NLSW -Mature and Young Women

• Mature Women cohort
• Young Women cohort

Mature Women cohort

The data set includes the respondent's date of birth and age as of the initial survey year. The initial survey year age variable, 'Age, 67,' was provided by the Census Bureau based on information collected during the 1966 household screening; complete information is available for most respondents. As age inconsistencies were discovered, Census made date of birth information available in the late 1970s. Two additional age variables were then collected in the "Household Roster" section of the questionnaire for those interviewed in 1987 or 1989 (i.e., 'Age of Respondent, 87' and 'Age of Respondent, 89').

During the 1981 interview, respondents were asked whether the Census birth date information was correct. In 144 cases, the respondent reported a birth date different from that originally provided by Census; the 1981 variable contains revised birth dates for those cases. The 1987 and 1989 "Household Roster" collected additional date of birth information for the respondent. During the 1995-2003 surveys, the respondent was asked to confirm or correct the most recent birth date information available.

Table MW1 provides reference numbers for date of birth and age variables; Table MW2 presents age distributions for the Mature Women. Data for reported age and birth dates include a small number of inconsistencies. As a result, attempts to restrict the universe according to age-related variables may lead to unwanted or incorrect results. The User Notes below discuss some of the idiosyncratic aspects of these variables.

Notes on Tables MW2A and MW2B: Tables MW2A and MW2B present age distributions for the Mature Women. In order to construct the most accurate ages possible, ages were created using the most recent date of birth information available. That is, information from the 2003 interview was used first, then 2001 data, then 1999, etc.

In some cases, the date of birth was incomplete. If the respondent did not report a year of birth in any of the three interview years, then no age was calculated. There are two respondents for whom this applies. If no month of birth was recorded for a respondent, then the respondent was assigned a birth month of June. If no day of birth was recorded, then the respondent was assigned to be born on the 30th of the month. This method of calculating ages places a number of respondents out of range for the age requirements for the sample. Respondents should have been aged 30 to 44 as of March 31, 1967. Calculating ages as of this date indicates that 16 of the respondents were younger than 30 and 44 of the respondents were over the age of 44.

Young Women cohort

The data set includes the respondent's date of birth and age as of the initial survey year. The initial survey year age variable was provided by the Census Bureau based on information collected during the 1966 household screening. As age inconsistencies were discovered, Census made date of birth information available in the late 1970s. For the most part, the date of birth and age variables were collected during fielding of the "Household Roster" (HHR) section of the questionnaire.

Date of birth variables (e.g., 'Month of R's Birth' and 'Year of R's Birth') are provided for the 1968, 1977, 1978, 1982, 1988, and 1991 survey years. During the 1995-2003 surveys, the respondent was asked to confirm or correct the most recent birth date information available. A series of variables including age as reported during the screening interview ('Age, 68') and 'Revised Age of R' at interview date (1968-75 survey years) was also created. These revised variables are considered to be more accurate than the age information originally reported.

Table YW1 provides reference numbers for date of birth and age variables; Tables YW2A and YW2B present age distributions for the Young Women. Data for reported age and birth dates include a small number of inconsistencies. As a result, attempts to restrict the universe according to age-related variables may lead to unwanted or incorrect results. The User Notes below discuss some of the idiosyncratic aspects of these variables.

• Mature Women cohort
• Young Women cohort

Mature Women cohort

A limited number of geographic variables are available in this data set. Due to Census Bureau confidentiality concerns, such variables provide only broad geographical demarcations of the respondent's area of residence, e.g., the name of the Census division, whether the residence was located in the South or non-South, and whether the residence was in an SMSA. A series of comparison variables contrast the respondent's current state/SMSA of residence with those of her birthplace, previous residences, and current job. A set of geographic mobility questions have been included in later surveys. Finally, characteristics of the respondent's environment are available in several variables describing the size of the labor force and unemployment rate for the labor market of current residence; this series stops with the 1989 interview. Specific information on the names of the county, state, or metropolitan statistical area(s) in which respondents reside is not available on the public data file.

Geographic variables that are not on the public-use files may be requested for any of the original cohorts. Proposals in which researchers request access to such variables are reviewed on a case-by-case basis. For more information, visit the Bureau of Labor Statistics website. Geographic variables also are available for use at the Federal Statistical Research Data Centers).

Due to the fact that Census procedures for the geocoding of geographical boundaries were deliberately frozen in the mid-1970s, users are advised to be skeptical about all variables relating to location below the state level except those delineating movement between counties.

Geographic residence

Some of the primary sets of geographic variables are described below. Table MW1 depicts the years for which various created variables are available.

Birthplace

Information for each respondent identifies the birthplace in relation to the respondent's permanent residence as of the initial survey year. Coding categories include same state; different state, same region; different region, with the region identified; and outside the U.S. Birthplace information is also available for each respondent's mother, father, and maternal/paternal grandparents; see the Family Background section of this guide for a breakdown of birth country of parents and grandparents. The decision rules used to create a nationality variable for each respondent are discussed within the Race, Ethnicity & Nationality section.

Region of residence (revised)

A series of variables indicates whether the location of the respondent's permanent address was in the South or in one of the non-South regions of the United States, e.g., the Northeast, North Central, or West. A listing of states constituting the various Census divisions is provided in Appendix 3 in the Mature Women Codebook Supplement. The three divisions comprising the South include the South Atlantic Division, the East South Central Division, and the West South Central Division. Users should note that both a revised version and a non-revised version of the 'Region of Residence' variables are present. Revised versions should be used whenever available. See the User Notes at the end of this section for more information.

Census division of current residence

A series of variables is available for the early years that identifies the Census division (e.g., New England, Middle Atlantic, Mountain, Pacific, etc.) of the respondent's permanent address. Appendix 3 in the Mature Women Codebook Supplement contains a listing of the nine Census divisions and the states comprising each.

Residence: SMSA (SMSA status)

A series of revised variables identifies whether the current residence of a respondent is "central city of the SMSA," "balance (not central city) of the SMSA," or "not in SMSA." Two versions of these variables are present: (1) 'Current Residence in SMSA' and (2) 'SMSA Status in (YR) (Revised).' The revised version of these variables should be used when it is available. The User Notes at the end of this section discuss issues relating to the SMSA classification systems in use by Census.

Residence status (mover)

A series of revised variables indicates whether a respondent has moved (i.e., reported a permanent address change) since the initial survey year. Residence in the first survey year is coded "1." Code "2" in a subsequent survey year indicates that the respondent has had an address change from the original residence, and code "3" indicates that no move occurred.

Comparisons of current residence with previous State/County/SMSA

This set of variables, available for each survey year, does not reveal the actual state, county, or SMSA of the respondent's current residence, but rather codes movement of the respondent in relationship to the permanent address reported in the first survey. The respondent's county, state, and SMSA are all coded "1" for 1967. A code of "2" in a given survey year indicates that the respondent had moved to, for example, a different county. A subsequent move in year 10 back to the 1967 county would again be coded "1." 

Type of area of residence

A single 1967 variable identifies whether the respondent lived in (1) an "urbanized area" of a certain size (over 3 million, under 250,000, etc.), (2) an "urban place outside an urbanized area" of varying population sizes, or (3) a "rural" area.

Environmental characteristics

Two sets of created variables provide information on characteristics of the labor market in which a respondent resided. The geographical unit used to define "residence" for the revised versions of the following variables was the 1970 Primary Sampling Unit (PSU), a geographical sampling area made up of one or more contiguous counties or Minor Civil Divisions (MCD).

Residence: Size of labor force

Two series of created variables provide information about the size of the labor force in the respondent's area of residence. The first series, present for 1967-77, is based on data from the 1960 Census. In the mid-70s, when problems with address information were discovered, the Census Bureau recreated the variables using the 1970 Census data. This more accurate revised series of variables is present for 1967-89.

Residence: Unemployment rate for labor market

Two series of variables provide data for the unemployment rate of the respondent's labor market of current residence. One set is drawn from the 1970 Census of Population and the second set from varying years of the Current Population Surveys. These variables are present for the 1967-88 survey years. Unemployment rates were calculated for each CPS Primary Sampling Unit (PSU) by summing the total number of unemployed for each month and dividing by the total number in the labor force over a twelve month period. A combined unemployment rate was computed for PSUs in the same Special Labor Market Area (i.e., combinations of two or more PSUs) and assigned to each PSU within the area. The Census Bureau created the unemployment rate by running the monthly CPS rates for the PSUs through the quarterly program and then running the quarterly rates through the annual program to obtain the average. These rates were then collapsed further into broader categories. See reference number R63253.00 for an example. he question name is NCV-UR-RECODE.YY and the variables are titled "UNEMPLOYMENT RATE FOR LABOR MARKET OF CURRENT RESIDENCE, CPS, YY REVISED."

Reference

Office of Management and the Budget. Standard Metropolitan Statistical Areas, Revised Edition. Washington, DC: Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, 1975.

Young Women cohort

A limited number of geographic variables are available in this data set. Due to Census Bureau confidentiality concerns, such variables provide only broad geographical demarcations of the respondent's area of residence, e.g., the name of the Census division, whether the residence was located in the South or non-South, and whether the residence was in an SMSA. A series of comparison variables contrast the respondent's current state/SMSA of residence with those of her birthplace, previous residences, and current job. A set of geographic mobility questions was included in recent surveys. Finally, characteristics of the respondent's environment are available in several variables describing the size of the labor force and unemployment rate for the labor market of current residence; this series stops with the 1988 interview. Specific information on the names of the county, state, or metropolitan statistical area(s) in which respondents reside is not available in the public data files.

Geographic variables that are not on the public-use files may be requested for any of the original cohorts. Proposals in which researchers request access to such variables are reviewed on a case-by-case basis. For more information, visit the Bureau of Labor Statistics website. Geographic variables also are available for use at the Federal Statistical Research Data Centers).

Due to the fact that Census procedures for the geocoding of geographical boundaries were deliberately frozen in the mid-1970s, users are advised to be skeptical about all variables relating to location below the state level except those delineating movement between counties.

Geographic residence

Some of the primary sets of geographic variables are described below. Table YW1 depicts the years for which various created variables are available.

Birthplace

Information for each respondent identifies the birthplace in relation to the respondent's permanent residence as of the initial survey year. Coding categories include same SMSA/county; different SMSA/county, same state; different state, same division; different division; and abroad. Birthplace information is also available for each respondent's mother, father, and maternal/paternal grandparents; see the Family Background section of this guide for a breakdown of birth country of parents and grandparents. The decision rules used to create a nationality variable for each respondent are discussed within the Race, Ethnicity & Nationality section of this guide.

Region of residence (revised)

A series of variables indicates whether the location of the respondent's permanent address was in the South or in one of the non-South regions of the United States, e.g., the Northeast, North Central, or West. A listing of states constituting the various Census divisions is provided in Appendix 2 in the Young Women Codebook Supplement. The three divisions comprising the South include the South Atlantic Division, the East South Central Division, and the West South Central Division. Users should note that both a revised version and a non-revised version of the 'Region of Residence' variables are present. Revised versions should be used whenever available. See the User Notes at the end of this section for more information.

Census division of current residence

A series of variables is available for the early years that identifies the Census division (e.g., New England, Middle Atlantic, Mountain, Pacific, etc.) of the respondent's permanent address. Appendix 2 in the Young Women Codebook Supplement contains a listing of the nine Census divisions and the states comprising each.

Residence: SMSA (SMSA status)

A series of revised variables identifies whether the current residence of a respondent is "central city of the SMSA," "balance (not central city) of the SMSA," or "not in SMSA. "Two versions of this variable are present: (1) 'Current Residence in SMSA' and (2) 'SMSA Status in (YR) (Revised).'  The revised version of these variables should be used when it is available. The User Notes at the end of this section discuss issues relating to the SMSA classification systems in use by Census.

Residence status (mover)

A series of revised variables indicates whether a respondent has moved (i.e., reported a permanent address change) since the initial survey year. Residence in the first survey year is coded "1."Code "2" in a subsequent survey year indicates that the respondent has had an address change from the original residence, and code "3" indicates that no move occurred.

Comparisons of current residence with previous State/County/SMSA

This set of variables, available for each survey year, does not reveal the actual state, county, or SMSA of the respondent's current residence, but rather codes movement of the respondent in relationship to the permanent address reported in the first survey. The respondent's county, state, and SMSA are all coded "1" for 1968. A code of "2" in a given survey year indicates that the respondent had moved to, for example, a different county. A subsequent move in year 10 back to the 1968 county would again be coded "1." Appendix 25 in the Young Women Codebook Supplement provides a further explanation of this coding system along with a listing of other geographic variables present through the mid-70s. The SMSA comparison series was discontinued after 1988 for reasons described in the User Notes section.

Comparison of current residence and location of current job

A set of variables present for select survey years compares each respondent's location of current residence with the location of her current (or last or longest) job. Coding categories include same SMSA or county; different SMSA or county, same state; different state, same division; different division; abroad; and other.

Geographic mobility

Information on the geographic mobility of respondents was collected during 1983 and 1988-2003. Data were collected, for those whose residence had changed, on date of move to current residence, location of previous residence, number of miles between current and previous residence, length of time the respondent lived in her previous residence, and the reason(s) she moved. The 1983 interview included an extended series on the impact of the move on the respondent's and her husband's employment, e.g., attitude toward job and effect on seniority, pension, retirement, and earnings.

Second residence

Information on whether a respondent resided in another residence during part of the year was collected during the 1995 interview. Variables provide information on the specific months of the year the respondent was in residence at that location and give the year she first started spending time there. The location of the second residence is compared with that of the respondent's current residence using the same coding categories as the comparison of the respondent's residence and current job.

Type of property of residence

A single variable identifies whether the respondent's property in the original survey year was "urban" or a "farm" or "nonfarm" residence with varying acreage and sales.

Type of area of residence

A single 1968 variable identifies whether the respondent lived in (1) an "urbanized area" of a certain size (over 3 million, under 250,000, etc.), (2) an "urban place outside an urbanized area" of varying population sizes, or (3) a "rural" area.

Environmental characteristics

Two sets of created variables provide information on characteristics of the labor market in which a respondent resided. The geographical unit used to define "residence" for the revised versions of the following variables was the 1970 Primary Sampling Unit (PSU), a geographical sampling area made up of one or more contiguous counties or Minor Civil Divisions (MCD).

Residence: Size of labor force

Two series of created variables provide information about the size of the labor force in the respondent's area of residence. The first series, present for 1968-78, is based on data from the 1960 Census. In the mid-70s, when problems with address information were discovered, the Census Bureau recreated the variables using the 1970 Census data. This more accurate revised series of variables is present for 1968-88.

Residence: Unemployment rate for labor market

Two series of variables provide data for the unemployment rate of the respondent's labor market of current residence. One set is drawn from the 1970 Census of Population and the second set from varying years of the Current Population Surveys. These variables are present for the 1968-88 survey years. Unemployment rates were calculated for each CPS Primary Sampling Unit (PSU) by summing the total number of unemployed for each month and dividing by the total number in the labor force over a twelve month period. A combined unemployment rate was computed for PSUs in the same Special Labor Market Area (i.e., combinations of two or more PSUs) and assigned to each PSU within the area. The Census Bureau created the unemployment rate by running the monthly CPS rates for the PSUs through the quarterly program and then running the quarterly rates through the annual program to obtain the average. These rates were then collapsed further into broader categories. See reference number R63253.00 for an example. The question name is NCV-UR-RECODE.YY and the variables are titled "UNEMPLOYMENT RATE FOR LABOR MARKET OF CURRENT RESIDENCE, CPS, YY REVISED."

Reference

Office of Management and the Budget. Standard Metropolitan Statistical Areas, Revised Edition. Washington, DC: Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, 1975.

• Mature Women cohort
• Young Women cohort

Mature Women cohort

Throughout the survey years, several details have been collected on characteristics of the jobs the Mature Women held, including work hours and schedule, traveling to work, number of people employed at company, supervising responsibilities, and dual jobs.

Work hours and schedule

In 1979 and in the 1995-2003 survey years, questions were asked about the number of hours worked and the type of work schedule the respondents had, such as the type of shift (regular day, night shift, etc.). In the 1972 and 1977 survey years, respondents voiced their preference on whether they would like more hours and more pay, fewer hours and less pay, or the same hours at the same pay. Respondents were also asked in most survey years about being offered flexible work schedules (see Fringe Benefits).

Traveling to work

Several questions have been asked about a respondent's commute.  In 1967 and 1969, respondents were asked the length of time and number of miles to travel to work, the method of traveling, and the cost of parking and tolls.  A similar set of questions was asked in 1972, 1977, and 1995.  A single question about length of time for travel to work was asked in 1982, 1987, and 1989.

Number of people employed at company

Questions about the number of people employed in a respondent's company (both the immediate plant/office and the entire company) were asked in select survey years between 1977 through 1992.

Supervising responsibilities

In select survey years between 1982 to 1992, respondents who worked outside the home were asked for their main job if they supervised the work of others. If so, the respondent indicated how many people she supervised, if she had any say over the supervisees' pay or promotion, and if her boss had a supervisor.

In the 1995 through 2003 surveys, there was a more extensive series of questions about supervisory positions. The respondent indicated if she held a supervisory position, the number she supervised directly, the gender count of those she supervised, how much responsibility she had for deciding pay/promotions and for the specific tasks the people performed, and if any of her subordinates supervised other employees. She was also asked if someone supervised her work, if her supervisor was a man or woman, how closely her work was supervised, the number of other people her boss supervised and the gender breakdown of those subordinates, if her boss had a supervisor, and the gender of that supervisor. The respondent also answered questions about whether she made decisions about budgets, hiring or firing.

Dual jobs

In most of the survey years between 1969 and 1992, respondents indicated whether they worked dual jobs and, if so, the number of weeks they had been a dual job holder and the number of dual jobs. Details about the dual job were also gathered.

Young Women cohort

Throughout the survey years, several details have been collected on characteristics of the jobs the Young Women held, including work hours and schedule, traveling to work, number of people employed at company, activity requirements of job, supervising responsibilities, dual jobs, and the Job Characteristics Index.

Work hours and schedule

In 1980 and in the 1995-2003 survey years, questions were asked about the number of hours worked and the type of work schedule the respondents had, such as the type of shift (regular day, night shift, etc.). In the 1972, 1973, 1978, 1983, and 1988 survey years, respondents voiced their preference on whether they would like more hours and more pay, fewer hours and less pay, or the same hours at the same pay. Respondents were also asked in most survey years about being offered flexible work schedules (see Fringe Benefits).

Traveling to work

Several questions have been asked about a respondent's commute.  In 1968, respondents were asked the length of time and number of miles to travel to work, the method of traveling, and the cost of parking and tolls.  A similar set of questions was asked in 1973, 1978, and 1995.  A single question about length of time for travel to work was asked in 1991 and 1993.

Number of people employed at company

Questions about the number of people employed in a respondent's company (both the immediate plant/office and the entire company) were asked in select survey years between 1978 through 1993.

Activity requirements of job

In 1991, respondents answered a question series about what activities they needed to be able to perform for their current job. These activities included walking around, using stairs/inclines, standing for long periods, stooping/kneeling/crouching, lifting/carrying weights up to 10 lbs., lifting/carrying weight over 10 lbs., reaching for supplies/materials, using hands and fingers to manipulate equipment, reading, hearing, and dealing with people. In 1968, they were asked if their current job required more or less skill and more or less responsibility than the job they held the previous year.

Supervising responsibilities

From 1983 to 1993, respondents who worked outside the home were asked for their main job if they supervised the work of others. If so, the respondent indicated how many people she supervised, if she had any say over the supervisees' pay or promotion, and if her boss had a supervisor.

In the 1995 through 1999 surveys, there was a more extensive series of questions about supervisory positions. The respondent indicated if she held a supervisory position, the number she supervised directly, the gender count of those she supervised, how much responsibility she had for deciding pay/promotions and for the specific tasks the people performed, and if any of her subordinates supervised other employees. She was also asked if someone supervised her work, if her supervisor was a man or woman, how closely her work was supervised, the number of other people her boss supervised and the gender breakdown of those subordinates, if her boss had a supervisor, and the gender of that supervisor. The respondent also answered questions about whether she made decisions about budgets, hiring or firing.

In 2001 and 2003, respondents were only asked if they supervised the work of others.

Dual jobs

In most of the survey years between 1970 and 1993, respondents indicated whether they worked dual jobs and, if so, the number of weeks they had been a dual job holder and the number of dual jobs. Dual job information was also gathered for the respondent's spouse in 1993.

Job Characteristics Index (JCI)

A special series in the 1980 Young Women dataset contained several questions pertaining to job characteristics. This special series of questions was also administered to the Young Men in 1978 and to the NLSY79 in 1980, but not to the Mature Women cohort. This series asked about characteristics of the respondents' current job, e.g., the amount of variety and autonomy, the opportunity to deal with people and develop friendships, the opportunity to complete tasks, the amount of significance they attributed to their job, and the amount of performance feedback received. Sims, Szilagyi, and Keller (1976) developed items for this scale, called the Job Characteristics Index (JCI).

The JCI, an extension of the work first begun by Turner and Lawrence in 1965, was preceded by an instrument developed by Hackman and Oldham (1975) known as the Job Diagnostic Survey (JDS). Dimensions of the JDS are also incorporated into the JCI, although in a simpler format. Comparisons of the JCI and JDS by Dunham et al. (1977) have shown that both scales tend to collapse to a one-dimensional scale measuring job complexity. Therefore, the JCI was shortened by selecting one scale item that loaded strongly on each of the dimensions of job complexity shown to be important in earlier research. In their 1976 article, Sims et al. reported the necessary factor analysis scores used to obtain the abbreviated scale. Question and reference numbers for the seven items that comprise the shortened JCI scale are listed in Table YW1.

References

Dunham, Randall B.; Aldag, Ramon; and Brief, Arthur P. "Dimensionality of Task Design as Measured by the Job Diagnostic Survey." Academy of Management Journal 20, 2 (June 1977): 209-23.

Hackman, J.R. and Oldham, J.R. "Development of the Job Diagnostic Survey." Journal of Applied Psychology 60 (1975): 159-70.

Pierce, Jon L. and Dunham, Randall B. "The Measurement of Perceived Job Characteristics: The Diagnostic Survey vs. the Job Characteristics Inventory." Academy of Management Journal 21,1 (March 1978): 123-28.

Sims, Henry R.; Szilagyi, Andrew; and Keller, Robert. "The Measurement of Job Characteristics." Academy of Management Journal 26,2 (June 1976): 195-212.

Turner, A.N. and Lawrence, P.R. Industrial Jobs and the Workers: An Investigation of Responses to Task Attributes. Boston: Harvard University Press, 1965.

• Mature Women cohort
• Young Women cohort

Mature Women cohort

Questions on work-related discrimination were fielded in 1972, 1977, 1982, 1987, 1989, 1995, and 2001. In general, respondents indicated whether they had experienced a particular type of discrimination (age, race, religion, nationality, or sex). If a respondent experienced any type of discrimination, a follow-up question elicited information on the type(s) of discriminatory practice experienced (e.g., the respondent believed that she was not hired, interviewed, or promoted; was demoted or laid off; or was paid less for the same work).

As Table MW1 indicates, information on the various types of work-related discrimination and discriminatory practices has been collected across survey years. The reference period for 1972-89 was the five-year period preceding each interview. In 1995 and 2001, the reference period was since the date of last interview.

Young Women cohort

Questions on work-related discrimination were fielded in 1972, 1978-83, 1988, 1995, and 2001. In general, respondents indicated whether they had experienced a particular type of discrimination (age, race, religion, nationality, or sex). If a respondent experienced any type of discrimination, a follow-up question elicited information on the type(s) of discriminatory practice experienced (e.g., the respondent believed that she was not hired, interviewed, or promoted; was demoted or laid off; or was paid less for the same work). The 1988 survey contained an expanded discrimination section that asked respondents about steps they had taken to resolve the problem and the eventual outcome. This interview also expanded the categories of discriminatory practices to include performance evaluations and relations with coworkers or supervisors.

As Table YW1 indicates, information on the various types of work-related discrimination and discriminatory practices was collected across survey years. The reference period of most work-related discrimination questions was the five-year period preceding each interview; in the 1972, 1982, and 1995 survey years, a shorter two-year interval was referenced.

• Mature Women cohort
• Young Women cohort

Mature Women cohort

This section overviews the rate of pay information collected for one or more jobs held by the respondent since the last interview (e.g., the current or last job, a second or dual job, or various intervening jobs). Data are also available for some survey years on reservation wages (i.e., the minimum wage required to accept a job by those not in the labor force) and on rates of pay associated with hypothetical job offers; these questions are described in the Job Search section of this guide. Related variables include whether and under what conditions extra pay was received, how such overtime work was compensated, whether wages were set by a collective bargaining agreement, the hours or shift usually worked, and the respondent's preference for working different hours for different pay.

Rate of pay

All interviews except the 1968 mail survey collected earnings, periodicity, and usual hours worked per week data for those respondents whose current or past job was in the private or governmental sector. From this information, a set of variables was created for each survey year based on a common hourly time unit, 'Hourly Rate of Pay at Current or Last Job *KEY*.' Rate of pay data for dual and/or intervening jobs are available for each post-1971 personal survey. The longest-job-held-since-June 1972 series fielded in 1977 included a rate of pay for that job. Follow-up questions for those respondents providing any time unit other than "per hour" were included in post-1987 surveys that asked whether wages were compensated by the hour on that job and, if so, an hourly wage rate was collected. In addition, post-1987 surveys gathered information on the number of hours a respondent worked at home for her current/last employer. This "at home" series was expanded beginning in 1992 to include (1) confirmation that the hours worked at home had been included in the already-reported usual number of hours worked per week, (2) the number of hours worked at home for not only the current/last job but also for a dual job (and intervening jobs in 1995-2003), and (3) the number of hours worked at home by those who owned their own business or who were working without pay during the survey week. Total pay along with an applicable time period for those respondents employed within the teaching profession is specified beginning with the 1992 survey. A special hourly pay rate variable (R03064.00) created for 1974 provides values for those who reported earnings in that year from a current/last job and for an additional 556 respondents reporting hourly wage information at an earlier interview.

References

Bureau of Labor Statistics. Work & Family: Changes in Wages and Benefits Among Young Adults. Report No. 849. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Labor, July 1993.

Olsen, Randall J. "Labor Market Behavior of Women 30-44 in 1967 and Women 14-24 in 1968: The National Longitudinal Surveys." Columbus, OH: Center for Human Resource Research, The Ohio State University, 1987.

Young Women cohort

This section overviews the rate of pay information collected for one or more jobs held by the respondent since the last interview (e.g., the current or last job, a second or dual job, or various intervening jobs). Data are also available for some survey years on reservation wages (i.e., the minimum wage required to accept a job by those not in the labor force) and on rates of pay associated with hypothetical job offers; these questions are described in the Job Search section of this guide. Related variables not discussed here include whether and under what conditions extra pay was received, how such overtime work was compensated, whether wages were set by a collective bargaining agreement, the hours or shift usually worked, and the respondent's preference for working different hours for different pay.

Rate of pay

Earnings, periodicity, and usual hours worked per week data were collected during each survey year for those respondents whose current or past job was in the private or governmental sector. From this information, a set of variables was created for all survey years except 1975 and 1977 based on a common hourly time unit, 'Hourly Rate of Pay at Current Job *KEY*' or 'Hourly Rate of Pay at Current or Past Job *KEY*.'  Excluded from the 1968-88 universes of these variables were those respondents reporting earnings by "day" or "(an)other" time unit, self-employed respondents, and those working without pay in the family business or farm. In addition, the 1988 and 1991 surveys gathered information on the number of hours a respondent worked at home for her current/last employer. This "at home" series was expanded beginning in 1993 to include (1) confirmation that the hours worked at home had been included in the already-reported usual number of hours worked per week, (2) the number of hours worked at home for not only the current/last job but also for a dual job (and intervening jobs in 1995-2003), and (3) the number of hours worked at home by those who owned their own business or who were working without pay during the survey week. In 1991 and 1993, modifications were made to the program generating these *KEY* variables; respondents reporting daily earnings are included and the separate time period information collected for those respondents working as teachers was factored in. In addition to earnings data for respondents' current or last job, rates of pay were collected for multiple intervening jobs during post-1969 personal surveys and for dual jobs during post-1971 personal interviews.

References

Bureau of Labor Statistics. Work & Family: Changes in Wages and Benefits Among Young Adults. Report No. 849. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Labor, July 1993.

Olsen, Randall J. "Labor Market Behavior of Women 30-44 in 1967 and Women 14-24 in 1968: The National Longitudinal Surveys. "Columbus, OH: CHRR, The Ohio State University, 1987.

• Mature Women cohort
• Young Women cohort

Mature Women cohort

During most survey years, respondents rated how they felt about their jobs on a scale from "like it very much" to "dislike it very much." For the early survey years, the question pertained only to the current job, thus restricting the universe to those respondents who reported working during the survey week. For the 1982 and 1987-92 interviews, the question was asked about the current or the most recent job, thereby expanding the universe to include respondents reporting work since the date of last interview. In 1995-2003, respondents were asked this question in reference to all jobs since their last interview. Following this global satisfaction question, most surveys elicited information on the specific factors that the respondent liked and disliked about the job. Global job satisfaction information is available for all survey years except 1968, 1974, and 1976.

Data comparing the respondent's attitude toward her current job with her attitude toward her job in a previous survey year were collected during some of the early years of the survey. In addition, respondents were asked in select survey years whether a higher wage or liking the job was more important toward motivating them to work. Consult MW1 for availability by survey year and reference numbers.

During the 1992 survey, respondents were asked a series of questions about the effort and concentration level required by their current or last job. In addition, the women agreed or disagreed with a series of statements about the satisfaction and importance of their jobs/work. The reference numbers for these questions are R10188.00-R10197.00.

Reference

Andrisani, Paul J.; Appelbaum, Eileen; Koppel, Ross; and Miljus, Robert C. Work Attitudes and Labor Market Experience: Evidence from the National Longitudinal Surveys. New York: Praeger Publishers, 1978.

Young Women cohort

Global job satisfaction

During all surveys except 1975 and 1977, respondents rated how they felt about their current/last job (all jobs in 1995-2003) on a scale from "like it very much" to "dislike it very much." In most of these years, respondents also listed specific factors about their jobs that they liked and disliked. In addition, data comparing respondents' attitudes toward their current jobs with their attitudes toward their jobs in a previous survey year were collected during certain early years of the survey. In 1970, 1972, 1978, 1980, and 1988, respondents answered a question intended to capture their commitment to working. Respondents stated whether they would continue to work if they had enough money to live comfortably without working; in all years except 1988, they also gave a reason for their response. Finally, the 1968 original survey asked respondents about their motivation to work (R00321.00). Table YW1 provides reference numbers for regularly asked job satisfaction items.

Facet-specific job satisfaction scale

During the 1980 survey, employed respondents (wage and salary workers or self-employed respondents) were asked to rate a series of descriptive statements, on a scale from "very true" to "not at all true." These job satisfaction statements covered pay, working conditions, chances for promotion, job security, competence of the supervisor, and the friendliness of their coworkers. The variable titles include the phrase "Job Satisfaction Index" and their reference numbers are R07195.00-R07209.00 and R07219.00-R07227.00.

Users can construct a job satisfaction index by coupling: (1) the global job satisfaction measures described above, (2) select items from the facet-specific job satisfaction ratings, and (3) responses to the commitment to work question. Table YW2 presents the years in which these components are available.

Reference

Andrisani, Paul J.; Appelbaum, Eileen; Koppel, Ross; and Miljus, Robert C. Work Attitudes and Labor Market Experience: Evidence from the National Longitudinal Surveys. New York: Praeger Publishers, 1978.

• Mature Women cohort
• Young Women cohort

Mature Women cohort

This section reviews (1) the occupational classification coding systems used by the Census Bureau to classify occupations of NLS respondents and other household members and (2) the occupational prestige scoring systems assigned to 1960 Census occupations. Data on the occupation(s) that respondents were seeking or in which they were employed or received training were collected during most survey years. In addition, select surveys collected information on the occupation of intervening and dual jobs.

Coding by occupation was based on an open-ended question (e.g., "What kind of work [are/were] you doing?"). Follow-up questions fielded during some survey years elicited more specific information on job duties and job titles. Interviewers entered verbatim responses from the respondent into the questionnaire; Census personnel then coded the responses using the 1960, 1980, 1990, and/or 2000 Census Bureau Alphabetical Index of Occupations and Industries. Table MW1 shows which coding systems were used in various survey years.

A series of edited variables (O & I Rewrite) provides three-digit and one-digit occupational codes for the current or last job ever reported by the respondent.  The universe for these variables is all respondents interviewed in a given survey year for whom occupational data were ever collected.  This series ended in 1993 because the 1960 codes were discontinued.

The User Notes in the Industries section of this guide provide additional information on the editing and creation procedures utilized for certain occupation variables.

Occupational prestige indices

The following occupational prestige scores are provided for select variables:

1. Duncan Index: All three-digit 1960 Census occupational categories have been assigned a two-digit ordinal prestige score based upon the education and income distributions of the occupation. The scores, ranging from 0 to 97, may be interpreted either as estimates of prestige ratings or simply as values on a scale of occupational socioeconomic status. For details, see Duncan (1961).
2. Bose Index: This ordinal measure of the prestige of an occupation was developed from responses of a sample of 197 white households in the Baltimore metropolitan area to questions about the prestige of 110 selected occupations. The rankings within each occupation were averaged and the mean values transformed to a metric with values 0 to 100 (Bose 1973). The latter scores were regressed on the 1959 median earnings and 1960 median years of school completed of the civilian experienced labor force employed in these occupations (Census 1960). The resultant equation was then used to estimate the mean prestige scores for occupations of the Mature Women. See Attachment 4 in the Young Women Codebook Supplement for more information.

References

Bose, Christine E. Jobs and Gender: Sex and Occupational Prestige. Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins University Center for Metropolitan Planning and Research, 1973.

Bose, Christine E. Jobs and Gender: Sex and Occupational Prestige. New York: Praeger Publishing, 1985.

Census Bureau. 1960 Census of Population Alphabetical Index of Occupations and Industries (Revised Edition). Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1960.

Census Bureau. "1970 Occupation and Industry Classification Systems in Terms of Their 1960 Occupation and Industry Elements." Technical Paper 26. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1972.

Census Bureau. 1980 Census of Population Classified Index of Industries and Occupations. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1980.

Census Bureau. Census of Population and Housing, 1990, Alphabetical Index of Industries and Occupations. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1990.

Census Bureau. "The Relationship Between the 1970 and 1980 Industry and Occupation Classification Systems." Technical Paper 59. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1989.

Census Bureau. U.S. Census of Population: 1960. Subject Reports. Occupational Characteristics. Final Report PC (2)-7A. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1960.

Duncan, O.D. "A Socioeconomic Index for All Occupations." In Occupations and Social Status, A.J. Reiss, Jr. et al. New York: Free Press, 1961.

U.S. Department of Labor. "Dictionary of Occupational Titles (Fourth Edition)." Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1977.

Young Women cohort

This section reviews (1) the occupational classification coding systems used by the Census Bureau to classify occupations of NLS respondents and other household members and (2) the occupational prestige scoring systems assigned to 1960 Census occupations. Data on the occupation(s) that respondents were seeking or in which they were employed or received training were collected during most survey years. In addition, select surveys have collected information on the occupation of intervening and dual jobs.

Coding by occupation has been based on an open-ended question (e.g., "What kind of work [are/were] you doing?"). Follow-up questions fielded during some survey years elicit more specific information on job duties and job titles. Interviewers enter verbatim responses from the respondent into the questionnaire; Census personnel then coded the responses using the 1960, 1980, 1990 and/or 2000 Census Bureau Alphabetical Index of Occupations and Industries. Table YW1 shows which coding systems were used in various survey years.

A series of edited variables (O & I Rewrite) provides three-digit and one-digit occupational codes for the current or last job ever reported by the respondent. The universe for these variables is all respondents interviewed in a given survey year for whom occupational data were ever collected. This series ended in 1993 because the 1960 codes were discontinued.

The User Notes in the Industries section of this guide provide additional information on the editing and creation procedures utilized for certain occupation variables.

Occupational prestige indices

The following occupational prestige scores are provided for select variables:

1. Duncan Index: All three-digit 1960 Census occupational categories have been assigned a two-digit ordinal prestige score based upon the education and income distributions of the occupation. The scores, ranging from 0 to 97, may be interpreted either as estimates of prestige ratings or simply as values on a scale of occupational socioeconomic status. For details, see Duncan (1961).
2. Bose Index: This ordinal measure of the prestige of an occupation was developed from responses of a sample of 197 white households in the Baltimore metropolitan area to questions about the prestige of 110 selected occupations. The rankings within each occupation were averaged and the mean values transformed to a metric with values 0 to 100 (Bose 1973). The latter scores were regressed on the 1959 median earnings and 1960 median years of school completed of the civilian experienced labor force employed in these occupations (Census 1960). The resultant equation was then used to estimate the mean prestige scores for occupations of the Young Women. See Attachment 4 in the Young Women Codebook Supplement for more information.

GED and SVP scores

The 1968, 1971, and 1973 surveys of the Young Women include created variables providing two special occupational scores: a General Education Development (GED) score and a Specific Vocational Preparation (SVP) score (Department of Labor 1965, Appendix B). The GED score is a representation of the amount of general education or life experience needed to perform a given job. The score represents three factors: reasoning development, mathematical development, and language development; each of these factors is divided into six levels, with one representing the least amount of education and six the most. The first number in the 3-digit GED score represents the level of reasoning required for the job, the second number is the level of mathematical achievement, and the last number indicates language requirements.

The SVP score considers the opposite proposition: that some amount of time is required to learn to perform a specific occupation at an average level of competence. This single-digit score ranges from 1 to 9, with 1 meaning that the job only requires a short demonstration, 2 indicating that the job requires up to 30 days of training and experience, and so on up to 9, which means that the job requires more than 10 years of specific learning and experience before it can be performed at an acceptable level.

References

Bose, Christine E. Jobs and Gender: Sex and Occupational Prestige. Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins University Center for Metropolitan Planning and Research, 1973.

Bose, Christine E. Jobs and Gender: Sex and Occupational Prestige. New York: Praeger Publishing, 1985.

Census Bureau. 1960 Census of Population Alphabetical Index of Occupations and Industries (Revised Edition). Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1960.

Census Bureau. "1970 Occupation and Industry Classification Systems in Terms of Their 1960 Occupation and Industry Elements. "Technical Paper 26. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1972.

Census Bureau. 1980 Census of Population Classified Index of Industries and Occupations. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1980.

Census Bureau. Census of Population and Housing, 1990, Alphabetical Index of Industries and Occupations. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1990.

Census Bureau. "The Relationship Between the 1970 and 1980 Industry and Occupation Classification Systems. "Technical Paper 59. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1989.

Census Bureau. U.S. Census of Population: 1960. Subject Reports. Occupational Characteristics. Final Report PC (2)-7A. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1960.

Duncan, O.D. "A Socioeconomic Index for All Occupations. "In Occupations and Social Status, A.J. Reiss, Jr. et al. New York: Free Press, 1961.

Scoville, James G. The Job Content of the U.S. Economy 1940-1970. New York: McGraw-Hill, 1969.

U.S. Department of Labor. "Dictionary of Occupational Titles (Fourth Edition)."Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1977.

• Mature Women cohort
• Young Women cohort

Mature Women cohort

Open-ended questions (e.g., "What kind of business or industry is/was this?") were included in each interview and used to code the industry of the respondent's current job or current/last job. In addition, the industry of intervening jobs was coded for each personal interview beginning in 1969 and for each dual job reported in a personal interview beginning in 1972. Verbatim responses to this question were coded by Census personnel using three-digit codes from the 1960, 1980, 1990, and 2000 classification systems (Census 1960, 1980, 1990, and 2000). Two- and one-digit edited versions of these raw variables are available for most survey years for 1960 codes. Table MW1 summarizes the years in which each of the various coding systems were used. The important information noted at the end of this section contain an extensive discussion of Census/CHRR editing and creation procedures that affect the industry variables.

The first survey included a retrospective collection of respondents' work experience prior to 1966, which asked about the industry of the longest job ever held and the longest job held between or since certain life cycle events (e.g., between stopping school and first marriage, between first marriage and first child, since the birth of first child, or since first marriage). These life cycle events questions were presented to varying universes (e.g., ever married, married without children, never married with children, and never married without children). A five-year retrospective fielded in 1977 included a question on the industry of the longest job held since June 1972. Related variables present for single survey years are (1) the industry of an alternative job that those respondents who reported job-shopping while remaining employed with the same firm indicated that they could have had and/or had been offered (1971) and (2) the industry of the employer from whom the respondent receives or will receive a pension and the type of industry providing a pension for her husband (1989).

Present for each survey year through 1992, edited variables from the Occupation & Industry (O & I) Rewrite provide one-, two-, and three-digit versions of the raw current/last job variables. Several versions of the current/last job variables (e.g., edited and unedited, collapsed and noncollapsed) are also available.

References

Census Bureau. 1960 Census of Population Alphabetical Index of Occupations and Industries (Revised Edition). Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1960.

Census Bureau. 1980 Census of Population Classified Index of Industries and Occupations. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1980.

Census Bureau. Census of Population and Housing, 1990, Alphabetical Index of Industries and Occupations. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1990.

Young Women cohort

Open-ended questions (e.g., "What kind of business or industry is/was this?") were included in each interview and used to code the industry of the respondent's current job or current/last job. In addition, the industry of intervening jobs was coded for each personal interview beginning in 1969 and for each dual job reported in a personal interview beginning in 1972. Verbatim responses to this question are coded by Census personnel using three-digit codes from the 1960, 1980, 1990, and 2000 classification systems (Census 1960, 1980, 1990, and 2000). Two- and one-digit edited versions of these raw variables are available for most survey years for 1960 codes. Table YW1 summarizes the years in which each of the various coding systems were used. The important information noted at the end of this section contain an extensive discussion of the Census/CHRR editing and creation procedures that affect the industry variables.

The first survey included a retrospective collection of respondents' work experience prior to the first interview, which asked about the industry of the job held one year ago and that held during the last year of high school. In 1973, 1978, and 1983, five-year retrospectives contained a question on the industry of the job held in February 1968, and that of the longest job held since January 1973 and since January 1978. Other related variables for single survey years include (1) the industry of an alternative job that those respondents who reported job-shopping while remaining employed with the same firm indicated that they could have had and/or had been offered (1973) and (2) two created variables that indicate the industry of the last job held before and after the birth of the respondent's first child (1973).

Present for each survey year through 1993, edited variables from the Occupation & Industry (O & I) Rewrite provide one-, two-, and three-digit versions of the raw current/last job variables. Beginning in 1986, several versions of the current/last job variables (e.g., edited and unedited, collapsed and noncollapsed) are also available.

References

Census Bureau. 1960 Census of Population Alphabetical Index of Occupations and Industries (Revised Edition). Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1960.

Census Bureau. 1980 Census of Population Classified Index of Industries and Occupations. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1980.

Census Bureau. Census of Population and Housing, 1990, Alphabetical Index of Industries and Occupations. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1990.

• Mature Women cohort
• Young Women cohort

Mature Women cohort

Most surveys of the Mature Women include at least basic job search questions, while several years have had extensive series concerning various job search aspects. These include questions about a respondent's job search activities based on the Current Population Survey (CPS), searches conducted while the respondent was otherwise employed, how geographic mobility affects job search, and what a respondent would do in hypothetical job offer situations.

CPS job search questions

Basic CPS questions, used to determine a respondent's labor force status, were included in every survey except 1968 (see the Labor Force Status section for more information). These asked about the respondent's main activity during the week before the interview (i.e., working, looking for work, going to school, retired), whether she was looking for work during the past four weeks, and the reason she could not take a job last week (i.e., temporary illness, child care problems). The surveys also asked for the reason the respondent was out of the labor force or was not looking for work during the last four weeks (i.e., could not find any, lacks experience, family responsibilities).

In all personal interviews, Mature Women respondents looking for work were questioned concerning the details of their job search. This series asked which methods they used during the previous four weeks to look for work, why they started looking (e.g., lost or quit job), the starting date or duration of their search, and whether they were looking for full- or part-time work.

Most interviews asked the respondent various questions concerning her labor force status during a specific time period (past calendar year, last 12 months). In some years, the questionnaire requested the number of non-working weeks that she spent looking for work or on layoff. If "missing" weeks existed when the respondent was not working and not looking for work, she was asked for the reason no job search was conducted during those weeks (i.e., illness, birth of child, in school).

Characteristics of the job a respondent was searching for can be found in the personal surveys between 1967 and 1982; in personal interviews from 1971-82, similar questions were asked of respondents who expected to look for work in the next year. The various details collected in these question sets include the kind of work, search methods used, the number of hours per week and amount of pay desired, and any restrictions (hours or location) that would be a factor in accepting a position.

Respondents who were not working and not looking for work in 1967 or 1969-72 were asked if they would accept a job if offered one. If they answered yes, a follow-up question asked why they were not looking for such a job now. Similarly, the 1977 and 1982 surveys asked respondents in the same group for a reason why they were not looking for work at this time. The 1995-2003 surveys simply asked if a respondent intended to begin looking for work during the next 12 months.

The surveys also include the reasons behind starting or stopping a job search. These can be instrumental in understanding why a respondent's labor force status has changed from one survey to another. For those who were looking for work at the time of the last interview, questions from the 1969 survey asked how they found their current job (if now working) or why they stopped looking for work (if currently not employed and not looking). During that same survey, respondents who were not employed and not looking last year, but were now searching for work, reported what prompted their decision. In 1969, 1972, and 1977, respondents who were not working and not looking but switched to working sometime during the year between interviews were asked why they decided to take their current job and how they found it.

Job search while employed

The 1972 Mature Women interview included an extensive series of questions concerning any job search activities respondents conducted while otherwise employed. These started by asking how often the respondent conducted this type of job search, the year when this search occurred, and what prompted the decision to look for other work at that time. The other details gathered include the search methods used, the kind of work she looked for, and whether the search was conducted in the same area where the respondent lived. If she found a job she could have had, a group of questions asked for specific characteristics of that position (i.e., kind of industry, location, salary).

Respondents who did not look for another job while employed are surveyed on whether they ever received a definite full-time job offer that they did not accept. If so, detailed questions concerning the offer then follow; if not, these respondents were asked whether they ever thought of looking for other work during this time. If the respondent considered it but never conducted a search, or never considered looking at all, she is asked about the reasons for her decision.

Geographic mobility

Personal surveys from 1969-82 asked respondents who had moved since a specific time (date of last interview or during the past calendar year) whether they had a job lined up at the time of their move or were looking before or afterwards. In 1971, 1972, and 1977, relocated respondents who had no job arrangements beforehand answered questions about the number of weeks spent looking until they found a job before or after the move. A 1982 question asked respondents who had moved since the 1972 interview whether they were looking for work right before or after the move. This same survey included questions for the respondent concerning whether her husband had a job lined up at the time of their move or was looking for work before or after the move.

Most surveys which have asked respondents about their reasons for moving include "better employment opportunities" as one of the options.

Hypothetical jobs

Several surveys have included questions about hypothetical job offers and reservation wages. The 1967 and 1969 questionnaires asked working respondents what they would do if they lost their current job tomorrow. One answer, "look for work," led to other questions that asked about the kind of work the respondent would look for, any specific companies where she would apply, and a reason for mentioning those employers. The 1967 survey also inquired as to the respondent's future plans after she stops her current job. If her response was "look for work," she was asked about the kind of work she would look for and whether it would be a part- or full-time position.

Respondents who were not working and not looking for work during the 1967 and 1969 interviews were asked about the possibility of accepting a job if one was offered to them. Those who answered that they would take it or that it depends were then asked if they expect to look for work within the next year. Similarly, in 1977 and 1982 respondents were asked if they would accept a job offer in the same area where they lived, at the same rate of pay that they currently received. Possible answers varied from a definite yes or no to several reasons in between: it depends on the type of work, it depends on whether she is satisfied with the company, no--the pay is not enough, etc.

Beginning in 1967 and continuing through the 1986 survey, respondents were queried about their reactions to hypothetical job offers. Most frequently, these questions were set in the context of a job offer in the same geographical area in which the respondent currently lived, but occasionally the questions referred to a different geographical area. The hypothetical job offer series was often broken down by current labor force status of the respondent (e.g., unemployed or out of the labor force); component questions usually asked about the rate of pay required to accept the job offer, hours per week the respondent would be willing to work on the job, and the occupation required to accept the position. Researchers should consult the questionnaires for survey years in which these types of questions were asked and note any minor variations in text wording or universes. These questions can be found on the data file by searching under the word "Hypothetical."

Young Women cohort

Each of the Young Women surveys includes at least basic job search questions, while several years have had extensive series concerning various job search aspects. These include questions about a respondent's job search activities based on the Current Population Survey, searches conducted while the respondent was otherwise employed, how geographic mobility affects job search, and what a respondent would do in hypothetical job offer situations.

CPS job search questions

Questions based on the Current Population Survey (CPS) were asked in every survey to determine respondents' labor force status (see the Labor Force Status section for more information). These asked about the respondent's main activity during the week before the interview (i.e., working, looking for work, going to school), whether she was looking for work during the past four weeks, and the reason she could not take a job last week (i.e., temporary illness, child care problems). The surveys also asked for the reason the respondent was out of the labor force or was not looking for work during the last four weeks (i.e., could not find any, lacks experience, family responsibilities).

In all personal interviews in the early years, Young Women respondents looking for work were questioned concerning the details of their job search. This series asked which methods they used during the previous four weeks to look for work, why they started looking (e.g., lost or quit job), the starting date or duration of their search, and whether they were looking for full- or part-time work.

Most interviews asked the respondent various questions concerning her labor force status during a specific time period (past calendar year, since date of last interview). In some years, the questionnaire requested the number of non-working weeks that she spent looking for work or on layoff. If "missing" weeks exist when the respondent was not working and not looking for work, she is asked for the reason no job search was conducted during those weeks (i.e., illness, birth of child, in school).

In all personal interviews, respondents who reported looking for work were presented with a series of questions about the kind of work and amount of pay they wanted. Any restrictions that would be a factor in taking a job, such as hours or location, were also listed. Some of these surveys included an additional question in this series that asked for the hours per week that the respondent wanted to work.

Most personal surveys include some series that were presented only to respondents categorized as being a particular labor force status (i.e., working, unemployed, looking). Respondents who reported neither working nor looking for work were questioned about whether they had any intentions of starting a job search during the next 12 months. If they answered "definitely" or "probably," follow-up questions asked when they planned to start looking, the kind of work they would look for and the search methods they planned to use. All respondents not working and not looking for work at the interview date were asked for the reason they did not start a job search, or why they had not begun looking now instead of waiting to start a search. Similarly, working respondents who were classified as "other" (not working and not looking for work) at the date of last interview were asked for the reason they decided to take a job since the last interview. The 1995-2003 surveys also asked if a respondent intended to begin looking for work during the next 12 months.

Some job search questions were only included in a few Young Women surveys. The first two interviews included a set of questions about any weeks spent looking for work or on layoff during the past calendar year (in 1968) or the last 12 months (in 1969). The follow-up questions inquired as to whether these weeks were all in one stretch and whether they were during summer vacation or the school year. Also, in 1983, the survey asked respondents which methods they used to look for work and how they found out about their current job.

Job search while employed

The 1973 Young Women interview included an extensive series of questions concerning any job search activities respondents conducted while otherwise employed. Respondents were eligible to answer these questions if not in school but with the same employer or self-employed in 1971-73. Those respondents who had looked for another job while employed were asked for the frequency of such a search, when this occurred, why they looked at that time, their search methods, the kind of work desired, and whether they looked in the same geographic area. If the respondent was unable to find another job, she was asked for a reason why her search was unsuccessful. Any respondent who found a job she could have had was then asked for various details about the position, including whether she accepted the job offer or not. If she declined it, the respondent was asked for a reason why. If an employer offered a respondent a job (since February 1971) that she did not take and she stopped searching or had no other success in her search, the survey requested various characteristics about the job. An additional question asked if the job was offered by a friend or relative, business acquaintance, former employer, or some other person.

Also in 1973, any employed respondent who did not receive an offer from an employer (and did not search for other work) was asked if she ever thought of looking for another job during this period. If the respondent answered no, the follow-up question asked why not; if she said yes, the next questions asked why she thought of looking and why she never actually searched for other work.

In the 1985 and 1987 telephone interviews, a question about the respondent's level of job satisfaction led into a job search question. It simply asked whether these employed respondents had been looking for other work during the four weeks before the interview.

Geographic mobility

In 1969, 1978, and 1983, the survey asked respondents who had moved since the date of last interview if they had a job lined up at the time they moved. If not, a follow-up question in 1969 and 1978 asked for the number of weeks they looked before finding a job (other possible answers included "did not look for work" and "still have not found work"). Also in 1978, parallel questions asked about job search activities conducted before and after a respondent's move. The universe for this series depended on the respondent's job status prior to the move.

The 1983 questionnaire asked respondents who had moved since 1973 if they were looking for work or on layoff from a job right before or after the move to their current residence. If these respondents worked for a different employer in the 12 months after the move, another question asked whether they had a new job arranged beforehand.

The 1983 interview also included two questions that asked respondents about how a move affected their husband's labor force status or job search. The Young Women respondents were asked if their husbands had a job lined up at the time of their move and whether he was searching for work right before or right after the move.

Most surveys that have asked respondents about their reasons for moving include "better employment opportunities" as one of the options.

Hypothetical jobs

Several surveys have included questions about hypothetical job offers and reservation wages. The initial survey in 1968 included some hypothetical situation questions about a respondent's current job. The first question asked what she would do if she were to lose that job tomorrow. If the answer was "look for work," the respondent then reported what kind of work she would look for, the job search methods she would use, any specific companies where she would apply, and a reason for mentioning those employers. Respondents who chose any other answer (i.e., stay at home, return to school) were then asked about their future plans after their current job ends. If they said "taking another job" or "looking for work," they were asked for the kind of work they wanted and whether it would be full- or part-time.

In 1978 and 1983, a hypothetical wages question asked respondents looking for work if they would accept a job offered at the same rate of pay as their last position. The possible answers for this question included "yes, definitely," "depends on the type of work," "no, not enough money," and "had no prior job."

Beginning in 1968 and continuing through the 1988 survey, respondents were asked about their reactions to hypothetical job offers. Most frequently, these questions were set in the context of a job offer in the same geographical area in which the respondent currently lived, but occasionally the questions referred to a different geographical area. The hypothetical job offer series was often broken down by current labor force status of the respondent (e.g., employed, unemployed, or out of the labor force); component questions ask about the rate of pay required to accept the job offer, hours per week the respondent would be willing to work on the job, and the occupation required to accept the position. Researchers should consult the questionnaires for survey years in which these types of questions were asked and note any minor variations in text wording or universes. These questions can be found on the data file by searching under the word "Hypothetical."

• Mature Women cohort
• Young Women cohort

Mature Women cohort

This section reviews the fringe benefit data collected for the Mature Women. Additional information on other work-related benefits can be found in the Pension Benefits & Pension Plans section.

Data on the availability of fringe benefits provided by employers of respondents were collected in 1977, 1982, 1987, 1989, and 1995-2003. At each survey point, information was gathered about the following fringe benefits: (1) medical, surgical, and hospital insurance; (2) life insurance; (3) a retirement pension program; (4) paid sick leave;  (5) paid vacation;  (6) training/educational opportunities; (7) profit sharing; and (8) stock options. In addition, select surveys collected data on the availability of paid and unpaid maternity leave, flexible work hours, child day care, paid personal time, time off for child care, time off for elder care, a flexible menu of benefits, free/discounted meals or merchandise, or dental insurance. Table MW1 below summarizes by survey year the numbers of employed respondents reporting the availability of each type of fringe benefit.

Young Women cohort

This section reviews the fringe benefit data collected for the Young Women. Additional information on other work-related benefits can be found in the Pension Benefits & Pension Plans section.

Data on the availability of fringe benefits provided by employers of respondents were collected in 1978 and 1983-2003. At each survey point, information was gathered about the following fringe benefits: (1) medical, surgical, hospital, and dental insurance (as well as vision insurance in some surveys); (2) life insurance; (3) a retirement pension program; (4) paid sick leave; (5) paid vacation; (6) training/educational opportunities; and (7) profit sharing. In addition, select surveys collected data on the availability of free/discounted meals or merchandise, paid and unpaid maternity leave, stock options, flexible work hours, child care, paid personal time, time off for child care, time off for elder care, or a flexible menu of benefits. Table YW1 below summarizes by survey year the numbers of employed respondents reporting the availability of each type of fringe benefit.

In 1987, additional items asked respondents to rank their most important and most desired fringe benefits. In 1991, the collection of fringe benefit data was broadened to include data on actual coverage by a health or retirement plan provided by the respondent's employer. Information on specific types of health insurance coverage (e.g., medical/surgical/hospital care, dental services, vision care, or prescription drugs) was collected, as were data on whether those respondents covered by a pension plan were vested. These pension data are discussed in the Pension Benefits & Pension Plans section of this guide.

Reference

Bureau of Labor Statistics. Work & Family: Changes in Wages and Benefits among Young Adults. Report No. 849. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Labor, July 1993.