Immigrants from Costa Rica vs Sri Lankan Hearing Disability
COMPARE
Immigrants from Costa Rica
Sri Lankan
Hearing Disability
Hearing Disability Comparison
Immigrants from Costa Rica
Sri Lankans
2.9%
HEARING DISABILITY
84.0/ 100
METRIC RATING
138th/ 347
METRIC RANK
2.9%
HEARING DISABILITY
84.1/ 100
METRIC RATING
137th/ 347
METRIC RANK
Immigrants from Costa Rica vs Sri Lankan Hearing Disability Correlation Chart
The statistical analysis conducted on geographies consisting of 204,259,714 people shows a poor negative correlation between the proportion of Immigrants from Costa Rica and percentage of population with hearing disability in the United States with a correlation coefficient (R) of -0.124 and weighted average of 2.9%. Similarly, the statistical analysis conducted on geographies consisting of 440,283,716 people shows a moderate positive correlation between the proportion of Sri Lankans and percentage of population with hearing disability in the United States with a correlation coefficient (R) of 0.407 and weighted average of 2.9%, a difference of 0.010%.
Hearing Disability Correlation Summary
| Measurement | Immigrants from Costa Rica | Sri Lankan |
| Minimum | 0.86% | 1.0% |
| Maximum | 6.8% | 29.8% |
| Range | 6.0% | 28.7% |
| Mean | 3.2% | 4.0% |
| Median | 2.8% | 2.8% |
| Interquartile 25% (IQ1) | 2.5% | 2.4% |
| Interquartile 75% (IQ3) | 3.6% | 3.1% |
| Interquartile Range (IQR) | 1.1% | 0.71% |
| Standard Deviation (Sample) | 1.3% | 4.3% |
| Standard Deviation (Population) | 1.3% | 4.3% |
Demographics Similar to Immigrants from Costa Rica and Sri Lankans by Hearing Disability
In terms of hearing disability, the demographic groups most similar to Immigrants from Costa Rica are Bermudan (2.9%, a difference of 0.050%), Immigrants from Jordan (2.9%, a difference of 0.060%), Immigrants from Brazil (2.9%, a difference of 0.10%), Soviet Union (2.9%, a difference of 0.13%), and Subsaharan African (2.9%, a difference of 0.13%). Similarly, the demographic groups most similar to Sri Lankans are Bermudan (2.9%, a difference of 0.050%), Immigrants from Jordan (2.9%, a difference of 0.070%), Immigrants from Brazil (2.9%, a difference of 0.10%), Soviet Union (2.9%, a difference of 0.13%), and Subsaharan African (2.9%, a difference of 0.14%).
| Demographics | Rating | Rank | Hearing Disability |
| South American Indians | 86.9 /100 | #127 | Excellent 2.9% |
| Immigrants | Western Asia | 86.9 /100 | #128 | Excellent 2.9% |
| Immigrants | Uganda | 86.6 /100 | #129 | Excellent 2.9% |
| Immigrants | Vietnam | 86.5 /100 | #130 | Excellent 2.9% |
| Immigrants | Kenya | 86.1 /100 | #131 | Excellent 2.9% |
| Chileans | 85.8 /100 | #132 | Excellent 2.9% |
| Immigrants | Syria | 85.8 /100 | #133 | Excellent 2.9% |
| Ugandans | 85.5 /100 | #134 | Excellent 2.9% |
| Soviet Union | 84.8 /100 | #135 | Excellent 2.9% |
| Immigrants | Brazil | 84.6 /100 | #136 | Excellent 2.9% |
| Sri Lankans | 84.1 /100 | #137 | Excellent 2.9% |
| Immigrants | Costa Rica | 84.0 /100 | #138 | Excellent 2.9% |
| Bermudans | 83.8 /100 | #139 | Excellent 2.9% |
| Immigrants | Jordan | 83.7 /100 | #140 | Excellent 2.9% |
| Sub-Saharan Africans | 83.3 /100 | #141 | Excellent 2.9% |
| Laotians | 81.1 /100 | #142 | Excellent 2.9% |
| Immigrants | Bahamas | 80.9 /100 | #143 | Excellent 2.9% |
| Immigrants | Bulgaria | 79.2 /100 | #144 | Good 2.9% |
| Immigrants | Congo | 78.9 /100 | #145 | Good 2.9% |
| Brazilians | 78.7 /100 | #146 | Good 2.9% |
| Tongans | 78.6 /100 | #147 | Good 2.9% |