Scottish Child Poverty Among Girls Under 16
COMPARE
Scottish
Select to Compare
Child Poverty Among Girls Under 16
Scottish Child Poverty Among Girls Under 16
15.7%
POVERTY | GIRLS < 16
79.6/ 100
METRIC RATING
126th/ 347
METRIC RANK
Scottish Child Poverty Among Girls Under 16 Correlation Chart
The statistical analysis conducted on geographies consisting of 540,006,819 people shows a significant positive correlation between the proportion of Scottish and poverty level among girls under the age of 16 in the United States with a correlation coefficient (R) of 0.662 and weighted average of 15.7%. On average, for every 1% (one percent) increase in Scottish within a typical geography, there is an increase of 1.5% in poverty level among girls under the age of 16.
It is essential to understand that the correlation between the percentage of Scottish and poverty level among girls under the age of 16 does not imply a direct cause-and-effect relationship. It remains uncertain whether the presence of Scottish influences an upward or downward trend in the level of poverty level among girls under the age of 16 within an area, or if Scottish simply ended up residing in those areas with higher or lower levels of poverty level among girls under the age of 16 due to other factors.
Demographics Similar to Scottish by Child Poverty Among Girls Under 16
In terms of child poverty among girls under 16, the demographic groups most similar to Scottish are Brazilian (15.7%, a difference of 0.030%), Malaysian (15.7%, a difference of 0.11%), Chilean (15.7%, a difference of 0.12%), Immigrants from Austria (15.7%, a difference of 0.14%), and Vietnamese (15.7%, a difference of 0.22%).
| Demographics | Rating | Rank | Child Poverty Among Girls Under 16 |
| Portuguese | 80.0 /100 | #119 | Good 15.6% |
| Samoans | 79.8 /100 | #120 | Good 15.7% |
| Israelis | 79.8 /100 | #121 | Good 15.7% |
| Irish | 79.8 /100 | #122 | Good 15.7% |
| Albanians | 79.7 /100 | #123 | Good 15.7% |
| Malaysians | 79.7 /100 | #124 | Good 15.7% |
| Brazilians | 79.6 /100 | #125 | Good 15.7% |
| Scottish | 79.6 /100 | #126 | Good 15.7% |
| Chileans | 79.5 /100 | #127 | Good 15.7% |
| Immigrants from Austria | 79.5 /100 | #128 | Good 15.7% |
| Vietnamese | 79.4 /100 | #129 | Good 15.7% |
| Peruvians | 79.4 /100 | #130 | Good 15.8% |
| Immigrants from Western Europe | 79.3 /100 | #131 | Good 15.8% |
| Immigrants from South Eastern Asia | 79.2 /100 | #132 | Good 15.8% |
| Armenians | 79.1 /100 | #133 | Good 15.8% |
Scottish Child Poverty Among Girls Under 16 Correlation Summary
| Measurement | Scottish Data | Child Poverty Among Girls Under 16 Data |
| Minimum | 0.27% | 2.6% |
| Maximum | 55.1% | 100.0% |
| Range | 54.8% | 97.4% |
| Mean | 17.1% | 35.5% |
| Median | 15.2% | 26.6% |
| Interquartile 25% (IQ1) | 7.5% | 16.1% |
| Interquartile 75% (IQ3) | 24.4% | 44.0% |
| Interquartile Range (IQR) | 16.9% | 28.0% |
| Standard Deviation (Sample) | 12.2% | 28.1% |
| Standard Deviation (Population) | 12.1% | 27.9% |
Correlation Details
| Scottish Percentile | Sample Size | Child Poverty Among Girls Under 16 |
[ 0.0% - 0.5% ] 0.27% | 89,973,788 | 24.7% |
[ 0.5% - 1.0% ] 0.76% | 104,097,031 | 20.4% |
[ 1.0% - 1.5% ] 1.25% | 102,904,981 | 18.0% |
[ 1.5% - 2.0% ] 1.73% | 93,743,805 | 16.2% |
[ 2.0% - 2.5% ] 2.22% | 60,970,656 | 14.0% |
[ 2.5% - 3.0% ] 2.73% | 39,838,265 | 13.2% |
[ 3.0% - 3.5% ] 3.24% | 20,436,251 | 12.6% |
[ 3.5% - 4.0% ] 3.72% | 11,725,044 | 12.7% |
[ 4.0% - 4.5% ] 4.23% | 6,780,701 | 12.4% |
[ 4.5% - 5.0% ] 4.73% | 3,669,778 | 12.2% |
[ 5.0% - 5.5% ] 5.23% | 1,763,589 | 13.0% |
[ 5.5% - 6.0% ] 5.73% | 1,443,798 | 14.3% |
[ 6.0% - 6.5% ] 6.21% | 743,000 | 17.2% |
[ 6.5% - 7.0% ] 6.72% | 520,876 | 16.0% |
[ 7.0% - 7.5% ] 7.27% | 383,141 | 17.9% |
[ 7.5% - 8.0% ] 7.76% | 233,273 | 20.0% |
[ 8.0% - 8.5% ] 8.17% | 165,873 | 17.5% |
[ 8.5% - 9.0% ] 8.77% | 145,395 | 15.1% |
[ 9.0% - 9.5% ] 9.21% | 76,601 | 22.1% |
[ 9.5% - 10.0% ] 9.75% | 55,020 | 27.8% |
[ 10.0% - 10.5% ] 10.27% | 56,146 | 27.3% |
[ 10.5% - 11.0% ] 10.78% | 62,663 | 27.0% |
[ 11.0% - 11.5% ] 11.23% | 65,754 | 10.9% |
[ 11.5% - 12.0% ] 11.74% | 25,552 | 29.6% |
[ 12.0% - 12.5% ] 12.24% | 21,173 | 17.8% |
[ 12.5% - 13.0% ] 12.83% | 10,715 | 26.3% |
[ 13.0% - 13.5% ] 13.18% | 26,606 | 28.6% |
[ 13.5% - 14.0% ] 13.80% | 8,219 | 21.3% |
[ 14.0% - 14.5% ] 14.24% | 3,779 | 30.5% |
[ 14.5% - 15.0% ] 14.56% | 5,081 | 13.8% |
[ 15.0% - 15.5% ] 15.19% | 9,841 | 38.6% |
[ 15.5% - 16.0% ] 15.74% | 5,211 | 41.8% |
[ 16.0% - 16.5% ] 16.35% | 3,883 | 34.0% |
[ 16.5% - 17.0% ] 16.69% | 2,618 | 29.3% |
[ 17.0% - 17.5% ] 17.16% | 5,185 | 35.9% |
[ 17.5% - 18.0% ] 17.61% | 687 | 25.6% |
[ 18.0% - 18.5% ] 18.31% | 2,834 | 49.5% |
[ 18.5% - 19.0% ] 18.60% | 4,382 | 2.6% |
[ 19.0% - 19.5% ] 19.46% | 812 | 73.2% |
[ 19.5% - 20.0% ] 19.95% | 1,830 | 32.1% |
[ 20.5% - 21.0% ] 20.75% | 2,641 | 26.6% |
[ 21.0% - 21.5% ] 21.15% | 960 | 87.6% |
[ 21.5% - 22.0% ] 21.54% | 845 | 76.2% |
[ 23.0% - 23.5% ] 23.21% | 418 | 100.0% |
[ 23.5% - 24.0% ] 23.76% | 202 | 100.0% |
[ 24.0% - 24.5% ] 24.13% | 1,471 | 46.3% |
[ 24.5% - 25.0% ] 24.73% | 275 | 29.2% |
[ 25.5% - 26.0% ] 25.81% | 62 | 9.1% |
[ 26.0% - 26.5% ] 26.13% | 199 | 51.9% |
[ 26.5% - 27.0% ] 26.67% | 915 | 30.4% |
[ 27.0% - 27.5% ] 27.40% | 416 | 18.5% |
[ 27.5% - 28.0% ] 27.64% | 796 | 23.2% |
[ 29.0% - 29.5% ] 29.23% | 65 | 100.0% |
[ 31.0% - 31.5% ] 31.17% | 154 | 50.0% |
[ 32.5% - 33.0% ] 32.76% | 525 | 33.4% |
[ 34.5% - 35.0% ] 34.51% | 1,052 | 79.8% |
[ 38.0% - 38.5% ] 38.45% | 710 | 3.2% |
[ 38.5% - 39.0% ] 38.93% | 393 | 100.0% |
[ 44.0% - 44.5% ] 44.41% | 707 | 69.1% |
[ 46.5% - 47.0% ] 46.55% | 58 | 100.0% |
[ 55.0% - 55.5% ] 55.08% | 118 | 100.0% |