Assignment 2 Data Presentation Jennifer Reddick & Brian Meadows SW 4810

Introduction In this study, we were curious as to how work force status and number of hours worked were affected by different outside circumstances such as age, marital status and how many children a worker has. Many people speculate about the injustices of corporate companies whom do not take workers uncontrollable circumstances into consideration when making business decisions for the company such as how old a majority of their employees are. Another well-known concept is the idea that ones status at the workplace is somehow affected by marital status. Some say that if you are married with or without children that it makes a person more dependable as an employee because they are obviously not afraid of commitment. Others argue that if a person is married, particularly a woman, that it means she will not be dependable because with marriage come children and the company may have to allow the woman time and money in a maternity leave to have the children and then contend with limited work availability or call offs because of a parental need to care for the child. It is also a well know idea that if one has multiple children, that they struggle to climb the corporate ladder because of stress at home that they then bring to work with them. Its also said that a worker with multiple children is somehow irresponsible because of a lack precaution in their social lives. For our study we explored three different methods of analysis to examine the relationship between the following variables. With the Pearson R statistical method we explored the question Does a persons income increase with age? With a Chi-Square method we explored the question Does a persons marital status affect their labor force status? And with the Anova method we asked Does having children effect your spouses labor force status?

n Income of Recipient Age of respondent 2216 2216

Mean 10.45 43.62

SD 2.924 13.630

In the above graph, we have the variables used for the first research question of does a persons income increase with age? To measure the variables researchers explored the valid number and percent of the variables as well as the missing to reduce error. With a ratio and an interval level variable, it was necessary to use the Pearson r correlation test due to the categorical nature of both variables. For the purposes of our study, we grouped our respondents income and identified each group by assigning the following values; 1 = less than $1000, 2 = $1000 2999, 3 = $3000 3999, 4 = $4000 4999, 5 = $5000 5999, 6 = $6000 6999, 7 = $7000 7999, 8 = $8000 9999, 9 = $10,000 14,999, 10 = $15,000 19,999, 11 = $20,000 24999, and 12 = $25,000 or more. Using SPSS to calculate our descriptive statistics, it is clearly identified in the table above that of the
respondents who participated in the study (2216), most fall in between the 15,000 to 20,000 dollars a year range as identified by the mean income of 10.45. With a mean score of 43.62 for age of respondent, the conclusion we can decide on is that most of the people who responded fall within +10 or -10 years of an average of 43. Putting this information together we realize that not only are the respondents middle income earners but are also in an age range of the population where most are of acceptable working ages. For this sample, representation of the population is small because of the broad nature of the two variables. Everyone in the world has an income or a lack there of as well as an age. For the research question posed, these variables are not a good representation of the population in question because there are simply to many people with incomes and an approximate age to determine the correlation of the whole population. However,

one may consider this study for a good middle income middle aged population due to the findings in the discriptives being within those parameters. n (%) Labor Force Status Working Full Time Working Part Time Temp not working Unemployed, laid off Retired School Keeping House Other Marital Status Married Widowed Divorced Separated Never Married 3556 total 1741(48.9%) 365(10.3%) 90(2.5%) 117(3.3%) 615(17.3%) 89(2.5%) 430(12.1%) 109(3.1%) 3552 total 1742(48.9%) 303(8.5%) 539(15.1%) 116(3.3%) 852(23.9%)

For this study we explored the frequency distributions of married people and their labor force status to answer the question of labor force status being affected by marital status or not. In this test, we used the Chi Square evaluation method because of the nominal level variables seen in this study. For our research question a cross tabulation table will help us to determine whether or not and how two nominal variables are related to each other. The distributions shown above show us that of those who responded to the survey (3,556), the majority of people not only work full time (48.9%) but are also married (48.9%). With these percentages, one can reasonably deduct that a majority of those who are

married work a full time job as well. However, because the percentage of those who are married and work full time are the same, the sample distribution could be skewed because one would think that of those who work full time not all would be married. Another possible characteristic of this variable could also be that of the people who responded to this survey only married people who work full time saw it prudent to respond. In terms of generalization, this study could also be used for any number of research questions regarding marriage and labor force status such as is it possible to increase your labor force status by getting married or does ones labor force status improve their chance of being marriageable material partners are looking for? However, like with the first set of variables in our previous study, this study is not a good representative of married high labor force workers as there are too many who have high labor force positions as well as married people to reasonably calculate if this sample is a good representation of everyone.

n Spouse Labor force Status Number of Children 1735 3555

Mean 2.38 1.95

SD 2.189 1.701

For this descriptive statistic we explored the variables of the respondents spouses labor force status and number of children they share to answer the question of does having children effect your spouses labor force status? For this set of nominal and ratio level variables, it is clear that ANOVA is the best statistical analysis for such a study as there are multiple dependent variable ages to a smaller amount of independent variables. Notice that the number of respondents were much higher for the number of children reported then the number of people who answered for their spouses labor force status at 3,555 and 1,735. Though one number is considerably higher than the other, the important thing to think about in this scenario is that the number for the children is the total number of children

reported by the respondents with only one value set at 8 = 8 or more children and 9 = dont know or not applicable. With this information one could easily misinterpret that number and think that of the respondents that replied (3559 total) that 3,555 of the respondents have one child. However, we know that most people have more than one child and might be confusing to those reading it. Also with a mean score of 2.38 with values set at 1 = working full time, 2 = working part time, 3 = temporarily not working, 4 = unemployed or laid off, 5 = retired, 6 = school, 7 = keeping house, 8 = other and 9 = not applicable, we can deduce that the majority of people who answered that many are either working part time or temporarily not work at all. With a standard deviation of 2.189, this distribution informs us further that not only the majority of those who responded are working only part time or not at all but that there is a fair amount of those who are also working full time as well. Representation of this study to the greater population may be easier to adopt then our previous two sets of variables because of a more specific question being asked. Because there are fewer people with children, it may be possible to use this as a reliable source for the working public who have children. This may impact generalizability by making it look as if all people who work have children and all people who have children work.

Bivariate Analysis The null and alternative hypothesiss for each of our research questions are There is no increase in income with age. (IV = Respondents Income, DV = Age of Respondent) o Income does increase with age.

There is no difference in labor force status between married and unmarried people. (IV = Labor Force status, DV = Marital Status) o Marital status improves labor force status

Having children has no effect on your spouses income. (IV = Spouses labor force status, DV = Number of Children) o Having children does affect labor force status.

Setting a standard significance level of 0.05 for all three sets of variables, the first order of business was to conduct our Pierson r correlation test on our first two sets of variables. After running our analysis we found an r=0.134 score for the Pierson r correlation test. With this correlation that close to a 0 or no correlation score, we can deduce that there is no relationship between our variables of income and age. With this fact we are able to deduce then that our null hypothesis is correct and that there is no increase in income the older you are. Next we analyze our next set of variables with the Chi-Square test to find if there is a cross tabulation relationship between labor force status and marital status. After running our numbers in SPSS, we find that the p <0.01 and therefore tells us that the probability that the odds of our results being a result of sampling error is likely. With this understanding, our findings of a strong cross tabulation between working full time and being separated from your spouse (57.8%) could be inaccurate. With all of the facts presented, we can conclude then that the null hypothesis is possible and that there is no increase in labor force status dependent on marriage or not. Lastly, we run our ANOVA test on our final hypothesis. Does having children affect your spouses labor force status? For these variables, we must first report that the Levene statistic of the spouses labor force

status is p = .006. This tells us that because the level of significance is not grater then a 0.05 that equal variance is not assumed and a formula that does not assume equal variance is used to calculate the ANOVA. With an F ratio of 5.786 and a significance level of 0.0001, we can now assume that the null hypothesis is rejected because with a p value of less than our target level of significance, we can safely say that having children does have an effect on ones labor force status. Lastly, we see the differences in the Dunnett T3 chart where the levels of significance are noticeable in the no answer given section for labor force status with five or more children.

Implications In the world of social work, these findings can have any number of meanings to our clients. Age, labor force status, children, and income are all major parts of everyones lives. When using evidence based research to find out how to better help our clients, although we must always remember that statistics are not an end all be all of how to help those in need, they do give that little bit of insight that anyone can adopt to their own needs and then help with the end result. With the variables described in this paper, the specific implications they could have with at-risk and disenfranchised populations is one could read such a study as this and assume that because a majority of the respondents were middle class, married, middle the low income with children that the information isnt reliable or beneficial because of the narrowness of some of the numbers. This then continues to put a negative light onto those populations that these studies are conducted on. The research done in this paper can inform other research looking into income disparities between the sexes, races, and ages. It could also help research looking to find a relationship between the numbers of people in a study to number of people contacted for the study.