TY - JOUR A1 - Munzert, Simon A1 - Ramirez-Ruiz, Sebastian A1 - Çalı, Başak A1 - Stoetzer, Lukas F. A1 - Gohdes, Anita R. A1 - Lowe, Will T1 - Prioritization preferences for COVID-19 vaccination are consistent across five countries JF - Humanities and Social Sciences Communications N2 - Vaccination against COVID-19 is making progress globally, but vaccine doses remain a rare commodity in many parts of the world. New virus variants require vaccines to be updated, hampering the availability of effective vaccines. Policymakers have defined criteria to regulate who gets priority access to the vaccination, such as age, health complications, or those who hold system-relevant jobs. But how does the public think about vaccine allocation? To explore those preferences, we surveyed respondents in Brazil, Germany, Italy, Poland, and the United States from September to December of 2020 using ranking and forced-choice tasks. We find that public preferences are consistent with expert guidelines prioritizing health-care workers and people with medical preconditions. However, the public also considers those signing up early for vaccination and citizens of the country to be more deserving than later-comers and non-citizens. These results hold across measures, countries, and socio-demographic subgroups. Y1 - 2022 U6 - https://doi.org/10.1057/s41599-022-01392-1 VL - 9 IS - 439 ER - TY - JOUR A1 - Munzert, Simon A1 - Ramirez-Ruiz, Sebastian A1 - Barberá, Pablo A1 - Guess, Andrew M. A1 - Yang, JungHwan T1 - Who’s cheating on your survey? A detection approach with digital trace data JF - Political Science Research and Methods N2 - In this note, we provide direct evidence of cheating in online assessments of political knowledge. We combine survey responses with web tracking data of a German and a US online panel to assess whether people turn to external sources for answers. We observe item-level prevalence rates of cheating that range from 0 to 12 percent depending on question type and difficulty, and find that 23 percent of respondents engage in cheating at least once across waves. In the US panel, which employed a commitment pledge, we observe cheating behavior among less than 1 percent of respondents. We find robust respondent- and item-level characteristics associated with cheating. However, item-level instances of cheating are rare events; as such, they are difficult to predict and correct for without tracking data. Even so, our analyses comparing naive and cheating-corrected measures of political knowledge provide evidence that cheating does not substantially distort inferences. Y1 - 2022 U6 - https://doi.org/10.1017/psrm.2022.42 SP - 1 EP - 9 ER -