All time references are in CEST
Environmental data in survey research – discrepancies between objective and subjective perspectives |
|
| Session Organisers | Dr Franziska Quoß (GESIS) Dr Dennis Abel (GESIS) |
| Time | Tuesday 18 July, 09:00 - 10:30 |
| Room | |
Environmental social sciences increasingly benefit from the integration of survey data with environmental context variables such as land cover and use, air pollution, or weather data. While this combination of subjective and objective data holds many promises for empirical research and allows for innovative research designs, it is also necessary to scrutinize this data linkage in itself. Do subjective and objective measures of concepts such as perceptions and attitudes lead to the same conclusions and which data source would be preferred? What are the determinants of deviations of subjective perceptions from objective measurements? How can we advance data integration of subjective and objective measures?
The focus of this session is explicitly wide. It aims to gather an overview of current research practices, methodological developments, as well as conceptual notes on challenges and ideas for the optimal combination of survey data with environmental context variables. The session is open for empirical, methodological, and conceptual contributions. Papers matching one of the following aspects are invited to be part of this session (but are not restricted to):
- Innovative research design in environmental social sciences which integrate subjective and objective measures
- Utility of subjective perceptions versus objective measures
- Usage of innovative data sources to advance objective measures such as satellite imagery, GPS data, or street-level imagery
- Quality of indicators and data integration process
Keywords: georeferenced data; environmental social sciences; data integration
Dr Franziska Quoß (GESIS) - Presenting Author
Professor Patrick W. Kraft (Carlos III University Madrid)
With global warming intensifying, average citizens are beginning to experience its impact more directly. More than 100 recent studies have examined the link between direct extreme weather experience and shifts in climate policy preferences but have found inconclusive results. One reason for this inconclusiveness is that so far, it is not well understood what average citizens perceive as extreme weather. This project develops a novel framework to analyze how average people perceive extreme weather based on open-ended survey responses. We leverage various automated text-as-data methods to analyze open-ended responses across four languages in a geocoded Swiss panel study based on a probability sample. Based on structural topic models, transformer-based classifiers and a novel zero-shot classification method, we capture in depth when and how people perceive extreme weather in the context of climate change (for example, based on precipitation or temperatures) and to distinguish whether they pay more attention to sudden-onset or slow-onset types of extreme weather. Based on respondents’ geolocations, we link their subjective perceptions to objective weather data to see to what extent the self-described extreme weather phenomena are aligned with objective local measures of extreme weather and whether this hinges on characteristics of their surroundings (e.g., share of local green spaces). We contribute to the question of whether extreme weather experience has the potential to increase preferences for stricter climate policies by clarifying what laypeople perceive as extreme weather. In addition, we hope to advance best practices on data integration of subjective and objective measures of environmental data.
Dr Barbara Jancewicz (University of Warsaw) - Presenting Author
Our project focused on embodying climate change and urban heat in particular. We surveyed a quota sample of older adults (65+) in Warsaw and Madrid (N=2111 total) in 2022 with Computer Assisted Personal Interviews enhanced with GPS mapping and temperature measurements. Thus, our thermosurvey incorporated both objective measures of temperature (with handheld thermometers) and respondents’ subjective evaluations of feelings, expectations and the thermal environment in general. We employed one objective and multiple subjective temperature measures, and found that while they correlate they don’t go hand in hand with each other. Furthermore, we juxtaposed participants' thermal expectations with their building’s surroundings, and found them less impactful than the buildings’ and individual respondents’ characteristics, highlighting how reliance on remote sensing can lead to overlooking people’s experiences. Finally, we found the temperature during the interview impacting more than just temperature-related answers, which might be crucial for future heat focused studies. Our findings highlight the complexity of both objective and subjective measurement of the thermal environment, while improving our understanding how environmental data can be integrated into survey’s and help in results’ interpretation.
Dr Dennis Abel (GESIS - Leibniz Institute for the Social Sciences) - Presenting Author
Dr Stefan Jünger (GESIS - Leibniz Institute for the Social Sciences)
Dr Franziska Quoss (GESIS - Leibniz Institute for the Social Sciences)
An increasing number of studies address the exposure to extreme weather events as an influencing factor for people’s perception of climate change, environmental behavior, or policy preferences and voting intention. A crucial pre-requisite is the subjective perception of weather anomalies and extremes and translation into subjective risk perceptions. Generally, research has shown that humans can perceive weather anomalies, but studies yield mixed evidence depending on the specific context. So far, it is unclear under which conditions weather patterns are correctly perceived and which factors determine deviations in subjective perceptions from objective measurements. We contribute to this research gap by integrating novel survey data on respondents’ subjective risk perceptions of weather extremes with spatially and temporally fine-grained earth observation data. For this project, we have fielded a novel battery of survey items. These items were developed based on an extensive review of climate and environmental items from national and international survey programs. Our survey items are highly specific and capture respondents’ risk perceptions of 1. heatwaves, 2. heavy rainfall, 3. storms, 4. droughts as well as 5. floods. We aim to exploit the natural variation of weather patterns for these five weather types during the field period and in relation to respondent-specific baseline periods to analyze congruence and discrepancies between objective measurements and subjective perspectives. Our survey items have been fielded between November 2023 and January 2024 in a large probability-based panel program in Germany. By building on previous methodological work, we are able to link these data to highly customizable weather data from the European Union’s Earth observation program Copernicus and employ a range of robustness checks by varying spatial buffers and temporal reference periods.
Mrs Manuela Schmidt (University of Kaiserslautern-Landau) - Presenting Author
Dr Claudia Schmiedeberg (LMU Munich)
The availability of amenities and green spaces is integral to how people perceive and experience their surroundings, but while many surveys ask respondents about characteristics of their environment and neighborhoods, the appropriate scale of the spatial context participants think of when answering these questions is unclear: Is it the immediate neighborhood, the municipality, or the county that matters?
Here, we investigate the consistency between respondents' subjective perceptions of their environment and objective characteristics across different spatial scales. Additionally, we examine if and how the consistency differs between socio-demographic groups. With this approach, we aim to contribute to the understanding of spatial mechanisms that play a role in the environmental perception of participants by identifying the spatial scale that best aligns with respondents’ subjective perceptions, and by highlighting how the area of reference may vary across demographic groups.
The analysis is based on data from the recruitment survey of the German Longitudinal Environmental Study (GLEN), a newly launched registered-based panel study. The survey is currently ongoing, and data collection will conclude by the end of 2024. We expect around 30.000 responses throughout Germany.
In the self-administered push-to-web survey, respondents were asked to rate their place of residence on a number of characteristics, including green spaces, mobility, and health care accessibility. We test whether the respondents’ subjective ratings are consistent with administrative data from official statistics at different spatial scales. Differential effects are tested for dimensions such as age, employment status, and urban vs. rural residence. The results will be presented at the conference.