yet) Volunteered only
qes2007_panel intvote (pre) identical (anchor) Anchor row of the target. intent_lean_push ADQ, PLQ, PQ, QS, PVQ, other, no_party; not offered: CAQ, PCQ, ON S’il y avait des élections provinciales aujourd’hui au Québec, pour lequel des partis suivants voteriez-vous? (relance, Q5 : pour lequel de ces partis seriez-vous tenté(e) de voter?) pondam1 (not usable yet) Volunteered only
qes1998 intvote (pre) approximate The producer’s combination of the first question and the push, but two firms’ telephone polls pooled in one variable (CREATEC and CROP, each with its own questionnaire; CREATEC’s is not deposited); CREATEC did not ask the 79 respondents who, at its turnout question, said they would probably not (22) or certainly not (35) vote, or did not know or refused (22), whereas CROP asked everyone. intent_lean_push ADQ, PLQ, PQ, other, no_party; not offered: CAQ, QS, PVQ, PCQ, ON 7a. S’il y avait des élections provinciales aujourd’hui au Québec, pour lequel des partis suivants voteriez-vous? Est-ce… (relance, 7b : Peut-être n’êtes-vous pas complètement décidé(e), mais actuellement pour lequel de ces partis seriez-vous tenté(e) de voter?) ponder3 (not usable yet) Not documented

Not used

  • qes1998 intvote2 (pre): not_comparable. The value labels are shifted in the source: the counts are those of vpl, whose code 1 is ADQ, 3 PLQ and 4 PQ, but intvote2 labels them PLQ, ADQ and Parti Égalité.

turnout_prov_recall: Voted in the provincial election (recall)

Whether the respondent reports having voted in the Quebec general election of the study, asked after that election. Respondents not eligible or not registered are missing values with a reason.

Family turnout_prov · type Categorical · timing Post-election

Levels

Code Name Label
1 yes Yes
2 no No
Coverage by study
Study Source Grade Reason Instrument Levels offered Wording Filter Weight Don’t know
qes2022 pes_turnout (pes) approximate Face-saving turnout format with three ways of not voting, a not-registered option and a don’t-remember option; expected to move the share of voters. turnout_excuse_format yes, no The Quebec election results were recently announced. In any election, some people are not able to vote because they are sick or busy, or for some other reason. Others do not want to vote. Did you vote in the recent Quebec election? pes_weight_general Offered explicitly
qes2018 q5 (post) approximate Face-saving turnout format with three ways of not voting and a not-eligible option, no don’t-know option; expected to move the share of voters. turnout_excuse_format yes, no In each election we find that a lot of people were not able to vote because they were not registered, they were sick, or they did not have time. Which of the following statements best describes you? pond Not offered
qes2018_panel rts_q1 (post) approximate Face-saving format (wanted to vote but could not; decided not to vote; or went to vote), mixed telephone and web mode. turnout_excuse_format yes, no À chaque élection, certaines personnes décident de ne pas voter, d’autres ne peuvent pas y aller pour différentes raisons. weight_rts Not documented
qes2014 Q2 (post) comparable Same yes/no format, but no don’t-know option (the anchor offers one) and the stem refers to ‘that election’ instead of naming its date. turnout_yesno yes, no Did you vote in that provincial election? POND Not offered
qes2012 q21 (post) identical (anchor) Anchor row of the target. turnout_yesno yes, no Did you vote in the last Quebec provincial election of September 4th, 2012? pond Offered explicitly
qes2012_panel participation (post) comparable Same yes/no question; a yes is probed for election day or advance poll, both yes; no don’t-know code (the anchor offers one); telephone, the anchor is web. turnout_yesno_probe yes, no First, can you tell me if you have voted in the recent Quebec election? (IF YES, PROBE) pond_post (not usable yet) Not offered
qes2008 q11 (post) comparable Same yes/no question, but no don’t-know code (the anchor offers one); telephone by the deposit metadata, the anchor is web. turnout_yesno yes, no Did you vote in the last provincial election? Not offered
qes2007 q11 (post) comparable Same yes/no question with a don’t-remember code; the study mixes telephone and web interviews (only the telephone script is deposited), the anchor is web. turnout_yesno yes, no Did you vote in the provincial election? pond Not documented
qes2007_panel voteoui (post) comparable Same yes/no question; a yes is probed for election day or advance poll, both yes; no don’t-know code (the anchor offers one); telephone, the anchor is web. turnout_yesno_probe yes, no First, can you tell me if you have voted at the last Quebec election that was just held? pond_tot_am1 (not usable yet) Not offered
qes1998 q1post (post) comparable Same yes/no question by telephone, with the same stem for both firms; no don’t-know code (the anchor offers one); the anchor is web. turnout_yesno yes, no 1. Pouvez-vous me dire si vous avez voté à l’élection du 30 novembre dernier? ponder3 (not usable yet) Not offered

turnout_prov_likely: Likelihood of voting in the provincial election

How likely the respondent says they are to vote in the coming Quebec general election, asked before it. Having already voted (in advance polls) is an answer. A different stimulus from turnout_prov_recall (reported turnout), and a separate target; the pooled variable turnout uses it only when asked to (types = list(turnout = c(“recall”, “intention”))).

Family turnout_prov · type Ordinal · timing Pre-election

Levels

Code Name Label
5 already_voted Already voted
1 certain Certain to vote
2 likely Likely to vote
3 unlikely Unlikely to vote
4 certain_not Certain not to vote
Coverage by study
Study Source Grade Reason Instrument Levels offered Wording Filter Weight Don’t know
qes2022 cps_turnout (cps) identical (anchor) Anchor row of the target. turnout_likely certain, likely, unlikely, certain_not, already_voted The Quebec election is scheduled for October 3, 2022. In this election, are you… cps_weight_general Not offered

vote_prov_intent_other: Provincial vote intention: another party (text)

The party the respondent typed after choosing another party at the vote-intention question (vote_prov_intent, level other), as typed. Open text, not harmonized.

Family vote_prov · type Text · timing Pre-election

Coverage by study
Study Source Grade Reason Instrument Levels offered Wording Filter Weight Don’t know
qes2022 cps_votechoice1_8_TEXT (cps) identical (anchor) Anchor row of the target. open_text Which party do you think you will vote for? [Another party (please specify)] cps_turnout: 3 = inapplicable, 4 = inapplicable, 5 = inapplicable, 6 = ineligible cps_weight_general Not offered

vote_prov_prev: Provincial vote at the previous election (recall)

Party the respondent reports having voted for in the Quebec general election before the study’s election (election_ref gives which one). Recalled years later: known to lean toward the winner of that election. Nonvoters, spoiled ballots and respondents not eligible then are missing values with a reason, never a party.

Family vote_prov_past · type Categorical · timing Any time

Levels

Code Name Label
1 PLQ PLQ
2 PQ PQ
3 CAQ CAQ
4 QS QS
5 PVQ PVQ
6 PCQ PCQ
7 ON ON
8 ADQ ADQ
90 other Other party
Coverage by study
Study Source Grade Reason Instrument Levels offered Wording Filter Weight Don’t know
qes2022 cps_qc_vote_2018 (cps) comparable The 2018 vote, asked during the 2022 campaign after a separate turnout question (cps_qc_turnout_2018: no is not_voted, not eligible is ineligible); web, four parties listed; no don’t-know, refusal or spoiled-ballot option, so such answers were typed under ‘another party’ and stay in other. vote_recall_prev_list PLQ, PQ, CAQ, QS, other; not offered: PVQ, PCQ, ON, ADQ Which party did you vote for in the Quebec election in 2018? cps_qc_turnout_2018: 2 = not_voted, 3 = ineligible cps_weight_general Not offered
qes2018 q9 (post) comparable (awaiting sign-off) The 2014 vote (‘4 years ago’), asked after the 2018 election; the list names four parties (the others are ‘another party’); not asked of the 270 respondents who were not asked the 2018 vote either (under 18 in 2018 or age unknown). vote_recall_prev_list PLQ, PQ, CAQ, QS, other; not offered: PVQ, PCQ, ON, ADQ Which party did you vote for 4 years ago in the previous provincial election, held on April 7, 2014? pond Offered explicitly
qes2014 Q6 (post) identical (anchor) Anchor row of the target: the 2012 vote, asked after the 2014 election. vote_recall_prev_list PLQ, PQ, CAQ, QS, PVQ, ON, other; not offered: PCQ, ADQ Which party did you vote for in the last provincial election, held on September 4, 2012? POND Not offered
qes2008 q13 (post) comparable (awaiting sign-off) The March 2007 vote, asked twenty months later, after the 2008 election, by telephone; the list names the parties of 2007; ‘aucun’ (none, 8 rows) could be a spoiled ballot or no vote, so it is not mapped; code 95 is ‘I did not vote / I spoiled my ballot’ in the English questionnaire (197296) and ‘n’a pas voté’ in the file, so its not_voted rows may include spoiled ballots; the 5 respondents born in 1990 (under 18 in March 2007) were asked and all answered 95, so they are not_voted, not ineligible, and those born in 1989 cannot be told apart without a birth date. vote_recall_prev_list PLQ, PQ, QS, PVQ, ADQ, other; not offered: CAQ, PCQ, ON Which party did you vote for at the provincial election of March 26, 2007? Not documented

vote_fed_recall: Federal vote at the last federal election (recall)

Party the respondent reports having voted for in the last Canadian federal election before the study (each row’s wording names it: January 2006, October 2008, May 2011, 2021). Nonvoters, spoiled ballots and respondents not eligible then are missing values with a reason, never a party.

Family vote_fed · type Categorical · timing Any time

Levels

Code Name Label
1 LPC Liberal
2 CPC Conservative
3 NDP NDP
4 BQ Bloc Québécois
5 GPC Green
6 PPC PPC
90 other Another party
Coverage by study
Study Source Grade Reason Instrument Levels offered Wording Filter Weight Don’t know
qes2022 cps_pastpartyvote (cps) comparable The 2021 federal vote, asked during the 2022 provincial campaign after a separate turnout question (cps_pastvote); web, the PPC listed. vote_fed_recall_list LPC, CPC, NDP, BQ, GPC, PPC, other Which party did you vote for in the 2021 Canadian federal election? cps_pastvote: 2 = not_voted, 3 = ineligible cps_weight_general Not offered
qes2012 q27 (post) identical (anchor) Anchor row of the target: the May 2011 federal vote, after a separate turnout question (q22). vote_fed_recall_list LPC, CPC, NDP, BQ, GPC, other; not offered: PPC And in the last Canadian federal election in May 2011? Did you vote for the: q22: 2 = not_voted, 8 = dk, 9 = refused pond Offered explicitly
qes2008 q74 (post) comparable The October 2008 federal vote, asked two months later, with not voting and a spoiled ballot as answers of the same question; telephone by the deposit metadata (mode to be confirmed). vote_fed_recall_list LPC, CPC, NDP, BQ, GPC, other; not offered: PPC At the last FEDERAL election in OCTOBER 2008, for which party did you vote? Not documented
qes2007 q74 (post) approximate The January 2006 federal vote, asked about 15 months later with not voting and a spoiled ballot as answers of the same question; the deposited telephone script says not to read the list (unprompted), but the study mixes telephone (1,003) and web (1,172) interviews and only the telephone script is deposited, so how the web version showed the options is unknown. vote_fed_recall_unprompted LPC, CPC, NDP, BQ, GPC, other; not offered: PPC At the last FEDERAL election in January 2006, for which party did you vote? pond Not documented

Party identification

pid_prov: Provincial party identification

The provincial party the respondent usually thinks of themselves as close to; none is an answer.

Family party_id · type Categorical · timing Any time

Levels

Code Name Label
1 PLQ PLQ
2 PQ PQ
3 CAQ CAQ
4 QS QS
5 PVQ PVQ
6 PCQ PCQ
7 ON ON
8 ADQ ADQ
90 other Other party
97 none None of these
Coverage by study
Study Source Grade Reason Instrument Levels offered Wording Filter Weight Don’t know
qes2022 cps_provpid (cps) comparable Same stem as the anchor, but the list drops the Onist and Green options, adds Conservative and another party, and offers no don’t-know option. pid_prov_list PLQ, PQ, CAQ, QS, PCQ, other, none; not offered: PVQ, ON, ADQ In provincial politics, do you usually think of yourself as a: cps_weight_general Not offered
qes2018 q56 (post) comparable Same stem as the anchor, but only the four main parties are listed (no Onist or Green). pid_prov_list PLQ, PQ, CAQ, QS, none; not offered: PVQ, PCQ, ON, ADQ, other In provincial politics, do you usually think of yourself as a: pond Offered explicitly
qes2014 Q55 (post) identical Same stem and the same six parties, none, don’t know and refusal options as the anchor, in English and French, web. pid_prov_list PLQ, PQ, CAQ, QS, ON, PVQ, none; not offered: PCQ, ADQ, other In provincial politics, do you usually think of yourself as a: POND Offered explicitly
qes2012 q92 (post) identical (anchor) Anchor row of the target. pid_prov_list PLQ, PQ, CAQ, QS, ON, PVQ, none; not offered: PCQ, ADQ, other In provincial politics, do you usually think of yourself as a: pond Offered explicitly
qes2008 q70 (post) comparable Same construct (usual provincial party identification, none an answer); the stem reads ‘do you usually identify yourself with’ and the list names the ADQ; telephone by the deposit metadata, the anchor is web. pid_prov_list PLQ, PQ, ADQ, QS, PVQ, other, none; not offered: CAQ, PCQ, ON In provincial politics, do you usually identify yourself with … Not documented
qes2007 q70 (post) comparable Same construct (usual provincial party identification, none an answer); the stem reads ‘do you usually identify yourself with’ and the list names the ADQ; the study mixes telephone and web interviews (only the telephone script is deposited), the anchor is web. pid_prov_list PLQ, PQ, ADQ, QS, PVQ, other, none; not offered: CAQ, PCQ, ON In provincial politics, do you usually identify yourself with … pond Not documented

pid_fed: Federal party identification

The federal party the respondent usually thinks of themselves as close to; none is an answer.

Family party_id · type Categorical · timing Any time

Levels

Code Name Label
1 LPC Liberal
2 CPC Conservative
3 NDP NDP
4 BQ Bloc Québécois
5 GPC Green
6 PPC PPC
90 other Another party
97 none None of these
Coverage by study
Study Source Grade Reason Instrument Levels offered Wording Filter Weight Don’t know
qes2022 cps_fedpid (cps) identical (anchor) Anchor row of the target. pid_list LPC, CPC, NDP, BQ, GPC, PPC, other, none In federal politics, do you usually think of yourself as a: cps_weight_general Not offered
qes2012 q94 (post) comparable Same question as the anchor; the list has no People’s Party (founded in 2018) and no other-party option; web. pid_list LPC, CPC, NDP, BQ, GPC, none; not offered: PPC, other And in federal politics, do you usually think of yourself as a: pond Offered explicitly

pid_prov_strength: Strength of provincial party identification

How strongly the respondent identifies with the provincial party named at the party identification question (very, fairly, not very strongly), asked of those who named a party. Those who named none, did not know or refused were not asked: the value is missing, reason inapplicable.

Family party_id · type Ordinal · timing Any time

Levels

Code Name Label
1 very Very strongly
2 fairly Fairly strongly
3 not_very Not very strongly
Coverage by study
Study Source Grade Reason Instrument Levels offered Wording Filter Weight Don’t know
qes2022 cps_provpidstr (cps) approximate (awaiting sign-off) The English version asks how strongly the respondent feels (very, fairly, not very strongly), but the French version, taken by 1,291 of 1,521 respondents (cps_UserLanguage FR-CA) who give 1,164 of the 1,352 answers, asks how close they feel (très proche, proche, pas très proche), the closeness wording graded approximate in 2007 and 2008; asked of those who named a party at cps_provpid (none of these, code 6, is routed out), web, with no don’t-know option, during the campaign. pid_strength_3 very, fairly, not_very How strongly ${cps_provpid/ChoiceGroup/SelectedChoicesTextEntry} do you feel? cps_provpid: 6 = inapplicable cps_weight_general Not offered
qes2018 q57 (post) comparable Same stem and options as the anchor, asked of those who named a party at q56, whose list offers four parties only. pid_strength_3 very, fairly, not_very How strongly [insert answer from Q56] do you feel? q56: 97 = inapplicable, 98 = inapplicable, 99 = inapplicable pond Offered explicitly
qes2014 Q56 (post) identical Same stem, options and filter as the anchor (asked of those who named a party at Q55), web. pid_strength_3 very, fairly, not_very How strongly [insert answer from Q55] do you feel? Q55: 97 = inapplicable, 98 = inapplicable, 99 = inapplicable POND Offered explicitly
qes2012 q93 (post) identical (anchor) Anchor row of the target. pid_strength_3 very, fairly, not_very How strongly [insert answer from Q92] do you feel? q92: 97 = inapplicable, 98 = inapplicable, 99 = inapplicable pond Offered explicitly
qes2008 q71 (post) approximate Asks how close the respondent feels to the party (très proche, assez proche, pas très proche), not how strongly they identify with it; asked of those who named one of the listed parties at q70 (another party, none, don’t know and refused are routed out); by telephone. pid_closeness_3 very, fairly, not_very How close do you feel to ? Is it… q70: 96 = inapplicable, 97 = inapplicable, 98 = inapplicable, 99 = inapplicable Not documented
qes2007 q71 (post) approximate Asks how close the respondent feels to the party (très proche, assez proche, pas très proche), not how strongly they identify with it; asked of those who named one of the listed parties at q70 (another party, none, don’t know and refused are routed out); by telephone. pid_closeness_3 very, fairly, not_very How close do you feel to ? Is it… q70: 96 = inapplicable, 97 = inapplicable, 98 = inapplicable, 99 = inapplicable pond Not documented

Attitudes

sov_indep: Referendum vote: independent country

How the respondent would vote in a referendum on whether Quebec should become an independent country.

Family sovereignty · type Categorical · timing Any time

Levels

Code Name Label
1 yes Yes
2 no No
95 would_not_vote Would not vote / would spoil
Coverage by study
Study Source Grade Reason Instrument Levels offered Wording Filter Weight Don’t know
qes2022 cps_qc_referendum (cps) comparable The stem adds a temporal adverb; don’t know is offered but there is no prefer-not-to-answer option. sov_indep_country yes, no; not offered: would_not_vote If there were today a referendum on independence that asked whether Quebec should be an independent country, would you vote YES or NO? cps_weight_general Offered explicitly
qes2018 q26 (post) comparable The stem adds a temporal adverb (‘today’, ‘aujourd’hui’); otherwise the same wording and options as the anchor. sov_indep_country yes, no; not offered: would_not_vote If there were today a referendum on independence that asked whether Quebec should be an independent country, would you vote YES or NO? pond Offered explicitly
qes2014 Q19 (post) identical Same stem as the anchor in English and French, same options (yes, no, don’t know, prefer not to answer), asked of everyone, web. sov_indep_country yes, no; not offered: would_not_vote If there were a referendum on independence that asked whether Quebec should be an independent country, would you vote YES or NO? POND Offered explicitly
qes2012 q52 (post) identical (anchor) Anchor row of the target. sov_indep_country yes, no; not offered: would_not_vote If there were a referendum on independence that asked whether Quebec should be an independent country, would you vote YES or NO? pond Offered explicitly

sov_sovereign_country: Referendum vote: sovereign country

How the respondent would vote in a referendum on whether Quebec should become a sovereign country. A different stimulus from sov_indep (sovereign, not independent), and a separate target; the pooled variable sov_support combines them and records the wording in sov_support__type. The push question asked of the undecided is not part of this target.

Family sovereignty · type Categorical · timing Any time

Levels

Code Name Label
1 yes Yes
2 no No
95 would_not_vote Would not vote / would spoil
Coverage by study
Study Source Grade Reason Instrument Levels offered Wording Filter Weight Don’t know
qes2012_panel intvoteref (pre) identical (anchor) Anchor row of the target; wording from the variable label and the codebook only (the pre-election questionnaire is not deposited), so whether would-not-vote and don’t know were read is not documented. sov_sovereign_country yes, no, would_not_vote Si un référendum avait lieu aujourd’hui vous demandant si vous voulez que le Québec devienne un pays souverain, voteriez-vous oui ou voteriez-vous non? pondam1 (not usable yet) Not documented

sov_favour: Favour Quebec independence (4 points)

How favourable or opposed the respondent is to Quebec independence, on a four-point scale. Not a referendum vote.

Family sovereignty · type Ordinal · timing Any time

Levels

Code Name Label
1 very_favourable Very favourable
2 somewhat_favourable Somewhat favourable
3 somewhat_opposed Somewhat opposed
4 very_opposed Very opposed
Coverage by study
Study Source Grade Reason Instrument Levels offered Wording Filter Weight Don’t know
qes2018_panel rts_q7 (post) identical (anchor) Anchor row of the target; wording from the codebook only (no questionnaire deposited), so whether don’t know was offered on the web is not documented. sov_favour_4pt very_favourable, somewhat_favourable, somewhat_opposed, very_opposed En ce qui concerne l’indépendance du Québec, c’est-à-dire que le Québec ne fasse plus partie du Canada, êtes-vous personnellement weight_rts Not documented

Not used

  • qes2018_panel independance (post): not_comparable. A recode of rts_q7 (1-2 favour, 3-4 oppose, 5 and missing set to missing), not a separate item: never mapped.

lr_self: Left-right self-placement (0-10)

Where the respondent places their own views on a scale from 0 (left) to 10 (right).

Family left_right · type Numeric · timing Any time

Valid range: 0-10

Coverage by study
Study Source Grade Reason Instrument Levels offered Wording Filter Weight Don’t know
qes2022 cps_ideoself_1 (cps) approximate Standalone 0-10 item with a different stem, no don’t-know option and not preceded by the party placements; item nonresponse is far lower than the don’t-know share of the anchor. lr_0_10 In politics, people sometimes talk of left and right. Where would you place yourself on this scale, where 0 means left and 10 means right? cps_weight_general Not offered
qes2018 q36_1 (post) comparable Same stem as the anchor, preceded by the party placements, but the endpoints read ‘left’ and ‘right’ instead of ‘most left’ and ‘most right’. lr_0_10 And on the same scale, where would you place your own views, generally speaking? pond Offered explicitly
qes2018_panel rts_q8 (post) approximate Different stem, mixed telephone and web mode; the deposited wording is cut at 80 characters, so the endpoint labels cannot be compared. lr_0_10 On utilise souvent un axe gauche-droite pour situer les opinions politiques des gens. Sur une échelle de 0 weight_rts Not documented
qes2014 Q32 (post) identical Same stem and endpoint labels as the anchor in English and French, preceded by the same party placements, web. lr_0_10 And on the same scale, where would you place your own views, generally speaking? POND Offered explicitly
qes2012 q71 (post) identical (anchor) Anchor row of the target. lr_0_10 And on the same scale, where would you place your own views, generally speaking? pond Offered explicitly

interest_4pt: Interest in politics (4 points)

How interested the respondent is in politics, on a four-point verbal scale. A separate target from the 0-10 interest items, never rescaled; the pooled variable pol_interest scores it on 0-1, graded approximate at most.

Family interest · type Ordinal · timing Any time

Levels

Code Name Label
1 very Very interested
2 quite Quite interested
3 hardly Hardly interested
4 not_at_all Not at all interested
Coverage by study
Study Source Grade Reason Instrument Levels offered Wording Filter Weight Don’t know
qes2018 q27 (post) comparable The stem adds ‘and public issues’; the options read very, somewhat, not very (assez, peu) and not at all interested. interest_4pt very, quite, hardly, not_at_all How interested would you say you are in politics and public issues? Are you: pond Offered explicitly
qes2014 Q28 (post) comparable Same stem in English and French and the same French options, but the third English option reads ‘Not very interested’ where the anchor has ‘Hardly interested’. interest_4pt very, quite, hardly, not_at_all How interested would you say you are in politics? Are you: POND Offered explicitly
qes2012 q67 (post) identical (anchor) Anchor row of the target. interest_4pt very, quite, hardly, not_at_all How interested would you say you are in politics? Are you: pond Offered explicitly

Not used

  • qes2012_panel interetrec (pre): not_comparable. Not a question: a campaign-interest score the producer derived from how much of each of the four leaders’ debates the respondent watched.

sov_partnership_1995: Referendum vote: the 1995 sovereignty-partnership question

How the respondent would vote if a referendum were held today on the question of the 1995 referendum, sovereignty with an offer of partnership to the rest of Canada. A different stimulus from sov_indep and sov_sovereign_country, and a separate target; the pooled variable sov_support combines them and records the wording in sov_support__type. The push question asked of the undecided is not part of this target (sov_partnership_1995_push includes it).

Family sovereignty · type Categorical · timing Any time

Levels

Code Name Label
1 yes Yes
2 no No
95 would_not_vote Would not vote / would spoil
Coverage by study
Study Source Grade Reason Instrument Levels offered Wording Filter Weight Don’t know
qes2008 q19 (post) comparable Same stem and options as the anchor in English and French; the mode differs (telephone by the deposit metadata; the anchor study mixes telephone and web). sov_partnership_1995 yes, no, would_not_vote If a referendum were held today on the same question as that asked in 1995, that is sovereignty with an offer of partnership with the rest of Canada, would you vote YES or would you vote NO? Not documented
qes2007 q19 (post) identical (anchor) Anchor row of the target: the 1995 question read in full; would not vote/spoil, don’t know and refused are codes; don’t know is pushed at q20, which is not part of the target. sov_partnership_1995 yes, no, would_not_vote If a referendum were held today on the same question as that asked in 1995, that is sovereignty with an offer of partnership with the rest of Canada, would you vote YES or would you vote NO? pond Not documented
qes2007_panel intref1 (pre) comparable Same question and options, by telephone; the stem says ‘accompagnée d’une offre de partenariat’ where the anchor says ‘assortie d’une offre’; would not vote, don’t know and refused are not read. sov_partnership_1995 yes, no, would_not_vote document 352416, 13 pondam1 (not usable yet) Volunteered only
qes1998 q16a_crop (pre) comparable Same stem and options as the anchor, by telephone; asked by CROP only (426 of the 1,483), not by CREATEC. sov_partnership_1995 yes, no, would_not_vote 16a. Si un référendum avait lieu aujourd’hui sur la même question que celle qui a été posée lors du dernier référendum de 1995, c’est-à-dire sur la souveraineté assortie d’une offre de partenariat au reste du Canada, voteriez-vous OUI ou voteriez-vous NON firme_post: 1 = inapplicable ponder3 (not usable yet) Not documented

interest_0_10: Interest in politics (0-10)

How interested the respondent is in politics in general, from 0 (no interest) to 10 (a great deal). A separate target from the four-point item (interest_4pt), never rescaled; the pooled variable pol_interest divides it by 10.

Family interest · type Numeric · timing Any time

Valid range: 0-10

Coverage by study
Study Source Grade Reason Instrument Levels offered Wording Filter Weight Don’t know
qes2022 cps_interest_1 (cps) approximate A slider from 0 to 10 on the web, with no don’t-know option; the anchor is a number read out on a scale, with don’t know and refusal volunteered. interest_0_10_slider How interested are you in politics generally? Set the slider to a number from 0 to 10, where 0 means no interest at all, and 10 means a great deal of interest. cps_weight_general Not offered
qes2007 q15 (post) identical (anchor) Anchor row of the target. interest_0_10 Et toujours avec la même échelle, quel est votre intérêt pour la politique en général ? (Sur une échelle de 0 à 10 où 0 veut dire aucun intérêt et 10 veut dire beaucoup d’intérêt) pond Volunteered only

interest_election_0_10: Interest in the provincial election (0-10)

How interested the respondent was in the Quebec general election that has just taken place, from 0 (no interest) to 10 (a great deal), asked after it. Interest in an election, not in politics in general.

Family interest · type Numeric · timing Post-election

Valid range: 0-10

Coverage by study
Study Source Grade Reason Instrument Levels offered Wording Filter Weight Don’t know
qes2008 q14 (post) comparable Same question and scale; the mode needs confirming, the anchor mixes telephone and web. interest_0_10 Using a scale from zero to ten, where zero (0) means no interest at all and ten (10) means a great deal of interest, how interested were you in this PROVINCIAL election? Offered explicitly
qes2007 q14 (post) identical (anchor) Anchor row of the target. interest_0_10 Sur une échelle de 0 à 10 où 0 veut dire aucun intérêt et 10 veut dire beaucoup d’intérêt, quel a été votre intérêt pour l’élection PROVINCIALE qui vient d’avoir lieu ? pond Volunteered only

interest_campaign_4pt: Interest in the election campaign (4 points)

How interested the respondent is in the current Quebec election campaign, on a four-point verbal scale, asked during it. Interest in a campaign, not in politics in general (interest_4pt).

Family interest · type Ordinal · timing Pre-election

Levels

Code Name Label
1 very Very interested
2 quite Quite interested
3 hardly Hardly interested
4 not_at_all Not at all interested
Coverage by study
Study Source Grade Reason Instrument Levels offered Wording Filter Weight Don’t know
qes2007_panel interet (pre) identical (anchor) Anchor row of the target. interest_4pt very, quite, hardly, not_at_all Personnellement, vous intéressez-vous beaucoup, assez, peu ou pas du tout à la présente campagne électorale au Québec? pondam1 (not usable yet) Volunteered only

sov_partnership_1995_push: Referendum vote: the 1995 question, undecided pushed

How the respondent would vote on the question of the 1995 referendum (sovereignty with an offer of partnership to the rest of Canada), with the respondents who did not know at the first question asked which way they would be inclined to vote (a push question), combined into one variable: the first answer where there is one, else the pushed answer. A separate target from sov_partnership_1995, which has the first question only; the pooled variable sov_support uses this one first.

Family sovereignty · type Categorical · timing Any time

Levels

Code Name Label
1 yes Yes
2 no No
95 would_not_vote Would not vote / would spoil
Coverage by study
Study Source Grade Reason Instrument Levels offered Wording Filter Weight Don’t know
qes2008 q19 + q20 (post) comparable Same first question and push as the anchor (q19, then q20 for those who did not know); the mode differs (telephone by the deposit metadata; the anchor study mixes telephone and web). sov_partnership_1995_push yes, no, would_not_vote If a referendum were held today on the same question as that asked in 1995, that is sovereignty with an offer of partnership with the rest of Canada, would you vote YES or would you vote NO? [If don’t know:] Even if you haven’t yet made up your mind, if a referendum were held today on this issue, would you be inclined to vote YES or to vote NO? Not documented
qes2007 q19 + q20 (post) identical (anchor) Anchor row of the target: the 1995 question read in full (q19), and, for the respondents who did not know, the push q20. sov_partnership_1995_push yes, no, would_not_vote If a referendum were held today on the same question as that asked in 1995, that is sovereignty with an offer of partnership with the rest of Canada, would you vote YES or would you vote NO? [If don’t know:] Even if you haven’t yet made up your mind, if a referendum were held today on this issue, would you be inclined to vote YES or to vote NO? pond Not documented
qes2007_panel intref1 + intref2 (pre) comparable Same question and push as the anchor, by telephone; the stem says ‘accompagnée d’une offre de partenariat’ where the anchor says ‘assortie d’une offre’; would not vote, don’t know and refused are not read. The push intref2 was asked of those who would not vote, did not know or refused (only those who did not know are pushed here, as in the anchor). sov_partnership_1995_push yes, no, would_not_vote Si un référendum avait lieu aujourd’hui sur la même question que celle qui a été posée lors du dernier référendum de 1995, c’est-à-dire sur la souveraineté accompagnée d’une offre de partenariat au reste du Canada, voteriez-vous Oui ou voteriez-vous Non? [Si ne sait pas :] Même si vous n’avez peut-être pas encore fait votre choix, s’il y avait un référendum aujourd’hui sur cette question, seriez-vous tenté(e) de voter Oui ou de voter Non? pondam1 (not usable yet) Volunteered only
qes1998 q16a_crop + q16b_crop (pre) comparable Same question and push as the anchor, by telephone; asked by CROP only (426 of the 1,483), not by CREATEC. The push q16b_crop was asked of those who would not vote, did not know or refused (only those who did not know are pushed here, as in the anchor). sov_partnership_1995_push yes, no, would_not_vote 16a. Si un référendum avait lieu aujourd’hui sur la même question que celle qui a été posée lors du dernier référendum de 1995, c’est-à-dire sur la souveraineté assortie d’une offre de partenariat au reste du Canada, voteriez-vous OUI ou voteriez-vous NON [Si ne sait pas :] 16b. Même si vous n’avez peut-être pas encore fait votre choix, s’il y avait un référendum aujourd’hui sur cette question, seriez-vous tenté(e) de voter pour le OUI ou pour le NON? firme_post: 1 = inapplicable ponder3 (not usable yet) Not documented

satis_demo_qc: Satisfaction with democracy in Quebec

How satisfied the respondent is, on the whole, with the way democracy works in Quebec, on a four-point verbal scale (very, fairly, not very, not at all satisfied).

Family democracy_satisfaction · type Ordinal · timing Any time

Levels

Code Name Label
1 very Very satisfied
2 fairly Fairly satisfied
3 not_very Not very satisfied
4 not_at_all Not at all satisfied
Coverage by study
Study Source Grade Reason Instrument Levels offered Wording Filter Weight Don’t know
qes2022 cps_satis_prov (cps) comparable Same construct and options; the stem asks ‘how satisfied are you’ (FR ‘quel est votre niveau de satisfaction’); web, with no don’t-know option (a skipped item is no_answer); asked during the campaign. satis_4pt very, fairly, not_very, not_at_all On the whole, how satisfied are you with the way democracy works in Quebec? cps_weight_general Not offered
qes2018 q1 (post) comparable The stem asks ‘how satisfied are you’ (anchor: ‘are you satisfied’); the second option reads ‘Somewhat satisfied’ in English (anchor: ‘Fairly satisfied’) and the third ‘Peu satisfait(e)’ in French (anchor: ‘Pas très satisfait(e)’); web, don’t know and refusal shown. satis_4pt very, fairly, not_very, not_at_all On the whole, how satisfied are you with the way democracy works in Quebec? Are you: pond Offered explicitly
qes2014 Q35 (post) identical Same stem and options as the anchor in English and French, web, with don’t know and refusal shown. satis_4pt very, fairly, not_very, not_at_all On the whole, are you satisfied with the way democracy works in Quebec? Are you: POND Offered explicitly
qes2012 q74 (post) identical (anchor) Anchor row of the target. satis_4pt very, fairly, not_very, not_at_all On the whole, are you satisfied with the way democracy works in Quebec? Are you: pond Offered explicitly
qes2008 q27 (post) comparable Same stem and options as the anchor in English and French; telephone by the deposit metadata (the deposited scripts read like a web one); don’t know and refusal are codes 8 and 9. satis_4pt very, fairly, not_very, not_at_all On the whole, are you SATISFIED with the way democracy works in Quebec? Are you … Not documented
qes2007 q27 (post) comparable Same stem and options as the anchor; the study mixes telephone and web interviews (only the telephone script is deposited), don’t know not read. satis_4pt very, fairly, not_very, not_at_all On the whole, are you SATISFIED with the way democracy works in Quebec? Are you … pond Not documented

gov_satisfaction: Satisfaction with the Quebec government

How satisfied the respondent is with the performance of the Quebec government in office, on a four-point scale. The government changes by design: each row’s wording names it (the Liberal government in 2012, the PQ government in 2014, Philippe Couillard’s in 2018, the government under François Legault in 2022).

Family government_satisfaction · type Ordinal · timing Any time

Levels

Code Name Label
1 very Very satisfied
2 fairly Fairly satisfied
3 not_very Not very satisfied
4 not_at_all Not at all satisfied
Coverage by study
Study Source Grade Reason Instrument Levels offered Wording Filter Weight Don’t know
qes2022 cps_province_gov_sat (cps) comparable The outgoing CAQ government, named by its leader (under François Legault); web, with no don’t-know option; asked during the campaign. gov_satis_4pt very, fairly, not_very, not_at_all How satisfied are you with the performance of the Quebec government under François Legault? cps_weight_general Not offered
qes2018 q10 (post) comparable The outgoing Liberal government, named by its leader (Philippe Couillard’s); the stem asks for the overall level of satisfaction and the third option reads ‘Peu satisfait(e)’. gov_satis_4pt very, fairly, not_very, not_at_all Overall, what is your level of satisfaction with the performance of Philippe Couillard’s liberal government? pond Offered explicitly
qes2014 Q10 (post) comparable Same stem and options as the anchor about the government in office, the outgoing PQ government of Pauline Marois (named by its party). gov_satis_4pt very, fairly, not_very, not_at_all How satisfied are you with the performance of the PQ government in general? POND Offered explicitly
qes2012 q35 (post) identical (anchor) Anchor row of the target: the outgoing Liberal government of Jean Charest. gov_satis_4pt very, fairly, not_very, not_at_all How satisfied are you with the performance of the provincial Liberal government in general? pond Offered explicitly
qes2007_panel satisf (pre) approximate A bipolar scale (very or rather satisfied, rather or very dissatisfied) read by telephone during the campaign, about the present Quebec government (Jean Charest’s Liberal government); rather dissatisfied and very dissatisfied are taken as not very and not at all satisfied. gov_satis_bipolar very, fairly, not_very, not_at_all Diriez-vous que vous êtes très satisfait(e), plutôt satisfait(e), plutôt insatisfait(e) ou très insatisfait(e) du présent gouvernement du Québec? pondam1 (not usable yet) Volunteered only

econ_retro_qc: Quebec’s economy over the past year

Whether the respondent thinks Quebec’s economy has gotten better, stayed about the same or gotten worse over the past year (a retrospective, sociotropic evaluation).

Family economy_retrospective · type Ordinal · timing Any time

Levels

Code Name Label
1 better Better
2 same About the same
3 worse Worse
Coverage by study
Study Source Grade Reason Instrument Levels offered Wording Filter Weight Don’t know
qes2022 cps_provecon (cps) comparable Same question and options, web, with no don’t-know option; asked during the campaign, which the 2022 inflation shaped. econ_retro_3 better, same, worse Over the past year, has Quebec’s economy… cps_weight_general Not offered
qes2018 q53 (post) identical Same stem and options as the anchor in English and French, web, with don’t know and refusal shown (codes 98 and 99). econ_retro_3 better, same, worse Over the past year, has Quebec’s economy: gotten better, gotten worse, or stayed about the same? pond Offered explicitly
qes2014 Q52 (post) identical Same stem and options as the anchor in English and French, web, with don’t know and refusal shown. econ_retro_3 better, same, worse Over the past year, has Quebec’s economy: gotten better, gotten worse, or stayed about the same? POND Offered explicitly
qes2012 q91 (post) identical (anchor) Anchor row of the target. econ_retro_3 better, same, worse Over the past year, has Quebec’s economy: gotten better, gotten worse, or stayed about the same? pond Offered explicitly
qes2008 q47 (post) comparable Same question and options, by telephone, fielded in December 2008 at the start of the financial crisis. econ_retro_3 better, same, worse Over the PAST YEAR, has QUÉBEC’s economy: gotten better, gotten worse, or stayed about the same? Not documented
qes2007 q47 (post) comparable Same question and options; the study mixes telephone and web interviews (only the telephone script is deposited). econ_retro_3 better, same, worse Over the PAST YEAR, has QUEBEC’s economy: gotten better, gotten worse, or stayed about the same? pond Not documented

attach_qc: Attachment to Quebec

How attached the respondent feels to Quebec, on a four-point scale (very, fairly, not very, not at all).

Family attachment · type Ordinal · timing Any time

Levels

Code Name Label
1 very Very attached
2 fairly Fairly attached
3 not_very Not very attached
4 not_at_all Not at all attached
Coverage by study
Study Source Grade Reason Instrument Levels offered Wording Filter Weight Don’t know
qes2022 cps_qc_attach (cps) comparable Same stem as the anchor; the French options read ‘Assez attaché(e)’ and ‘Peu attaché(e)’; web; don’t know is an option but there is no refusal option; asked during the campaign (pre-election), whereas the anchor is post-election. attach_4pt very, fairly, not_very, not_at_all How attached do you feel to Quebec? cps_weight_general Offered explicitly
qes2018 q18 (post) comparable Same stem as the anchor; the English second option reads ‘Somewhat attached’ (anchor ‘Fairly attached’) and the French options read ‘Assez attaché(e)’ and ‘Peu attaché(e)’ (anchor ‘Plutôt attaché(e)’, ‘Pas très attaché(e)’). attach_4pt very, fairly, not_very, not_at_all How attached do you feel to Quebec? pond Offered explicitly
qes2014 Q12 (post) comparable Same stem as the anchor; the French options read ‘Plutôt attaché(e)’ and ‘Pas très attaché(e)’. attach_4pt very, fairly, not_very, not_at_all How attached do you feel to Quebec? POND Offered explicitly
qes2012 q1 (post) identical (anchor) Anchor row of the target. attach_4pt very, fairly, not_very, not_at_all How attached do you feel to Quebec? pond Offered explicitly

attach_ca: Attachment to Canada

How attached the respondent feels to Canada, on a four-point scale (very, fairly, not very, not at all).

Family attachment · type Ordinal · timing Any time

Levels

Code Name Label
1 very Very attached
2 fairly Fairly attached
3 not_very Not very attached
4 not_at_all Not at all attached
Coverage by study
Study Source Grade Reason Instrument Levels offered Wording Filter Weight Don’t know
qes2022 cps_can_attach (cps) comparable Same stem and options as the anchor in English (without the leading ‘And’); the French options read ‘Assez attaché(e)’ and ‘Peu attaché(e)’ (anchor: ‘Plutôt attaché(e)’, ‘Pas très attaché(e)’); web; don’t know is an option (code 5); asked during the campaign, the anchor after the election. attach_4pt very, fairly, not_very, not_at_all How attached do you feel to Canada? cps_weight_general Offered explicitly
qes2018 q19 (post) comparable Same stem as the anchor; option 2 reads ‘Somewhat attached’ in English (anchor ‘Fairly attached’), and the French options read ‘Assez attaché(e)’ and ‘Peu attaché(e)’ (anchor ‘Plutôt attaché(e)’, ‘Pas très attaché(e)’). The file has no value labels; codes come from the questionnaire with programmed answer values (367181). attach_4pt very, fairly, not_very, not_at_all And how attached do you feel to Canada? pond Offered explicitly
qes2014 Q13 (post) comparable Same stem as the anchor; the French options read ‘Plutôt attaché(e)’ and ‘Pas très attaché(e)’. attach_4pt very, fairly, not_very, not_at_all And how attached do you feel to Canada? POND Offered explicitly
qes2012 q2 (post) identical (anchor) Anchor row of the target. attach_4pt very, fairly, not_very, not_at_all And how attached do you feel to Canada? pond Offered explicitly

identity_qc_ca: Québécois or Canadian identity

How the respondent defines themselves, from Québécois only to Canadian only (the five-point Moreno question); another self-definition is an answer (level other).

Family national_identity · type Categorical · timing Any time

Levels

Code Name Label
1 qc_only Québécois only
2 qc_first Québécois first, then Canadian
3 equal Equally Québécois and Canadian
4 ca_first Canadian first, then Québécois
5 ca_only Canadian only
90 other Other
Coverage by study
Study Source Grade Reason Instrument Levels offered Wording Filter Weight Don’t know
qes2022 pes_identity_qc_ca (cps) comparable The French stem of the anchor, web, with ‘Cannot say’ (Je ne sais pas) as an option always shown last; the five options were shown from Canadian only to Québécois only for 741 respondents and in the reverse order for the other 780 (display-order variables pes_identity_qc_ca_DO_1 to DO_6), one variable, so the order effect averages as in 2014, 2007 and 2008. Despite its pes prefix, the item is in the campaign-period survey: every respondent answered it, those of the post-election wave and the 301 who did not take it alike (codebook p. 52, in the campaign section). identity_moreno_5 qc_only, qc_first, equal, ca_first, ca_only; not offered: other People have different ways of defining themselves. Do you consider yourself to be __________ cps_weight_general Offered explicitly
qes2014 Q14A + Q14B (post) comparable The anchor’s question in English and French, asked on a split ballot: half the sample (Q14A, SEL1 = 1) saw the options from Québécois only to Canadian only, the other half (Q14B) in reverse order; the two halves are combined, which averages the order effect. identity_moreno_5 qc_only, qc_first, equal, ca_first, ca_only; not offered: other Which, if any, of the following best describes the way you think of yourself? (options in one order for half the sample, Q14A, in the reverse order for the other half, Q14B) POND Offered explicitly
qes2012 q3 (post) identical (anchor) Anchor row of the target. identity_moreno_5 qc_only, qc_first, equal, ca_first, ca_only; not offered: other Which if any of the following best describes the way you think of yourself? pond Offered explicitly
qes2008 q18a + q18b (post) comparable The French stem of the anchor, with the five options read in one order for half the sample (q18a) and in the reverse order for the other half (q18b), combined; another self-definition (96, ‘Other, specify’) is printed as an option in both questionnaires, with no reading instruction; by telephone (per the deposit metadata). identity_moreno_5 qc_only, qc_first, equal, ca_first, ca_only, other People have different ways of defining themselves. Do you consider yourself to be… Not documented
qes2007 q18a + q18b (post) comparable The French stem of the anchor, with the five options read in one order for half the sample (q18a) and in the reverse order for the other half (q18b), combined; another self-definition (96) is volunteered; telephone and web. identity_moreno_5 qc_only, qc_first, equal, ca_first, ca_only, other People have different ways of defining themselves. Do you consider yourself to be… pond Not documented

therm_leader_plq: Rating of the PLQ leader (0-100)

How much the respondent likes the leader of the PLQ, from 0 (really dislike) to 100 (really like); the leader changes by design, and each row names the person rated. Not knowing the leader is don’t know (dk).

Family leader_ratings · type Numeric · timing Any time

Valid range: 0-100

Coverage by study
Study Source Grade Reason Instrument Levels offered Wording Filter Weight Don’t know
qes2022 cps_leadertherm_1 (cps) approximate A 0-100 slider for each provincial leader, web, asked during the campaign; -99 is the explicit ‘Don’t know leader’ option (codebook 7449514, p. 26) and, per the codebook note under cps_intelligent, may also include a slider left blank (the file has no system missing), so it is read as don’t know. therm_0_100 Using the same scale, how do you feel about the provincial party leaders below? [Dominique Anglade] cps_weight_general Offered explicitly
qes2018 q33_a (post) approximate A 0-10 scale multiplied by 10 (affine 10*x): the same construct on a coarser scale; not knowing the person (97) is don’t know; web. therm_0_10 On a scale of 0 to 10, where 0 means you REALLY DISLIKE him or her and 10 means you REALLY LIKE him or her, how do you feel about… Philippe Couillard? pond Offered explicitly
qes2014 Q29A (post) comparable Same stem and 0-100 scale as the anchor, web; not knowing the person (997) is don’t know. therm_0_100 On a scale where zero means you REALLY DISLIKE him and one hundred means you REALLY LIKE him, how do you feel about … POND Offered explicitly
qes2012 q68 (post) identical (anchor) Anchor row of the target. therm_0_100 On a scale where zero means you REALLY DISLIKE him and one hundred means you REALLY LIKE him, how do you feel about JEAN CHAREST? pond Offered explicitly
qes2008 q39 (post) comparable Same 0-100 scale; telephone by the deposit metadata (to be confirmed); not knowing any leader (995) or this one (997) is don’t know. The French wording matches the anchor; the deposited English questionnaire asks only ‘How do you feel about JEAN CHAREST?’ and does not define 0 and 100 (the anchor’s English does). therm_0_100 How do you feel about JEAN CHAREST? Not documented
qes2007 q39 (post) comparable Same 0-100 scale; the study mixes telephone and web interviews; not knowing the leader or any leader (995, 997) is don’t know. therm_0_100 Now the party leaders. On the same scale, where zero means you REALLY DISLIKE the leader and one hundred means you REALLY LIKE the leader. How do you feel about JEAN CHAREST? pond Not documented

therm_leader_pq: Rating of the PQ leader (0-100)

How much the respondent likes the leader of the PQ, from 0 (really dislike) to 100 (really like); the leader changes by design, and each row names the person rated. Not knowing the leader is don’t know (dk).

Family leader_ratings · type Numeric · timing Any time

Valid range: 0-100

Coverage by study
Study Source Grade Reason Instrument Levels offered Wording Filter Weight Don’t know
qes2022 cps_leadertherm_2 (cps) approximate A 0-100 slider for each provincial leader, web, asked during the campaign; -99 is the explicit ‘Don’t know leader’ option (codebook 7449514, p. 26) and, per the codebook note under cps_intelligent, may also include a slider left blank (the file has no system missing), so it is read as don’t know. therm_0_100 Using the same scale, how do you feel about the provincial party leaders below? [Paul St-Pierre Plamondon] cps_weight_general Offered explicitly
qes2018 q33_b (post) approximate A 0-10 scale multiplied by 10 (affine 10*x): the same construct on a coarser scale; not knowing the person (97) is don’t know; web. therm_0_10 On a scale of 0 to 10, where 0 means you REALLY DISLIKE him or her and 10 means you REALLY LIKE him or her, how do you feel about… Jean-François Lisée? pond Offered explicitly
qes2014 Q29B (post) comparable Same stem and 0-100 scale as the anchor, web; not knowing the person (997) is don’t know. therm_0_100 On a scale where zero means you REALLY DISLIKE him and one hundred means you REALLY LIKE him, how do you feel about … PAULINE MAROIS? POND Offered explicitly
qes2012 q68b (post) identical (anchor) Anchor row of the target. therm_0_100 On the same scale, how do you feel about PAULINE MAROIS? pond Offered explicitly
qes2008 q40 (post) comparable Same 0-100 scale; telephone by the deposit metadata (to be confirmed); not knowing any leader (995) or this one (997) is don’t know. The French wording matches the anchor; the deposited English questionnaire asks only ‘How do you feel about PAULINE MAROIS?’ and does not define 0 and 100 (the anchor’s English does). therm_0_100 How do you feel about PAULINE MAROIS? Not documented
qes2007 q40 (post) comparable Same 0-100 scale; the study mixes telephone and web interviews; not knowing the leader or any leader (995, 997) is don’t know. therm_0_100 Now the party leaders. On the same scale, where zero means you REALLY DISLIKE the leader and one hundred means you REALLY LIKE the leader. How do you feel about ANDRÉ BOISCLAIR? pond Not documented

therm_leader_caq: Rating of the CAQ leader (0-100)

How much the respondent likes the leader of the CAQ, from 0 (really dislike) to 100 (really like); the leader changes by design, and each row names the person rated. Not knowing the leader is don’t know (dk).

Family leader_ratings · type Numeric · timing Any time

Valid range: 0-100

Coverage by study
Study Source Grade Reason Instrument Levels offered Wording Filter Weight Don’t know
qes2022 cps_leadertherm_3 (cps) approximate A 0-100 slider for each provincial leader, web, asked during the campaign; -99 is the explicit ‘Don’t know leader’ option (codebook 7449514, p. 26) and, per the codebook note under cps_intelligent, may also include a slider left blank (the file has no system missing), so it is read as don’t know. therm_0_100 Using the same scale, how do you feel about the provincial party leaders below? [François Legault] cps_weight_general Offered explicitly
qes2018 q33_c (post) approximate A 0-10 scale multiplied by 10 (affine 10*x): the same construct on a coarser scale; not knowing the person (97) is don’t know; web. therm_0_10 On a scale of 0 to 10, where 0 means you REALLY DISLIKE him or her and 10 means you REALLY LIKE him or her, how do you feel about… François Legault? pond Offered explicitly
qes2014 Q29C (post) comparable Same stem and 0-100 scale as the anchor, web; not knowing the person (997) is don’t know. therm_0_100 On a scale where zero means you REALLY DISLIKE him and one hundred means you REALLY LIKE him, how do you feel about … FRANÇOIS LEGAULT? POND Offered explicitly
qes2012 q68c (post) identical (anchor) Anchor row of the target. therm_0_100 On the same scale, how do you feel about FRANÇOIS LEGAULT? pond Offered explicitly

therm_leader_qs: Rating of the QS leader (0-100)

How much the respondent likes the leader of the QS, from 0 (really dislike) to 100 (really like); the leader changes by design, and each row names the person rated (QS has two spokespersons: the one the study rated, or its candidate for premier when the study rated both). Not knowing the leader is don’t know (dk).

Family leader_ratings · type Numeric · timing Any time

Valid range: 0-100

Coverage by study
Study Source Grade Reason Instrument Levels offered Wording Filter Weight Don’t know
qes2022 cps_leadertherm_7 (cps) approximate A 0-100 slider for each provincial leader, web, asked during the campaign; -99 is the explicit ‘Don’t know leader’ option (codebook 7449514, p. 26) and, per the codebook note under cps_intelligent, may also include a slider left blank (the file has no system missing), so it is read as don’t know. therm_0_100 Using the same scale, how do you feel about the provincial party leaders below? [Gabriel Nadeau-Dubois] cps_weight_general Offered explicitly
qes2018 q33_d (post) approximate A 0-10 scale multiplied by 10 (affine 10*x): the same construct on a coarser scale; not knowing the person (97) is don’t know; web. therm_0_10 On a scale of 0 to 10, where 0 means you REALLY DISLIKE him or her and 10 means you REALLY LIKE him or her, how do you feel about… Manon Massé? pond Offered explicitly
qes2014 Q29D (post) comparable Same stem and 0-100 scale as the anchor, web; not knowing the person (997) is don’t know. therm_0_100 On a scale where zero means you REALLY DISLIKE him and one hundred means you REALLY LIKE him, how do you feel about … FRANÇOISE DAVID? POND Offered explicitly
qes2012 q68d (post) identical (anchor) Anchor row of the target. therm_0_100 On the same scale, how do you feel about AMIR KHADIR? pond Offered explicitly
qes2008 q42 (post) comparable Same 0-100 scale; telephone by the deposit metadata (to be confirmed); not knowing any leader (995) or this one (997) is don’t know. The French wording matches the anchor; the deposited English questionnaire asks only ‘How do you feel about FRANÇOISE DAVID?’ and does not define 0 and 100 (the anchor’s English does). therm_0_100 How do you feel about FRANÇOISE DAVID? Not documented
qes2007 q42 (post) comparable Same 0-100 scale; the study mixes telephone and web interviews; not knowing the leader or any leader (995, 997) is don’t know. therm_0_100 Now the party leaders. On the same scale, where zero means you REALLY DISLIKE the leader and one hundred means you REALLY LIKE the leader. How do you feel about FRANÇOISE DAVID? pond Not documented

therm_leader_adq: Rating of the ADQ leader (0-100)

How much the respondent likes the leader of the ADQ, from 0 (really dislike) to 100 (really like); the leader changes by design, and each row names the person rated. Not knowing the leader is don’t know (dk).

Family leader_ratings · type Numeric · timing Any time

Valid range: 0-100

Coverage by study
Study Source Grade Reason Instrument Levels offered Wording Filter Weight Don’t know
qes2008 q41 (post) comparable Same 0-100 scale; telephone by the deposit metadata (to be confirmed); not knowing any leader (995) or this one (997) is don’t know. The French wording matches the anchor; the deposited English questionnaire asks only ‘How do you feel about MARIO DUMONT?’ and does not define 0 and 100 (the anchor’s English does). therm_0_100 How do you feel about MARIO DUMONT? Not documented
qes2007 q41 (post) identical (anchor) Anchor row of the target. therm_0_100 Now the party leaders. On the same scale, where zero means you REALLY DISLIKE the leader and one hundred means you REALLY LIKE the leader. How do you feel about MARIO DUMONT? pond Not documented

Issues

mip_issue: Most important issue of the election

Which issue, from the study’s closed list, was the most important to the respondent personally in the Quebec general election of the study. The lists change from election to election: an issue a study did not list is a structural zero there (levels_not_offered), not an absence of concern.

Family issues · type Categorical · timing Any time

Levels

Code Name Label
1 economy The economy
2 health Health care
3 environment The environment
4 education Education
5 families Aid to families
6 poverty Poverty
7 integrity Integrity and corruption
8 taxes_finances Taxes and public finances
9 sovereignty Quebec sovereignty
10 secularism State secularism (the charter)
11 immigration Immigration
12 cost_of_living Cost of living
13 housing Housing
14 french_language The French language
90 other Another issue
Coverage by study
Study Source Grade Reason Instrument Levels offered Wording Filter Weight Don’t know
qes2022 cps_impissue_matrix (cps) comparable The same question (‘for you personally, the most important’) about the study’s election, with the study’s own closed list: issues it did not list are structural zeros. Fourteen issues, asked during the campaign, web, no don’t-know option; Quebec City’s third road link and gun violence are other issues. mip_closed_list economy, health, environment, education, poverty, integrity, taxes_finances, sovereignty, immigration, cost_of_living, housing, french_language, other; not offered: families, secularism What is the most important issue to you personally in this provincial election? cps_weight_general Not offered
qes2018 q2 (post) comparable The same question (‘for you personally, the most important’) about the study’s election, with the study’s own closed list: issues it did not list are structural zeros. Ten issues and another issue; integrity reads ‘of politicians and corruption’. mip_closed_list economy, health, environment, education, families, poverty, integrity, taxes_finances, sovereignty, immigration, other; not offered: secularism, cost_of_living, housing, french_language Of the following issues, which was, for you personally, the most important in the provincial election held on October 1st? pond Offered explicitly
qes2014 Q1 (post) comparable The same question (‘for you personally, the most important’) about the study’s election, with the study’s own closed list: issues it did not list are structural zeros. Ten issues, among them the charter of secularism (the PQ’s Charte des valeurs). mip_closed_list economy, health, environment, education, families, poverty, integrity, taxes_finances, sovereignty, secularism; not offered: immigration, cost_of_living, housing, french_language, other Of the following issues, which was, for you personally, the most important in the provincial election held on April 7? POND Offered explicitly
qes2012 q34bb (post) identical (anchor) Anchor row of the target: eight issues, no other-issue option. mip_closed_list economy, health, environment, education, families, poverty, integrity, sovereignty; not offered: taxes_finances, secularism, immigration, cost_of_living, housing, french_language, other Of the following issues, which was, for you personally, the most important in the provincial election of September 4? pond Offered explicitly
qes2008 q1 (post) comparable The same question (‘for you personally, the most important’) about the study’s election, with the study’s own closed list: issues it did not list are structural zeros. Six issues and another issue, by telephone. mip_closed_list economy, health, environment, education, families, poverty, other; not offered: integrity, taxes_finances, sovereignty, secularism, immigration, cost_of_living, housing, french_language What was the most important issue to you personally in the provincial election on December 8? Not offered

Sociodemographics

birth_year: Year of birth

Year the respondent was born.

Family birth · type Numeric · timing Time-invariant

Valid range: 1900-2010

Coverage by study
Study Source Grade Reason Instrument Levels offered Wording Filter Weight Don’t know
qes2022 cps_yob (cps) identical (anchor) Anchor row of the target. yob_list Finally, in what year were you born? cps_weight_general Not offered
qes2018 ageyear_1 (post) comparable Same question (year of birth); year and month are entered, with an option not to answer (age is then asked instead); the anchor offers a list of years without one. yob_month_entry In what year were you born? agensp: 1 = refused pond Offered explicitly
qes2014 QAGE (post) comparable Same question (year of birth); the year is typed in a box, with an option not to answer; the anchor offers a list of years without one. yob_entry In what year were you born? POND Offered explicitly
qes2012 agex (post) comparable Same question (year of birth); the year is typed in a box, with an option not to answer; the anchor offers a list of years without one. yob_entry In what year were you born? pond Offered explicitly
qes2008 q75 (post) comparable Same question (year of birth); the year is entered, with an option not to answer; the anchor offers a list of years without one. yob_entry To make sure we are talking to a cross section of Quebeckers, we need to get a little information about your background. First, in what year were you born? (Example: 1972) I prefer not answering 9999 Not documented
qes2007 q75 (post) comparable Same question (year of birth); the year is entered, with a refusal code; the anchor offers a list of years without one. yob_entry To make sure we are talking to a cross section of Quebeckers, we need to get a little information about your background. First, in what year were you born? Enter year of birth Refusal 9999 pond Not documented

birth_month: Month of birth

Month the respondent was born (1 = January). Asked with the year of birth in some studies; with birth_year, it tells whether a respondent born 18 years before the election year was 18 on election day.

Family birth · type Numeric · timing Time-invariant

Valid range: 1-12

Coverage by study
Study Source Grade Reason Instrument Levels offered Wording Filter Weight Don’t know
qes2018 agemonth_1 (post) identical (anchor) Anchor row of the target. yob_month_entry In what year were you born? agensp: 1 = refused pond Offered explicitly

age: Age in years

The respondent’s age in years at the interview, as asked. Never computed from the year of birth, which gives the age only to within a year.

Family age_years · type Numeric · timing Any time

Valid range: 15-115

Coverage by study
Study Source Grade Reason Instrument Levels offered Wording Filter Weight Don’t know
qes2022 cps_age_in_years (cps) identical (anchor) Anchor row of the target. age_list To make sure we are talking to a cross section of Canadians, we need to get a little information about your background. First, how old are you? cps_weight_general Not offered
qes2018 agenum (post) approximate The same question (How old are you?, a list of ages) asked only of the respondents who did not give their year and month of birth; the anchor asks every respondent. age_list How old are you? agensp: 0 = inapplicable pond Offered explicitly

age_group3: Age group (3 bands)

The respondent’s age group at the interview in three bands: 18-34, 35-54, 55 and over. Built from a question with these bands or with bands that collapse into them exactly; where the study has no such question, derived from the age (exact) or the year of birth (graded approximate: an age at a band edge can be one year off).

Family age_bands · type Ordinal · timing Any time

Levels

Code Name Label
1 a18_34 18-34
2 a35_54 35-54
3 a55_plus 55 and over
Coverage by study
Study Source Grade Reason Instrument Levels offered Wording Filter Weight Don’t know
qes2018_panel age (pre) identical (anchor) Anchor row of the target. age_3bands a18_34, a35_54, a55_plus document 341538, age weight Not documented
qes2012_panel age (pre) comparable Six age bands, collapsed exactly into the three of the target (18-24 and 25-34, 35-44 and 45-54, 55-64 and 65 and over), by telephone; the anchor offers the three bands, by telephone and web. age_6bands a18_34, a35_54, a55_plus document 654292, age pondam1 (not usable yet) Not documented
qes_crop_2007_2010 QAGE (each poll) comparable Six age bands, collapsed exactly into the three of the target (18-24 and 25-34, 35-44 and 45-54, 55-64 and 65 and over), by telephone; the anchor offers the three bands, by telephone and web. age_6bands a18_34, a35_54, a55_plus Auquel des groupes d’àges suivants appartenez-vous? XPOND (not usable yet) Not documented
qes2008 q0age (post) comparable Seven age bands, collapsed exactly into the three of the target (18-24 and 25-34, 35-44 and 45-54, 55-64, 65-74 and 75 and over); the anchor offers the three bands. age_7bands a18_34, a35_54, a55_plus How old are you? Not documented
qes2007_panel age (any wave) comparable Six age bands, collapsed exactly into the three of the target (18-24 and 25-34, 35-44 and 45-54, 55-64 and 65 and over), by telephone; the anchor offers the three bands, by telephone and web. age_6bands a18_34, a35_54, a55_plus Auquel des groupes d’âges suivants appartenez-vous? Not documented
qes1998 age (pre) comparable Six age bands, collapsed exactly into the three of the target (18-24 and 25-34, 35-44 and 45-54, 55-64 and 65 and over), by telephone; the anchor offers the three bands, by telephone and web. age_6bands a18_34, a35_54, a55_plus A quel groupe d’age appartenez-vous? (LIRE SI NECESSAIRE) ponder3 (not usable yet) Not documented

citizen: Canadian citizen

Whether the respondent is a Canadian citizen, where the study asked. Only citizens may vote in Quebec elections.

Family citizenship · type Categorical · timing Any time

Levels

Code Name Label
1 yes Yes
2 no No
Coverage by study
Study Source Grade Reason Instrument Levels offered Wording Filter Weight Don’t know
qes2022 cps_citizen (cps) identical (anchor) Anchor row of the target. citizen_status yes, no Are you a… cps_weight_general Not offered

age_group6: Age group (6 bands)

The respondent’s age group at the interview in six bands: 18-24, 25-34, 35-44, 45-54, 55-64, 65 and over. Built from a question with these bands or with bands that collapse into them exactly; where the study has no such question, derived from the age (exact) or the year of birth (graded approximate: an age at a band edge can be one year off).

Family age_bands · type Ordinal · timing Any time

Levels

Code Name Label
1 a18_24 18-24
2 a25_34 25-34
3 a35_44 35-44
4 a45_54 45-54
5 a55_64 55-64
6 a65_plus 65 and over
Coverage by study
Study Source Grade Reason Instrument Levels offered Wording Filter Weight Don’t know
qes2012_panel age (pre) comparable The six bands of the anchor, by telephone; the codebooks do not say whether don’t know was offered. age_6bands a18_24, a25_34, a35_44, a45_54, a55_64, a65_plus document 654292, age pondam1 (not usable yet) Not documented
qes_crop_2007_2010 QAGE (each poll) identical (anchor) Anchor row of the target. age_6bands a18_24, a25_34, a35_44, a45_54, a55_64, a65_plus Auquel des groupes d’àges suivants appartenez-vous? XPOND (not usable yet) Not documented
qes2008 q0age (post) comparable Seven age bands, collapsed exactly into the six of the target (65-74 and 75 and over into 65 and over); the anchor offers the six bands, by telephone. age_7bands a18_24, a25_34, a35_44, a45_54, a55_64, a65_plus How old are you? Not documented
qes2007_panel age (any wave) comparable The six bands of the anchor, by telephone; the codebooks do not say whether don’t know was offered. age_6bands a18_24, a25_34, a35_44, a45_54, a55_64, a65_plus Auquel des groupes d’âges suivants appartenez-vous? Not documented
qes1998 age (pre) comparable The six bands of the anchor, by telephone, asked by both firms; the anchor’s codebook does not say whether don’t know was offered, nor does this one. age_6bands a18_24, a25_34, a35_44, a45_54, a55_64, a65_plus A quel groupe d’age appartenez-vous? (LIRE SI NECESSAIRE) ponder3 (not usable yet) Not documented

gender: Gender

The respondent’s gender, as asked or, in some telephone surveys, as recorded by the interviewer. Most studies offered only man and woman (a question on sex, in some); qes2022 also offered non-binary and another gender.

Family sex_gender · type Categorical · timing Time-invariant

Levels

Code Name Label
1 man Man
2 woman Woman
3 nonbinary Non-binary
4 other Another gender
Coverage by study
Study Source Grade Reason Instrument Levels offered Wording Filter Weight Don’t know
qes2022 cps_genderid (cps) comparable A question on gender identity on the web that adds non-binary and another gender to the two options of the anchor; expected to move the shares of man and woman very little. gender_4 man, woman, nonbinary, other Are you…? cps_weight_general Not offered
qes2018 qsexe (post) comparable Same two options on the web and the same stems as the anchor (English gender, French sexe); the French questionnaire with programmed values adds Statistics Canada’s note that transgender, transsexual and intersex respondents choose the sex they identify with most; the file has no value labels. gender_2 man, woman; not offered: nonbinary, other What is your gender? pond Not offered
qes2018_panel sexfix (pre) comparable Same two options, by web (850) and telephone (400); the codebook gives only the label Sexe, so whether it was asked or recorded is not documented. gender_2 man, woman; not offered: nonbinary, other Sexe: weight Not documented
qes2014 QSEXE (post) comparable Same two options on the web and the same stems as the anchor in English (What is your gender?) and French (Quel est votre sexe?), plus a no-answer option that is not in the file; kept at comparable, the grade it had before the review: an identical grade for a row that pools the languages of the interview is given only after a review by a person, which this row has not had yet. gender_2 man, woman; not offered: nonbinary, other What is your gender? POND Not offered
qes2012 sexe (post) identical (anchor) Anchor row of the target. gender_2 man, woman; not offered: nonbinary, other What is your gender? pond Not offered
qes2012_panel sexe (pre) comparable Same two options, by telephone; the codebook gives only the variable name, so whether it was asked or recorded is not documented. sex_recorded man, woman; not offered: nonbinary, other document 654292, sexe pondam1 (not usable yet) Not documented
qes_crop_2007_2010 SEXE (each poll) comparable Same two options, recorded by the interviewer (not asked), by telephone. sex_recorded man, woman; not offered: nonbinary, other INSCRIRE LE SEXE DU REPONDANT XPOND (not usable yet) Not offered
qes2008 q76 (post) comparable Asked (Un homme / Une femme) with the same two options; the mode of the study needs confirming (telephone in the deposit’s metadata), the anchor is web. gender_2 man, woman; not offered: nonbinary, other Are you…? Not offered
qes2007 q76 (post) comparable Recorded by the telephone interviewer without asking (NE PAS LIRE), and on the web for the web respondents (only the telephone script is deposited); same two options. sex_recorded man, woman; not offered: nonbinary, other (DO NOT READ) Enter respondent’s gender: pond Not offered
qes2007_panel sexe (any wave) comparable Same two options, recorded by the interviewer (not asked), by telephone. sex_recorded man, woman; not offered: nonbinary, other INSCRIRE LE SEXE DU RÉPONDANT Not offered
qes1998 sexe_post (pre) comparable Same two options, by telephone; the codebooks give only the label SEXE (Sexe du répondant in CROP’s), so whether it was asked or recorded by the interviewer is not documented. sex_recorded man, woman; not offered: nonbinary, other SEXE ponder3 (not usable yet) Not offered

education4: Education (4 groups)

The respondent’s highest level of education in four groups: primary or less, secondary, college (CEGEP or technical), university (completed or not). From the highest level completed where the study asks for it, from years of schooling otherwise (graded approximate). A vocational or trade credential (the DEP) has no group of its own and is not placed alike in every study: secondary where the question lists the DEP as a secondary diploma (qes2018), college where it is a trade certificate or technical training (qes2018_panel and, probably, the studies with no DEP option); see the grade reasons.

Family education · type Ordinal · timing Time-invariant

Levels

Code Name Label
1 primary Primary or less
2 secondary Secondary
3 college College (CEGEP, technical)
4 university University
Coverage by study
Study Source Grade Reason Instrument Levels offered Wording Filter Weight Don’t know
qes2022 cps_edu (cps) comparable Highest level completed on the web, with options that collapse exactly into the four groups (some university counts as university, as in the anchor); no don’t-know option. edu_levels primary, secondary, college, university What is the highest level of education that you have completed? cps_weight_general Not offered
qes2018 qscol (post) comparable Same stem as the anchor on the web, with finer options (each year of secondary school, the vocational diploma DEP, the CEGEP programmes) that collapse exactly into the four groups; the file has no value labels. The vocational diploma (DEP, code 9) is secondary here, whereas the trade certificate of qes2018_panel (d3 code 4) is college, and the questionnaires without a DEP option (the qes2014 anchor, qes2012, qes2007, qes2008) probably put DEP holders under technical training (college): a vocational or trade credential does not fall in the same group in every study. edu_levels primary, secondary, college, university À quel niveau se situe la dernière année de scolarité que vous avez complétée? pond Offered explicitly
qes2018_panel d3 (pre) approximate Highest level reached in Statistics Canada’s categories, by telephone and web: a trade certificate or registered apprenticeship is one option, counted as college (technical), and university certificates below the bachelor’s as university; the labels are cut at 60 characters in the file. In Quebec this option mostly holds the vocational diploma (DEP), which qes2018 (qscol code 9) counts as secondary: a vocational or trade credential does not fall in the same group in every study. edu_statcan primary, secondary, college, university Quel est le plus haut niveau de scolarité que vous avez atteint ? weight Not documented
qes2014 QSCOL (post) identical (anchor) Anchor row of the target. edu_levels primary, secondary, college, university What is the highest level of education that you have completed? POND Not offered
qes2012 scol (post) comparable Same French question as the anchor, on the web; the English options follow a British scheme (further or higher education), and one code of the file is in neither questionnaire. edu_levels primary, secondary, college, university What is the highest level of education that you have completed? pond Offered explicitly
qes_crop_2007_2010 scol (each poll) approximate Years of schooling in four ranges named after the levels (7 or fewer, primary; 8 to 12, secondary; 13 to 15, CEGEP; 16 or more, university), by telephone, not the highest level completed. edu_years primary, secondary, college, university Combien d’années d’études avez-vous complétées? XPOND (not usable yet) Not documented
qes2008 q77 (post) comparable Level of education with and without diploma, options that collapse exactly into the four groups; the mode needs confirming, the anchor is web. edu_levels primary, secondary, college, university What is the highest level of education that you have completed? Offered explicitly
qes2007 q77 (post) comparable Level of education with and without diploma, options that collapse exactly into the four groups; mixed telephone and web interviews, the anchor is web. edu_levels primary, secondary, college, university Quel est votre niveau d’éducation ? pond Volunteered only
qes2007_panel scol (any wave) approximate Years of schooling in four ranges named after the levels (7 or fewer, primary; 8 to 12, secondary; 13 to 15, CEGEP; 16 or more, university), by telephone, not the highest level completed. edu_years primary, secondary, college, university Combien d’années d’études avez-vous complétées? Volunteered only

lang_mother: Mother tongue

The first language the respondent learned at home in childhood and still understands: French, English or another language. A respondent who reports two first languages is a missing value (reason not_mappable), never assigned to one of them.

Family language · type Categorical · timing Time-invariant

Levels

Code Name Label
1 french French
2 english English
3 other Other
Coverage by study
Study Source Grade Reason Instrument Levels offered Wording Filter Weight Don’t know
qes2022 cps_lang_1 + cps_lang_2 + cps_lang_3 (cps) approximate A select-all question (the languages first learned and still understood): a respondent who ticked one option gets it; two or more (146) are not_mappable, as a second mother tongue elsewhere; web, asked during the campaign. lang_first_multiselect french, english, other Which language(s) did you learn as a child and still understand today? (Select all that apply) cps_weight_general Not offered
qes2018 qlangue (post) comparable Same stem on the web, asking for the main language first learned (langue principale); the file has no value labels. lang_first french, english, other Quelle est la langue principale que vous avez apprise en premier lieu à la maison dans votre enfance et que vous comprenez toujours? pond Offered explicitly
qes2018_panel s1 (pre) comparable Shorter stem (first language learned and still understood, without ‘at home in childhood’), by telephone and web; one language only. lang_first french, english, other Quelle est la première langue que vous avez apprise et que vous comprenez toujours? weight Not documented
qes2014 QLANG (post) comparable Same stem on the web, with three options for two first languages, which are missing values here (not_mappable). lang_first_multi french, english, other Quelle est la langue que vous avez apprise en premier lieu à la maison dans votre enfance et que vous comprenez toujours? POND Offered explicitly
qes2012 langu (post) identical (anchor) Anchor row of the target. lang_first french, english, other What is the language you first learned at home in your childhood and that you still understand? pond Offered explicitly
qes2012_panel lmat (pre) comparable Mother tongue defined as the first language learned and still understood, by telephone; one language only. lang_first french, english, other Quelle est votre langue maternelle, c’est-à-dire celle que vous avez appris à parler en premier et que vous comprenez toujours? pondam1 (not usable yet) Not documented
qes_crop_2007_2010 lmat (each poll) comparable Mother tongue asked without a definition, by telephone; one language only. lang_mother french, english, other Quelle est votre langue maternelle? XPOND (not usable yet) Not documented
qes2008 langu (post) comparable Same stem and options; the mode needs confirming, the anchor is web. lang_first french, english, other What is the language you first learned at home in your childhood and that you still understand? Offered explicitly
qes2007 langu (post) comparable Same stem, with options for two first languages, which are missing values here (not_mappable); mixed telephone and web interviews, the anchor is web. lang_first_multi french, english, other Quelle est la langue que vous avez apprise en premier lieu à la maison dans votre enfance et que vous comprenez toujours ? pond Volunteered only
qes2007_panel lmat (any wave) comparable Mother tongue defined as the first language learned and still spoken, by telephone; one language only. lang_first french, english, other Quelle est votre langue maternelle, c’est-à-dire la première langue que vous avez apprise et que vous pouvez encore parler? Volunteered only

born_canada: Born in Canada

Whether the respondent was born in Canada. From a question on birthplace (Quebec, elsewhere in Canada, outside Canada) where the study asks that one, collapsed exactly.

Family birthplace · type Categorical · timing Time-invariant

Levels

Code Name Label
1 yes Yes
2 no No
Coverage by study
Study Source Grade Reason Instrument Levels offered Wording Filter Weight Don’t know
qes2022 cps_borncda (cps) identical (anchor) Anchor row of the target. born_canada yes, no Were you born in Canada? cps_weight_general Not offered
qes2018 q69 (post) comparable A question on birthplace (in Quebec, elsewhere in Canada, outside Canada), collapsed exactly into born in Canada or not, on the web; the anchor asks directly. The file has no value labels. birthplace3 yes, no Où êtes-vous né(e)? pond Offered explicitly
qes2014 Q65 (post) comparable A question on birthplace (in Quebec, elsewhere in Canada, outside Canada), collapsed exactly into born in Canada or not, on the web; the anchor asks directly. birthplace3 yes, no Where were you born? POND Offered explicitly
qes2012 q105 (post) comparable A question on birthplace (in Quebec, elsewhere in Canada, outside Canada), collapsed exactly into born in Canada or not, on the web; the anchor asks directly. birthplace3 yes, no Where were you born? pond Offered explicitly

income_native: Household income (each study’s own brackets)

The respondent’s household income before taxes as each study recorded it: the text of the study’s own bracket (or the amount, where the study asked for one). Brackets differ between studies, so the values are not comparable across studies; don’t know and refusals are missing values.

Family income · type Text · timing Time-invariant

Coverage by study
Study Source Grade Reason Instrument Levels offered Wording Filter Weight Don’t know
qes2022 cps_income (cps) approximate The amount in dollars, typed on the web, not a bracket. income_amount What was your total household income, before taxes, for the year 2021? Be sure to include income from all sources, to the nearest thousand dollars. cps_weight_general Not offered
qes2018_panel d5 (pre) approximate Seven brackets from less than $20,000 to $150,000 and more, by telephone and web, not the anchor’s nine; the deposited question text is cut, so whether income is before taxes and for which year is not documented. income_7brackets Laquelle des catégories suivantes décrit le mieux le revenu total de votre foyer, c’est-à-dire le total des revenus weight Not documented
qes2014 Q57 (post) comparable The same nine brackets as the anchor, for the previous year, on the web; no don’t-know option. income_9brackets Parmi les catégories suivantes, laquelle reflète le mieux le revenu total avant impôt de tous les membres de votre foyer pour l’année 2013? 3. Ceci inclut les revenus de toutes les sources telles l’épargne, les pensions, les loyers, en plus des salaires. Était-ce: POND Not offered
qes2012 reven (post) identical (anchor) Anchor row of the target. income_9brackets And now your total household income before taxes for 2011. That includes income from all sources such as savings, pensions, rent, as well as wages. Was it: pond Offered explicitly
qes_crop_2007_2010 revenu (each poll) approximate Five brackets of $20,000 up to $80,000 and more, by telephone, not the anchor’s nine. income_5brackets Dans laquelle des catégories suivantes se situe le revenu XPOND (not usable yet) Not documented
qes2008 q78 (post) approximate Ten brackets, from under $20,000 then $10,000 steps to more than $100,000, not the anchor’s nine; asked about the year before the election (2007). income_10brackets And now what is your total household income before taxes for 2007? That includes income FROM ALL SOURCES such as savings, pensions, rent, as well as wages. Was it … Offered explicitly
qes2007 q78 (post) approximate Ten brackets of $10,000 up to more than $100,000, not the anchor’s nine; asked about the year before the election. income_10brackets Et maintenant le revenu total de votre ménage avant impôts en 2006. Ceci inclut les revenus de toutes les sources telles l’épargne, les pensions, les loyers, en plus des salaires. Est-ce…? pond Offered explicitly
qes2007_panel revenu (any wave) approximate Five brackets of $20,000 up to $80,000 and more, by telephone, not the anchor’s nine. income_5brackets Dans laquelle des catégories suivantes se situe le revenu annuel total, avant impôts et déductions, de tous les membres de votre foyer, en vous incluant? Est-ce… Volunteered only

religion: Religion (each study’s own categories)

The respondent’s religion as each study recorded it: the text of the study’s own category. Categories differ between studies. Where the question was asked only of respondents who belong to a religion, the others are missing values: reason inapplicable for those who said they belong to none, refused for those who would not answer the filter question, which is the gate of the crosswalk row.

Family faith · type Text · timing Time-invariant

Coverage by study
Study Source Grade Reason Instrument Levels offered Wording Filter Weight Don’t know
qes2022 cps_religion (cps) approximate A single question with a long list of denominations and none (no filter question), on the web; not the anchor’s six categories. religion_list Please tell me what is your religion, if you have one? cps_weight_general Not offered
qes2014 Q63 (post) comparable Same filter question and categories as the anchor, with a slightly longer question stem, on the web. religion_list Which religion do you belong to? Q62: 2 = inapplicable, 9 = refused POND Not offered
qes2012 q103 (post) identical (anchor) Anchor row of the target. religion_list Which religion? q102: 2 = inapplicable, 3 = refused pond Not offered

region_cma3: Region (Montreal and Quebec CMAs)

Where the respondent lives: the Montreal census metropolitan area (CMA), the Quebec CMA or the rest of Quebec, from the region the study recorded for its sampling, quotas or weighting (not a question of its own).

Family region · type Categorical · timing Time-invariant

Levels

Code Name Label
1 mtl_cma Montreal CMA
2 quebec_cma Quebec CMA
3 rest Rest of Quebec
Coverage by study
Study Source Grade Reason Instrument Levels offered Wording Filter Weight Don’t know
qes2018 regio (post) identical The study’s sampling region: the same three areas as the anchor. region_cma_sample mtl_cma, quebec_cma, rest document 425914, regio pond Not offered
qes2018_panel region (pre) approximate The producer’s recoded region (Montreal island, its ‘Couronne’, the ‘Région de Québec’, rest of Quebec): the ring and the Quebec region are not documented as the census metropolitan areas. region_recoded mtl_cma, quebec_cma, rest document 333052, region weight Not offered
qes2014 REGIO (post) identical The study’s sampling region: the same three areas as the anchor. region_cma_sample mtl_cma, quebec_cma, rest document 425916, REGIO POND Not offered
qes2012 regio (post) identical (anchor) Anchor row of the target: the producer’s derived region variable REGIO (Montreal CMA, Quebec CMA, other regions; variable label empty), matching the RÉGION among POND’s weighting variables (technical report, file 196368: SEXE, ÂGE, RÉGION, LANGUE). Not a question: Q110 (17 administrative regions) is in the file as q0qc, but REGIO splits regions that straddle the CMAs, so it is not a recode of q0qc alone. Q111 (postal code) is not in the file. region_cma_sample mtl_cma, quebec_cma, rest document 425917, REGIO; document 196368, RÉGION pond Not offered
qes2012_panel reg (pre) comparable The panel’s sampling region in four areas (Montreal island, rest of the Montreal CMA, Quebec CMA, rest of Quebec), the first two joined exactly. region_cma_sample mtl_cma, quebec_cma, rest document 361043, reg pondam1 (not usable yet) Not offered
qes_crop_2007_2010 REG (each poll) comparable CROP’s sampling region in four areas (Montreal island, rest of the Montreal CMA, Quebec CMA, rest of Quebec), the first two joined exactly. region_cma_sample mtl_cma, quebec_cma, rest document 329990, REG XPOND (not usable yet) Not offered
qes2008 regio (post) comparable Derived in the questionnaire (CALCM/CALCQ/CALCA -> REGIO) from the screening questions on administrative region (Q0QC) and city (Q0QCA-Q0QCE), and used for quotas: the same three areas as the anchor, with the CMA parts defined by the questionnaire’s city lists. Graded comparable, not identical: the deposit records the mode as telephone (unconfirmed), unlike the web anchor. region_cma_sample mtl_cma, quebec_cma, rest In which Quebec area do you live? [+ In which city do you live?] Not offered
qes2007 nomx (post) comparable The 21 sampling subgroups (administrative regions, those around the two metropolitan areas split into their CMA part and the rest), joined into the three areas: Montreal CMA = Montreal, Laval and the CMA parts of Lanaudière, Laurentides and Montérégie; Quebec CMA = Quebec CMA and the CMA part of Chaudière-Appalaches. region_admin_cma mtl_cma, quebec_cma, rest document 425921, nomx pond Not offered

lang_home: Language spoken most often at home

The language the respondent speaks most often at home: French, English or another language.

Family language · type Categorical · timing Time-invariant

Levels

Code Name Label
1 french French
2 english English
3 other Other
Coverage by study
Study Source Grade Reason Instrument Levels offered Wording Filter Weight Don’t know
qes2022 pes_langhome_1 + pes_langhome_2 + pes_langhome_3 + pes_langhome_4 + pes_langhome_5 + pes_langhome_6 + pes_langhome_7 + pes_langhome_8 + pes_langhome_9 + pes_langhome_10 + pes_langhome_11 + pes_langhome_12 + pes_langhome_13 + pes_langhome_14 + pes_langhome_15 + pes_langhome_16 + pes_langhome_17 (pes) approximate A select-all question (the languages usually spoken at home, 17 options), not the one spoken most often: a respondent who ticked options of one level gets it; English and French, or either with another language (171 in all), are not_mappable; web, asked after the election. lang_home_multiselect french, english, other Which language(s) do you usually speak at home? pes_weight_general Not offered
qes2018 q70 (post) comparable Same question and list as the anchor, web, with don’t know and refusal shown. lang_home_list french, english, other Which language do you speak most often at home? pond Offered explicitly
qes2014 Q66 (post) comparable Same question and list as the anchor, web, with don’t know and refusal shown. lang_home_list french, english, other Which language do you speak most often at home? POND Offered explicitly
qes2012 q107 (post) identical (anchor) Anchor row of the target. lang_home_list french, english, other Which language do you speak most often at home? pond Not documented
qes_crop_2007_2010 lusag (each poll) comparable The language spoken most often in the household (‘dans votre foyer’), three options, by telephone, in each poll. lang_home_3 french, english, other Quelle langue parle-t-on le plus souvent dans votre foyer? XPOND (not usable yet) Not documented
qes2008 q80 (post) comparable Same question as the anchor; the list is nearly the same (no Inuktitut, so Cree is code 13, and no don’t-know code); telephone by the deposit metadata, the anchor is web. lang_home_list french, english, other What language do you speak most often at home? Not offered
qes2007 q80 (post) comparable Same question and list as the anchor; the study mixes telephone and web interviews. lang_home_list french, english, other What language do you speak most often at home? pond Not documented
qes2007_panel lusage (any wave) comparable The language spoken most often in the household (‘dans votre foyer’), not the respondent’s own, three options, by telephone; one language only. lang_home_3 french, english, other Quelle langue parle-t-on le plus souvent dans votre foyer? Volunteered only

relig_attend: Attendance at religious services

How often the respondent attends services at their place of worship, not counting weddings and funerals, from every week to hardly ever or never. Where the study asked only those who belong to a religion, those who do not are hardly ever or never (graded approximate).

Family faith · type Ordinal · timing Any time

Levels

Code Name Label
1 weekly Every week
2 twice_month Twice a month
3 monthly Once a month
4 yearly Once or twice a year
5 never Hardly ever or never
Coverage by study
Study Source Grade Reason Instrument Levels offered Wording Filter Weight Don’t know
qes2018 q68 (post) approximate Asked only of those who belong to a religion (the filter question): those who do not are set to hardly ever or never, and those who refused the filter are inapplicable. The anchor asks everyone, so the shares are not directly comparable. attend_5_filtered weekly, twice_month, monthly, yearly, never Not counting weddings and funerals, how often do you attend services at your place of worship? q66: 2 = never, 9 = inapplicable pond Offered explicitly
qes2014 Q64 (post) approximate Asked only of those who belong to a religion (the filter question): those who do not are set to hardly ever or never, and those who refused the filter are inapplicable. The anchor asks everyone, so the shares are not directly comparable. attend_5_filtered weekly, twice_month, monthly, yearly, never Not counting weddings and funerals, how often do you attend services at your place of worship? Q62: 2 = never, 9 = inapplicable POND Offered explicitly
qes2012 q104 (post) identical (anchor) Anchor row of the target: asked of every respondent. attend_5 weekly, twice_month, monthly, yearly, never Not counting weddings and funerals, how often do you attend services at your place of worship? pond Offered explicitly
qes2008 q81 (post) comparable Same question and options, asked of every respondent, by telephone. attend_5 weekly, twice_month, monthly, yearly, never Not counting weddings and funerals, how often do you attend services at your place of worship: is it…? Not documented
qes2007 q81 (post) comparable Same question and options, asked of every respondent; the study mixes telephone and web interviews. attend_5 weekly, twice_month, monthly, yearly, never Not counting weddings and funerals, how often do you attend services at your place of worship: every week, twice a month, once a month, once or twice a year, or hardly ever? pond Not documented

birthplace3: Birthplace (Quebec, rest of Canada, abroad)

Where the respondent was born: in Quebec, elsewhere in Canada or outside Canada. Where both are harmonized, born_canada is yes exactly where this is quebec or other_canada.

Family birthplace · type Categorical · timing Time-invariant

Levels

Code Name Label
1 quebec Quebec
2 other_canada Elsewhere in Canada
3 abroad Outside Canada
Coverage by study
Study Source Grade Reason Instrument Levels offered Wording Filter Weight Don’t know
qes2018 q69 (post) comparable Same question and options, web, with don’t know shown. birthplace_3 quebec, other_canada, abroad Where were you born? pond Offered explicitly
qes2014 Q65 (post) comparable Same question and options, web, with don’t know shown. birthplace_3 quebec, other_canada, abroad Where were you born? POND Offered explicitly
qes2012 q105 (post) identical (anchor) Anchor row of the target. birthplace_3 quebec, other_canada, abroad Where were you born? pond Offered explicitly

Pooled variables

A pooled variable is one column for every study that pools several targets, its members: vote_choice pools the reported vote and the vote intentions, sov_support the referendum wordings, pol_interest the interest scales. The members stay targets, each one stimulus; the pooled column records, row by row, which member its value comes from (<pooled>__type), that member’s grade (<pooled>__grade, never raised; a lossy transform caps it at approximate) and its item (<pooled>__item, study:wave:source variables). qes_harmonize(targets = "vote_choice") returns the pooled column and its companions; types = list(vote_choice = "recall") keeps some members only.

How a row gets its value: the members of the requested types are tried in order of precedence. The first member whose cell has a value, or a missing value that is an answer (don’t know, refused, did not vote, …), sets the row. A member that did not ask the respondent (not in the wave, not asked, not reviewed, below the grade, routed out, system missing, a code that straddles levels) passes to the next. When every member passes, the row is NA with the reason of the first usable member that has a row in the study and wave, else of the first member that has a row. In the respondent layout (one row per respondent), a study’s values come from one wave: that of the first member it applies, so that one weight column fits them; the long layout (layout = "long", one row per respondent and wave) keeps every wave.

vote_choice: Provincial vote choice (pooled)

The party of the respondent’s vote in the Quebec general election of the study, one variable for every study: the reported vote (recall), asked after the election, where the study asked it; else the vote intention with those who named no party (the undecided and, in some studies, those who would not vote, would vote for none or refused) pushed toward the party they lean to, so no_party is lower under intention_push than under intention; else the vote intention at the first question. The wordings differ from study to study and vote_choice__type says which question each value comes from. Would not vote, none or would spoil (level no_party) is an answer only in intentions; in a reported vote, nonvoters and spoiled ballots are missing values with a reason.

type Categorical

Levels

Code Name Label
1 PLQ PLQ
2 PQ PQ
3 CAQ CAQ
4 QS QS
5 PVQ PVQ
6 PCQ PCQ
7 ON ON
8 ADQ ADQ
90 other Other party
95 no_party Would not vote / none / would spoil

Members

Precedence Type Member (target) Default Transform Grade cap
1 recall: Reported vote (after the election). The act the study is about, and the one official results measure: used first. vote_prov_recall yes identity
2 intention_push: Vote intention, undecided pushed. The first question plus a push put to those who named no party at it: a party named at the first question is never changed. Who was pushed differs by study: the undecided everywhere, and also those who would not vote, would vote for none or would spoil (qes1998, qes2007_panel, qes2012_panel, the CROP polls) or who refused (qes1998, qes2012_panel). The push can turn such an answer into a (softer) party or into another answer without a party: in qes2012_panel, of 172 don’t know 77 name a party, 1 would not vote and 1 refuses, of 30 refusals 6 name a party, 2 would not vote and 4 don’t know, and of 14 would not vote 3 name a party and 2 don’t know; in qes2007_panel, of 81 would not vote, none or spoil, 25 name a party and 14 don’t know or refuse; in qes1998, 5 would-not-vote answers and 20 refusals name a party, and 4 and 6 become don’t know. So no_party is lower under intention_push than under intention. In qes2022 it also adds the conditional intention of respondents unlikely to vote, who were not asked the first question (cps_votechoice2, ‘If you decide to vote, which party do you think you would vote for?’, then cps_votelean if they did not know: 62 respondents, 43 of whom name a party). vote_prov_intent_push yes identity
3 intention: Vote intention (first question) vote_prov_intent yes identity
Coverage by study
Study recall intention_push intention Respondent layout uses
qes2022 Comparable (pes) Approximate (cps) Approximate (cps) recall
qes2018 Comparable (post) — — recall
qes2018_panel Comparable (post) Approximate (pre) Approximate (pre) recall
qes2014 Comparable (post) — — recall
qes2012 Identical (post) — — recall
qes2012_panel Approximate (post) Approximate (pre) Approximate (pre) recall
qes_crop_2007_2010 — Comparable (each poll) Comparable (each poll) intention_push
qes2008 Comparable (post) — — recall
qes2007 Comparable (post) — — recall
qes2007_panel Approximate (post) Identical (pre) Identical (pre) recall
qes1998 Comparable (post) Approximate (pre) — recall

Each cell gives the member’s grade in the study (capped by its grade cap) and the wave that asked it; a dash means the study has no question for the member. The last column is the member the respondent layout takes the study’s values from, among the default members (the long layout uses every wave).

sov_support: Support for sovereignty (pooled)

How the respondent would vote (yes, no, would not vote) on Quebec sovereignty, one variable for every study that asked about it, across the referendum wordings: an independent country; a sovereign country; the 1995 question (sovereignty with an offer of partnership), with the undecided pushed where the study pushed them; and, collapsed to yes or no, being favourable or opposed to Quebec independence. Support depends on the wording: sov_support__type says which wording each value comes from.

type Categorical

Levels

Code Name Label
1 yes Yes
2 no No
95 would_not_vote Would not vote / would spoil

Members

Precedence Type Member (target) Default Transform Grade cap
1 independence: Referendum on an independent country sov_indep yes identity
2 sovereign_country: Referendum on a sovereign country sov_sovereign_country yes identity
3 partnership_1995_push: 1995 question, undecided pushed sov_partnership_1995_push yes identity
4 partnership_1995: 1995 question (sovereignty-partnership) sov_partnership_1995 yes identity
5 favour: Favourable or opposed to independence (collapsed to yes or no). Four points collapsed to two: graded approximate at most. sov_favour yes recode:very_favourable=yes,somewhat_favourable=yes,somewhat_opposed=no,very_opposed=no approximate
Coverage by study
Study independence sovereign_country partnership_1995_push partnership_1995 favour Respondent layout uses
qes2022 Comparable (cps) — — — — independence
qes2018 Comparable (post) — — — — independence
qes2018_panel — — — — Approximate (post) favour
qes2014 Identical (post) — — — — independence
qes2012 Identical (post) — — — — independence
qes2012_panel — Identical (pre) — — — sovereign_country
qes_crop_2007_2010 — — — — — —
qes2008 — — Comparable (post) Comparable (post) — partnership_1995_push
qes2007 — — Identical (post) Identical (post) — partnership_1995_push
qes2007_panel — — Comparable (pre) Comparable (pre) — partnership_1995_push
qes1998 — — Comparable (pre) Comparable (pre) — partnership_1995_push

Each cell gives the member’s grade in the study (capped by its grade cap) and the wave that asked it; a dash means the study has no question for the member. The last column is the member the respondent layout takes the study’s values from, among the default members (the long layout uses every wave).

pol_interest: Interest in politics (pooled, 0-1)

How interested the respondent is in politics, on a scale from 0 (not at all) to 1 (very), one variable for every study that asked: the four-point items scored 1, 0.7, 0.3 and 0 (very, quite, hardly and not at all interested), the 0-10 items divided by 10. Interest in politics in general comes before interest in the campaign or the election. pol_interest__type says which item each value comes from; a scored four-point item is graded approximate at most, since its scores are an assumption.

type Numeric

Valid range: 0-1

Members

Precedence Type Member (target) Default Transform Grade cap
1 general_4pt: Interest in politics, four points (scored). Scored 1, 0.7, 0.3 and 0 (very, quite, hardly and not at all interested). interest_4pt yes score:very=1,quite=0.7,hardly=0.3,not_at_all=0 approximate
2 general_0_10: Interest in politics, 0-10 interest_0_10 yes affine:0.1*x
3 campaign_4pt: Interest in the campaign, four points (scored) interest_campaign_4pt yes score:very=1,quite=0.7,hardly=0.3,not_at_all=0 approximate
4 election_0_10: Interest in the election, 0-10. Interest in one election, not in politics: graded approximate at most. interest_election_0_10 yes affine:0.1*x approximate
Coverage by study
Study general_4pt general_0_10 campaign_4pt election_0_10 Respondent layout uses
qes2022 — Approximate (cps) — — general_0_10
qes2018 Approximate (post) — — — general_4pt
qes2018_panel — — — — —
qes2014 Approximate (post) — — — general_4pt
qes2012 Approximate (post) — — — general_4pt
qes2012_panel — — — — —
qes_crop_2007_2010 — — — — —
qes2008 — — — Approximate (post) election_0_10
qes2007 — Identical (post) — Approximate (post) general_0_10
qes2007_panel — — Approximate (pre) — campaign_4pt
qes1998 — — — — —

Each cell gives the member’s grade in the study (capped by its grade cap) and the wave that asked it; a dash means the study has no question for the member. The last column is the member the respondent layout takes the study’s values from, among the default members (the long layout uses every wave).

turnout: Turnout in the provincial election (pooled)

Whether the respondent voted in the Quebec general election of the study (yes, no): the reported turnout, asked after the election. With types = list(turnout = c(“recall”, “intention”)), a study that asked no reported turnout gives instead the likelihood of voting asked before the election, collapsed to yes (certain or likely to vote, already voted) or no (unlikely, certain not to vote), graded approximate at most: an intention is not a turnout, so it is not used by default.

type Categorical

Levels

Code Name Label
1 yes Yes
2 no No

Members

Precedence Type Member (target) Default Transform Grade cap
1 recall: Reported turnout (after the election) turnout_prov_recall yes identity
2 intention: Likelihood of voting (before the election, collapsed). Not used by default: an intention to vote is not a turnout. turnout_prov_likely no recode:certain=yes,likely=yes,already_voted=yes,unlikely=no,certain_not=no approximate
Coverage by study
Study recall intention Respondent layout uses
qes2022 Approximate (pes) Approximate (cps) recall
qes2018 Approximate (post) — recall
qes2018_panel Approximate (post) — recall
qes2014 Comparable (post) — recall
qes2012 Identical (post) — recall
qes2012_panel Comparable (post) — recall
qes_crop_2007_2010 — — —
qes2008 Comparable (post) — recall
qes2007 Comparable (post) — recall
qes2007_panel Comparable (post) — recall
qes1998 Comparable (post) — recall

Each cell gives the member’s grade in the study (capped by its grade cap) and the wave that asked it; a dash means the study has no question for the member. The last column is the member the respondent layout takes the study’s values from, among the default members (the long layout uses every wave).

Relaxed harmonization: qes_decon()

qes_decon() puts one concept in one column for every study, even when the wording or the answer options differ, with coarse common categories, under plain column names. It trades exactness for coverage: a relaxed column has no grade and does not claim that two studies asked the same question; the targets above keep the strict, graded versions. A column is built from a strict target or a pooled variable where one exists, recoded into the column’s categories where needed, and from relaxed mappings of the studies’ own questions where the strict layer has none. A relaxed mapping is applied once a reviewer has approved it.

citizenship: Citizenship

Whether the respondent is a Canadian citizen.

Base: target:citizen · recode:yes=citizen,no=not_citizen · one value per respondent

How it is relaxed: Canadian citizenship where a study recorded it: asked directly in 2022, and taken in the 2018 panel from the screening question on the right to vote in the coming Quebec election, so that every respondent of that panel is a citizen.

Levels

Code Name Label
1 citizen Canadian citizen
2 not_citizen Not a Canadian citizen
Mappings by study
Study Source Recode Use Notes status
qes2018_panel qa (pre) 1 = Canadian citizen; 2 = Source category straddles target levels (NA); 3 = Don’t know or refused (one code) (NA) fills the study The screening question asks whether the respondent may vote in the coming Quebec election, which requires Canadian citizenship; every respondent answered yes, so the column is constant in this study. approved

yob: Year of birth

The respondent’s year of birth.

Base: target:birth_year · one value per respondent

How it is relaxed: The year of birth as reported; the studies that asked only an age group have none (see age_group).

Valid range: 1900-2010

Relaxed mappings

None: every study’s values come from the base.

age_group: Age group

The respondent’s age group.

Base: target:age_group3 · one value per respondent

How it is relaxed: Three age groups (18-34, 35-54, 55 and over), from the study’s own age bands or from the age at the start of fieldwork; respondents under 18 are missing.

Levels

Code Name Label
1 a18_34 18-34
2 a35_54 35-54
3 a55_plus 55 and over

Relaxed mappings

None: every study’s values come from the base.

gender: Gender

The respondent’s gender.

Base: target:gender · one value per respondent

How it is relaxed: Gender or sex as each study asked it: man or woman everywhere, and in 2022 also non-binary or another gender; the questions differ, the categories do not.

Levels

Code Name Label
1 man Man
2 woman Woman
3 nonbinary Non-binary
4 other Another gender

Relaxed mappings

None: every study’s values come from the base.

education4: Education (four groups)

The highest level of schooling the respondent completed, in four groups.

Base: relaxed mappings only · one value per respondent

How it is relaxed: Each study’s levels are grouped into four: no high school diploma, high school, college (CEGEP, technical or trade school) and university, including some university; the 2007 panel and the CROP polls asked years of schooling, so their high school group also holds those who left secondary school without a diploma, and their college group may hold some respondents with some university but no degree. qes1998 is missing (not mappable): the middle group of its pooled file, 10 to 15 years of schooling, spans high school and college (education, in three groups, includes it). The strict target of the same name in qes_harmonize() groups differently: its lowest group is primary or less.

Levels

Code Name Label
1 no_diploma No high school diploma
2 high_school High school diploma
3 college College, CEGEP or trade school
4 university University
Mappings by study
Study Source Recode Use Notes status
qes2022 cps_edu (cps) 1-4 = No high school diploma; 5 = High school diploma; 6, 7 = College, CEGEP or trade school; 8-11 = University; -99 = No answer (item nonresponse) (NA) fills the study approved
qes2018 qscol (post) 1-7 = No high school diploma; 8 = High school diploma; 9-12 = College, CEGEP or trade school; 13-15 = University; 99 = Refused (NA) fills the study Code 9 (secondary 5 with a vocational diploma, DEP) is college; the strict education4 puts it with secondary. approved
qes2014 QSCOL (post) 1-4 = No high school diploma; 5 = High school diploma; 6-8 = College, CEGEP or trade school; 9-11 = University; 99 = Refused (NA) fills the study approved
qes2012 scol (post) 1-4 = No high school diploma; 5 = High school diploma; 6-8 = College, CEGEP or trade school; 9-12 = University; 98 = Don’t know (NA); 99 = Refused (NA) fills the study Code 8 (post-secondary, not higher education; the French questionnaire’s technical course) is college; code 10 (certificate and diploma), in neither questionnaire, is university with code 9 (some higher education). approved
qes2018_panel d3 (pre) 1, 2 = No high school diploma; 3 = High school diploma; 4, 5 = College, CEGEP or trade school; 6-8 = University; 9 = Don’t know or refused (one code) (NA) fills the study Code 4 (registered apprenticeship or other trades certificate) is college; code 6 (university certificate below the bachelor’s) is university. approved
qes2007_panel scol (any wave) 1 = No high school diploma; 2 = High school diploma; 3 = College, CEGEP or trade school; 4 = University; 9 = Refused (NA) fills the study Years of schooling, in bands named after a level: 7 years or less (primary) is no diploma, 8 to 12 years (secondary) is high school, 13 to 15 years (CEGEP, technical school) is college and 16 years or more is university. The high school group therefore also holds those who left secondary school without a diploma, and the college group may hold respondents with some university but no degree, whom other studies count as university. approved
qes2007 q77 (post) 1-4 = No high school diploma; 5 = High school diploma; 6, 7 = College, CEGEP or trade school; 8-11 = University; 98 = Don’t know (NA); 99 = Refused (NA) fills the study approved
qes2008 q77 (post) 1-4 = No high school diploma; 5 = High school diploma; 6, 7 = College, CEGEP or trade school; 8-11 = University; 98 = Don’t know (NA); 99 = Refused (NA) fills the study approved
qes1998 scol (pre) 1-3 = Source category straddles target levels (NA); 9 = Don’t know or refused (one code) (NA) fills the study The pooled file groups years of schooling as 1-9, 10-15 and university; 10-15 years spans high school and college, and mapping only the other two groups would bias every share, so the study is left out of the four groups. The three groups of education include it. approved
qes_crop_2007_2010 scol (each poll) 1 = No high school diploma; 2 = High school diploma; 3 = College, CEGEP or trade school; 4 = University; 9 = Refused (NA) fills the study Years of schooling in CROP’s four ranges (7 or fewer, primary; 8 to 12, secondary; 13 to 15, CEGEP or technical school; 16 or more, university): 7 or fewer is no diploma and 8 to 12 is high school, so that group also holds those who left secondary school without a diploma; grouping by years, not by highest level, can also put some university (14 or 15 years) in college. approved

education: Education

The highest level of schooling the respondent completed, in three groups.

Base: column:education4 · recode:no_diploma=no_diploma,high_school=high_school_college,college=high_school_college,university=university · one value per respondent

How it is relaxed: Each study’s levels are grouped into three: no high school diploma, high school to college (a high school diploma, CEGEP, technical or trade school) and university, including some university. These are the groups of education4 with high school and college joined, which lets qes1998 in. Where a study asked years of schooling (the 2007 panel, the CROP polls and the CROP respondents of qes1998), the bands do not follow diplomas: some respondents without a diploma (10 years in qes1998; 8 to 10 years in the others, as Quebec high school ends after 11 years) count as high school to college, and some university students (14 or 15 years) are not counted in university.

Levels

Code Name Label
1 no_diploma No high school diploma
2 high_school_college High school to college (CEGEP)
3 university University
Mappings by study
Study Source Recode Use Notes status
qes1998 scol (pre) 1 = No high school diploma; 2 = High school to college (CEGEP); 3 = University; 9 = Don’t know or refused (one code) (NA) replaces the base The pooled file’s three groups are labelled 1-9 years, 10-15 years and university or more, but the two firms built them differently. For the CREATEC respondents (firme_post = 1), scol recodes the highest level completed (r15: elementary or some secondary; secondary completed or technical, college or CEGEP; university, completed or not), so the three groups hold. For the CROP respondents (firme_post = 2), it groups years of schooling (CROP question 19: 7 or fewer, 8-9, 10-11, 12-15, 16 or more), so the match is approximate: Quebec high school ends after 11 years, so a respondent with 10 years has no diploma but counts as high school to college, and some respondents with 14 or 15 years are university students who count as high school to college. Code 9 is unlabelled and read as don’t know or refused. approved

income_cat: Household income (thirds)

The household’s total income before taxes, in thirds of the study’s respondents.

Base: relaxed mappings only · one value per respondent

How it is relaxed: Household income in thirds of each study’s own respondents: income brackets are never split, so a third holds the whole brackets whose midpoint falls in it and is rarely exactly a third; the dollar limits differ from study to study.

Levels

Code Name Label
1 low Low (bottom third)
2 middle Middle
3 high High (top third)
Mappings by study
Study Source Recode Use Notes status
qes2022 cps_income (cps) amount under 52200 = Low (bottom third); 52200 to under 95600 = Middle; 95600 or more = High (top third); -99, 0 pass to cps_income2: 1-3 = Low (bottom third); 4 = Middle; 5-8 = High (top third); -99 = No answer (item nonresponse) (NA) fills the study The amount (2021 income) in thirds of the 1,444 amounts given, unweighted: low under $52,200, high $95,600 or more. An amount of 0 or -99 (no amount) passes to the bracket question cps_income2, whose brackets go in by their midpoint against the same limits. approved
qes2018 q61 (post) 1-4 = Low (bottom third); 5, 6 = Middle; 7-9 = High (top third); 99 = Refused (NA) fills the study Thirds by the midpoint rule on the unweighted counts of the brackets. Low is under $40,000, high $72,000 or more (2017 income). approved
qes2014 Q57 (post) 1-4 = Low (bottom third); 5, 6 = Middle; 7-9 = High (top third); 99 = Refused (NA) fills the study Thirds by the midpoint rule on the unweighted counts of the brackets. Low is under $40,000, high $72,000 or more (2013 income). approved
qes2012 reven (post) 1-4 = Low (bottom third); 5-7 = Middle; 8, 9 = High (top third); 98 = Don’t know (NA); 99 = Refused (NA) fills the study Thirds by the midpoint rule on the unweighted counts of the brackets. Low is under $40,000, high $88,000 or more (2011 income). approved
qes2018_panel d5 (pre) 1, 2 = Low (bottom third); 3, 4 = Middle; 5-7 = High (top third); 8 = Don’t know or refused (one code) (NA) fills the study Thirds by the midpoint rule on the unweighted counts of the brackets. Low is under $40,000, high $80,000 or more. approved
qes2007_panel revenu (any wave) 1, 2 = Low (bottom third); 3 = Middle; 4, 5 = High (top third); 9 = Don’t know or refused (one code) (NA) fills the study Thirds by the midpoint rule on the unweighted counts of the brackets. Low is under $40,000, high $60,000 or more. approved
qes2007 q78 (post) 1-3 = Low (bottom third); 4-6 = Middle; 7-10 = High (top third); 98 = Don’t know (NA); 99 = Refused (NA) fills the study Thirds by the midpoint rule on the unweighted counts of the brackets. Low is under $40,000, high $70,000 or more (2006 income). approved
qes2008 q78 (post) 1-3 = Low (bottom third); 4-6 = Middle; 7-10 = High (top third); 98 = Don’t know (NA); 99 = Refused (NA) fills the study Thirds by the midpoint rule on the unweighted counts of the brackets. Low is under $40,000, high $70,000 or more (2007 income). approved
qes_crop_2007_2010 revenu (each poll) 1, 2 = Low (bottom third); 3, 4 = Middle; 5 = High (top third); 9 = Don’t know or refused (one code) (NA) fills the study Thirds by the midpoint rule on the unweighted counts of the brackets. Low is under $40,000, high $80,000 or more; the thirds pool the 24 polls. approved

language: Mother tongue

The respondent’s mother tongue: French, English or another language.

Base: target:lang_mother · one value per respondent

How it is relaxed: The language first learned in childhood, in three groups; a respondent who reported French and another language is French, and English and a language other than French is English, and the 1998 CREATEC respondents are French by the design of their sample.

Levels

Code Name Label
1 french French
2 english English
3 other Other
Mappings by study
Study Source Recode Use Notes status
qes2022 cps_lang_2 (cps) the first option ticked, in this order: cps_lang_2 (French), cps_lang_1 (English), cps_lang_3 (Other) replaces the base A respondent who reported two mother tongues is French when one is French, else English when one is English. approved
qes2014 QLANG (post) 1, 4, 5 = French; 2, 6 = English; 3 = Other; 8 = Don’t know (NA); 9 = Refused (NA) replaces the base A respondent who reported two mother tongues is French when one is French, else English when one is English. approved
qes2007 langu (post) 1, 4, 7 = French; 2, 5 = English; 3, 6 = Other; 9 = Don’t know or refused (one code) (NA) replaces the base A respondent who reported two mother tongues is French when one is French, else English when one is English. approved
qes1998 firme_post (pre) 1 = French; 2 = Source category straddles target levels (NA) fills the study The CREATEC sample (firme_post = 1) holds only respondents whose mother tongue is French (codebook of the CREATEC file); the CROP respondents were screened on another criterion and have no mother tongue. approved

language_fr: French as a mother tongue

Whether French is one of the respondent’s mother tongues.

Base: column:language · recode:french=yes,english=no,other=no · one value per respondent

How it is relaxed: Yes when French is among the mother tongues reported, so a respondent with two mother tongues can be yes in both language_fr and language_eng.

Levels

Code Name Label
1 yes Yes
2 no No
Mappings by study
Study Source Recode Use Notes status
qes2022 cps_lang_2 (cps) the first option ticked, in this order: cps_lang_2 (Yes), cps_lang_1 (No), cps_lang_3 (No) replaces the base Yes when this language is among the mother tongues reported. approved
qes2014 QLANG (post) 1, 4, 5 = Yes; 2, 3, 6 = No; 8 = Don’t know (NA); 9 = Refused (NA) replaces the base Yes when this language is among the mother tongues reported. approved
qes2007 langu (post) 1, 4, 7 = Yes; 2, 3, 5, 6 = No; 9 = Don’t know or refused (one code) (NA) replaces the base Yes when this language is among the mother tongues reported. approved

language_eng: English as a mother tongue

Whether English is one of the respondent’s mother tongues.

Base: column:language · recode:french=no,english=yes,other=no · one value per respondent

How it is relaxed: Yes when English is among the mother tongues reported, so a respondent with two mother tongues can be yes in both language_eng and language_fr.

Levels

Code Name Label
1 yes Yes
2 no No
Mappings by study
Study Source Recode Use Notes status
qes2022 cps_lang_1 (cps) the first option ticked, in this order: cps_lang_1 (Yes), cps_lang_2 (No), cps_lang_3 (No) replaces the base Yes when this language is among the mother tongues reported. approved
qes2014 QLANG (post) 1, 3, 5 = No; 2, 4, 6 = Yes; 8 = Don’t know (NA); 9 = Refused (NA) replaces the base Yes when this language is among the mother tongues reported. approved
qes2007 langu (post) 1, 3, 4, 6 = No; 2, 5, 7 = Yes; 9 = Don’t know or refused (one code) (NA) replaces the base Yes when this language is among the mother tongues reported. approved

religion: Religion

The respondent’s religion: Catholic, Protestant, other Christian, another religion or none.

Base: relaxed mappings only · one value per respondent

How it is relaxed: The religion the respondent belongs to, in five groups; the 2022 question offers a long list, where agnostic counts as no religion, and the other studies first ask whether the respondent belongs to a religion at all.

Levels

Code Name Label
1 catholic Catholic
2 protestant Protestant
3 other_christian Other Christian
4 other Other religion
5 none No religion
Mappings by study
Study Source Recode Use Notes status
qes2022 cps_religion (cps) 1, 2 = No religion; 3-7, 22 = Other religion; 8, 9, 13, 15-21 = Protestant; 10 = Catholic; 11, 12, 14 = Other Christian; -99 = No answer (item nonresponse) (NA) fills the study Those who belong to no religion are none; Jewish, Muslim and other non-Christian religions are other. Agnostic counts as none; the Orthodox churches, Jehovah’s Witnesses and Mormons are other Christian; the other Christian denominations listed are Protestant. approved
qes2018 q67 (post) where q66: 2 = No religion; 9 = Refused (NA); else q67: 1 = Catholic; 2 = Protestant; 3 = Other Christian; 4, 5, 96 = Other religion; 99 = Refused (NA) fills the study Those who belong to no religion are none; Jewish, Muslim and other non-Christian religions are other. approved
qes2014 Q63 (post) where Q62: 2 = No religion; 9 = Refused (NA); else Q63: 1 = Catholic; 2 = Protestant; 3 = Other Christian; 4-6 = Other religion; 9 = Refused (NA) fills the study Those who belong to no religion are none; Jewish, Muslim and other non-Christian religions are other. approved
qes2012 q103 (post) where q102: 2 = No religion; 3 = Refused (NA); else q103: 1 = Catholic; 2 = Protestant; 3 = Other Christian; 4-6 = Other religion; 9 = Refused (NA) fills the study Those who belong to no religion are none; Jewish, Muslim and other non-Christian religions are other. approved

marital: Marital status

The respondent’s marital status, in four groups.

Base: relaxed mappings only · one value per respondent

How it is relaxed: Married or living with a partner, separated or divorced, widowed, or never married; 2012 and 2014 asked the official civil status, with no common-law option, so some partners who live together are never married there.

Levels

Code Name Label
1 married Married or living with a partner
2 separated_divorced Separated or divorced
3 widowed Widowed
4 never_married Single, never married
Mappings by study
Study Source Recode Use Notes status
qes2022 pes_married (pes) 1, 2 = Married or living with a partner; 3, 4 = Separated or divorced; 5 = Widowed; 6 = Single, never married; -99 = No answer (item nonresponse) (NA) fills the study Asked after the election: the respondents of the campaign wave only are missing (not in this wave). approved
qes2018 qstat (post) 1, 6 = Married or living with a partner; 2, 4 = Separated or divorced; 3 = Single, never married; 5 = Widowed; 98 = Refused (NA) fills the study Married or in a civil union (1) and common-law partner (6) are married. approved
qes2014 Q68 (post) 1, 6 = Married or living with a partner; 2, 4 = Separated or divorced; 3 = Single, never married; 5 = Widowed; 9 = Refused (NA) fills the study The question asks the official civil status and lists no common-law option. Civil union (6) is married. Code 6 holds 309 of the 1,501 substantive answers, far more than the share of formal civil unions in Quebec, so most respondents living common-law probably chose it; any who answered single instead are never married. approved
qes2012 q109 (post) 1, 6 = Married or living with a partner; 2, 4 = Separated or divorced; 3 = Single, never married; 5 = Widowed; 9 = Refused (NA) fills the study The question asks the official civil status, with no common-law option; civil partnership (6) is married. Partners who live together could answer Single or civil partnership: 360 respondents (24%) chose civil partnership, far more than the legal civil unions in Quebec, so common-law partners are split between married and never married. approved

employment: Employment

The respondent’s employment status: working, unemployed, retired, student or other.

Base: relaxed mappings only · one value per respondent

How it is relaxed: The main employment status in five groups; a respondent who gave two statuses, such as retired and working, takes the one that is not work, and at home, unable to work and other statuses are other. In the 2018 panel only web respondents were asked about employment, so its telephone respondents appear as don’t know or refused.

Levels

Code Name Label
1 working Working (employee or self-employed)
2 unemployed Unemployed
3 retired Retired
4 student Student
5 other At home, unable to work or other
Mappings by study
Study Source Recode Use Notes status
qes2022 pes_employed (pes) 1-3 = Working (employee or self-employed); 4, 11 = Retired; 5 = Unemployed; 6, 9 = Student; 7, 8, 10, 12 = At home, unable to work or other; -99 = No answer (item nonresponse) (NA) fills the study A respondent who gave two statuses (student and working, retired and working, at home and working) takes the one that is not work; two jobs is working; at home, disabled and other statuses are other. Asked after the election: the respondents of the campaign wave only are missing (not in this wave). approved
qes2018 qoccup (post) 1, 2, 8 = Working (employee or self-employed); 3, 11 = Retired; 4 = Unemployed; 5, 9 = Student; 6, 7, 10, 96 = At home, unable to work or other; 99 = Refused (NA) fills the study A respondent who gave two statuses (student and working, retired and working, at home and working) takes the one that is not work; two jobs is working; at home, disabled and other statuses are other. approved
qes2014 Q58 (post) 1, 2, 8 = Working (employee or self-employed); 3, 11 = Retired; 4 = Unemployed; 5, 9 = Student; 6, 7, 10, 96 = At home, unable to work or other; 99 = Refused (NA) fills the study A respondent who gave two statuses (student and working, retired and working, at home and working) takes the one that is not work; two jobs is working; at home, disabled and other statuses are other. approved
qes2012 occup (post) 1, 2, 8 = Working (employee or self-employed); 3, 11 = Retired; 4 = Unemployed; 5, 9 = Student; 6, 7, 10, 96 = At home, unable to work or other; 99 = Refused (NA) fills the study A respondent who gave two statuses (student and working, retired and working, at home and working) takes the one that is not work; two jobs is working; at home, disabled and other statuses are other. approved
qes2018_panel d4 (pre) 1-3 = Working (employee or self-employed); 4 = Unemployed; 5 = Student; 6 = Retired; 7, 8 = At home, unable to work or other; 9 = Don’t know or refused (one code) (NA) fills the study Full time, part time and self-employed are working; outside the labour market (at home) and other are other. The item was asked of the 850 web respondents only: the file codes all 400 telephone respondents (method 1-2) as 9 (don’t know), so 400 of the 406 missing values are not asked, not real don’t-know answers (6 web respondents chose 9). approved
qes2007_panel occup (any wave) 1, 2 = Working (employee or self-employed); 3 = Unemployed; 4 = At home, unable to work or other; 5 = Retired; 6 = Student; 9 = Refused (NA) fills the study Full time and part time are working; at home full time is other. approved
qes2007 q79 (post) 1, 2, 8 = Working (employee or self-employed); 3, 11 = Retired; 4 = Unemployed; 5, 9 = Student; 6, 7, 10, 96 = At home, unable to work or other; 99 = Refused (NA) fills the study A respondent who gave two statuses (student and working, retired and working, at home and working) takes the one that is not work; two jobs is working; at home, disabled and other statuses are other. approved
qes2008 q79 (post) 1, 2 = Working (employee or self-employed); 3 = Retired; 4 = Unemployed; 5 = Student; 6, 7, 96 = At home, unable to work or other; 99 = Refused (NA) fills the study One status per respondent (the 2008 questionnaire has no two-status codes): self-employed and working for pay are working; at home, disabled and other (specify) are other. approved
qes1998 occup (pre) 1-3 = Source category straddles target levels (NA) fills the study The pooled file has full time, part time and not working; not working joins the unemployed, the retired, students and those at home, so the study is left out. approved
qes_crop_2007_2010 Occup (each poll) 1, 2 = Working (employee or self-employed); 3 = Unemployed; 4 = At home, unable to work or other; 5 = Retired; 6 = Student; 9 = Refused (NA) fills the study Full time and part time are working; at home full time is other. approved

union: Union membership

Whether the respondent, or in some studies anyone in the household, belongs to a union.

Base: relaxed mappings only · one value per respondent

How it is relaxed: Whether the respondent belongs to a union in 2022, but whether the respondent or anyone in the household does in 2014 and 2018 (in 2018, respondents who live with their parents were asked about their family: parents, brothers or sisters). Only these three studies ask it, and 2022 asks it after the election, so its campaign-only respondents are missing.

Levels

Code Name Label
1 yes Yes
2 no No
Mappings by study
Study Source Recode Use Notes status
qes2022 pes_union (pes) 1 = Yes; 2 = No fills the study The respondent belongs to a union (not the household). Asked after the election: the respondents of the campaign wave only are missing (not in this wave). approved
qes2018 q65a (post) 1 = Yes; 2 = No; 98 = Don’t know (NA); 99 = Refused (NA); Inapplicable (routed out) (NA), System missing (NA) pass to q65b: 1 = Yes; 2 = No; 98 = Don’t know (NA); 99 = Refused (NA) fills the study Q65 has two versions, split by QPARENTS: those who do not live with their parents (q65a, 2,558 respondents) were asked about their household, those who do (q65b, 514) about their family (parents, brothers or sisters). The household version is read first, then the family version for those who were not asked it. The respondent or anyone in the household (or family) belongs to a union. approved
qes2014 Q61 (post) 1 = Yes; 2 = No; 9 = Refused (NA) fills the study The respondent or anyone in the household belongs to a union. approved

region: Region

Where the respondent lives: Montreal CMA, Quebec CMA or the rest of Quebec.

Base: target:region_cma3 · one value per respondent

How it is relaxed: The Montreal census metropolitan area, the Quebec City census metropolitan area or the rest of Quebec, from each study’s region or sub-region variable, with the boundaries each study used.

Levels

Code Name Label
1 mtl_cma Montreal CMA
2 quebec_cma Quebec CMA
3 rest Rest of Quebec
Mappings by study
Study Source Recode Use Notes status
qes2007_panel reg2 (any wave) 1-3, 5-11, 17-19, 21, 22 = Rest of Quebec; 4, 20 = Quebec CMA; 12-16 = Montreal CMA fills the study Sub-regions: the five parts of the Montreal CMA (in Lanaudière, Laurentides, Laval, Montérégie and Montréal) are the Montreal CMA, and the parts of the Quebec CMA in Capitale-Nationale and Chaudière-Appalaches are the Quebec CMA. approved

region_admin: Administrative region

The administrative region where the respondent lives.

Base: relaxed mappings only · one value per respondent

How it is relaxed: The 17 administrative regions of Quebec, where a study recorded them or sub-regions that fit within them; the sub-regions of the 2007 study and the 2007 panel that split a region are joined.

Levels

Code Name Label
1 bas_saint_laurent Bas-Saint-Laurent
2 saguenay_lac_saint_jean Saguenay–Lac-Saint-Jean
3 capitale_nationale Capitale-Nationale
4 mauricie Mauricie
5 estrie Estrie
6 montreal Montréal
7 outaouais Outaouais
8 abitibi_temiscamingue Abitibi-Témiscamingue
9 cote_nord Côte-Nord
10 nord_du_quebec Nord-du-Québec
11 gaspesie_iles Gaspésie–Îles-de-la-Madeleine
12 chaudiere_appalaches Chaudière-Appalaches
13 laval Laval
14 lanaudiere Lanaudière
15 laurentides Laurentides
16 monteregie Montérégie
17 centre_du_quebec Centre-du-Québec
Mappings by study
Study Source Recode Use Notes status
qes2018 q0qc (post) 1 = Bas-Saint-Laurent; 2 = Saguenay–Lac-Saint-Jean; 3 = Capitale-Nationale; 4 = Mauricie; 5 = Estrie; 6 = Montréal; 7 = Outaouais; 8 = Abitibi-Témiscamingue; 9 = Côte-Nord; 10 = Nord-du-Québec; 11 = Gaspésie–Îles-de-la-Madeleine; 12 = Chaudière-Appalaches; 13 = Laval; 14 = Lanaudière; 15 = Laurentides; 16 = Montérégie; 17 = Centre-du-Québec fills the study approved
qes2014 QREGION (post) 1 = Bas-Saint-Laurent; 2 = Saguenay–Lac-Saint-Jean; 3 = Capitale-Nationale; 4 = Mauricie; 5 = Estrie; 6 = Montréal; 7 = Outaouais; 8 = Abitibi-Témiscamingue; 9 = Côte-Nord; 10 = Nord-du-Québec; 11 = Gaspésie–Îles-de-la-Madeleine; 12 = Chaudière-Appalaches; 13 = Laval; 14 = Lanaudière; 15 = Laurentides; 16 = Montérégie; 17 = Centre-du-Québec fills the study approved
qes2012 q0qc (post) 1 = Bas-Saint-Laurent; 2 = Saguenay–Lac-Saint-Jean; 3 = Capitale-Nationale; 4 = Mauricie; 5 = Estrie; 6 = Montréal; 7 = Outaouais; 8 = Abitibi-Témiscamingue; 9 = Côte-Nord; 10 = Nord-du-Québec; 11 = Gaspésie–Îles-de-la-Madeleine; 12 = Chaudière-Appalaches; 13 = Laval; 14 = Lanaudière; 15 = Laurentides; 16 = Montérégie; 17 = Centre-du-Québec fills the study approved
qes2007_panel reg2 (any wave) 1 = Abitibi-Témiscamingue; 2 = Bas-Saint-Laurent; 3, 4 = Chaudière-Appalaches; 5 = Côte-Nord; 6 = Estrie; 7 = Gaspésie–Îles-de-la-Madeleine; 8, 12 = Lanaudière; 9, 13 = Laurentides; 10 = Mauricie; 11, 15 = Montérégie; 14 = Laval; 16 = Montréal; 17 = Nord-du-Québec; 18 = Outaouais; 19, 20 = Capitale-Nationale; 21 = Saguenay–Lac-Saint-Jean; 22 = Centre-du-Québec fills the study Sub-regions that split a region (its part in a CMA and the rest) are joined. approved
qes2007 nomx (post) 1 = Bas-Saint-Laurent; 2 = Saguenay–Lac-Saint-Jean; 3, 33 = Capitale-Nationale; 4 = Mauricie; 5 = Estrie; 6 = Montréal; 7 = Outaouais; 8 = Abitibi-Témiscamingue; 9 = Côte-Nord; 11 = Gaspésie–Îles-de-la-Madeleine; 12, 32 = Chaudière-Appalaches; 13 = Laval; 14, 24 = Lanaudière; 15, 25 = Laurentides; 16, 26 = Montérégie; 17 = Centre-du-Québec fills the study Sub-regions that split a region (its part in a CMA and the rest) are joined; Nord-du-Québec has no code. approved

born_canada: Born in Canada

Whether the respondent was born in Canada.

Base: target:born_canada · one value per respondent

How it is relaxed: Born in Canada or not, as each study asked it: from the birthplace (Quebec, elsewhere in Canada or abroad), or asked directly in 2022.

Levels

Code Name Label
1 yes Yes
2 no No

Relaxed mappings

None: every study’s values come from the base.

born_quebec: Born in Quebec

Whether the respondent was born in Quebec.

Base: target:birthplace3 · recode:quebec=yes,other_canada=no,abroad=no · one value per respondent

How it is relaxed: Born in Quebec or not, from the birthplace question (Quebec, elsewhere in Canada or abroad); 2022 asked only whether the respondent was born in Canada, so it is missing there.

Levels

Code Name Label
1 yes Yes
2 no No

Relaxed mappings

None: every study’s values come from the base.

vote_choice: Provincial vote choice

The party of the respondent’s vote in the Quebec general election of the study.

Base: pooled:vote_choice · on the wave that asked it

How it is relaxed: The reported vote where a study asked it, else the vote intention with the undecided pushed toward the party they lean to, else the first intention question (the pooled vote_choice); vote_type says which, and the parties are those each study offered.

Levels

Code Name Label
1 PLQ PLQ
2 PQ PQ
3 CAQ CAQ
4 QS QS
5 PVQ PVQ
6 PCQ PCQ
7 ON ON
8 ADQ ADQ
90 other Other party
95 no_party Would not vote / none / would spoil

Relaxed mappings

None: every study’s values come from the base.

vote_type: Question of the vote choice

The question of vote_choice on the row.

Base: pooled:vote_choice__type · on the wave that asked it

How it is relaxed: Which question vote_choice comes from on each row: the reported vote, the pushed intention or the first intention question.

Levels

Code Name Label
1 recall Reported vote (after the election)
2 intention_push Vote intention (undecided pushed)
3 intention Vote intention (first question)

Relaxed mappings

None: every study’s values come from the base.

turnout: Turnout (reported)

Whether the respondent voted in the Quebec general election of the study.

Base: pooled:turnout · on the wave that asked it

How it is relaxed: Whether the respondent says they voted in the Quebec general election of the study, asked after it; the wordings and answer options differ, some offering several ways of not voting.

Levels

Code Name Label
1 yes Yes
2 no No

Relaxed mappings

None: every study’s values come from the base.

vote_prev: Vote at the previous provincial election

The party the respondent voted for at the previous Quebec general election.

Base: target:vote_prov_prev · on the wave that asked it

How it is relaxed: The party of the reported vote at the Quebec general election before the study; those who did not vote are missing, the sources name the election recalled, and the 1998 question names only the PLQ and the PQ.

Levels

Code Name Label
1 PLQ PLQ
2 PQ PQ
3 CAQ CAQ
4 QS QS
5 PVQ PVQ
6 PCQ PCQ
7 ON ON
8 ADQ ADQ
90 other Other party
Mappings by study
Study Source Recode Use Notes status
qes2007_panel voteprec (pre) 1 = ADQ; 2 = PLQ; 3 = PQ; 4 = Other party; 6 = Did not vote (NA); 8 = Don’t know (NA); 9 = Refused (NA) fills the study The election of April 2003 (QC2003); asked in the second pre-election poll only, so the other respondents are system missing. approved
qes1998 vote94 (pre) 1 = PLQ; 2 = PQ; 3 = Did not vote (NA); 4 = Don’t know or refused (one code) (NA); 9 = Source category straddles target levels (NA) fills the study The election of 1994 (QC1994). The pooled file names only the PLQ and the PQ; the unlabelled code 9 holds the other parties (the ADQ among them) and unknown answers, so 1994 ADQ voters are missing. approved
qes_crop_2007_2010 QP4 (each poll) 1 = ADQ; 2 = PLQ; 3 = PQ; 4 = QS; 5 = PVQ; 6 = Other party; 7 = Did not vote (NA); 9 = Don’t know or refused (one code) (NA) fills the study The last Quebec election before each poll: QC2007 for the polls of June 2007 to November 2008, QC2008 from January 2009. The original question (QP4); code 7 joins not voted and spoiled. approved

pid: Provincial party identification

The Quebec party the respondent identifies with.

Base: target:pid_prov · on the wave that asked it

How it is relaxed: The Quebec party the respondent identifies with, or none, as each study asked it; the parties offered differ from study to study.

Levels

Code Name Label
1 PLQ PLQ
2 PQ PQ
3 CAQ CAQ
4 QS QS
5 PVQ PVQ
6 PCQ PCQ
7 ON ON
8 ADQ ADQ
90 other Other party
97 none None of these

Relaxed mappings

None: every study’s values come from the base.

lr: Left-right self-placement (0-10)

The respondent’s position on a left-right scale.

Base: target:lr_self · on the wave that asked it

How it is relaxed: Self-placement on a left-right scale from 0 (left) to 10 (right); a scale of another length would be rescaled to 0-10, and every study that asked one used 0 to 10.

Valid range: 0-10

Relaxed mappings

None: every study’s values come from the base.

interest: Interest in politics

How interested the respondent is in politics.

Base: pooled:pol_interest · bands:0.55,0.85:low,medium,high · on the wave that asked it

How it is relaxed: Interest on 0 to 1 (interest_01) in three bands, low below 0.55 and high from 0.85: on a 0-10 question, 0 to 5 is low, 6 to 8 medium and 9 or 10 high; on a 4-point question, not at all or hardly interested is low, quite interested medium and very interested high. The two formats still do not line up exactly, and the 2008 study and the 2007 panel asked interest in the election or the campaign, not in politics.

Levels

Code Name Label
1 low Low
2 medium Medium
3 high High

Relaxed mappings

None: every study’s values come from the base.

interest_01: Interest in politics (0-1)

How interested the respondent is in politics, on 0 to 1.

Base: pooled:pol_interest · on the wave that asked it

How it is relaxed: Interest on 0 to 1 (the pooled pol_interest): four-point answers scored 1, 0.7, 0.3 and 0, and 0-10 answers divided by 10.

Valid range: 0-1

Relaxed mappings

None: every study’s values come from the base.

sovereignty: Sovereignty referendum vote

How the respondent would vote in a referendum on Quebec sovereignty.

Base: pooled:sov_support · recode:yes=yes,no=no,would_not_vote=NA:not_voted · on the wave that asked it

How it is relaxed: Yes or no in a referendum on Quebec sovereignty, whatever the question (an independent country, a sovereign country, the 1995 question or being favourable to independence); sovereignty_type says which, and would not vote is missing.

Levels

Code Name Label
1 yes Yes
2 no No
Mappings by study
Study Source Recode Use Notes status
qes_crop_2007_2010 intvoterefa (each poll) 1 = Yes; 2 = No; 3 = Source category straddles target levels (NA); 8 = Don’t know (NA); 9 = Refused (NA); Don’t know (NA) pass to intvoterefb: 1 = Yes; 2 = No; 3 = Source category straddles target levels (NA); 8 = Don’t know (NA); 9 = Refused (NA) fills the study The referendum question of the CROP polls. Its label is cut off in the file and the deposited codebook gives no more. CROP’s reports give the wording for 19 of the 24 polls: whether Quebec should become a sovereign country (« devienne un pays souverain »). It is not documented for the other five; in April 2009 CROP asked both a sovereign-country and a sovereignty-partnership question, and for May 2009 the press does not say which one gave the published result. For those who did not know, the push (intvoterefb) is used. The push was also asked of those who would not vote or refused, whose first answer is kept. Would not vote is missing. approved

sovereignty_type: Question of the sovereignty vote

The question of sovereignty on the row.

Base: pooled:sov_support__type · recode:independence=independence,sovereign_country=sovereign_country,partnership_1995_push=partnership_1995,partnership_1995=partnership_1995,favour=favour · on the wave that asked it

How it is relaxed: Which question sovereignty comes from on each row: an independent country, a sovereign country, the 1995 question, being favourable to independence, or the CROP polls’ question, whose full wording was not deposited.

Levels

Code Name Label
1 independence Independent country
2 sovereign_country Sovereign country
3 partnership_1995 1995 question (sovereignty-partnership)
4 favour Favourable to independence
5 crop_undocumented CROP referendum question (wording not deposited)
Mappings by study
Study Source Recode Use Notes status
qes_crop_2007_2010 intvoterefa (each poll) every respondent = CROP referendum question (wording not deposited) fills the study Every CROP poll respondent; sovereignty says whether they answered. approved

satis_democracy: Satisfaction with democracy in Quebec

How satisfied the respondent is with the way democracy works in Quebec.

Base: target:satis_demo_qc · on the wave that asked it

How it is relaxed: Satisfaction with the way democracy works in Quebec, on four points, as each study asked it.

Levels

Code Name Label
1 very Very satisfied
2 fairly Fairly satisfied
3 not_very Not very satisfied
4 not_at_all Not at all satisfied

Relaxed mappings

None: every study’s values come from the base.

gov_satisfaction: Satisfaction with the Quebec government

How satisfied the respondent is with the Quebec government.

Base: target:gov_satisfaction · on the wave that asked it

How it is relaxed: Satisfaction with the Quebec government of the day, on four points; the 1998 question asks about the Bouchard government, in its own words.

Levels

Code Name Label
1 very Very satisfied
2 fairly Fairly satisfied
3 not_very Not very satisfied
4 not_at_all Not at all satisfied
Mappings by study
Study Source Recode Use Notes status
qes1998 satisf (pre) 1 = Very satisfied; 2 = Fairly satisfied; 3 = Not very satisfied; 4 = Not at all satisfied; 9 = Don’t know or refused (one code) (NA) fills the study Satisfaction with the Bouchard (PQ) government, in the pooled file’s words: very satisfied, rather satisfied, rather dissatisfied, very dissatisfied; code 9 is unlabelled and read as don’t know or refused. approved

econ_retro: Quebec’s economy over the past year

The respondent’s view of Quebec’s economy over the past year.

Base: target:econ_retro_qc · on the wave that asked it

How it is relaxed: Whether Quebec’s economy got better, stayed about the same or got worse over the past year, as each study asked it.

Levels

Code Name Label
1 better Better
2 same About the same
3 worse Worse

Relaxed mappings

None: every study’s values come from the base.

econ_self: Personal financial situation over the past year

The respondent’s view of their own financial situation over the past year.

Base: relaxed mappings only · on the wave that asked it

How it is relaxed: Whether the respondent’s own financial situation got better, stayed about the same or got worse over the past year. Only qes2022 asks it, during the campaign; the column is kept for analyses within that study (essential), as cesR’s econ_self, although it has fewer than three studies. The 2012 and 2014 question on one’s own finances if Quebec became independent is another question and is not used.

Levels

Code Name Label
1 better Better
2 same About the same
3 worse Worse
Mappings by study
Study Source Recode Use Notes status
qes2022 cps_ownfin (cps) 1 = Better; 2 = Worse; 3 = About the same fills the study Asked during the campaign of every respondent; the file has no missing value. Not the 2012 and 2014 question on one’s own finances if Quebec became independent (q85, Q47), which asks about another situation. approved

identity: Québécois and Canadian identity

How the respondent sees themselves, as Québécois, Canadian or both.

Base: target:identity_qc_ca · on the wave that asked it

How it is relaxed: Québécois only, Québécois first, both equally, Canadian first or Canadian only, from one question or from the two orders of a split ballot.

Levels

Code Name Label
1 qc_only Québécois only
2 qc_first Québécois first, then Canadian
3 equal Equally Québécois and Canadian
4 ca_first Canadian first, then Québécois
5 ca_only Canadian only
90 other Other

Relaxed mappings

None: every study’s values come from the base.

attach_quebec: Attachment to Quebec

How attached the respondent feels to Quebec.

Base: target:attach_qc · on the wave that asked it

How it is relaxed: Attachment to Quebec on four points, as each study asked it.

Levels

Code Name Label
1 very Very attached
2 fairly Fairly attached
3 not_very Not very attached
4 not_at_all Not at all attached

Relaxed mappings

None: every study’s values come from the base.

attach_canada: Attachment to Canada

How attached the respondent feels to Canada.

Base: target:attach_ca · on the wave that asked it

How it is relaxed: Attachment to Canada on four points, as each study asked it.

Levels

Code Name Label
1 very Very attached
2 fairly Fairly attached
3 not_very Not very attached
4 not_at_all Not at all attached

Relaxed mappings

None: every study’s values come from the base.