KOREAN NATIONAL ELECTION STUDY 1992
SSD 0394
Principal investigator
Institute for
Korean Election Studies
First SSD edition
November 1992
Swedish Social Science Data Service
Skanstorget 18
Go to variable list
S-411 22 Göteborg
ACKNOWLEDGMENT OF ASSISTANCE
All manuscripts utilizing data made available through the
Swedish Social Science Data Service should acknowledge that
fact as well as identify the original collector of the data.
SSD urges all users of SSD data facilities to follow some
adaption of this statement with the parantheses indicating
items to be filled in appropriately or deleted by the
individual user.
The data (and tabulations) utilized in this
(publication) were made available (in part) by
the Swedish Social Science Data Service. The
data for KOREAN NATIONAL ELECTION STUDY 1992
were originally collected by the Institute
for Korean Election Studies (IKES). Neither
the collector of the original data nor SSD
bear any responsibility for the analyses or
interpretations presented here.
According to an agreement between the Institute for Korean
Election Studies and the Swedish Social Science Data Service
KOREAN NATIONAL ELECTION STUDY 1992 can be disseminated to
and analysed by researchers on condition that the usage is
for research purpose. The code of ethics for humanities and
social sciences research established by the Swedish
Humanities and Social Sciences Research Council, and
published in HSFR-ETIK, must be adhered to wherever
applicable.
Data and/or documentation can not be made available to any
third party without the written permission of SSD.
Two copies of all reports based on these data shall be sent
to the SSD, which will forward one copy to the principal
investigator(s).
CONTENTS
Page
INTRODUCTION
Background I
Codebook information II
SSD documentation III
VARIABEL DESCRIPTION IV
CODEBOOK 1
I
INTRODUCTION
BACKGROUND
This election survey was conducted by the Institute for
Korean Election Studies (IKES) under the auspices of the
Korea National Council for Research Promotion and the
National Election Management Bureau. This survey is the
first research product of the IKES. As a further
continuation of a series of IKES research, surveys are
planned to be carried out at the time of the presidential
and Korean Assembly elections.
Professor Nam-Young Lee (Sungmyong Woman's University) and
professor Joong-Bin Cho (Gungmin University) stand for
planning and managing the research. Some co-researchers
including professor Myong-Ku Kang (Ajoo University),
professor Byong-Joon Kim (Gungmin University), professor
Sun-Jong Kim (Kang Won National University), professor
Ung-Jin Kim (Hanguk University of Foreign Studies), Jae-Han
Kim (Hallim University), Ph.D. Tae-Il Kim (Institute for
National Unification), professor Chan-Uk Park (Seoul
National University), professor Keun-Won Song (Kyongsang
University), professor Won-Kyu Lee (Chonbuk National
University), and professor Yong-Heon Chon (Kyemyong
University), stand for field research.
Miscellaneous works like compiling and managing the
interview questionnaires could be completely executed by the
two M.A. students, Chong-Kook Yun (Gungmin University) and
He-Young Kwon (Sungmyong Woman's University).
Interviewers who were selected from the different
universities in Seoul region were higher undergraduate and
M.A. students whose major was political science.
Interviewers of the other cities were selected among the
higher undergraduate students of the respective region.
After being instructed and well-trained, they conducted the
designed fieldwork.
Interviews were fully accomplished with oral interviews by
visiting every household drawn. In the case that the
selected respondents might not be interviewed for the
reasons of disease, death, movement, and so on, such
respondents were replaced to the alternative ones who were
prepared in advance. The interviews were fully executed for
five days between March 26 and 30, 1992.
Sample design
The sample for the survey was drawn on the basis of the
'multistage probability sample method'. At the first stage,
the total sample size of 1200 were drawn with probability
proportionate to electorate of the cities and communities.
At the second stage, electoral constituencies within which
30 eligible voters would be drawn were selected. Eleven
constituencies were selected in Seoul, four in Pusan, two in
Inchon, and one in Kwangju, and so on.
Within each constituency drawn two polling districts were
allocated at the third stage, and finally a systematic
random sample of 15 individuals were drawn within each
polling district with probability proportionate to
electorate.
II
CODEBOOK INFORMATION
The example below is a reproduction of information appearing
in a machine-readable codebook for a typical variable. The
numbers in brackets do not appear but are references to the
descriptions which follow this example.
............................................................
(1) VAR 35 (2) ASSESSMENT OF GOVT 25 (3) MD=9
REF 35 (4) LOC 51 WIDTH 1 (5) NUMERIC
(6) Q.25 How well do you think the government takes
care of politics?
(7) ......................
(8) (9) (10)
11 1. Very well
315 2. Moderately well
680 3. Moderately poorly
182 4. Very poorly
18 9. MD
............................................................
(1) Variabel- and reference number. Usually identical.
Should the data be subset or rearranged by an OSIRIS
program, the variable numbers would change to reflect the
order of the new dataset, while the reference number would
remain unchanged to reflect the variable number in the
codebook describing the archived dataset.
(2) Variable name. An abbreviation of the question at issue
(maximum of 24 characters).
(3) Missing data. Indicates the code values of missing data.
(4) Position. Indicates the starting location and width of
this variable.
(5) Indicates if data is numeric or alphabetic.
(6) The full text (question) supplied by the investigator to
describe the variable.
(7) Additional comments or explanations appended to the
variable description.
(8) Frequency of occurence of each code value.
(9) Code values occuring in the data.
(10) Textual definitions of the codes.
III
SSD DOCUMENTATION
The documentation has been processed using a computer-based
documentation system made available for the SSD from the
Inter-University Consortium for Political and Social
Research (ICPSR) at the University of Michigan. The system
is called Guided Interactive Dataset Organization (GIDO).
Variable list
1 SSD Study Number 0394
2 SSD Edition Number 1
3 SSD Part Number 001
4 ID-number
5 City
6 Constituency
7 Research ID
ELECTION CAMPAIGN & VOTE
8 Winner perception
9 Perception of elected candidate
10 Winning party perception
11 Political conversation
12 Information source
13 Exposure to party meeting
14 Exposure to political meeting for candidate speech
15 Exposure to canvassing
16 Interest in election result
17 Feeling about candidates
18 Voted in the election
19 Time for candidate selection
20 Reason for vote on candidate
21 Feeling about electoral participation
22 Most important element for candidate competence
23 Prompt factor
24 Party voted for
25 Motive for party choice
26 Reason for abstention
27 1987 presidential election
SERIOUS PROBLEMS & IMPORTANT ISSUES
28 Serious national problem: First item
29 Serious national problem: Second item
30 Most important election issue
31 Feeling of household economy
32 Assessment of party fusion
33 Party closest to respondent
34 Reason for party closeness
POLITICAL INSTITUTIONS & POLITICS IN GENERAL
35 Assessment of government
36 Assessment of political efficacy, 1
37 Assessment of political efficacy, 2
38 Assessment of politicians
39 Assessment of assembly members
40 Assessment of politics in general
41 Party orientation
FAIRNESS OF ELECTION CAMPAIGN
42 Electoral fairness
43 Reason for unfairness
44 Experience of taking money offered by candidates
45 Experience of receiving candidates' offering
46 Eating food offered by candidates
47 Group-tour offered by candidates
48 Candidates' promise of economic/material reward
49 Mobilizing central or local government organization
50 Influence of senior staff at work
51 Reason for receiving candidates' bid
52 Impact of illegalities on the vote
53 Urgent measure against illegal election campaign
54 Coverage on clean election campaign: TV
55 Coverage on clean election campaign: Radio
56 Coverage on clean election campaign: Newpaper
57 Coverage on clean election campaign: Magazine
58 Coverage on clean election campaign: Poster
59 Coverage on clean election campaign: Government
information leaflet
60 Campaign effectiveness
61 Fair-play spirit
NATIONAL ELECTION MANAGEMENT BUREAU
62 Role of the National Election Management Bureau
63 Influence of the National Election Management Bureau
64 Impending problem of the National Election Management
Bureau
BACKGROUND
65 Age
66 Gender
67 Education
68 Rich or Poor
69 Own income
70 Household income
71 Household size
72 Housing
73 Occupation
74 Hometown
75 Urban-rural
76 House
77 Interview method
78 Respondent type
VAR 1 SSD STUDY NUMBER 0394 Loc 1 width 4
SSD Study Number 0394
VAR 2 SSD EDITION NUMBER 1 Loc 5 width 1
SSD Edition Number
The number identifying the release edition of this dataset.
VAR 3 SSD PART NUMBER 001 Loc 6 width 3
SSD Part Number
The number identifying this part of a 1-part study.
VAR 4 ID-NUMBER Loc 9 width 5
ID-number
VAR 5 CITY Loc 14 width 2
City
312 01. Seoul
105 02. Pusan
60 03. Taegu
60 04. Inchon
30 05. Kwangju
32 06. Taejon
172 07. Kyonggido
44 08. Kangwondo
52 09. Choongbuk
34 10. Choongnam
60 11. Chonbuk
65 12. Chonnam
75 13. Kyongbuk
105 14. Kyongnam
VAR 6 CONSTITUENCY Loc 16 width 2
Constituency
15 00. Seongdong Kap
13 01. Seongdong Eul
29 02. Joongrang Kap
30 03. Seongbuk Eul
30 04. Tobong Eul
30 05. Mapo Eul
30 06. Kangseo Kap
30 07. Yongdeungpo Kap
30 08. Kwanak Eul
30 09. Seocho Eul
15 10. Kangnam Kap
30 11. Kangdong Kap
15 12. Busan Dong Ku
30 13. Busan Jin Eul
30 14. Busan Buku Kap
30 15. Heundae
30 16. Taegu Buku
30 17. Taegu Dalseo Kap
30 18. Inchon Namgu Kap
30 19. Inchon Seogu
30 20. Kwangju Buku Kap
32 21. Taejon Seogu
45 22. Kyonggi Suwon
41 23. Kyonggi Kwangmyong
30 24. Kyonggi Songtan
15 25. Kyonggi Osan
29 26. Kyonggi Kwaseong
12 27. Kyonggi Pochon
30 28. Kwangwon Chunchon
14 29. Kwangwon Wonju
18 30. Choongbuk Chongju
18 31. Choongbuk Chongwon
6 32. Choongnam Kongju
17 33. Choongnam Kongju
11 34. Choongnam Chongyang
19 35. Chonbuk Chonju (Deokjin)
11 36. Chonbuk Chonju (Wansan)
30 37. Chonbuk Namwon
17 38. Chonnam Sunchon
48 39. Chonnam Posung
30 40. Kyongbuk Pohang
15 41. Kyongbuk Chongsong
30 42. Kyongbuk Andong
30 43. Kyongnam Masan
30 44. Kyongnam Jinhe
30 45. Kyongnam Jinyang
15 46. Kyongnam Yangsan
16 47. Choongnam Chonan
VAR 7 RESEARCH ID Loc 18 width 2
Research ID
Code scheme for this question is missing.
Kod: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14
Frek: 48 47 48 48 48 48 47 47 46 47 47 45 45 43
Kod: 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28
Frek: 43 36 35 33 31 30 30 30 30 30 30 30 29 30
Kod: 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42
Frek: 30 29 4 4 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 2
Kod: 43 44 45 46 47 48
Frek: 2 2 2 1 1 1
VAR 8 WINNER PERCEPTION 1 Loc 20 width 1
MD=9
Q.1. Do you remember which candidate won at your local
district in the recent election?
1087 1. Correct
109 5. Wrong
10 9. MD
VAR 9 CANDIDATE PERCEPTION 2 Loc 21 width 1
MD=9
Q.2. Do you remember which party the candidate who won the
vote in your local district represented?
524 1. Democratic Liberal Party
331 2. Democratic Party
126 3. Unification National Party
1 4. New Government Party
127 5. Independent
93 8. DK
4 9. MD
VAR 10 WIN PARTY PERCEPTION 2 Loc 22 width 1
MD=9
Q.2(1). Winning candidates party
<See Q.2 for complete question text>
1024 1. Correct
178 5. Wrong
4 9. Undocumented code
VAR 11 POLITICAL CONVERSATION 3 Loc 23 width 1
MD=9
Q.3. How often have you talked with people surrounding you
on voting decision during the election campaign?
72 1. Very often
231 2. Often
530 3. Less often
369 4. Never
4 9. MD
VAR 12 INFORMATION SOURCE 4 Loc 24 width 2
MD=99
Q.4. What was the main source of your information of
candidate and parties?
48 01. Hanging placard
179 02. Wall newspaper
75 03. Public prints
433 04. Ad papers of parties
129 05. Candidate speech/Debate among candidates
59 06. TV
2 07. Radio
28 08. Newspaper
228 09. Conversation with others
25 99. MD
VAR 13 EXPOS. PARTY MEETING 5 Loc 26 width 1
MD=9
Q.5. Have you ever seen/been to local party meeting or
political meeting for candidate speech during the period of
election campaign?
Q.5(1). Exposure to local party meeting
131 1. Yes
961 5. No
114 9. MD
VAR 14 EXPO. CANDIDATE SPEECH 5 Loc 27 width 1
MD=9
Q.5(2). Exposure to political meeting for candidate speech
<See Q.5 for complete question text>
281 1. Yes
860 5. No
65 9. MD
VAR 15 EXPO.TO CANVASSING 6 Loc 28 width 1
MD=9
Q.6. During the election campaign, have you ever met party
activists who promted for certain candidate?
459 1. Yes
742 5. No
5 9. MD
VAR 16 INTEREST ELEC. RESULT 7 Loc 29 width 1
MD=9
Q.7. How much were you interested in the election result?
319 1. Strongly interested
555 2. Somewhat interested
274 3. Not so much interested
56 4. Definitely not interested
2 9. MD
VAR 17 FEELING OF CANDIDATE 8 Loc 30 width 1
MD=9
Q.8. How did you feel about the candidates who ran in your
local district? Did you feel that they were honorable or
good enough to be elected as a congressman?
94 1. Strongly honorable
556 2. Somewhat honorable
508 3. Not so much honorable
33 4. Not honorable at all/Disqualified as a candidate
15 9. MD
VAR 18 VOTE/ABSTAIN 9 Loc 31 width 1
MD=9
Q.9. Did you manage to vote in the election?
1035 1. Voted
168 5. Abstained
3 9. MD
VAR 19 TIME CAND. SELECTION 10 Loc 32 width 1
MD=0
Q.10. (VOTED:) When did you select the candidate you voted
for?
192 1. At the election day
256 2. 2-3 days before the election day
145 3. 4-7 days before the election day
153 4. 1-2 weeks before the election day
294 5. More than 2 weeks before the election day
166 0. INAP
VAR 20 REASON FOR VOTE 11 Loc 33 width 1
MD=0
Q.11. (VOTED:) Were there any reason to select the
candidate you voted for? In that case, which item was most
seriously considered?
299 1. Candidate's party
262 2. Election commitment of the candidate
329 3. Candidate's competence
31 4. Personal relationship to candidate
38 5. Prompt of others
75 6. No special reason
172 0. INAP
VAR 21 FEELING ON PARTICIP 12 Loc 34 width 1
MD=0
Q.12. (VOTED:) How was your feeling, when you went to the
local election booth?
698 1. Pleased/satisfied
328 5. No special feeling
180 0. INAP
VAR 22 CANDIDATE COMPETENCE 13 Loc 35 width 1
MD=0
Q.13. (COMPETENCE MOST IMPORTANT IN Q.11:) Which item was
regarded as the most important element for candidate
competence?
33 1. Intelligence
173 2. Experience
4 3. Wealth
1 4. Social/family ties
17 5. Political/moral clearness
132 6. Reliability
58 7. Honesty
18 8. Modesty
37 9. Good impression
733 0. INAP
VAR 23 PROMPT FACTOR 14 Loc 36 width 1
MD=0
Q.14. (VOTED:) What prompted you most in candidate choice?
245 1. Daily talk with family members
66 2. Talk with friends
171 3. Talk with neighbors
44 4. Talk with work mates
28 5. Party meetings
96 6. Candidate speeches/debates
118 7. Mass media
238 8. Various political advertisement
200 0. INAP
VAR 24 PARTY VOTED FOR 15 Loc 37 width 1
MD=0
Q.15. (VOTED:) Which party's candidate did you vote for?
388 1. Democratic Liberal Party
334 2. Democratic Party
147 3. Unification National Party
6 4. New Government Party
23 5. Peoples' Party
92 6. Independents
4 7. Others
212 0. INAP
VAR 25 MOTIVE PARTY CHOICE 16 Loc 38 width 1
MD=0
Q.16. (VOTED:) What was the most crucial motive in
selecting a party or candidate?
320 1. For political stability
143 2. For strategic reason
182 3. For political change
84 4. For progressive politics
112 5. For continuous democratization
131 6. Party was not important factor at all
9 7. Others
225 0. INAP
VAR 26 WHY ABSTAINED 17 Loc 39 width 1
MD=0
Q.17. (ABSTAINED:) Is there any reason why you did not
vote?
10 1. My vote had not any influence on election result
13 2. I had not any special interest in election result
17 3. I did not know much about candidate and party
36 4. People like me have nothing to do with politics
25 5. There was no candidate I liked
79 6. Personal reasons
1026 0. INAP
VAR 27 1987 PRESIDENT VOTE 18 Loc 40 width 1
MD=9
Q.18. How about the 1987 presidential election? Which
candidate did you cast your vote for?
410 1. Roh Tae Woo
224 2. Kim Young Sam
237 3. Kim Dae Jung
62 4. Kim Jong Pil
36 5. Others
80 6. Abstained
111 7. Not eligible to vote
46 9. MD
VAR 28 NATIONAL PROBLEM, 1 19 Loc 41 width 2
MD=99
Q.19. How do you evaluate the national situation in
general? Make a choice among the following items you think
as the most serious problem.
Q.19(1). First item
88 01. Education
48 02. Ecology/Environment
676 03. Economy
134 04. Domestic Politics
55 05. Crime
10 06. Juvenile delinquency
4 07. Sexual discrimination
23 08. Welfare policy for elders
18 09. South-North relationship/Unification
25 10. Regional anti-sentiment
20 11. Unbalanced wealth distribution
90 12. Open market pressure
15 99. MD
VAR 29 NATIONAL PROBLEM, 2 19 Loc 43 width 2
MD=99
Q.19(2). Second item
<See Q.19 for complete question text>
68 01. Education
80 02. Ecology/Environment
183 03. Economy
226 04. Domestic Politics
134 05. Crime
37 06. Juvenile delinquency
17 07. Sexual discrimination
37 08. Welfare policy for elders
52 09. South-North relationship/Unification
87 10. Regional anti-sentiment
115 11. Unbalanced wealth distribution
130 12. Open market pressure
1 13. Others
39 99. MD
VAR 30 ELECTION ISSUE 20 Loc 45 width 2
MD=99
Q.20. Which of the following was thought as the most
important issue in the election? Choose one item.
43 01. Political funds
903 02. Economic matters
30 03. Delay in launching local government
8 04. 6.29 Declaration
66 05. Party fusion among government and opposition
parties
9 06. Corruption of the government
21 07. Manipulation politics
30 08. Money politics
6 09. Others
90 99. MD
VAR 31 HOUSEHOLD ECONOMY 21 Loc 47 width 1
MD=9
Q.21. How do you feel about the present economic situation
compared to the situation 3-4 years ago? Choose an
appropriate item. It became ...
33 1. Much better
251 2. Somewhat better
638 3. Same all the time
190 4. Somewhat worse
87 5. Much worse
7 9. MD
VAR 32 PARTY FUSION 22 Loc 48 width 1
MD=9
Q.22. How do you estimate the party fusion of the then
government party, Democratic Justice Party, and the two then
opposition parties, Kim Young Sam's party and Kim Jong Pil's
Party? Do you think it was well-done or not well-done, when
we think of future Korean politics?
34 1. Extremely well-done
169 2. Moderately well-done
419 3. Moderately not well-done
250 4. Extremely not well-done
321 8. DK
13 9. MD
VAR 33 CLOSEST PARTY 23 Loc 49 width 1
MD=9
Q.23. Which party do you think you stand closest to? If
there is no party you feel close to, just give the name of
the party you feel relatively closer to than others.
466 1. Democratic Liberal Party
432 2. Democratic Party
175 3. Unification National Party
36 4. New Government Party
47 5. People's Party
50 9. MD
VAR 34 WHY CLOSE TO PARTY 24 Loc 50 width 1
MD=9
Q.24. Why do you think you feel closest to the party you
named? Choose one item regarded as the most appropriate
reason.
189 1. Economic stability
240 2. Political stability
236 3. Democratization
122 4. Clean politics
86 5. Fresh politics
33 6. Balanced distribution
170 7. Regional prosperity
30 8. Credibility and competence
100 9. MD
VAR 35 ASSESSMENT OF GOVT 25 Loc 51 width 1
MD=9
Q.25. How well do you think the government takes care of
politics?
11 1. Very well
315 2. Moderately well
680 3. Moderately poorly
182 4. Very poorly
18 9. MD
VAR 36 POLITICAL EFFICACY, 1 26 Loc 52 width 1
MD=9
Q.26. How much do you agree with the following statement:
"People like me do not have any say about the politics"?
94 1. Completely agreed
455 2. Somewhat agreed
443 3. Somewhat disagreed
199 4. Completely disagreed
15 9. MD
VAR 37 POLITICAL EFFICACY, 2 27 Loc 53 width 1
MD=9
Q.27. How meaningful do you think your ballot is in
election?
657 1. Very meaningful
444 2. Slightly meaningful
94 3. Slightly unmeaningful
2 4. Very unmeaningful
9 9. MD
VAR 38 ASSESS.OF POLITICIANS 28 Loc 54 width 1
MD=9
Q.28. How well do you think the politicians take care of
politics?
13 1. Very well
257 2. Moderately well
733 3. Moderately poorly
190 4. Very poorly
13 9. MD
VAR 39 ASSESS.OF ASSM.MEMBR 29 Loc 55 width 1
MD=9
Q.29. How well do you think the assembly members take care
of politics?
22 1. Very well
288 2. Moderately well
483 3. Moderately poorly
145 4. Very poorly
263 8. DK
5 9. MD
VAR 40 ASSESS. OF POLITICS 30 Loc 56 width 1
MD=9
Q.30. How about politics in general? Do you think Korean
politics is democratic or undemocratic?
34 1. Very democratic
642 2. Somewhat democratic
438 3. Somewhat undemocratic
64 4. Very undemocratic
28 9. MD
VAR 41 PARTY ORIENTATION 31 Loc 57 width 1
MD=9
Q.31. We sometimes classify people in terms of
"government-party oriented" or "opposition-party oriented".
How about you? Are you regarded as the former or the
latter?
274 1. Government party oriented
518 3. Middle of the road
403 5. Opposition party oriented
11 9. MD
VAR 42 ELECTORAL FAIRNESS 32 Loc 58 width 1
MD=9
Q.32. In comparison to the previous general election, how
do you estimate this year's election? Was it fair or unfair
for all the parties?
66 1. Very fair
757 2. Somewhat fair
322 3. Somewhat unfair
44 4. Very unfair
17 9. MD
VAR 43 REASON FOR UNFAIRNESS 33 Loc 59 width 1
MD=0
Q.33. (UNFAIR:) Why do you think the election was unfair?
Which item listed below could be the most plausible reason
for your assessment?
191 1. Illegal election campaign of candidates/parties
64 2. Illegality of voters, i.e., demand of money, etc.
39 3. Electoral intervenience of governmental branches
27 4. Partial election coverage of mass media
35 5. Unfair election management
54 6. Passive measure of judiciary and police against
illegal cases
796 0. INAP
VAR 44 RECEIVING MONEY 34 Loc 60 width 1
Q.34. Have you ever experienced one of the following
illegal election campaigns? Please answer to all items.
Q.34(1). Experience of taking money offered by candidates
33 1. Yes
1173 5. No
VAR 45 RECEIVE OFFERING 34 Loc 61 width 1
Q.34(2). Experience of receiving candidates' offering
<See Q.34 for complete question text>
48 1. Yes
1158 5. No
VAR 46 EATING FOOD 34 Loc 62 width 1
Q.34(3). Experience of eating food offered by candidates
<See Q.34 for complete question text>
136 1. Yes
1070 5. No
VAR 47 GROUP TOUR 34 Loc 63 width 1
Q.34(4). Experience of group-tour offered by candidates
<See Q.34 for complete question text>
4 1. Yes
1202 5. No
VAR 48 FUTURE REWARD 34 Loc 64 width 1
Q.34(5). Experience of candidates' promise of
economic/material reward
<See Q.34 for complete question text>
7 1. Yes
1199 5. No
VAR 49 PUBLIC MOBILIZING 34 Loc 65 width 1
Q.34(6). Experience of mobilizing central or local
government organization
<See Q.34 for complete question text>
79 1. Yes
1127 5. No
VAR 50 PRESSURE AT WORK 34 Loc 66 width 1
Q.34(7). Influence of senior staff at work
<See Q.34 for complete question text>
28 1. Yes
1178 5. No
VAR 51 WHY RECEIVED BID 35 Loc 67 width 1
MD=9
Q.35. (EXPERIENCE OF RECEIVING BID:) Is there any special
reason why you received offerings?
4 1. Because of money
18 2. Because the candidate I supported offered me
50 3. Because it was believed that there was no meaning
17 4. Because the candidate insisted on it
30 5. Because I did not know the disguised meaning
66 6. Because I could not say "No"
1021 9. MD
VAR 52 IMPACT OF ILLEGALITY 36 Loc 68 width 1
MD=0
Q.36. (EXPERIENCE OF RECEIVING BID:) Do you think the fact
that you received something from the candidate made a
crucial influence on your voting decision in your case?
Choose an appropriate item below.
11 1. I cast the ballot to the candidate from whom I
received offering
154 2. It did not play any important role
13 3. I cast the ballot to other candidate
6 4. I was so unpleased that I gave up to vote
5 5. I indicated the case to local authority
1017 0. INAP
VAR 53 URGENT MEASURE 37 Loc 69 width 1
MD=9
Q.37. Which item do you think is necessary for fair and
clean election?
475 1. Respect for law of canvassers
321 2. Refusal to illegal campaign of the voters
136 3. Taking preventive measures and punishing illegal
activities severely
73 4. More active role of the National Election Management
Bureau
160 5. Vigilant surveillance of society members
41 9. MD
VAR 54 COVERAGE: TV 38 Loc 70 width 1
Q.38. Have you ever read/listened to any kind of public
campaign program/article/publication on TV/Radio or in
newspaper/magazine/poster/government information leaflet for
clean election campaign run by the National Election
Management Bureau?
Q.38(1). Coverage: TV
1045 1. Yes
161 5. No
VAR 55 COVERAGE: RADIO 38 Loc 71 width 1
Q.38(2). Coverage: Radio
<See Q.38 for complete question text>
372 1. Yes
834 5. No
VAR 56 COVERAGE: NEWSPAPER 38 Loc 72 width 1
Q.38(3). Coverage: Newspaper
<See Q.38 for complete question text>
677 1. Yes
529 5. No
VAR 57 COVERAGE: MAGAZINE 38 Loc 73 width 1
Q.38(4). Coverage: Magazine
<See Q.38 for complete question text>
134 1. Yes
1072 5. No
VAR 58 COVERAGE: POSTER 38 Loc 74 width 1
Q.38(5). Coverage: Poster
<See Q.38 for complete question text>
625 1. Yes
581 5. No
VAR 59 COVERAGE: LEAFLET 38 Loc 75 width 1
Q.38(6). Coverage: Government Information Leaflet
<See Q.38 for complete question text>
572 1. Yes
634 5. No
VAR 60 CAMPGN EFFECTIVENESS 39 Loc 76 width 1
MD=9
Q.39. How do you estimate the role of the National Election
Bureau for fortifying fairness of election campaign? Do you
think it was effective, moderately effective, moderately
ineffective, or very ineffective?
147 1. Very effective
675 2. Moderately effective
334 3. Moderately ineffective
25 4. Very ineffective
25 9. MD
VAR 61 FAIR-PLAY SPIRIT 40 Loc 77 width 1
MD=9
Q.40. What do you think the best way for "fair-play spirit"
in Korean election politics is?
190 1. More active public information service of the
National Election Management Bureau
126 2. Enlightenment through school education
383 3. Active guidance of mass media
474 4. Social movement of citizens
33 9. MD
VAR 62 NEMB'S ROLE 41 Loc 78 width 1
MD=9
Q.41. How well or fairly do you think the National Election
Management Bureau executed its role during election
campaign?
72 1. Absolutely well/fairly
799 2. Moderately well/fairly
265 3. Moderately not well/fairly
31 4. Absolutely not well/fairly
39 9. MD
VAR 63 NEMB'S INFLUENCE 42 Loc 79 width 1
MD=9
Q.42. How do you estimate influence of the NEMB? The
influence or jurisdiction of the NEMB should be ...
850 1. Expanded
258 3. Just same as now
59 5. Reduced
39 9. MD
VAR 64 PROBLEM OF NEMB 43 Loc 80 width 1
MD=9
Q.43. Which item of the followings do you think is the most
urgent thing to be done by NEMB?
209 1. Impartial election management
413 2. Information service for right perception of suffrage
right/meaning of election in democracy
190 3. Activity for preventing violation of election law
184 4. Strict regulation and indictment against election
crime
172 5. Improvement of election law
38 9. MD
VAR 65 AGE 44 Loc 81 width 2
MD=99
Q.44. Age
20. 20 years
.
.
90. 90 years
14 99. MD
Kod: 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33
Frek: 12 25 25 44 26 28 34 44 30 36 55 39 42 40
Kod: 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47
Frek: 42 37 33 27 25 15 28 12 20 21 19 31 15 18
Kod: 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61
Frek: 28 20 27 20 12 16 18 22 16 14 15 9 16 7
Kod: 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75
Frek: 10 9 13 10 6 6 14 2 12 6 6 4 3 4
Kod: 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 84 87 89 90 99
Frek: 4 5 3 4 1 1 1 1 1 1 2 14
VAR 66 GENDER 45 Loc 83 width 1
Q.45. Gender
601 1. Man
605 2. Woman
VAR 67 EDUCATION 46 Loc 84 width 1
MD=9
Q.46. To what level/how long have you been educated?
202 1. Primary school (less than 6 years)
162 2. Middle school (7-9 years)
487 3. High school (10-12)
292 4. University (more than 13 years)
63 9. MD
VAR 68 RICH OR POOR 47 Loc 85 width 1
MD=9
Q.47. Do you think of yourself that you are "very rich",
"moderately rich", "neither rich nor poor", "moderately
poor", or "very poor"?
1 1. Very rich
53 2. Moderately rich
831 3. Neither rich nor poor
273 4. Moderately poor
41 5. Very poor
7 9. MD
VAR 69 OWN INCOME 48 Loc 86 width 1
MD=9
Q.48. How much is your monthly income?
Q.48(1). Own income:
1 SEK = Apprx. 100 Won
191 1. Under 200.000 Won
117 2. 200.000 - 390.000
156 3. 400.000 - 590.000
210 4. 600.000 - 890.000
99 5. 900.000 - 1.190.000
34 6. 1.200.000 - 1.490.000
15 7. 1.500.000 - 1.990.000
20 8. Over 2.000.000 Won
364 9. MD
VAR 70 HOUSEHOLD INCOME 48 Loc 87 width 1
MD=9
Q.48(2). Whole household income:
<See Q.48 for complete question text>
1 SEK = Apprx. 100 Won
139 1. Under 400.000 Won
264 2. 400.000 - 790.000
321 3. 800.000 - 1.190.000
162 4. 1.200.000 - 1.590.000
65 5. 1.600.000 - 1.990.000
40 6. 2.000.000 - 2.990.000
8 7. 3.000.000 - 3.990.000
13 8. Over 4.000.000 Won
194 9. MD
VAR 71 HOUSEHOLD SIZE 49 Loc 88 width 2
MD=99
Q.49. How many family members are living together with you?
25 01. 1 person
107 02. 2 persons
203 03. 3 persons
393 04. 4 persons
271 05. 5 persons
114 06. 6 persons
56 07. 7 persons
15 08. 8 persons
12 09. 9 persons
10 99. MD
VAR 72 HOUSING 50 Loc 90 width 1
MD=9
Q.50. Do you own or rent the house you are living in?
750 1. Live in self-owned house
79 2. Live in a rented house now, but possess an own house
in another place
354 3. Live in a rented house, and have no own house
23 9. MD
VAR 73 OCCUPATION 51 Loc 91 width 2
MD=99
Q.51. What is your present occupation? Describe
concretely.
1 11. Doctor
6 12. Pharmacist/Nurses
1 13. Lawyer/Judge/Attorney
8 14. Professor/Researcher
33 15. Teacher/Private school teacher
2 16. Employee in mass media
36 17. Clergyman
7 18. Artist
12 19. High ranked public official
18 22. Middle ranked public official
1 23. Career military officer (higher than major)
3 24. Career military officer (lower than major)
7 25. Lowly ranked public officer
7 26. Temporary employed
5 31. Employer/high ranked manager
29 32. Middle ranked manager
113 33. Clerical workers
10 34. Owner of small/medium sized firm
77 41. Small shop owner
21 42. Restaurant/Hotel/Laundry owner
5 43. House broker
13 44. Shop clerk
11 45. Barber/Cosmetician/Cook
7 46. Peddler/Street seller
4 47. Maid/Dairy product deliverer
9 51. Supervisor
15 52. Skilled worker/Craftsman
71 53. Industry workers
25 54. Driver/Heavy equipment operator
29 55. Simple laborer/Odd-jobber
6 56. Home worker
9 61. Rich farmer/Large farm owner
30 62. Upper-middle farmer
50 63. Lower-middle farmer
46 64. Poor farmer/Sharecropper
1 65. Fisherman/Crewman
8 66. Dairy worker/Dairy producer
53 71. Student
281 72. Housewife
86 73. Jobless
8 74. Veteran/Retired/Pensioner
7 75. Military service in duty
17 76. Others
18 99. MD
VAR 74 HOMETOWN 52 Loc 93 width 1
MD=9
Q.52. Where are you originally from? (=Where is your
grandfather's hometown?)
131 1. Seoul
140 2. Kyongki
67 3. Kangwon
202 4. Choongchong
263 5. Cholla
375 6. Kyongsang
2 7. Cheju
13 8. One of the five North Korean provinces
13 9. MD
VAR 75 URBAN-RURAL Loc 94 width 1
MD=9
City type:
597 1. Large city
317 2. Medium city
284 3. Small city
8 9. MD
VAR 76 HOUSE Loc 95 width 2
MD=99
House type:
21 01. Luxurious house
8 02. Luxurious villa
44 03. Luxurious apartment
370 04. Populace house
171 05. Tenement-house
198 06. Populace apartment
111 07. Building in shopping area
47 08. Illegal shack
231 09. Small house in farming area
5 99. MD
VAR 77 INTERVIEW METHOD Loc 97 width 1
MD=9
Interview method:
514 1. Direct oral interview
561 2. Filled out by respondent
125 3. Both alternatives
6 9. MD
VAR 78 RESPONDENT TYPE Loc 98 width 1
MD=9
Respondent type:
605 1. Respondent drawn by scheme
287 2. First alternative respondent
291 3. Second alternative respondent
23 9. MD