NLSM -Older and Young Men

The Older Men's Codebook Supplement consists of the following Appendices and Attachments. Click a link to view the corresponding file.

• Appendix 1. Table for Poverty Status Variables (PDF)
• Appendix 2. Additional Instructions to 1969 Survey (PDF)
• Appendix 3. State by Division Listing with State Codes (PDF)
• Appendix 4. Weeks on Layoff (1967 and 1969) (PDF)
• Appendix 5. New Geographic and Environmental Public Variables (PDF)
• Appendix 18. Union Categories (PDF)
• Appendix 19. Derivations for Key Variables (1981)
• Appendix 27. Procedure for Calculating the 1990 Weights for  he Resurvey of NLS Older Males (PDF)
• Appendix 28. Derivations for 1990 *KEY* Variables
• Appendix 29. Summary of Major Differences Between the 1990 and Earlier Surveys (PDF)
• Appendix 30. Explanation for the 1990 Created Social Security Variables -- R6743.10-R6743.30 (PDF)
• Appendix 31. Derivations for Collapsed Occupation & Industry Variables -- R7092. - R7098 (PDF)
• Appendix 32. Procedure for Coding Cause of Death from Death Certificate Variables -- R7185.10-7185.40 (PDF)
• Attachment 2. 1960 Census Occupation and Industry Codes (PDF)

The Young Men's Codebook Supplement consists of the following Appendices and Attachments. Click a link to view the corresponding file.

• Appendix 1. Fields of Study in College (PDF)
• Appendix 2. State by Division Codes (PDF)
• Appendix 3. Codes for Enlisted Men and Officers (PDF)
• Appendix 4. Median Education
• Appendix 5. Corrections to Employment Status Recode: 1966-1969
• Appendix 6. R's Father and Mother 1966 Variables
• Appendix 7. Partial Derivatives for R2958
• Appendix 8. Enrollment Pattern 1966-1969
• Appendix 9. Determinants of Early Labor Market Success: Appendix A
• Appendix 10. Determinants of Early Labor Market Success: Appendix B
• Appendix 11. Determinants of Early Labor Market Success: Appendix C
• Appendix 12. Determinants of Early Labor Market Success
• Appendix 13. Dual Labor Market Theory: Appendix A (Primary and Secondary Jobs) (PDF)
• Appendix 14. Edits for R2997
• Appendix 15. Decision Criteria: Dates Last Attended School
• Appendix 16. Edits for 21 Variables
• Appendix 17. Work Experience Variables: Time Reference (PDF)
• Appendix 18. Union/Employee Association Variables (PDF)
• Appendix 19. GED/SVP/Job-Level/Job-Family and 3-Digit Occupation Codes (PDF)
• Appendix 20: Derivation for R3836 and Number of Weeks Key Variables Between 1975 and 1976
• Appendix 21. New Geographic and Environmental Variables 1966-1976 (PDF)
• Appendix 22. Job Characteristics Measures (PDF)
• Appendix 23. Job Satisfaction Measures (PDF)
• Appendix 24. Derivations for R3035, R3829, R3833, R3833.50 and R3876.50
• Appendix 25. Reason for Preference in Union Certification Elections (PDF)
• Appendix 26. Derivations for R8114-R8118
• Attachment 2. 1960 Census Occupation and Industry Codes (PDF)

• Reasons for non-interview
• Sample representativeness and attrition

Reasons for non-interview

A cumulative 'Reason for Noninterview' variable was created by CHRR for the full sample of respondents in each cohort. This created variable is a combination of: (1) the noninterview reasons provided by Census for the subset of respondents designated as eligible for interview in that survey year and (2) the reason for noninterview assigned during a previous survey to out-of-scope respondents. Instructions to interviewers on how to code the reason a respondent was not interviewed appear within the cohort-specific Interviewer's Reference Manuals.

The set of noninterview coding categories present during the initial survey years of each cohort was supplemented over the years with additional reasons for noninterview, and the meaning of existing categories was refined. For each cohort, Table 1 presents the raw coding categories and specifies the survey years during which each category was utilized.

In addition to the cumulative 'Reason for Noninterview' variable, the 1990 resurvey of Older Men data include two noninterview variables which reflect the reasons for noninterview for just those respondents for whom interviews were attempted that year. R06014. provides the reason for noninterview for sample persons with whom an interview was attempted, and R07114. provides the reason for noninterview of the Older Men respondent's widow. The cumulative 1990 variable R06014.01 provides the reason for noninterview for all Older Men respondents and is comparable to the single variable included in the other interview years.

The reason for noninterview coding categories depicted in the tables below were constructed from the raw coding categories as shown in Tables 1a and 1b. For example, the conceptual category "can't locate" is the sum of codes "0" and "3" for the Older Men and codes "1" and "4" for the Young Men. Tables 2 through 5 depict the number of respondents in each cohort not interviewed by survey year, reason, and race. Additional detail on nonresponse rates and numbers by age in 1966 for the Older Men and Young Men cohorts is presented in Parsons (1987a, 1987b).

Sample representativeness and attrition

The retention rate for the Older Men as of the 1983 survey was 52.5 percent, or 2,633 of the original 5,020 respondents. In 1990, 41.5 percent or 2,092 of the original respondents completed an interview, along with 1,341 widows and 865 other next-of-kin; some information was obtained about 85.6 percent of the cohort members. The retention rate for the Young Men as of the final 1981 survey was 64.9 percent, or 3,398 of the original 5,225 respondents. Retention rate is defined as the percent of base year respondents who were interviewed in any given survey year; included in the calculations are deceased and other out-of-scope respondents (see Table 1 for definitions).

An analysis of selected characteristics of respondents interviewed in the tenth year samples of the Original Cohorts found that noninterviews had not seriously distorted the sample representativeness of any of the cohorts for the characteristics studied (Rhoton 1984). A second analysis of differential attrition among wealthy and non-wealthy subsamples of each of the four Original Cohorts found that non-wealthy respondents of each cohort showed a consistent tendency toward greater attrition (Rhoton and Nagi 1991). Among the three younger cohorts, almost all of the difference between wealthy and non-wealthy subsamples is accounted for by attrition reasons other than the death of the respondent.

In Tables 6a and 6b, the racial composition of interviewed respondents is presented for the base survey year (1966) and the most recent interview year for which data are available. These tables also provide information on numbers of deceased respondents by race.

Finally, Tables 7 and 8 present the number of interviews completed by respondents, broken down by race. In these tables, the "number who completed" column shows how many respondents completed exactly that number of surveys. The "cumulative %" column shows a cumulative total percent of those completing at least a given number of surveys rather than a percentage of those completing an exact number of surveys.

• Interview schedule and fielding periods
• Interview methods and target universe

Interview schedule and fielding periods

In the initial survey plan, respondents from each of the four Original Cohorts were to be interviewed yearly over a five-year period. Due to cost considerations, it was decided after the second survey of the Older Men to survey the two older groups (Older Men and Mature Women) biennially rather than annually. Due to their greater mobility, the Young Women and Young Men were interviewed annually.

A decision was made at the end of the first five-year period to continue the interviews for another five years because of the usefulness of these data and the relatively small sample attrition. At this point, the interviewing pattern changed to a 2-2-1 schedule; each respondent was contacted by phone approximately every two years, then again in person one year after the second phone interview. The 2-2-1 schedule was continued through 1981 for the Young Men and 1983 for the Older Men, when interviewing of both cohorts ceased. The Older Men or their proxies were then personally reinterviewed in 1990.

Tables 1a and 1b depict the years in which each cohort was surveyed, the type of interview used, the fielding period, and the number and percent of respondents with completed interviews.

Interview methods and target universe

Listings of respondents to be interviewed were generated by the Census Bureau and distributed to its 12 regional offices. Current addresses and contact information were generated from information on the various Household Record Cards as well as through a postal check conducted by Census. Cases were assigned to interviewers who lived in the same geographic area as the respondent. For each respondent in their caseload, interviewers received copies of the questionnaire, respondents' Household Record Cards, flashcards, and information booklets.

Interviewers were responsible for contacting each respondent in their caseload and for using additional local resources to locate respondents who had moved since the last interview. Respondents who had moved outside the geographic district of their original interviewer were assigned another interviewer unless there was no interviewer nearby. In the latter event, an effort was made to interview the respondent by telephone.

Each respondent to be interviewed was sent various materials designed to encourage continued participation. Advance letters thanking respondents for their continued participation and informing them of the coming survey were mailed prior to each interview period. Fact sheets highlighting recent research findings from each cohort's survey data were also provided. Respondents who initially refused to participate in a survey were sent refusal letters by the regional offices designed to encourage their continued participation and were once again contacted by local level interviewers to secure the interview.

While the type of survey, personal or telephone, determined the chief mode of contact, an alternate contact method was used for certain respondents. During a personal survey, for example, those respondents who lived long distances from the Census interviewer's base of operation or those for whom the Census supervisor decided that another contact method was warranted were contacted by telephone. Although survey instruments are written in English only, multilingual interpreters were made available by the regional offices to interviewers who needed them.

The average length of an interview varied depending on the type conducted, with personal interviews lasting from 50-60 minutes and telephone interviews averaging 20-25 minutes. No stipends were paid to respondents in the men's cohorts for their participation in the NLS.

Respondents selected for interviewing each year were, with the exceptions noted below, those who had participated in the initial year interviews and who were alive, living within the United States at the interview date, and noninstitutionalized. Subsequent to the first year interview for each cohort, those respondents who had refused to be interviewed were dropped from the sample; respondents who had been noninterviews for reasons other than death or refusal for two consecutive years were also eliminated from attempted interviewing. This noninterview exclusion was not applied to those members of the Young Men cohort who were subsequently inducted into the Armed Forces. No interviews were attempted with this group while they were on active military duty. They were, however, retained in the sample and attempts were made to reinterview them as soon as they left active military service. Table 2 depicts reasons for exclusion from the eligible samples.

Survey design and fielding procedures for the 1990 Older Men resurvey differed substantially from those employed during earlier interviews. Respondents in this cohort were last surveyed in 1983 and, if living, would have been between 69 and 83 years of age at the time of the 1990 interviews. It was expected that nearly half of the original cohort members could be deceased by the time of this resurvey.

The goal of the 1990 interviews was expanded to include obtaining information about the original cohort member regardless of his ability to respond. Questionnaires were designed for interviews with not only respondents, called "sample persons" for the purposes of this survey, but with widows of deceased sample members, or other next-of-kin in the absence of a widow. Information was to be collected not only on the labor market activities, retirement experience, and health of the respondent, whether living or deceased, but also on the widow's work experience, household composition, and family income. Institutionalized sample persons or widows--those who resided in nursing homes, homes for the needy, mental institutions, correctional facilities and long stay hospitals--were to be interviewed. Staff members at institutions could be contacted to provide information on residency within and medical insurance coverage for long-term care facilities. To assess cognitive functioning, e.g., orientation to time and place, long-term memory, and arithmetic ability, the Short Portable Mental Status Questionnaire (SPMSQ) was administered to all sample persons and widows.

Proxy interviews were encouraged in cases where the sample person was physically or mentally unable to participate. Eligible proxies, in order of preference, included a sample person's wife, child, relative, friend, or neighbor, with those residing with or close to the respondent (e.g., in the same household, in the same community) preferred over those living some distance away. Finally, Census address information, which had last been updated in 1983, was supplemented by locator information from the Social Security Administration for both sample persons and their beneficiaries. These unusual procedures resulted in some information being collected from or about 4,298 (86%) of the original cohort members. Interviews were completed with 2,092 original sample persons (90% of those designated by Census as alive in 1990) and with 2,206 respondent widows or other next-of-kin (82% of those designated deceased before the interviews began). Table 3 summarizes response rates and types of interviews for the 1990 resurvey.

• Sample design
• Screening process
• Sampling process

Sample design

Each of the original NLS samples was designed to represent the civilian noninstitutionalized population of the United States at the time of the initial survey. The Older Men cohort includes individuals who were ages 45-59 as of March 31, 1966, and the Young Men cohort consists of respondents ages 14-24 as of the same date.

Each cohort is represented by a multi-stage probability sample originally drawn by the Bureau of the Census from 1,900 primary sampling units (PSUs) that had originally been selected from the nation's counties and cities for the experimental Monthly Labor Survey, conducted between early 1964 and late 1966. A primary sampling unit consists of Standard Metropolitan Statistical Areas (SMSAs), counties (or parishes in some states), parts of counties (parishes), and independent cities. A total of 235 sample areas comprising 485 counties and independent cities were chosen to represent every state and the District of Columbia. 

From the sample areas, 235 strata were created of one or more PSUs that were relatively homogeneous according to socioeconomic characteristics. Within each of the strata, a single PSU was selected to represent the stratum. Finally, within each PSU, a probability sample of housing units was selected to represent the civilian noninstitutionalized population. Because the addresses for the sample frame came from the 1960 Census, respondents are covered by Title 13 confidentiality restrictions. Variables linked to geographic residence, including county and state, are available for use at Census Data Centers.

Screening process

The initial sample of about 42,000 housing units for all four NLS Original Cohorts was selected and screening interviews took place in March and April 1966. Of this number, about 7,500 units were found to be either vacant, occupied by persons whose usual residence was elsewhere, changed from residential use, or demolished. On the other hand, about 900 additional units were found created within existing living space or changed from what had been nonresidential space. A total of 35,360 housing units were available for interview, from which usable information was collected for 34,662 households, for a completion rate of 98.0 percent.

The original plan called for using the initial screening to select all four Original Cohorts. However, after the sample members for the Older Men were chosen, the sample was rescreened in September 1966 before the initial interview of the Young Men. This decision was made because a seven-month delay between the screening and first interview seemed inordinate due to the mobility of Young Men in their late teens and early twenties. To increase efficiency, it was decided to stratify the sample for the rescreening by the presence or absence of a 14- to 24-year-old male in the household. The probability was high that a household that contained a 14- to 24-year-old in March would also have such a member in September. However, to insure that the sample also represented persons who had moved into sample households in the intervening period, a sample of addresses that previously had no 14- to 24-year-old males was also included in the screening operation. Since a telephone number had been recorded for most households at the time of the initial interview, every attempt was made to complete the short screening interview by telephone. The sample of households obtained through rescreening for young men was subsequently used to obtain the two samples of women ages 30-44, the Mature Women, and ages 14-24, the Young Women (Shea, Roderick, Zeller and Kohen 1971).

Sampling process

The sample was designed to provide approximately 5,000 respondents--about 1,500 blacks and 3,500 non-blacks--for each of the men's cohorts. The men were sampled differentially within four strata: whites in predominantly white enumeration districts (EDs), blacks in predominantly black EDs, whites in predominantly black Eds, and blacks in predominantly white EDs. The sampling rate of households in predominantly black EDs was between three and four times that for households in predominantly white EDs in order to meet the survey requirement of providing separate reliable statistics for black respondents; the sample design called for oversampling of blacks at twice the expected rate in the total population. An enumeration district is a geographical area considered to be an appropriate size for an interviewer to complete all the necessary interviews within a prescribed time frame.

Following the initial household interview and screening operation, 5,518 men ages 45-59 as of March 31, 1966, were designated to be interviewed. After rescreening, 5,713 young men ages 14-24 as of March 31, 1966 were designated for interview. Initial interviews with both of the men's cohorts occurred in 1966. Among the individuals designated for interview, 5,020 or 91.0% of the Older Men and 5,225 or 91.5% of the Young Men were interviewed in 1966.

• Older Men cohort
• Young Men cohort

Older Men cohort

Official title

National Longitudinal Survey of Older Men, part of the Original Cohorts from the National Longitudinal Surveys (NLS) program.

Status of survey

Not active. The most recent interviews of the Older Men respondents took place in 1990.

Age of cohort

Born between 1906 and 1921. At the time of first interview (1966), respondents' ages ranged from 45 to 59. The respondents were 69 to 83 at the time of their last interviews in 1990.

Number of respondents in the survey

5,020 individuals were initially interviewed in round 1. For the last fielding period in 1990, a total of 2,092 men were interviewed, 41.7% of the original sample. (The 1990 survey also collected information about deceased respondents from 1,341 widows and 865 other family members, so information is available for 85.6% of the original sample members.)

Gender

All men (although the widows of the Older Men were interviewed in the final fielding period). The NLS Original Cohorts project also interviewed two women's cohorts, the Young Women and the Mature Women.

Race/ethnicity (in initial survey)

• White: 3,518 (70%)
• Black: 1,420 (28.3%)
• Other: 82 (1.6%)

Number of survey rounds available to the public

13 rounds. Older Men respondents were surveyed annually between 1966-1969. After that, they were interviewed three years out of every five until 1983. In 1990, a final interview was conducted with both living Older Men respondents and widows or other family members of deceased respondents. Public data are available for no charge at www.nlsinfo.org/investigator.

Types of information gathered in the survey

• Work Experience, including Retirement
• Education
• Household Composition
• Family Background
• Marital Status and Marital Transitions
• Income and Assets
• Health
• Attitudes

Funding sources for the Older Men

The Older Men interviews were originally sponsored by the Office of Manpower, Automation, and Training (now the Employment and Training Administration), part of the U.S. Department of Labor. The Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) currently oversees the NLS program. The National Institute on Aging sponsored the 1990 interview.

Young Men cohort

Official title

National Longitudinal Survey of Young Men, part of the Original Cohorts from the National Longitudinal Surveys (NLS) program.

Status of survey

Not active. The most recent interviews of the Young Men respondents took place in 1981.

Age of cohort

Born between 1941 and 1952. At the time of first interview (1966), respondents' ages ranged from 14 to 24. The respondents were 29 to 39 at the time of their last interviews in 1981.

Number of respondents in the survey

5,225 individuals were initially interviewed in round 1. For the last fielding period in 1981, a total of 3,398 were interviewed, 65% of the original sample.

Gender

All men. The NLS Original Cohorts project also interviewed the Young Women cohort that was the same 14-24 age range, as well as the older Mature Women cohort.

Race/ethnicity (in initial survey)

• White: 3,734 (71.5%)
• Black: 1,438 (27.5%)
• Other: 53 (1.0%)

Number of survey rounds available to the public

12 rounds. Young Men respondents were surveyed annually between 1966-1971. After that, they were interviewed three years out of every five through the final 1981 survey year. Public data are available for no charge at www.nlsinfo.org/investigator.

Types of information gathered in the survey

• Work Experience, including Retirement
• Education
• Household Composition
• Family Background
• Marital Status and Marital Transitions
• Income and Assets
• Health
• Attitudes

Funding sources for the Young Men

The Young Men interviews were originally sponsored by the Office of Manpower, Automation, and Training (now the Employment and Training Administration), part of the U.S. Department of Labor. The Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) currently oversees the NLS program.