Houma Births to Unmarried Women
COMPARE
Houma
Select to Compare
Births to Unmarried Women
Houma Births to Unmarried Women
46.6%
BIRTHS TO UNMARRIED WOMEN
0.0/ 100
METRIC RATING
337th/ 347
METRIC RANK
Houma Births to Unmarried Women Correlation Chart
The statistical analysis conducted on geographies consisting of 36,513,880 people shows no correlation between the proportion of Houma and percentage of births to unmarried women in the United States with a correlation coefficient (R) of -0.047 and weighted average of 46.6%. On average, for every 1% (one percent) increase in Houma within a typical geography, there is a decrease of 0.67% in percentage of births to unmarried women.
It is essential to understand that the correlation between the percentage of Houma and percentage of births to unmarried women does not imply a direct cause-and-effect relationship. It remains uncertain whether the presence of Houma influences an upward or downward trend in the level of percentage of births to unmarried women within an area, or if Houma simply ended up residing in those areas with higher or lower levels of percentage of births to unmarried women due to other factors.
Demographics Similar to Houma by Births to Unmarried Women
In terms of births to unmarried women, the demographic groups most similar to Houma are Arapaho (47.1%, a difference of 1.2%), Puerto Rican (45.7%, a difference of 1.9%), Colville (45.3%, a difference of 2.7%), Lumbee (48.2%, a difference of 3.5%), and Yuman (44.4%, a difference of 4.9%).
Demographics | Rating | Rank | Births to Unmarried Women |
Chippewa | 0.0 /100 | #330 | Tragic 42.6% |
Natives/Alaskans | 0.0 /100 | #331 | Tragic 43.0% |
Kiowa | 0.0 /100 | #332 | Tragic 43.1% |
Blacks/African Americans | 0.0 /100 | #333 | Tragic 44.3% |
Yuman | 0.0 /100 | #334 | Tragic 44.4% |
Colville | 0.0 /100 | #335 | Tragic 45.3% |
Puerto Ricans | 0.0 /100 | #336 | Tragic 45.7% |
Houma | 0.0 /100 | #337 | Tragic 46.6% |
Arapaho | 0.0 /100 | #338 | Tragic 47.1% |
Lumbee | 0.0 /100 | #339 | Tragic 48.2% |
Tohono O'odham | 0.0 /100 | #340 | Tragic 49.8% |
Hopi | 0.0 /100 | #341 | Tragic 50.8% |
Menominee | 0.0 /100 | #342 | Tragic 51.1% |
Pima | 0.0 /100 | #343 | Tragic 51.5% |
Navajo | 0.0 /100 | #344 | Tragic 51.5% |
Houma Births to Unmarried Women Correlation Summary
Measurement | Houma Data | Births to Unmarried Women Data |
Minimum | 0.012% | 9.3% |
Maximum | 8.0% | 100.0% |
Range | 8.0% | 90.7% |
Mean | 2.7% | 52.2% |
Median | 2.6% | 42.9% |
Interquartile 25% (IQ1) | 1.1% | 32.4% |
Interquartile 75% (IQ3) | 3.8% | 73.4% |
Interquartile Range (IQR) | 2.7% | 41.0% |
Standard Deviation (Sample) | 1.9% | 28.0% |
Standard Deviation (Population) | 1.9% | 27.3% |
Correlation Details
Houma Percentile | Sample Size | Births to Unmarried Women |
[ 0.0% - 0.5% ] 0.012% | 35,140,763 | 35.6% |
[ 0.0% - 0.5% ] 0.27% | 522,113 | 49.2% |
[ 0.5% - 1.0% ] 0.52% | 262,442 | 32.4% |
[ 0.5% - 1.0% ] 0.71% | 230,833 | 41.6% |
[ 0.5% - 1.0% ] 0.93% | 78,430 | 30.3% |
[ 1.0% - 1.5% ] 1.10% | 43,230 | 73.4% |
[ 1.0% - 1.5% ] 1.32% | 4,401 | 42.9% |
[ 1.0% - 1.5% ] 1.47% | 24,952 | 36.5% |
[ 1.5% - 2.0% ] 1.78% | 12,978 | 32.0% |
[ 1.5% - 2.0% ] 1.86% | 6,935 | 88.4% |
[ 2.0% - 2.5% ] 2.10% | 6,464 | 95.4% |
[ 2.5% - 3.0% ] 2.60% | 7,741 | 100.0% |
[ 2.5% - 3.0% ] 2.71% | 5,951 | 10.7% |
[ 2.5% - 3.0% ] 3.00% | 21,142 | 52.6% |
[ 3.0% - 3.5% ] 3.09% | 5,118 | 100.0% |
[ 3.0% - 3.5% ] 3.31% | 5,619 | 69.5% |
[ 3.5% - 4.0% ] 3.56% | 33,094 | 67.9% |
[ 3.5% - 4.0% ] 3.79% | 15,373 | 55.8% |
[ 4.0% - 4.5% ] 4.21% | 11,624 | 9.3% |
[ 4.5% - 5.0% ] 4.63% | 30,192 | 84.8% |
[ 5.0% - 5.5% ] 5.16% | 35,760 | 41.0% |
[ 5.0% - 5.5% ] 5.46% | 5,845 | 13.9% |
[ 7.5% - 8.0% ] 7.99% | 2,880 | 37.5% |