There is a gender gap in the global literacy rate. Although literacy rates have generally increased worldwide for both men and women, men are on average more literate than women. As of 2023, about 90.6 percent of men and a little less than 84.1 percent of women worldwide were literate. Adult literacy rate is defined as the percentage of people aged 15 years and above who can both read and write with understanding a short, simple statement about their everyday life. Youth literacy rate Not only does the literacy gender gap concern adults, it also exists among the world’s younger generations aged 15 to 24. Despite an overall increase in literacy, young men are still more literate than young women. In fact, the global youth literacy rate as gender parity index was 0.98 as of 2023, indicating that young women are not yet as literate as young men. Gender pay gap Gender gaps occur in many different spheres of global society. One such issue concerns salary gender gaps in professional life. Regarding the controlled gender pay gap, which measures the median salary for men and women with the same job and qualifications, women still earned less than men as of 2024. The difference was even bigger when measuring the median salary for all men and women. However, not everyone worries about gender pay gaps. According to a survey from 2021, 54 percent of the female respondents deemed the gender pay gap a real problem, compared to 45 percent of the male respondents.

United States CES: CM: AAE: Reading data was reported at 66.000 USD in 2016. This records a decrease from the previous number of 69.000 USD for 2015. United States CES: CM: AAE: Reading data is updated yearly, averaging 83.000 USD from Dec 1984 (Median) to 2016, with 33 observations. The data reached an all-time high of 112.000 USD in 1992 and a record low of 54.000 USD in 2014. United States CES: CM: AAE: Reading data remains active status in CEIC and is reported by Bureau of Labor Statistics. The data is categorized under Global Database’s USA – Table US.H042: Consumer Expenditure Survey: By Occupation.

Abstract

PIRLS provides internationally comparative data on how well children read by assessing students’ reading achievement at the end of grade four. PIRLS 2016 is the fourth cycle of the study and collects considerable background information on how education systems provide educational opportunities to their students, as well as the factors that influence how students use this opportunity. In 2016 PIRLS was extended to include ePIRLS – an innovative assessment of online reading.

The results of PIRLS 2016 demonstrate a number of positive developments in reading literacy worldwide. For the first time in the history of the study, as many as 96 percent of fourth graders from over 60 education systems achieved above the PIRLS low international benchmark.

Geographic coverage

Nationally representative samples of approximately 4,000 students from 150 to 200 schools participated in PIRLS 2016. About 319,000 students, 310,000 parents, 16,000 teachers, and 12,000 schools participated in total.

Analysis unit

The unit of analysis describes:

• Schools

• Students

• Parents

• Teachers

Universe

All students enrolled in the grade that represents four years of schooling counting from the first year of ISCED Level 1, providing the mean age at the time of testing is at least 9.5 years.

All students enrolled in the target grade, regardless of their age, belong to the international target population and should be eligible to participate in PIRLS. Because students are sampled in two stages, first by randomly selecting a school and then randomly selecting a class from within the school, it is necessary to identify all schools in which eligible students are enrolled. Essentially, eligible schools for PIRLS are those that have any students enrolled in the target grade, regardless of type of school.

Kind of data

Sample survey data [ssd]

Sampling procedure

PIRLS is designed to provide valid and reliable measurement of trends in student achievement in countries around the world, while keeping to a minimum the burden on schools, teachers, and students. The PIRLS program employs rigorous school and classroom sampling techniques so that achievement in the student population as a whole may be estimated accurately by assessing just a sample of students from a sample of schools. PIRLS assesses reading achievement at fourth grade. The PIRLS 2016 cycle also included PIRLS Literacy-a new, less difficult reading literacy assessment, and ePIRLS-an extension of PIRLS with a focus on online informational reading.

PIRLS employs a two-stage random sample design, with a sample of schools drawn as a first stage and one or more intact classes of students selected from each of the sampled schools as a second stage. Intact classes of students are sampled rather than individuals from across the grade level or of a certain age because PIRLS pays particular attention to students’ curricular and instructional experiences, and these typically are organized on a classroom basis. Sampling intact classes also has the operational advantage of less disruption to the school’s day-to-day business than individual student sampling.

SAMPLE SIZE

For most countries, the PIRLS precision requirements are met with a school sample of 150 schools and a student sample of 4,000 students for each target grade. Depending on the average class size in the country, one class from each sampled school may be sufficient to achieve the desired student sample size. For example, if the average class size in a country were 27 students, a single class from each of 150 schools would provide a sample of 4,050 students (assuming full participation by schools and students). Some countries choose to sample more than one class per school, either to increase the size of the student sample or to provide a better estimate of school level effects.

For countries choosing to participate in both PIRLS and PIRLS Literacy, the required student sample size is doubled-i.e., around 8,000 sampled students. Countries could choose to select more schools or more classes within sampled schools to achieve the required sample size. Because ePIRLS is designed to be administered to students also taking PIRLS, the PIRLS sample size requirement remains the same for countries choosing also to participate in ePIRLS.

PIRLS STRATIFIED TWO-STAGE CLUSTER SAMPLE DESIGN

The basic international sample design for PIRLS is a stratified two-stage cluster sample design, as follows:

• First Sampling Stage. For the first sampling stage, schools are sampled with probabilities proportional to their size (PPS) from the list of all schools in the population that contain eligible students. The schools in this list (or sampling frame) may be stratified (sorted) according to important demographic variables. Schools for the field test and data collection are sampled simultaneously using a systematic random sampling approach. Two replacement schools are also pre-assigned to each sampled school during the sample selection process, and these replacement schools are held in reserve in case the originally sampled school refuses to participate. Replacement schools are used solely to compensate for sample size losses in the event that the originally sampled school does not participate. School sampling is conducted for each country by Statistics Canada with assistance from IEA Hamburg, using the sampling frame provided by the country’s National Research Coordinator.

• Second Sampling Stage. The second sampling stage consists of the selection of one (or more) intact class from the target grade of each participating school. Class sampling in each country is conducted by the National Research Coordinator using the Within-School Sampling Software (WinW3S) developed by IEA Hamburg and Statistics Canada. Having secured a sampled school’s agreement to participate in the assessment, the National Research Coordinator requests information about the number of classes and teachers in the school and enters it in the WinW3S database.

Classes smaller than a specified minimum size are grouped into pseudo-classes prior to sampling. The software selects classes with equal probabilities within schools. All students in each sampled class participate in the assessment. Sampled classes that refuse to participate may not be replaced.

For countries participating in both PIRLS and PIRLS Literacy, students within a sampled class are randomly assigned either a PIRLS or PIRLS Literacy booklet through a booklet rotation system. This is done to ensure that PIRLS and PIRLS Literacy are administered to probabilistically equivalent samples. In countries taking part in ePIRLS, all students assessed in PIRLS are expected to participate in ePIRLS.

STRATIFICATION

Stratification consists of arranging the schools in the target population into groups, or strata, that share common characteristics such as geographic region or school type. Examples of stratification variables used in PIRLS include region of the country (e.g., states or provinces); school type or source of funding (e.g., public or private); language of instruction; level of urbanization (e.g., urban or rural area); socioeconomic indicators; and school performance on national examinations.

In PIRLS, stratification is used to:

• Improve the efficiency of the sample design, thereby making survey estimates more reliable

• Apply different sample designs, such as disproportionate sample allocations, to specific groups of schools (e.g., those in certain states or provinces)

• Ensure proportional representation of specific groups of schools in the sample School stratification can take two forms: explicit and implicit. In explicit stratification, a separate school list or sampling frame is constructed for each stratum and a sample of schools is drawn from that stratum. In PIRLS, the major reason for considering explicit stratification is disproportionate allocation of the school sample across strata. For example, in order to produce equally reliable estimates for each geographic region in a country, explicit stratification by region may be used to ensure the same number of schools in the sample for each region, regardless of the relative population size of the regions.

Implicit stratification consists of sorting the schools by one or more stratification variables within each explicit stratum, or within the entire sampling frame if explicit stratification is not used. The combined use of implicit strata and systematic sampling is a very simple and effective way of ensuring a proportional sample allocation of students across all implicit strata. Implicit stratification also can lead to improved reliability of achievement estimates when the implicit stratification variables are correlated with student achievement.

National Research Coordinators consult with Statistics Canada and IEA Hamburg to identify the stratification variables to be included in their sampling plans. The school sampling frame is sorted by the stratification variables prior to sampling schools so that adjacent schools are as similar as possible. Regardless of any other explicit or implicit variables that may be used, the school size is always included as an implicit stratification variable.

SCHOOL SAMPLING FRAME

One of the National Research Coordinator’s most important sampling tasks is the construction of a school sampling frame for the target population. The sampling frame is a list of all schools in the country that have students enrolled in the target grade and is the list from which the school sample is drawn. A well-constructed sampling frame provides complete coverage of the national target population without being contaminated by incorrect or duplicate entries or entries that refer to elements that are not

Literacy in India has been increasing as more and more people receive a better education, but it is still far from all-encompassing. In 2023, the degree of literacy in India was about 77 percent, with the majority of literate Indians being men. It is estimated that the global literacy rate for people aged 15 and above is about 86 percent. How to read a literacy rateIn order to identify potential for intellectual and educational progress, the literacy rate of a country covers the level of education and skills acquired by a country’s inhabitants. Literacy is an important indicator of a country’s economic progress and the standard of living – it shows how many people have access to education. However, the standards to measure literacy cannot be universally applied. Measures to identify and define illiterate and literate inhabitants vary from country to country: In some, illiteracy is equated with no schooling at all, for example. Writings on the wallGlobally speaking, more men are able to read and write than women, and this disparity is also reflected in the literacy rate in India – with scarcity of schools and education in rural areas being one factor, and poverty another. Especially in rural areas, women and girls are often not given proper access to formal education, and even if they are, many drop out. Today, India is already being surpassed in this area by other emerging economies, like Brazil, China, and even by most other countries in the Asia-Pacific region. To catch up, India now has to offer more educational programs to its rural population, not only on how to read and write, but also on traditional gender roles and rights.

Abstract

The PIRLS 2011 aimed to generate a database of student achievement data in addition to information on student, parent, teacher, and school background data for the 57 areas that participated

Geographic coverage

In 2011, nationally representative samples of students in 49 countries participated in PIRLS and prePIRLS. Forty-five countries assessed fourth grade students, and some countries participated in one or more of the other available options initiated in 2011 to permit wider participation at the end of the primary school cycle: four countries assessed their sixth-grade students; and three countries participated in prePIRLS, a less difficult version of PIRLS inaugurated in 2011 to be a stepping stone to PIRLS. In addition, PIRLS 2011 included nine benchmarking participants, mostly regions of countries that also participated in PIRLS, including three Canadian provinces, two Emirates, the Andalusian region of Spain, and the US state of Florida. Malta and South Africa used benchmarking to collect information relevant to their language of instruction policies.

Analysis unit

Units of analysis in the study are schools, students, parents and teachers

Universe

PIRLS is a study of student achievement in reading comprehension in primary school and is targeted at the grade level in which students are at the transition from learning to read to reading to learn, which is the fourth grade in most countries. The formal definition of the PIRLS target population makes use of UNESCO's International Standard Classification of Education (ISCED) in identifying the appropriate target grade:

"…all students enrolled in the grade that represents four years of schooling, counting from the first year of ISCED Level 1, providing the mean age at the time of testing is at least 9.5 years. For most countries, the target grade should be the fourth grade, or its national equivalent."

As a new initiative in 2011, prePIRLS was developed as a less difficult version of PIRLS to provide more assessment options for developing countries where students may not be prepared for the demands of PIRLS. prePIRLS is based on the same view of reading comprehension as PIRLS but is designed to assess basic reading skills that are a prerequisite for success on PIRLS. Botswana, Colombia, and South Africa administered prePIRLS to their fourth grade students. Colombia also administered PIRLS to the same fourth grade students, providing the basis for a link between the PIRLS and prePIRLS scales.

Kind of data

Sample survey data [ssd]

Sampling procedure

The basic sample design used in PIRLS 2011 was a two-stage stratified cluster design, with the first stage consisting of a sample of schools, and the second stage consisting of a sample of intact classrooms from the target grade in the sampled schools. Intact classes of students are sampled rather than individuals from across the grade level or of a certain age because PIRLS pays particular attention to students’ curricular and instructional experiences.

Each country participating in PIRLS 2011 needed a plan for defining its national target population and applying the TIMSS and PIRLS sampling methods to achieve a nationally representative sample of schools and students. The development and implementation of the national sampling plan is a collaborative exercise involving the country’s National Research Coordinator (NRC) and the PIRLS sampling experts.

Mode of data collection

Face-to-face [f2f]

Research instrument

• PIRLS Background Questionnaires By gathering information about children’s experiences together with reading achievement on the PIRLS test, it is possible to identify the factors or combinations of factors that relate to high reading literacy. An important part of the PIRLS design is a set of questionnaires targeting factors related to reading literacy. PIRLS administered four questionnaires: to the tested students, to their parents, to their reading teachers, and to their school principals.

• Student Questionnaire Each student taking the PIRLS reading assessment completes the student questionnaire. The questionnaire asks about aspects of students’ home and school experiences – including instructional experiences and reading for homework, selfperceptions and attitudes towards reading, out-of-school reading habits, computer use, home literacy resources, and basic demographic information.

• Learning to Read (Home) Survey The learning to read survey is completed by the parents or primary caregivers of each student taking the PIRLS reading assessment. It addresses child-parent literacy interactions, home literacy resources, parents’ reading habits and attitudes, homeschool connections, and basic demographic and socioeconomic indicators.

• Teacher Questionnaire The reading teacher of each fourth-grade class sampled for PIRLS completes a questionnaire designed to gather information about classroom contexts for developing reading literacy. This questionnaire asks teachers about characteristics of the class tested (such as size, reading levels of the students, and the language abilities of the students). It also asks about instructional time, materials and activities for teaching reading and promoting the development of their students’ reading literacy, and the grouping of students for reading instruction. Questions about classroom resources, assessment practices, and home-school connections also are included. The questionnaire also asks teachers for their views on opportunities for professional development and collaboration with other teachers, and for information about their education and training.

• School Questionnaire The principal of each school sampled for PIRLS responds to the school questionnaire. It asks school principals about enrollment and school characteristics (such as where the school is located, resources available in the surrounding area, and indicators of the socioeconomic background of the student body), characteristics of reading education in the school, instructional time, school resources (such as the availability of instructional materials and staff), home-school connections, and the school climate.

Response rate

For a full table of school participation rates, which vary by country, please see Appendix C on page 262 of the PIRLS 2011 Report.

Abstract

The STEP (Skills Toward Employment and Productivity) Measurement program is the first ever initiative to generate internationally comparable data on skills available in developing countries. The program implements standardized surveys to gather information on the supply and distribution of skills and the demand for skills in labor market of low-income countries.

The uniquely-designed Household Survey includes modules that measure the cognitive skills (reading, writing and numeracy), socio-emotional skills (personality, behavior and preferences) and job-specific skills (subset of transversal skills with direct job relevance) of a representative sample of adults aged 15 to 64 living in urban areas, whether they work or not. The cognitive skills module also incorporates a direct assessment of reading literacy based on the Survey of Adults Skills instruments. Modules also gather information about family, health and language.

Geographic coverage

The STEP target population is the urban population aged 15 to 64 (inclusive). Areas are classified as urban based on Armenia's official definition.

Analysis unit

The units of analysis are the individual respondents and households. A household roster is undertaken at the start of the survey and the individual respondent is randomly selected among all household members aged 15 to 64 included. The random selection process was designed by the STEP team and compliance with the procedure is carefully monitored during fieldwork.

Universe

The target population for the Armenia STEP survey comprises all non-institutionalized persons 15 to 64 years of age (inclusive) living in private dwellings in urban areas of the country at the time of data collection. This includes all residents except foreign diplomats and non-nationals working for international organizations.

The following are excluded from the sample: - Residents of institutions (prisons, hospitals, etc) - Residents of senior homes and hospices - Residents of other group dwellings such as college dormitories, halfway homes, workers' quarters, etc - Persons living outside the country at the time of data collection

In some countries, extremely remote villages or conflict-ridden regions could not be surveyed.

Kind of data

Sample survey data [ssd]

Sampling procedure

The Armenia sample design is a 3 stage sample design. There was no explicit stratification but the sample is implicitly stratified by Region. Implicit stratification was achieved by sorting the PSUs by Region and selecting a systematic sample of PSUs.

First Stage Sample The primary sample unit (PSU) is a cluster of households that are users of Electricity Networks of Armenia (ENA). The first stage units were selected by the World Bank Survey Methodologist. Each PSU is uniquely defined by the sample frame variable 'Cluster_ID'. The sampling objective was to conduct interviews in 200 PSUs. In addition, 25 extra PSUs were selected for use in case it was impossible to conduct any interviews in one or more initially selected PSUs. (N.B. None of the 25 extra PSUs were required to be activated.)

Second Stage Sample The second stage sample unit (SSU) is a household. The sampling objective was to obtain interviews at 15 households within each selected PSU. The households were selected in each PSU using a systematic random method. There was an expectation of high non-response for the Armenia STEP. Therefore, it was decided to select 60 households in each PSU; in each PSU, 2 replicates of 30 households each were selected. The sample of 60 households was divided randomly into an initial sample of 15 households and a reserve sample of 45 households which was activated as necessary in the order in which the sample was selected. During the data collection operation, one PSU (i.e., PSU #183) required additional sample due to exceptionally high non-response. A 3rd replicate of 30 households was selected to accommodate this requirement. Thus, a sample of 90 households was selected in this PSU.

Third Stage Sample The third stage sample unit was an individual aged 15-64 (inclusive). The sampling objective was to select one individual with equal probability from each selected household.

Mode of data collection

Face-to-face [f2f]

Research instrument

The STEP survey instruments include: - The background questionnaire developed by the WB STEP team - Reading Literacy Assessment developed by Educational Testing Services (ETS).

All countries adapted and translated both instruments following the STEP Technical Standards: 2 independent translators adapted and translated the Background Questionnaire and Reading Literacy Assessment, while reconciliation was carried out by a third translator.

The WB STEP team and ETS collaborated closely with the Armenian survey firm during the process and reviewed the adaptation and translation to Armenian (using a back translation).

The survey instruments were both piloted as part of the survey pretest.

The adapted Background Questionnaires are provided in English as external resources. The Reading Literacy Assessment is protected by copyright and will not be published.

Cleaning operations

STEP Data Management Process:

1) Raw data is sent by the survey firm 2) The WB STEP team runs data checks on the Background Questionnaire data. - ETS runs data checks on the Reading Literacy Assessment data. - Comments and questions are sent back to the survey firm. 3) The survey firm reviews comments and questions. When a data entry error is identified, the survey firm corrects the data. 4) The WB STEP team and ETS check the data files are clean. This might require additional iterations with the survey firm. 5) Once the data has been checked and cleaned, the WB STEP team computes the weights. Weights are computed by the STEP team to ensure consistency across sampling methodologies. 6) ETS scales the Reading Literacy Assessment data. 7) The WB STEP team merges the Background Questionnaire data with the Reading Literacy Assessment data and computes derived variables.

Detailed information data processing in STEP surveys is provided in the 'Guidelines for STEP Data Entry Programs' document provided as an external resource. The template do-file used by the STEP team to check the raw background questionnaire data is provided as an external resource.

Response rate

An overall response rate of 50.3% was achieved in the Armenia STEP Survey. Table 18 of the STEP Survey Weighting Procedures Summary provides the detailed percentage distribution by final status code.

Sampling error estimates

A weighting documentation was prepared for each participating country and provides some information on sampling errors. Please refer to the STEP Survey Weighting Procedures Summary provided as an external resource.

United States CES: AAE: Reading data was reported at 110.000 USD in 2017. This records a decrease from the previous number of 118.000 USD for 2016. United States CES: AAE: Reading data is updated yearly, averaging 139.500 USD from Dec 1984 (Median) to 2017, with 34 observations. The data reached an all-time high of 166.000 USD in 1993 and a record low of 100.000 USD in 2010. United States CES: AAE: Reading data remains active status in CEIC and is reported by Bureau of Labor Statistics. The data is categorized under Global Database’s USA – Table US.H042: Consumer Expenditure Survey.

United States CES: $50 to 69.999 Th: AAE: Reading data was reported at 100.000 USD in 2016. This records a decrease from the previous number of 101.000 USD for 2015. United States CES: $50 to 69.999 Th: AAE: Reading data is updated yearly, averaging 137.000 USD from Dec 1992 (Median) to 2016, with 25 observations. The data reached an all-time high of 262.000 USD in 1992 and a record low of 92.000 USD in 2014. United States CES: $50 to 69.999 Th: AAE: Reading data remains active status in CEIC and is reported by Bureau of Labor Statistics. The data is categorized under Global Database’s USA – Table US.H041: Consumer Expenditure Survey: By Income Level.

United States CES: $70 to 79.999 Th: AAE: Reading data was reported at 131.000 USD in 2015. This records an increase from the previous number of 111.000 USD for 2014. United States CES: $70 to 79.999 Th: AAE: Reading data is updated yearly, averaging 131.000 USD from Dec 2003 (Median) to 2015, with 13 observations. The data reached an all-time high of 180.000 USD in 2003 and a record low of 107.000 USD in 2010. United States CES: $70 to 79.999 Th: AAE: Reading data remains active status in CEIC and is reported by Bureau of Labor Statistics. The data is categorized under Global Database’s USA – Table US.H041: Consumer Expenditure Survey: By Income Level.

The literacy rate measures the percentage of people aged 15 and above who are able to read and write. In 2019, Pakistan's total literacy rate was around 58 percent, with less than 46.49 percent of women being literate and more than 69.29 percent of men.

Women in Pakistan need education

In Pakistan, women’s education is in dire need of improvement, and so far, the number of illiterate women has not decreased - on the contrary, it has been going up for years. Although education for both genders is not prohibited in Pakistan, women are generally not as well educated as men. But it doesn’t stop there: Pakistan is one of the countries deemed worst for women in general when it comes to quality of life and safety.

Economy and education

Pakistan is a predominantly Muslim country with a low urbanization rate, meaning the majority of its population live in rural areas, where education is traditionally harder to come by than in cities. Pakistan is still a developing country, and typically, most of the inhabitants work in the primary sector, since Pakistan is rich in arable land. However, the tertiary sector generates the lion’s share of GDP. If the country wants to make the leap to being a developed nation, education and equality need to be higher on the list.

The country reported to have read books most regularly in 2017 was China, where a survey among internet users across ** countries revealed that ** percent of respondents read a book every day or most days, and ** percent read at least once a week. Conversely, just ** percent of South Korean respondents were reading books on a daily basis. Other countries with a low share of those aged 15 years or above reading daily included Belgium, Japan, the Netherlands and Mexico.

Age and reading habits

It is surprising how much age can affect reading habits, even on a global level. In Germany, more 12 to 13-year-olds read daily or several times per week than their slightly older peers. Meanwhile, in the United Kingdom, a survey showed that more teenagers and Millennials said that they would be happy without books than adults aged 34 or older. More than double the percentage of adults in Colombia aged 65 or above read a book every day than those aged between 12 and 25 years.

The number of books read over the past year in the United States was overall higher among adults aged 18 to 34 than older generations, and in Canada the share of children reading books for fun halved with the approach of teenage years. Whilst ** percent of children aged between six and eight years old were reading for pleasure multiple times per week, among ** to 17-year-olds this figure amounted to just ** percent. Meanwhile, the opposite was true of going online for fun, which increased sharply with age and replaced the activity of reading.

United States Off Within 2 Weeks: All Residential: Reading, PA data was reported at 69.182 % in Jul 2020. This records a decrease from the previous number of 70.608 % for Jun 2020. United States Off Within 2 Weeks: All Residential: Reading, PA data is updated monthly, averaging 34.934 % from Feb 2012 (Median) to Jul 2020, with 102 observations. The data reached an all-time high of 70.608 % in Jun 2020 and a record low of 20.290 % in Dec 2013. United States Off Within 2 Weeks: All Residential: Reading, PA data remains active status in CEIC and is reported by Redfin. The data is categorized under Global Database’s United States – Table US.EB010: Off Market Within 2 Weeks: by Metropolitan Areas.

United States CES: $150 Th & More: AAE: Reading data was reported at 262.000 USD in 2015. This records an increase from the previous number of 249.000 USD for 2014. United States CES: $150 Th & More: AAE: Reading data is updated yearly, averaging 289.000 USD from Dec 2003 (Median) to 2015, with 13 observations. The data reached an all-time high of 372.000 USD in 2003 and a record low of 249.000 USD in 2014. United States CES: $150 Th & More: AAE: Reading data remains active status in CEIC and is reported by Bureau of Labor Statistics. The data is categorized under Global Database’s USA – Table US.H041: Consumer Expenditure Survey: By Income Level.

United States CES: Oth: AAE: Reading data was reported at 141.000 USD in 2017. This records a decrease from the previous number of 170.000 USD for 2016. United States CES: Oth: AAE: Reading data is updated yearly, averaging 142.500 USD from Dec 1984 (Median) to 2017, with 34 observations. The data reached an all-time high of 171.000 USD in 2015 and a record low of 109.000 USD in 1984. United States CES: Oth: AAE: Reading data remains active status in CEIC and is reported by Bureau of Labor Statistics. The data is categorized under Global Database’s USA – Table US.H045: Consumer Expenditure Survey: By Occupation.

United States CES: 75Yrs & Abv: AAE: Reading data was reported at 175.000 USD in 2016. This records a decrease from the previous number of 199.000 USD for 2015. United States CES: 75Yrs & Abv: AAE: Reading data is updated yearly, averaging 133.000 USD from Dec 1984 (Median) to 2016, with 33 observations. The data reached an all-time high of 199.000 USD in 2015 and a record low of 84.000 USD in 1984. United States CES: 75Yrs & Abv: AAE: Reading data remains active status in CEIC and is reported by Bureau of Labor Statistics. The data is categorized under Global Database’s USA – Table US.H040: Consumer Expenditure Survey: By Age Group.

United States CES: 45 to 54Yrs: AAE: Reading data was reported at 136.000 USD in 2016. This records an increase from the previous number of 106.000 USD for 2015. United States CES: 45 to 54Yrs: AAE: Reading data is updated yearly, averaging 171.000 USD from Dec 1984 (Median) to 2016, with 33 observations. The data reached an all-time high of 212.000 USD in 1993 and a record low of 88.000 USD in 2013. United States CES: 45 to 54Yrs: AAE: Reading data remains active status in CEIC and is reported by Bureau of Labor Statistics. The data is categorized under Global Database’s USA – Table US.H040: Consumer Expenditure Survey: By Age Group.

United States CES: $80 to 99.999 Th: AAE: Reading data was reported at 136.000 USD in 2015. This records an increase from the previous number of 132.000 USD for 2014. United States CES: $80 to 99.999 Th: AAE: Reading data is updated yearly, averaging 148.000 USD from Dec 2003 (Median) to 2015, with 13 observations. The data reached an all-time high of 202.000 USD in 2003 and a record low of 121.000 USD in 2010. United States CES: $80 to 99.999 Th: AAE: Reading data remains active status in CEIC and is reported by Bureau of Labor Statistics. The data is categorized under Global Database’s USA – Table US.H041: Consumer Expenditure Survey: By Income Level.

United States CES: $5 to 9.999 Th: AAE: Reading data was reported at 22.000 USD in 2015. This records a decrease from the previous number of 32.000 USD for 2014. United States CES: $5 to 9.999 Th: AAE: Reading data is updated yearly, averaging 63.500 USD from Dec 1984 (Median) to 2015, with 32 observations. The data reached an all-time high of 77.000 USD in 1988 and a record low of 22.000 USD in 2015. United States CES: $5 to 9.999 Th: AAE: Reading data remains active status in CEIC and is reported by Bureau of Labor Statistics. The data is categorized under Global Database’s USA – Table US.H041: Consumer Expenditure Survey: By Income Level.

United States CES: Northeast: AAE: Reading data was reported at 123.000 USD in 2017. This records an increase from the previous number of 95.000 USD for 2016. United States CES: Northeast: AAE: Reading data is updated yearly, averaging 165.000 USD from Dec 1984 (Median) to 2017, with 34 observations. The data reached an all-time high of 201.000 USD in 1998 and a record low of 95.000 USD in 2016. United States CES: Northeast: AAE: Reading data remains active status in CEIC and is reported by Bureau of Labor Statistics. The data is categorized under Global Database’s USA – Table US.H046: Consumer Expenditure Survey: By Region.

United States CES: Midwest: AAE: Reading data was reported at 121.000 USD in 2016. This records an increase from the previous number of 117.000 USD for 2015. United States CES: Midwest: AAE: Reading data is updated yearly, averaging 147.000 USD from Dec 1984 (Median) to 2016, with 33 observations. The data reached an all-time high of 171.000 USD in 1992 and a record low of 101.000 USD in 2010. United States CES: Midwest: AAE: Reading data remains active status in CEIC and is reported by Bureau of Labor Statistics. The data is categorized under Global Database’s USA – Table US.H043: Consumer Expenditure Survey: By Region.