2 ms·

Given the context the the article provides, and that the raw table does not, I am inclined to believe the pew research article, and would suggest the linked tab

by dv_dt 6y ago

Given the context the the article provides, and that the raw table does not, I am inclined to believe the pew research article, and would suggest the linked table needs to also have some methodology and definition of what it thinks it is and is not capturing. The pew article also looks at statistics like "In 2019, 20% of households are shared households, up from 17% in 2007." The weakness in the pew article is it's forecasting growth in household size from one year of its model, obviously we need to wait more time to see if it's model is correct.

brianchu 6y ago
I have the opposite assumption: the raw data is usually more reliable than an editorial. And I confirmed it: the raw table is more reliable since it is the same survey across different years. The article is inconsistently comparing numbers from 2 different surveys. The 2018 figure (2.63) is from the "American Community Survey" and the 2010 figure (2.58) is from "Census SF1 data". But the 2010 "American Community Survey" says the average houshold size is 2.63 (https://data.census.gov/cedsci/table?q=b25010&tid=ACSDT1Y2010.B25010&hidePreview=false https://data.census.gov/cedsci/table?q=b25010&tid=ACSDT1Y201...), so for this survey the trend is flat.
- dv_dt 6y ago
  The pew article is more comprehensive than those two surveys. They also point out supporting data from https://www.census.gov/library/publications/2019/demo/p60-266.html https://www.census.gov/library/publications/2019/demo/p60-26... From which they conclude "In 2019, 20% of households are shared households, up from 17% in 2007." https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2018/04/05/a-record-64-million-americans-live-in-multigenerational-households/ https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2018/04/05/a-record-64... from which they mention "By 2016, 20% of Americans lived in a multigenerational household, up from 12% in 1980" One survey is one survey, multiple data points from a set of different perspectives is more comprehensive an analysis and less susceptible to single measurement methodology errors. The main thing I take from this is that movement of a household income number is fairy meaningless unless you also know what household size number is measured or calculated with the income number.

by dv_dt 6y ago

brianchu 6y ago

I have the opposite assumption: the raw data is usually more reliable than an editorial. And I confirmed it: the raw table is more reliable since it is the same survey across different years. The article is inconsistently comparing numbers from 2 different surveys. The 2018 figure (2.63) is from the "American Community Survey" and the 2010 figure (2.58) is from "Census SF1 data". But the 2010 "American Community Survey" says the average houshold size is 2.63 (https://data.census.gov/cedsci/table?q=b25010&tid=ACSDT1Y2010.B25010&hidePreview=false https://data.census.gov/cedsci/table?q=b25010&tid=ACSDT1Y201...), so for this survey the trend is flat.

dv_dt 6y ago
The pew article is more comprehensive than those two surveys. They also point out supporting data from https://www.census.gov/library/publications/2019/demo/p60-266.html https://www.census.gov/library/publications/2019/demo/p60-26... From which they conclude "In 2019, 20% of households are shared households, up from 17% in 2007." https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2018/04/05/a-record-64-million-americans-live-in-multigenerational-households/ https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2018/04/05/a-record-64... from which they mention "By 2016, 20% of Americans lived in a multigenerational household, up from 12% in 1980" One survey is one survey, multiple data points from a set of different perspectives is more comprehensive an analysis and less susceptible to single measurement methodology errors. The main thing I take from this is that movement of a household income number is fairy meaningless unless you also know what household size number is measured or calculated with the income number.