Despite increasing censorship adn the ongoing conflict in Ukraine, researchers are developing new methods to gauge public opinion within russia, moving beyond reliance on the Levada Center as the sole reliable source. A team led by University of Helsinki doctoral candidate Marina Wyrskaja is utilizing online and telephone surveys – thru projects like PROPA, Chroniken, and ExtremeScan – to navigate the challenges of obtaining accurate data in a climate of fear and restricted freedoms. Their work highlights the complexities of interpreting responses, but underscores the critical need to understand evolving sentiment within Russia regarding the war and its domestic impact.
Researchers are finding ways to gauge public opinion in Russia despite increasing censorship and the ongoing conflict in Ukraine. While the independent Levada Center has long been considered the sole reliable source for polling data within the country, several smaller research projects have emerged since 2022, conducting surveys both online and by telephone.
Marina Wyrskaja, a doctoral candidate at the University of Helsinki, is involved in three of these projects, studying public opinion in Russia under wartime censorship. Her work highlights the challenges of obtaining accurate data in a climate of fear and restricted freedoms, but also demonstrates that insights are still possible.
As part of the PROPA project, Wyrskaja develops online questionnaires, collects data, and analyzes the results. She also participates in the Chroniken and ExtremeScan projects, which conduct telephone surveys. The ability to assess public sentiment is crucial for understanding the domestic impact of the war and potential shifts in support for the government.
“It depends on what we mean by ‘possible,’” Wyrskaja said when asked whether reliable polling is feasible in present-day Russia. “Technically, it is possible – we are conducting online and telephone surveys. In a situation of censorship, war, and potential repression, people obviously react in different ways: some immediately hang up, others say ‘I don’t know,’ and still others respond reflexively, just to be left alone. Yet there are people who are willing to talk.”
However, Wyrskaja cautions that the results of these surveys must be interpreted carefully. “Responses can have different meanings,” she explained. “If someone says, ‘I support the war,’ it could mean ‘I really support it,’ or ‘Stop calling me,’ or even ‘I just want it to end.’ Therefore, a single number should never be taken as definitive.”
Instead of focusing on a single percentage point, Wyrskaja advocates for combining multiple questions to gain a more nuanced understanding. “For example, whether someone would support withdrawing troops without achieving war goals, or whether state spending should be directed towards the military or social programs.”
Using this approach, as her colleagues at Chroniken have done, researchers have identified two relatively stable groups: consistent supporters and consistent opponents of the war, each representing around 20 percent of the population. The number of consistent opponents is slightly higher than the number of supporters, and the proportion of consistent supporters has decreased slightly over time, though the change is marginal.
