Chickasaw vs Alaskan Athabascan Community Comparison

The statistical analysis conducted on geographies consisting of 32,188,731 people shows a poor positive correlation between the proportion of Alaskan Athabascans within Chickasaw communities in the United States with a correlation coefficient (R) of 0.144. On average, for every 1% (one percent) increase in Chickasaw within a typical geography, there is an increase of 0.698% in Alaskan Athabascans. To illustrate, in a geography comprising of 100,000 individuals, a rise of 1,000 Chickasaw corresponds to an increase of 697.7 Alaskan Athabascans.

When considering income, the most significant differences between Chickasaw and Alaskan Athabascan communities in the United States are seen in householder income over 65 years ($53,732 compared to $62,330, a difference of 16.0%), householder income under 25 years ($44,763 compared to $51,713, a difference of 15.5%), and householder income ages 25 - 44 years ($77,929 compared to $88,446, a difference of 13.5%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of median male earnings ($47,832 compared to $49,748, a difference of 4.0%), wage/income gap (27.2% compared to 25.8%, a difference of 5.4%), and median earnings ($40,672 compared to $43,393, a difference of 6.7%).

When considering poverty, the most significant differences between Chickasaw and Alaskan Athabascan communities in the United States are seen in seniors poverty over the age of 75 (11.6% compared to 13.4%, a difference of 14.8%), single mother poverty (34.4% compared to 30.3%, a difference of 13.8%), and child poverty among boys under 16 (19.8% compared to 17.6%, a difference of 12.5%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of child poverty under the age of 5 (21.8% compared to 21.8%, a difference of 0.010%), seniors poverty over the age of 65 (10.7% compared to 10.6%, a difference of 0.71%), and single male poverty (16.3% compared to 16.1%, a difference of 1.3%).

When considering unemployment, the most significant differences between Chickasaw and Alaskan Athabascan communities in the United States are seen in unemployment among ages 45 to 54 years (4.2% compared to 8.5%, a difference of 99.4%), unemployment among ages 60 to 64 years (4.3% compared to 8.4%, a difference of 93.9%), and male unemployment (5.2% compared to 9.8%, a difference of 89.5%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of unemployment among women with children under 6 years (9.0% compared to 9.1%, a difference of 1.5%), unemployment among women with children ages 6 to 17 years (8.6% compared to 8.5%, a difference of 1.6%), and unemployment among ages 16 to 19 years (16.7% compared to 17.7%, a difference of 6.2%).

When considering labor participation, the most significant differences between Chickasaw and Alaskan Athabascan communities in the United States are seen in in labor force | age 16-19 (38.3% compared to 45.2%, a difference of 17.9%), in labor force | age 20-24 (74.5% compared to 79.1%, a difference of 6.2%), and in labor force | age > 16 (62.3% compared to 64.8%, a difference of 4.0%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of in labor force | age 30-34 (81.9% compared to 81.7%, a difference of 0.27%), in labor force | age 35-44 (80.9% compared to 81.3%, a difference of 0.49%), and in labor force | age 25-29 (81.9% compared to 82.3%, a difference of 0.51%).

When considering family structure, the most significant differences between Chickasaw and Alaskan Athabascan communities in the United States are seen in single father households (2.8% compared to 3.4%, a difference of 22.7%), divorced or separated (14.2% compared to 13.1%, a difference of 8.2%), and married-couple households (45.9% compared to 43.6%, a difference of 5.2%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of family households with children (28.2% compared to 27.6%, a difference of 2.4%), average family size (3.19 compared to 3.27, a difference of 2.4%), and single mother households (7.0% compared to 7.3%, a difference of 3.7%).

When considering vehicle availability, the most significant differences between Chickasaw and Alaskan Athabascan communities in the United States are seen in no vehicles in household (7.9% compared to 15.6%, a difference of 98.5%), 4 or more vehicles in household (7.4% compared to 8.1%, a difference of 8.6%), and 1 or more vehicles in household (92.3% compared to 86.0%, a difference of 7.3%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of 3 or more vehicles in household (22.2% compared to 21.9%, a difference of 1.1%), 2 or more vehicles in household (59.0% compared to 55.2%, a difference of 6.9%), and 1 or more vehicles in household (92.3% compared to 86.0%, a difference of 7.3%).

When considering education level, the most significant differences between Chickasaw and Alaskan Athabascan communities in the United States are seen in no schooling completed (1.7% compared to 1.5%, a difference of 15.6%), doctorate degree (1.5% compared to 1.7%, a difference of 13.6%), and professional degree (3.4% compared to 3.8%, a difference of 13.2%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of college, 1 year or more (53.3% compared to 53.4%, a difference of 0.18%), nursery school (98.4% compared to 98.8%, a difference of 0.42%), and kindergarten (98.4% compared to 98.8%, a difference of 0.42%).

When considering disability, the most significant differences between Chickasaw and Alaskan Athabascan communities in the United States are seen in disability age under 5 (1.7% compared to 1.5%, a difference of 20.0%), hearing disability (4.5% compared to 5.3%, a difference of 18.9%), and ambulatory disability (8.0% compared to 6.9%, a difference of 16.0%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of vision disability (3.2% compared to 3.1%, a difference of 0.93%), male disability (15.1% compared to 14.9%, a difference of 1.4%), and disability age 35 to 64 (16.1% compared to 15.7%, a difference of 2.5%).