Immigrants from Japan vs Palestinian Hearing Disability
COMPARE
Immigrants from Japan
Palestinian
Hearing Disability
Hearing Disability Comparison
Immigrants from Japan
Palestinians
2.9%
HEARING DISABILITY
66.3/ 100
METRIC RATING
162nd/ 347
METRIC RANK
2.9%
HEARING DISABILITY
73.6/ 100
METRIC RATING
150th/ 347
METRIC RANK
Immigrants from Japan vs Palestinian Hearing Disability Correlation Chart
The statistical analysis conducted on geographies consisting of 340,074,925 people shows a moderate positive correlation between the proportion of Immigrants from Japan and percentage of population with hearing disability in the United States with a correlation coefficient (R) of 0.411 and weighted average of 2.9%. Similarly, the statistical analysis conducted on geographies consisting of 216,454,064 people shows a slight positive correlation between the proportion of Palestinians and percentage of population with hearing disability in the United States with a correlation coefficient (R) of 0.099 and weighted average of 2.9%, a difference of 0.84%.
Hearing Disability Correlation Summary
| Measurement | Immigrants from Japan | Palestinian |
| Minimum | 0.47% | 0.070% |
| Maximum | 17.2% | 6.8% |
| Range | 16.8% | 6.7% |
| Mean | 4.2% | 3.0% |
| Median | 3.1% | 2.9% |
| Interquartile 25% (IQ1) | 2.7% | 2.5% |
| Interquartile 75% (IQ3) | 4.6% | 3.4% |
| Interquartile Range (IQR) | 1.8% | 0.93% |
| Standard Deviation (Sample) | 2.9% | 1.2% |
| Standard Deviation (Population) | 2.9% | 1.2% |
Demographics Similar to Immigrants from Japan and Palestinians by Hearing Disability
In terms of hearing disability, the demographic groups most similar to Immigrants from Japan are Albanian (2.9%, a difference of 0.030%), Immigrants from Fiji (2.9%, a difference of 0.090%), Immigrants from Australia (2.9%, a difference of 0.11%), Immigrants from Central America (3.0%, a difference of 0.15%), and Immigrants from Cambodia (3.0%, a difference of 0.16%). Similarly, the demographic groups most similar to Palestinians are Immigrants from France (2.9%, a difference of 0.060%), Immigrants from Lithuania (2.9%, a difference of 0.070%), Sudanese (2.9%, a difference of 0.18%), Immigrants from Lebanon (2.9%, a difference of 0.25%), and Costa Rican (2.9%, a difference of 0.27%).
| Demographics | Rating | Rank | Hearing Disability |
| Brazilians | 78.7 /100 | #146 | Good 2.9% |
| Tongans | 78.6 /100 | #147 | Good 2.9% |
| Immigrants | Russia | 77.7 /100 | #148 | Good 2.9% |
| Immigrants | Panama | 76.9 /100 | #149 | Good 2.9% |
| Palestinians | 73.6 /100 | #150 | Good 2.9% |
| Immigrants | France | 73.1 /100 | #151 | Good 2.9% |
| Immigrants | Lithuania | 73.0 /100 | #152 | Good 2.9% |
| Sudanese | 72.1 /100 | #153 | Good 2.9% |
| Immigrants | Lebanon | 71.5 /100 | #154 | Good 2.9% |
| Costa Ricans | 71.4 /100 | #155 | Good 2.9% |
| Immigrants | Poland | 70.2 /100 | #156 | Good 2.9% |
| Immigrants | Kazakhstan | 69.6 /100 | #157 | Good 2.9% |
| Immigrants | Burma/Myanmar | 69.5 /100 | #158 | Good 2.9% |
| Immigrants | Australia | 67.4 /100 | #159 | Good 2.9% |
| Immigrants | Fiji | 67.1 /100 | #160 | Good 2.9% |
| Albanians | 66.6 /100 | #161 | Good 2.9% |
| Immigrants | Japan | 66.3 /100 | #162 | Good 2.9% |
| Immigrants | Central America | 64.9 /100 | #163 | Good 3.0% |
| Immigrants | Cambodia | 64.8 /100 | #164 | Good 3.0% |
| Immigrants | Zimbabwe | 64.2 /100 | #165 | Good 3.0% |
| Immigrants | South Eastern Asia | 62.9 /100 | #166 | Good 3.0% |