Finnish National Election Study 2015

Finnish National Election Study 2015 charted the political participation, political attitudes, party allegiance, candidate and party choice, and voting behaviour of Finns. Further topics included citizens' initiative, different ways of having a say, and future prospects of Finland. The data were collected after the elections through face-to-face interviews and a self-administered drop-off questionnaire. The interview data contain Finland's contribution to the international CSES study (module 4). First questions in the interview covered interest in politics, attention paid to media coverage of the elections (including social media), Internet use, discussions about politics with others, party identification and self-perceived social class. The respondents were asked to what extent they agreed with some statements relating to voting, democracy, the electoral system, and decision-making. Willingness to influence things by own activity (for instance, by participating in a demonstration or joining a consumer boycott) was charted as well as membership in a political party. Concerning citizens' initiative, the respondents were asked whether they thought the introduction of the initiative had promoted democracy in Finland and whether they had signed any initiatives. Opinions on the importance of the Internet and social media as channels of civic engagement were surveyed. The survey also carried a set of attitudinal statements on voting, politics, political parties, politicians and public political influence (e.g. 'I have no say in what the Government and Parliament decide' or 'By voting, ordinary people can influence political decision-making'. With regard to the future prospects of Finland, the respondents were asked which future directions they thought sounded good or bad (e.g. "more entrepreneurship and market economy", "better equality between men and women"). The CSES module explored the respondents' opinions on the economic situation of Finland, own financial situation, whether public expenditure on various things should be increased or decreased, whether the Government should take measures to bridge the income gap, and whether it made a difference who was in power or who people voted for. The respondents were asked to place themselves and the parties on a left-right axis. Questions also covered satisfaction with democracy in Finland and whether the respondents felt close to any party. Voting behaviour was studied with questions on whether the respondents had voted, the candidate of which party they had voted for, whether they had considered voting for a candidate of any other party and if yes, which party, whether they had voted in the previous parliamentary elections and which party they had voted for. Opinions on the party leaders were surveyed. Finally, the respondents' factual knowledge of politics was tested with a few questions. Non-voters were asked why they had not voted and how self-evident not voting had been to them. All those who had voted were asked what had influenced their choice of party, to what extent various issues had influenced their candidate choice, whether they had voted for a candidate who was of the same age and gender as themselves, and when they had decided which candidate and party to vote for. The respondents' perceptions of how much different things and people had affected their political opinions were studied. Trust in government and other institutions, groups and people was charted as well as views on the performance of the Government in the previous electoral term. The self-administered questionnaire surveyed the extent to which the respondents agreed with a number of statements relating to values and Finnish politics, whether they identified with different groups, and information sources used for making the voting decision. The respondents were also asked whether they had been contacted personally by a party or a candidate during campaigning, whether their family or friends and acquaintances had tried to influence their voting decision, and how easy it had been for the respondents to find a suitable party and candidate. Online voting and political activities and participation on the Internet were charted as well as time spent on following news and other programmes on politics and topical issues. Other topics included views on own financial situation and the Finnish economy and employment situation, satisfaction with own life, and opinions on who should make the important political decisions. Finally, personality traits of the respondents were surveyed using the Ten-item personality inventory (TIPI). Variables beginning with 'k' are national election study variables, 'q' denotes CSES variables, 'p' denotes variables in the self-administered questionnaire, 'a' denotes CSES administrative variables and 'd' denotes background variables. Background variables included, among others, the respondent's year of birth, gender, education, marital status, health status, trade union membership, economic activity and occupational status, employer type, unemployment periods, religiosity and religious attendance, mother tongue, gross annual household income, number of people in the household, type of neighbourhood/municipality, housing tenure, and electoral district.

2015年芬兰全国选举研究（Finnish National Election Study 2015）对芬兰民众的政治参与、政治态度、党派归属、候选人和政党选择以及投票行为进行了系统性调研。后续研究主题还涵盖公民倡议、多元民意表达渠道以及芬兰的未来发展展望。该数据集于选举结束后，通过面对面访谈与自填留置问卷（self-administered drop-off questionnaire）两种方式采集完成，其中访谈数据包含芬兰参与国际选举系统比较研究（Comparative Study of Electoral Systems，CSES）第4模块的相关内容。访谈的开篇问题涉及政治兴趣、对选举媒体报道（含社交媒体）的关注度、互联网使用情况、与他人开展政治讨论的行为、党派认同以及自我感知的社会阶层。受访者需就一系列与投票、民主、选举制度及公共决策相关的表述表明自身认同程度，研究同时考察了受访者通过自身行动（例如参与游行示威或加入消费者联合抵制）施加社会影响的意愿，以及政党党员身份情况。针对公民倡议议题，受访者被询问是否认为该制度的引入推动了芬兰的民主发展，以及是否曾签署过任何公民倡议；调研还收集了受访者对互联网与社交媒体作为公民参与渠道的重要性的看法。本次调查还包含一系列关于投票、政治、政党、政客与公共政治影响力的态度性表述（例如“我对政府与议会的决策毫无话语权”或“通过投票，普通民众能够影响政治决策”）。针对芬兰的未来发展展望，受访者需回答哪些未来方向他们认为是积极或消极的（例如“发展更多创业活动与市场经济”“改善男女两性间的平等状况”）。CSES模块探究了受访者对芬兰整体经济状况、自身财务状况的看法，是否应当增减政府在各领域的公共支出，政府是否应采取措施缩小收入差距，以及执政者身份或选民选择是否会对政策走向产生影响；受访者需将自身与各政党置于左右维度的政治光谱上。此外调查还涵盖了对芬兰民主状况的满意度，以及受访者是否对某一政党抱有情感亲近感。投票行为相关调研包括：受访者是否参与了本次投票、支持的政党候选人所属党派、是否曾考虑过投票给其他政党的候选人（若是则需说明具体党派）、是否在上一届议会选举中投过票以及当时支持的政党；研究还收集了受访者对各政党领袖的评价，最后通过若干问题测试了受访者的政治事实知识储备。未参与投票的受访者需说明未投票的原因，以及未投票对他们而言是否属于理所当然的选择；所有参与投票的受访者则被问及：哪些因素影响了其政党选择、各类议题对其候选人选择的影响程度、是否投票给了与自己同龄或同一性别的候选人，以及何时确定了心仪的候选人和政党。研究还考察了受访者对各类事物与人群如何影响其政治观点的感知。调研同时收集了受访者对政府及其他机构、群体与个人的信任程度数据，以及对上一届选举周期内政府施政表现的看法。自填留置问卷调研了受访者对一系列与价值观及芬兰政治相关的表述的认同程度、是否认同不同社会群体，以及投票决策时所使用的信息来源；受访者还被询问是否在竞选期间收到过政党或候选人的个人联系、家人朋友或熟人是否试图影响其投票决策，以及受访者找到合适政党与候选人的难易程度。研究还考察了在线投票、网络政治活动与参与情况，以及花在关注政治与热点议题新闻及其他节目的时间。其他调研主题包括对自身财务状况、芬兰经济与就业状况的看法、对自身生活的满意度，以及关于应由谁制定重要政治决策的观点。最后，通过十项人格量表（Ten-item personality inventory, TIPI）调研了受访者的人格特质。以“k”开头的变量为全国选举研究专属变量，“q”代表CSES变量，“p”代表自填留置问卷中的变量，“a”代表CSES行政变量，“d”代表背景变量。背景变量包括但不限于：受访者出生年份、性别、受教育程度、婚姻状况、健康状况、工会会员身份、经济活动与职业状况、雇主类型、失业时长、宗教信仰与宗教礼拜频率、母语、家庭年度总收入、家庭人口数、社区/市镇类型、住房产权情况以及选举选区等。