NLSW -Mature and Young Women

Because the Young Women's survey was developed to examine the transition from school to work, significant effort was devoted to collecting information on future educational and occupational goals.

Educational goals

From 1968 to 1978, questions were asked about the respondent's goal for her completed education (categories range from less than high school to 7 or more years of college), the actual amount of education she expected to receive, and the reason for any change in her educational plans between surveys. For generational comparisons, the respondent's report of her parents' goal for her education was collected in select survey years, as was the respondent's educational goal for her own children. Table YW4 summarizes the reference numbers for this data and indicates universe limitations where applicable.

Occupational goals

In order to map educational experience to future employment experience, the NLS collected information on the Young Women's occupational goals as they moved into adulthood. Thus, from 1968 to 1987 (when the last respondent reached age 35), questions were asked on their future plans, including the occupation they desired at age 35. Two questions were addressed to respondents who had not yet reached that age. Typically, the first question (e.g., R00329.00 in 1968) asked what respondents' plans were for age 35. This question was asked of all respondents regardless of their current employment status. The response set included:

1. Working at a different job
2. Working at the same job as the current/most recent job
3. Married, keeping house, raising a family
4. Other

Users should be aware that coding categories for this variable have changed slightly over time and the codebook should be consulted before using individual survey year items in computer programs.

To complete information on the respondent's occupational goal, a second question collected verbatim information on the type of occupation the respondent desired at age 35. This information was then coded in multiple ways. In most survey years, the occupation was coded according to standard Census three-digit occupation codes. In addition, data were coded using a variety of prestige indices, including a measure of the atypicality of the occupation and the Bose and Duncan Indices (see the Occupations section for a discussion of the various indices and additional references). The atypicality index measures the difference for each three digit occupational category between women as a percentage of all workers in that occupation and women as a percentage of the experienced civilian labor force in 1970 (see Appendix 5 in the Young Women Codebook Supplement). Table YW5 gives reference numbers for the variables discussed above.

For select survey years (1969-73), items that distinguished whether a respondent's occupational goal had changed between the current and last survey are also provided in the data set, along with the respondent's reason for the change in her occupational plans.

• Mature Women cohort
• Young Women cohort

Mature Women cohort

During the 1981, 1986, and 1989-2003 surveys, information was collected on whether the respondent and/or other family members were covered by health insurance. This series gathered information on whether any family member was covered by medical or hospital insurance and the specific source of the coverage for each family member (e.g., a group policy through the respondent's or spouse's employment, a policy purchased directly from the company, Medicaid, or Veterans benefits). Table MW1 depicts respondents reporting health care coverage by provider.

The 1992-2003 surveys asked those respondents who were covered by health insurance through their current or former employer whether they and their husbands expected to be covered by health insurance after the respondent retired. In these interviews, respondents who had employer-provided health care also stated whether they contributed toward the cost of the policy.

Young Women cohort

During the 1988-2003 surveys, information was collected on whether the respondent and/or other family members were covered by health insurance. This series gathered information on whether any family member was covered by medical or hospital insurance and the specific source of the coverage for each family member (e.g., a group policy through the respondent's or spouse's employment, a policy purchased directly from the company, Medicaid, or veterans benefits). In 1991 and 1995-2003, respondents who had employer-provided health care also stated whether they contributed toward the cost of the policy. Table YW1 depicts respondents reporting health care coverage by provider.

The 1993-2003 surveys asked those respondents who were covered by health insurance through their current or former employer whether they and their husbands expected to be covered by health insurance after the respondent retired.

• Mature Women cohort
• Young Women cohort

Mature Women cohort

In 1989 and in 2003, the full 20-item CES-D (Center for Epidemiological Studies Depression) scale was administered to the Mature Women respondents (R09791.00-R09810.00). This scale measures symptoms of depression and discriminates between clinically depressed individuals and others; it is highly correlated with other depression rating scales (see Radloff 1977; Ross and Mirowsky 1989). The 1995-2001 surveys contained a reduced set of seven items from the original 20-item CES-D scale. The CES-D items can be found in the data set by searching for the term "CES-D" in the variable titles.

The complete 10-item Affect Balance Scale developed by Norman Bradburn (1969) was administered to the Mature Women respondents in 1981 (R05226.00-R05235.00). This measure of positive and negative feelings in the weeks before the interview provides an indication of the respondent's general psychological well-being. The statements ask, for example, whether the respondent felt particularly excited or interested in something in the past few weeks, whether she was so restless she could not sit long in a chair, and whether she felt that things were going her way.

At four survey points, the Mature Women gave responses to a measure of internal-external locus of control. Internal control refers to the perception of events as being under personal control; external control involves events being perceived as unrelated to one's own behavior. In 1969, 1972, and 1977, an 11-item abbreviated version of Rotter's (1966) Internal-External Control Scale was used. The abbreviated scale was constructed by including only those items of the original 23-item Rotter scale which were the most general and oriented to the adult world of work (see Parnes et al. 1974). Reducing the number of items would have required an overall reduction in the range of scores. To avoid this situation, the response format was modified to four choices rather than two as in the original scale. The respondent was thus asked how closely each of the 11 statements represented her own view of the issue. The total score is obtained by summing the values of all 11 items, resulting in a range of 11 to 44 in order of increasing external control. The modified scale has been shown to be highly correlated with the original 23-item scale (see Parnes et al. 1974). The 2001 survey included a modified four-item scale.

More questions related to mental health were added in 2003. Respondents were asked a single question on whether they were currently taking any medication for depression or nerves. Also, in a series on pet ownership, respondents provided information about the number and type of pets owned.

References

Bradburn, Norman M. The Structure of Psychological Well-Being. Chicago: Aldine, 1969.

Parnes, Herbert S., Adams, Arvil V.; Andrisani, Paul J.; Kohen, Andrew I.; and Nestel, Gilbert. The Pre-Retirement Years: Five Years in the Work Lives of Middle-aged Men, Vol. 4. Columbus, OH: Center for Human Resource Research, The Ohio State University, 1974.

Radloff, Lenore. "The CES-D Scale: A Self Report Depression Scale for Research in the General Population." Applied Psychological Measurement. 1 (1977): 385-401.

Ross, Catherine E. and Mirowsky, John. "Explaining the Social Patterns of Depression: Control and Problem Solving--or Support and Talking?" Journal of Health and Social Behavior. 30 (June 1989): 206-9.

Rotter, Julian B. "Generalized Expectancies for Internal vs. External Control of Reinforcements." Psychological Monographs. 80,609 (1966): 1-28.

Young Women cohort

In 1993 and in 2003, the full 20-item CES-D (Center for Epidemiological Studies Depression) scale was administered to the Young Women respondents (R14740.00-R14759.00). This scale measures symptoms of depression and discriminates between clinically depressed individuals and others; it is highly correlated with other depression rating scales (see Radloff 1977; Ross and Mirowsky 1989). The 1995-2001 surveys contained a reduced set of seven items from the original 20-item CES-D scale. The CES-D items can be found in the data set by searching for the term "CES-D" in the variable titles.

At five survey points, the Young Women gave responses to a measure of internal-external locus of control. Internal control refers to the perception of events as being under personal control; external control involves events being perceived as unrelated to one's own behavior. In 1970, 1973, and 1978, an 11-item abbreviated version of Rotter's (1966) Internal-External Control Scale was used. The abbreviated scale was constructed by including only those items of the original 23-item Rotter scale that were the most general and oriented to the adult world of work (see Parnes et al. 1974). Reducing the number of items would have required an overall reduction in the range of scores. To avoid this situation, the response format was modified to four choices rather than two as in the original scale. The respondent was thus asked how closely each of the 11 statements represented her own view of the issue. The total score is obtained by summing the values of all 11 items, resulting in a range of 11 to 44 in order of increasing external control. The modified scale has been shown to be highly correlated with the original 23-item scale (see Parnes et al. 1974). In 1983 and 1988, this scale was further reduced to only four items. The 2001 survey included a modified four-item scale.

More questions related to mental health were added in 2003. Respondents were asked a single question on whether they were currently taking any medication for depression or nerves. Also, in a series on pet ownership, respondents provided information about the number and type of pets owned.

References

Parnes, Herbert S., Adams, Arvil V.; Andrisani, Paul J.; Kohen, Andrew I.; and Nestel, Gilbert. The Pre-Retirement Years: Five Years in the Work Lives of Middle-aged Men, Vol. 4. Columbus, OH: CHRR, The Ohio State University, 1974.

Radloff, Lenore. "The CES-D Scale: A Self Report Depression Scale for Research in the General Population."Applied Psychological Measurement 1 (1977): 385-401.

Ross, Catherine E. and Mirowsky, John. "Explaining the Social Patterns of Depression: Control and Problem Solving--or Support and Talking?"Journal of Health and Social Behavior 30 (June 1989): 206-9.

Rotter, Julian B. "Generalized Expectancies for Internal vs. External Control of Reinforcements." Psychological Monographs 80,609 (1966): 1-28.

• Mature Women cohort
• Young Women cohort

Mature Women cohort

This section reviews information on receipt of pension benefits and on pension plans for which the respondent is eligible. It also describes the special pension plan matching project conducted in conjunction with the 1989 survey. For details on income from Social Security/Railroad Retirement or disability insurance, see the Social Security & Disability section.

Pension income

One focus of the Mature Women pension data collection was receipt of various entitlements by the respondent and/or other members of the respondent's household over a 12-month period. The 1967-72 and 1977 surveys gathered information on whether income had been received in the past calendar year from any local, state, or federal governmental pensions or from any other retirement pensions and, if so, the pension benefit amount received from each. The universe for the 1967-72 survey years was any (unspecified) family member; during 1977, receipt and amount information was collected separately for the respondent, her husband, and other family members. The 1974, 1976, and 1981 surveys fielded questions which did not distinguish the source of the pension benefit, combining Social Security and other pension income.

The 1982 and subsequent surveys included a set of pension income questions that asked, in a separate series, whether the respondent or her husband had received any pension income in the past calendar year/last 12 months and, if so, the amount. Beginning in 1982, coding categories consistently identified plan providers as one of the following: private employer, the military, the federal government, state or local government, a union, a personal plan (e.g., IRA, Keogh, or 401k), or another source.

Pension plans

In the late 1970s, the Mature Women surveys began to ask respondents about their expected retirement income. A series fielded in 1979 included questions about working respondents' eligibility for a pension plan--other than Social Security/Railroad Retirement—from their employers, the age at which eligibility for full or reduced benefits would be attained should they remain with their employer, and the age at which benefits could be drawn should they leave their current job today. Also collected was information on the eligibility of the respondent's spouse for other pension benefits from one or more of the following sources: a personal plan, a private employer, a government employer, or the military.

The 1982 and 1986 questionnaires included similar sets of questions designed to explore current/expected pension coverage of the household from current or past employment. Questions included: (1) whether the respondent or her spouse was eligible for or already receiving pension benefits from a current employer or from another job held in the past; (2) whether the respondent was eligible for or already receiving survivor benefits or other benefits from a husband's or ex-husband's employment or military service; and (3) whether the respondent or husband had a personal retirement (IRA or Keogh) plan.

More detailed data were collected beginning in 1989. This survey included questions designed to identify the most important pension plan for which a respondent was eligible through her own employment, the most important pension plan of a spouse, and any other benefits for which a respondent was eligible through a spouse's or ex-spouse's employment or military service. During this fielding, information was gathered on:

• characteristics of the pension provider (whether the source of the pension was a private employer; the military; another federal, state, or local governmental unit; a union; etc.)
• the industry of the provider and corresponding occupation of the respondent or spouse
• characteristics of each plan (age/service year requirements and estimated pension benefit amounts for full versus reduced benefits; method of determining benefits; vesting rules; and for those already receiving benefits, actual monthly benefit amounts)

Information collected in 1989 about the respondent's pension plans was used to contact the plan providers and gather additional data. This special pension matching project is described below.

In 1992 and each subsequent survey, extensive data were collected regarding multiple employer-provided pension plans; coverage under pension plans obtained through self-employment was not included. Separate questionnaire sections collected information for both the respondent and her husband on: (1) future pensions from current employers, (2) current pensions from previous employers, and (3) future pensions from previous employers. Each series gathered details on participation in defined benefit and/or defined contribution pension plans offered by an employer. For those participating in a defined benefit plan, data were collected on the number of years included in the plan, the amount of money contributed, the age at which full or reduced benefits would be/were being received, and expected/actual benefit amounts at retirement. For those participating in a defined contribution plan, information was gathered on the type(s) of account plan (e.g., thrift or savings, 401k, 403b, Supplemental Retirement Account, profit sharing, stock purchase), amounts both employer and respondent contributed, the total dollar amount of contributions ever made, and how the dollars were invested. All respondents providing pension plan information were asked whether an early retirement option with incentives had been offered and, if so, the type(s) (credit for extra years of service, increased benefits, early benefits, lump sum settlement, etc.). Additional information was collected from those covered under a pension plan from a previous employer on type of employer, years worked for that employer, years included in the pension plan, and employment stop date. Those currently receiving a pension from a previous employer reported the year they started receiving this pension, the amount received, cost of living adjustments, and changes in the pension benefit amount over time.

Researchers should be aware of a shift in the way pension data were organized between 1995 and 1997. In 1995, the pension questions are included as part of the employer roster (a part of the questionnaire that collects information about any employers since the previous interview), so the pensions are organized by employer. This means that respondents reported all pensions from employer #01, then all pensions from employer #02, and so on. The employer number (#01, #02, etc.) is included in the variable title. In 1997-2003, pension data are located in a separate roster, so that plans are organized in the order they were reported by the respondent. The variable titles include only "PN #01," "PN #02," "PN #03," etc., for the first plan reported, second plan reported, and so on, regardless of which employer that plan is associated with. A set of ID variables then permits researchers to link the plans with the appropriate employer. The two systems are described further below.

The following example in table MW1 illustrates the implications of this change. Consider a respondent with four pensions, two from a current employer listed on line 2 in the employer roster, and two from a past employer listed on line 5 of the employer roster. In 1995, the respondent would start with question name RSP-108-ARR-02 and answer questions about the first plan for employer #02. She would then return to the same question, now named RSP-208-ARR-02, and provide information about the second plan with that employer. This pattern would repeat for plans three and four. In 1997, the respondent would answer a series of questions, beginning with question name RSP-102-ARR-01, about her first pension plan. She would next answer the same series of questions, now named RSP-102-ARR-02, about her second plan, and so on until all plans are reported. Researchers can then look at the R7PENS variables (R7PENS is the prefix of the question name) to determine which plan number a given plan is for a specific employer. Finally, researchers can use the R7EMPS variables to determine which employer matches with a given plan. Note that, in the example, the plans are listed by employer, but they would not necessarily be listed in that order.

Pension Matching Project (1989)

Address information collected during the regular 1989 survey permitted the Census Bureau to contact pension providers identified during the 1989 survey for the subsequent Pension Matching Project. Copies of the relevant Summary Plan Descriptions (SPD), actual pension plans, and Internal Revenue Forms-5500 were obtained. Details on each defined benefit or defined contribution plan were systematically coded by the Institute for Survey Research (ISR) at the University of Michigan using the protocol developed for the Survey of Consumer Finances (SCF). Respondents eligible for the pension-matching project were those who provided, during administration of the main questionnaire, pension plan and provider locator information for one or more of the pension sources listed in Table MW2. Of the approximately 1,900 respondent households reporting pension eligibility from one or more sources, plan information was linked to respondent information for 1,329 respondents. Use the series of 'ISR Pension Plan Matching' variables on the Mature Women main data file to locate the correct pension plan.

Of the 815 unique pension plans, 538 (66.0 percent) are defined benefit plans, 259 (31.8 percent) are defined contribution plans, and 18 (2.2 percent) are plans with combined characteristics. Users should note that coverage under multiple and different types of pension plans is possible. For example, a household may receive or be eligible to receive pension benefits from one defined benefit and three defined contribution plans. The source of the four plans could be solely from one household member's (e.g., the spouse's) employment, or from more than one member.

The SCF-based instruments recorded data on plan definitions, benefit formulas, and other provisions applicable to six different retirement conditions: early retirement, normal retirement, late retirement, employment termination prior to retirement, disability retirement, and death or survivor's benefits. Each record contains the identification, linkage, and plan characteristic variables listed below in Figure MW1.

Reference

Gustman, Alan L. and Steinmeier, Thomas L. "Retirement in a Family Context: A Structural Model for Husbands and Wives." NLS Discussion Paper 94-17. Washington, DC: Bureau of Labor Statistics, 1994.

Young Women cohort

This section reviews the pension coverage information from recent surveys and the pension plan data collections. For details on income from Social Security/Railroad Retirement or disability insurance, see the Social Security & Disability section.

Pension benefits

The 1993-2003 surveys collected information about pension benefits actually received as income by the respondent and her husband or partner. Pension sources included a personal plan (e.g., IRA/401k), a private employer, the military, the federal government, a state or local government, a union, or another source.

Pension plans

The 1991-2003 interviews included the collection of extensive information on employer pension plans for which the respondent and her spouse were eligible and participating.

1991 survey

The 1991 survey included questions on actual pension coverage and vesting rights of those respondents who indicated, during administration of the fringe benefit series, that a retirement pension program was available from their current or last employer. Respondents enrolled in an employer's pension program were asked for information on (1) the method used to determine their benefit amount, i.e., a defined benefit formula based on years of service/salary, the amount accumulated in their pension account, or both, and (2) whether they had worked under the plan long enough to be vested or entitled to some pension benefits. Those not vested were asked for information on the number of additional years needed until such rights would be obtained, what would happen to the money accumulated in each retirement account should the respondent leave her job, the dollar amount in the account now, and the amount of money that would be received in a partial or full cash settlement.

1995-2003 surveys

Information on employer-provided pension plans was collected in 1995-2003. The respondent provided information about the eligibility of herself and her spouse for current pensions from current employers. Details were gathered on participation in both defined benefit and defined contribution pension plans offered by an employer. Data were collected from those participating in a defined benefit plan on the number of years included in the plan, the amount of money contributed, age at which full or reduced benefits would be/were being received, and expected/actual benefit amounts at retirement. For those with defined contribution plans, information included the type(s) of account plan (e.g., thrift or savings, 401k, 403b, Supplemental Retirement Account, profit sharing, stock purchase), amounts both the employer and respondent contributed, total dollar amount of contributions ever made, and how the dollars were invested. All respondents who provided pension plan information were asked whether an early retirement option with incentives had been offered and, if so, the type(s) (e.g., extra service credit, increased benefits, early benefits, lump sum settlement, etc.).

Researchers should be aware of a shift in the way pension data were organized between 1995 and 1997. In 1995, the pension questions are included as part of the employer roster (a part of the questionnaire that collects information about any employers reported since the previous interview), so the pensions are organized by employer. This means that respondents report all pensions from employer #01, then all pensions from employer #02, and so on. The employer number (#01, #02, etc.) is included in the variable title. In 1997 and 1999, pension data are located in a separate roster, so that plans are organized in the order they were reported by the respondent. The variable titles include only "PN #01," "PN #02," "PN #03," etc., for the first plan reported, second plan reported, and so on, regardless of which employer that plan is associated with. A set of ID variables then permits researchers to link the plans with the appropriate employer. The two systems are described further below.

The following example in Table YW1 illustrates the implications of this change. Consider a respondent with four pensions, two from a current employer listed on line 2 in the employer roster, and two from a past employer listed on line 5 of the employer roster. In 1995, the respondent would start with question name RSP-108-ARR-02 and answer questions about the first plan for employer #02. She would then return to the same question, now named RSP-208-ARR-02, and provide information bout the second plan with that employer. This pattern would repeat for plans three and four. In 1997, the respondent would answer a series of questions, beginning with question name RSP-102-ARR-01, about her first pension plan. She would next answer the same series of questions, now named RSP-102-ARR-02, about her second plan, and so on until all plans are reported. Researchers can then look at the R7PENS variables (R7PENS is the prefix of the question name) to determine which plan number a given plan is for a specific employer. Finally, researchers can use the R7EMPS variables to determine which employer matches with a given plan. Note that, in the example, the plans are listed by employer, but they would not necessarily be listed in that order.

• Mature Women cohort
• Young Women cohort

Mature Women cohort

This section describes income from Social Security, Railroad Retirement, and disability programs such as Workers' Compensation. Refer to the Pension Benefits & Pension Plans section of this guide for information on income from pension plans.

Social Security and Railroad Retirement payments

All survey years except 1968 included a set of income questions on whether one or more family members had received Social Security or Railroad Retirement payments during the past year. Receipt by the respondent, her husband, or another family member was specified during most survey years. During four interviews (1974, 1976, 1979, and 1981), household income from Social Security was not separated from income received from other pension sources, nor were the specific family members receiving such payments identified.

Beginning with the 1979 survey, separate questions address the current/future eligibility of the respondent and, during select years, that of her husband, for Social Security benefits. Respondents interviewed in the 1979, 1982, 1986, and 1989 surveys were asked whether they would be eligible for Social Security based on their own work record when they reached retirement age. Information on the eligibility of the respondent for benefits from her husband's or ex-husband's account was collected during 1982, 1986, and 1989. The total number of years the respondent was employed in jobs covered by Social Security or Railroad Retirement was gathered during 1984, 1986, and 1989. The 1989 and 1992 surveys included a question asking whether the respondent was covered by Social Security or Railroad Retirement in her current/last job.

Social Security Disability and other disability payments

Information on receipt of and amount of benefit payments received as a result of a disability was collected during each survey year except 1968. Separate questions that differentiate income received from Social Security Disability, Veterans Compensation or pension, Workers' (previously Workman's) Compensation, or another disability payment are present in most survey years. The 1974, 1976, 1979, and 1981 question wording merges disability income with income received from interest and dividends, while the 1984 and 1986 interviews asked respondents about whether any (unspecified) disability income from such sources as Social Security Disability, Workers' Compensation, etc., had been received. Both universes (any family member, respondent or other family member, respondent or husband/partner) and time frames (past calendar year, last 12 months) vary across survey years. The 1992-2003 surveys included a set of questions on whether the respondent and/or her husband had applied for or received Social Security Disability benefits either in her lifetime or since the last interview. If so, the survey recorded the age of each family member when receipt began and the year disability benefits were last received.

Young Women cohort

This section describes income from Social Security, Railroad Retirement, and disability programs such as Workers' Compensation. Refer to the Pension Benefits & Pension Plans section of this guide for information on income from pension plans.

Social Security and Railroad Retirement payments

The 1983 and 1988-2003 surveys collected information on whether income from Social Security/Railroad Retirement benefits had been received during the past 12 months. If income was received, the survey asked about the amounts received by either the respondent or her spouse. During other years, receipt of such income was incorporated within a residual "all other" income question. The 1991 and 1993 surveys included a question for respondents reporting a current or last job on whether she was covered by Social Security/Railroad Retirement on that job.

Social Security Disability and other disability payments

In 1978, 1983, and 1988-2003, the survey included questions on whether disability income had been received during the past 12 months. If the respondent or her spouse received income, the specific amount received from each of the following sources was collected: Social Security Disability, Veterans Compensation or pension, Workers' (previously Workman's) Compensation, or another disability program. In 1991, each respondent was asked whether she had ever received or applied for a pension or compensation for any existing disability; this series was updated in 1993-2003. Questions asked during the 1968-82 surveys did not differentiate disability income from other income such as rental income, dividends, etc.

Attitudes towards possible future Social Security program reforms

In 2003, the survey introduced a series of questions about the respondents' feelings towards possible changes in the Social Security program, including hypothetical investment and payment options. These questions are found in the "Attitudes" section of the 2003 questionnaire and can be found by searching question titles for the phrase "Attitude Toward Social Security."

• Mature Women cohort
• Young Women cohort

Mature Women cohort

Data on public assistance income sources were collected during all survey years except 1968; sources generally included public assistance/welfare, Aid to Families with Dependent Children (AFDC)/Temporary Assistance to Needy Families (TANF), food stamps, Supplemental Security Income (SSI), and public housing. Users should be aware that not only is there considerable variation across years in the types of public assistance income sources for which data were collected but also that universes (all family members, any family member, respondent and spouse, respondent only, spouse only), reporting periods (past calendar year, previous 12 months, most recent month), and question wording can differ substantially from year to year. Table MW1 outlines these variations.

Beginning in 1982, data were collected on the number of months in the past year the respondent or husband/partner received each type of assistance. In 1982 and 1987-2003, respondents also reported the monthly average welfare (AFDC) income and monthly average SSI income they received. Monthly average variables are available for welfare/public assistance in 1979, 1981, 1984, and 1986.

Young Women cohort

Data on public assistance (government program participation) income sources were collected in each survey year; sources generally include public assistance/welfare, Aid to Families with Dependent Children (AFDC)/Temporary Assistance to Needy Families (TANF), food stamps, Supplemental Security Income (SSI), and public housing. Users should be aware that not only is there considerable variation across years in the types of public assistance income sources for which data were collected but also that universes (all family members, any family member, respondent and spouse, respondent only, spouse only), reporting periods (past calendar year, previous 12 months, most recent month), and question wording can differ substantially from year to year. Table YW1 presents these variations.

Beginning in 1978, data were collected on the number of months in the past year the respondent or husband/partner received each type of assistance. In 1978, 1983, and 1988-2003, respondents also reported the monthly average welfare (AFDC) income and monthly average SSI income they received.

• Mature Women cohort
• Young Women cohort

Mature Women cohort

Two sets of child care variables were collected: (1) information on the type and location of child care arrangements and (2) data on the extent of responsibility for various household tasks including child care. An additional series of questions in the "Current Labor Force Status" section of the questionnaire included "child care" and/or "family reasons" as reasons for being out of the labor force or unemployed.

Types and locations of child care arrangements

Data were collected on the types and locations of child care arrangements, plus select details on the costs, the number of hours child care was required, the preferred child care arrangements, the attitude toward child care/day care centers, and the impact of child care availability on job search activity. Details concerning child care arrangements are available for the 1967, 1969, 1971, 1972, 1977, and 1995 interviews.

In general, different sets of questions were administered to respondents based upon their labor market status and/or the presence of children under age 18 in the household. Coding categories for the specific type of child care arrangement varied somewhat over the years but typically included: in own home by relative (specified and unspecified), in own home by nonrelatives, in relative's home, in nonrelative's home, and at day care or group care center.

The 1971 survey contained an expanded set of coding categories for types of child care arrangements and identified the kinds of child care arrangements utilized by a respondent for different-aged children. In 1995, the survey included questions on the number of days of work lost by the respondent because of child care and total child care costs for each child.

Finally, a set of variables created for certain survey years includes such information as types and location of child care arrangements, costs per hour worked, preferred child care arrangements, and changes in family child care responsibilities between survey years.

Extent of child care responsibility

Information on the extent of responsibility for various household tasks including child care was collected during the 1974, 1976, 1981, 1982, 1984, 1987, and 1989 interviews. The basic question in this series asked whether the task of child care, including helping with children, was the sole responsibility of the respondent (or another person) or whether the responsibility was shared (see also the Attitudes & Expectations section). The 1995 questionnaire asked whether the respondent had any responsibility for the care of children under the age of 18 who lived in her household.

Young Women cohort

Two sets of child care variables were collected: (1) information on the type and location of child care arrangements and (2) data on the extent of responsibility for various household tasks including child care. An additional series of questions in the Current Labor Force Status section of the questionnaire included "child care" and/or "family reasons" as reasons for being out of the labor force or unemployed.

Types and locations of child care arrangements

Data were collected on the types and locations of child care arrangements, plus select details on the costs, the number of hours child care was required, the preferred child care arrangements, the attitude toward child care/day care centers, and the impact of child care availability on job search activity. Details concerning child care arrangements are available for the 1968-72, 1975, 1977, 1978, 1983, and 1988-95 interviews.

In general, different sets of questions were administered to respondents based upon their labor market status and/or the presence of children under age 18 in the household. Coding categories for the specific type of child care arrangement varied somewhat over the years but typically included: in own home by relative (specified and unspecified), in own home by nonrelatives, in relative's home, in nonrelative's home, and at day care or group care center.

The 1971, 1991, 1993, and 1995 surveys contained an expanded set of coding categories for types of child care arrangements and identified the kinds of child care arrangements utilized by a respondent for different-aged children. The 1983 survey asked whether the respondent had lost any days of work in the last year due to child care problems; the 1991, 1993, and 1995 surveys included questions on the number of days of work lost by the respondent because of child care and total child care costs for each child. During the 1978 and 1983 survey years, data on child care arrangements were collected for only the youngest child.

Finally, a set of variables created for certain survey years includes such information as types and location of child care arrangements, costs per hour worked, preferred child care arrangements, and changes in family child care responsibilities between survey years.

Extent of child care responsibility

Information on the extent of responsibility for various household tasks including child care was collected during the 1975, 1978, 1982, 1983, and 1987 interviews. The basic question in this series asked whether the task of child care, including helping with children, was the sole responsibility of the respondent (or another person) or whether the responsibility was shared. Select interviews included a follow-up question on who (husband, children, hired help) shared this child care responsibility. In 1978 and 1983, respondents also gave their attitude toward caring for children as part of this series (see also the Attitudes & Expectations section). Finally, the 1995 questionnaire asked whether the respondent had any responsibility for the care of children under the age of 18 who lived in her household.

• Mature Women cohort
• Young Women cohort

Mature Women cohort

In most of the Mature Women surveys, information is collected about each child living in the respondent's household at the time of the interview. This information is found in the "Household Record" and includes the child's age, date of birth, and sex. Post-1976 surveys specified whether the child was a biological or an adopted son or daughter or an adopted son or daughter by marriage. For more information about data collected in the household record (also called the "Household Roster"), see the Household Composition section of this guide.

Household record information only provides a partial picture of each respondent's fertility because it does not capture children given up for adoption, children who died, and children who resided outside the home. To remedy this problem, a series of questions asked in the 1977 survey reviewed each respondent's total fertility. This series collected detailed information about each of up to 19 children ever born to the respondent and about each of up to 5 adopted children or children from an earlier relationship of her husband. Information available for each child includes sex; date of birth; life status; whether the child was still residing in the respondent's home and, if not, the month and year the child left the household; the child's school enrollment status; and the highest grade he or she had completed.

To ensure that researchers can create a complete fertility record for each respondent, the 1982 survey asked for information about any children born or adopted since the 1977 questions were fielded. Since the women were ages 45-59 in 1982, combining these two sections likely provides a complete record of child bearing and rearing for each respondent; any additional new children should be included on the household record.

To provide researchers with a clearer picture of the socio-economic status of the respondent's children, a special set of questions was fielded in 1986. These questions asked the respondent to describe the marital and fertility history of her four oldest biological or adopted children. The series provides information for each child on sex, age, age at first marriage, number of marriages, the way the first marriage ended, number of children, highest grade attended, and highest degree received.

In addition to these large sections, information was gathered during select surveys on the total number of children ever born to the respondent, the number of children of specific age ranges living with her at the time of the interview, and the number of children she had either adopted or who had come to live in her household from her husband's previous relationships.

Young Women cohort

In most of the Young Women surveys, information was collected about each child living in the respondent's household at the time of the interview. This information is found in the "Household Record" and includes the child's age and relationship to the respondent. Depending on the survey, the household record may also include the child's date of birth, educational attainment, labor force status, and sex. For more information about data collected in the household record (also called the "Household Roster"), see the Household Composition section of this guide.

Household record information only provides a partial picture of each respondent's fertility because it does not capture children given up for adoption, children who died, and children who reside outside the home. To remedy this problem, a number of surveys have gathered additional information about each respondent's fertility. This information is quite complex, making construction of a fertility history for the Young Women more time-consuming than for other NLS cohorts. Users will find small gaps in the collection of fertility data for respondents not consistently interviewed over time. However, close examination of household record data for new children after survey gaps can help to ameliorate this limitation.

The first set of fertility questions was asked in 1973. Respondents were asked how many children they had given birth to, how many more children they desired, and their opinion of the optimal family size. The 1978 interview collected detailed fertility information about each of up to six children born to the respondent and about each of up to five adopted children or children from an earlier marriage of her husband. Information available for each child includes sex, date of birth, life status, whether the child was still residing in the respondent's home, and, if not, the month and year the child left the household. While the adopted child roster covered the respondent's entire life, the 1978 biological roster only asked about children born since 1973.

In 1983 the fertility and adoption rosters were repeated to include children born since January 1978. Users should note that respondents who were noninterviews in 1978 do not provide information back to 1973, so these respondents would be missing fertility information for 1973-77.

Beginning in 1985, the roster format was dropped and respondents were asked the number of births since their last survey and the total number of children ever born. For each child born since the last survey, the date of birth was recorded. Respondents were also asked how many more children they expected to have overall and within the next five years.

In 1988, the fertility question format used in 1985 was repeated for births. The section was expanded, however, by a roster for adopted and other children who came to live in the household. This roster asked the name, sex, birth date, year they entered the household, life status, and date they left the household. This roster was designed to capture all nonbiological children who had entered the household since January 1983.

In the 1991 and 1993 surveys, biological births were recorded using the format instituted in the 1985 survey; the 1993 survey additionally recorded the child's sex.

• Mature Women cohort
• Young Women cohort

Mature Women cohort

Many Americans have the responsibility of taking care of elderly parents or in-laws, while others are providing money to support their elderly parents or in-laws. Additionally, many people help their children with education expenses, costs of weddings and new families, house purchases, child care, and so on. In 1997-2003, the Mature and Young Women NLS cohorts included questions about transfers of time and money to a respondent's parents and children.

Parents and transfers

Prior to the 1997 survey, a limited amount of data was collected about parents or transfers. The 1967 survey started an occasional collection of information about the life status of the respondent's parents. In most surveys' "Income" sections, respondents were asked if they had received an inheritance and the inheritance's value. In 1982, 1984, and 1987-2003, the survey asked respondents whether they regularly spent time caring for a relative or friend outside of their household and the number of hours spent at this task each week. The 1984, 1987, and 1989-2003 surveys included questions about the respondent's care of household members, including her relationship to the person needing care. These questions on caring for ill and disabled persons are located in either the household chores series or the "Health" section of the questionnaire, depending on the survey year. Finally, in the "Current Labor Force Status" section of the questionnaires, respondents who were not working could state that they were caring for an ill family member. These sources, however, provided only a minimal picture of parents and transfers.

The "Parents and Transfers" section in the 1997 and 2001 surveys contained in-depth questions about parental health, marital status, income, housing, and transfers to and from the respondent. (The 2003 survey also contained a smaller series of parent questions).  The section began with biographical and health information about the respondent's parents and in-laws, living and deceased. Information was then collected about the parents' residence, including whether the parent lived in a nursing home, and the distance the parent lived from the respondent. If one or more of the respondent's or her husband's parents lived in the same household as the respondent, the survey asked whether the parent(s) contributed to the running of the household. Respondents also provided information about the financial situation of their parents and in-laws by answering questions about parental income and the net worth of the parents' assets. Residence and financial information was gathered for the surviving parents of the respondent as well as for her husband's parents; stepparents were included when married to a biological parent.

In addition to this basic background information, the 1997 survey collected extensive data about transfers of time and money to the respondent's living parents and parents-in-law. The respondent first reported transfers to her father and his current wife, whether that was the respondent's mother or another person. If the respondent's parents were not currently married, she next reported transfers to her mother and her current husband. This process was repeated for the respondent's husband's father and his wife and finally, if applicable, for the husband's mother and her husband. Transfers were not reported separately for a married couple; for example, money given to a father and his wife was reported as one amount. Questions in the 2001 survey asked about transfers both to and from the respondent's living parents and parents-in-law.

In 1997, questions about time transfers asked about two types of assistance: help with personal care (defined in the survey as help with dressing, eating, cutting hair, or any other care involving the body) and help with household chores and errands (activities such as house cleaning, yard work, cooking, house repairs, car repairs, shopping, and trips to doctors). Respondents first reported whether they had spent any time in the past 12 months helping each parent or couple with personal care and stated how many hours over the past 12 months they had spent helping each parent. The same questions were repeated for time spent helping with household chores or running errands.

The 1997 Mature Women survey then collected information about financial transfers to each parent or couple in the previous 12 months. Regarding loans, the first type of financial assistance, respondents stated whether they had made any loans, the value of the loan, and whether they expected the amount to be repaid. Respondents then reported the total value of gifts given in the past 12 months, if the gifts had a total value of at least $100. The last question about money transfers asked about the value of other financial support, such as paying bills or expenses without the expectation of being paid back. In 2001, the survey asked not only about transfers to parents but also from parents. The 2001 survey also included in-depth questions on any parental transfers greater than $2,000 from the time the respondent was age 19 until the present.

Finally, the transfers section included questions about whether deceased parents had a will and the amount of the estate. If the estate was not divided evenly among the surviving children, the respondent was asked to explain the reason.

Table MW1 provides basic information about the number of respondents in the universe for each major topic in the 1997 and 2001 transfers sections. These totals do not imply that all respondents answered every question on a given topic; they are shown to give researchers a general idea of the amount of data available.

Children and transfers

To capture complementary information about intergenerational transfers in the opposite direction, the 1999 and 2003 surveys asked Mature Women about transfers involving the respondent's children. Included in the data collection were biological, step-, and adopted children of both the respondent and her husband (see R52580.00, "Total Children in Roster," for total number of children in roster). This new section supplements the fertility data periodically collected since the 1960s.

The transfers section initially collected demographic data, including gender, age or date of birth, highest grade completed, and relationship to the respondent for all children not residing in the household (these data are in the household record for children residing in the household). Residence questions for children outside the household asked about the distance each child lived from the respondent, whether the child owned his or her home, and the home's value.

The rest of the transfers questions referred only to children age 19 or older and to children ages 14 to 18 who were married or had a child. If any of the respondent's children lived with her and met these universe requirements, a series of residence questions asked about each child's financial and time contributions to the household. If the respondent lived in her child's household, these questions asked her to report her financial and time contributions to the shared household. The respondent then answered questions about the assets and debts of each eligible child.

After collecting this preliminary information, the survey asked the respondent to report transfers of time and money to and from up to five children meeting the universe requirements described above. Included were separate questions regarding loans, gifts, and other financial assistance, as well as time transferred for child care, personal care, chores, and errands. These questions were very similar to the parental series described above, although additional categories of time transfers were included. If the respondent had more than five children, additional information was collected about the remaining children as a group. The selection of children for these questions is described in Figure MW1.

Respondents then provided information about their estates. If the respondent had a will, she first stated whether or not she would leave everything to her husband if she died before he did. She then stated whether any of her children would be the beneficiaries if her husband was not alive; if not, the respondent was asked to explain. If the estate would not be divided equally among the children, she was asked to give a reason.

Young Women cohort

Many Americans have the responsibility of taking care of elderly parents or in-laws, while others are providing money to support their elderly parents. Additionally, many people help their children with education expenses, costs of weddings and new families, house purchases, child care, and so on. Recent surveys of the Mature and Young Women NLS cohorts have included questions about transfers of time and money to a respondent's parents and children.

Parents and transfers

Prior to the 1993 survey, a limited amount of data was collected about parents or transfers. The 1968 survey started an occasional collection of information about the life status of the respondent's parents. In most surveys' "Income" sections, respondents are asked if they have received an inheritance and the inheritance's value. As part of the household chores series, the 1987 survey sought information on whether the respondent provided care to household members who were ill or disabled. Beginning with the 1991 survey, questions in the "Health" section determine whether the respondent regularly spends time helping or caring for household members who are chronically ill or disabled or for friends or relatives who do not reside in the respondent's household. Finally, in the "Current Labor Force Status" section of the questionnaires, respondents who are not working can state that they are caring for an ill family member. These sources, however, provided only a minimal picture of parents and transfers.

The "Parents and Transfers" section in the 1993, 1997, and 2001 surveys contained in-depth questions about parental health, marital status, income, housing, and transfers to and from the respondent. (The 2003 survey also contained a smaller series of parent questions). The section began with biographical and health information about the respondent's parents and in-laws, living and deceased. Information was then collected about the parents' residence, including whether the parent lived in a nursing home, and the distance the parent lived from the respondent. In 1997 and 2001, if one or more of the respondent's or her husband's parents lived in the same household as the respondent, the survey asked whether the parent(s) contributed to the running of the household. During both surveys, respondents also provided information about the financial situation of their parents and in-laws by answering questions about parental income, the value of the parents' home (1993 only), and the net worth of the parents' assets. Residence and financial information was gathered for the surviving parents of the respondent as well as for her husband's parents; stepparents were included when married to a biological parent.

In addition to this basic background information, the 1993 and 1997 surveys collected extensive data about transfers of time and money to the respondent's living parents and parents-in-law. The respondent first reported transfers to her father and his current wife, whether that was the respondent's mother or another person. If the respondent's parents were not currently married, she next reported transfers to her mother and her current husband. This process was repeated for the respondent's husband's father and his wife and finally, if applicable, for the husband's mother and her husband. Transfers were not reported separately for a married couple; for example, money given to a father and his wife was reported as one amount. Questions in the 2001 survey asked about transfers both to and from the respondent's living parents and parents-in-law. In 1993, the Young Women answered similar questions about transfers of time and money from their parents as well, enabling researchers to examine transfers in both directions.

In 1997, questions about time transfers asked about two types of assistance: help with personal care (defined in the survey as help with dressing, eating, cutting hair, or any other care involving the body) and help with household chores and errands (activities such as house cleaning, yard work, cooking, house repairs, car repairs, shopping, and trips to doctors). Respondents first reported whether they had spent any time in the past 12 months helping each parent or couple with personal care and stated how many hours over the past 12 months they had spent helping each parent. The same questions were repeated for time spent helping with household chores or running errands. The 1993 survey combined both types of assistance into one question; it also asked about transfers of time received from the respondent's parents.

The 1997 Young Women survey then collected information about financial transfers to each parent or couple in the previous 12 months. Regarding loans, the first type of financial assistance, respondents stated whether they had made any loans, the value of the loan, and whether they expected the amount to be repaid. Respondents then reported the total value of gifts given in the past 12 months, if the gifts had a total value of at least $100. The last question about money transfers asked about the value of other financial support, such as paying bills or expenses without the expectation of being paid back. As with time transfers, the 1993 survey asked about all the financial transfers in one question, rather than breaking them into separate categories, but included questions about money received from the respondent's parents. The 2001 survey also included in-depth questions on any parental transfers greater than $2,000 from the time the respondent was age 19 until the present.

Finally, the transfers section included questions about whether deceased parents had a will and the amount of the estate. If the estate was not divided evenly among the surviving children, the respondent was asked to explain the reason.

Table YW1 provides basic information about the number of respondents in the universe for each major topic in the 1997 and 2001 parent transfers sections. (The series of questions on parents' estates was also asked in 2003). These totals do not imply that all respondents answered every question on a given topic; they are shown to give researchers a general idea of the amount of data available.

Children and transfers

To capture complementary information about intergenerational transfers in the opposite direction, the 1999 and 2003 surveys asked Young Women about transfers involving the respondent's children. Included in the data collection were biological, step-, and adopted children of both the respondent and her husband (see R52580.00, "Total Children in Roster," for total number of children in roster). This section supplements the fertility data periodically collected since the 1960s.

The transfers section initially collected demographic data, including gender, age or date of birth, highest grade completed, and relationship to the respondent for all children not residing in the household (these data are in the household record for children residing in the household). Residence questions for children outside the household asked about the distance each child lived from the respondent, whether the child owned his or her home, and the home's value.

The rest of the transfers questions referred only to children age 19 or older and to children ages 14 to 18 who were married or had a child. If any of the respondent's children lived with her and met these universe requirements, a series of residence questions asked about the child's financial and time contributions to the household. If the respondent lived in her child's household, these questions asked her to report her financial and time contributions to the shared household. The respondent then answered questions about the assets and debts of each eligible child.

After collecting this preliminary information, the survey asked the respondent to report transfers of time and money to and from up to five children meeting the universe requirements described above. Included were separate questions regarding loans, gifts, and other financial assistance, as well as time transferred for child care, personal care, chores, and errands. These questions were very similar to the parental series described above, although additional categories of time transfers were included. If the respondent had more than five children, additional information was collected about the remaining children as a group. The selection of children for these questions is described in Figure YW1.

Respondents then provided information about their estates. If the respondent had a will, she first stated whether or not she would leave everything to her husband if she died before he did. She then stated whether any of her children would be the beneficiaries if her husband was not alive; if not, the respondent was asked to explain. If the estate would not be divided equally among the children, she was asked to give a reason.

• Mature Women cohort
• Young Women cohort

Mature Women cohort

Race

One race variable (R00023.00) is available for each respondent. 'Race' is a three-category variable ("black," "white," and "other") available only for the respondent and, in general, is derived from the household screening. According to the Current Population Survey Interviewer's Reference Manual (Census 1962) in use at the time of the screening, race was to be determined by interviewer observation. Interviewers were instructed to code Mexicans, Puerto Ricans, and other Latin Americans as "white" unless they were obviously of another race and to include respondents of Japanese, Chinese, American Indian, Korean, Hindu, Eskimo, etc., heritage in the "other" category. At the time of the first survey, race information for each respondent was manually transferred to the questionnaire from data entered on the Household Record Cardsduring the 1966 household screening. (Only in the case of the creation of a new household, where a respondent had moved out of the household in which she was living at the time of the screening, would the interviewer fill out a new Household Record Card, in which case all household member information would be newly recorded.) Table MW1 presents a distribution of race by nationality.

Nationality/ethnicity

The variable 'Nationality of R' (R00625.00), created in 1967, is available for each respondent. The nationality of respondents was derived from the first parent or grandparent born outside of the U.S. and Canada using the following decision rules: if the father was born outside of the U.S. and Canada, his nationality was assigned to the respondent; if he was born inside the U.S. and Canada but the respondent's mother was not, her nationality was assigned, and so forth. Categories include U.S. or Canada, North or West Europe, Central or East Europe, South Europe, Latin America, and other; there are no separate categories for Asian or African countries. Specific countries in each category are not listed in the codebook with the nationality variable but are included in Table MW2.

A single question fielded in 1995 asked each respondent for information on her origin or descent. Thirty-one ethnicity coding categories (e.g., Chinese, Dutch, Mexican-American, Portuguese, etc.) were provided with instructions to "mark all that apply." This question was repeated in 1997, and 1999 for respondents who had not been interviewed during any previous survey in which it was included.

Reference

Census Bureau. "Current Population Survey and Housing Vacancy Survey: Interviewer's Reference Manual." Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Commerce, 1962.

Young Women Race cohort

Race

One race variable (R00032.00) is available for each respondent. 'Race' is a three-category variable ("black," "white," and "other") available only for the respondent and, in general, is derived from the household screening. According to the Current Population Survey Interviewer's Reference Manual (Census 1962) in use at the time of the screening, race was to be determined by interviewer observation. Interviewers were instructed to code Mexicans, Puerto Ricans, and other Latin Americans as "white" unless they were obviously of another race and were to include respondents of Japanese, Chinese, American Indian, Korean, Hindu, Eskimo, etc., heritage in the "other" category. At the time of the first survey, race information for each respondent was manually transferred to the questionnaire from data entered on the Household Record Cards during the 1966 household screening. (Only in the case of the creation of a new household, where a respondent had moved out of the household in which she was living at the time of the screening, would the interviewer fill out a new Household Record Card, in which case all household member information would be newly recorded.) Table YW1 presents a distribution of race by nationality.

Nationality/ethnicity

The variable 'Nationality of R' (R00786.00), created in 1968, is available for each respondent. The nationality of respondents was derived from the first parent or grandparent born outside of the U.S. and Canada using the following decision rules: if the father was born outside of the U.S. and Canada, his nationality was assigned to the respondent; if he was born inside the U.S. and Canada but the respondent's mother was not, her nationality was assigned; and so forth. Categories include U.S. or Canada, North or West Europe, Central or East Europe, South Europe, Latin America, and other; there are no separate categories for Asian or African countries. Specific countries in each category are not listed in the codebook with the nationality variable but are included in Table YW2.

A single question fielded in 1993 asked each respondent for information on her origin or descent. Thirty-one ethnicity coding categories (e.g., Chinese, Dutch, Mexican-American, Portuguese, etc.) were provided with instructions to "mark all that apply." This question was repeated in 1995, 1997, and 1999 for respondents who had not been interviewed during any previous survey in which it was included.

Reference

Census Bureau. "Current Population Survey and Housing Vacancy Survey: Interviewer's Reference Manual." Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Commerce, 1962.