Back to PULS

SAMPLE DATA · NOT A REAL STUDY

Public spaces through the citizen panel’s eyes

This is what a detailed survey report could look like. Explore illustrative answers, compare age groups and read a sample research report.

All questions, counts, percentages and conclusions on this page are fictional. Nobody completed this questionnaire. It is not open for voting, does not describe residents’ real views and is excluded from PULS results. Downloads also contain sample data only.

illustrative answers
200
sample questions
5
illustrative age groups
4

Sample key finding

In the fictional dataset, 40% choose greenery and shade as the main priority. Average satisfaction is 3.3 out of 5. This is not a finding about Pelhřimov, only an illustration of reading results.

Illustrative results

Illustrative base website: 200 fictional answers

Percentages use the number of answers in the selected fictional group and are rounded. Each of the four groups contains 50 answers; this is not the actual composition of the panel or town.

SAMPLE DATA · NOT A REAL STUDY · 1/5

What would most improve public spaces in Pelhřimov?

40 % · More greenery and shade

  • More greenery and shade40 %
  • Comfortable places to sit30 %
  • Safer walking routes20 %
  • Other priorities10 %
Show sample data table
SAMPLE DATA · NOT A REAL STUDY website: What would most improve public spaces in Pelhřimov?
AnswerCountShare
More greenery and shade8040 %
Comfortable places to sit6030 %
Safer walking routes4020 %
Other priorities2010 %

SAMPLE DATA · NOT A REAL STUDY · 2/5

Which improvements would you welcome? Select all that matter to you.

60 % · Trees and shade

  • Trees and shade60 %
  • Benches50 %
  • Accessible pavements30 %
  • Drinking water20 %

Multiple choices: each person could choose several options, so percentages may total more than 100%.

Show sample data table
SAMPLE DATA · NOT A REAL STUDY website: Which improvements would you welcome? Select all that matter to you.
AnswerCountShare
Trees and shade12060 %
Benches10050 %
Accessible pavements6030 %
Drinking water4020 %

SAMPLE DATA · NOT A REAL STUDY · 3/5

How satisfied are you with public spaces? (1 = very dissatisfied, 5 = very satisfied)

3.3 / 5

A 1–5 scale; higher values mean greater satisfaction. The average is calculated from the fictional distribution.

Show sample data table
SAMPLE DATA · NOT A REAL STUDY website: How satisfied are you with public spaces? (1 = very dissatisfied, 5 = very satisfied)
AnswerCountShare
12010 %
23015 %
35025 %
47538 %
52513 %

SAMPLE DATA · NOT A REAL STUDY · 4/5

How often do you use public spaces to relax?

35 % · Several times a week

  • Daily30 %
  • Several times a week35 %
  • Less often25 %
  • Almost never10 %
Show sample data table
SAMPLE DATA · NOT A REAL STUDY website: How often do you use public spaces to relax?
AnswerCountShare
Daily6030 %
Several times a week7035 %
Less often5025 %
Almost never2010 %

Sample open question · no real written responses · 5/5

What else would you like to add about public spaces?

Fictional editorial summary: topics might include summer shade, available seating and comfortable walking routes. This text is invented and is not based on people’s responses.

Real public reports do not publish individual open responses; only an editorially reviewed summary may be published.

SAMPLE DATA · NOT A REAL STUDY

Sample research report

What the model shows

In the full fictional dataset, main priorities are greenery and shade (40%), seating (30%), safer walking routes (20%) and other priorities (10%). In the multiple-choice question, trees and shade receive 60% and benches 50%. These are different questions; their percentages are not interchangeable.

Reading group differences

In the fictional 18–29 group, 30% prefer greenery, compared with 50% in the 60+ group. This 20-percentage-point difference is part of the simulation. It does not establish real generational differences, statistical significance or causation. Select an age group to explore all four charts and tables.

What cannot be concluded

Even a real voluntary online panel does not automatically represent the whole town. A survey alone does not determine what the council should build or fund. This sample is not advice to the town and must not be cited as public opinion research.

Follow-up measurement

A new wave repeats a survey as a separate study without rewriting earlier responses. Change over time can only be assessed with identical wording, comparable collection methods and real approved results. This preview deliberately does not create a fictional time trend.

Privacy is more than a footnote

Real results protect small groups: at least 10 responses alone is not sufficient if identities could be inferred by combining data or subtraction. Nicknames, individual profiles and personal answers are not published. Panel data are pseudonymised: a separate panel identifier enables follow-up measurements, so this is not complete anonymity.

Sample methodology card
Nature of data
A pre-built simulation only; no real participants, data collection or collection dates.
Sponsor and funding
This is not commissioned or funded research, but a presentation of the Pelhřimov PULS citizen panel.
Base
200 fictional answers; four equally sized age groups of 50. This is not a population quota or the current panel membership.
Questionnaire
Five sample questions: two single-choice, one multiple-choice, one 1–5 scale and one open question. Exact wording appears above each output.
Calculation
Share = selection count / answers in the fictional group × 100. The scale mean uses its distribution; percentages are rounded to whole numbers.
Weighting and limitations
No weighting, sampling error or population inference. The sample does not demonstrate representativeness or statistical significance.

What belongs in public results

PULS provides summaries, charts and answer counts, safe group comparisons, a research report, methodology, CSV/XLSX downloads and printing to PDF. Questionnaire preparation, editorial AI assistance, approval, new waves and internal analysis stay in administration — visitors do not enter the studio. The Quality of Life Index requires approved methodology and real measurements; this preview does not calculate it.

A real picture of the town starts with you.

Join the citizen panel and help us understand views in Pelhřimov. Profile information is required at enrolment; participation in each survey remains voluntary.

Join the citizen panel