Diversity assent: conceptualisation and an empirical application

Figures & data

Table 1. Survey questions used for evaluation and participation assent.

Dimension	Item	Abbreviation
Evaluation	It is enriching for a city when the people come from different backgrounds and cultures.	enriching city
	Young people benefit from being in contact with peers of other backgrounds or beliefs.	benefit contact
	It is a good thing if many languages can be heard on our streets.	language plurality
Participation	Government support for culture should include minority cultural traditions.	funding culture
	Parliaments should reflect the diversity of the population through their members.	diverse parliaments
	The Muslims living in Germany should have the right to build mosques, including in your own neighbourhood.	build mosques

Note: All items measured with a 5-point Likert-scale: strongly agree, somewhat agree, neither/nor, somewhat disagree, strongly disagree.

Table 2. Criteria for forming assenting and dissenting groups.

	Group	Condition 1	Condition 2
Evaluation	Assenting	> =  2/3 (strongly) agree	No negative answers
	Non-committing	< = 1 (strongly) agree, Rest NA or middle^10	No negative answers
	Dissenting	> =  1 negative
Participation	Assenting	> =  2/3 (strongly) agree	No negative answers
	Non-committing	< = 1 (strongly) agree, Rest NA or middle	No negative answers
	Dissenting	> =  1 negative

Figure 1. Distribution of answers to the diversity assent items. Note: N = 2800, missings (don’t know or refuse to answer) per question shown in table A2B in the online appendix. Weights are applied.

Figure 2. Evaluation and participation assent and dissent among survey respondents. Note: N = 2893. Weights are applied.

Figure 3. Groups of Diversity Assenters. Note: N = 2893, Weights are applied.

Figure 4. Frequency of assenters and non-assenters across different groups. Note: Missings for each variable are reported in table A2a in the online appendix, weights are applied.

Figure 5. Results of logistic regression, assenters vs non-assenters. Note. N = 2723. Plotted are average marginal effects calculated from logistic regression shown in online appendix table A3. Ref. categories for categorical variable, voting (SPD), cities (large town), income (low income).

Figure 6. Results of multinomial regression model, “evaluation only” assenters. Note: N = 2723. Plotted are log-odds for belonging to the groups “evaluation only” assenters in comparison with evaluation and participation assenters, calculated from model 1 in table A5.

Data availability

The DivA dataset is currently in the GESIS online repository, and will be released from an embargo period on 31.12.2024. For access or other enquiries, please contact Karen Schönwälder at schönwä[email protected]