Chickasaw vs Scottish Community Comparison

COMPARE

Chickasaw
Race
Ancestry
AfghanAfricanAlaska NativeAlaskan AthabascanAlbanianAleutAlsatianAmericanApacheArabArapahoArgentineanArmenianAssyrian/Chaldean/SyriacAustralianAustrianBahamianBangladeshiBarbadianBasqueBelgianBelizeanBermudanBhutaneseBlackfeetBolivianBrazilianBritishBritish West IndianBulgarianBurmeseCajunCambodianCanadianCape VerdeanCarpatho RusynCelticCentral AmericanCentral American IndianCherokeeCheyenneChickasawChileanChineseChippewaChoctawColombianColvilleComancheCosta RicanCreeCreekCroatianCrowCubanCypriotCzechCzechoslovakianDanishDelawareDominicanDutchDutch West IndianEastern EuropeanEcuadorianEgyptianEnglishEstonianEthiopianEuropeanFijianFilipinoFinnishFrenchFrench American IndianFrench CanadianGermanGerman RussianGhanaianGreekGuamanian/ChamorroGuatemalanGuyaneseHaitianHmongHonduranHopiHoumaHungarianIcelanderIndian (Asian)IndonesianInupiatIranianIraqiIrishIroquoisIsraeliItalianJamaicanJapaneseJordanianKenyanKiowaKoreanLaotianLatvianLebaneseLiberianLithuanianLumbeeLuxembourgerMacedonianMalaysianMalteseMarshalleseMenomineeMexicanMexican American IndianMongolianMoroccanNative HawaiianNavajoNepaleseNew ZealanderNicaraguanNigerianNorthern EuropeanNorwegianOkinawanOsageOttawaPaiutePakistaniPalestinianPanamanianParaguayanPennsylvania GermanPeruvianPimaPolishPortuguesePotawatomiPuebloPuerto RicanPuget Sound SalishRomanianRussianSalvadoranSamoanScandinavianScotch-IrishSeminoleSenegaleseSerbianShoshoneSierra LeoneanSiouxSlavicSlovakSloveneSomaliSouth AfricanSouth AmericanSouth American IndianSoviet UnionSpaniardSpanishSpanish AmericanSpanish American IndianSri LankanSubsaharan AfricanSudaneseSwedishSwissSyrianTaiwaneseThaiTlingit-HaidaTohono O'OdhamTonganTrinidadian and TobagonianTsimshianTurkishU.S. Virgin IslanderUgandanUkrainianUruguayanUteVenezuelanVietnameseWelshWest IndianYakamaYaquiYugoslavianYumanYup'ikZimbabwean
Immigration
NonimmigrantsImmigrantsAfghanistanAfricaAlbaniaArgentinaArmeniaAsiaAustraliaAustriaBahamasBangladeshBarbadosBelarusBelgiumBelizeBoliviaBosnia and HerzegovinaBrazilBulgariaBurma/MyanmarCabo VerdeCambodiaCameroonCanadaCaribbeanCentral AmericaChileChinaColombiaCongoCosta RicaCroatiaCubaCzechoslovakiaDenmarkDominicaDominican RepublicEastern AfricaEastern AsiaEastern EuropeEcuadorEgyptEl SalvadorEnglandEritreaEthiopiaEuropeFijiFranceGermanyGhanaGreeceGrenadaGuatemalaGuyanaHaitiHondurasHong KongHungaryIndiaIndonesiaIranIraqIrelandIsraelItalyJamaicaJapanJordanKazakhstanKenyaKoreaKuwaitLaosLatin AmericaLatviaLebanonLiberiaLithuaniaMalaysiaMexicoMicronesiaMiddle AfricaMoldovaMoroccoNepalNetherlandsNicaraguaNigeriaNorth AmericaNorth MacedoniaNorthern AfricaNorthern EuropeNorwayOceaniaPakistanPanamaPeruPhilippinesPolandPortugalRomaniaRussiaSaudi ArabiaScotlandSenegalSerbiaSierra LeoneSingaporeSomaliaSouth AfricaSouth AmericaSouth Central AsiaSouth Eastern AsiaSouthern EuropeSpainSri LankaSt. Vincent and the GrenadinesSudanSwedenSwitzerlandSyriaTaiwanThailandTrinidad and TobagoTurkeyUgandaUkraineUruguayUzbekistanVenezuelaVietnamWest IndiesWestern AfricaWestern AsiaWestern EuropeYemenZaireZimbabweAzores
Scottish
Race
Ancestry
AfghanAfricanAlaska NativeAlaskan AthabascanAlbanianAleutAlsatianAmericanApacheArabArapahoArgentineanArmenianAssyrian/Chaldean/SyriacAustralianAustrianBahamianBangladeshiBarbadianBasqueBelgianBelizeanBermudanBhutaneseBlackfeetBolivianBrazilianBritishBritish West IndianBulgarianBurmeseCajunCambodianCanadianCape VerdeanCarpatho RusynCelticCentral AmericanCentral American IndianCherokeeCheyenneChileanChineseChippewaChoctawColombianColvilleComancheCosta RicanCreeCreekCroatianCrowCubanCypriotCzechCzechoslovakianDanishDelawareDominicanDutchDutch West IndianEastern EuropeanEcuadorianEgyptianEnglishEstonianEthiopianEuropeanFijianFilipinoFinnishFrenchFrench American IndianFrench CanadianGermanGerman RussianGhanaianGreekGuamanian/ChamorroGuatemalanGuyaneseHaitianHmongHonduranHopiHoumaHungarianIcelanderIndian (Asian)IndonesianInupiatIranianIraqiIrishIroquoisIsraeliItalianJamaicanJapaneseJordanianKenyanKiowaKoreanLaotianLatvianLebaneseLiberianLithuanianLumbeeLuxembourgerMacedonianMalaysianMalteseMarshalleseMenomineeMexicanMexican American IndianMongolianMoroccanNative HawaiianNavajoNepaleseNew ZealanderNicaraguanNigerianNorthern EuropeanNorwegianOkinawanOsageOttawaPaiutePakistaniPalestinianPanamanianParaguayanPennsylvania GermanPeruvianPimaPolishPortuguesePotawatomiPuebloPuerto RicanPuget Sound SalishRomanianRussianSalvadoranSamoanScandinavianScotch-IrishScottishSeminoleSenegaleseSerbianShoshoneSierra LeoneanSiouxSlavicSlovakSloveneSomaliSouth AfricanSouth AmericanSouth American IndianSoviet UnionSpaniardSpanishSpanish AmericanSpanish American IndianSri LankanSubsaharan AfricanSudaneseSwedishSwissSyrianTaiwaneseThaiTlingit-HaidaTohono O'OdhamTonganTrinidadian and TobagonianTsimshianTurkishU.S. Virgin IslanderUgandanUkrainianUruguayanUteVenezuelanVietnameseWelshWest IndianYakamaYaquiYugoslavianYumanYup'ikZimbabwean
Immigration
NonimmigrantsImmigrantsAfghanistanAfricaAlbaniaArgentinaArmeniaAsiaAustraliaAustriaBahamasBangladeshBarbadosBelarusBelgiumBelizeBoliviaBosnia and HerzegovinaBrazilBulgariaBurma/MyanmarCabo VerdeCambodiaCameroonCanadaCaribbeanCentral AmericaChileChinaColombiaCongoCosta RicaCroatiaCubaCzechoslovakiaDenmarkDominicaDominican RepublicEastern AfricaEastern AsiaEastern EuropeEcuadorEgyptEl SalvadorEnglandEritreaEthiopiaEuropeFijiFranceGermanyGhanaGreeceGrenadaGuatemalaGuyanaHaitiHondurasHong KongHungaryIndiaIndonesiaIranIraqIrelandIsraelItalyJamaicaJapanJordanKazakhstanKenyaKoreaKuwaitLaosLatin AmericaLatviaLebanonLiberiaLithuaniaMalaysiaMexicoMicronesiaMiddle AfricaMoldovaMoroccoNepalNetherlandsNicaraguaNigeriaNorth AmericaNorth MacedoniaNorthern AfricaNorthern EuropeNorwayOceaniaPakistanPanamaPeruPhilippinesPolandPortugalRomaniaRussiaSaudi ArabiaScotlandSenegalSerbiaSierra LeoneSingaporeSomaliaSouth AfricaSouth AmericaSouth Central AsiaSouth Eastern AsiaSouthern EuropeSpainSri LankaSt. Vincent and the GrenadinesSudanSwedenSwitzerlandSyriaTaiwanThailandTrinidad and TobagoTurkeyUgandaUkraineUruguayUzbekistanVenezuelaVietnamWest IndiesWestern AfricaWestern AsiaWestern EuropeYemenZaireZimbabweAzores
Social Comparison
Social Comparison
Income
Poverty
Unemployment
Labor Participation
Family Structure
Vehicle Availability
Education Level
Disability

Social Comparison

Chickasaw

Scottish

Fair
Good
3,663
SOCIAL INDEX
34.2/ 100
SOCIAL RATING
212th/ 347
SOCIAL RANK
6,834
SOCIAL INDEX
65.8/ 100
SOCIAL RATING
139th/ 347
SOCIAL RANK

Scottish Integration in Chickasaw Communities

The statistical analysis conducted on geographies consisting of 147,440,925 people shows a mild positive correlation between the proportion of Scottish within Chickasaw communities in the United States with a correlation coefficient (R) of 0.322. On average, for every 1% (one percent) increase in Chickasaw within a typical geography, there is an increase of 0.070% in Scottish. To illustrate, in a geography comprising of 100,000 individuals, a rise of 1,000 Chickasaw corresponds to an increase of 70.0 Scottish.
Chickasaw Integration in Scottish Communities

Chickasaw vs Scottish Income

When considering income, the most significant differences between Chickasaw and Scottish communities in the United States are seen in householder income ages 45 - 64 years ($82,193 compared to $102,123, a difference of 24.2%), median family income ($85,356 compared to $104,288, a difference of 22.2%), and per capita income ($36,475 compared to $44,440, a difference of 21.8%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of wage/income gap (27.2% compared to 29.1%, a difference of 7.2%), median female earnings ($34,414 compared to $38,397, a difference of 11.6%), and householder income under 25 years ($44,763 compared to $50,554, a difference of 12.9%).
Chickasaw vs Scottish Income
Income MetricChickasawScottish
Per Capita Income
Tragic
$36,475
Good
$44,440
Median Family Income
Tragic
$85,356
Good
$104,288
Median Household Income
Tragic
$70,005
Average
$85,101
Median Earnings
Tragic
$40,672
Average
$46,463
Median Male Earnings
Tragic
$47,832
Good
$55,793
Median Female Earnings
Tragic
$34,414
Tragic
$38,397
Householder Age | Under 25 years
Tragic
$44,763
Tragic
$50,554
Householder Age | 25 - 44 years
Tragic
$77,929
Average
$94,622
Householder Age | 45 - 64 years
Tragic
$82,193
Good
$102,123
Householder Age | Over 65 years
Tragic
$53,732
Good
$61,735
Wage/Income Gap
Tragic
27.2%
Tragic
29.1%

Chickasaw vs Scottish Poverty

When considering poverty, the most significant differences between Chickasaw and Scottish communities in the United States are seen in family poverty (10.8% compared to 7.9%, a difference of 36.5%), married-couple family poverty (5.8% compared to 4.3%, a difference of 35.7%), and receiving food stamps (13.1% compared to 9.9%, a difference of 32.6%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of single father poverty (19.0% compared to 17.7%, a difference of 6.8%), seniors poverty over the age of 75 (11.6% compared to 10.5%, a difference of 10.7%), and single mother poverty (34.4% compared to 30.1%, a difference of 14.3%).
Chickasaw vs Scottish Poverty
Poverty MetricChickasawScottish
Poverty
Tragic
14.7%
Exceptional
11.5%
Families
Tragic
10.8%
Exceptional
7.9%
Males
Tragic
13.5%
Exceptional
10.4%
Females
Tragic
15.9%
Exceptional
12.5%
Females 18 to 24 years
Tragic
24.5%
Tragic
20.9%
Females 25 to 34 years
Tragic
17.0%
Fair
13.9%
Children Under 5 years
Tragic
21.8%
Good
16.9%
Children Under 16 years
Tragic
19.5%
Exceptional
15.0%
Boys Under 16 years
Tragic
19.8%
Exceptional
15.2%
Girls Under 16 years
Tragic
19.6%
Exceptional
15.4%
Single Males
Tragic
16.3%
Tragic
14.0%
Single Females
Tragic
26.3%
Tragic
21.8%
Single Fathers
Tragic
19.0%
Tragic
17.7%
Single Mothers
Tragic
34.4%
Tragic
30.1%
Married Couples
Tragic
5.8%
Exceptional
4.3%
Seniors Over 65 years
Good
10.7%
Exceptional
9.2%
Seniors Over 75 years
Exceptional
11.6%
Exceptional
10.5%
Receiving Food Stamps
Tragic
13.1%
Exceptional
9.9%

Chickasaw vs Scottish Unemployment

When considering unemployment, the most significant differences between Chickasaw and Scottish communities in the United States are seen in unemployment among seniors over 75 years (7.3% compared to 10.1%, a difference of 37.5%), unemployment among ages 30 to 34 years (6.2% compared to 5.5%, a difference of 13.7%), and unemployment among women with children under 6 years (9.0% compared to 7.9%, a difference of 13.4%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of unemployment among ages 20 to 24 years (9.9% compared to 9.8%, a difference of 0.79%), unemployment among ages 25 to 29 years (6.7% compared to 6.6%, a difference of 2.1%), and unemployment among youth under 25 years (11.2% compared to 10.9%, a difference of 2.6%).
Chickasaw vs Scottish Unemployment
Unemployment MetricChickasawScottish
Unemployment
Exceptional
5.0%
Exceptional
4.7%
Males
Excellent
5.2%
Exceptional
4.8%
Females
Excellent
5.1%
Exceptional
4.7%
Youth < 25
Exceptional
11.2%
Exceptional
10.9%
Age | 16 to 19 years
Exceptional
16.7%
Exceptional
16.2%
Age | 20 to 24 years
Exceptional
9.9%
Exceptional
9.8%
Age | 25 to 29 years
Fair
6.7%
Good
6.6%
Age | 30 to 34 years
Tragic
6.2%
Average
5.5%
Age | 35 to 44 years
Tragic
4.9%
Exceptional
4.5%
Age | 45 to 54 years
Exceptional
4.2%
Exceptional
4.1%
Age | 55 to 59 years
Good
4.8%
Exceptional
4.5%
Age | 60 to 64 years
Exceptional
4.3%
Exceptional
4.6%
Age | 65 to 74 years
Exceptional
4.7%
Exceptional
5.2%
Seniors > 65
Exceptional
4.4%
Exceptional
4.9%
Seniors > 75
Exceptional
7.3%
Tragic
10.1%
Women w/ Children < 6
Tragic
9.0%
Poor
7.9%
Women w/ Children 6 to 17
Exceptional
8.6%
Tragic
9.4%
Women w/ Children < 18
Good
5.4%
Exceptional
5.1%

Chickasaw vs Scottish Labor Participation

When considering labor participation, the most significant differences between Chickasaw and Scottish communities in the United States are seen in in labor force | age 16-19 (38.3% compared to 42.0%, a difference of 9.6%), in labor force | age 45-54 (79.0% compared to 82.2%, a difference of 4.0%), and in labor force | age 20-24 (74.5% compared to 77.4%, a difference of 4.0%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of in labor force | age > 16 (62.3% compared to 63.9%, a difference of 2.5%), in labor force | age 30-34 (81.9% compared to 84.2%, a difference of 2.8%), and in labor force | age 25-29 (81.9% compared to 84.6%, a difference of 3.3%).
Chickasaw vs Scottish Labor Participation
Labor Participation MetricChickasawScottish
In Labor Force | Age > 16
Tragic
62.3%
Tragic
63.9%
In Labor Force | Age 20-64
Tragic
76.2%
Tragic
78.9%
In Labor Force | Age 16-19
Exceptional
38.3%
Exceptional
42.0%
In Labor Force | Age 20-24
Poor
74.5%
Exceptional
77.4%
In Labor Force | Age 25-29
Tragic
81.9%
Average
84.6%
In Labor Force | Age 30-34
Tragic
81.9%
Tragic
84.2%
In Labor Force | Age 35-44
Tragic
80.9%
Tragic
83.9%
In Labor Force | Age 45-54
Tragic
79.0%
Tragic
82.2%

Chickasaw vs Scottish Family Structure

When considering family structure, the most significant differences between Chickasaw and Scottish communities in the United States are seen in single mother households (7.0% compared to 5.8%, a difference of 22.4%), single father households (2.8% compared to 2.3%, a difference of 19.9%), and births to unmarried women (36.3% compared to 31.7%, a difference of 14.4%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of family households (64.4% compared to 64.5%, a difference of 0.14%), average family size (3.19 compared to 3.11, a difference of 2.7%), and family households with children (28.2% compared to 27.0%, a difference of 4.3%).
Chickasaw vs Scottish Family Structure
Family Structure MetricChickasawScottish
Family Households
Good
64.4%
Good
64.5%
Family Households with Children
Exceptional
28.2%
Tragic
27.0%
Married-couple Households
Fair
45.9%
Exceptional
49.0%
Average Family Size
Tragic
3.19
Tragic
3.11
Single Father Households
Tragic
2.8%
Good
2.3%
Single Mother Households
Tragic
7.0%
Exceptional
5.8%
Currently Married
Average
46.6%
Exceptional
49.2%
Divorced or Separated
Tragic
14.2%
Tragic
12.6%
Births to Unmarried Women
Tragic
36.3%
Average
31.7%

Chickasaw vs Scottish Vehicle Availability

When considering vehicle availability, the most significant differences between Chickasaw and Scottish communities in the United States are seen in no vehicles in household (7.9% compared to 6.8%, a difference of 16.2%), 2 or more vehicles in household (59.0% compared to 61.2%, a difference of 3.8%), and 3 or more vehicles in household (22.2% compared to 22.6%, a difference of 1.9%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of 4 or more vehicles in household (7.4% compared to 7.4%, a difference of 0.13%), 1 or more vehicles in household (92.3% compared to 93.4%, a difference of 1.2%), and 3 or more vehicles in household (22.2% compared to 22.6%, a difference of 1.9%).
Chickasaw vs Scottish Vehicle Availability
Vehicle Availability MetricChickasawScottish
No Vehicles Available
Exceptional
7.9%
Exceptional
6.8%
1+ Vehicles Available
Exceptional
92.3%
Exceptional
93.4%
2+ Vehicles Available
Exceptional
59.0%
Exceptional
61.2%
3+ Vehicles Available
Exceptional
22.2%
Exceptional
22.6%
4+ Vehicles Available
Exceptional
7.4%
Exceptional
7.4%

Chickasaw vs Scottish Education Level

When considering education level, the most significant differences between Chickasaw and Scottish communities in the United States are seen in professional degree (3.4% compared to 4.6%, a difference of 35.5%), master's degree (11.4% compared to 15.2%, a difference of 32.8%), and doctorate degree (1.5% compared to 2.0%, a difference of 31.4%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of nursery school (98.4% compared to 98.7%, a difference of 0.28%), kindergarten (98.4% compared to 98.6%, a difference of 0.28%), and 1st grade (98.3% compared to 98.6%, a difference of 0.28%).
Chickasaw vs Scottish Education Level
Education Level MetricChickasawScottish
No Schooling Completed
Exceptional
1.7%
Exceptional
1.4%
Nursery School
Exceptional
98.4%
Exceptional
98.7%
Kindergarten
Exceptional
98.4%
Exceptional
98.6%
1st Grade
Exceptional
98.3%
Exceptional
98.6%
2nd Grade
Exceptional
98.3%
Exceptional
98.6%
3rd Grade
Exceptional
98.2%
Exceptional
98.5%
4th Grade
Exceptional
98.0%
Exceptional
98.4%
5th Grade
Exceptional
97.9%
Exceptional
98.3%
6th Grade
Exceptional
97.6%
Exceptional
98.1%
7th Grade
Exceptional
96.7%
Exceptional
97.5%
8th Grade
Exceptional
96.4%
Exceptional
97.3%
9th Grade
Exceptional
95.5%
Exceptional
96.5%
10th Grade
Excellent
94.1%
Exceptional
95.6%
11th Grade
Fair
92.3%
Exceptional
94.4%
12th Grade, No Diploma
Tragic
90.3%
Exceptional
93.0%
High School Diploma
Poor
88.4%
Exceptional
91.4%
GED/Equivalency
Tragic
83.8%
Exceptional
87.7%
College, Under 1 year
Tragic
60.4%
Exceptional
67.0%
College, 1 year or more
Tragic
53.3%
Excellent
60.5%
Associate's Degree
Tragic
38.6%
Good
46.9%
Bachelor's Degree
Tragic
30.4%
Average
38.1%
Master's Degree
Tragic
11.4%
Good
15.2%
Professional Degree
Tragic
3.4%
Good
4.6%
Doctorate Degree
Tragic
1.5%
Excellent
2.0%

Chickasaw vs Scottish Disability

When considering disability, the most significant differences between Chickasaw and Scottish communities in the United States are seen in vision disability (3.2% compared to 2.3%, a difference of 37.8%), disability age 35 to 64 (16.1% compared to 12.4%, a difference of 30.2%), and disability age 65 to 74 (30.2% compared to 23.6%, a difference of 28.1%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of disability age under 5 (1.7% compared to 1.6%, a difference of 5.7%), cognitive disability (18.5% compared to 16.9%, a difference of 9.3%), and disability age over 75 (51.2% compared to 46.7%, a difference of 9.5%).
Chickasaw vs Scottish Disability
Disability MetricChickasawScottish
Disability
Tragic
15.2%
Tragic
12.9%
Males
Tragic
15.1%
Tragic
12.8%
Females
Tragic
15.2%
Tragic
13.0%
Age | Under 5 years
Tragic
1.7%
Tragic
1.6%
Age | 5 to 17 years
Tragic
6.8%
Tragic
6.1%
Age | 18 to 34 years
Tragic
9.0%
Tragic
7.7%
Age | 35 to 64 years
Tragic
16.1%
Tragic
12.4%
Age | 65 to 74 years
Tragic
30.2%
Fair
23.6%
Age | Over 75 years
Tragic
51.2%
Exceptional
46.7%
Vision
Tragic
3.2%
Tragic
2.3%
Hearing
Tragic
4.5%
Tragic
3.7%
Cognitive
Tragic
18.5%
Exceptional
16.9%
Ambulatory
Tragic
8.0%
Tragic
6.5%
Self-Care
Tragic
2.9%
Average
2.5%