Norwegian vs Chickasaw Community Comparison
COMPARE
Norwegian
Chickasaw
Social Comparison
Social Comparison
Norwegians
Chickasaw
8,521
SOCIAL INDEX
82.7/ 100
SOCIAL RATING
68th/ 347
SOCIAL RANK
3,663
SOCIAL INDEX
34.2/ 100
SOCIAL RATING
212th/ 347
SOCIAL RANK
Chickasaw Integration in Norwegian Communities
The statistical analysis conducted on geographies consisting of 146,167,801 people shows a moderate positive correlation between the proportion of Chickasaw within Norwegian communities in the United States with a correlation coefficient (R) of 0.414. On average, for every 1% (one percent) increase in Norwegians within a typical geography, there is an increase of 0.014% in Chickasaw. To illustrate, in a geography comprising of 100,000 individuals, a rise of 1,000 Norwegians corresponds to an increase of 13.7 Chickasaw.
Norwegian vs Chickasaw Income
When considering income, the most significant differences between Norwegian and Chickasaw communities in the United States are seen in householder income ages 45 - 64 years ($103,682 compared to $82,193, a difference of 26.1%), median family income ($106,144 compared to $85,356, a difference of 24.3%), and householder income ages 25 - 44 years ($96,866 compared to $77,929, a difference of 24.3%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of wage/income gap (29.0% compared to 27.2%, a difference of 6.6%), median female earnings ($38,802 compared to $34,414, a difference of 12.8%), and householder income over 65 years ($61,104 compared to $53,732, a difference of 13.7%).
Income Metric | Norwegian | Chickasaw |
Per Capita Income | Good $44,480 | Tragic $36,475 |
Median Family Income | Excellent $106,144 | Tragic $85,356 |
Median Household Income | Good $86,084 | Tragic $70,005 |
Median Earnings | Good $46,865 | Tragic $40,672 |
Median Male Earnings | Excellent $55,965 | Tragic $47,832 |
Median Female Earnings | Poor $38,802 | Tragic $34,414 |
Householder Age | Under 25 years | Exceptional $53,127 | Tragic $44,763 |
Householder Age | 25 - 44 years | Good $96,866 | Tragic $77,929 |
Householder Age | 45 - 64 years | Excellent $103,682 | Tragic $82,193 |
Householder Age | Over 65 years | Average $61,104 | Tragic $53,732 |
Wage/Income Gap | Tragic 29.0% | Tragic 27.2% |
Norwegian vs Chickasaw Poverty
When considering poverty, the most significant differences between Norwegian and Chickasaw communities in the United States are seen in family poverty (6.9% compared to 10.8%, a difference of 57.4%), married-couple family poverty (3.7% compared to 5.8%, a difference of 55.9%), and child poverty under the age of 16 (13.0% compared to 19.5%, a difference of 50.2%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of seniors poverty over the age of 75 (10.2% compared to 11.6%, a difference of 14.1%), female poverty among 18-24 year olds (20.7% compared to 24.5%, a difference of 18.1%), and single father poverty (15.9% compared to 19.0%, a difference of 19.2%).
Poverty Metric | Norwegian | Chickasaw |
Poverty | Exceptional 10.5% | Tragic 14.7% |
Families | Exceptional 6.9% | Tragic 10.8% |
Males | Exceptional 9.5% | Tragic 13.5% |
Females | Exceptional 11.5% | Tragic 15.9% |
Females 18 to 24 years | Tragic 20.7% | Tragic 24.5% |
Females 25 to 34 years | Exceptional 12.6% | Tragic 17.0% |
Children Under 5 years | Exceptional 14.6% | Tragic 21.8% |
Children Under 16 years | Exceptional 13.0% | Tragic 19.5% |
Boys Under 16 years | Exceptional 13.2% | Tragic 19.8% |
Girls Under 16 years | Exceptional 13.3% | Tragic 19.6% |
Single Males | Fair 12.9% | Tragic 16.3% |
Single Females | Good 20.8% | Tragic 26.3% |
Single Fathers | Exceptional 15.9% | Tragic 19.0% |
Single Mothers | Exceptional 28.4% | Tragic 34.4% |
Married Couples | Exceptional 3.7% | Tragic 5.8% |
Seniors Over 65 years | Exceptional 8.7% | Good 10.7% |
Seniors Over 75 years | Exceptional 10.2% | Exceptional 11.6% |
Receiving Food Stamps | Exceptional 9.0% | Tragic 13.1% |
Norwegian vs Chickasaw Unemployment
When considering unemployment, the most significant differences between Norwegian and Chickasaw communities in the United States are seen in unemployment among seniors over 75 years (9.8% compared to 7.3%, a difference of 33.3%), unemployment among ages 30 to 34 years (5.0% compared to 6.2%, a difference of 24.5%), and unemployment among women with children under 6 years (7.2% compared to 9.0%, a difference of 24.2%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of unemployment among ages 60 to 64 years (4.3% compared to 4.3%, a difference of 0.050%), unemployment among women with children ages 6 to 17 years (8.3% compared to 8.6%, a difference of 3.4%), and unemployment among ages 65 to 74 years (5.0% compared to 4.7%, a difference of 5.3%).
Unemployment Metric | Norwegian | Chickasaw |
Unemployment | Exceptional 4.2% | Exceptional 5.0% |
Males | Exceptional 4.4% | Excellent 5.2% |
Females | Exceptional 4.2% | Excellent 5.1% |
Youth < 25 | Exceptional 9.8% | Exceptional 11.2% |
Age | 16 to 19 years | Exceptional 14.5% | Exceptional 16.7% |
Age | 20 to 24 years | Exceptional 9.0% | Exceptional 9.9% |
Age | 25 to 29 years | Exceptional 6.0% | Fair 6.7% |
Age | 30 to 34 years | Exceptional 5.0% | Tragic 6.2% |
Age | 35 to 44 years | Exceptional 4.0% | Tragic 4.9% |
Age | 45 to 54 years | Exceptional 3.9% | Exceptional 4.2% |
Age | 55 to 59 years | Exceptional 4.2% | Good 4.8% |
Age | 60 to 64 years | Exceptional 4.3% | Exceptional 4.3% |
Age | 65 to 74 years | Exceptional 5.0% | Exceptional 4.7% |
Seniors > 65 | Exceptional 4.7% | Exceptional 4.4% |
Seniors > 75 | Tragic 9.8% | Exceptional 7.3% |
Women w/ Children < 6 | Exceptional 7.2% | Tragic 9.0% |
Women w/ Children 6 to 17 | Exceptional 8.3% | Exceptional 8.6% |
Women w/ Children < 18 | Exceptional 4.4% | Good 5.4% |
Norwegian vs Chickasaw Labor Participation
When considering labor participation, the most significant differences between Norwegian and Chickasaw communities in the United States are seen in in labor force | age 16-19 (46.2% compared to 38.3%, a difference of 20.5%), in labor force | age 20-24 (80.1% compared to 74.5%, a difference of 7.6%), and in labor force | age 45-54 (84.4% compared to 79.0%, a difference of 6.8%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of in labor force | age 30-34 (85.7% compared to 81.9%, a difference of 4.7%), in labor force | age 25-29 (86.1% compared to 81.9%, a difference of 5.2%), and in labor force | age > 16 (65.7% compared to 62.3%, a difference of 5.4%).
Labor Participation Metric | Norwegian | Chickasaw |
In Labor Force | Age > 16 | Exceptional 65.7% | Tragic 62.3% |
In Labor Force | Age 20-64 | Exceptional 81.0% | Tragic 76.2% |
In Labor Force | Age 16-19 | Exceptional 46.2% | Exceptional 38.3% |
In Labor Force | Age 20-24 | Exceptional 80.1% | Poor 74.5% |
In Labor Force | Age 25-29 | Exceptional 86.1% | Tragic 81.9% |
In Labor Force | Age 30-34 | Exceptional 85.7% | Tragic 81.9% |
In Labor Force | Age 35-44 | Exceptional 85.6% | Tragic 80.9% |
In Labor Force | Age 45-54 | Exceptional 84.4% | Tragic 79.0% |
Norwegian vs Chickasaw Family Structure
When considering family structure, the most significant differences between Norwegian and Chickasaw communities in the United States are seen in single mother households (5.5% compared to 7.0%, a difference of 28.9%), births to unmarried women (29.3% compared to 36.3%, a difference of 23.7%), and divorced or separated (12.1% compared to 14.2%, a difference of 17.1%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of family households (63.9% compared to 64.4%, a difference of 0.79%), family households with children (27.4% compared to 28.2%, a difference of 3.2%), and average family size (3.08 compared to 3.19, a difference of 3.5%).
Family Structure Metric | Norwegian | Chickasaw |
Family Households | Poor 63.9% | Good 64.4% |
Family Households with Children | Fair 27.4% | Exceptional 28.2% |
Married-couple Households | Exceptional 49.5% | Fair 45.9% |
Average Family Size | Tragic 3.08 | Tragic 3.19 |
Single Father Households | Poor 2.4% | Tragic 2.8% |
Single Mother Households | Exceptional 5.5% | Tragic 7.0% |
Currently Married | Exceptional 50.2% | Average 46.6% |
Divorced or Separated | Fair 12.1% | Tragic 14.2% |
Births to Unmarried Women | Exceptional 29.3% | Tragic 36.3% |
Norwegian vs Chickasaw Vehicle Availability
When considering vehicle availability, the most significant differences between Norwegian and Chickasaw communities in the United States are seen in no vehicles in household (6.4% compared to 7.9%, a difference of 22.1%), 3 or more vehicles in household (23.9% compared to 22.2%, a difference of 7.5%), and 4 or more vehicles in household (8.0% compared to 7.4%, a difference of 7.5%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of 1 or more vehicles in household (93.7% compared to 92.3%, a difference of 1.5%), 2 or more vehicles in household (62.8% compared to 59.0%, a difference of 6.5%), and 4 or more vehicles in household (8.0% compared to 7.4%, a difference of 7.5%).
Vehicle Availability Metric | Norwegian | Chickasaw |
No Vehicles Available | Exceptional 6.4% | Exceptional 7.9% |
1+ Vehicles Available | Exceptional 93.7% | Exceptional 92.3% |
2+ Vehicles Available | Exceptional 62.8% | Exceptional 59.0% |
3+ Vehicles Available | Exceptional 23.9% | Exceptional 22.2% |
4+ Vehicles Available | Exceptional 8.0% | Exceptional 7.4% |
Norwegian vs Chickasaw Education Level
When considering education level, the most significant differences between Norwegian and Chickasaw communities in the United States are seen in no schooling completed (1.3% compared to 1.7%, a difference of 25.7%), professional degree (4.2% compared to 3.4%, a difference of 24.6%), and associate's degree (47.6% compared to 38.6%, a difference of 23.3%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of nursery school (98.7% compared to 98.4%, a difference of 0.36%), kindergarten (98.7% compared to 98.4%, a difference of 0.36%), and 1st grade (98.7% compared to 98.3%, a difference of 0.37%).
Education Level Metric | Norwegian | Chickasaw |
No Schooling Completed | Exceptional 1.3% | Exceptional 1.7% |
Nursery School | Exceptional 98.7% | Exceptional 98.4% |
Kindergarten | Exceptional 98.7% | Exceptional 98.4% |
1st Grade | Exceptional 98.7% | Exceptional 98.3% |
2nd Grade | Exceptional 98.7% | Exceptional 98.3% |
3rd Grade | Exceptional 98.6% | Exceptional 98.2% |
4th Grade | Exceptional 98.5% | Exceptional 98.0% |
5th Grade | Exceptional 98.4% | Exceptional 97.9% |
6th Grade | Exceptional 98.3% | Exceptional 97.6% |
7th Grade | Exceptional 97.8% | Exceptional 96.7% |
8th Grade | Exceptional 97.6% | Exceptional 96.4% |
9th Grade | Exceptional 96.9% | Exceptional 95.5% |
10th Grade | Exceptional 96.2% | Excellent 94.1% |
11th Grade | Exceptional 95.2% | Fair 92.3% |
12th Grade, No Diploma | Exceptional 94.0% | Tragic 90.3% |
High School Diploma | Exceptional 92.5% | Poor 88.4% |
GED/Equivalency | Exceptional 89.0% | Tragic 83.8% |
College, Under 1 year | Exceptional 68.4% | Tragic 60.4% |
College, 1 year or more | Exceptional 61.7% | Tragic 53.3% |
Associate's Degree | Excellent 47.6% | Tragic 38.6% |
Bachelor's Degree | Average 37.5% | Tragic 30.4% |
Master's Degree | Poor 14.0% | Tragic 11.4% |
Professional Degree | Fair 4.2% | Tragic 3.4% |
Doctorate Degree | Average 1.8% | Tragic 1.5% |
Norwegian vs Chickasaw Disability
When considering disability, the most significant differences between Norwegian and Chickasaw communities in the United States are seen in vision disability (2.0% compared to 3.2%, a difference of 55.3%), disability age 35 to 64 (11.5% compared to 16.1%, a difference of 40.5%), and ambulatory disability (5.9% compared to 8.0%, a difference of 36.0%). Conversely, both communities are more comparable in terms of disability age under 5 (1.7% compared to 1.7%, a difference of 3.8%), cognitive disability (16.5% compared to 18.5%, a difference of 12.1%), and disability age over 75 (45.5% compared to 51.2%, a difference of 12.5%).
Disability Metric | Norwegian | Chickasaw |
Disability | Tragic 12.2% | Tragic 15.2% |
Males | Tragic 12.2% | Tragic 15.1% |
Females | Fair 12.3% | Tragic 15.2% |
Age | Under 5 years | Tragic 1.7% | Tragic 1.7% |
Age | 5 to 17 years | Fair 5.7% | Tragic 6.8% |
Age | 18 to 34 years | Tragic 7.6% | Tragic 9.0% |
Age | 35 to 64 years | Fair 11.5% | Tragic 16.1% |
Age | 65 to 74 years | Exceptional 22.5% | Tragic 30.2% |
Age | Over 75 years | Exceptional 45.5% | Tragic 51.2% |
Vision | Exceptional 2.0% | Tragic 3.2% |
Hearing | Tragic 3.7% | Tragic 4.5% |
Cognitive | Exceptional 16.5% | Tragic 18.5% |
Ambulatory | Exceptional 5.9% | Tragic 8.0% |
Self-Care | Exceptional 2.3% | Tragic 2.9% |