Chickasaw Single Female Poverty
COMPARE
Chickasaw
Select to Compare
Single Female Poverty
Chickasaw Single Female Poverty
26.3%
POVERTY | SINGLE FEMALES
0.0/ 100
METRIC RATING
318th/ 347
METRIC RANK
Chickasaw Single Female Poverty Correlation Chart
The statistical analysis conducted on geographies consisting of 147,052,400 people shows a weak positive correlation between the proportion of Chickasaw and poverty level among single females in the United States with a correlation coefficient (R) of 0.290 and weighted average of 26.3%. On average, for every 1% (one percent) increase in Chickasaw within a typical geography, there is an increase of 0.80% in poverty level among single females.
It is essential to understand that the correlation between the percentage of Chickasaw and poverty level among single females does not imply a direct cause-and-effect relationship. It remains uncertain whether the presence of Chickasaw influences an upward or downward trend in the level of poverty level among single females within an area, or if Chickasaw simply ended up residing in those areas with higher or lower levels of poverty level among single females due to other factors.
Demographics Similar to Chickasaw by Single Female Poverty
In terms of single female poverty, the demographic groups most similar to Chickasaw are Black/African American (26.4%, a difference of 0.33%), Arapaho (26.4%, a difference of 0.63%), Ottawa (26.0%, a difference of 1.0%), Yup'ik (26.6%, a difference of 1.3%), and Immigrants from Somalia (25.8%, a difference of 1.9%).
| Demographics | Rating | Rank | Single Female Poverty |
| Immigrants from Honduras | 0.0 /100 | #311 | Tragic 25.5% |
| Paiute | 0.0 /100 | #312 | Tragic 25.5% |
| Comanche | 0.0 /100 | #313 | Tragic 25.6% |
| Cherokee | 0.0 /100 | #314 | Tragic 25.7% |
| Iroquois | 0.0 /100 | #315 | Tragic 25.7% |
| Immigrants from Somalia | 0.0 /100 | #316 | Tragic 25.8% |
| Ottawa | 0.0 /100 | #317 | Tragic 26.0% |
| Chickasaw | 0.0 /100 | #318 | Tragic 26.3% |
| Blacks/African Americans | 0.0 /100 | #319 | Tragic 26.4% |
| Arapaho | 0.0 /100 | #320 | Tragic 26.4% |
| Yup'ik | 0.0 /100 | #321 | Tragic 26.6% |
| Seminole | 0.0 /100 | #322 | Tragic 26.8% |
| Chippewa | 0.0 /100 | #323 | Tragic 26.8% |
| Kiowa | 0.0 /100 | #324 | Tragic 26.9% |
| Choctaw | 0.0 /100 | #325 | Tragic 27.2% |
Chickasaw Single Female Poverty Correlation Summary
| Measurement | Chickasaw Data | Single Female Poverty Data |
| Minimum | 0.032% | 11.1% |
| Maximum | 36.8% | 100.0% |
| Range | 36.8% | 88.9% |
| Mean | 8.4% | 35.8% |
| Median | 7.1% | 30.6% |
| Interquartile 25% (IQ1) | 3.2% | 24.5% |
| Interquartile 75% (IQ3) | 11.6% | 42.2% |
| Interquartile Range (IQR) | 8.4% | 17.7% |
| Standard Deviation (Sample) | 6.8% | 19.0% |
| Standard Deviation (Population) | 6.8% | 18.8% |
Correlation Details
| Chickasaw Percentile | Sample Size | Single Female Poverty |
[ 0.0% - 0.5% ] 0.032% | 136,287,441 | 22.9% |
[ 0.0% - 0.5% ] 0.25% | 5,211,640 | 23.0% |
[ 0.0% - 0.5% ] 0.45% | 1,559,667 | 25.8% |
[ 0.5% - 1.0% ] 0.60% | 1,567,189 | 29.7% |
[ 0.5% - 1.0% ] 0.83% | 815,435 | 29.4% |
[ 0.5% - 1.0% ] 0.98% | 457,139 | 24.3% |
[ 1.0% - 1.5% ] 1.19% | 228,844 | 30.6% |
[ 1.0% - 1.5% ] 1.35% | 243,029 | 28.0% |
[ 1.5% - 2.0% ] 1.53% | 76,062 | 27.2% |
[ 1.5% - 2.0% ] 1.74% | 87,096 | 27.7% |
[ 1.5% - 2.0% ] 1.93% | 51,874 | 26.1% |
[ 2.0% - 2.5% ] 2.13% | 38,579 | 30.9% |
[ 2.0% - 2.5% ] 2.28% | 51,687 | 25.2% |
[ 2.5% - 3.0% ] 2.51% | 15,979 | 36.3% |
[ 2.5% - 3.0% ] 2.67% | 11,432 | 37.1% |
[ 2.5% - 3.0% ] 2.88% | 64,331 | 24.5% |
[ 3.0% - 3.5% ] 3.00% | 18,243 | 34.6% |
[ 3.0% - 3.5% ] 3.24% | 14,523 | 40.5% |
[ 3.0% - 3.5% ] 3.46% | 7,995 | 31.2% |
[ 3.5% - 4.0% ] 3.58% | 7,909 | 42.5% |
[ 3.5% - 4.0% ] 3.83% | 1,306 | 26.2% |
[ 3.5% - 4.0% ] 3.93% | 2,773 | 46.5% |
[ 4.0% - 4.5% ] 4.13% | 4,862 | 31.7% |
[ 4.0% - 4.5% ] 4.35% | 20,308 | 30.7% |
[ 4.5% - 5.0% ] 4.53% | 26,620 | 30.6% |
[ 4.5% - 5.0% ] 4.70% | 3,830 | 35.8% |
[ 4.5% - 5.0% ] 4.85% | 1,773 | 27.8% |
[ 5.0% - 5.5% ] 5.12% | 1,893 | 17.7% |
[ 5.0% - 5.5% ] 5.18% | 40,674 | 32.7% |
[ 5.5% - 6.0% ] 5.56% | 3,670 | 30.0% |
[ 5.5% - 6.0% ] 6.00% | 4,035 | 42.2% |
[ 6.0% - 6.5% ] 6.16% | 438 | 33.3% |
[ 6.0% - 6.5% ] 6.36% | 6,967 | 45.5% |
[ 6.5% - 7.0% ] 6.65% | 1,234 | 55.4% |
[ 6.5% - 7.0% ] 6.98% | 3,280 | 29.4% |
[ 7.0% - 7.5% ] 7.09% | 254 | 42.9% |
[ 7.0% - 7.5% ] 7.28% | 8,632 | 21.3% |
[ 7.0% - 7.5% ] 7.45% | 2,925 | 22.3% |
[ 7.5% - 8.0% ] 7.56% | 6,148 | 21.0% |
[ 7.5% - 8.0% ] 7.88% | 2,449 | 22.0% |
[ 8.0% - 8.5% ] 8.21% | 633 | 13.1% |
[ 8.0% - 8.5% ] 8.29% | 4,329 | 13.9% |
[ 8.5% - 9.0% ] 8.81% | 919 | 30.3% |
[ 8.5% - 9.0% ] 8.89% | 551 | 30.6% |
[ 9.0% - 9.5% ] 9.11% | 966 | 16.7% |
[ 9.0% - 9.5% ] 9.44% | 4,841 | 40.0% |
[ 9.5% - 10.0% ] 9.70% | 268 | 66.7% |
[ 10.0% - 10.5% ] 10.00% | 7,518 | 60.4% |
[ 10.0% - 10.5% ] 10.49% | 286 | 50.0% |
[ 10.5% - 11.0% ] 10.75% | 930 | 63.4% |
[ 10.5% - 11.0% ] 10.95% | 5,491 | 41.3% |
[ 11.0% - 11.5% ] 11.15% | 1,283 | 31.8% |
[ 11.5% - 12.0% ] 11.54% | 208 | 62.5% |
[ 11.5% - 12.0% ] 11.63% | 43 | 100.0% |
[ 11.5% - 12.0% ] 11.85% | 16,537 | 31.4% |
[ 11.5% - 12.0% ] 11.98% | 31,368 | 23.5% |
[ 12.0% - 12.5% ] 12.37% | 897 | 37.1% |
[ 13.0% - 13.5% ] 13.12% | 7,470 | 39.3% |
[ 13.0% - 13.5% ] 13.31% | 3,110 | 43.6% |
[ 13.0% - 13.5% ] 13.45% | 119 | 100.0% |
[ 14.5% - 15.0% ] 14.64% | 560 | 55.6% |
[ 15.0% - 15.5% ] 15.30% | 791 | 28.9% |
[ 15.5% - 16.0% ] 15.98% | 488 | 55.6% |
[ 16.5% - 17.0% ] 16.79% | 262 | 18.2% |
[ 18.0% - 18.5% ] 18.29% | 82 | 69.0% |
[ 18.0% - 18.5% ] 18.46% | 428 | 14.8% |
[ 20.0% - 20.5% ] 20.31% | 64 | 25.0% |
[ 21.0% - 21.5% ] 21.23% | 212 | 11.1% |
[ 23.5% - 24.0% ] 23.81% | 189 | 11.1% |
[ 25.5% - 26.0% ] 25.74% | 1,286 | 15.3% |
[ 36.5% - 37.0% ] 36.79% | 106 | 100.0% |