Measuring Global Power: Inside the Pew Research Center’s Experiment on How the World Defines "Superpowers"

Main Facts

How do citizens perceive global power structures in an increasingly complex and multipolar world? Traditional survey methodologies have long relied on rigid, predefined categories to measure geopolitical dominance. However, a groundbreaking methodological experiment conducted by the Pew Research Center in March 2026 highlights a significant shift in how survey researchers capture public opinion on international relations.

For decades, pollsters asked respondents to identify the world’s top economic or military power from a fixed, standardized list of countries. While these tracking questions provided valuable longitudinal data, they suffered from critical limitations. They often failed to capture the multifaceted nature of modern geopolitical influence, restricted respondents to pre-selected choices, and entirely overlooked the perspectives of individuals who view global power through a multi-nation lens—or see no global superpowers at all.

To address these blind spots, researchers at Pew designed a comprehensive study combining qualitative cognitive interviews with a large-scale, split-form survey experiment administered via the nationally representative American Trends Panel (ATP). Fielding the experiment from March 23 to 29, 2026, among 1,770 U.S. adults, the study evaluated two innovative approaches to questioning the public: an unfiltered approach (a single open-ended question allowing respondents to write in multiple nations) and a filtered approach (a two-step sequence asking first if any superpowers exist, followed by an open-ended request to name them).

The experiment revealed that while both methods yielded similar baseline hierarchies—with the United States, China, and Russia occupying the top spots—the structural design of the question deeply influenced respondent certainty, the range of nations cited, and the prevalence of unipolar versus multipolar worldviews. Ultimately, Pew researchers concluded that the unfiltered, single-question approach provides a more robust, streamlined, and lower-attrition mechanism for future cross-national studies.

Chronology: The Evolution of a Methodological Experiment

The path to the March 2026 survey experiment was a multi-stage methodological journey rooted in qualitative discovery and quantitative testing.

Winter 2024: Cognitive Interviews

The initiative began in the winter of 2024 with cognitive interviews involving 12 U.S. adults. Researchers utilized this qualitative approach—where trained interviewers prompt participants to articulate their internal thought processes—to test how everyday citizens conceptualize global power structures.

Participants were asked to consider whether the world was unipolar (one superpower), bipolar (two superpowers), or multipolar (three or more). Crucially, follow-up questions probed what the term "superpower" actually meant to them. The consensus was definitive: respondents defined a superpower as a sovereign state possessing both simultaneous economic and military dominance.

March 2026: The American Trends Panel Experiment

Armed with qualitative insights defining a superpower as dual-dominant (economically and militarily), researchers developed two experimental formats and fielded them during Wave 190 of the American Trends Panel (ATP) between March 23 and 29, 2026.

• The Unfiltered Approach: Presented respondents with a single open-ended question: "Thinking about the world today, what country or countries are global superpowers, where ‘superpower’ means a country that is both militarily and economically dominant?" Participants could write in up to six countries, or select "None" or "Not sure."
• The Filtered Approach: Imposed a two-step gatekeeper structure. First, respondents were asked whether any global superpowers existed. Those who answered affirmatively were then directed to a secondary open-ended text box to list up to six nations.

Following the quantitative fieldwork, data analysts cross-referenced the 2026 experiment results with prior responses from the same panel participants captured in 2025, enabling a rare look at individual-level stability and shifts in geopolitical perception.

Supporting Data: What the Experiment Revealed

The empirical findings of the March 2026 experiment offer vital lessons for survey methodologists and geopolitical analysts alike. Although both the filtered and unfiltered approaches pointed toward the same dominant actors, the statistical nuances between the two datasets were striking.

Comparative Response Rates Across Experimental Forms

When examining the overall share of U.S. adults identifying specific nations as global superpowers, the unfiltered approach consistently elicited higher affirmative counts across all major powers:

• United States: 57% under the unfiltered approach vs. 50% under the filtered approach (-7 percentage point difference).
• China: 44% (unfiltered) vs. 32% (filtered) (-12 percentage point difference).
• Russia: 24% (unfiltered) vs. 14% (filtered) (-10 percentage point difference).
• United Kingdom: 8% (unfiltered) vs. 3% (filtered) (-5 percentage point difference).
• European Union (EU): 5% (unfiltered) vs. 2% (filtered) (-3 percentage point difference).
• Some Other Country: 17% (unfiltered) vs. 8% (filtered) (-9 percentage point difference).
• None: 11% (unfiltered) vs. 14% (filtered) (+3 percentage point difference).
• Not Sure / Don’t Know: 18% (unfiltered) vs. 28% (filtered) (+10 percentage point difference).

Uncertainty and Breadth of Recognition

The data demonstrates that the filtered approach significantly heightened respondent uncertainty. A combined 28% of respondents expressed hesitation or uncertainty under the filtered design (23% stating "not sure" at the gatekeeper stage, plus an additional 5% failing to complete the follow-up text box), compared to just 18% under the unfiltered format.

Furthermore, the unfiltered question encouraged a broader geographic imagination. Respondents utilizing the open-ended, single-step format named a total of 47 different countries, whereas the filtered format generated only 30 unique countries.

The Persistence of Multipolarity

When analyzing the number of superpowers attributed by respondents, the unfiltered approach uncovered a much stronger inclination toward a multipolar worldview. Fully 27% of respondents using the unfiltered method named three or more countries, compared to only 15% under the filtered method.

This trend persisted even among individuals who previously identified the U.S. as the singular global leader in past surveys. Among Americans who in 2025 stated that the U.S. held the top spot in both economic and military dimensions, 44% still expressed a multipolar worldview when given the unfiltered 2026 prompt, compared to just 29% under the filtered version.

Official Insights and Methodological Implications

The implications of Pew Research Center’s experiment extend far beyond academic curiosity, striking at the core of how public opinion data informs foreign policy analysis and international relations theory.

Overcoming the Constraints of Closed-Ended Polling

Traditional polling instruments have historically forced respondents into artificial binaries or unipolar assumptions. By incorporating open-ended text fields coupled with explicit definitions of economic-military dominance, Pew’s experimental design bridges the gap between rigid quantitative metrics and nuanced qualitative realities.

Methodologists noted that allowing respondents to write in multiple nations validates the public’s complex view of modern power distribution—where economic interdependence (e.g., China’s global trade footprint) coexists with traditional hard power security dominance (e.g., U.S. global military projection).

Administrative and Practical Considerations

From an operational perspective, the findings offer a clear mandate for future cross-national polling. Because the unfiltered approach produced lower nonresponse rates, reduced overall respondent uncertainty, and simplified survey programming without sacrificing data validity, it emerges as the superior instrument for large-scale international studies like the Global Attitudes Survey.

Broader Implications for Global Geopolitics

As international relations enter a volatile era defined by great power competition, the way citizens perceive global hierarchy matters deeply. Public perception shapes domestic political support for foreign interventions, trade tariffs, defense spending, and diplomatic alliances.

When nearly half of the American public perceives a multipolar world—even amid ongoing U.S. preeminence—it signals a public consciousness that is acutely aware of decentralized power dynamics. Policymakers ignoring these decentralized public attitudes risk designing foreign policies disconnected from how citizens understand global realities.

Ultimately, Pew’s 2026 experiment proves that listening closer to how everyday people define and distribute global power yields richer, more honest data—paving the way for sharper, more adaptable survey research in an unpredictable world.