U.S. Department of Labor

Elaine L. Chao, Secretary

Bureau of Labor Statistics

Kathleen P. Utgoff, Commissioner

2003

NLS Handbook, 2003

This handbook was prepared under contracts #J-9-J-9-0007 and #J-9-J-9-0029 with the Bureau of Labor Statistics, U.S.

Department of Labor.

The NLS Handbook is intended to introduce and describe

the National Longitudinal Surveys (NLS) to those unfamiliar

with them. The handbook contains general information about

the surveys, describes the contents of each round of the

surveys, and explains how to acquire and use the data. The

Handbook includes tables that provide descriptions of the

variables and lists the years for which those variables are

available.

The National Longitudinal Surveys are sponsored by the

Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) of the U.S. Department of

Labor. The NLS program at BLS includes a staff of

economists who work with NLS data and assist in developing NLS questionnaires and products.

Preface

iii
The Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) thanks numerous Federal agencies that have supported the National Longitudinal

Surveys (NLS) throughout the years, particularly the Employment and Training Administration of the U.S. Department of Labor, which initiated the NLS and sponsored the

surveys from 1965 through 1986. Other supporting agencies

include: The National Institute of Child Health and Human

Development, the National Institute on Aging, the National

Institute on Drug Abuse, the National Institute on Alcohol

Abuse and Alcoholism, the Social Security Administration,

the U.S. Department of Defense, the U.S. Department of Justice, the U.S. Department of Education, and the Women’s

Bureau and the Pension and Welfare Benefits AdministraAcknowledgments

tion of the Department of Labor.

BLS also thanks the NLS contractors for their work in

data collection, production, distribution, user services, and

overall survey management. BLS contracts with the Center

for Human Resource Research (CHRR) at The Ohio State

University, the National Opinion Research Center (NORC) at

the University of Chicago, and the U.S. Census Bureau for

these services.

Finally, BLS thanks the thousands of individuals who

have participated in the NLS throughout the years. The

long-term cooperation of NLS respondents is ultimately the

most important factor in making the NLS such a valuable

data resource.

iv
CHAPTER 1: THE NLS .......................................................................................................................................................... 1

The NLS samples ............................................................................................................................................................. 1

Development of the NLS.................................................................................................................................................. 1

Purposes and content of the surveys .............................................................................................................................. 2

NLS datasets.................................................................................................................................................................... 4

Project administration ...................................................................................................................................................... 4

Current status and directions .......................................................................................................................................... 5

Organization of this Handbook ....................................................................................................................................... 6

References ....................................................................................................................................................................... 6

CHAPTER 2: THE NLSY97 ................................................................................................................................................... 7

Chapter organization........................................................................................................................................................ 7

The NLSY97 samples ....................................................................................................................................................... 7

Multiple-respondent households .................................................................................................................................... 7

The NLSY97 interviews ................................................................................................................................................... 7

Sampling weights............................................................................................................................................................. 9

Survey instruments and special data collections ............................................................................................................. 9

Major data elements ...................................................................................................................................................... 12

Data files and documentation ........................................................................................................................................ 20

Reference ...................................................................................................................................................................... 20

Selected variables by age and instrument: NLSY97 ...................................................................................................... 21

CHAPTER 3: THE NLSY79 ................................................................................................................................................. 33

Chapter organization...................................................................................................................................................... 33

The NLSY79 ................................................................................................................................................................... 33

The NLSY79 samples ..................................................................................................................................................... 33

Multiple-respondent households .................................................................................................................................. 34

The interviews ............................................................................................................................................................... 34

Attrition and sample drops ............................................................................................................................................ 35

Sampling weights........................................................................................................................................................... 35

Major data elements ...................................................................................................................................................... 35

Data files and documentation ........................................................................................................................................ 42

References ..................................................................................................................................................................... 43

Selected variables by survey year: NLSY79.................................................................................................................. 43

CHAPTER 4: CHILDREN OF THE NLSY79 ....................................................................................................................... 52

Chapter organization...................................................................................................................................................... 52

The NLSY79 child sample .............................................................................................................................................. 52

Sampling weights........................................................................................................................................................... 53

The interviews ............................................................................................................................................................... 53

Major data elements ...................................................................................................................................................... 55

Data files and documentation ........................................................................................................................................ 61

Reference ...................................................................................................................................................................... 61

Selected variables by survey year: Children of the NLSY79 ......................................................................................... 61

CHAPTER 5: THE NLS ORIGINAL COHORTS: MATURE AND YOUNG WOMEN ...................................................... 75

Chapter organization...................................................................................................................................................... 75

The samples ................................................................................................................................................................... 75

Multiple-respondent households .................................................................................................................................. 75

Interviews and fielding periods ..................................................................................................................................... 76

Attrition ......................................................................................................................................................................... 77

Contents

v
Sampling weights........................................................................................................................................................... 78

Major data elements ...................................................................................................................................................... 78

Data files and documentation ........................................................................................................................................ 87

References ..................................................................................................................................................................... 87

Selected variables by cohort and year: Mature and Young Women ............................................................................. 87

CHAPTER 6: THE NLS ORIGINAL COHORTS: OLDER AND YOUNG MEN ............................................................... 103

Chapter organization.................................................................................................................................................... 103

The samples ................................................................................................................................................................. 103

Multiple-respondent households ................................................................................................................................ 103

Interviews and fielding periods ................................................................................................................................... 104

Attrition ....................................................................................................................................................................... 105

Sampling weights......................................................................................................................................................... 106

Major data elements .................................................................................................................................................... 106

Data files and documentation ...................................................................................................................................... 111

References ................................................................................................................................................................... 112

Selected variables by cohort and year: Older and Young men .................................................................................... 112

CHAPTER 7: A SAMPLER OF NLS RESEARCH............................................................................................................. 123

CHAPTER 8: NLS DATA SETS AND DOCUMENTATION ............................................................................................ 134

NLS User Services Office ............................................................................................................................................. 134

Current data releases ................................................................................................................................................... 134

NLS Software ............................................................................................................................................................... 136

Codebook documentation ........................................................................................................................................... 136

NLS user’s guides and supplemental documentation .................................................................................................. 138

NLSY97 documentation ........................................................................................................................................ 139

NLSY79 documentation ........................................................................................................................................ 140

NLSY79 child and young adult documentation .................................................................................................... 143

NLS original cohort documentation...................................................................................................................... 143

CHAPTER 9: CONFIDENTIALITY AND CONSENT....................................................................................................... 148

OMB procedures ....................................................................................................................................................... 148

Institutional review boards .......................................................................................................................................... 149

Federal laws ................................................................................................................................................................. 151

NLSY79 and NLSY97 cohorts ...................................................................................................................................... 151

NLSW cohort ............................................................................................................................................................... 155

Data handling in all NLS cohorts ................................................................................................................................. 157

CHAPTER 10: FOR MORE INFORMATION ................................................................................................................... 158

NLS News................................................................................................................................................................... 158

Technical manuals ....................................................................................................................................................... 158

Summary reports .......................................................................................................................................................... 160

NLS bibliography database ......................................................................................................................................... 161

NLSY79 child biographies ........................................................................................................................................... 161

Error updates ............................................................................................................................................................... 161

Research analyses ....................................................................................................................................................... 161

Contents—continued

vi
Table 1.1. The NLS: Survey groups, sample sizes, interview years, and survey status ...................................................... 1

Table 2.1. NLSY97 sample sizes by sex, race and ethnicity, and subsample ........................................................................ 8

Table 2.2. Round 1 distribution of NLSY97 respondents by household type ...................................................................... 8

Table 2.3. Round 1 distribution of NLSY97 sibling groups .................................................................................................. 8

Table 2.4. NLSY97 sample sizes, retention rates, and fielding periods ................................................................................. 9

Table 2.5. NLSY79 interview schedule ................................................................................................................................. 9

Table 2.6. NLSY97 youth and youths with parent interview by age .................................................................................. 10

Table 2.7. Data collected for nonresident relatives in NLSY97 round 1 ............................................................................. 18

Table 2.8. Selected NLSY97 variables by survey round: Respondents ages 12 to 17 in 1997 ............................................ 22

Table 3.1. Distribution of NLSY79 respondents by sample type, race, and sex ................................................................. 34

Table 3.2. Number of NLSY79 civilian respondents by type of multiple-respondent household (1979) ............................ 35

Table 3.3. NLSY79 interview schedule ............................................................................................................................... 36

Table 3.4. NLSY79 retention rates by sample type ............................................................................................................. 37

Table 3.5. NLSY79 response rates (excluding deceased respondents) by sample type ..................................................... 38

Table 3.6. Selected NLSY79 variables by survey year: Respondents ages 14 to 22 in 1979 ............................................... 44

Table 4.1. NLSY79 mother and child samples: 1986–2000 surveys.................................................................................... 53

Table 4.2. NLSY79 child sample sizes by age and race and ethnicity: 1986–2000 ............................................................. 54

Table 4.3. Distribution of child’s age in 2000 by mother’s age at birth of child: NLSY79 children assessed and young

adults interviewed in 2000 ................................................................................................................................. 54

Table 4.4. NLSY79 child assessments: Variations in administration by survey year ......................................................... 56

Table 4.5. Numbers and percentages of children with valid assessment scores: Children of the NLSY79 in 2000 ............ 57

Table 4.6. Selected variables by survey year: Children (birth to age 14) of the NLSY79 .................................................. 61

Table 4.7. Selected variables by survey year: Young adult children (aged 15 and older) of the NLSY79 .......................... 66

Table 5.1. Number of respondents interviewed by cohort and race: Mature and Young Women ...................................... 75

Table 5.2. Number of respondent pairs by cohort and relationship identified during the initial survey years: NLS of

Mature and Young Women ................................................................................................................................ 76

Table 5.3. Mature Women interview schedule ................................................................................................................... 77

Table 5.4. Young Women interview schedule .................................................................................................................... 78

Table 5.5. Interview schedules and retention rates: Mature and Young Women ............................................................... 79

Table 5.6. Selected Mature Women variables by survey year: Respondents ages 30 to 44 in 1967 ................................... 88

Table 5.7. Selected Young Women variables by survey year: Respondents ages 14 to 24 in 1968 .................................... 95

Table 6.1. Number of respondents interviewed by cohort and race: Older and Young Men........................................... 103

Table 6.2. Number of respondent pairs by cohort and relationship identified during the initial survey years: Older

and Young Men ............................................................................................................................................... 104

Table 6.3. Interview schedules and retention rates: Older and Young Men .................................................................... 105

Table 6.4. Selected Older Men variables by survey year: Respondents aged 45 to 59 in 1966 ....................................... 113

Table 6.5. Selected Young Men variables by survey year: Respondents aged 14 to 24 in 1966 ..................................... 119

Table 8.1. Mature and Young Women industry and occupation coding systems by survey year .................................. 145

Tables

vii
Figure 1.1. NLS data content: Core and supplemental data collections .............................................................................. 3

Figure 1.2. NLS main data files ............................................................................................................................................. 4

Figure 1.3. NLS special data files ......................................................................................................................................... 5

Figure 2.1. Resident parental hierarchy .............................................................................................................................. 10

Figure 2.2. Contents of the CAT-ASVAB ............................................................................................................................ 11

Figure 2.3. Data elements in the NLSY97 ........................................................................................................................... 11

Figure 3.1. Data elements in the NLSY79 ........................................................................................................................... 37

Figure 4.1. Data elements in the Children of the NLSY79 ................................................................................................... 58

Figure 5.1. Data elements in the NLS of Mature and Young Women ................................................................................. 80

Figure 6.1. Data elements in the NLS of Older and Young Men ....................................................................................... 106

Figure 8.1. NLS data files ................................................................................................................................................. 135

Figure 8.2. Investigator search and extraction screens for the NLS Windows software .................................................. 137

Figure 8.3. NLS supplemental documentation items ........................................................................................................ 138

Figure 9.1. NLSY79 round 20 advance letter .................................................................................................................... 150

Figure 9.2. Privacy Act statement used in the NLSY79 and NLSY97 ............................................................................... 151

Figure 9.3. BLS Disclosure Notice used in the NLSY79 and NLSY97 ............................................................................... 152

Figure 9.4. Confidentiality and reporting burden information in the 2001 NLSW advance letter ..................................... 156

Figure 10.2. NLS User’s Guide topical areas: NLSY97 ........................................................................................................ 159

Figure 10.2. NLS User’s Guide topical areas: Mature Women (MW), Young Women (YW), and NLSY79 (79) ................. 159

Figures

viii
CHAPTER 1: THE NLS 1

THE NLS

The National Longitudinal Surveys (NLS), sponsored bythe Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS), are a set of surveys

designed to gather information at multiple points in time on

the labor market experiences of six groups of men and women.

Each of the six cohorts has been selected to represent all

people living in the United States at the initial interview date

and born during a given period. This selection allows

weighted conclusions to be drawn about the sample group

that can be generalized to represent the experiences of the

larger population of U.S. residents born during the same period. Sample design procedures ensure that the labor market

experiences of blacks, Hispanics, youths, women, and the

economically disadvantaged can be examined. The NLS also

include surveys of the children born to women who participate in the National Longitudinal Survey of Youth 1979

(NLSY79). Detailed information is gathered biennially on the

child’s home environment and cognitive, socioemotional, and

physiological development; as they get older, these young

adults report on their education, workforce participation, and

fertility. This unique set of national surveys offers researchers the opportunity to study large panels of men, women,

and children over significant segments of their lives.

The NLS samples

Each of the NLS cohorts consists of 5,000 or more original

members, some of whom have been surveyed over several

decades. Interviews continue with four of the six cohorts, as

well as the NLSY79 children and young adults. Table 1.1

summarizes the NLS cohorts, the sizes of the original samples,

the span of years over which each group has been interviewed, and the current interview status of each group.

Development of the NLS

The National Longitudinal Surveys of Labor Market Experience began in the mid-1960s. The Office of Manpower Policy,

Evaluation, and Research of the U.S. Department of Labor

contracted with the Center for Human Resource Research

(CHRR) at The Ohio State University to conduct longitudinal studies of the labor market experiences of four population groups:

Age Birth year Original Initial year / Number Number at

Survey group cohort cohort sample latest year of surveys last interview Status

Older men 45–59 4/1/06–3/31/21 5,020 1966 / 1990 13 1

2,092 Ended

Mature women 30–44 4/1/22–3/31/37 5,083 1967 / 2003 21 2

2,318 Continuing

Young men 14–24 4/1/41–3/31/52 5,225 1966 / 1981 12 3,398 Ended

Young women 14–24 1943–1953 5,159 1968 / 2001 22 2

2,806 Continuing

NLSY79 14–21 1957–1964 3

12,686 1979 / 2002 20 48,033 Continuing

NLSY79 children birth–14 — 5— 1986 / 2002 9 4

3,392 Continuing

NLSY79 young adults 15 and older6 — 5

— 1994 / 2002 5 43,025 Continuing

NLSY97 12–16 1980–1984 8,984 1997 / 2003 6 7

7,883 Continuing

Table 1.1. The NLS: Survey groups, sample sizes, interview years, and survey status

1Interviews in 1990 also were conducted with 2,206 widows

or other family members of deceased respondents. 2

The latest sample size available is from the 2001 survey.

3

After dropping the military (in 1985) and economically disadvantaged nonblack/non-Hispanic oversamples (in 1991), the

sample contains 9,964 respondents eligible for interview. 4

The latest sample size available is from the 2000 survey.

5The size of the NLSY79 child sample depends on the number

of children born to female NLSY79 respondents, attrition over

time, and the gradual aging of the children into the young adult

sample. The size of the young adult sample depends on the

number of children who reach age 15 in each survey year. Information about the number interviewed in each survey is available in chapter 4. 6

In 1998 only, the young adults eligible for interview were limited to those ages 15 to 20. 7The latest sample size available is from round 5.
2 CHAPTER 1: THE NLS

z Men 45 to 59 years of age—referred to as the “NLS of

Older Men”—first conducted in 1966

z Women 30 to 44 years of age—the “NLS of Matu

z Young men 14 to 24 years of age—the “NLS of Young

Men”—first conducted in 1966

z Young women 14 to 24 years of age—the “NLS of Young

Women”—first conducted in 1968

These four groups of Americans, known collectively as the

“Original Cohorts” of the NLS, were selected because each

faced important labor market decisions of special concern to

policymakers. The Older Men respondents faced decisions

about the timing and extent of their labor force withdrawal at

retirement age. Mature Women were experiencing a return to

the labor force as their children became independent. As the

Young Men and Young Women completed their schooling,

they began careers or joined the military, married, and started

families.

 The initial plan called for six interviews over a 5-year

period with a nationally representative sample of approximately 5,000 individuals in each group. As the 5-year period

ended, relatively high retention rates and the widespread

interest generated by these data led to the decision to continue the surveys.

On the basis of a survey of all known NLS data users

and the recommendations of a panel of experts convened by

the Department of Labor, policymakers decided in 1977 to

continue the surveys of the four original cohorts. The Older

Men and Young Men cohorts were administered until 1990

and 1981, respectively, when they ended because of attrition. The Mature Women and Young Women cohorts, which

are surveyed biennially, have been administered the identical questionnaires during the same field period since 1995.

The data for the two surveys of women are still presented

separately on the CD and as separate files that can be downloaded from the NLS Web site (http://www.bls.gov/nls).

The Department of Labor also decided in 1977 to begin

a new longitudinal study of young men and women. This

study would replicate the surveys of young men and women

that began in the 1960s. The new longitudinal study would

help policymakers and researchers to evaluate the expanded

employment and training programs for youths legislated by

the 1977 amendments to the Comprehensive Employment

and Training Act (CETA).

Toward these ends, a national probability sample was

drawn of civilian young women and men ages 14 to 21 (as of

December 31, 1978), with overrepresentation of blacks, Hispanics, and economically disadvantaged nonblack/non-Hispanics. Funding from the U.S. Department of Defense allowed

the selection of an additional group of young persons serving in the Armed Forces for interviewing. This sample of

civilian and military youths, called the National Longitudinal

Survey of Youth 1979 (NLSY79), was interviewed for the first

time in early 1979. The cohort was interviewed annually until

1994, although the military and economically disadvantaged

nonblack/non-Hispanic subsamples were dropped for funding reasons after 1984 and 1990, respectively. Since 1994, the

NLSY79 has been conducted biennially.

The “Children of the NLSY79” began in 1986 and further

enhanced the NLS program. With funding from the National

Institute of Child Health and Human Development (NICHD)

and a number of private foundations, detailed information

on the development of children born to NLSY79 women has

supplemented the data on mothers and children collected

during the main NLSY79. During the biennial interviews of

the Children of the NLSY79, interviewers administer a battery of child cognitive, socioemotional, and physiological

assessments to NLSY79 mothers and their children. Since

1994, children age 15 and older during the survey year—the

“Young Adults”—have replied to a separate survey that

contains questions similar to those asked of their mothers.

The complete child sample statistically represents the children of women born during the years 1957 to 1964 who resided in the United States in 1978.

In 1997, data collection began for the sixth NLS cohort.

The National Longitudinal Survey of Youth 1997 (NLSY97)

documents the transition from school to work for a group of

young people ages 12 to 16 as of December 31, 1996. The

sample was designed to represent the U.S. population born

during the years 1980 to 1984. Through the NLSY97, researchers are able to identify characteristics defining the transition that today’s youths make from school to the labor

market and into adulthood. Information from the NLSY97

allows researchers to compare the progress of this cohort

with that of other NLS cohorts.

Purposes and content of the surveys

The primary purpose of the NLS is to collect data on the

labor force experiences of adults and young adults. In addition, the surveys have regularly gathered information about

a range of factors potentially affecting labor market attachment, including investments in education and training, geographic region of residence, local labor market conditions,

the formative influence of parents, marital status and family

responsibilities, socioeconomic status, work-related attitudes

and aspirations, health problems, and job discrimination.

With the advent of the NLSY79 in the late 1970s, the

content of the surveys expanded to reflect the interests of

other governmental agencies besides the Department of Labor. Support from the U.S. Department of Defense made

possible the 1979–84 interviews of 1,280 youths enlisted in

the military. In 1980, the Departments of Defense and Labor

jointly sponsored the administration of the Armed Services

Vocational Aptitude Battery (ASVAB) to the civilian and

military NLSY79 samples. The Department of Defense sponsored a similar administration for the NLSY97 cohort in 1997,
CHAPTER 1: THE NLS 3

Supplemental data collections

 Family background and demographic characteristics

 Child development

 School records, aptitude, and intelligence scores

 Attitudes, aspirations, and psychological well-being

 Military experiences

 Work-related discrimination

 Retirement plans, pension eligibility, and pension plans

 Volunteer and leisure-time activities

 Alcohol, cigarette, and substance use

 Delinquent and criminal activities and arrest records

 Household chores, child care, and care of ill and disabled persons

Core data collections

Work and nonwork experiences

Training investments

Schooling information

Health conditions

Household composition

Marital histories, children, and dependents

Family assets and income

Geographic residence and environmental characteristics

consisting of the computerized version of the ASVAB (CATASVAB) and the Interest-Finder. Also, the U.S. Department

of Justice sponsored a series of delinquency questions included in the 1980 survey.

Beginning in 1979, a 5-year cooperative effort of the

National Center for Research in Vocational Education and

CHRR resulted in a survey of the high schools of civilian

NLSY79 respondents and the collection of detailed transcript

information on potential high school graduates. In 1981, the

National Institute of Education sponsored a set of time-use

questions. The National Institute on Alcohol Abuse and

Alcoholism and the National Institute on Drug Abuse

(NIDA) have provided funding in a number of years to include questions on alcohol and substance abuse. The National Institute of Child Health and Human Development

(NICHD) has provided funds for the assessments of the children of the NLSY79, the development of the fertility and

childcare components of the NLSY79, the young adult survey, and the child school survey conducted in 1995–96.

The 1989 NLS of Mature Women pension matching

project was funded by BLS in conjunction with the Women’s

Bureau and the Pension and Welfare Benefits Administration of the U.S. Department of Labor, the Social Security

Administration, and the National Institute on Aging. The

Social Security Administration continues to provide financial support for interviews with the Mature Women. The

National Institute on Aging also funded the 1990 survey of

living Older Men respondents and the family members of

deceased respondents.

The U.S. Department of Education provided funding for

the 1996 and 2000 surveys of high schools that were conducted as part of the NLSY97. The Department of Education

also provided funding for the 2000 collection of high school

transcript data for NLSY97 respondents. Finally, sections of

the NLSY97 have been funded by the Department of Justice’s

Office of Juvenile Justice and Delinquency Prevention and

by the National Institute of Child Health and Human Development.

Figure 1.1 presents a summary of the topics covered by

NLS data. The core repeating modules are supplemented

with topical series administered to particular cohorts during

selected survey years. All topics are not necessarily available for all survey years or all cohorts; consult the cohortspecific chapters in this Handbook or each cohort’s user’s

guide for more information.

As suggested by the figure, the broad range of core

NLS data, the topical expansion of the ongoing surveys, and

the replication of cohorts across time make the NLS a rich

information source for the continued study of many issues.

These include life-cycle changes, the family, the aging process, retirement decisions, geographic and occupational

mobility, and a host of other topics.

While the NLS data can be used for cross-sectional studies, the longitudinal nature of the data offers significant advantages to researchers interested in causal processes.

Event histories covering topics such as employment, education, marriage, and childbearing support a variety of methodological approaches to research. The frequent overlap in

data content among cohorts, coupled with the variety of age

ranges covered by the different samples, invites cross-cohort comparisons and studies of social change.

For more than three decades, NLS data have served as

an important tool for economists, sociologists, and other

researchers interested in the study of earnings, job search

and separation, labor supply, labor market inequities, and

human capital investments. Researchers also have used

these data to study the impact of governmental policies and

programs and the effect of various social-psychological factors on labor force participation.

An Internet bibliographic database (http://

www.nlsbibliography.org) provides annotated citations for

research using the NLS cohorts. The continued relevance of

the NLS for the research community in general, and for

policymakers at the Federal, State, and local levels, is evident in the high number of citations added to the list each

year. See chapter 7 for more information.

BLS publishes summaries of NLS data in news releases,

Monthly Labor Review articles, and the NLS Discussion

Figure 1.1. NLS data content: Core and supplemental data collections
4 CHAPTER 1: THE NLS

File contents

Provides the longitudinal record of each respondent for the 1966–83 and 1990 interview years.

Includes information collected during the 1990 interviews with the widows or other family members

of deceased sample members and cause of death information collected from State vital records

departments.

Contains the longitudinal record of each respondent for the 1967–2001 interviews. Supplemental

pension plan data are described in figure 1.3.

Includes the longitudinal record of each respondent for the 1966–81 interview years. Includes

information from the separately administered 1968 survey of high schools attended by respondents

in this cohort.

Contains the longitudinal record of each respondent for the 1968–2001 interviews. Includes information from the separately administered 1968 survey of high schools attended by respondents in

this cohort.

Provides the longitudinal record of each respondent for the 1979–2000 interviews. Includes information from the separately fielded 1980 high school survey, the 1980 ASVAB administration, and the

1980-83 transcript data collections. Supplementary data for this cohort can be found in the special

data files discussed in figure 1.3.

Contains the record of each youth for all survey rounds. Includes information from each youth

interview, as well as the round 1 parent interview and the round 1 screener, household roster, and

nonresident roster questionnaire. Initial data from the round 1 CAT-ASVAB administration also are

included in this data set Supplementary data for this cohort can be found in the special data files

discussed in figure 1.3.

Figure 1.2. NLS main data files

Cohort

Older Men

Mature Women

Young Men

Young Women

NLSY79

NLSY97

Period

1966–83

and 1990

1967–2001

1966–81

1968–2001

1979–2000

Rounds

1-5

Paper series.

NLS data sets

The cohort-specific main data files summarized in figure 1.2

are available to the public. Each file contains the cumulative

record of each respondent through the current release date.

In addition to the main data files, other special data files

are available (figure 1.3). These files, designed to be used

primarily in conjunction with variables from a cohort’s main

file, have been constructed from data collected during the

main surveys, from supplementary questionnaire data, or from

external data sources.

Chapters 2 through 6 of this handbook discuss in detail

each NLS cohort and the contents of the data files; information on accessing the data files is found in chapter 8.

Project administration

Responsibility for the administration of the NLS resides with

BLS, an agency of the U.S. Department of Labor. Established in 1884, BLS is responsible for the analysis and publication of data on employment and unemployment, prices

and living conditions, compensation and working conditions,

productivity, occupational safety and health, and employment projections. Its mission is to promote the development

of the U.S. labor force by gathering information and disseminating it to policymakers and the public so that they can

make more informed, and thus more efficient, choices.

The NLS program supports BLS in this mission. The

surveys are part of a longitudinal research program that includes in-house analyses, a grant program, and other special

projects. The NLS is housed in the BLS Office of Employment and Unemployment Statistics. Direction for the NLS is

the responsibility of the Director of the National Longitudinal Surveys program. BLS contracts with CHRR to manage

the original cohorts and the NLSY79 cohort, share in the

design of the survey instruments, disseminate the data, and

provide user services. The U.S. Census Bureau undertakes

collection of data for the Mature Women and Young Women

cohorts through an interagency agreement with BLS. Data

collection for the NLSY79 and NLSY79 children samples is

subcontracted to the National Opinion Research Center

(NORC) at the University of Chicago. BLS contracts with

NORC to manage the NLSY97 cohort, share in the design of

the survey instrument, and collect the data for this survey.

As a subcontractor, CHRR is responsible for NLSY97 questionnaire programming, data dissemination and user services,

documentation, variable creation, and sharing in the design

of the survey instruments.

The NLS Technical Review Committee assists the project

in its efforts. Meeting twice each year, committee members

provide recommendations regarding questionnaire design,

additional survey topics, potential research uses, methodological issues, data distribution, and user services. The

committee is multidisciplinary, reflecting the wide range of

social scientists who use the NLS data.

BLS has ultimate responsibility for overseeing all as-
CHAPTER 1: THE NLS 5

Cohort

Mature Women

 Pension Plan File

NLSY79

 Children and

 Young Adults

NLSY79

Work History

 NLSY79

 Geocode

 NLSY79

 Young Adult

 Geocode

 NLSY79 Women

 Support Network File

NLSY97 Event History

NLSY97 Geocode

pects of the work undertaken by the other organizations.

For more information about the NLS, contact:

The National Longitudinal Surveys

Bureau of Labor Statistics

2 Massachusetts Avenue NE, Room 4945

Washington, DC 20212-0001

(202) 691-7410; FAX: (202) 691-7425

e-mail: NLS_Info@bls.gov

Users can also visit the NLS Internet site: http://

www.bls.gov/nls.

Current status and directions

As the NLS program nears the end of its fourth decade, the

22nd survey of the Young Women and the 21st survey of the

Mature Women are scheduled for summer 2003. The 20th

survey of the NLSY79, the 9th survey of the children of the

NLSY79, and the 5th survey of the young adults were completed in 2002, with the next round of each planned for 2004.

The 7th survey of the NLSY97 is scheduled to begin in fall

2003 and end in spring 2004.

Technological advances have affected the mode of NLS

interviews and the medium in which NLS data are distributed. The paper-and-pencil survey administrations, used

since the inception of the surveys, have been replaced with

computer-assisted personal interviews (CAPI). The 1993

survey of the NLSY79 marked the first time that computerassisted interviews were administered to the full sample of

NLSY79 respondents. This event completed a 5-year effort

by BLS, CHRR, and NORC to improve the quality and timeliness of NLS data releases. Analyses of two NLSY79 CAPI

experiments conducted during 1989 and 1990 suggested

higher data quality, improvements in data transfer, and lower

data processing costs for these CAPI interviews (Baker and

Bradburn, 1992; Bradburn, Frankel, et al., 1992; Olsen, 1991;

Figure 1.3. NLS special data files

1989

1986-98

1979–2000

1979–2000

1994–2000

1983–85

Rounds

1-41

Rounds

1-41

File contents

Includes detailed information on the characteristics of 815 pension plans for which respondents or their husbands were eligible in 1989. These data were coded using the protocol

developed for the Survey of Consumer Finances and include plan definitions, benefit formulas, and eligibility requirements.

Contains information about the children born to females of the NLSY79. Data were collected during the biennial assessments of each child, which began in 1986, and during

interviews of young adults (age 15 and older) beginning in 1994. Information on prenatal

care, maternal and child health, household composition, and maternal work history collected

during the main surveys of the NLSY79 also is included on the child files.

Provides a constructed week-by-week longitudinal record of labor force activity for each

respondent from January 1978 through the 1998 interview date. Three arrays provide information on the respondent’s labor force and military status, usual hours worked, and dual

jobs for those respondents working at more than one job during any of the survey weeks.

The work history data set also includes all main file data.

Identifies the State, county, and metropolitan statistical area of each NLSY79 respondent’s

current residence; provides selected environmental data for the respondent’s county or

metropolitan area of current residence. The geocode data also includes all main file data.

Identifies the State, county, and metropolitan statistical area of each NLS79 respondent’s

current residence; provides selected environmental data for the respondent’s county or

metropolitan area of current residence. The geocode data set also includes all of the child

and young adult main data.

Includes details on the geographic proximity of relatives, friends, and acquaintances of female NLSY79 respondents who were interviewed during 1983–85.

Contains constructed event history variables regarding respondents’ employment, schooling, marriages and cohabitations, and participation in government assistance programs. The

data set also includes all main file data.

Identifies the State, county, and metropolitan statistical area of each NLSY97 respondent’s

current residence; provides selected environmental data for the respondent’s county or

metropolitan area of current residence. The geocode data also includes all main file and

event history data.

 1Data from round 5 available in mid-2003.

Period
6 CHAPTER 1: THE NLS

Speizer and Dougherty, 1991). Computer-assisted survey

interviewing software also has been used in the interviews

with the NLS of Mature Women and Young Women since

1995, as well as in all rounds of the NLSY97.

The NLSY97 uses an audio computer-assisted self-interview (ACASI) to obtain potentially sensitive information

from both the parent (round 1 only) and the youth. A replacement for the paper self-administered questionnaire, the

audio version improves response quality by reducing data

entry errors, permitting more complex questionnaire design,

and minimizing errors due to respondent literacy problems.

The respondents can choose to read the questionnaire from

the computer screen or, if they prefer, use headphones to

listen to the questions as they appear on the screen. The

ACASI is conducted in the language (English or Spanish)

selected by the respondent.

NLS data sets are available for a fee on compact discs

(CDs) or can be downloaded for free from the Internet at

http://www.bls.gov/nls. The CDs and downloads include

Windows software that features a user-friendly interface that

allows users to peruse the variables for a given cohort, select variables of interest, and create ASCII extract files. The

software also provides the information needed to read these

data files into SAS, SPSS, or STATA.

Organization of this Handbook

The rest of this publication comprises eight chapters:

z Chapters 2 through 6 contain overviews of the NLSY97,

the NLSY79, the NLSY79 children and young adults, the

Mature and Young Women, and the Older and Young

Men. Each chapter provides information on the samples,

the interviews, and the major data elements available

within the data sets.

z Chapter 7 presents a sampling of recent research based

on data from the NLS.

z Chapter 8 describes the NLS data sets, the search and

extraction software, and the comprehensive documentation available to researchers.

z Chapter 9 explains the confidentiality and consent procedures undertaken to protect NLS respondents in each

survey.

z Chapter 10 directs readers to other publications, manuals, and reports that provide more information on the

NLS.

References

Baker, Reginald P. and Bradburn, Norman M. “CAPI: Impacts on Data Quality and Survey Costs.” In Proceedings of the 1991 Public Health Conference on Records

and Statistics. Washington, DC: U.S. National Center

for Health Statistics (1992): 459–64.

Bradburn, Norman M.; Frankel, Martin R.; Baker, Reginald

P.; and Pergamit, Michael R. “A Comparison of Computer-Assisted Personal Interviews (CAPI) with Paperand-Pencil Interviews (PAPI) in the National

Longitudinal Survey of Youth.” NLS Discussion Paper

92-2. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics, 1992.

Olsen, Randall J. “The Effects of Computer Assisted Interviewing on Data Quality.” Columbus, Ohio: CHRR, The

Ohio State University, 1991.

Speizer, Howard and Dougherty, Doug. “Automating Data

Transmission and Case Management Functions for a

Nationwide CAPI Study.” In Proceedings of the 1991

Annual Research Conference. Washington, DC: U.S.

Census Bureau (1991): 389–97.
CHAPTER 2: THE NLSY97 7

THE NLSY97

Designed to be representative of U.S. residents in 1997who were born during the years 1980 through 1984, the

National Longitudinal Survey of Youth 1997 (NLSY97) documents the transition from school to work experienced by

today’s youths. The majority of the oldest cohort members

(age 16 as of December 31, 1996) were still in school during

the first survey round and the youngest respondents (age

12) had not yet entered the labor market. The original sample

includes 8,984 youths.

Through the NLSY97, researchers will be able to identify characteristics defining the transition that today’s

youths make from school to the labor market and into adulthood. To accomplish this goal, the NLSY97 collects extensive information on respondents’ labor market behavior and

educational experiences. The survey also includes data on

the youths’ family and community backgrounds. This information will help researchers assess the impact of schooling

and other environmental factors on these newest labor market entrants. Data from the NLSY97 also will aid in determining how youths’ experiences relate to establishing careers,

participating in government programs, and forming families.

Finally, information from the NLSY97 will allow researchers

to compare the progress of this cohort with that of other NLS

cohorts.

Chapter organization

This chapter first discusses the sample for the NLSY97 cohort. Next, some of the mechanics of the interviews are described. The chapter then provides details about the various

instruments that were used in the round 1 (1997) survey—

the screener, household roster, and nonresident roster questionnaire; the youth questionnaire; the parent questionnaire;

the school survey; and the computer adaptive form of the

Armed Services Vocational Aptitude Battery

(CAT-ASVAB)—and about the instruments used in subsequent rounds. The final section describes the major data

elements of the NLSY97.

The NLSY97 samples

During the initial NLSY97 interview period, interviewers visited randomly selected households to identify all youths eligible for the NLSY97. All household residents ages 12 to 16

as of December 31, 1996, were considered eligible; the sample

included those who usually resided in a household in the

sample area but were away at school or college, as well as

those in a hospital, correctional facility, or other type of institution. If an eligible youth lived in the household, the interviewer also asked one of the youth’s parents to participate.

To draw the sample of 8,984 respondents, interviewers

screened 75,291 households in 147 nonoverlapping primary

sampling units. Two samples were drawn—a cross-sectional

sample representative of the U.S. population born between

1980 and 1984 and a supplemental sample of black or Hispanic youths in that age range. This oversample allows for

analysis across race or ethnicity. Individual sample weights

created by the National Opinion Research Center (NORC) at

the University of Chicago permit comparisons between the

full NLSY97 sample, which includes both the cross-sectional

sample and the oversample, and the national population in

the same age range. Table 2.1 profiles the NLSY97 sample

during rounds 1 through 5 by sex, race and ethnicity, and

cross-sectional or supplemental sample assignment; data

from round 6 are not yet available.

Multiple-respondent households

In the NLSY97 cohort, 8,984 respondents originated from

6,819 unique households. Because the sample design selected all household residents in the appropriate age range,

1,862 households included more than one NLSY97 respondent. Table 2.2 lists the numbers of youths living in multiplerespondent households during the initial survey round.

Sibling was the most common relationship between multiple

respondents living in the same household during the initial

round. Table 2.3 provides the subset of respondents living

with at least one sibling. The NLSY97 does not contain

nationally representative samples of siblings of all ages and

living arrangements; users should exercise caution when

generalizing from the findings of NLSY97 sibling studies.

No spouse pairs were present in the data during round 1.

The NLSY97 interviews

The NLSY97 uses a computer-assisted personal interviewing (CAPI) system, which automatically guides respondents

down certain question paths and loops depending on responses and the youth’s age. A set of checks within the

CAPI system lowers the probability of inconsistent data,
8 CHAPTER 2: THE NLSY97

Household type Respondents Households

1 respondent 4,957 4,957

Total multiple respondents 4,027 1,862

2 respondents 3,192 1,596

3 respondents 705 235

4 respondents 100 25

5 respondents 30 6

Total 8,984 6,819

both during an interview and over time, relative to the results

of paper-and-pencil interviews. For example, if a respondent

who reports being enrolled in the 10th grade states that he or

she has already completed the 12th grade, the program

prompts the interviewer to ask the respondent either to correct the information or to give a verbal explanation. Respondents can choose either an English or a Spanish version of

the CAPI interview.

Use of the CAPI system also allowed for a “screen and

go” method of screening the households in 1997. If the

screener identified an eligible youth in the household, the

program automatically transferred selected data (for example,

basic demographic information or a roster of household members) into the parent and youth questionnaires for verification and use during the interview. As a result, the interviewer

could administer the parent or the youth portion of the

NLSY97 immediately.

The NLSY97 uses an audio computer-assisted self-interview (ACASI) to obtain potentially sensitive information

from the youth and, in round 1, the youth’s parent. A replacement for paper self-administered questionnaires, the

audio version should improve response quality by reducing

data entry errors, permitting more complex questionnaire

design, and minimizing errors due to respondent literacy

problems. The respondents can choose to read the questionnaire from the computer screen or, if they prefer, use headphones to listen to the questions as they appear on the

screen. The ACASI is conducted in the language (English or

Spanish) selected by the respondent at the beginning of the

survey.

The NLSY97 is an annual survey; however, there was a

longer gap between rounds 1 and 2, with most respondents

surveyed about 18 months after their first interview. Table

2.4 provides information about fielding periods and retention rates for each survey. Table 2.5 lists the mode of interview (in person or by telephone) and completion rates for

each survey year.

Table 2.2. Round 1 distribution of NLSY97 respondents by household type

Table 2.1. NLSY97 sample sizes by sex, race and ethnicity, and subsample

Total Sample

Cross-sectional sample

 Nonblack, non-HIspanic

 Black, non-Hispanic

 Hispanic

 Mixed

Supplemental sample

 Black, non-Hispanic

 Hispanic

 Mixed

4,599

3,459

2,413

537

469

40

1,140

632

508

—

Sample Round 1 Round 2 Round 3 Round 4 Round 5

Males Males Males Males Males Females Females Females Females Females

4,385

3,289

2,252

544

452

41

1,096

622

472

2

4,283

3,213

2,238

504

433

38

1,070

599

471

—

4,103

3,066

2,095

517

417

37

1,037

584

451

2

4,170

3,144

2,193

490

422

39

1,026

572

454

—

4,039

3,029

2,076

503

412

38

1,010

568

441

1

4,117

3,098

2,153

485

423

37

1,019

580

439

—

3,964

2,957

2,027

489

402

39

1,007

570

435

2

3,989

3,012

2,110

455

411

36

977

541

436

—

3,894

2,097

1,991

478

401

37

987

558

427

2

 NOTE: This table was created using the following variables:

 KEY!RACE_ETHNICITY (R14826.), KEY!SEX (R05363.),

CV_SAMPLE_TYPE (R12358.), and RNI (R25102., R38277., etc.).

Sibling groups Respondents

No siblings in survey 5,129

Total multiple siblings 3,855

2 siblings 3,134

3 siblings 627

4 siblings 84

5 siblings 10

Total 8,984

Table 2.3. Round 1 distribution of NLSY97

sibling groups

NOTE: In this table, siblings include biological, adoptive, half,

and step relationships.
CHAPTER 2: THE NLSY97 9

Cross-sectional sample Supplemental sample Total sample

Round Fielding period Total Retention rate Total Retention rate Total Retention rate

Sampling weights

After round 1, initial sampling weights for the entire sample

were constructed to adjust for differential nonresponse and

for the black and Hispanic oversamples. These weights provide researchers with an estimate of the number of individuals in the United States represented by each respondent’s

answers. NORC calculates the weights after each survey

round to account for noninterviews in that round. For example, the weights for rounds 1 through 3 were all recalculated and released with the round 4 data. Sampling weights

for each round can be found in the NLSY97 data set. Researchers should be aware that the weights are being recalculated in order to improve the efficiency of sample estimates.

The previously released weights are correct, but the new

weights will result in smaller standard errors for sample estimates. For more information, see O’Muircheartaigh and

Pedlow (2000) or contact NLS User Services by e-mail at

usersvc@postoffice.chrr.ohio-state.edu.

Survey instruments and special data collections

This section describes the various NLSY97 instruments, as

well as two special data collections conducted in conjunction with the surveys. First, the youth questionnaire and

household income update are discussed; these are the only

instruments involved in the surveys following round 1. In

addition to the youth questionnaire, the initial NLSY97 round

used the screener, household roster, and nonresident roster

questionnaire and the parent questionnaire. Finally, two

special data collections, the school survey and the administration of the CAT-ASVAB, both took place during round 1;

the school survey was repeated in round 3. The collection of

high school transcript data began in round 3 and will be

continued in future rounds. Users may contact BLS for availability information at NLS_Info@bls.gov.

Youth questionnaire. This questionnaire focuses in great

detail on the schooling and employment activities of the reTable 2.4. NLSY97 sample sizes, retention rates, and fielding periods

NOTE: Retention rate is defined as the percentage of base-year

respondents who were interviewed in a given survey year; deceased respondents are included in the calculations.

1This is the planned fielding period.

2

The sample sizes for round 6 are not yet available at the printing of this Handbook.

1 February–October 1997 6,748 — 2,236 — 8,984 —

and March–May 1998

2 October 1998–April 1999 6,279 93.0 2,107 94.2 8,386 93.3

3 October 1999–April 2000 6,173 91.5 2,036 91.1 8,209 91.4

4 November 2000–May 2001 6,055 89.7 2,026 90.6 8,081 89.9

5 November 2001–May 2002 5,919 87.7 1,964 87.8 7,883 87.7

6 November 2002–May 20031 2— 2— 2— 2— 2— 2—

Year Personal Telephone Not available Interviewed Not interviewed

1997 8,700 96.8% 284 3.2% 0 — 8,984 — —

1998 7,924 94.5 460 5.5 2 1 8,386 598 6.7%

1999 7,552 92.0 656 8.0 1 1 8,209 775 8.6

2000 7,372 91.2 707 8.7 2 1 8,081 903 10.1

Table 2.5. NLSY97 interview schedule

NOTE: Telephone was also the mode of interview for 223 of the

parent interviews conducted in round 1.

1

Less than 0.05%
10 CHAPTER 2: THE NLSY97

spondent; it also collects extensive data on the youth’s financial characteristics, family background, interaction with

a nonresident parent(s), social behavior, and health status.

In round 1, many topics in the youth questionnaire solicited

past and current information. In rounds 2 and beyond, the

questionnaires repeat some items asked in previous rounds

and also include some additional questions. The major data

elements section of this chapter describes the contents of

this instrument.

Household income update. If a youth respondent lives with

a parent or guardian, this self-administered paper update is

completed by the parent figure in rounds 1 through 5. (See

the income section of this chapter for more details.) This

instrument collects income information about the parent and

the parent’s spouse or partner. The parent who signs the

youth’s interview consent form completes the household

income update; if the youth is not living with a parent or

guardian, no update form is administered.

Screener, household roster, and nonresident roster questionnaire. In round 1, an initial 3-minute screener collected

the name and birth date or age of each household resident. If

a household contained an NLSY97-eligible youth (ages 12 to

16 as of December 31, 1996), interviewers then administered

an extensive two-part roster. The household roster section

collected information on all members of the respondent’s

household, and the nonresident roster portion gathered data

on those members of the respondent’s immediate family (for

example, parents, siblings, spouse, or children) who lived

elsewhere. For each household resident or nonresident relative, these rosters collected demographic information, marital status, educational attainment, and employment status.

The major data elements section of this chapter details the

contents of this questionnaire. Users should keep in mind

that screening interviews were conducted only in round 1.

However, the youth survey updates some of this information in later rounds, as described in the major data elements

section.

Parent questionnaire. Also conducted only in round 1, this

interview asked one parent of each youth to participate.

Potential responding parents, selected during the screener

portion of the interview, were limited to those who resided in

the same household as the youth. Figure 2.1 presents the

preordered list used to choose the preferred responding parent. For example, the biological mother was chosen before

the biological father, and so forth. If the youth did not live

with a parent-type figure or lived with a guardian or parent

not listed (for example, a foster parent with whom the youth

had lived for less than 2 years), then no parent questionnaire

was administered. Note that, due to nonresponse, not all

youths with an eligible parent will have a completed parent

interview.

The resident parent or guardian provided extensive personal background information, including marital and employment histories. The responding parent also answered

questions about the family in general, as well as aspects of

his or her NLSY97-eligible children’s lives. Although parent

interviews were conducted only in round 1, a few questions

in the youth questionnaire update some basic information in

subsequent rounds. The major data elements section of this

chapter describes the data collected in the parent questionnaire, as well as parent information updated in the youth

questionnaires.

Interviews are available for 6,124 parents; 7,942 youth

respondents have information available from a parent interview. Table 2.6 shows the number of youths by age who had

a parent participate in the round 1 survey.

School surveys. In the fall of 1996, all public and private

schools that had a 12th grade and that were located in one of

the NLSY97 primary sampling units received school survey

questionnaires. Researchers should note that the round 1

Total number Youths with

Age (birth year) of youths parent interview

12 (1984) 1,771 1,583

13 (1983) 1,807 1,615

14 (1982) 1,841 1,595

15 (1981) 1,874 1,668

16 (1980) 1,691 1,481

Total 8,984 7,942

Figure 2.1. Resident parental hierarchy

1 Biological mother

2 Biological father

3 Adoptive mother

4 Adoptive father

5 Stepmother

6 Stepfather

7 Guardian, relative

8 Foster parent, youth lived with for 2 or more years

9 Other nonrelative, youth lived with for 2 or more

years

10 Mother-figure, relative

11 Father-figure, relative

12 Mother-figure, nonrelative, youth lived with for

 2 or more years

13 Father-figure, nonrelative, youth lived with for

2 or more years

Table 2.6. NLSY97 youths and youths with parent

interview by age
CHAPTER 2: THE NLSY97 11

school survey was a “school census,” or a census of schools

in the sampling areas, rather than a survey of only those

schools attended by respondents. This mail survey asked

school administrators to provide detailed data on the characteristics of the school. Nearly 7,500 schools received questionnaires; the response rate for this survey was 72 percent.

School characteristics include the type of school (for

example, public, private), the grades offered by the school,

the length of the school day, and the facilities available at the

school (for example, a health clinic, computer center, cafeteria). The survey obtained data on staff characteristics such

as the number of full-time and part-time teachers, the sex and

racial and ethnic composition of the teachers, and the proportion of teachers with more than a bachelor’s degree.

School administrators also provided information on the

characteristics of the student body. Questions in this section include the average daily attendance rate, total enrollment, and sex and racial and ethnic composition of the

students. The survey asked about programs available to

students—such as gifted and talented enrichment, dropout

prevention, job placement, and summer school—and about

the number of reported incidents of gang activity, vandalism, weapons possession, and alcohol or drug use.

Data on the 1996 graduating class include the percentage who took national college entrance exams (for example,

the SAT and American College Test [ACT]), the average

scores on these tests, and the percentage of graduates who

enrolled in postsecondary education or entered the Armed

Forces. Finally, the survey asked whether students must

pass a standardized test to graduate and the total number of

credits needed to graduate.

The 2000 school survey included all the schools in the

original 1996 sample, plus vocational high schools in those

original primary sampling units (vocational schools were not

included in the 1996 survey), plus high schools that NLSY97

respondents had attended after moving to a residence outside of the primary sampling unit in which they had lived at

the time the NLSY97 sample was selected. The 2000 school

survey began with questions about the school and its overall offerings: grade levels, school type, tuition, program offerings, computer and other facilities, and sources of Federal

funding. Faculty-related questions asked about the number

of teachers with different education and experience levels,

any staff development requirements, basic demographics,

and the salary schedule. Questions about the student body

captured basic demographics, special education and Limited

English Proficiency (LEP) enrollments, and remedial and accelerated program offerings, as well as percentages of students involved in such activities as athletics, truancy, and

illegal activities. The survey also asked about the academic

requirements of the high school’s curriculum and academic

outcomes of its graduates.

The career preparation section began with items about

how schools help students prepare for careers, how schools

support teachers in professional development, and how enrollments have changed in various career preparation programs since the 1994–95 school year. A battery of questions

asked about the existence of, enrollment in, duration of, and

targeting of several different career preparation programs.

More than 9,600 schools received questionnaires; the response rate for the 2000 school survey was 71 percent.

School survey data are not available in the main file or

geocode data sets. Access to these data is restricted because of confidentiality concerns. For more information

about how to request access to the school survey data, interested researchers should see the Web page at http://

www.bls.gov/bls/blsresda.htm.

The CAT-ASVAB. Over the summer and fall of 1997 and the

winter of 1998, NLSY97 respondents took the computer adaptive version of the Armed Services Vocational Aptitude Battery (CAT-ASVAB), as well as the Interest-Finder. The

CAT-ASVAB comprises 12 separate tests, listed in figure 2.2.

A formula based on the first four tests is used to calculate

Figure 2.2. Contents of the CAT-ASVAB

1 Arithmetic reasoning

2 Mathematical knowledge

3 Word knowledge

4 Paragraph comprehension

5 Assembling objects (a spatial test)

6 General science

7 Coding speed

8 Automobile information

9 Shop information

10 Numerical operations

11 Mechanical comprehension

12 Electronics comprehension

Figure 2.3. Data elements in the NLSY97

1 Employment

2 Schooling

3 Training

4 Income, assets, and program participation

5 Family formation

6 Family background

7 Expectations

8 Attitudes, behaviors, and time use

9 Health

10 Environmental variables

11 Event history variables
12 CHAPTER 2: THE NLSY97

the Armed Forces Qualification Test (AFQT) score.

The Interest-Finder, an interest inventory designed to

measure occupational preferences, includes six subscales.

This 240-item test surveys the respondent on his or her interest in various activities or occupations.

The U.S. Department of Defense, which funded the administration of the CAT-ASVAB and Interest-Finder for

NLSY97 respondents, administered the tests to two additional samples of youths. The first group consisted of a

nationally representative sample of students who were expected to be in the 10th through 12th grades in the fall of

1997. This sample included many of the youths who participated in the NLSY97. The second group was a nationally

representative sample of youths 18 to 23 years old as of June

1, 1997. The Department of Defense is interested in using

data for this older group to establish national norms for the

ASVAB score distribution of youths who are potential military recruits.

Selected ASVAB data are available in the current NLSY97

data set, with additional variables to be released in the future.

Major data elements

This section briefly describes the major data elements for the

NLSY97. The youth questionnaire; the parent questionnaire;

and the screener, household roster, and nonresident roster

questionnaire collected data for this cohort during the 1997

survey round. Only the youth questionnaire and household

income update are administered in subsequent rounds. The

following listing is not comprehensive and data elements are

not necessarily present for all respondents in an age bracket.

Prospective users should examine the detailed variable table

at the end of this chapter, which presents a more comprehensive look at the types of variables available on the NLSY97

main data files. To find out whether the specific variables of

interest are available for the age(s) and respondent

universe(s) of interest, users should consult the NLSY97

User’s Guide (available at http://www.bls.gov/nls), acquire

copies of the NLSY97 data-collection instruments, and

browse the documentation files contained in the NLSY97

data set.

Data elements for the NLSY97 are discussed in the order

presented in figure 2.3. Unless otherwise noted, the following data elements come from the youth questionnaire. The

age restrictions mentioned in the text usually refer to the

respondent’s age as of December 31, 1996; however, the

employment and training sections refer to the age of the

respondent on the interview date or when the job ended.

Exceptions are noted as appropriate.

1. Employment

Designed to capture each youth’s earliest experiences in the

labor market, the NLSY97 includes three different categories

of labor market activity: Employee jobs (those in which the

respondent had an ongoing association with a particular

employer) held since the age of 14, freelance or self-employment jobs, and gaps between jobs. A freelance job is defined

as any job for which the respondent performs tasks for a

number of people but does not have a specific boss, such as

babysitting or mowing lawns. In rounds 1 and 4, respondents also reported their work experience in the week before

the survey.

Employee jobs. The set of questions on employee jobs asks

respondents age 14 and older at the time of the survey (all

respondents beginning in round 3) about jobs held since

their 14th birthday. The youth reports information about the

job at the time he or she started working, such as the usual

number of hours worked per week; the regular rate of pay

(amount per month, per week, per day, or per hour); and the

amount of nonwage, nonsalary pay (overtime, tips, incentive pay, and so forth). The youth also provides a description of the industry and occupation of the job. These items

are coded according to the U.S. Census Bureau’s 1990 threedigit industry and occupation codes. The survey solicits

the same information as of the stop date or interview date for

all employee jobs lasting more than 13 weeks to capture

changes that occurred during the youth’s tenure.

All respondents who report a gap of a week or more at

an employee job (other than paid vacations or sick leave)

answer a followup question about the reason (for example,

on strike, on unpaid vacation) for that gap. Respondents

also state the number of weeks spent looking for work or on

layoff during that gap. Any youth classified as not looking

for work provides the reason (for instance, did not want to

work or was on vacation).

Respondents who report a job that ended after the date

of their 16th birthday (or those who are currently 16 or older

and report an ongoing job) answer an additional series of

questions. This information includes the class of worker

(government, private, nonprofit, unpaid worker in a business owned by a family member, Armed Forces), the type of

benefits offered (medical, dental, unpaid maternity leave, and

so on), and the number of paid vacation or sick days per year

to which the respondent is entitled at the time of the survey

or the job’s end date. Other questions in this section ask

about the respondent’s regular work shift; collective-bargaining status; the sex, race, and age of the respondent’s

immediate supervisor; the number of employees working at

the same location as the respondent; and the number of employees at all locations. The survey also collects data on the

respondent’s general satisfaction with the job and the reason for leaving a past job.

In round 4, several questions were added to more effectively identify self-employment jobs for this and future

rounds. Respondents age 18 or older who had preexisting
CHAPTER 2: THE NLSY97 13

freelance jobs that met the definition of self-employment (they

held the job when age 16 or older and earned $200 or more

per week) were routed into the regular employer section. They

were then questioned about the industry and occupation of

this job and the number of people who work for them. If

respondents reported that the job had ended, they stated

the reason (for example, end of seasonal-type work or return

to school). Prior to round 4, all self-employment questions

were included with freelance jobs.

One special type of employee job included in the NLSY97

is military service. Youths in the service report their branch

of the military, pay grade, military occupation, and specific

military level (regular forces, reserves, or the National Guard),

as well as whether they left their term of service early. A

separate variable to identify military jobs is available in the

YEMP roster.

Freelance jobs. In rounds 1 through 3, respondents age 14

and older at the time of the survey (all respondents beginning in round 3) were questioned on the freelance jobs they

had held since their 14th birthday. This changed in round 4,

when only respondents born in 1983–84 answered questions

in the freelance jobs section; in round 5, this universe was

restricted to respondents born in 1984. For all freelance jobs,

the youth states the start and stop dates (month and year).

The questions on freelance employment gather information

about the usual number of hours the respondent worked per

week, the usual weekly earnings, the total number of days

worked per week (weekdays/weekend days), and the number of hours per weekday/weekend worked.

The freelance section in rounds 1 through 3 asked additional questions of self-employed respondents, defined as

those who are age 16 or older and who usually earn $200 or

more per week in a freelance job. The youth defined his or

her industry and occupation and stated the number of people

who worked for him or her. Finally, those who reported that

the job had ended provided the reason (for example, end of

seasonal-type work or return to school). The freelance section continued to ask these questions in rounds 4 and 5 for

the youngest respondents. Beginning in round 4, older respondents reported these data as part of the self-employment questions in the regular employment section, as

described above.

Employment for youths ages 12 and 13. In rounds 1 and 2,

respondents ages 12 and 13 provided information about all

jobs held since the age of 12 (without explicitly distinguishing between employee and freelance jobs). The type of information collected for each job was the same as that

described above in the freelance section for youths age 14

and older. Because every respondent had reached age 14 by

the round 3 field period, they all answered separate questions about employee and freelance jobs.

Work experience in the week before the survey. Using questions from the Current Population Survey (CPS), the round

1 and round 4 surveys asked respondents age 15 and older

about their labor force status (for example, working, looking

for work, unable to work) in the week before the current interview. Employed respondents detailed the characteristics of

their current job(s), such as usual number of hours on the

main job, number of hours on all other jobs, number of overtime hours, reason for working part time, and so forth. Youths

classified as not working reported job search activities during the previous month. Users should note that the questions were not included in rounds 2, 3, 5 or 6.

Gaps between jobs. Any youth age 14 or older who reports

a period during which he or she is not working at an employee job states the number of weeks spent during that time

searching for another employee job or, if the youth went

through the freelance section, working at a freelance job.

Those who do not report search activity during a specific

period answer questions about the reason why no search

activity was undertaken (for example, did not want to work,

had health problems, was on vacation). The survey also

collects data on the type of search activity in which the youth

participated—for example, contacted an employer directly,

contacted an employment agency, or placed an ad.

2. Schooling

The schooling section of the youth questionnaire contains

questions on the respondent’s educational attainment, experiences, and coursework. The round 1 parent questionnaire also solicited information concerning the youth’s past

and current schooling experiences.

The schooling section first asks about the respondent’s

current enrollment status. Youths who report that they are

not enrolled provide their reason(s) for leaving school and

the date at which this separation occurred. The respondents

also state the highest grade level they have attended and the

highest grade level they have completed. In addition, the

survey asks all youths if they were ever suspended from

school. Those who have been suspended state the grade

level(s) in which this occurred and the duration of each

grade’s total suspensions. Any grades that the respondent

skipped or repeated also are recorded.

In round 1, all youths in the 12th grade or lower during

the fall 1996 school term answered questions about that term,

including the number of days the youth was absent, whether

the youth had something of value stolen, and whether the

youth was involved in a physical fight.

Interviewers administered the Peabody Individual

Achievement Test (PIAT) Math Assessment to youths enrolled in the 9th or a lower grade during round 1. In rounds 2

through 5, administration of the PIAT was restricted to respondents who were 12 years old as of December 31, 1996,
14 CHAPTER 2: THE NLSY97

and who were enrolled in the 9th or a lower grade during

round 1, providing several scores for respondents born in

1984. (The PIAT was given to respondents in round 6 only if

they were 12 years old as of December 31, 1996, and were

currently in high school at the survey date.) Researchers

can potentially combine these test scores with information

on math courses the youth took to assess correlations between curriculum and math performance.

High school. If a respondent is currently enrolled in high

school, the survey collects information on the expected graduation date. Those who left high school since the last interview state whether they received a regular high school

diploma or a GED and the overall marks they received during

high school.

Youths who have attended the 9th or a higher grade

provide information about the overall marks they received in

8th grade and about their course of study in high school (for

example, college preparatory, vocational). The respondents

then list the types of math, science, and other courses taken

from 7th grade through high school; information about

whether each course was an honors course also is recorded.

Standardized achievement test scores were collected for

youths in the 9th grade or higher in round 1 and in the 11th

grade or higher in rounds 2 through 6. If respondents meeting these eligibility requirements have taken the SAT or ACT,

they report the highest score received on each component

of the SAT and the highest total ACT score. In round 1,

eligible respondents reported whether they had taken an

Advanced Placement (AP) test, their grade when the test

was taken, the subject of the test, and the highest AP score

they had ever received. Rounds 2 through 6 recorded only

the subject of any AP tests taken by youths meeting the

eligibility requirements.

School-based learning programs. The survey instrument

contains questions on school-based learning programs (apprenticeships, cooperative education, internships,

mentoring, technical preparatory, and the like). Respondents

who participated in school-based learning programs in high

school answer questions about the program’s characteristics, such as the type of program, time spent at the worksite,

whether the respondent was paid, and the rate of pay. Other

questions ask whether the youth took any classes at the

worksite and whether the employer wrote an evaluation of

the youth.

College. The survey contains a number of questions related

to college experiences. This section asks youths who report

being enrolled in college for the number of years attended at

any college (either 2-year or 4-year colleges) and the number

of colleges attended. Information collected includes whether

the college is publicly supported, the type of degree sought

and received, the total credits required to graduate, and the

tuition and fees. The youth also reports on sources and

amounts of financial aid received while at each college. For

each completed college term, the survey gathers data on the

number of college credits the respondent took and earned

and the respondent’s grade-point average, primary and secondary major, and full- or part-time status. Finally, respondents report the name and address of each college; survey

staff use this information to provide the Integrated

Postsecondary Education Data System (IPEDS) Code of each

institution. IPEDS codes are available only in the geocode

data; see chapter 8 of this Handbook for more details about

this restricted-use data set.

Parent questionnaire. The round 1 interview asked the responding parent about the youth’s current enrollment status and grade level. The responding parent also provided

information about all schools the youth had attended since

the 7th grade (including home schooling) and about gaps in

enrollment of 1 month or more. The “school finder” aided in

obtaining and verifying the name and address of each

school.1

This section also inquired about any academic classes

the youth took during a school break in the 9th or a higher

grade and the reason for taking the classes. For youths who

had been only home schooled since the 7th grade, the parent

stated whether the youth had ever taken the SAT, ACT, or

AP tests; the year in which the youth took the tests; and the

highest score received. Additional educational information

collected from the responding parent included whether the

child had ever been enrolled in Head Start, whether he or she

had ever repeated or skipped a grade, and the age at which

the youth had entered 1st grade.

3. Training

Respondents age 16 and older as of the interview date report

on their participation in training programs. These questions

solicit information about the youth’s reasons for participating in each program; the type of certification the youth

earned, if any; and the program’s length, contents, completion status, and source of funding. If the respondent states

that the training was for a specific employer, followup questions ask about the occupation for which the training program prepared the respondent and the reason for enrolling in

the training program. Finally, the survey gathers data about

services provided, such as job search assistance.

1

 The school finder is a record of the names and addresses of

primary and secondary schools located in the United States. This

information is taken from the “National Education Database,” provided under copyright by Quality Education Data (QED), Inc.
CHAPTER 2: THE NLSY97 15

4. Income, assets, and program participation

This section describes the data collected on the financial

characteristics of the respondent. Similar data, described

under family background in this section, also are gathered

for certain adults in the youth’s household. Users should

note that a number of questions in these sections of the

questionnaire are addressed only to independent youths.

Independent youths are those who meet at least one of the

following criteria: Are age 18 or older, have a child, have ever

been married or are currently in a marriage-like relationship,

are no longer enrolled in school or are enrolled in a 4-year

college, or report not living with any parent or parent figure.

Income. The survey asks all respondents about their income from wages, salaries, and parental allowance during

the previous calendar year. Independent youths additionally report in detail on other income received in the last calendar year, such as self-employment income, child support,

interest or dividend payments, or income from rental properties. These youths also list the income of their spouse or

partner.

Parent questionnaire. In round 1, the NLSY97 collected

data from the responding parent on the 1996 earnings and

income of the youth. In addition, parents reported on the

amount of financial support given to independent youths

still living in the household.

Assets. In rounds 1 through 3, independent youths provided information about current asset holdings. Topics of

the questions included the market value of any residence or

business, whether the respondent paid property taxes in the

previous year, the average amount spent on utilities per

month, and the amount owed on motor vehicles. Other questions asked about the respondent’s current checking and

savings account balances, the value of various assets such

as stocks or certificates of deposit, and the amount of any

loans of at least $200 that the youth received in the last

calendar year.

Beginning with round 4, the questions in the asset section remain the same, but the universe for the asset section is

more limited. Respondents answer these questions only at

specific points: the first interview after they turn age 18, the

first interview after they reach age 20, and the first interview

in which they meet criteria to be considered independent.

Respondents will continue to answer these questions at

regular intervals in future rounds.

Program participation. This section questions independent youths about their participation in government programs. Included are specific questions (number of spells,

duration of each spell, amount of benefit, and the like) regarding a number of government assistance programs such

as Unemployment Compensation; Aid to Families with Dependent Children (AFDC)/Temporary Assistance for Needy

Families (TANF)/Aid to Dependent Children (ADC); the

Women, Infants, and Children (WIC) program; and Food

Stamps. Youths also are asked whether they lived in public

housing. See table 2.8 at the end of this chapter for further

details.

5. Family formation

Marriage. Respondents who were at least 16 years old by

the end of the previous calendar year provide information

about their history of marriage and marriage-like relationships. Along with the legal status and length of each relationship, this section gathers information about the age,

highest grade completed, employment status, and race/

ethnicity of each spouse or partner not listed on the household roster. For each relationship, the youth also reports

changes in the relationship status, such as separation, divorce, or marriage. In round 1 and rounds 4 through 6, respondents who were currently married or involved in a

marriage-like relationship answered questions about the quality of that relationship. Round 1 questions asked about specific behaviors, for example, how often the spouse or partner

screams or yells, criticizes the respondent’s ideas, blames

the respondent for his or her problems, and vice versa. A

shorter series of questions in rounds 4 through 6 collected

the respondents’ rating of the overall levels of caring, closeness, and conflict between themselves and their spouse or

partner.

Fertility. A series of questions asks respondents who report having given birth to, fathered, or adopted a child about

their children. This section collects the number, sex, and age

of all biological and adopted children, including children who

are deceased or have been given up for adoption. Fertility

data also include characteristics of the child’s other biological parent (if that person is not a current spouse or cohabiting partner), such as race, age, and highest grade completed,

and the type of relationship the respondent had with that

person (married, dating, separated, or other). If that person

is a current spouse or cohabiting partner, the same information is collected in the marriage section of the questionnaire.

Finally, the fertility questions solicit information about the

biological parents’ legal responsibility or custody rights with

respect to the child.

A set of questions in rounds 4 through 6 addressed

only male respondents who had fathered a child. First—if

the mother was not the spouse or cohabiting partner—the

respondent provided current information about the mother

of each child, such as her enrollment and employment status, program participation status, and income. He also stated

whether he currently had a close relationship with the mother.
16 CHAPTER 2: THE NLSY97

In addition, these male respondents provided information

about child support. Respondents first reported the amount

of support awarded in a child support agreement and then

stated whether they had provided additional informal support, such as performing household repairs, buying clothes

for the child, or buying household items or gifts for anyone

in the household, in the past 12 months. In rounds 5 and 6,

questions about the father of their children and child support details also were asked of female respondents.

Beginning in round 4, the survey asked about the relationship a male respondent had with each of his children.

Respondents reported whether they participated in prenatal

activities such as going with the mother to the doctor, buying things before the baby was born, and being present at

the delivery. If the respondent had seen the child in the past

month, he stated how often he performed activities such as

bathing or dressing the child, preparing a meal for the child,

or reading books to the child.

Information on other pregnancies is gathered in the selfadministered section of the questionnaire. Female respondents report the number of pregnancies that did not result in

live births, their age at the time of each such pregnancy, the

month and year in which each pregnancy ended, and the

outcome of each pregnancy. Male respondents state the

number of times they have gotten someone pregnant, the

number of pregnancies that ended in a live birth, and the

number of pregnancies that ended in abortion.

Child care. A new section added to the survey in round 5

gathered details about the childcare used by female respondents who have children. The respondent is first asked for

the total hours in a typical week during which she works for

pay, attends school or training, or commutes. Then, she

reports the childcare situation in which her children spend

most of these hours: In the care of a spouse or partner,

relative, or sibling; in self-care; in nonrelative care; at family

daycare; at a childcare center; or in formal schooling. For

each type of care the respondent reports, the following details are collected: The person responsible for transporting

the child, traveling time, amount paid for the childcare,

whether an outside source (for example, an employer or other

agency outside the household) contributes all or part of the

payment, and the number of hours spent in each type of

care. Hypothetical questions also are posed to these respondents and to childless female youths born in 1983 or

1984 concerning relatives who live close by and the amount

respondents would expect to pay or be willing to pay for care

at the nearest childcare center. The round 6 survey has a

less extensive series of questions on childcare. Female respondents who have children are asked for the number of

hours they are at work, school, or training in a typical week.

The series continues by ascertaining the type of childcare

used in a typical week for all children, the amount paid weekly

for that care, and whether an outside employer or other entity paid for all or part of the childcare.

6. Family background

Parent’s background. Questions in the round 1 parent questionnaire determined the responding parent’s nationality,

month and year of birth, birthplace, and religious preference.

In addition, the survey collected information about the responding parent’s number of siblings, whether he or she had

lived with both biological parents while growing up, and the

ages and highest grade completed of his or her parents. The

responding parent also reported these data for his or her

current spouse. If the youth had been in contact with a

nonresident biological parent since the age of 10, the same

set of questions sought information about that nonresident

parent.

Parent’s history. In the round 1 parent questionnaire, interviewers collected historical data on the responding parent’s

employment history since the parent’s 18th birthday or the

youth’s date of birth, whichever was earlier. For each spell of

employment lasting at least 3 months, the responding parent

was asked about the usual number of hours he or she worked

per week. In a similar fashion, this section established a

marital or partner history for the responding parent, with

questions seeking information on the length of the marriage

and the employment status of the spouse during the marriage. Next, a number of questions recorded the history of

participation in various government programs such as AFDC/

TANF, Medicaid, Supplemental Security Income (SSI), and

WIC.

Parent’s current status. The round 1 parent questionnaire

obtained detailed information on the current status of the

respondents’ parents, as described below. In subsequent

rounds, limited data are collected in the youth questionnaire

and household income update (rounds 1 through 5).

Youth questionnaire. Demographic data from the household roster section of the questionnaire are available for parents who lived in the same household as the youth; the

household information section below describes these data

in detail. The round 2 youth questionnaire asked respondents who were classified as independent (see the income

section above) or who were age 14 or older by the end of

1997 to report the 1997 earnings of each parent. In rounds 3

through 6, all respondents reported each parent’s earnings

in the previous calendar year.

Household income update. In rounds 1 through 5, the resident parent of a nonindependent youth respondent completes this self-administered paper supplement. The
CHAPTER 2: THE NLSY97 17

supplement collects information on the income during the

previous year of the respondent’s parent and the parent’s

current spouse or partner.

Parent questionnaire. In round 1, the youth’s responding

parent stated his or her present employment status, marital

status, highest grade completed, and participation in government programs. Information on the resident parent’s earnings and income in 1996 was gathered; similar questions

summarized the same information with regard to the responding parent’s spouse. This section of the parent questionnaire also elicited information on the asset and debt holdings

of the responding parent and his or her spouse. Additional

questions asked about the amount received from government programs in the previous year.

Parents who had a youth ages 12 to 14 answered a series of questions on the parent’s attitude toward self (for

instance, “always optimistic about the future” or “hardly

ever expect things to go my way”), toward certain behaviors,

and toward the relationship with his or her partner. The

responding parent also provided information on religious

beliefs and practices.

Interviewers also collected information on the general

health and the presence of any longstanding health problems of the responding parent and his or her spouse. The

responding parent stated his or her own height and weight

and those of his or her partner. If the youth was adopted, the

responding parent reported the height and weight (if known)

of the youth’s biological parents.

Youth demographic characteristics. Several demographic

details have been collected about youth respondents. In

round 1, respondent birthdates were collected in the household screener and later verified by the youth and responding

parent. This birth date information is used in each round to

create a variable indicating the respondent’s age as of the

interview date. The youth’s sex, race, and Hispanic ethnicity

also were reported in the round 1 household screener.

Youth residential history. Information about the youth’s

residences has been collected in each survey. In round 1,

the parent questionnaire and the screener, household roster,

and nonresident roster questionnaire gathered these data;

some of the information is updated in the youth questionnaires in subsequent rounds.

Youth questionnaire. In rounds 2 through 6, the survey

instruments collected information on the changes in the

youth’s living and custodial situations since the last interview. Questions asking about the dates of each move to a

new State, city, or county and about the parent figures with

whom the youth has lived since the last interview update the

information from previous rounds.

Parent questionnaire. The round 1 parent questionnaire

queried the responding parent about whom the youth had

lived with since birth. For adopted youths, information includes whether the youth had ever lived with either biological parent. For each youth not living with both biological

parents, the survey asked whether the responding parent

held legal responsibility for or legal custody of the youth. If

only the youth’s biological mother was listed on the birth

certificate, followup questions determined whether the biological father had been legally identified through a blood

test, court ruling, signed legal document, or other means.

Screener, household roster, and nonresident roster questionnaire. Information included the distance the youth lived

from his or her biological parents (if they were alive) or the

date on which each of the youth’s biological parents died.

Household environment. Respondents ages 12 to 14 (as of

December 31, 1996) have answered a brief series of questions about their household environment in each survey

round. Depending on the round, these questions include

whether the respondent’s household was conducive to

studying in the past month and the number of days in a

typical week on which the family interacts. The round 1

survey also asked these same respondents to report the number of days in a typical week on which the youth heard gunshots in the neighborhood. In addition, respondents answer

various questions about knowing or being the victim of a

crime.

Household information. Data about other residents in the

respondent’s household were collected in the screener,

household roster, and nonresident roster questionnaire in

round 1; these questions are included in the youth questionnaire in later survey rounds.

Youth questionnaire. In surveys after round 1, the first section of the youth questionnaire identifies the youth’s resident and nonresident parents and establishes the

relationship to the youth of all nonrelative household residents. The current marital status of each nonresident parent

is collected, while followup questions verify demographic

data (such as marital status, age, and race or ethnicity) on

each household occupant from the previous round and

record any changes. For each occupant, this section also

asks about enrollment status, highest grade completed, and

the highest degree each has completed if currently enrolled

(already collected in a previous round for those not currently enrolled). Current labor force status is collected for

residents age 16 and older. In rounds 2 through 6, independent respondents provided information about the previous

year’s earnings for household residents age 14 or older.
18 CHAPTER 2: THE NLSY97

Screener, household roster, and nonresident roster questionnaire. In round 1, this instrument collected the demographic and relationship information for household

occupants described in the above paragraph. For each resident age 16 or older, the roster also asked for the number of

weeks the resident had worked in 1996 and the usual hours

worked per week during that period.

The questions in the nonresident roster section of this

instrument determined the relationship to the youth of any

key nonresident relatives (biological, step-, or adoptive parents; siblings; spouses; children; or other parent of youth’s

children) and gathered the information summarized in table

2.7. Note that, while it was not collected directly, the sex of

nonresident relatives can be inferred from relationship codes

for parents, spouses, siblings, and children.

Parent questionnaire. In round 1, the responding adult provided information on the 1996 earnings (self-employment

earnings and earnings from an employee job) and income of

each household member age 14 and older.

7. Expectations

The round 1 survey asked respondents who were age 15 or

older by the end of the previous calendar year to assess the

probability of certain events occurring in their lives over the

next year, by the time they turn 20, and by the time they reach

30. The list included events such as working more than 20

hours per week, serving time in prison, and earning a 4-year

college degree. The round 4 survey asked all respondents

similar questions about the likelihood of events taking place

over the next year and within the next 5 years; the round 5

questions refer to several different periods.

Parent questionnaire. In round 1, responding parents of

youths age 15 and older answered a similar set of questions

about events that might occur in the youth’s life.

8. Attitudes, behaviors, and time use

Attitudes. Respondents report in each round on their contact with any absent parents and, in rounds 1 through 4 and

6, state their perception of the amount of supportiveness

displayed by each parent figure. Also collected in rounds 1

through 3 and 5 from respondents ages 12 to 14 as of December 31, 1996, were data on the youths’ opinions about their

parent(s) (for example, want to be like him or her, enjoy spending time with him or her). In rounds 1 through 5, respondents’ beliefs about their parents’ knowledge of their

activities were reported. Younger respondents provide further information about their parents’ relationship with

spouses or partners and about contact between biological

parents who live separately.

One question was included in rounds 1 through 3 for

respondents who were age 14 or younger as of December 31,

1996, and was addressed to all respondents in rounds 4 and

6. It asked youths whom they would turn to for help with a

personal problem (for example, parent, sibling, friend, counselor). Round 6 also asked respondents about their best

friend. If this person was someone other than a parent,

spouse, cohabitating partner, sexual partner, or other parent

of the youth’s child, a separate question collected demographic data about the individual. If the best friend was

anyone besides a parent, respondents reported their frequency of contact with this person and how often they had

asked for advice about decisions or relationships since the

last interview.

Several series of questions address respondent perceptions about different aspects of society. Each round of the

Marital Educational Employment

Relationship Sex Race Age status status status

Biological parent ∗∗ ∗ ∗ ∗

Adoptive parent1 ∗∗ ∗ ∗ ∗

Stepparent1 ∗

Full-sibling2 ∗∗ ∗

Half-sibling2 ∗∗ ∗

Spouse of youth ∗ ∗

Children of youth3 ∗ ∗

Parent of youth’s children ∗

Table 2.7. Data collected for nonresident relatives in NLSY97 round 1

1

Information on nonresident stepparents or adoptive parents

is collected only if those parents live with one of the youth’s biological parents. 2

Data on full- and half-siblings are gathered only if those siblings do not live with either of the youth’s nonresident biological

parents. Coresident siblings appear on the household roster. 3

This information is collected only if the NLSY97 youth is aged

14 or older.
CHAPTER 2: THE NLSY97 19

survey asks about the respondent’s perception of the criminal justice system and the odds of being caught and punished for a hypothetical crime. In round 1, a series of

questions asked respondents about the activities of their

peers, including the percentage of students in their grade

they believe to be involved in a gang, an organized sport, or

volunteer work. The series also addressed peer behavior,

such as the percentage of students the respondents believe

smoke cigarettes, drink alcohol, or use drugs. In addition,

respondents reported their attitudes toward their teachers

and perceptions of the school environment (for example,

whether the respondent considers school a safe place) during the round 1 survey.

The religiosity of the youth respondent also has been

included in the surveys. In round 1, respondents reported

their religious preference. Rounds 4 through 6 asked about

the frequency of their attendance at religious worship services, and round 6 also included a series about religious

beliefs. Religiosity information also is collected for household members, the youth’s parents, and the youth’s spouse

or partner.

Behaviors. A series of questions on health-related behaviors in each survey asks youths whether they have ever

smoked cigarettes, consumed alcohol, or used illegal drugs,

as well as whether and how often they have engaged in

these activities within the past month. This section also

solicits data on the age at which these activities first occurred. Delinquency information is collected about respondents age 16 or younger who have run away from home and

about all respondents who have carried a handgun or joined

a gang. Respondents answer questions about their participation in criminal activities, such as assault, theft, battery, or

carrying a handgun, and arrests or punishment resulting from

these activities.

Besides answering questions concerning delinquent

behavior, respondents are also asked about their social behavior. All respondents are questioned about the frequency

of their dates and the number of different people they have

dated. Round 6 also included a more extensive series about

the current or most recent person the respondent had dated.

Respondents age 14 or older as of the end of the previous

calendar year (all respondents in round 3 and beyond) provide information on their sexual activity. These questions

include frequency of sexual intercourse and birth control

use.

Youths ages 12 or 13 as of December 31, 1996, answered

a series of questions in rounds 1 through 5 on how decisions

concerning their activities were made (for example, who determined how late the youth can stay out at night, who determined the type of TV shows and movies the youth can

watch). If the youth reported that the parents made the rules

or that the parents and the youth jointly decided, followup

questions asked about the number of times the youth had

broken the rules in the last 30 days.

Parent questionnaire. Responding parents of youths ages

12 or 13 answered a similar series of questions on control

and autonomy during the initial interview. Followup questions asked about the number of times the youth broke the

rules in the last 30 days.

Time use. In the series of questions on time use in rounds 1

through 3, respondents who were not in school or employed

and were at least age 16 (round 1) or at least age 15 (rounds

2 and 3) reported details about the way they spend a typical

day. Information collected includes the time at which they

usually wake up each day, whether they go to a place on a

regular basis, and the time at which they leave for and return

from that place. In round 1, youths ages 12 to 14 assessed

the amount of time they spent in the prior week doing homework, watching television, reading, or taking extra classes or

lessons.

9. Health

Every round collects basic data on respondents’ health status. All respondents provide information about their general

health and state their height and weight. They also report a

perception of their weight (for example, very underweight,

slightly overweight, about the right weight), as well as any

action they are taking concerning their weight (for instance,

trying to lose, trying to gain, trying to stay the same). The

round 1 questionnaire asked respondents to report whether

they had entered puberty and, if so, their age at onset; this

information is updated in subsequent rounds if puberty was

not attained at the previous interview.

More detailed data were gathered in rounds 1 and 6.

The initial interview asked youths who were 13 years old as

of December 31, 1996, about their practices with regard to

health-related behaviors such as seatbelt use, nutrition, and

exercise. In addition, these youths stated their opinions

about whether smoking cigarettes or drinking alcohol contributes to certain health problems (getting AIDS, getting

heart disease, harming an unborn child, and so forth). Also

in round 1, the health section questioned youths not living

with their parents about their health insurance coverage (for

example, covered by job, covered by military-related plan,

not covered).

In round 6, respondents reported their health practices

in a typical week (for example, nutrition, exercise, sleep, computer and television use) in a series similar to the one in

round 1. This series of questions also asked how many

times in the past month the youth had driven after drinking

or had ridden with a driver who had been drinking. Next, the

youth answered questions (similar to those asked of parents

in round 1) concerning any chronic health conditions or prob-
20 CHAPTER 2: THE NLSY97

lems, including the age at which a condition was first noticed

and whether the condition currently limits activities. Two

new health series were also part of round 6. The first asked

about when the respondent was ill or injured in the past year,

the length of time since the last routine checkup, and

healthcare coverage over the past year. Finally, the other

new series questioned the youth about various traumatic

events that had occurred in the past 5 years. This list included the death of a close relative, being the victim of a

violent crime, periods of homelessness, hospitalization of a

household member, adult household members being in jail or

unemployed, and a parent’s divorce.

Parent questionnaire. The responding parent also answered

questions about the youth’s health during the first survey

round. In particular, this section questioned the parent about

whether the youth suffers from or takes medication for any

chronic health problems such as mental retardation, blindness, cancer, or asthma. Followup questions determined the

condition, the age of the youth when the condition was first

noticed, and whether the condition currently limited the

youth. Parents reported on the youth’s health insurance

coverage for youths who live at home. Finally, if the youth

was born in 1983, the responding parent stated his or her

perception of the health effects of drinking alcohol.

10. Environmental variables

The NLSY97 main data set includes several created variables

that describe the youth’s permanent residence. The main

variables indicate whether the youth lives in an urban or

rural area, whether the youth lives in a Metropolitan Statistical Area (MSA), and in which census region the youth resides. In addition, an unemployment rate variable reports

the unemployment rate (within a 3-percentage-point range)

for the youth’s local labor market. These variables permit

researchers to obtain general information about the youth’s

geographic area without having access to the restricted-use

geocode data set.

11. Event history variables

These special created variables summarize the timing of a

variety of major life events for each respondent. The event

history variables are divided into four major sections. The

first section contains the employment status (working for

employer number 1, unemployed, out of the labor force, and

so on) of each respondent for each week from the

respondent’s 14th birthday to the interview date.

The variables for marital status, the second topic, cover

the respondent’s marital or cohabitation status during each

month from the respondent’s 14th birthday to the month of

the most recent interview. Possible status labels are never

married and not cohabiting, never married and cohabiting,

married, legally separated, divorced, or widowed.

Variables on program participation status, the third topic,

are similar in structure to those for marital status. For each

month since the respondent’s 14th birthday, these variables

indicate whether the respondent was receiving economic

assistance such as unemployment compensation, AFDC, or

Food Stamps.

The fourth event history topic concerns the

respondent’s schooling experiences. Unlike the other constructions, this section provides some information on a yearly

basis beginning with each youth’s date of birth. Beginning

in round 2, data also are provided in monthly variables to

capture information for each month from the respondent’s

interview date in round 1 to the current interview date.

These event history arrays are not included on the initial main data release, but are located on the subsequent

event history and geocode releases. In these data sets, the

variables can be found by searching for question names that

begin with “EMP_” for employment status, “MAR_” for

marital status, and “SCH_” for schooling experiences. Researchers may access the program participation status variables by searching for question names that begin with

“WKCOMP_,” “UNEMP_,” “AFDC_,” “FDST_,” “WIC_,”

or “OTHER_,” depending on the program of interest.

Data files and documentation

Data for rounds 1 through 4 of the NLSY97 are distributed in

three data sets:

(1) NLSY97 Main Files—includes main interview data and

created variables;

(2) NLSY97 Event History Data—includes all main file data

 plus created event history variables; and

(3) NLSY97 Geocode Data—in addition to restricted-release

geographic information, includes main file and event

history data.

Each data set includes documentation files and is accompanied by search and extraction software that enables users to

easily peruse, select, and extract variables. Chapter 8 provides more technical information on the NLS data format and

extraction software, as well as descriptions of supplementary documentation items available for the NLSY97. Data

from round 5 will be available in mid-2003.

Reference

O’Muircheartaigh, C. and Pedlow, S. “Combining Samples

vs. Cumulating Cases: A Comparison of Two Weighting

Strategies in the NLSY97.” Proceedings of the Section

on Survey Research Methods, American Statistical Association (2000): 319–24.
CHAPTER 2: THE NLSY97 21

Selected variables by age and instrument:

NLSY97

Table 2.8 depicts selected variables from the NLSY97 interviews. The first column of the table lists some of the variables included in the survey. Codes in the following columns

indicate which survey instrument yielded the information (Y

= Youth Questionnaire; P = Parent Questionnaire; S =

Screener, Household Roster, and Nonresident Roster Questionnaire; and U = Household Income Update).

As appropriate, age restrictions are noted in parentheses; the applicable dates for the restrictions are provided at

the beginning of each section or within the description of

the question. Age restrictions for each round refer to the

youth’s age as of December 31, 1996, unless otherwise noted

in the table. Other restrictions not mentioned here may apply to some variables; users should refer to the codebook or

to the NLSY97 User’s Guide (available at http://

www.bls.gov/nls) for more information. “Y” used in variable

descriptions stands for “youth respondent.” Users should

be aware that, in some instances, the variable descriptions in

the table represent a group of questions and not single response items.
22 CHAPTER 2: THE NLSY97

Table 2.8. Selected NLSY97 variables by survey round: Respondents ages 12 to 17 in 1997 

Variable Round

1

Round

2

Round

3

Round

4

Round

5

Round

6

I. EMPLOYMENT, UNEMPLOYMENT, AND JOB SEARCH (age restrictions as of interview date) 

A. Current Population Survey (CPS): Week before survey 

 Labor force and employment status Yt15 Yt15

Worked for profit or pay; worked at unpaid position in family business 

or farm Yt15 Yt15

 Hours per week worked or usually worked at main job Yt15 Yt15

 Hours per week worked at main job last week Yt15 Yt15

 Number of overtime hours Yt15 Yt15

 Reason worked part time Yt15 Yt15

 Reason absent from work Yt15 Yt15

 Actual weeks or expected duration of layoff Yt15 Yt15

 Disability prevents Y from working or accepting work Yt15 Yt15

 Length of time spent looking for work Yt15 Yt15

 Search methods used in last 4 weeks Yt15 Yt15

 Is Y searching for part-time or full-time job Yt15 Yt15

B. Characteristics of employee jobs (starting in round 4, also self-employed jobs of youths age 18 at end of prior calendar year)

1. Jobs of any length 

 Who helped Y find job Yt14 

 Job start and stop dates Yt14 Yt14 Y Y Y Y 

 Industry and occupation at start date Yt14 Yt14 Y Y Y Y 

 Rate of pay at start date Yt14 Yt14 Y Y Y Y 

 Usual hours per week worked Yt14 Yt14 Y Y Y Y 

 Overtime rate of pay at start date Yt14 Yt14 Y Y Y Y 

 Weeks Y had worked as of job’s stop date Yt14 Yt14 Y Y Y Y 

 Class of worker Yt16 Yt16 Yt16 Yt16 Y Y 

 Y covered by collective bargaining (all jobs in round 1) Yt16 Yt16 Yt16 Yt16 Y Y 

 Reason for gap during employment Yt14 Yt14 Y Y Y Y 

 Did Y look for work during gap Yt14 Yt14 Y Y Y Y 

 Age, race, and sex of immediate supervisor (all jobs in round 1) Yt16 Yt16 Yt16 Yt16 Y Y 

 Shift worked (all jobs in round 1) Yt16 Yt16 Yt16 Yt16 Y Y 

Size of employer (number of employees/locations/people worked for 

Y) (all jobs in round 1) Yt16 Yt16 Yt16 Yt16 Y Y 

Benefits available at employer (all jobs in round 1) Yt16 Yt16 Yt16 Yt16 Y Y 

 Reason for leaving job or reason self-employment job ended Yt16 Yt16 Yt16 Yt16 Y Y 

 General job satisfaction (all jobs in round 1) Yt16 Yt16 Yt16 Yt16 Y Y 

2. Jobs lasting more than 13 weeks 

 Y covered by collective bargaining (all jobs in round 1) Yt16 Yt16 Yt16 Yt16 Y Y 

 Age, race, and sex of immediate supervisor (all jobs in round 1) Yt16 Yt16 Yt16 Yt16 Y Y 
CHAPTER 2: THE NLSY97 23

Table 2.8. Selected NLSY97 variables by survey round: Respondents ages 12 to 17 in 1997 

Variable Round

1

Round

2

Round

3

Round

4

Round

5

Round

6

 Shift worked (all jobs in round 1) Yt16 Yt16 Yt16 Yt16 Y Y 

Size of employer (number of employees/locations/people worked for 

Y) (all jobs in round 1) Yt16 Yt16 Yt16 Yt16 Y Y 

 Benefits available at employer (all jobs in round 1) Yt16 Yt16 Yt16 Yt16 Y Y 

 General job satisfaction (all jobs in round 1) Yt16 Yt16 Yt16 Yt16 Y Y 

 Occupation and industry at current or stop date Yt14 Yt14 Y Y Y Y 

Rate of pay at current or stop date Yt14 Yt14 Y Y Y Y 

 Overtime rate of pay at current or stop date Yt14 Yt14 Y Y Y Y 

 Usual hours per week at current or stop date Yt14 Yt14 Y Y Y Y 

C. Characteristics of freelance jobs (any length)1

 Type and duration of freelance job(s) Y Y Y Y Y 

 Who helped Y find job Y 

 Usual hours worked per week Y Y Y Y Y 

 Number of weekdays, weekends worked Y Y Y Y Y 

 Number of days per week usually worked Y Y Y Y Y 

 Hours per day worked on weekdays, weekends Y Y Y Y Y 

 Usual weekly earnings Y Y Y Y Y 

 Number of weeks worked at job Y Y Y Y Y 

1. Self-employment jobs for youths earning $200 or more per week 

 Industry and occupation Yt16 Yt16 Yt16 2 2

 Number of people who worked for Y Yt16 Yt16 Yt16 2 2

 Reason job ended Yt16 Yt16 Yt16 2 2

D. Military (Youths age 16 and older who report an ongoing job) 

 Branch of Armed Forces Y Y Y Y Y 

 Current or most recent military occupation Y Y Y Y Y 

 Current pay grade or pay grade when entered Y Y Y Y 

E. Periods not working at an employee job 

 Start and stop date of period not working Yt14 Yt14 Y Y Y Y 

 Number of weeks on layoff Yt14 Yt14 Y Y Y Y 

 Number of weeks unemployed Yt14 Yt14 Y Y Y Y 

 Number of weeks out of labor force Yt14 Yt14 Y Y Y Y 

 Number of weeks actively looking for work Yt14 Yt14 Y Y Y Y 

 Methods of job search used Yt14 Yt14 Y Y Y Y 

 1In rounds 1 and 2, the survey collected characteristics of freelance jobs for youths ages 14 or older (as of the interview date) and

characteristics of all jobs for youths ages 12 and 13. The round 3 survey gathered characteristics of freelance jobs for all youths.

Round 4 included freelance jobs for youths born in 1983 or 1984. Round 5 included freelance jobs only for youths born in 1984.

 2Youths age 16 or older at the interview date but younger than 18 at the end of the previous calendar year answer these questions.

Older youths report information on self-employment jobs in the regular employee jobs section.
24 CHAPTER 2: THE NLSY97

Table 2.8. Selected NLSY97 variables by survey round: Respondents ages 12 to 17 in 1997 

Variable Round

1

Round

2

Round

3

Round

4

Round

5

Round

6

 Main reason did not look for work Yt14 Yt14 Y Y Y Y 

II. SCHOOLING (age restrictions as of 12/31/96) 

Y’s educational history (number of schools, type) (since last 

interview) P Y Y Y Y Y 

 Current enrollment status Y,P Y Y Y Y Y 

 Grade level currently attending Y,P Y Y Y Y Y 

 Reason stopped attending school Y Y Y Y Y Y 

 Date of last enrollment Y Y Y Y Y Y 

 Type of school attended (public, private, or alternative) Y Y Y Y Y Y 

Degree and date degree received Y Y Y Y Y Y 

 Highest grade level attended Y,P Y Y Y Y Y 

Highest grade level completed Y Y Y Y Y Y 

Did Y ever skip or repeat a grade (since last interview) P Y Y Y Y Y 

 Gaps in enrollment P Y Y Y Y Y 

Grade level(s) when and duration for which Y was suspended from 

school Y,P Y Y Y Y Y 

 Y’s experiences in school during fall term Y 

PIAT Math score—rounds 1–5: Youths in 9th or lower grade in round 

1, round 6: Youths currently in high school Y Y=12 Y=12 Y=12 Y=12 Y=12 

A. High school 

 High school curriculum Y Y Y Y Y Y 

 Grades received in 8th grade and high school Y Y Y Y Y Y 

Grade Y took SAT I or ACT, highest scores (in rounds 2 through 6, 

grade 11 or higher only) Y Y Y Y Y Y 

Subjects of AP exams taken (in rounds 2 through 6), highest score 

(round 1) Y,P Y Y Y Y Y 

 Math and science courses taken or completed in grades 7 through 12 Y Y Y Y Y Y 

 Expected graduation date Y Y Y Y Y Y 

 Y received regular high school diploma Y Y Y Y Y Y 

 Y received GED Y Y Y Y Y Y 

 Reason for and type of academic class taken during break P 

B. School-based learning programs 

 Y participated in school-based learning programs Y Y Y Y Y Y 

 Type(s) of school-based learning programs Y Y Y Y Y Y 

 Number of weeks/days/hours participated in most recent program Y Y Y Y Y Y 

 Stipend Y received for participation Y Y Y Y Y Y 

C. College 

 Number of colleges or universities attended Y Y Y Y Y Y 
CHAPTER 2: THE NLSY97 25

Table 2.8. Selected NLSY97 variables by survey round: Respondents ages 12 to 17 in 1997 

Variable Round

1

Round

2

Round

3

Round

4

Round

5

Round

6

Type of college Y currently attending (2-year or 4-year; public or 

private) Y Y Y Y Y Y 

 Y currently full- or part-time student Y Y Y Y Y Y 

 Cost of attendance at Y’s college Y Y Y Y Y Y 

 Type and amount of educational loans or financial aid Y Y Y Y Y Y 

Type of diploma/degree/certificate working toward Y Y Y Y Y Y 

Type of degree received Y Y Y Y Y Y 

Number of credits required for Y’s degree Y Y Y Y Y Y 

 College credits Y earned before college Y Y Y Y Y Y 

 Method of earning college credits before college Y Y Y Y Y Y 

Date and terms Y enrolled Y Y Y Y Y Y 

 Number of credits enrolled for or earned per term Y Y Y Y Y Y 

 Grade point average (GPA) in each term Y Y Y Y Y Y 

 Field of study in each term Y Y Y Y Y Y 

 Terms in which Y took remedial math or English course Y Y Y Y Y Y 

III. TRAINING (age restrictions as of interview date) 

 Type(s) of training program(s) Yt16 Yt16 Yt16 Yt16 Y Y 

 Number and duration of training programs Yt16 Yt16 Yt16 Yt16 Y Y 

 Type of degree/certificate/journeyman’s card Yt16 Yt16 Yt16 Yt16 Y Y 

Hours per day and days per week Y usually in training Yt16 Yt16 Yt16 Yt16 Y Y 

Method of financing training program Yt16 Yt16 Yt16 Yt16 Y Y 

 Amount of training allowance (government program) Yt16 Yt16 Yt16 Yt16 Y Y 

 Skills learned in program Yt16 Yt16 Yt16 Yt16 Y Y 

 Services provided by program Yt16 Yt16 Yt16 Yt16 Y Y 

 Participate in job search assistance training Yt16 Yt16 Yt16 Yt16 Y Y 

 Training related to specific employer Yt16 Yt16 Yt16 Yt16 Y Y 

 Job or occupation Y in training program to acquire Yt16 Yt16 Yt16 Yt16 Y Y 

 Reason for enrolling in training program if employer paid Yt16 Yt16 Yt16 Yt16 Y Y 

 Did Y complete training program Yt16 Yt16 Yt16 Yt16 Y Y 

IV. INCOME, ASSETS, AND PROGRAM PARTICIPATION 

A. Income (all questions except wages/salary and parental allowance asked only of independent youths) 

Previous year’s income from wages or salary (collected separately for 

Y and spouse) Y,P Y Y Y Y Y 

Previous year’s income from farm or own business (collected 

separately for Y and spouse) Y Y Y Y Y Y 

 Previous year’s income from child support Y Y Y Y Y Y 

 Previous year’s interest or dividend payments Y Y Y Y Y Y 

 Previous year’s income from estates/trusts/annuities/inheritance Y Y Y Y Y Y 
26 CHAPTER 2: THE NLSY97

Table 2.8. Selected NLSY97 variables by survey round: Respondents ages 12 to 17 in 1997 

Variable Round

1

Round

2

Round

3

Round

4

Round

5

Round

6

 Previous year’s income from rental properties Y Y Y Y Y Y 

 Previous year’s income from parental transfers other than allowance Y Y Y Y Y Y 

 Previous year’s income from other sources Y Y Y Y Y Y 

 Previous year’s income from parental allowance Y Y Y Y Y Y 

 Previous year’s income paid to parents Y,P 

Y or spouse/partner claimed Earned Income Tax Credit (EITC) on 

previous tax return Y Y Y Y Y Y 

B. Assets (all questions asked only of independent youths)3

 Market value of Y’s residence or business Y Y Y Y Y Y 

 Amount of rent/mortgage/land contract/loans Y Y Y Y Y Y 

 Improvements to property since last interview Y Y Y Y Y 

 Y paid property taxes Y Y Y Y Y Y 

Average amount spent on utilities per month Y Y Y Y Y Y 

 Value of Y’s stock or mutual funds Y Y Y Y Y Y 

 Value of Y’s retirement plan Y Y Y Y Y Y 

 Y’s current checking and savings balance Y Y Y Y Y Y 

 Value of certificates of deposit/bonds/bills Y Y Y Y Y Y 

 Value of real estate Y Y Y Y Y Y 

Value of business or professional practice Y Y Y Y Y Y 

 Value of and amount owed on motor vehicles Y Y Y Y Y Y 

 Estimated net value of Y’s household furnishings Y Y Y Y Y Y 

 Value of other assets Y Y Y Y Y Y 

 Amount of loans ($200 or more) Y received Y Y Y Y Y Y 

Amount owed on other types of debt Y Y Y Y Y Y 

Value of assets owned solely by spouse/partner Y Y Y Y Y 

C. Program participation (all questions asked only of independent youths) (asked of Y and spouse jointly except where noted) 

Number and duration of unemployment compensation spells, income 

per week each spell (Y and spouse collected separately) Y Y Y Y Y Y 

Number and duration of workers’ compensation spells, income per 

week each spell (Y and spouse collected separately) Y Y Y Y Y 

 Source of workers’ compensation payments Y Y Y Y Y 

Income from workers’ compensation, amount received (Y and spouse 

collected separately) Y 

Number and duration of AFDC/TANF/ADC spells, income per month 

each spell Y Y Y Y Y Y 

 Persons covered under the AFDC/TANF/ADC program Y Y Y Y Y Y 

3

 Y’s are asked these asset questions in the first interview after they become independent, turn age 18, and turn age 20. They

will continue to be asked periodically in future rounds.
CHAPTER 2: THE NLSY97 27

4

 In round 1, information on adopted children was collected only if such children were reported on the household or nonresident

rosters; otherwise, an age filter made these questions impossible to reach. In rounds 2 through 4, these questions were asked only of

respondents who reported an adopted child on the household or nonresident roster or who were age 17 or older as of the end of the

previous calendar year.

Table 2.8. Selected NLSY97 variables by survey round: Respondents ages 12 to 17 in 1997 

Variable Round

1

Round

2

Round

3

Round

4

Round

5

Round

6

Number and duration of Food Stamp (FS) spells, value of FS 

received per month each spell Y Y Y Y Y Y 

 Persons covered under the FS program Y Y Y Y Y Y 

 Number and duration of WIC spells, income per month each spell Y Y Y Y Y Y 

 Persons covered under the WIC program Y Y Y Y Y Y 

Number and duration of Low-Income Home Energy Assistance 

Program spells, income per spell Y 

Number and duration of other welfare spells, income per month each 

spell Y Y Y Y Y Y 

 Persons covered under other welfare programs Y Y Y Y Y Y 

 Y lives in public housing or receives rental vouchers Y Y Y Y Y Y 

V. FAMILY FORMATION (age restrictions as of end of previous calendar year—12/31/96 in round 1, 12/31/97 in round 2, and so on) 

A. Marital history 

 Spells Y married or lived with sexual partner Yt16 Yt16 Yt16 Yt16 Y Y 

 Y’s current marital status Yt16 Yt16 Yt16 Yt16 Y Y 

Duration of Y’s and partner’s cohabitation Yt16 Yt16 Yt16 Yt16 Y Y 

Current partner’s age, race, highest grade completed, degree earned, 

and labor market status (from household roster; only in rounds 2 

through 6 if new to household) 

Y Y Y Y Y Y 

Demographic characteristics of noncurrent partner (new since last 

interview) Yt16 Yt16 Yt16 Yt16 Y Y 

 Partner’s religion Yt16 Yt16 Yt16 Yt16 Y Y 

 Partner enrolled in government program Yt16 Yt16 Yt16 Yt16 Y Y 

 Changes in relationship status Yt16 Yt16 Yt16 Yt16 Y Y 

 Y’s and partner’s behavior toward each other (questions vary) Yt16 Yt16 Y Y 

B. Fertility and children 

 Number, sex, and ages of biological children S,Y Y Y Y Y Y 

 Number, sex, and ages of adopted children4 S,Y Y Y Y Y Y 

 Number and outcome of pregnancies not ending in live births Yt14 Yt14 Y Y Y Y 

 Current residence of live biological or adopted children4 Y Y Y Y Y Y 

 Y has legal responsibility for or custody of biological or adopted child4 Y Y Y Y Y Y 

 Male youths: has Y gotten someone pregnant, number, outcome Y Y Y Y Y 

 Male youths: quality of relationship with child’s mother Y Y Y 

 Female youths: quality of relationship with child’s father Y Y 

Male youths: current economic status of child’s mother, amount of 

informal child support Y Y Y 
28 CHAPTER 2: THE NLSY97

Table 2.8. Selected NLSY97 variables by survey round: Respondents ages 12 to 17 in 1997 

Variable Round

1

Round

2

Round

3

Round

4

Round

5

Round

6

Female youths: current economic status of child’s father, amount of 

informal child support Y Y 

 Male youths: contact with resident and nonresident children Y Y Y 

Race, age, highest grade completed, welfare recipiency, school 

enrollment, religion, and labor force status of other parent at 

conception (if not already collected in household roster or marriage 

section) 

Y Y Y Y Y Y 

C. Childcare 

1. Female youths with at least one resident child under the age of 13 

Hours spent at work, at school, at training, or commuting in a typical 

week Y Y 

 Type of childcare Y Y 

 Hours spouse/partner cared for child Y 

 Specify relatives who care for child, location of this care Y 

 Hours spent in each type of childcare Y 

Payment details (total amount, amount of funding from outside 

source) Y Y 

Who most often dropped off and picked up child at childcare, travel 

time Y 

2. Female youths with children who did not use child care 

 Number of relatives living close to youth’s home Y 

These relatives able to care for child without or with pay, amount 

would need Y 

 Amount expect to pay or be willing to pay for outside care provider Y 

3. Female youths without children who were born in 1983 or 1984 

 Number of relatives living close to Y’s home Y 

 Any relatives be able to care for child Y 

 Amount expect to pay or be willing to pay for outside care provider Y 

VI. FAMILY BACKGROUND (age restrictions as of 12/31/1996) 

A. Parent history and current status 

 Parent nationality/birthplace/date of birth P 

 Parent religious affiliation when growing up and currently P 

 Reason parent did not live with both biological parents P 

 Parents’ number of siblings P 

 Type of community when parent was age 14 P 

 Y’s parents’ parents’ birth year and highest grade completed P 

 Language spoken by parent at the time of the survey P 

 Highest grade parent completed P,S 

 Number and duration of parents’ previous marriages P 

 Parent employment history (dates, hours per week worked) P 
CHAPTER 2: THE NLSY97 29

Table 2.8. Selected NLSY97 variables by survey round: Respondents ages 12 to 17 in 1997 

Variable Round

1

Round

2

Round

3

Round

4

Round

5

Round

6

Parents’ earnings in last calendar year (in rounds 1 and 2, 

independent youths and youths age 14 or older as of previous 

calendar year) 

P,Y Y,U Y,U Y,U Y,U Y 

 Parents’ participation in and income from government program P 

 Parent income from all other sources P U U U U 

 Value of parents’ IRA or prepaid tuition accounts P 

 Value of parents’ assets P 

Amount of parents’ debt P 

 Parents’ height and weight P 

Parents’ longstanding health problem P 

 Parent’s attitude toward self P=12–14 

 Parent’s attitude toward certain behaviors P=13 

 Parent’s attitude toward relationship with partner P=12–14 

B. Youth history 

 Which parent(s) Y lives with and custody arrangements P Y Y Y Y Y 

 Number of residential moves away from parent 

 Y has adoptive parent(s) P Y Y Y Y Y 

 Is Y legally adopted, year adoption occurred P 

 Did Y ever live with biological parent P 

 Distance from biological mother/father S 

 Date biological mother/father died S 

 Y ever in Head Start P 

 Y at childcare from birth to age 5 P 

Y’s biological father legally identified by medical test, signed legal or 

nonlegal document P 

C. Household environment 

 Y’s house conducive to studying, had computer in the past month Yd14 Yd14 Yd14 Y Yd13 Y

 Days per week Y’s family interrelates Yd14 Yd14 Yd14 Yd14

 Days per week Y’s family completes housework Yd14 

 Days per week Y hears gunshots in the neighborhood Yd14

 Y was victim of crime before age 12 Y 

Y was victim of crime between ages 12 and 18 (if not already 

answered) (age restrictions as of end of previous calendar year) Yt18 Yt18 Yt18 Yt18 Yt18

 Specific traumatic events (past 5 years) Y 

D. Household information 

 Relationship of other household occupants to Y S Y Y Y Y Y 

 Relationship of nonresident relatives to Y S 

Household occupants’ demographics (age, sex, race, ethnicity, 

marital status) S Y Y Y Y Y 
30 CHAPTER 2: THE NLSY97

Table 2.8. Selected NLSY97 variables by survey round: Respondents ages 12 to 17 in 1997 

Variable Round

1

Round

2

Round

3

Round

4

Round

5

Round

6

 Nonresident demographics (age, sex, race, ethnicity, marital status) S 

 Current labor force status: household occupants age 16 and older S Y Y Y Y Y 

Employment status in 1996: nonresident spouse, biological or 

adoptive parent S 

Current or most recent occupation, weeks worked in past year: 

household occupants age 16 and older S 

Current enrollment status, highest degree and grade completed: 

household occupants S Y Y Y Y Y 

 Highest grade completed: nonresidents S 

Income received, all sources: household occupants age 14 and older 

(independent youths) P,Y Y Y Y Y Y 

 Type of dwelling S Y Y Y Y Y 

VII. EXPECTATIONS (age restrictions as of 12/31/96) 

Situations parent expects Y to be in during next year, by age 20, and 

by age 30 Pt15 

Situations Y expects to be in during next year, by age 20, and by age 

30 in round 1; by next year and in 5 years for round 4; various times 

in round 5 

Yt15 Y Y 

VIII. ATTITUDES, BEHAVIORS, AND TIME USE 

A. Attitudes (age restrictions as of 12/31/96) 

 Y’s perception of teachers, school discipline, school safety Y 

 Percent of peers Y believes participate in various activities Y 

 Percent of peers Y believes have had sexual intercourse Yt15 

 Y’s contact with absent parent Y Y Y Y<14 Y<14 Y<13 

 Y’s opinion of parent’s supportiveness, permissiveness Y Y Y Y Y 

 Y’s opinion of resident/biological mother, resident/biological father Y=12–14 Y=12–14 Y=12–14 Y 

 Belief about parent’s knowledge of Y’s activities Y=12–14 Y=12–14 Y=12–14 Y=12–14 Y

Frequency of contact between Y’s parents, level of friendliness and 

hostility Y=12–14 Y=12,13 Y=12,13 Y=12–14 Y 

 Y’s opinion of parents’ relationship behaviors Y=12–14 Y=12–14 Y=12–14 Y=12–14 Y=12–14 Y<13

 How much say Y has in making rules P,Y=12,13 Y=12,13 Y=12,13 Y=12,13 Y=12,13 

 Y’s communication with and advice from parent figures Y Y Yt13

 Whom Y would turn to for help with a problem Yd14 Yd14 Yd14 Y Y 

 Religious identification and attendance (questions vary) Y Y Y Y 

 Y’s perception of criminal justice system Y Y Y Y Y Y 

 Y’s perception of own personality traits Yd14

 Series about Y’s best friend Y 

B. Behaviors (age restrictions as of previous calendar year—12/31/96 in round 1, 12/31/97 in round 2, and so forth) 

 Dating: Age first dated, frequency of dating, number of people dated Y Y Y Y Y 

 More detailed dating series about most recent partner Y 
CHAPTER 2: THE NLSY97 31

Table 2.8. Selected NLSY97 variables by survey round: Respondents ages 12 to 17 in 1997 

Variable Round

1

Round

2

Round

3

Round

4

Round

5

Round

6

 Age first had sexual intercourse Yt14 Yt14 Y Y Y Y 

Number of sexual partners Yt14 Yt14 Y Y Y Y 

Characteristics of first and most recent sexual partner or experience Y Y Y 

Risky sexual behaviors Y Y Y 

 Type and use of birth control (condom use, other) Yt14 Yt14 Y Y Y Y 

 Amount of cigarettes/alcohol/marijuana in past month Y Y Y Y Y Y 

 Age of first cigarette/alcohol/marijuana use Y Y Y Y Y Y 

Age first used/frequency of use of other drugs such as cocaine, 

crack, heroin Y Y Y Y Y 

Age first time/number of times ever ran away (age restriction as of 

last interview date) Y Yd16 Yd16 Yd16 Yd16 Yd16

Age Y first carried a handgun Y Y Y Y Y Y 

 Y carried a handgun to school in last month Y Y Y Y Y Y 

 Age Y joined a gang Y Y Y Y Y Y 

 Type of crimes Y committed Y Y Y Y Y Y 

Age when Y committed crime first time Y 

Number of crimes committed in the previous year or since last 

interview Y Y Y Y Y Y 

 Amount from selling illegal drugs or merchandise Y Y Y Y Y Y 

 Number of times Y arrested Y Y Y Y Y Y 

 Date of Y’s first or most recent arrest Y Y5

 Y5 Y5 Y5 Y5

 Offense charged with for each arrest Y Y Y Y Y Y 

 Y convicted or pled guilty for each arrest Y Y Y Y Y Y 

 Facility, duration of sentence Y Y Y Y Y Y 

C. Time use (age restrictions as of 12/31/96) 

 Time spent on homework (weekends/weekdays) Y=12–14 

 Time in extra classes, reading, watching TV (weekends/weekdays) Y=12–14 

 Time Y usually gets up (not enrolled or employed youths) Yt16 Yt15 Yt15 

Place Y goes to on a regular basis, time goes and returns (not 

enrolled or employed) Yt16 Yt15 Yt15 

IX. HEALTH (age restrictions as of 12/31/96) 

 Y’s general health Y,P Y Y Y Y Y 

 Mental health in past month (series) Y Y 

 Y practices health-related behaviors (details vary) Y=13 Y 

 Y’s opinion on effects of smoking or drinking Y=13 

 Y’s height and weight Y Y Y Y Y Y 

 Y’s perception about weight Y Y Y Y Y Y 

5 First commission of a crime and first arrest information were collected in a later round only if not available from a previous round.
32 CHAPTER 2: THE NLSY97

Table 2.8. Selected NLSY97 variables by survey round: Respondents ages 12 to 17 in 1997

Variable Round

1

Round

2

Round

3

Round

4

Round

5

Round

6

 Y’s health insurance coverage Y,P Y 

Y diagnosed with chronic health condition P Y 

Age first noticed health condition P Y 

 Health condition limits school or work activities P Y 

 Visits to doctor in past 12 months Y 

 Knowledge of pregnancy and birth control Y=13 

 Has Y entered puberty and age at onset Y Y Y Y Y Y 

X. ENVIRONMENTAL VARIABLES (in main data set) 

Dates of residential moves to new State/city/county (since last 

interview) Y Y Y Y Y 

 Collapsed unemployment rate for local labor market Y Y Y Y Y Y 

 Current residence urban or rural Y Y Y Y Y Y 

 Current residence in MSA Y Y Y Y Y Y 

 Region of residence Y Y Y Y Y Y 
CHAPTER 3: THE NLSY79 33

THE NLSY79

I

n 1977, a panel of experts convened by the U.S. Depart

ment of Labor recommended that the National Longitudinal Surveys program begin a longitudinal study of young

men and women. This study would replicate the surveys of

young men and women that began in the 1960s. The new

longitudinal study would help policymakers and researchers

to evaluate the expanded employment and training programs

for youths legislated by the 1977 amendments to the Comprehensive Employment and Training Act (CETA).

To these ends, investigators drew a national probability

sample of civilian young men and women ages 14 to 21 (as of

December 31, 1978), with overrepresentation of blacks, Hispanics, and economically disadvantaged nonblack/non-Hispanics. Funding from the U.S. Department of Defense allowed

interviews with an additional group of youths serving in the

Armed Forces. The first interview with this sample of civilian and military youths, called the National Longitudinal

Survey of Youth 1979 (NLSY79), took place in early 1979.

The cohort was interviewed annually through 1994; after

1994, the survey was put on a biennial schedule. Interviewing for round 20 of the NLSY79 cohort began in January

2002; the content of the 2002 survey is reflected in this chapter. Data through the 2000 interview now are available. Data

from the 2002 interview are scheduled for release in late 2003;

researchers interested in more details should contact NLS

User Services at usersvc@postoffice.chrr.ohio-state.edu.

Since 1986, detailed information on the development of

children born to women in the NLSY79 cohort has supplemented the data on mothers and children collected during

the main NLSY79. Chapter 4 describes the biennial surveys

of this group, referred to as the “Children of the NLSY79.”

Chapter organization

This chapter supplies an overview of the main NLSY79 cohort and the types of data present within this data set. It

provides information about the main and supplemental

NLSY79 samples and includes a discussion of multiple-respondent households in the NLSY79, an important feature

of the original sampling design. This chapter also gives

information on interviews with the NLSY79 men and women,

as well as information relevant to assessing how attrition

has affected the sample sizes over time. Major data elements

for the NLSY79 are then highlighted. The chapter concludes

with a brief summary of the data files and documentation

available for the NLSY79.

The NLSY79

The NLSY79 is a nationally representative sample of 12,686

young men and women who were 14 to 22 years of age when

first surveyed in 1979. During the years since that first interview, these young people typically have finished their schooling, moved out of their parents’ homes, made decisions on

continuing education and training, entered the labor market,

served in the military, married, and started families of their

own. Data collected from the NLSY79 respondents chronicle

these changes, providing researchers with a unique opportunity to study in detail the life course experiences of a large

group of adults representative of all men and women born in

the late 1950s and early 1960s and living in the United States

when the survey began.

The NLSY79 samples

The NLSY79 sample design enables researchers to analyze

the disparate life course experiences of groups such as

women, Hispanics, blacks, and the economically disadvantaged. Three subsamples make up the NLSY79:

z A cross-sectional sample of 6,111 youths designed to

be representative of noninstitutionalized civilian youths

living in the United States in 1979 and born between

January 1, 1957, and December 31, 1964 (ages 14 to 21 as

of December 31, 1978)

z A supplemental sample of 5,295 youths designed to

oversample civilian Hispanic, black, and economically

disadvantaged nonblack/non-Hispanic youths living in

the United States during 1979 and born between January 1, 1957, and December 31, 1964

z A military sample of 1,280 youths designed to represent

the population born between January 1, 1957, and December 31, 1961 (ages 17 to 21 as of December 31, 1978),

and enlisted in one of the four branches of the active

military forces as of September 30, 1978

All members of the cross-sectional sample and the Hispanic

and black supplemental samples have been eligible for interview during each round of the NLSY79. Funding constraints

limited the numbers of military sample members interviewed
34 CHAPTER 3: THE NLSY79

after 1984 and of economically disadvantaged nonblack/nonHispanic supplemental sample members interviewed after

1990. (See table 3.1.)

Multiple-respondent households

In accordance with the NLSY79 sample design, all eligible

individuals ages 14 to 21 who resided in a surveyed household at the end of 1978 were selected as respondents. As a

result, the 11,406 civilian respondents interviewed in 1979

originated from 7,490 unique households; 2,862 households

included more than one NLSY79 respondent.

At the time the surveys began, the primary types of

relationships between respondents living in multiple-respondent households were those of spouse and biological,

step-, or adopted sibling. Table 3.2 lists the number of cohort members living in multiple-respondent households during the initial survey by type of relationship.

The interviews

Interviews with NLSY79 respondents were conducted on an

Table 3.1. Distribution of NLSY79 respondents by sample type, race, and sex

1The economically disadvantaged nonblack/non-Hispanic

supplemental sample was dropped after the 1990 interview. 2After the military sample was dropped in 1985, 201 sample

members were retained for continued interviewing; 183 of these

respondents were interviewed in 1990.

Sample type 1979 1984 1990 1994 1998 2000

Total sample 12,686 12,069 10,436 8,891 8,399 8,033

Cross-sectional sample 6,111 5,814 5,498 5,457 5,159 4,949

Males 3,003 2,839 2,664 2,648 2,459 2,356

Nonblack/non-Hispanic 2,439 2,303 2,157 2,150 2,007 1,926

Black 346 329 318 310 289 272

Hispanic 218 207 189 188 163 158

Females 3,108 2,975 2,834 2,809 2,700 2,593

Nonblack/non-Hispanic 2,477 2,365 2,271 2,243 2,161 2,065

Black 405 393 365 363 346 343

Hispanic 226 217 198 203 193 185

Supplemental sample 5,295 5,040 4,755 3,256 3,065 2,921

Males 2,576 2,442 2,280 1,599 1,480 1,412

Economically disadvantaged

 nonblack/non-Hispanic 742 699 664 1— 1— 1—

Black 1,105 1,055 979 973 883 847

Hispanic 729 688 637 626 597 565

Females 2,719 2,598 2,475 1,657 1,585 1,509

Economically disadvantaged

 nonblack/non-Hispanic 901 851 819 1— 1— 1—

Black 1,067 1,034 984 987 951 912

Hispanic 751 713 672 670 634 597

Military sample 1,280 1,215 2

183 178 175 163

Males 824 774 168 164 161 152

Nonblack/non-Hispanic 609 575 70 68 66 64

Black 162 151 68 62 63 61

Hispanic 53 48 30 34 32 27

Females 456 441 15 14 14 11

Nonblack/non-Hispanic 342 331 7766

Black 89 86 5553

Hispanic 25 24 3232
CHAPTER 3: THE NLSY79 35

Type of household Number of respondents

Sibling 5,914

Two siblings 3,398

Three siblings 1,743

Four siblings 624

Five siblings 125

Six siblings 24

Spouse 334

Table 3.2.Number of NLSY79 civilian respondents

by type of multiple-respondent household (1979)

annual basis from 1979 through 1994. After 1994, the survey

was placed on a biennial schedule. The original interview

schedule, calling for primarily in-person interviews, was maintained from 1979 to 1986. In 1987, budget constraints dictated that almost 86 percent of respondents participated in a

more limited telephone interview, while others were administered the shortened survey in person. Personal interviews

were again the dominant type of interviews for the 1988 round.

From 1979 to 1986, NLSY79 interviews generally were conducted in the first half of the year. Beginning in 1987, the

fielding period was shifted to the summer and fall months.

This continued until the 2002 survey when the fielding began in January with a telephone effort. Researchers should

carefully note interview dates and fielding periods when using variables that may be affected by the time of year of the

interview.

In 1993, computer-assisted personal interviewing (CAPI)

replaced the traditional paper-and-pencil interview (PAPI)

instruments used during the 1979–92 interviews. Experimental CAPI administrations had taken place during the 1989

and 1990 interviews, with documented improvements in data

quality. (See Baker and Bradburn, 1992; Bradburn, Frankel et

al., 1992; Olsen, 1991; Speizer and Dougherty, 1991.)

Table 3.3 presents the type of survey (personal or telephone) and the completion rate for each year. Table 3.4 lists

the number of interviewed respondents by sample type and

the resulting retention rates for each NLSY79 round.

Attrition and sample drops

As table 3.4 shows, retention rates for NLSY79 respondents

considered eligible for interview remained close to 90 percent during the first 16 interview rounds and were approximately 85 percent for rounds 17 and 18. Retention rate,

expressed as a percentage, is calculated by dividing the number of respondents interviewed by the number of respondents remaining eligible for interview. All base-year respondents, including those reported as deceased, are considered

eligible for interview; those who have been permanently

dropped from the sample are not considered eligible for interview. In the round 19 (2000) survey, 8,033 civilian and

military respondents out of the 9,964 eligible were interviewed, for an overall retention rate of 80.6 percent.

The number of respondents interviewed also can be expressed as a percentage of the number of base-year respondents not known to be deceased. This number, called

response rate, is reported for each survey in table 3.5. As of

2000, 313 respondents (more than 3 percent of the respondents eligible for interview) had been reported as deceased.

Thus, the response rate for those still believed to be alive is

83.2 percent.

Funding constraints required that selected respondents

in the military and supplemental subsamples be dropped from

interviewing following the 1984 and 1990 surveys, respectively. After the 1984 survey, interviewing ceased for 1,079

members of the military subsample; retained for continued

interviewing were 201 respondents randomly selected from

the entire military sample. After the 1990 survey, all 1,643

economically disadvantaged nonblack/non-Hispanic respondents in the supplemental sample were dropped from

the interview rolls.

Sampling weights

After the initial round, sampling weights were constructed

to adjust for differential nonresponse and for the black, Hispanic, and economically disadvantaged oversamples. These

weights provide the researcher with an estimate of the number of individuals in the United States who are represented

by each respondent’s answers. The National Opinion Research Center (NORC) at the University of Chicago recalculates the weights after each survey to account for

noninterviews. Researchers can create custom weights by

going to the Web site http://www.bls.gov/nls, choosing the

general overview page for the NLSY79, and clicking on the

link for custom weights.

Major data elements

Each round of the NLSY79 contains core sets of questions

on the following topics: Work and nonwork experiences,

training investments, schooling, family income, health conditions, geographic residence and environmental characteristics, household composition, and marital and fertility

histories. Although the surveys have collected information

on these topics on a regular basis, users should note that the

number of questions on a given topic, as well as the wording

and universe(s) for each question, may differ from year to

year.

In selected years, the surveys have included additional

NOTE: Siblings may be biological, step, or adopted. Some

households may include both siblings and spouses, as well as

respondents with other relationships not presented in this table.
36 CHAPTER 3: THE NLSY79

sets of questions on a variety of factors potentially affecting

labor force attachment. The initial survey, for example, collected information on each respondent’s family background,

his or her knowledge of the world of work, and a detailed

retrospective evaluation of the respondent’s labor market

experience. Subsequent surveys have included questions

on subjects such as job search methods, migration, school

discipline, health, childcare, self-esteem, time use, delinquency, knowledge about AIDS, attitudes toward work, childhood residences, neighborhood problems, drug and alcohol

use, educational/occupational aspirations, and prenatal and

postnatal health behaviors.

In addition to these core and supplemental data collections, several special surveys have focused on NLSY79 reTable 3.3. NLSY79 interview schedule

Year Personal Telephone Not available Interviewed Not interviewed

1979 11,863 93.5% 548 4.3% 275 2.2% 12,686 — —

1980 11,493 94.7 648 5.3 0 — 12,141 545 4.3%

1981 11,541 94.6 654 5.4 0 — 12,195 491 3.9

1982 11,066 91.3 1,054 8.7 3 1 12,123 563 4.4

1983 11,897 97.3 324 2.7 0 — 12,221 465 3.7

1984 11,422 94.6 646 5.4 1 1 12,069 617 4.9

1985 9,941 91.3 953 8.7 0 — 10,894 2713 6.1

1986 9,726 91.3 929 8.7 0 — 10,655 952 8.2

1987 1,126 10.7 8,998 85.8 361 3.4 10,485 1,122 9.7

1988 9,494 90.7 920 8.8 51 0.5 10,465 1,142 9.8

1989 PAPI: 8,832 83.3 1,469 13.9 3 1 10,605 1,002 8.6

CAPI : 252 2.4 49 0.5

1990 PAPI: 6,972 66.8 1,032 9.9 2 1 10,436 1,171 10.1

 CAPI: 2,145 20.6 285 2.7

1991 7,773 86.2 1,241 13.8 4 1 9,018 3946 9.5

1992 7,848 87.0 1,164 12.9 4 1 9,016 948 9.5

1993 7,917 87.9 1,081 12.0 13 0.1 9,011 953 9.6

1994 7,948 89.4 933 10.5 10 0.1 8,891 1,073 10.8

1996 7,594 87.9 1,042 12.1 0 — 8,636 1,328 13.3

1998 6,330 75.4 2,069 24.6 0 — 8,399 1,565 15.7

2000 5,420 67.5 2,613 32.5 0 — 8,033 1,931 19.4

 1Less than 0.05%.

2

The total number of NLSY79 civilian and military respondents

eligible for interview beginning in 1985 was 11,607. A total of

201 military respondents were retained from the original sample

of 1,280. 3

The total number of NLSY79 civilian and military respondents

eligible for interview beginning in 1991 was 9,964. The 1,643

economically disadvantaged nonblack/non-Hispanic male and female members of the supplemental subsample were not eligible

for interview as of the 1991 survey year.

NOTE: PAPI interviews are those conducted with paper survey instruments and pencil-entered responses; CAPI interviews

are administered using a laptop computer and an electronic questionnaire that captures respondent-, interviewer-, and machinegenerated data.
CHAPTER 3: THE NLSY79 37

spondents. These studies include the 1980 high school survey, the 1980–83 high school transcript data collections, and

the 1980 administration of the Armed Services Vocational

Aptitude Battery (ASVAB).

This section briefly describes major data elements for

the NLSY79. The categories encompass information available not only from the NLSY79 main files but also from the

NLSY79 work history and geocode constructed data files.

This listing is by no means comprehensive, and not all data

elements are necessarily present for all respondents in all

survey years. To determine whether the specific variables of

interest are available for the year(s) and respondent

universe(s) of interest, prospective users should examine

several sources. They first should look at the detailed variable table in this chapter, which presents a more comprehensive look at the types of variables available on the NLSY79

 1 Retention rate is defined as the percentage of base-year respondents remaining eligible who were interviewed in a given survey year; deceased respondents are included in the calculations.

 2 A total of 201 military respondents was retained from the original sample of 1,280; 186 of the 201 participated in the 1985 interview. The total number of NLSY79 civilian and military respondents

eligible for interview beginning in 1985 was 11,607.

 3 The 1,643 economically disadvantaged nonblack/non-Hispanic

male and female members of the supplemental subsample were

not eligible for interview as of the 1991 survey year. The total

number of NLSY79 civilian and military respondents eligible for

interview beginning in 1991 was 9,964.

1979 6,111 — 5,295 — 1,280 — 12,686 —

1980 5,873 96.1 5,075 95.9 1,193 93.2 12,141 95.7

1981 5,892 96.4 5,108 96.5 1,195 93.4 12,195 96.1

1982 5,876 96.2 5,036 95.1 1,211 94.6 12,123 95.6

1983 5,902 96.6 5,093 96.2 1,226 95.8 12,221 96.3

1984 5,814 95.1 5,040 95.2 1,215 94.9 12,069 95.1

1985 5,751 94.1 4,957 93.6 2

186 92.5 210,894 93.9

1986 5,633 92.2 4,839 91.4 183 91.0 10,655 91.8

1987 5,538 90.6 4,768 90.1 179 89.1 10,485 90.3

1988 5,513 90.2 4,777 90.2 175 87.1 10,465 90.2

1989 5,571 91.2 4,853 91.7 181 90.0 10,605 91.4

1990 5,498 90.0 4,755 89.8 183 91.0 10,436 89.9

1991 5,556 90.9 33,281 89.9 181 90.0 39,018 90.5

1992 5,553 90.9 3,280 89.8 183 91.0 9,016 90.5

1993 5,537 90.6 3,293 90.2 181 90.0 9,011 90.4

1994 5,457 89.3 3,256 89.2 178 88.6 8,891 89.2

1996 5,290 86.6 3,171 86.8 175 87.1 8,636 86.7

1998 5,159 84.4 3,065 83.9 175 87.1 8,399 84.3

2000 4,949 81.0 2,921 80.0 163 81.1 8,033 80.6

Cross-sectional sample Supplemental sample Military sample Total sample

Year Retention Retention Retention Retention

Total rate1 Total rate1 Total rate1 Total rate1

Table 3.4. NLSY79 retention rates by sample types

main data files. Additional information can be found in the

NLSY79 questionnaires, the NLSY79 User’s Guide (available

at http://www.bls.gov/nls), and the documentation files in the

NLSY79 data sets.

Data elements for the NLSY79 are discussed in the order

presented in figure 3.1.

1. Work and nonwork experiences

For the years 1979 through 2002, information is available for

all respondents on their current labor force status (that is,

whether the respondent was employed, unemployed, or out

of the labor force during most of the week preceding the

survey). Those who report being employed supply job- and

company-specific data, such as occupation, industry, firm

size, availability of fringe benefits, job satisfaction, and number of hours worked each week. For all surveys, detailed job
38 CHAPTER 3: THE NLSY79

Table 3.5. NLSY79 response rates (excluding deceased respondents) by sample types

1979 6,111 0 — 5,295 0 — 1,280 0 — 12,686 0 —

1980 5,873 4 96.2 5,075 5 95.9 1,193 0 93.2 12,141 9 95.8

1981 5,892 15 96.7 5,108 14 96.7 1,195 0 93.4 12,195 29 96.3

1982 5,876 24 96.5 5,036 19 95.5 1,211 1 94.7 12,123 44 95.9

1983 5,902 27 97.0 5,093 26 96.7 1,226 4 96.1 12,221 57 96.8

1984 5,814 30 95.6 5,040 33 95.8 1,215 4 95.2 12,069 67 95.6

1985 5,751 36 94.7 4,957 43 94.4 2186 0 92.5 210,894 79 94.5

1986 5,633 43 92.8 4,839 51 92.3 183 1 91.5 10,655 95 92.6

1987 5,538 51 91.4 4,768 56 91.0 179 3 90.4 10,485 110 91.2

1988 5,513 56 91.0 4,777 68 91.4 175 3 88.4 10,465 127 91.2

1989 5,571 60 92.1 4,853 78 93.0 181 3 91.4 10,605 141 92.5

1990 5,498 67 91.0 4,755 82 91.2 183 3 92.4 10,436 152 91.1

1991 5,556 75 92.1 33,281 65 91.5 181 4 91.9 39,018 144 91.8

1992 5,553 81 92.1 3,280 71 91.6 182 4 92.4 9,015 156 91.9

1993 5,537 90 92.0 3,293 83 92.3 181 4 91.9 9,011 177 92.1

1994 5,457 104 90.8 3,256 96 91.6 178 4 90.4 8,891 204 91.1

1996 5,290 129 88.4 3,171 109 89.5 175 5 89.3 8,636 243 88.8

1998 5,159 152 86.6 3,065 118 86.7 175 5 89.3 8,399 275 86.7

 2000 4,949 170 83.3 2,921 136 83.1 163 7 84.0 8,033 313 83.2

Cross-sectional sample Supplemental sample Military sample Total sample

# Response # Response # Response # Response

Year Total deceased rate1 Total deceased rate1 Total deceased rate1 Total deceased rate1

1

Response rate is defined as the percentage of base-year respondents remaining eligible and not known to be deceased who

were interviewed in a given survey year. 2

A total of 201 military respondents were retained from the

original sample of 1,280; 186 of the 201 participated in the 1985

interview. The total number of NLSY79 civilian and military respondents eligible for interview (including deceased respondents)

beginning in 1985 was 11,607. 3

The 1,643 economically disadvantaged nonblack/non-Hispanic

male and female members of the supplemental subsample were

not eligible for interview as of the 1991 survey year. The total

number of NLSY79 civilian and military respondents eligible for

interview (including deceased respondents) beginning in 1991

was 9,964.

Figure 3.1. Data elements in the NLSY79

1 Work and nonwork experiences

2 Training investments

3 Schooling, school records, and aptitude information

4 Military experience

5 Income and assets

6 Health conditions, injuries, and insurance coverage

7 Alcohol and substance use, criminal behavior

8 Attitudes and aspirations

9 Geographic residence information

10 Family background and demographic characteristics

11 Household composition

12 Marital and fertility histories

13 Child care
CHAPTER 3: THE NLSY79 39

information is available on up to five employers for whom

the respondent worked since the last interview. The surveys

ask about the dates on which the job started and stopped,

the number of hours worked, the reason why the respondent

left the job, details on up to four gaps in employment while

associated with an employer, occupation, class of worker,

rate of pay, the types of fringe benefits available, and collective bargaining activity in setting wages. In the 1994–2000

surveys, the information collected about each employer was

expanded to include the job search method(s) that the respondent used to obtain the job. Also beginning with the

1994 survey, questions were included on whether the respondent participated in a pension plan available through

that employer, and whether the respondent received severance pay when leaving the job. The 1994–98 surveys also

asked whether the position held with the employer was permanent, temporary, or as an independent contractor.

Beginning in 2002, the employer supplement section of

the questionnaire includes questions tailored to self-employed respondents and respondents with nontraditional

employment arrangements such as contract or temporary

workers. Similar information is collected for these types of

jobs and for regular employment, so that comparability is

maintained, but the specialized questions more accurately

reflect the job’s characteristics.

Also available is information on the activity of the respondent during periods when he or she was not associated

with an employer or was in the military (that is, weeks not

working, weeks spent looking for work, reasons not looking

for work). Data are collected on job search behavior for

unemployed respondents and on plans to seek employment

for those out of the labor force. The surveys also have

gathered information on the type and success of various job

search methods used by unemployed respondents to find

work. The 1979 interview included hypothetical job offer

and reservation wage information.

The Center for Human Resource Research (CHRR) at

The Ohio State University has constructed a week-by-week

longitudinal work record for each respondent from January

1, 1978, through the most recent survey date; this record is

present in the work history area of interest (found only on

the main file with work history data set). These weekly data

are arranged in three primary arrays:

z A STATUS array of the respondent’s labor force/military activity each week, beginning in January 1978

z An HOUR array of the usual hours worked per week at

all jobs, beginning in January 1978

z A DUALJOB array, containing up to four additional job

numbers for respondents who worked at more than one

job simultaneously in any week, beginning in January

1978

Created work history variables include information about the

number of weeks of a respondent’s active military service,

the number of weeks that the respondent spent in various

labor force states, and detailed information regarding up to

five civilian jobs reported by the respondent during each

survey year. The respondent identification number permits

researchers to link these data with the separate NLSY79 child

data.

2. Training investments

The surveys have regularly collected detailed information

about the types of non-government-sponsored vocational

or technical training programs in which a respondent had

enrolled since the last interview. In general, the scope of

information gathered includes the occupation in which a respondent received training, dates of enrollment and completion, the type of school providing the training, whether the

respondent received any subsequent training, the types of

certificates or licenses he or she earned, and how the respondent paid for the training.

The 1979–86 surveys asked an extensive series of questions about government-sponsored training programs in

which the respondent had enrolled since the last interview.

This series includes program-specific information regarding

the respondent’s current enrollment status, dates/hours of

participation, periods of nonparticipation, and whether the

program was part of a federally funded training program such

as the Job Training Partnership Act (JTPA)/Comprehensive

Employment and Training Act (CETA) or the Work Incentive

Program (WIN). These surveys also collected information

on the types of occupational or on-the-job training received,

the types of classroom training and supportive services provided, and the respondent’s rate of pay during training. For

jobs identified as government-sponsored, information includes the job’s occupational code, the types of classroom

training received, and supportive services provided in conjunction with the job and job placement information. Surveys conducted after 1986 posed substantially fewer

questions about respondents’ participation in government

training and employment programs.

In 1993 and 1994, the interviews included a series of

questions on (1) the informal methods (for instance, classes/

seminars, supervisors, coworkers, self-study) used to learn

skills required on the respondent’s current job and (2) the

potential transferability of skills acquired during various onand off-the-job training programs. The 1993 survey also

fielded a set of high school course relevancy questions. This

series included questions on whether the skills learned in a

training program added to those the respondent had acquired

during high school. For respondents who did not take such

high school courses, questions attempted to determine how

much of what was learned in the training program could have

been learned in high school. Beginning in 1996, questions

on informal training on current jobs in the last 4 weeks re-
40 CHAPTER 3: THE NLSY79

placed the questions about informal training used to learn

the job. In 2002, this series was limited to questions on the

use of self-training materials.

3. Schooling, school records, and aptitude information

NLSY79 respondents regularly answer questions about their

schooling investments since the date of last interview. Information available includes respondents’ current school

enrollment status, the highest grade they have attended or

completed, whether they have earned a high school diploma

or GED equivalency, the type of their high school curriculum, their college enrollment status, their major field of study

at college, and the type(s) of college degrees they have

earned. The 1994 survey collected retrospective information

about respondents’ participation in Head Start or another

preschool program.

The 1980 high school survey gathered data from the

records of the last secondary school attended by NLSY79

respondents; data are available for more than 8,500 respondents. This set of variables includes both respondent-specific and school-specific information about factors such as

(1) the respondent’s school enrollment status, highest grade

attended, remedial classes taken, and scores for various intelligence and aptitude tests that had been administered during the youth’s schooling and (2) each school’s total

enrollment, grading system, types of curricula offered, dropout rate, student body composition, and staffing characteristics.

Transcript data collected during the 1980–83 survey

years are available for more than 9,000 NLSY79 respondents

who had completed or were expected to complete high

school. Information about as many as 64 high school

courses includes course titles, final grades, and credit received. The transcript data collection also provided respondents’ attendance records, class rank, and scores on various

aptitude and achievement tests.

In addition to the aptitude and intelligence scores collected during the high school and transcript surveys described above, scores from the ASVAB are available for 11,914

NLSY79 respondents. These data include individual respondent raw scores, standard scores, scale scores, and standard

errors for each of the 10 test sections (for example, general

science, arithmetic reasoning, word knowledge, mechanical

comprehension). Two Armed Forces Qualifications Test

(AFQT) scores also are available in the data files.

4. Military experience

The survey provides information regarding the respondent’s

enlistment intentions, attitudes toward the military, dates of

military service/reserve duty, branch of service, military occupation, pay grade, income, education/training received,

and reasons for leaving the military or reenlisting. Surveys

after 1985 use an abbreviated set of military experience questions.

5. Income and assets

The interviews record information about the sources and

amounts of income received during the past calendar year

by the respondent and his or her spouse or partner. Data on

income sources of an opposite-sex partner are available beginning in 1990; if a respondent volunteers such information

for a same-sex partner, that information also is recorded. Income sources identified include the respondents’ and their

spouses’ or partners’ wages and salaries, income from military service, profits from a farm or business, Social Security,

pensions and annuities, and alimony/child support. Surveys between 1993 and 2000 asked a set of child support

questions that allows comparisons to be made between

amounts of money to which a respondent or spouse was

legally entitled and amounts of child support received. Finally, the surveys ask respondents to report the total income

received by all family members living in the household. In

some surveys, the sources of this income are recorded, but

the specific amounts received from each source are not.

Income received through various government programs

also is recorded. The survey asks about monthly income

received by the respondent and spouse or partner from unemployment compensation, Aid to Families with Dependent

Children/Temporary Assistance to Needy Families (AFDC/

TANF), Food Stamps, and other public assistance, including

Supplemental Security Income (SSI). In response to the 1996

welfare reform legislation, the 1998 and 2000 surveys included

questions about the effect of reform on respondents. In

1998, for example, respondents reported whether they had

enrolled in training, looked for a job, or gotten a job to fulfill

new welfare requirements, and reported in detail on receipt

of targeted benefits. In 2000, a shortened targeted benefits

series asked about receipt of job or skills training, clothing

assistance, or food assistance other than Food Stamps, WIC,

or school meals.

In addition to the information described above, the data

include a set of created variables detailing the respondent’s

history of participation in unemployment compensation (respondent and spouse), AFDC/TANF, SSI, and Food Stamp

programs. For each type of recipiency program, variables

include: (1) A monthly dollar value of the benefits, (2) a

yearly indicator of receipt or nonreceipt, and (3) a yearly

dollar value of the benefits. In addition, there are two yearly

summary variables that indicate whether the respondent received any form of public assistance during the year and the

total dollar value of all benefits received from AFDC/TANF,

SSI, and Food Stamp programs.

Asset and liability information collected during the 1985–

90 and 1992–2000 survey years includes: (1) The types and

total market value of property owned by the respondent; (2)

the value of other assets, including vehicles and savings
CHAPTER 3: THE NLSY79 41

accounts; and (3) the total amount of debts owed, including

mortgages, back taxes, and other debts over $500. Although

not included in the 2002 survey, asset information will continue to be collected on a regular basis in future rounds.

6. Health conditions, injuries, and insurance coverage

The surveys provide data regarding the respondent’s height

and weight, as well as the presence and duration of health

conditions that prevent or limit labor market activity. In some

surveys, respondents answer questions about the type(s)

of work-related injuries or illnesses they had experienced

and their impact on the respondent’s work activity. The International Classification of Diseases coding system identifies health conditions and work-related injuries reported by

respondents during selected survey years. In some years,

mothers provide data on prenatal healthcare, infant feeding

practices, infant illnesses and treatment, and well-baby care,

as well as accidents and injuries to their children. Recent

surveys have included questions on the respondent’s physical activity and health behaviors.

Most surveys since 1989 have collected information on

whether NLSY79 respondents, their spouses, and their children are covered by a private or governmental healthcare/

hospitalization plan and the source(s) of the coverage (current or previous employer, direct purchase, public assistance

healthcare program, or other). The 1994 survey asked about

specific periods without coverage for respondents, their

spouses, and their children; surveys since 1994 have asked

about specific periods without coverage only for respondents.

A set of health questions first asked in the 1998 survey

established baseline health data for respondents age 40 and

older. Each subsequent survey addresses the health module

to respondents who have reached age 40 but have not yet

answered these questions. This extensive module records

these respondents’ general health status, the ways in which

their health influences daily activities, and their emotional

well-being in the past 4 weeks. Respondents also state

whether they have experienced any of a list of several potential health problems, such as heart disease, cancer, diabetes,

back pain, and so forth. A series about respondents’ exercise habits was included in the 2000 survey; this was replaced in 2002 by a short series of questions on general

health behaviors. Finally, limited data are collected on the

health of the respondents’ parents, including their life status, current state of health, major health problems, and cause

of death, if deceased.

7. Alcohol and substance use, criminal behavior

Alcohol use questions, asked during selected survey years,

cover the respondent’s consumption of alcohol, his or her

frequency of use, quantity usually consumed, whether such

use has affected the respondent’s schoolwork or job performance, and whether any relatives have alcohol-related problems. Respondents also have provided information on their

use of cigarettes, including the age at which they began

smoking, how frequently they smoke, and the age at which

they stopped smoking, if applicable. Substance use data

include the respondent’s age at first use; extent of use of

marijuana/hashish, amphetamines, barbiturates, cocaine, and

heroin; and whether the respondent has used such substances on the job. Female NLSY79 respondents have regularly reported on their use of alcohol, cigarettes, marijuana,

or cocaine during pregnancy.

A self-report supplement to the 1980 survey collected

data on the respondent’s participation in and income from

various delinquent and criminal activities such as truancy,

alcohol/marijuana use, vandalism, shoplifting, drug dealing,

and robbery. A second set of questions in this supplement

measured involvement with the criminal justice system, including reported arrest records and police contact.

8. Attitudes and aspirations

Attitude variables available for selected survey years include

the Internal-External Locus of Control Scale (Rotter, 1966),

the Mastery Scale (Pearlin et al., 1981), the Self-Esteem Scale

(Rosenberg, 1965), and the Center for Epidemiologic Studies Depression (CES-D) Scale (Radloff, 1977). In some years,

the survey has included questions on attitudes toward

women and work; occupational aspirations; work commitment; knowledge of the world of work; perceived problems

in getting a good job; and future expectations about marriage, education, and employment. In the initial survey, respondents reported on the attitude of the most influential

person in their life toward certain key career, occupational,

residence, and childbearing decisions.

9. Geographic residence information

The main NLSY79 data files contain general information on

the larger environment in which the respondent lives and

works. This information includes details on each

respondent’s region of residence at birth and at age 14, region of residence at each interview date, whether the current

residence is urban or rural, and whether the residence is located in a Standard Metropolitan Statistical Area (SMSA).

The 1992 and 1994–2000 surveys collected neighborhood

characteristics information from NLSY79 women, asking them

to rate their neighborhood as a place to raise children and to

identify the extent of neighborhood problems such as crime

and violence, lack of police protection, neighborhood apathy, and joblessness.

The restricted-release, detailed geocode data files provide additional geographic information about NLSY79 respondents. These files are distributed only to NLS

researchers who complete the BLS geocode application process. The geocode file includes information on the
42 CHAPTER 3: THE NLSY79

respondent’s State, county, and Standard Metropolitan Statistical Area (SMSA)/Metropolitan Statistical Area (MSA)/

Consolidated Metropolitan Statistical Area (CMSA)/Primary

Metropolitan Statistical Area (PMSA) of current residence;

the location of the most recent college that the respondent

attended; and selected environmental variables from the U.S.

Census Bureau’s County and City Data Books for the

respondent’s county or SMSA of current residence. For

information about receiving a geocode data set, researchers

should contact the Bureau of Labor Statistics, 2 Massachusetts Ave. NE., Room 4945, Washington, DC 20212-0001; (202)

691-7410; e-mail: NLS_Info@bls.gov.

A separate data set, the NLSY79 Women’s Support Network data file, offers measures of the geographic proximity

of the residences of relatives, friends, and acquaintances to

female NLSY79 respondents interviewed during the 1983

through 1985 surveys.

10. Family background and demographic

characteristics

Selected surveys have collected information on respondents’

sex (interviewer-coded), racial/ethnic identification, date of

birth, State or country of birth, number of siblings, religious

affiliation, childhood residences from birth to age 18, and

immigration/visa status, as well as background information

about their parents’ birthplace, education, and work experiences. The 1993 survey asked respondents to report the

age, education, and fertility of as many as 13 biological siblings. For those respondents identifying a sibling of the

same age, followup questions in 1994 confirmed whether the

paired relationship was that of an identical or fraternal twin,

triplet, or quadruplet.

11. Household composition

Basic demographic information is available for each person

living in the respondent’s household at the time of the survey. These data include each resident’s sex, relationship to

the respondent, age, highest grade of schooling completed,

and work experience during the past year.

12. Marital and fertility histories

Regularly collected information includes respondents’ marital status at the survey date, changes in marital status since

the last interview, and dates of each marital status change.

Beginning in 2002, information about the respondent’s cohabitations since the last interview has been recorded, replacing questions that asked only about cohabitations that

were ongoing as of the interview date. Certain surveys have

gathered information about the respondents’ spouses (and,

on a more limited basis, partners), including birth and death

dates, occupation, educational attainment, labor force status, religious affiliation, and health limitations. Since 1994,

“partner” is generally considered equal to “spouse” for the

purposes of administering questions.

Beginning with the 2000 release, the data include a new

series of constructed variables for each survey year that

provides information about the respondent’s relationship

status. All previous surveys were examined to match names

of spouses and partners, resulting in the creation of two

variables for each year. The first variable provides information about the respondent’s total number of spouses and

partners since 1979 and can range from 0 to 9. The second

variable is a unique code assigned to each new spouse/partner at the interview date. If the same spouse or partner resides with the respondent during the next survey round, his

or her code remains the same. If the respondent has a new

spouse or partner, the next available number is given to that

person. If the respondent is reunited with a previous spouse

or partner in a later survey round, the total number of spouses/

partners is not increased, and the code for that year reflects

the recurring spouse/partner’s original number. For more

details about these created variables, see the NLSY79 User’s

Guide.

Fertility data collected for NLSY79 women include information about all pregnancies, a cumulative roster of all children, residence status of all children, contraceptive methods

used, birth expectations and wantedness information, confidential abortion reports, and ages at menarche and first sexual

intercourse. Fertility data collected for men in the NLSY79

cohort are more limited. Information includes birth data for

the respondent’s children, the residence status of his children, his age at first sexual intercourse, and contraceptive

methods used by the respondent. Additionally, a set of questions asked in 1998 and 2000 recorded the frequency of the

male respondent’s various interactions with his oldest and

youngest children.

A set of edited fertility variables added to the main data

file (area of interest Fertility and Relationship History/Created) provides revisions to dates of birth, sex, and usual

living arrangements for all respondents’ children, as well as

flag variables indicating the types of revisions made. A set

of constructed variables includes the beginning and ending

dates of marriages, ages at first marriage and first birth, spacing between births, and spacing between marriage and first

birth for the respondent’s children. Because they have been

corrected, variables in this area of interest are more accurate

than the raw data. Users are strongly encouraged to use

these edited and created variables. Finally, the database

contains a variable evaluating the consistency of each

respondent’s longitudinal fertility record between the 1979

and 1982 survey years.

13. Childcare

Select surveys provide information about the types of

childcare used by female respondents (for instance, care by

relatives, care by nonrelatives, daycare center, nursery or
CHAPTER 3: THE NLSY79 43

preschool, child cares for self), the types of childcare payments incurred, and the number of hours or days that the

respondents’ children spent in childcare. Retrospective data

collected in recent surveys include childcare experiences and

arrangements in the first 3 years of life for all children at least

1 year old.

Data files and documentation

Data for the NLSY79 from 1979–2000 are distributed in three

data sets:

(1) NLSY79 Main File 1979–2000 data set, which excludes

the restricted geocode data;

(2) NLSY79 Geocode File 1979–2000 CD with all main file

data and geocode data; and

(3) NLSY79 Work History 1979–2000 data set with all main

file data and created work history variables. Users who

are interested in main file data are encouraged to use the

work history data set instead of the main file data set, as

it is released later. The main file with work history variables data set is available for download from the http://

www.bls.gov/nls Web site.

Each data set includes documentation files and is accompanied by search and extraction software that enables users to

easily peruse, select, and extract variables. Chapter 8 provides more technical information on the NLS data format and

extraction software, as well as descriptions of supplementary documentation available for the NLSY79. Data from the

2002 survey will be available in late 2003.

References

Baker, Reginald P. and Bradburn, Norman M. “CAPI: Impacts on Data Quality and Survey Costs.” In: Proceedings of the 1991 Public Health Conference on Records

and Statistics. Washington, DC: U.S. National Center

for Health Statistics (1992): 459–64.

Bradburn, Norman M.; Frankel, Martin R.; Baker, Reginald

P.; and Pergamit, Michael R. “A Comparison of Computer-Assisted Personal Interviews (CAPI) with Paperand-Pencil (PAPI) Interviews in the National

Longitudinal Study of Youth.” NLS Discussion Paper

92-2. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics, 1992.

Olsen, Randall J. “The Effects of Computer Assisted Interviewing on Data Quality.” Columbus, Ohio: Center for

Human Resource Research, The Ohio State University,

1991.

Pearlin, Leonard I.; Lieberman, Morton A.; Menaghan, Elizabeth G.; and Mullan, Joseph T. “The Stress Process.”

Journal of Health and Social Behavior 22 (December

1981): 337–56.

Radloff, Lenore Sawyer. “The CES-D Scale: A Self-Report

Depression Scale for Research in the General Population.” Applied Psychological Measurement 1,3 (Summer 1977): 385–401.

Rosenberg, Morris. Society and the Adolescent Self-Image.

Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 1965.

Rotter, Julian B. “Generalized Expectancies for Internal vs.

External Control of Reinforcements.” Psychological

Monographs 80,1 (1966): 1–28.

Speizer, Howard and Dougherty, Doug. “Automating Data

Transmission and Case Management Functions for a

Nationwide CAPI Study.” In: Proceedings of the 1991

Annual Research Conference. Washington, DC: U.S.

Census Bureau (1991): 389–97.

Selected variables by survey year: NLSY79

Table 3.6 depicts selected variables from the NLSY79 main

data files. Additional raw and constructed variables on a

number of topics (such as geographic-environmental data

and detailed individual work histories) can be found on the

separately released NLSY79 geocode CD and within the work

history area of interest. Detailed information on the Children

of the NLSY79 can be found in the various handbooks, user’s

guides, and evaluation reports that document the child data;

more information is available in chapter 4.

The top row of the table lists the years in which the

NLSY79 has been administered; the first column gives some

of the variables for which information has been collected.

An asterisk (*) indicates that information for the designated

variable was obtained for the given cohort in the year indicated. “R” used in variable descriptions stands for “respondent.” Users should be aware that, in some instances, the

variable descriptions in the table represent a group of questions and not single response items.
44 CHAPTER 3: THE NLSY79

1

 Beginning in 1994, characteristics of the current or most recent job were collected in the first Employer Supplement loop,

rather than in the CPS section. To maintain consistency, these questions are still included in this section of the table. 2

 Note that, beginning in 2002, the questionnaire includes separate sets of questions for self-employed respondents and

respondents with nontraditional employment arrangements. The information collected is very similar to the regular employment

questions, but wordings may vary to accommodate different situations. The three types of employer questions are not

represented separately in the table. 

Table 3.6. Selected NLSY79 variables by survey year: Respondents ages 14 to 22 in 1979 

Variable 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 96 98 00 02

I. LABOR MARKET EXPERIENCE VARIABLES 

A. Current labor force and employment status and characteristics of current/most recent job1

 Survey week labor force and employment status * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 

 Occupation (DOT code) * 

 Hours worked in survey week * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 

 Hours per week usually worked * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 

 Shift worked * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 

 Promotion (varies with year) * * * * * * * * * * * 

 Commuting time to current job * * * * * * 

 Availability of fringe benefits * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 

 Global job satisfaction item * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 

 Job satisfaction scale * * * * * 

 Job characteristics inventory * * 

 Size of employer (in 2002, only at R’s worksite) * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 

 Minority status of coworkers (1980 only), supervisor * * 

 Time R expects to stay at job * * * * 

 Participation in work-study program * * * * * * * * 

B. Work experience since Jan. 1, 1978, or previous survey, or in past calendar year 

 Weeks worked * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 

 Hours usually worked per week * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 

 Number of weeks, spells of unemployment * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 

 Weeks out of labor force * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 

C. Characteristics of jobs since Jan. 1, 1978, or last survey, including current or most recent job (more than 10 to 20 hours per 

week and more than 9 weeks in duration if not CPS job)2

 Occupation and industry (Census code) * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 

 Class of worker * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 

 Start date and stop date * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 

Hours usually worked at home * * * * * * * * * * * 

 Shift worked (only current/most recent job in 2002) * * * * * 

 Rate of pay, hourly rate of pay * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 

 Covered by collective bargaining * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 

 Is R union member * * * * * * * * * * * * 

 Reason for leaving job * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 

Severance pay received * * * * * 
CHAPTER 3: THE NLSY79 45

Table 3.6. Selected NLSY79 variables by survey year: Respondents ages 14 to 22 in 1979 

Variable 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 96 98 00 02

Availability of fringe benefits (CPS job) (all jobs 

since 1994) * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 

Characteristics of employer’s pension plan * * * * * 

Is employer exempt from Social Security; does 

another plan replace it * 

 Global job satisfaction item * * * * * 

 Promotion and promotion potential with employer * * * * * * * * 

 Size of employer (in 2002, only at R’s worksite) * * * * 

 Sex of supervisor and coworkers * * 

 Is R a temporary or contractual worker * * * 

D. Job search 

 Job search activities and (some years) intentions * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 

R looking for work or employed when found current 

or most recent job * * * * * 

 Methods of job search * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 

 Job offers rejected (while looking for each job) * * * * * * * * 

 Desired characteristics of job sought * * * * 

II. HUMAN CAPITAL AND OTHER SOCIOECONOMIC VARIABLES 

A. Early formative influences/Parental status 

 Nationality and birthplace * * 

 Birth date * * * 

 Ethnic self-identification (revised 2002) * * 

 Year foreign-born R entered the United States * 

Month and year R entered the United States to live 

for at least 6 months * * 

 Country of citizenship when immigrated * 

 Immigration or visa status * 

Religious affiliation, frequency of attendance (only 

new spouses in 2002) * * * * 

 Periods lived away from parents (birth to age 18) * * 

 Non-English language spoken when R was a child * 

Were magazines, newspapers, or library cards 

available in home when R was age 14 * 

 Person(s) R lived with at age 14 * * 

 Occupations of primary adults when R was 14 * 

 Birthplace of parents: State or country * 

 Highest grade completed by father and mother * 

Employment status of father and mother in past 

year 

* * 

 Are R’s parents living * * 
46 CHAPTER 3: THE NLSY79

Table 3.6. Selected NLSY79 variables by survey year: Respondents ages 14 to 22 in 1979 

Variable 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 96 98 00 02

R’s biological parents—life status, health, cause of 

death (40-and-older health module) * * * 

B. Education 

 Current enrollment status, date of last enrollment * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 

 Highest grade completed * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 

 Reason stopped attending school * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 

 Highest degree and date received * * * * * * * * * * * 

 Is or was school public or private * 

High school curriculum * * * * * * * 

Comparison of high school courses to skills training * 

 College degree received * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 

 Type of college attending (2- or 4-year) * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 

 Field of study or specialization in college * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 

 College tuition * 

 Educational loans or financial aid in college * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 

 Attitude toward selected aspects of high school * 

 Courses taken during last year of high school * 

 Ever suspended or expelled from school; date * 

C. Vocational training outside regular school 

 Type(s) of training * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 

 Number of weeks, hours per week in training * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 

 Was training completed * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 

Was degree, certificate, or journeyman’s card 

obtained * * 

 Was training related to specific job or employer * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 

 Was training related to a promotion * * * * * 

 Reason for training * * * * * * * * * * * 

 Method of financing training * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 

Informal job learning activities (questions vary; selftraining only in 2002) * * * * * * 

D. Government jobs and training programs 

 Participation in programs * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 

 Type of program * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 

 Satisfaction with program * * * * * * * * * 

 Did program help on subsequent jobs * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 

 Services provided by program * * * * * * * * * 

Length of participation in program * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 

 Hours per week and per day spent in program * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 

 Amount of income from participating in program * * * * * * * * 
CHAPTER 3: THE NLSY79 47

Table 3.6. Selected NLSY79 variables by survey year: Respondents ages 14 to 22 in 1979 

Variable 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 96 98 00 02

 Aspects liked most and least about programs * 

 Reasons for entering and leaving programs * * * * * * * * * 

E. Health and physical condition 

 Does health limit work, duration of limitation * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 

 Type of health problem (ICD-9 code) * * * * 

 Work-related injury or illness (ICD-9 code) * * * * * * * * * 

Height * * * 

Weight * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 

 Health insurance coverage—R, spouse, children * * * * * * * * * 

 Frequency and intensity of R’s physical activity * * 

 R’s general health behaviors * 

General perception of health (40-and-older health 

module) * * * 

Does health interfere with daily activities (40-andolder module) * * * 

Emotional health in past 4 weeks (40-and-older 

module) * * * 

R’s various health problems (heart problems, 

cancer, diabetes, poor eyesight or hearing, and so 

forth) (40-and-older module) 

 * * * 

Time spent on healthcare activities (40-and-older 

module) * * * 

F. Marital history and spouse characteristics (note that all spouse items also refer to partners beginning in 1994) 

 Dating behaviors and attitudes (unmarried females) * * * * * * * 

 Marital status * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 

Changes in marital status since 1/1/1978 or 

previous interview; number and duration of 

marriages 

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 

 Month, year R and partner began living together * * * * * * * * * 

Did R and spouse live together continuously before 

marriage (or R and partner continuously until now) * * * * * * * * * 

Changes in cohabitation with partner since last 

interview * 

 Occupation of spouse * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 

 Extent spouse worked in previous calendar year * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 

Current labor force status, reason not employed for 

spouse 

 * * * * * * * * * * * 

 Shift worked by spouse * * * * * * * * * * * * 

 Rate of pay, hourly rate of pay of spouse * * * * * * * * * 

Spouse’s religious affiliation and attendance (new 

spouses only in 2000–02) * * * 

 Number of spouse’s marriages, details * * * * 

 Effect of spouse’s health on R’s work * 
48 CHAPTER 3: THE NLSY79

Table 3.6. Selected NLSY79 variables by survey year: Respondents ages 14 to 22 in 1979 

Variable 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 96 98 00 02

Quality of R’s relationship (14 items) (mothers in 

1988; females all other years) * * * * * * * 

 Age at which R expects to marry * 

G. Household and children 

 Relationship of household or family members to R * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 

Household or family members’ demographics (sex, 

age, highest grade completed, work status in past 

year) 

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 

 Number of dependents or exemptions * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 

Number and ages of R’s children living in 

household * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 

 Expected number of children * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 

 Number of children R considers ideal * * 

Healthcare during pregnancy (females) * * * * * * * * * * * * 

 Postnatal infant healthcare and feeding (females) * * * * * * * * * * * * 

 Father’s relationship with children (males) * * 

 Fertility history * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 

 Use of birth control methods * * * * * * * * * * * * 

Pregnancies not resulting in live births (includes 

how ended through 1990) * * * * * * * * * * * * * 

H. Childcare (only female R’s in even years after 1986) 

 Current childcare arrangements * * * * * * * 

 Childcare during first 3 years of life * * * * * * * * 

 Cost per week * * * * 

 Number of hours per week * * * * * * 

Is childcare a hindrance to R’s work, school, or 

training * * * * * 

 Extent of various neighborhood problems * * * * * 

I. Financial characteristics and program participation (note that all spouse items also refer to partners beginning in 1994) 

 Total family income in previous calendar year * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 

Income of R and spouse in previous calendar year 

from: 

 Farm or own business * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 

 Wages or salary * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 

 Unemployment compensation * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 

 Public assistance * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 

Food Stamps * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 

Targeted cash or noncash benefits * * 

Pensions/Social Security * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 

 Military service * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 
CHAPTER 3: THE NLSY79 49

Table 3.6. Selected NLSY79 variables by survey year: Respondents ages 14 to 22 in 1979 

Variable 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 96 98 00 02

Veterans’ benefits, workers’ compensation, other 

disability (collected separately beginning in 2002) * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 

 Other sources * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 

R receives government rent subsidy or public 

housing * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 

Income from child support * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 

 Child support expected vs. received * * * * * 

Rights to estate or trust; income from inheritances 

(since last interview) * * 

R claimed Earned Income Tax Credit (EITC) on 

previous tax return, amount * * 

 Possession of various assets (R and spouse) * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 

 Asset market value (R and spouse) * * * * * * * * * * * * 

 Amount of debt * * * * * * * * * * * * 

 Amount spent on food, other than Food Stamps * * * * * 

 Effect of 1996 welfare reform on R (shorter in 2000) * * 

R receives targeted benefits from public assistance 

program (gas vouchers, childcare, and so forth) * 

J. Military service (current or past) 

 Branch of Armed Forces * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 

Months spent in Armed Forces * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 

 Military occupation(s) * * * * * * * 

 ROTC or officer training * 

 Reserve or guard activities * * * * * * * 

 Pay grade and income * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 

 Type and amount of military training * * * * * * * 

 Does R use military skills on civilian job * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 

 Formal education received while in service * * * * * * * 

 Family members who have served on active duty * 

Participation in Veteran’s Educational Assistance 

Program (VEAP) (after 1985, with GI bill) * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 

 Attitude toward military service * * * * * * * 

 Future military plans * * * * * * * 

 Reason for entering and leaving military * * * * * * 

 Contact with military recruiters * * * * * * * 

Type of discharge * * 

 Enlistment or reenlistment bonuses received * * * * * * * 

 Civilian job offer at time of discharge * * * * * * 

 Return to same employer after active duty * * * * * * 

K. Educational and occupational aspirations and expectations 

 Would R like more education or training; type * 
50 CHAPTER 3: THE NLSY79

Table 3.6. Selected NLSY79 variables by survey year: Respondents ages 14 to 22 in 1979 

Variable 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 96 98 00 02

 How much education desired and actually attained * * * 

Kind of work R would like to be doing at age 35 * * 

 Expectation of achieving occupational goal * * 

L. Attitudes 

 Knowledge of World of Work score * 

 Would R work if had enough money to live on * 

Characteristics of job R is willing to take (R 

unemployed or out of labor force) * * * * * * * * 

 Reaction to hypothetical job offers * 

 Internal-External Locus of Control Scale (Rotter) * 

 Mastery Scale (Pearlin) * 

 Attitude toward women working * * * 

 Self-Esteem Scale (Rosenberg) (10 items) * * 

CES-Depression Scale (40-and-older health 

module in 1998–2002) * * * * * 

Person having most influence on R, his or her 

responses to various situations * 

M. Retrospective evaluation of labor market experience 

 Perception of age, race, and sex discrimination * * 

 Reason for problems in obtaining employment * * 

N. Delinquency, drugs, and alcohol use 

 Activities within last year (20 items) * 

 Income from illegal activities within last year * 

Alcohol consumption in last week or month * * * * * * * * * 

 Extent of cigarette use * * * * 

 Age R first smoked and stopped smoking cigarettes * * * 

Extent of marijuana use * * * * * * 

 Age R first used marijuana * * * * * 

 Extent of cocaine use, age R first used * * * * * 

 Extent of “crack” cocaine use, age R first used * * * 

Ever used sedatives, barbiturates, and so forth * * * * 

 Cigarette and alcohol use during pregnancy * * * * * * * * * * * * 

 Marijuana and cocaine use during pregnancy * * * * * * * * 

O. Reported police contacts 

 Number of times stopped by police * 

 Number of times booked or arrested * 

 Number of convictions, charges * 

 Number of times incarcerated; date of release * 
CHAPTER 3: THE NLSY79 51

NOTE: Excluded from this table are the detailed geographic, fertility, and child-specific variables that appear on separate NLSY79

constructed data files.

Variable 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 96 98 00 02

P. Time use 

Use of time at various activities (school, work, 

watching TV, household chores, and so forth) * 

III. ENVIRONMENTAL VARIABLES 

 Region of residence * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

 Current residence urban or rural * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

 Current residence in SMSA * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

 Unemployment rate of local labor market * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

Changes in residence since January 1, 1978, or 

date of last interview (collected as a history) * * * * *

Table 3.6. Selected NLSY79 variables by survey year: Respondents ages 14 to 22 in 1979
52 CHAPTER 4: CHILDREN OF THE NLSY79

CHILDREN OF THE NLSY79

On a regular basis, the main surveys of the NLSY79 havecollected information on the experiences of NLSY79

women as they became mothers, including the birth and early

childhood of their children. In 1982, the National Longitudinal Surveys (NLS) program obtained funding from the National Institute of Child Health and Human Development

(NICHD) to expand the collection of fertility information from

NLSY79 women; in 1983, NICHD provided funds for prenatal

care questions. Collection of data on children of NLSY79

women was further expanded in 1986, when NICHD began

sponsoring a set of supplemental surveys to gather a large

amount of information about the lives of these children. A

battery of child cognitive, socioemotional, and physiological assessments has been administered biennially since 1986

to NLSY79 mothers and their children. Beginning in 1988,

NLSY79 children age 10 and older answered a self-administered set of questions gathering information on a variety of

topics related to family, friends, jobs, and school.

Starting in 1994, a computer-assisted personal interview

(CAPI) was used to ask children who had reached age 15 by

December 31 of the survey year (known as the “young

adults”) about their work experiences, training, schooling,

health, fertility, attitudes, and work expectations. This NLSstyle interview, repeated in subsequent rounds, replaced the

child assessments for these older adolescents. A confidential supplement recorded self-reports from the young adults

on topics such as parent-child conflict, participation in delinquent or criminal activities, use of controlled and uncontrolled substances, access to a computer and computer

training, volunteer activities, and expectations for the future.

Beginning with the 2000 survey, components of the confidential supplement were integrated into the CAPI instrument,

and no separate paper instrument was used.

The collection of information from young adults has

been repeated in each subsequent survey year; in 1998, however, the sample was limited to those who had not reached

age 21 by the interview date. Young adults age 21 and older

were again eligible for interview in the 2000 survey, but the

primary mode of interview was changed to telephone, rather

than in-person, interviews. In addition, about 40 percent of

children and young adults under age 21 from the households originally selected in the black/Hispanic oversample

were not eligible for interview in 2000 due to funding constraints. The entire minority child and young adult oversample

was again eligible for reinterview in 2002.

The child data and the longitudinal mother information

from the main NLSY79 data offer researchers a unique opportunity to examine linkages between maternal-family behaviors and attitudes and child development. Researchers

also can investigate relationships between child development and subsequent schooling and early employment activities. Data through the 2000 interview are available to

researchers on CD and online at http://www.bls.gov/nls. Users should always consult the survey instruments for the

exact questions included in each year.

Chapter organization

This chapter provides an overview of the Children of the

NLSY79 data collection and the types of information present

within this data set. The composition of the child sample is

first discussed, followed by a description of the survey instruments and assessments used in this data collection. The

next section highlights major data elements for the Children

of the NLSY79. The chapter concludes with a brief summary

of the data files and documentation available for the Children of the NLSY79.

The NLSY79 child sample

The child sample consists of all children born to female

NLSY79 respondents. The number of children born to interviewed mothers has increased from 5,255 in 1986, the initial

child collection survey year, to a total of 8,323 in 2000. During 2000, interviewers completed surveys with 6,417 children

of NLSY79 mothers. After applying the child sampling

weights, this sample is nationally representative of the children of women who were born from 1957 to 1964 and were

living in the United States in 1978.

Starting in 1994, two separate groups of children have

been interviewed in each round of the NLSY79. The first is

made up of children younger than age 15 (as of December 31

of that survey year) who live with their NLSY79 mothers.

These children are directly assessed, and additional information about each child is obtained from the child’s mother.

Making up the second group are NLSY79 children who are

age 15 or older by the end of the calendar year (limited to

those age 20 and younger in 1998 only). These young adults,
CHAPTER 4: CHILDREN OF THE NLSY79 53

who had previously been assessed during child surveys,

answer a separate set of questions gathering information on

a wide range of topics. Due to funding constraints in 2000,

approximately 40 percent of the minority child oversample

was not eligible for interview. In the 2000 survey, 3,392 children were assessed and 3,025 young adults were interviewed.

Table 4.1 presents sample sizes for NLSY79 mothers and

children across surveys. Several publications discuss important issues related to changes over time in the NLSY79

child and mother sample sizes; see the NLSY79 2000 Child

and Young Adult Data Users Guide (CHRR, 2002) and the

NLSY Child Handbook: A Guide to the 1986–1990 NLSY

Child Data (Baker et al., 1993) for more information.

The sample of children interviewed during 2000 includes

substantial numbers of Hispanic and black children, and children of each age from birth through early adulthood. While

the sample was composed mainly of children under 10 years

of age in all survey years through 1994, the number of children age 10 and older represented a majority of the sample

for the first time in 1996. Table 4.2 presents, by select age

ranges and race/ethnicity, the numbers of children across

survey years who completed interviews.

Due to residence status and nonresponse, not all children born to interviewed NLSY79 mothers are assessed or

interviewed. The overall sample of children born to NLSY79

mothers represents a cross-section of children born to

women in the NLSY79 sample who were 37 to 44 years of age

on December 31, 2001. Large numbers of children have been

born to NLSY79 women between about age 17 and age 33, as

shown in table 4.3. These children represent a large majority

of the children to be born to this cohort of women. The

number of children born to these women can be considered

fully representative of children born to a nationally representative sample of women who were between the ages of 14

and 21 on December 31, 1978.

Sampling weights

Child sampling weights are based on mother weights, discussed in chapter 3, with an adjustment factor used to account for different interview rates for children in various age,

race, and sex groups. These factors use counts of children

known to exist, as well as estimates of fertility for women

who have discontinued their participation in the main NLSY79

sample. However, child weights do not adjust for children

who were eligible to complete a specific assessment but did

not, even though they completed other parts of the interview. For more information, see the NLSY79 Child Handbook: A Guide to the 1986–1990 NLSY79 Child Data (Baker

et al., 1993).

The interviews

The NLSY79 children, their mothers (or, occasionally, other

guardians), and interviewers from the National Opinion Research Center (NORC) at the University of Chicago, who are

trained to assess each child directly and evaluate the home

environment, all provide information for the Children of the

Table 4.1. NLSY79 mother and child samples: 1986–2000 surveys

Sample groups 1979 1986 1988 1990 1992 1994 1996 1998 2000

NLSY79 females:

Interviewed 6,283 5,418 5,312 4,510 4,535 4,480 4,361 4,299 4,113

NLSY79 mothers:

Interviewed — 2,922 3,346 3,088 3,325 3,464 3,489 3,533 3,425

Interviewed; children also

interviewed — 2,774 3,196 2,772 2,964 3,212 3,228 3,221 2,934

NLSY79 children:

Born to interviewed mothers — 5,255 6,543 6,427 7,255 7,862 8,123 8,395 8,323

Children not young adults 6,622 6,010 5,343 4,438

Young adults 1,240 2,113 3,052 3,885

Interviewed1 — 4,971 6,266 5,803 6,509 7,089 7,103 2

7,067 6,417

Children not young adults 6,109 5,431 4,924 3,392

Young adults 980 1,672 2,143 3,025

1

An interview was considered “complete” if an interviewer

was able to directly assess a child or obtain a maternal report of

the child’s background, health, or assessment information as recorded in either the child or mother survey instrument. 2This total includes 37 children who were assessed and interviewed, but whose mothers were not interviewed.

NOTE: Sample sizes for all child surveys exclude the 441 female members of the military subsample dropped from interviewing in 1985 and their children. In addition, sample sizes for 1990

and later exclude female members of the economically disadvantaged nonblack/non-Hispanic subsample whose children were

not eligible for assessment. The exclusion of this subsample after 1990 accounts for much of the drop in the sample size between 1988 and 1990.
54 CHAPTER 4: CHILDREN OF THE NLSY79

Table 4.3. Distribution of child’s age in 2000 by mother’s age at birth of child: NLS79 children

assessed and young adults interviewed in 2000

Table 4.2. NLSY79 child sample sizes by age and race and ethnicity: 1986–2000

Sample groups 1986 1988 1990 1992 1994 1996 1998 2000

Total interviews 4,971 6,266 5,803 6,509 7,089 7,103 7,067 6,417

By age1

Birth to 9 years 4,676 5,380 4,508 4,430 4,154 3,480 2,978 1,915

10 to 14 years 294 851 1,158 1,700 1,955 1,951 1,996 1,477

15 years and older 1 35 137 379 980 1,672 2,143 3,025

By race and ethnicity2

Hispanic 937 1,158 1,304 1,483 1,546 1,520 1,550 1,193

Black 1,604 1,895 1,994 2,133 2,350 2,330 2,229 1,914

Nonblack/non-Hispanic 2,430 3,213 2,505 2,893 3,193 3,253 3,288 3,310

1Starting in 1994, children who are aged 15 by December 31st

of the interview year are interviewed as young adults. They are

counted in this table as 15 years and older even though the chronological age at the time of the actual interview might be 14 years

for some respondents. Age for children under the age of 15 refers to their age at their mother’s interview date. 2

Decision rules used in assigning race/ethnicity are described

in the NLSY79 User’s Guide (available at http://

www.bls.gov/nls).

NOTE: In this table, the age for children under age 15 is

measured as of the mother’s interview date (C00047.45) and

may be different from the age at the time of the child assessment. The age of children 15 years and older (young adults) is

measured at their date of interview (Y11924). The age of the

mother at the birth of her child is found in the variable C00070.

Child’s 

age Age of mother at birth of child 

2000 17 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37+ Total 

1 1 21 26 61 109

1 18 24 22 49 113

2 3 20 31 36 28 45 163 

3 1 27 33 24 27 23 22 157

4 2 26 39 25 29 19 11 19 170 

5 1 29 27 40 31 28 12 13 14 195

6 2 25 35 34 27 25 20 11 16 1 196 

7 2 39 34 41 54 35 22 19 22 2 270

8 2 36 42 41 35 33 22 6 12 4 233 

9 1 38 49 54 39 38 39 24 23 4 309

10 2 35 48 47 54 42 34 34 28 3 327 

11 1 29 43 50 48 48 38 22 30 7 316

12 24 42 56 54 50 32 23 23 9 313 

13 3 27 51 45 36 47 35 37 33 4 318

14-CH 13 24 27 20 29 23 31 25 11 203 

14-YA 4 31 39 28 30 28 25 22 14 221

15 5 34 61 45 57 45 37 52 34 8 378 

16 2 34 49 40 51 45 46 43 37 6 353

17 3 30 43 50 56 42 38 48 36 3 349 

18 20 29 41 47 50 50 38 38 6 319

19 10 28 40 52 47 29 27 39 3 275 

20+ 268 191 188 174 141 110 51 7 1,130

Total 278 242 289 349 372 393 356 355 348 350 379 360 355 287 263 287 252 188 186 176 141 211 6,417
CHAPTER 4: CHILDREN OF THE NLSY79 55

NLSY79. Interviewers conducted child surveys through 1992

primarily in person, using a traditional paper-and-pencil interview (PAPI) method. Beginning with the 1994 interviews,

CAPI replaced the traditional interview method for the Child

Supplement and for certain child assessments, such as the

WISC-R Digit Span Subscale, the Self-Perception Profile

for Children, the reading and math subtests of the Peabody

Individual Achievement Test, and the Peabody Picture Vocabulary Test-Revised. The young adult surveys have used

the CAPI format since they were started in 1994. In 2000,

about 87 percent of the young adults were interviewed by

telephone, while the remaining 13 percent were interviewed

in person.

The timing of mother-child assessments generally coincides with the main NLSY79 interview of each mother. Fielding has occurred over periods of approximately 6 months:

February through July of 1986; June through December of

1988 and 1990; May through November of 1992, 1994, and

1996; April to September of 1998; and May to November of

2000. Because of the switch to telephone interviews, the

2000 young adult survey began in March, before the main

NLSY79 interviews.

Each child interview includes the administration of a

number of instruments: The Mother Supplement, the Child

Supplement, and, for children ages 10 to 14, the Child SelfAdministered Supplement. The young adults provide responses to the NLSY79 Young Adult CAPI Questionnaire

and, through 1998, completed a confidential Self-Report

Booklet. (In the 2000 survey, many questions from this booklet were included as a section in the CAPI questionnaire

administered over the telephone.) These child and young

adult instruments:

z Elicit reports from the mother on each child’s background,

home environment, schooling, health, temperament, behavior problems, and motor-social development

z Directly assess a child’s development using nationally

normed tests such as the Peabody Picture Vocabulary

Test-Revised (PPVT-R); the Wechsler Intelligence Scale

for Children-Revised (WISC-R): Digit Span Subscale;

the Peabody Individual Achievement Test (PIAT): Math,

Reading Recognition, and Reading Comprehension

Assessments; and Harter’s Self-Perception Profile for

Children (SPPC)

z Record the interviewer’s observations of each child’s

home environment and an interviewer evaluation of the

testing conditions

z· Gather information from those NLSY79 children in their

preteen, teenage, and young adult years on a variety of

factors including child-parent interactions, child home

responsibilities, attitudes toward school, schooling,

employment, training experiences, religious attendance,

health, substance use, dating and friendship patterns,

sexual activity, marital history, and expectations for the

future.

As indicated in table 4.4, not all assessments were fielded in

each child survey year and, in some instances, selected assessments were administered to only those children for whom

no valid score had been obtained during a previous survey.

Between 1988 and 2000, all children ages 10 or 11 completed

any assessment for which they were age-eligible in order to

establish a representative index group for future analyses.

(The exception is the Self-Perception Profile, administered

only to those 12 to 14 years old since 1996.)

During each survey year, substantial numbers of children have valid scores available on both the assessments

completed directly by the children and those completed by

the mother about the child. Completion rates remain relatively high for each instrument. (See the NLSY79 Child Assessments Selected Tables for more information.) In 1998, for

example, a total of 4,550 children have valid scores on the

Home Observation for Measurement of the Environment

(HOME), the one assessment for which all children under

age 15 in each survey year are eligible. Table 4.5 presents the

numbers of children with valid scores in 1998 by assessment

instrument and race/ethnicity. The “Major data elements”

section below describes the types of child variables present

on the NLSY79 child data file.

Major data elements

The NLSY79 child and young adult data release includes

data from the child assessments and the young adult interviews, self-reports from children ages 10 to 14, and selected

maternal and child information from the main NLSY79 interviews with the children’s mothers. All child-specific information in the NLSY79 child file can be linked with any item

from the mother’s record present on the NLSY79 main data

file and the specially constructed NLSY79 work history and

geocode files. The following discussion summarizes the

major child data elements in this collection; mother data elements are described in chapter 3 of this Handbook. Users

can find more detailed information on the types of data available for the NLSY79 children and their mothers by examining

the child assessment instruments, young adult questionnaires, and main NLSY79 questionnaires; by browsing the

documentation files on the NLSY79 child and main files; or

by consulting the documentation products described in

chapter 10 of this Handbook.

Data elements for the Children of the NLSY79 are discussed in the order presented in figure 4.1.

1. Child demographic and family background

characteristics

A series of constructed demographic variables is provided

for every child, regardless of age or survey status. This
56 CHAPTER 4: CHILDREN OF THE NLSY79

Eligible ages1

Assessment 1986 1988 1990 1992

Parts of the Body 1–2 1–2 — —

Memory for Locations2 8 months–3 years (8 months–3 years) — —

McCarthy Verbal Memory Subscale2 3–6 (3–6) (4–6) (3–6)

What I Am Like 8 and older 8 and older 8 and older 8 and older

(Self-Perception Profile)

WISC-R Digit Span Subscale2 7 and older 10–11 10–11 10–11

(7 and older) (7 and older) (7 and older)

PIAT Math and Reading 5 and older 5 and older 5 and older 5 and older

PPVT-R2 3 and older 10–11 10–11 3 and older

(3 and older) (4 and older)

The HOME All ages All ages All ages All ages

How My Child Usually Acts 0–6 0–6 0–6 0–6

Motor & Social Development 0–3 0–3 0–3 0–3

Behavior Problems Index 4 and older 4 and older 4 and older 4 and older

Table 4.4. NLSY79 child assessments: Variations in administration by survey year

1

Age in years unless otherwise noted.

2

Parentheses indicate age eligibility for children with no previous valid score. For example, in 1990, all 10- and 11-year-olds

were eligible for the PPVT-R; a 6-year-old with no previous score

also was eligible, but a 6-year-old with a previous valid score

Eligible ages1

Assessment 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002

Parts of the Body — — — — —

Memory for Locations — — — — —

McCarthy Verbal Memory Subscale2 (3–6) — — — —

What I Am Like 8–14 12–14 12–14 12–14 12–14

(Self-Perception Profile)

WISC-R Digit Span Subscale2 10–11 7–11 7–11 7–11 7–11

(7–14)

PIAT Math and Reading 5–14 5–14 5–14 5–14 5–14

PPVT-R2 10–11 10–11 4–5, 4–5, 4–5,

(3–14) (4–14) 10–11 10–11 10–11

The HOME 0–14 0–14 0–14 0–14 0–14

How My Child Usually Acts 0–6 0–6 0–6 0–6 2–6

Motor & Social Development 0–3 0–3 0–3 0–3 2–3

Behavior Problems Index 4–14 4–14 4–14 4–14 4–14

from 1986 or 1988 was not eligible.

NOTE: Beginning in 1994, assessments were no longer

given to children who reached age 15 by the end of that calendar year.
CHAPTER 4: CHILDREN OF THE NLSY79 57

Race and ethnicity

Nonblack/

All children Hispanic Black non-Hispanic

Assessment Child age Number Percent Number Percent Number Percent Number Percent

Children home environment

The HOME Inventory All ages (birth to 14) 4,550 92.9 504 88.6 762 93.6 1,884 93.8

Under 3 years 304 79.8 64 72.7 63 80.8 177 82.3

3 to 5 years 493 93.9 73 88.0 105 92.9 315 95.7

6 to 9 years 952 95.2 139 93.3 203 95.3 610 95.6

10 to 14 years 1,401 94.3 228 91.6 391 95.4 782 94.6

Child motor, social, and

emotional development

Temperament Scale Under 1 year 102 97.1 29 100 24 100 49 94.2

1 year 117 100 27 100 28 100 62 100

2 to 6 years 808 91.7 122 86.5 164 90.1 522 93.5

Motor and Social Under 4 years 518 95.7 106 93.8 110 96.5 302 96.2

Development Scale

Behavior Problems Index 4 to 14 years 2,608 91.5 392 86.0 631 90.1 1,585 93.5

Self-Perception Global 12 to 14 years 758 90.6 142 93.4 203 89.0 413 90.4

Self-Perception Scholastic 12 to 14 years 758 90.6 142 93.4 203 89.0 413 90.4

Child cognitive development

WISC-R Digit Span Subscale 7 to 11 years 1,341 92.4 210 95.5 333 94.9 798 90.7

PIAT Math PPVT aged 5 to 14 2,462 91.6 398 93.4 615 92.5 1,449 90.8

PIAT Reading Recognition PPVT aged 5 to 14 2,464 91.7 396 93.0 619 93.1 1,449 90.8

PIAT Reading Comprehension PPVT aged 5 to 14 2,451 91.2 394 92.5 617 92.8 1,440 90.2

PPVT-R 4 to 5 years 326 89.6 49 81.7 70 92.1 207 90.8

10 to 11 years 599 92.3 93 94.9 171 93.4 335 91.0

Table 4.5. Numbers and percentages of children with valid assessment scores: Children of the NLSY79

in 2000

NOTE: Of the 8,432 children born to mothers interviewed in

1998, 4,924 children were living in the household of an eligible

mother or were otherwise known to be available, and were assessed in 1998. Children who had reached age 15 by the end of

1998 were not eligible for assessment. Data from 1998 are used

in this table because 2000 data are not yet available.

demographic information includes his or her date of birth,

birth order, sex, and race, as well as the respondent identification number of each sibling. Also listed are characteristics

of the child’s immediate family (for example, mother’s age,

mother’s educational attainment). Additionally, the survey

provides data on the usual living arrangements of the child

at each of the mother’s interview dates by stating whether

the child usually resides with the mother, with the father, or

elsewhere. Starting with the 1984 main NLSY79 interview,

information for children living in the mother’s household includes whether the child’s father is alive and if he is present

in the household. If the father does not reside with his children, the survey asks about the frequency and pattern of the

child’s contact with him.

2. Prenatal and child postnatal health history

This portion of the survey gathers information about the

mother’s use of prenatal care, alcohol use, smoking, marijuana and cocaine use (beginning in 1988), use of sonograms,

amniocentesis, and dietary supplementation during pregnancy. Also available for each child are data regarding gestation and birth weight, as well as breastfeeding practices,

other infant feeding practices (for selected survey rounds),

illnesses and injuries, and well-baby care in the first year of

life.

3. Child health

Information on this topic includes ongoing physical characteristics (such as height, weight, and left- or right-handed-
58 CHAPTER 4: CHILDREN OF THE NLSY79

ness); type of health conditions affecting school attendance

or childhood activities; use of medicine or medical equipment; and care by a doctor or other healthcare professional.

Details concerning use of the medical system include the

presence, number, and type of accidents, injuries, or illnesses

requiring medical attention; hospitalization history; timing

of last routine health and dental checkups; and coverage by

and type of health insurance. The survey also probes the

need of the child for professional assistance with a behavioral, emotional, or mental problem; visits to a psychiatrist,

psychologist, or counselor; and routine use of medication to

control activity level or behavior. Comparable questions

continue to be asked of the young adults, allowing researchers the opportunity to continue examining health issues into

early adulthood.

4. Child home environment

The Home Observation for Measurement of the Environment (HOME) Inventory, administered in four versions for

children of all ages, measures the nature and quality of the

child’s home environment. These data, collected from both

mother reports and interviewer observations during the biennial assessment interviews, provide information on the

overall quality of the home environment, maternal emotional

and verbal responsiveness, maternal acceptance of and involvement with the child, organization of the environment,

presence of materials for learning, and variety of stimulation.

For the older age groups, the HOME Inventory also includes

a measure of parental modeling of maturity. All of the items

in the NLSY79 Child HOME Inventory are not necessarily

included in the HOME score. Beginning in 2000, the HOME

items for younger children were moved from the paper Mother

Supplement to the CAPI format in the Child Supplement.

5. Child cognitive development

The following assessments were administered to all children

of selected ages through 1992; since 1994, only children below the age of 15 continue to be assessed. Ages of children

taking each assessment and other sampling information appear in table 4.4, and may vary across survey rounds.

z Peabody Picture Vocabulary Test-Revised (PPVT-R).

Can be administered to children 3 years of age or older.

Measures the child’s hearing vocabulary of Standard

American English. From 1988–98, the Hispanic-American adaptation of the PPVT-R (Test de Vocabulario en

Imágenes Peabody or TVIP) was used to measure receptive vocabulary of single Spanish words spoken by

an examiner.

z McCarthy Scale of Children’s Abilities: Verbal Memory

Subscale. Typically administered to children ranging

from 3 through 6 years old. Assesses short-term verbal

memory. Not administered after 1994.

z Wechsler Intelligence Scale for Children-Revised

(WISC-R): Digit Span Subscale. Administered to children age 7 and older during the 1986–94 interviews and

to children ages 7 to 11 years beginning with the 1996

interview. Measures short-term memory.

z Peabody Individual Achievement Test (PIAT): Math,

Reading Recognition, and Reading Comprehension

Assessments. Administered to children 5 years of age

and older. Measures ability in mathematics and oral

reading and the ability to derive meaning from printed

words.

z Memory for Location Assessment. Administered to children 8 months through 3 years of age in 1986 and 1988.

Measures a child’s short-term memory.

z Body Parts Assessment. Administered in the 1986 and

1988 rounds to children 1 or 2 years of age. Measures

receptive vocabulary knowledge of orally presented

words.

6. Child motor, social, and emotional development

Interviewers administered the following four assessments

during each of the assessment years to children of the appropriate age group. (See tables 4.4 and 4.5.) Since 1994,

only children below the age of 15 continue to be assessed.

z Behavior Problems Index. Completed by the child’s

mother for children 4 years of age and older. The public

file includes an overall behavior problems score, as well

as an externality and internality scale. Additionally,

subscales rate the child on the following six types of

problem behaviors: Antisocial, anxious or depressed,

hyperactive, headstrong, dependent, and peer conflicts.

z Temperament Scales. Completed by the child’s mother.

These items measure the temperament, or behavioral

style, of children under age 7 (age 2 to 6 in 2002). Three

age-specific versions assess such factors as activity,

predictability, positive affect, fearfulness, compliance,

Figure 4.1. Data elements in the children of the

NLSY79

1 Child demographic and family background

characteristics

2 Prenatal and child postnatal health history

3 Child health

4 Child home environment

5 Child cognitive development

6 Child motor, social, and emotional development

7 Educational experiences

8 Preteen and teen behaviors and attitudes

9 Young adult survey

10 Mother-specific information
CHAPTER 4: CHILDREN OF THE NLSY79 59

and insecure attachment. Interviewer assessments of

the child’s shyness, cooperation, interest, and persistence during the interview, as well as attitude about and

rapport with the interviewer, also are collected.

z Self-Perception Profile for Children (SPPC). A selfadministered scale that measures, for children age 8 and

older (12 to 14 years old beginning with the 1996 survey), the child’s perceived competence in academics and

sense of general self-worth.

z Motor and Social Development Scale. Completed by

the mother. Measures milestones in the areas of motor,

cognitive, communication, and social development for

children under 4 years of age.

7. Educational experiences

A major focus of the Children of the NLSY79 has been education and school experiences. Each survey has collected

information about the child’s preschool and regular school

attendance. Since 1988, the child’s mother has provided information about the child’s schooling, including data such

as grades skipped or repeated, type of school attended, quality of the school, and the child’s performance in class. Since

1988, the Child Self-Administered Supplement has gathered

information from children age 10 and older on the characteristics of their school, the involvement of their parents in their

education, and their educational expectations. Starting in

1996, questions also ask about teaching style and classroom

practices for children age 6 and older. Beginning in 1994,

young adults (age 15 and older) have answered an extensive

series of questions covering topics such as school attendance, degrees and diplomas received, school characteristics, parent involvement with school, college experiences and

college choice, and a number of other areas.

This information collected from respondents is supplemented by a one-time school survey, conducted in 1995–96.

This survey, administered by mail, on the telephone, or in

person, collected information from school officials at schools

attended by NLSY79 child respondents in grades 1 through

12 during either the 1993–94 or 1994–95 school year. School

officials first responded to a questionnaire that collected information about the characteristics of the school; a second

questionnaire gathered data on the experiences of each individual child sample member. Additionally, the data include

scores on standardized tests recorded from student transcripts. See table 4.8 for the specific details collected. Selected information is available for 3,000 children.

A public-use version of the child school survey data,

which removes items that might compromise respondent

confidentiality, is available to researchers as a separate file.

Researchers can link the school information to the child survey data in the main data set. A few additional restricted

items also are available. See table 4.8 for a list of which items

are considered public and which are restricted items. For

more information about accessing the restricted use data,

see the “Ordering Data” section of the NLS Web site

(http://www.bls.gov/nls).

8. Preteen and teen behaviors and attitudes

Each survey except the initial 1986 interview has collected

self-reported information from children age 10 and older (10

to 14 beginning in 1994). Information gathered includes childparent interaction, child home responsibilities, attitudes toward school, time use, employment, religious attendance,

alcohol and drug use, sexual activity (age 13 and older), dating and friendship patterns, and other attitudes and behaviors. Mott and Quinlan (1993) discuss the data in detail and

present summary tabulations from the 1990 round. The content of the child self-administered interview has been expanded gradually since 1988. Many questions asked in the

child self-administered sections have been carried forward

and expanded in the young adult self-report booklet/section, allowing researchers to track these behaviors throughout adolescence and into early adulthood.

9. Young adult survey

Since 1994, a special set of instruments has gathered information from children age 15 and older by the end of the

calendar year of the survey. In 1998 only, those age 21 and

older as of the interview date were excluded from the sample.

Young adults age 21 years and older were again eligible for

interview in 2000.

About 40 percent of children and young adults under

age 21 originally selected in the black/Hispanic oversample

were not eligible for interview in 2000 due to funding constraints, but will be eligible for interview again in 2002. Young

adult surveys through 1998 used a CAPI questionnaire modeled on the main NLSY79 interview, along with a paper-andpencil self-report booklet. Beginning in 2000, surveys have

been conducted primarily by telephone interviews, with

questions from the self-report booklet integrated into the

computerized instrument.

The young adult survey collects information about these

young people’s regular schooling, job history, military experience, training investments, physical well-being, dating and

marital history, fertility, childcare arrangements, household

composition, and family income and assets. It fields a variety of attitude, aspiration, and psychological well-being questions, including questions about the young person’s

knowledge of the world of work, attitudes toward women

working, expectations about work, feelings of self-esteem,

and sense of autonomy. A confidential supplement (incorporated into the CAPI instrument in 2000) records these

young adults’ self-reports on their alcohol use, cigarette

smoking, use of prescribed and nonprescribed drugs, participation in delinquent or criminal activities, arrest records,

sexual activity, parent-child conflict, access to a computer
60 CHAPTER 4: CHILDREN OF THE NLSY79

and computer training, volunteer activities, expectations for

the future, and neighborhood problems. As with the child

data, these young adult data can be readily linked with the

complete file of the mother’s information, as well as with the

respondent’s own child history.

The 2000 young adult survey was extensively redesigned to accommodate the telephone mode of interviewing

and the increasing age range of the sample, as well as to

integrate the self-report booklet into the CAPI questionnaire.

The resulting questionnaire was still parallel to the NLSY79

main questionnaire in some sections.

New series on migration, sibling contact, ideal relationships, parenting behaviors and attitudes, financial strain,

marijuana addiction, and amphetamine usage were introduced into the questionnaire in 2000. Additionally, the questionnaire was modified to ensure a more complete history of

key events such as employment, marriages, cohabitations,

and births. It was also streamlined to ensure a reasonable

interview length for administration over the telephone; because of this, some questions asked in other years were either eliminated or restructured into multiple questions. Items

retained from the young adult self-report booklet were modified for CAPI/telephone administration and either integrated

into existing sections of the CAPI questionnaire or located

in a new section. This new section was interviewer-administered for telephone interviews and self-administered for inperson interviews.

10. Mother-specific information

The complete set of variables on each NLSY79 mother is

now available as a separate file in the child data. All motherspecific information present on the NLSY79 main file, and on

the specially constructed NLSY79 work history and geocode

files, can be linked with the child data through respondent

identification codes. Discussions of the types of information available for NLSY79 mothers can be found in the

NLSY79 User’s Guide (available at http://www.bls.gov/nls) or

chapter 3 in this Handbook.

The child data set includes a set of created variables

drawn from the main NLSY79 interview that provides information on the mother with respect to the child’s life situation. These constructed variables include items on maternal

family background, maternal household composition at each

interview, educational background of the child’s parents and

other members of the household, and maternal health history. Also present in the child data set are maternal work

histories of the mother’s quarterly (13-week periods) employment activity and job characteristics starting 1 year prior to

the child’s birth and continuing for a period of up to 5 years

after the child’s birth.

Data files and documentation

The NLSY79 Child/Young Adult Data 1986–2000 CD presents

the data for the NLSY79 children and young adults. The

complete child and young adult data set also is available

online at http://www.bls.gov/nls. The current data release

includes data and documentation from the NLSY79 1986–

2000 child and mother questionnaires, all assessment scores,

the 1988–2000 supplements for children age 10 to 14, the

1994–2000 young adult interviews, and other information

collected during each child survey. Users can easily link the

child, young adult, and mother data files because they are all

part of the data set; complete mother information is found in

the NLSY79 main, geocode, and work history data files. Processing of the child and young adult 2002 data should be

completed by early 2004.

Search and extraction software enables users to peruse,

select, and extract variables on both the child and young

adult data sets. Chapter 8 provides more technical information on the NLS data format and extraction software, as well

as descriptions of supplementary documentation items available for the NLSY79 child and NLSY79 main file.

Lists of NLSY79 child and young adult documentation

items can be found in chapters 8 and 10, under the appropriate heading.

References

Mott, Frank L. and Quinlan, Stephen V. “The Ten-and-Over

Years: Self-Reports from the Children of the NLSY. 1990

Tabulations and Discussion.” Columbus, OH: Center

for Human Resource Research, The Ohio State University, 1993.

Selected variables by survey year: Children of

the NLSY79

Tables 4.6 (children, birth to age 14) and 4.7 (young adults

age 15 and older) depict selected variables from the Children

of the NLSY79 data set. The top row of the tables lists the

years in which the Children of the NLSY79 have been surveyed; the first column gives some of the variables that have

been collected. An asterisk (*) indicates that information for

the designated variable was obtained for the relevant child

or young adult sample in that year. In some instances, an

asterisk also can indicate a created variable. “R” used in

variable descriptions stands for “respondent.” Users should

be aware that, in some instances, the variable descriptions in

the table represent a group of questions, and not single response items. Question series asked of only a restricted

universe of respondents have the restrictions included in

the variable description or in the section heading. As always, researchers should consult the survey instruments

before using any data in analysis.
CHAPTER 4: CHILDREN OF THE NLSY79 61

Table 4.6. Selected variables by survey year: Children (birth to age 14) of the NLSY79 

Variable 86 88 90 92 94 96 98 00 02 

CHILD SUPPLEMENT AND MOTHER SUPPLEMENT 

 Child’s date of birth * * * * * * * * * 

 Child’s age * * * * * * * * * 

 Date of child interview * * * * * * * * * 

 Date mother supplement completed * * * * * * * * * 

 Relationship of person completing supplement to child * * * * * * * * * 

 Verify child’s age with mother * * * * * * * * * 

A. Child background 

 Child currently attending or enrolled in regular school (or preschool) * * * * * * * * * 

 Child ever attended regular school, nursery school, or preschool * * * * * * * * 

 Current or last school attended * * * 

 Current or last grade attended * * * * * * * * * 

 Head Start program information * * * * * * * * 

B. Child health 

 Child’s eye and hair color * 

 Place of child’s birth * * 

 Does health limit school or play * * * * * * * * * 

Any physical, emotional, or mental condition requiring: Frequent treatment, 

medicine, or special equipment * * * * * * * * * 

 Type and duration of health conditions * * * * * * * * * 

 Accidents and injuries needing medical attention in last 12 months; details * * * * * * * * * 

Accidents and injuries needing hospitalization since last interview or since 

birth; details * * * * * * * * 

 Number of illnesses requiring medical attention or treatment * * * * * * * * * 

 Date of last routine health checkup * * * * * * * * * 

 Sex of child * * * * * 

 Menstrual period information * * * * * * * * * 

 Right- or left-handedness * * * * 

 Date of last dental checkup or dental work * * * * * * * * * 

 Source of health insurance, if any * * * * * * * * * 

 Behavioral, emotional, or mental problems; did insurance cover doctor visit * * * * * * * * * 

Any medicines or prescription drugs taken to help control activity or behavior * * * * * * * * * 

 Height and weight of child * * * * * * * * * 

C. Child assessments (see table 4.4 for age restrictions) 

 Parts of the Body: number of body parts child can identify by common names * *

Memory for Locations: how long the child can remember the location of the 

doll * *

Verbal Memory test: ability to remember and repeat word sequences *****

SPPC: what child thinks he or she is like, how he or she thinks and feels *********
62 CHAPTER 4: CHILDREN OF THE NLSY79

Table 4.6. Selected variables by survey year: Children (birth to age 14) of the NLSY79 

Variable 86 88 90 92 94 96 98 00 02 

 Memory for Digit Span test (WISC-R): memory for number order * ********

 PIAT Math subtest *********

 PIAT Reading: Recognition and Comprehension subtests *********

 Peabody Picture Vocabulary Test: vocabulary *********

HOME inventory (in 2000: ages 0 to 3 in Child survey, others in Mother 

Supplement; in 2002: all items but Observations in Mother Supplement) * ********

Temperament Scales (in 2000: ages 0 to 3 in Child survey, others in Mother 

Supplement; in 2002: entirely in CAPI Mother Supplement) * ********

 Motor and Social Development Scale *********

 Behavior Problems Index *********

D. Child schooling (see also Child Self-Administered Supplement section for self-reported school information) 

 Time spent on homework, reading for fun * * * *

 Style of teaching in English or Language Arts classes ****

 Parent involvement in child’s schooling (19 items) (age 5 and older) ****

E. School and family background (children 10 to 14 years old in 1986–94; 5 to 14 years old in 1996–2002) 

 Type of school child attends * *******

 Reason child not attending school ********

 Grades child has repeated ********

 Reason child last repeated a grade ********

 Has child had behavior problems at school; grade this first happened ********

 Number of different schools child has attended  

 Time child spends on homework each week ** **

 Extent of parent involvement in school  

 Child ever suspended or expelled from school; grade this first happened ** ******

 Parent ranking of child in class ********

 Does child get remedial help in school ********

 Does child attend advanced classes ********

 Parent rating of child’s school (series) * * * * * *

 Parent perception of child’s probable educational attainment * * * * * * *

 Parent perception of difficulty in raising child * * * * * *

Parent rating of aspects of child’s life (series): Health, friendships, relationship 

with mother, feelings about self, future prospects, relationships with siblings * *****

 Number of child’s friends the parent knows * * * * * * *

 How often parent knows who child is with when the child is not at home * * * * * *

 Frequency of child’s attendance at religious services in the past year * * * * * * *

 Importance parent puts on child’s religious training * * * * * * *

F. Interviewer evaluation of testing conditions * * * * * * * * *

G. Home observations: Interviewer observations of home environment * * * * * * * * *
CHAPTER 4: CHILDREN OF THE NLSY79 63

Table 4.6. Selected variables by survey year: Children (birth to age 14) of the NLSY79 

Variable 86 88 90 92 94 96 98 00 02 

CHILD SELF-ADMINISTERED SUPPLEMENT (10 to 14 years old) 

A. Home 

 In last month, have R and parents gone to: Movies, shopping, outing, church * * * * * * * * 

 In last week, have R and parents done: Crafts, schoolwork, games together * * * * * * * * 

 Does R help around house * * * * * * * * 

Any rules about: Homework, TV, whereabouts, dating, parties * * * * * * * * 

 How much say R has in making rules * * * * * * * * 

 How often R argues with parent(s) about the rules * * * * * * * * 

 How often each parent talks over decisions, listens to R’s side * * * * * * * * 

Who usually makes the decisions about: Buying clothes, spending money, 

friends, curfew, allowance, TV, religious training * * * * * * * * 

B. Parents 

 How often each parent knows who R is with when R is not home * * * * * * 

 Does R think parents spend enough time with him or her * * * * * * 

 How often each parent misses events or activities important to R * * * * * * 

 How close R feels to each parent * * * * * * 

How well R and each parent share ideas and talk about things that matter * * * * * * 

 In dealing with R, how often R and mother or father agree with each other * * * * * * 

 Does R live with biological father, stepfather, or neither * * * * * 

Do biological parents (and mother and stepfather, if applicable) get along, 

agree about rules, argue * * * * * 

 Does R feel caught in middle; can R talk to each parent about the other * * * * * 

What R tells parent about activities (TV and movies watched, whereabouts, 

teachers, and so forth) * * * * 

How often R feels (series): Sad, happy, nervous, bored, lonely, tired, excited, 

too busy, pressured * * * * * * 

Has R been away from mother or father for at least 2 months, except summer 

camp 

 * * * * * * * * 

 Where, how old was R the last time away from mother or father * * * * * * * * 

C. School and activities 

 Current grade attending * * * * * * * * 

 Characteristics of R’s school (eight items) * * * * * * * * 

 Level of satisfaction with school * * * * * * * * 

 Usual activities between school and dinner * * * * * * * * 

 If R goes home after school, is an adult usually present * * * * * * * * 

 Level of schooling R anticipates * * * * * * * * 

 Is R member of any clubs, teams, or school activities in/out of school * * * * * * * * 

 Perceptions of gender roles (six items) * * * * * 

 Usual activities in summer * * * * * * 

 Does R feel safe in neighborhood * * * * * * 
64 CHAPTER 4: CHILDREN OF THE NLSY79

Table 4.6. Selected variables by survey year: Children (birth to age 14) of the NLSY79 

Variable 86 88 90 92 94 96 98 00 02 

 Usual time spent watching TV on weekdays and on weekends * * * * * * * 

Number of times in last year R engaged in a series of criminal or delinquent 

acts * * * * * * * * 

D. Employment 

Work for pay (babysitting, paper route, yardwork, and so forth), excluding 

chores around home; type of work * * * * * * * * 

Usual frequency with which R works; hours worked in usual week in last 3 

months * * * * * * * * 

 Money earned in a usual week * * * * * * * * 

E. Religion 

 Present religion, attendance at religious services in past year * * * * * * * * 

 Does R attend services with or without parents * * * * * * * * 

 Do friends attend services; if so, do they attend services at the same place * * * * * * * * 

F. Friendships and peers 

 Number of close friends of each sex * * * * * * * * 

 How much R tells own parents about friends and friends’ parents * * * 

 Are close friends in the same or a different grade or not in school * * * * * * * * 

How often R is lonely, wants more friends * * * * * * * * 

Does R feel pressure from friends to (series): Smoke, work hard in school, try 

drugs, drink alcohol, skip school, or commit a crime or do something violent * * * * * * 

 Risk-taking behaviors and attitudes (six items) * * * * * 

G. Substance use 

 Cigarette use; age first smoked; frequency * * * * * * * * 

 Alcohol use (more than a sip or two); age at which R first drank; frequency * * * * * * * * 

Marijuana use; age at which R first used; frequency * * * * * * * * 

Use of substances (like glue, gas, sprays, fluids) that are “sniffed/huffed”; age 

at which R first used; frequency * * * * * 

Other drug use (LSD, cocaine, uppers, downers); age at which R first used; 

frequency * * * * * * * * 

H. Dating and relationships 

 Age at which R had first date or went out alone with someone of opposite sex * * * * * * * * 

 How often R usually has a date; is it usually the same person * * * * * * * * 

Best age and youngest age R can imagine for getting married, having first 

child * * * * * * * * 

I. Sex education 

 Any courses or time spent in class on sex education; grade, month and year * * * * * * * * 

 Whom in family R talks to about sex * * * * * * * * 

 When during the menstrual cycle pregnancy is most likely to occur * * * * * * * * 

J. Computer use 

 Does R have a computer at home * * * * * 
CHAPTER 4: CHILDREN OF THE NLSY79 65

Table 4.6. Selected variables by survey year: Children (birth to age 14) of the NLSY79 

Variable 86 88 90 92 94 96 98 00 02 

 What R uses computer for most often * * * * * 

 Has R ever used computer at school * * * * * 

 Where and from whom has R learned most about computers * * * * * 

Has R ever had a class or other training, in school or elsewhere, on: 

Computer use, programming, or word processing * * * * * 

How often R uses computer to do homework, play games, use e-mail, and so 

forth * * * * * 
66 CHAPTER 4: CHILDREN OF THE NLSY79

Table 4.7. Selected variables by survey year: Young adult children (age 15 and older) of the NLSY79 

Variable 94 96 98 00 02 

I. LABOR MARKET EXPERIENCE VARIABLES 

A. Current labor force and employment status 

 Survey week labor force and employment status * * * 

 Hours worked in survey week * * * 

 Hours per week usually worked * * * 

 Job search activities * * * 

B. Work experience since January 1 of previous year through 1998 or date of last interview in 2000 and 2002 

 Weeks worked * * * * * 

 Hours usually worked per week * * * * * 

 Number of weeks unemployed, out of labor force * * * 

 Spells of unemployment * * * * * 

Characteristics of last job lasting 2 weeks or more and of first significant job after leaving high 

school * * * * * 

C. Characteristics of jobs (more than 10 hours/week, more than 9 weeks in duration) since January 1 of previous year through 

1998 or date of last interview in 2000 and 2002 

 Occupation and industry (Census code) * * * * * 

 Class of worker * * * * * 

 Start date and stop date * * * * * 

 Hours per week usually worked * * * * * 

 Shift worked * * * 

 Rate of pay * * * * * 

Hourly rate of pay * * * * * 

 Commuting time to job, method of transportation * * * 

 Covered by collective bargaining * * * 

 Is R union member * * * 

 Availability of fringe benefits (CPS job only starting in 2000) * * * * * 

 Global job satisfaction item * * * * * 

 Size of employer * * * 

Reason for leaving job * * * 

 Promotion and promotion potential with employer * * * 

II. HUMAN CAPITAL AND OTHER SOCIOECONOMIC VARIABLES 

A. Early formative influences 

 Date of birth * * * * * 

 Ethnic self-identification * * * * * 

 Number of times R has lived away from mother * * * * * 

Father’s employment status, occupation, highest grade completed, ethnicity * * * * * 

Contact with nonresidential parent(s) * * * * * 

Contact with sibling R feels closest to * * 
CHAPTER 4: CHILDREN OF THE NLSY79 67

Table 4.7. Selected variables by survey year: Young adult children (age 15 and older) of the NLSY79 

Variable 94 96 98 00 02 

Current religion, religious attendance, importance of religion * * * * * 

B. Education 

 Current enrollment status, grade * * * * * 

 Reason stopped attending school * * * * * 

 Date of last enrollment * * * * * 

 Periods of nonattendance, grades when occurred, reason why * * * * * 

 Grades repeated or skipped * * * * * 

 Highest grade attended, highest grade completed * * * * * 

 GED or diploma received, date received * * * * * 

 Is or was the school R attended public, private, or religious * * * * * 

 High school curriculum * * * * * 

 Time spent on homework in school, out of school * * * * 

 Style of teaching in English classes * * * * 

 Parent involvement with R’s schooling (19 items in 1996–98, 17 items in 2000 and 2002) * * * * 

 Job or career counseling received in high school * * * * * 

 Characteristics of R’s school (nine items) * * * * * 

 Level of satisfaction with school * * * * * 

 Number of high schools attended * * * * * 

 Colleges/universities applied to * * 

 Date of college enrollment * * * * * 

 College degree received, date received (asked in 2000 and 2002) * * * * * 

 Type of college attending (2- or 4-year) * * * 

Field of study or specialization in college * * * * * 

 College tuition * * * * * 

 Educational loans or financial aid in college * * * * * 

 Other means of paying college expenses * * * * * 

 Highest grade R would like or expects to complete * * * * * 

 Highest grade R’s best friend would like to complete * * * 

C. Vocational training outside regular school (information on only the most recent program was obtained in 2000) 

 Type(s) of training * * * * * 

 Services provided by training program * * * * * 

 Duration of training programs * * * * * 

 Was training completed * * * * * 

 Hours per week usually spent in training * * * * * 

 Was training related to specific job or employer, related to a promotion * * * 

 Method of financing training * * * * * 

 Does R have certificate or journeyman’s card * * * * * 
68 CHAPTER 4: CHILDREN OF THE NLSY79

Table 4.7. Selected variables by survey year: Young adult children (age 15 and older) of the NLSY79 

Variable 94 96 98 00 02 

D. Physical and mental health 

 Does health limit work or school activity * * * * * 

 Type and duration of health limitation * * * * * 

Recent accidents, injuries, illnesses, hospitalization * * * * * 

 Height, weight * * * * * 

 Right- or left-handedness * * 

 Menstrual period information * * * * * 

 Health insurance coverage for R, children * * * * * 

 CES-Depression Scale (seven items) * * * * * 

E. Relationship and fertility history and household characteristics 

Number, ages, and demographic characteristics of all household residents (only information on 

age and relationship was obtained beginning in 2000) * * * * * 

 Number of close friends of each sex, their ages relative to R’s age * * 

 Month and year or age at first date * * * * * 

 Number of people R has dated in the past 12 months * * * * * 

 How often R usually has a date * * * * * 

 Marital status * * * * * 

 Unmarried R’s: Status of current relationship * * * * * 

 Relationship quality of steady dating relationship * * 

 Has R ever (since last interview) lived with someone R was not married to * * * * * 

 Month and year or age of spouse or partner when R and spouse or partner began living together * * * * * 

 Characteristics of current spouse or partner: Ethnicity, religion, education, employment, income * * * * * 

 Relationship history: Characteristics of previous spouses or partners * * * * * 

 Relationship quality: Happiness rating, positive activities series, topics of arguments series * * * * * 

 Relationship plans, expectations * * * * * 

 Fertility history * * * * * 

 Use of various birth control methods * * * * * 

 Parenting attitudes * * 

 Prenatal care (females) * * * * * 

 Healthcare and nutrition during pregnancy (females) * * * * 

 Cigarette and alcohol use during pregnancy (females) * * * * * 

 Drug use during pregnancy (females) * * * 

Postnatal infant care (females) * * * * * 

 Expected number of children * * * * * 

 R’s opinions or beliefs about parenting; actual parenting behaviors * * 

F. Financial characteristics and program participation 

 Income of R and spouse from farm or own business * * * * * 

Income of R and spouse from wages or salary (military income included starting in 2000) * * * * * 
CHAPTER 4: CHILDREN OF THE NLSY79 69

Table 4.7. Selected variables by survey year: Young adult children (age 15 and older) of the NLSY79 

Variable 94 96 98 00 02 

 Income of R and spouse from unemployment compensation * * * * * 

Income of R and spouse from public assistance * * * * * 

Income of R and spouse from Food Stamps * * * * * 

Income of R and spouse from Social Security, other sources * * * * * 

Income of R and spouse from military service (combined with civilian wages starting in 2000) * * * 

Income of R and spouse from child support * * * * * 

Child support expected versus amount received * * * * * 

Income of R and spouse from other sources * * * * * 

Possession of various assets (R and spouse) * * * * * 

Asset market values (R and spouse) * * * 

Household income * * 

Financial strain * * 

Amount of debts * * * * * 

G. Military service (current or past) 

 Branch of Armed Forces * * * * * 

 Months spent in Armed Forces * * * * * 

 Military occupation(s) * * * * * 

Activation for reservists; reactivation for regular branches * 

Participation in VEAP or GI bill * * * * * 

 Type and amount of military training * * * * * 

 Formal education received while in service * * * * * 

H. Attitudes toward work and self 

 Knowledge of World of Work series * * * 

 Characteristics of job R is willing to take (for Rs who are unemployed or out of labor force) * * * 

 Reaction to hypothetical job offers * * * 

 Pearlin Mastery Scale (seven items) * * * * * 

 Self-Esteem Scale (Rosenberg) (10 items) * * * * * 

 Attitude toward women working * * * * 

I. Childcare (youngest child in household in 2000 and 2002) and parenting behavior 

 Childcare arrangements in last month (youngest child only) * * * * * 

 Number of hours per week (youngest child only) * * * * * 

 Parenting behavior towards youngest child * * 

 Cost per week (all children) * * * * * 

 Did childcare problems force R to turn down job offer or to lose work * * * * * 

J. Looking for work 

 R looking for work or employed when found current or most recent job * * * 

 Methods of job search used * * * 
70 CHAPTER 4: CHILDREN OF THE NLSY79

Table 4.7. Selected variables by survey year: Young adult children (age 15 and older) of the NLSY79 

Variable 94 96 98 00 02 

 Job offers rejected (while looking for each job) * * * 

 Desired characteristics of job sought * * * 

III. ATTITUDES AND BEHAVIORS (located in self-report booklet through 1998) 

A. Computer use 

 Does R have a computer at home or have access to one elsewhere * * * * * 

 What R uses computer for most often * * * 

 Has R ever used computer at school or college, or at work * * 

How R has learned about computers * * * 

 Has R ever had a class or training in computer use, programming, or word processing * * * 

 How often R uses computer for various activities * * * * * 

B. Substance use 

 Extent, frequency of R’s alcohol use; age first used * * * * * 

Where and with whom was first drink * * 

Alcohol abuse behavior in past year series (had an argument, missed school or work, drove a 

car, and so on) * * * * * 

 Does R usually drink beer, wine, or liquor * * * 

 Where and with whom R usually drinks * * * 

R’s perception of how many drink at least sometimes (series): Students in R’s grade, people R’s 

age with whom R hangs out, people R’s age in R’s neighborhood * * * * * 

 Extent, frequency of cigarette use; age first used * * * * * 

 Extent, frequency of marijuana use; age first used; various details * * * * * 

 Extent, frequency of amphetamine use * * 

 Extent, frequency of use of substances (glue, gas, sprays, fluids) that are “sniffed/huffed” * * * * * 

 Extent, frequency of cocaine use * * * * * 

 Extent, frequency of “crack” use * * * * * 

 Age at which R first used each drug * * * 

 Extent, frequency of use of other drugs (LSD, uppers, downers); age at which R first used * * * 

 Frequency of use of hallucinogens (LSD, PCP, peyote, mescaline) * * * 

 Frequency of use of sedatives or downers (barbiturates, sleeping pills) * * * 

Frequency of use of other drugs (stimulants, heroin, steroids, MDMA/“Ecstasy,” crystal 

meth./“Ice”) * * 

While high, has R ever: Hurt self or someone else; stayed home from school or work; gone late to 

school or work; driven a car * * * 

 Due to drug use, have R’s grades suffered; has R ever hurt chances for a raise or for a better job * * * 

Has R ever taken sedatives, tranquilizers, stimulants, painkillers, steroids, heroin, hallucinogens, 

or an injection of any drug without doctor’s orders * * * 

C. Attitudes and expectations 

 Risk-taking behaviors and attitudes (six items) * * * * * 

 Best age for R to marry; youngest age at which R can imagine getting married * * * 

 Best age and youngest age R can imagine to have first child * * * 
CHAPTER 4: CHILDREN OF THE NLSY79 71

Table 4.7. Selected variables by survey year: Young adult children (age 15 and older) of the NLSY79 

Variable 94 96 98 00 02 

 Aspirations for future (marriage, fertility, employment, relationships) * * * * * 

D. Sex education and sexual intercourse 

 Any courses or time spent in class on sex education * * * * * 

 Grade R first had this course * * * * * 

 Who in family R talks to about sex * * * * 

 Who outside family R talks to about sex * 

 Ever had sexual intercourse; age at first intercourse * * * * * 

Number of partners in last 12 months * * * * * 

 When last sexual intercourse occurred * * * * * 

 During last sexual intercourse, did R and partner use birth control and, if so, which method(s) * * * * * 

 Relationship with and characteristics of partner at last intercourse * * * 

Has R ever been pregnant, number of times (through 1998) * * * * * 

 Month and year in which R got pregnant the first time, R’s age at the time * * * * * 

In the month before the last time R got pregnant, did R or R’s partner use birth control and, if so, 

which method(s) * * * * * 

Did R or R’s partner use a birth control method on every occasion of sexual intercourse that 

month * * * 

Has R ever had an abortion and, if so, how many * * * 

 Month and year of R’s first abortion, and R’s age at the time * * * 

E. Home and neighborhood environment 

 Does R live with biological father or stepfather * * * * * 

Do biological parents (and mother and stepfather, if applicable) get along, agree about who sets 

rules, argue * * * * * 

 Does R feel caught in the middle; can R talk about each parent with the other * * * * * 

Extent of neighborhood problems (series): Disrespect for laws, incidence of crime or violence, 

incidence of unemployment, and so forth * * * * * 

 Number of times R has run away from home * * * * * 

 R’s age the first time R ran away * * * * * 

F. Criminal activities 

Crimes or delinquent activities R has committed in the last year (got in a fight, stole something, 

and so on) * * * * * 

Has R ever been convicted on any charges except a minor traffic violation; if so, what was R’s 

age at the time * * * * * 

Number of times R has been convicted of something * * * * * 

Date of most recent conviction * * * 

Charges on which R was convicted (for example, assault, robbery, or theft) * * * * * 

 Has R ever been convicted on charges in adult court * * * 

 Has R ever been on probation; has R been on probation since last interview * * * * * 

 When did R’s (most recent) probation period end * * * 

 Has R ever been sentenced to spend time in a youth or adult corrections institution * * * * * 
72 CHAPTER 4: CHILDREN OF THE NLSY79

Table 4.7. Selected variables by survey year: Young adult children (age 15 and older) of the NLSY79 

Variable 94 96 98 00 02 

 Date of most recent release from corrections facility * * * 

Number of times R has been referred to a court-related counseling or diversion program by 

police, courts, school, or own parents; if so, age at which this first occurred * * * 

 Date on which (most recent) counseling program ended * * * 

G. Volunteer activities 

 Volunteer work performed in last 2 years or since last interview * * * * * 

 Was any of the volunteer work: Court ordered, church- or school-sponsored, other * * * * * 

 Types of organizations R is or was involved with (for example, service, church, youth) * * * * * 

H. Mental health 

 Has R received any help for an emotional, behavioral, or family problem in the last 12 months * * * * * 

 Type of problem(s) * * * * * 

Has R felt or has anyone suggested that R needed help for any behavioral, emotional, or mental 

problem in the past 12 months? * * * 

 Does R regularly take any medicine or prescription drug to help control activity level or behavior * * * * * 
CHAPTER 4: CHILDREN OF THE NLSY79 73

Table 4.8. Content of Child Schooling Questionnaire 

Child Sample Member Data Public Restricted

Month/year questionnaire was filled out * 

Day questionnaire was filled out * 

Enrollment details (month/year started, month/year ended, reason ended) * 

Day enrollment started, day ended * 

Highest grade attended, highest grade completed * 

Days absent, times suspended during academic year * 

Student’s participation or enrollment in activities/programs (for example, remedial classes, gifted and 

talented, ESL, summer school, school breakfast, pregnancy counseling) *

Highest possible GPA, student’s GPA * 

Competency exams taken, whether passed/failed * 

Ever expelled *

Ever repeated a grade or been held back, which grade * 

Ever skipped a grade, which grade *

About student’s most recent grade level: * 

Enrollment totals (male, female, total) * 

Average class size *

Number of hours in a typical school day * 

Number of students suspended/expelled * 

Percentage of students repeating a grade * 

Percentage of students who will be promoted to the next grade * 

Number of full-time classroom teachers * 

Percentage of teachers with a master’s degree * 

Degree to which blended classrooms were used (with more than one grade together) * 

Degree to which team teaching occurred * 

Whether students typically have access to computers in classroom * 

The degree to which handicapped/special needs children were mainstreamed * 

Approximate amount of daily homework assigned (minutes required) * 

Principal Questionnaire Public Restricted

Month/year questionnaire was filled out * 

Day questionnaire was filled out * 

School is public or private *

Descriptive characteristics of school (for example, public school of choice, public magnet school, 

Catholic parish, boarding school) *

School is coed, all male, or all female * 

Grade levels included *

Month/year school year began *

Day school year began * 

Enrollment totals at beginning of school year * 

Average daily attendance *
74 CHAPTER 4: CHILDREN OF THE NLSY79

Table 4.8. Content of Child Schooling Questionnaire 

Child Sample Member Data Public Restricted

Minimum number of days State requires school to be in session * 

Month/year school year expected to end * 

Day school year expected to end * 

Number of full-time counselors, teachers, teachers with a master’s degree * 

Percent of regular teachers who are female, percent who are new * 

Percent of students, percent of faculty belonging to racial/ethnic groups listed * 

Annual salary for teacher with listed levels of educational experience * 

Percent of student body participating/enrolled in programs (for example, remedial math, ESL, 

summer school, gifted and talented, pregnancy counseling) *

Percent of 12th grade students who participate in various instructional programs (for example, 

college prep, industrial arts, fine arts) *

Percent of 12th grade students last year who graduated * 

Does school have library/media center; number of books, videos, compact discs * 

Instructional materials principal considers most important (for example, computers, textbooks, 

workbooks, and practice sheets) *
CHAPTER 5: NLS OF MATURE AND YOUNG WOMEN 75

THE NLS ORIGINAL COHORTS:

MATURE AND YOUNG WOMEN

Table 5.1. Number of respondents interviewed by cohort and race: Mature and Young Women

Cohort Initial survey 10-year survey 20-year survey 30-year survey Latest survey

Mature Women 1967 1977 1987 1997 2001

Total 5,083 3,964 3,241 2,608 2,318

Nonblacks 3,693 2,892 2,383 1,939 1,749

Blacks 1,390 1,072 858 669 569

Young Women 1968 1978 1988 1997 2001

Total 5,159 3,902 3,508 3,049 2,806

Nonblacks 3,700 2,838 2,628 2,287 2,119

Blacks 1,459 1,064 880 762 687

I

nterviews of the National Longitudinal Surveys (NLS) of

Mature Women and of Young Women were begun in the

mid-1960s because the U.S. Department of Labor was interested in studying the employment patterns of two groups of

women. Respondents to the NLS of Mature Women were a

group of women in their 30s and early 40s, many of whom

were reentering the workforce and balancing the roles of

homemaker, mother, and labor force participant. The NLS of

Young Women included women in their teens and early 20s,

who were completing school, making initial career and job

decisions, and starting families.

Chapter organization

This chapter begins with a summary of the NLS Mature

Women and Young Women samples and special features of

the sample design. Users then will find information regarding the interviews, fielding periods, retention rates, and sampling weights for the cohorts. The chapter continues with

descriptions of the topical content of the data sets and information on the specific data files and documentation available for each cohort. Finally, tables provide further detail on

the types of questions asked in the surveys and the survey

years in which the questions were included.

The samples

During 1966, the U.S. Census Bureau conducted two household screenings. Using information about household residents compiled during these screenings, two cohorts of

women were established: 5,393 Mature Women ages 30 to 44

as of March 31, 1967, and 5,533 Young Women ages 14 to 24

as of December 31, 1967. Each sample group represented the

civilian, noninstitutionalized population of women in the age

group residing in the United States at the time the samples

were selected. To meet the requirement of providing statistically reliable estimates for black Americans, blacks were to

be represented in the sample at twice their expected rate in

the population.

During 1967 and 1968, the first interviews were conducted with the NLS of Mature Women and the NLS of Young

Women, respectively. Of the 5,393 Mature Women identified

during the household screenings, 5,083 (94 percent) participated in the 1967 interview. Of the 5,533 Young Women

designated for interview, 5,159 (93 percent) completed the

initial interview in 1968. Table 5.1 presents, by race, the number of respondents in the two NLS cohorts of women interviewed during the initial survey and several subsequent

surveys. Data through the 2001 survey are now available to

researchers.

Multiple-respondent households

Mature and Young Women. The sampling design used by

the U.S. Census Bureau to select respondents for the four

1960s cohorts made it possible for an NLS household to
76 CHAPTER 5: NLS OF MATURE AND YOUNG WOMEN

Number

Cohort relationships: Young Women of pairs

Young women-Mature women 1,848

Daughter-mother (same household) 1,540

Daughter-mother (different household) 308

Young Women-Young Men 2,398

Sister-brother (same household) 1,243

Sister-brother (different household) 571

Wife-husband (same household) 574

Wife-husband (different household) 10

Young Women-Older Men 988

Daughter-father (same household) 963

Daughter-father (different household) 25

Young Women-Young Women 949

Sisters (same household) 949

Table 5.2. Number of respondent pairs by cohort and relationship identified during the initial survey

years: Mature and Young Women

Number

Cohort relationships: Mature women of pairs

Mature Women-Older Men 506

Wife-husband (same household) 492

Daughter-father (same household) 11

Sister-brother (same household) 3

Mature Women-Young Women 1,848

Mother-daughter (same household) 1,540

Mother-daughter (different household) 308

Mature Women-Young Men 1,671

Mother-son (same household) 1,620

Mother-son (different household) 51

include multiple respondents from the same cohort or from

different cohorts. At the time the samples were selected,

one-half of the respondents from the Mature Women cohort

shared their household with at least one other NLS respondent; more than three-quarters of the respondents from the

Young Women cohort shared the same household with at

least one other NLS respondent. A matching process, conducted after interviews had been completed with each of the

1960s cohorts, identified common relationships in these multiple-respondent households during the early survey years.

Variables present in the data files identify each of the respondents belonging to a multiple-respondent household at

the time of the screening.

Table 5.2 presents the number of matched pairs for the

NLS of Mature and Young Women by cohort and relationship. During the initial survey years, 492 Mature Women

respondents shared a household with a husband who was a

respondent in the Older Men cohort, 1,540 Mature Women

lived with a daughter who was a member of the Young Women

cohort, and 1,620 Mature Women resided in the same household as a son who was a respondent in the Young Men

cohort. Originally, 574 Young Women respondents shared a

household with a husband who was a respondent in the

Young Men cohort, and 963 Young Women resided in the

same household as a father who was a respondent in the

Older Men cohort. In addition, some of the Young Women

lived with siblings participating in the surveys: 949 shared a

household with a sister who was also a respondent in the

Young Women cohort, and 1,243 Young Women lived with a

brother who was a member of the Young Men cohort. Attrition and mortality of one or more members have reduced the

number of pairs for whom data are available across survey

years.

These pairs offer unique samples for a number of research topics. However, the original cohorts do not contain

nationally representative samples of spouses and siblings

of all ages and living arrangements. For example, sibling

pairs represent only those who were fairly close in age and

both in the sampled age range at the time of the initial survey.

Users should be aware of these statistical sampling issues

when using NLS data to study siblings and spouses.

Interviews and fielding periods

Mature Women. Respondents in the Mature Women cohort

participated in 21 interviews from 1967 to 2003. Interviewers

from the U.S. Census Bureau conducted all of the surveys.

Interviewers administered 14 of these surveys primarily in

person, 6 by telephone, and 1 (the 1968 survey) by mail.

Users should note that, in years during which the survey

was conducted primarily in person, some interviews were

administered by telephone when the interviewer decided this

alternative method was necessary. Interviews of Mature

Women took place during a 3-month period in the spring

and summer, with only the 1992 survey conducted during

the fall. Table 5.3 lists the mode of interview (in person or by

telephone) and completion rates for selected Mature Women

cohort survey years.

Young Women. The Young Women cohort completed 22

interviews from 1968 to 2003. Interviewers from the U.S.

Census Bureau conducted all surveys. Interviewers admin-
CHAPTER 5: NLS OF MATURE AND YOUNG WOMEN 77

Year1 Personal Telephone Not available Interviewed Not interviewed

1974 917 21.2% 3,326 77.0% 79 1.8% 4,322 761 15.0%

1976 612 14.7 3,560 85.3 0 __ 4,172 911 17.9

1979 472 12.4 3,328 87.3 12 0.3 3,812 1,271 25.0

1981 383 10.4 3,294 89.6 0 __ 3,677 1,406 27.7

1984 354 10.3 3,063 89.5 5 0.1 3,422 1,661 32.7

1986 366 11.0 2,948 88.4 21 0.6 3,335 1,748 34.4

1989 2,567 83.0 513 16.6 14 0.5 3,094 1,989 39.1

1992 2,298 77.8 602 20.4 53 1.8 2,953 2,130 41.9

1995 2,144 79.1 536 19.8 31 1.1 2,711 2,372 46.7

1999 1,523 61.7 813 33.0 131 5.3 2,467 2,616 51.5

2001 1,376 59.4 883 38.1 59 2.5 2,318 2,765 54.4

Table 5.3. Mature Women interview schedule

1

The years with available mode of interview data are listed.

Missing years do not have this information recorded.

NOTE: Respondents who conducted part of an interview in

person and part over the telephone are included in the telephone

category.

istered 16 of these surveys primarily in person and 6 by telephone. Users should note that, in years during which the

survey was conducted primarily in person, some interviews

were administered by telephone when an interviewer considered this alternative method necessary. The majority of

the earlier interviews with Young Women respondents occurred from January through March; fielding of post-1987

interviews shifted to the summer, with only the 1993 interview taking place in the fall. Table 5.4 lists the mode of

interview (in person or by telephone) and completion rates

for selected Young Women cohort survey years.

CAPI surveys. The 1995 survey marked the departure from a

paper-and-pencil instrument (PAPI) to a computer-assisted

personal interview (CAPI). In 1995, the Mature Women and

Young Women cohorts responded to the same survey instrument during the same fielding period; the data for the

two cohorts are still presented separately on the CDs and are

separate downloadable files on the http://www.bls.gov/nls

Web site. The survey continues to be administered on a

biennial basis.

Attrition

Mature Women. As of the 2001 interview, 2,318 respondents (45.6 percent) of the original 5,083 Mature Women continued to participate in the survey. The retention rate is the

percentage of base-year respondents (including those who

have subsequently died or become institutionalized) interviewed in any given year; table 5.5 presents the total number

of respondents interviewed in each survey round and the

survey’s retention rate at that point. Because many of the

Mature Women have died, a better participation measure is

the percentage of respondents interviewed out of all respondents who are known to be alive. With a base that excludes

deceased respondents but includes institutionalized respondents, 57.9 percent of the Mature Women continued to participate as of 2001. Until the mid-1980s, the U.S. Census

Bureau enforced a policy of excluding from continued interviewing respondents who refused to be interviewed or were

not interviewed for any reason for 2 consecutive years; the

agency changed the rules and attempted to reinterview some

of these respondents beginning in 1986. By the time of the

2001 survey, the major groups not interviewed included 1,285

respondents who refused an interview, 1,079 respondents

whom the Census Bureau reported as deceased, and 194

women who were dropped after 2 consecutive years of

noninterview and not included in the expanded 1986 sample.

Young Women. As of the 2001 interview, 2,806 respondents

(54.4 percent) of the original 5,159 Young Women continued

to participate in the survey. Table 5.5 presents the total number of respondents interviewed in each survey round and

the survey’s retention rate at that point. Although fewer
78 CHAPTER 5: NLS OF MATURE AND YOUNG WOMEN

Year Personal Telephone Not available Interviewed Not interviewed

1975 887 20.9% 3,329 78.4% 27 0.6% 4,243 916 17.8%

1977 660 16.1 3,434 83.6 14 0.3 4,108 1,051 20.4

1980 333 8.8 3,468 91.2 0 __ 3,801 1,358 26.3

1982 376 10.3 3,273 89.7 1 1 3,650 1,509 29.2

1985 369 9.9 3,343 89.9 8 0.2 3,720 1,439 27.9

1987 344 9.5 3,273 89.9 22 0.6 3,639 1,520 29.5

1991 2,502 73.6 860 25.3 38 1.1 3,400 1,759 34.1

1993 2,071 65.0 1,082 34.0 34 1.1 3,187 1,972 38.2

1995 2,144 71.0 844 28.0 31 1.0 3,019 2,140 41.5

1999 1,505 51.9 1,238 42.7 157 5.4 2,900 2,259 43.8

2001 1,388 49.5 1,319 47.0 99 3.5 2,806 2,353 45.6

Table 5.4. Young Women interview schedule

1

 Less than 0.05%.

Young Women than Mature Women have died, it is a better

participation measure to look at the percentage of respondents interviewed out of all respondents who are known to

be alive. With a base that excludes deceased respondents

but includes institutionalized respondents, 57.0 percent of

the Young Women continued to participate as of 2001. Until

the mid-1980s, the Census Bureau enforced a policy of excluding from continued interviewing respondents who refused to be interviewed or were not interviewed for any reason

for 2 consecutive years; the agency attempted to reinterview

most of these respondents beginning in 1985. By the time of

the 2001 survey, the major groups not interviewed included

1,324 respondents who refused an interview, 295 respondents who could not be located, 237 respondents whom the

Census Bureau reported as deceased, and 258 women who

were dropped from the sample after 2 consecutive years of

noninterview and not included in the expanded 1985 sample.

As with the Mature Women cohort, respondents institutionalized in jail or long-term care facilities were not interviewed.

Sampling weights

Mature and Young Women. The Census Bureau created

sampling weights for each cohort after the initial interview;

the Center for Human Resource Research (CHRR) at The

Ohio State University has adjusted them after each subsequent interview. These weights account for the

overrepresentation of blacks in the initial sample and for persons who were not interviewed. Analysis of each of the

cohorts indicates that the weighting scheme used to compensate for nonresponse has allowed the samples to remain

representative (Rhoton, 1984; Rhoton and Nagi, 1991;

Zagorsky and Rhoton, 1998).

Major data elements

The surveys of the women have collected three basic types

of information: (1) Core data on each respondent’s work and

nonwork experiences, training investments, schooling, family income and assets, physical well-being, and geographic

residence; (2) background information on the respondent’s

family and household composition and on her marital and

fertility history; and (3) supplementary data specific to the

age, stage of life, or labor market attachment of the cohort

(for example, household responsibilities, childcare arrangements, retirement plans, volunteer work).

This section provides brief summaries of the major data

elements available for respondents in the NLS of Mature and

Young Women. Certain data elements have been collected

longitudinally, while others are available only for particular

survey years; not all data elements will be present for all

respondents. Because the descriptions below are not comprehensive, readers interested in additional information

should review the topical descriptions of variables found in

the Mature Women User’s Guide and the Young Women

User’s Guide (available at http://www.bls.gov/nls), examine

the detailed variable tables provided at the end of this chap-
CHAPTER 5: NLS OF MATURE AND YOUNG WOMEN 79

Mature Women Young Women

Response rate, Response rate,

Type of Total Retention living Type of Total Retention living

Year interview1 interviewed rate2 respondents only interview1 interviewed rate2 respondents only

1967 Personal 5,083 100.0 100.0 — — — —

1968 Mail 4,910 96.6 97.0 Personal 5,159 100.0 100.0

1969 Personal 4,712 92.7 93.3 Personal 4,930 95.6 95.6

1970 — — — — Personal 4,766 92.4 92.5

1971 Personal 4,575 90.0 91.1 Personal 4,714 91.4 91.6

1972 Personal 4,471 88.0 89.2 Personal 4,625 89.6 90.0

1973 — — — — Personal 4,424 85.8 86.1

1974 Telephone 4,322 85.0 86.8 — — — —

1975 — — — — Telephone 4,243 82.2 82.7

1976 Telephone 4,172 82.1 84.2 — — — —

1977 Personal 3,964 78.0 80.2 Telephone 4,108 79.6 80.1

1978 — — — — Personal 3,902 75.6 76.1

1979 Telephone 3,812 75.0 77.7 — — — —

1980 — — — — Telephone 3,801 73.7 74.2

1981 Telephone 3,677 72.3 75.5 — — — —

1982 Personal 3,542 69.7 73.1 Telephone 3,650 70.8 71.4

1983 — — — — Personal 3,547 68.7 69.4

1984 Telephone 3,422 67.3 71.3 — — — —

1985 — — — — Telephone 3,720 72.1 72.9

1986 Telephone 3,335 65.6 70.3 — — — —

1987 Personal 3,241 63.7 68.7 Telephone 3,639 70.5 71.5

1988 — — — — Personal 3,508 68.0 69.0

1989 Personal 3,094 60.9 66.5 — — — —

1991 — — — — Personal 3,400 65.9 67.1

1992 Personal 2,953 58.1 65.1 — — — —

1993 — — — — Personal 3,187 61.8 63.1

1995 Personal 2,711 53.3 61.3 Personal 3,019 58.5 60.0

1997 Personal 2,608 51.3 61.0 Personal 3,049 59.1 61.1

1999 Personal 2,467 48.5 59.2 Personal 2,900 56.2 58.4

2001 Personal 2,318 45.6 57.9 Personal 2,806 54.4 57.0

Table 5.5. Interview schedules and retention rates: Mature and Young Women

2Retention rate is defined as the percentage of base-year respondents who were interviewed in any given survey year. Included in the calculations are deceased and institutionalized

respondents, as well as those serving in the military.

1Even in years during which the survey was conducted in

person, some interviews were administered by telephone when

an interviewer determined that method to be the most appropriate

for completing a case.

ter, acquire copies of the survey instruments, and browse

the documentation files present in the separate Mature

Women and Young Women data sets.

Data elements for the NLS of Mature and Young Women

are discussed in the order presented in figure 5.1.

1. Work and nonwork experiences

Mature and Young Women. Each survey collects information on the respondent’s labor force status during the survey week. Although the data collected are similar, users

should note that the questions in this section were changed

beginning with the 1995 survey to reflect the redesign of the

Current Population Survey. Employed respondents give

details about their occupation, class of worker, rate of pay,

hours worked per week, and job satisfaction. Additional

questions asked during selected surveys collect information

about the respondent’s job or job-related activities, such as

shift worked, union membership, tenure, and types of fringe

benefits.

Each survey asks about the number of weeks the respondent worked in the past year or since her last interview.
80 CHAPTER 5: NLS OF MATURE AND YOUNG WOMEN

Figure 5.1. Data elements in the NLS of Mature and Young Women

1 Work and nonwork experiences

2 Work-related discrimination

3 Training investments

4 Schooling information (school records, aptitude, IQ)

5 Retirement status and plans, pensions

6 Volunteer work and leisure-time activities

7 Income and assets

8 Physical well-being, health care, and health insurance

9 Alcohol and cigarette use

10 Attitudes, aspirations, and psychological well-being

11 Geographic and environmental data

12 Demographics, family background, and household

composition

13 Marital and fertility histories

14 Child care arrangements

15 Care of ill and disabled persons

16 Household chores

17 Transfers

Respondents who report being unemployed or out of the

labor force provide data about their activities. Included is

information on method(s) that respondents used to seek

employment, the number of weeks they spent looking for

work, their reasons for not looking for work, and the number

of weeks they spent out of the labor force.

Selected surveys have collected detailed job information for intervening jobs. Specific information includes the

start and stop dates for each job, the number of hours that

the respondent worked, the occupation and industry of each

job, the respondent’s class of worker, her rate of pay, and her

reason for leaving the job.

2. Work-related discrimination

Mature and Young Women. Mature Women respondents

answered questions on work-related discrimination during

the 1972, 1977, 1982, 1987, 1989, 1995, and 2001 surveys;

Young Women responded to these questions during the 1972,

1978, 1980, 1982, 1983, 1988, 1995, and 2001 interviews. In

general, each series of questions asked whether the respondent had experienced a particular type of discrimination (age,

race, religion, nationality, sex, marital status, or health-related) for a specified amount of time. In 1995 and 2001, this

list also included discrimination based on weight, sexual orientation, or AIDS status. A followup question gathered information on the way in which the discrimination was

experienced (not hired, not promoted, paid less for equal

work, fired, and so forth). The 1988 Young Women survey

included an expanded series that asked about steps taken to

resolve the problem and the results of this action.

3. Training investments

Mature Women. The initial survey collected information on

the training experiences of each respondent during high

school and after her regular schooling ended. Questions

included: (1) Whether the respondent had enrolled in a vocational or commercial training program while in high school;

(2) the type of high school specialty (for example, typing or

bookkeeping); (3) the number of years in which she had enrolled in typing or shorthand classes; and (4) whether she

had enrolled in other training programs.

Details recorded about each training program include

the type of training, the time spent by the respondent in

training, and whether she used the skills acquired in the program on her current job. Interviewers also asked about certifications that the respondent had earned to practice a

profession or a trade and about her plans to enroll in educational courses or training programs in the future. Subsequent surveys updated both the respondent’s training and

certification records.

Post-1977 surveys of this cohort have gathered information about the respondent’s participation in on-the-job

training programs and other vocational programs. Data collected about each program include its overall length, the

number of hours the respondent spent in the program each

week, and whether she completed the program.

Young Women. The initial 1968 survey collected information

on the training plans and experiences of respondents since

they had stopped attending regular school. For each training program, detailed information includes the type of training, the length of the training program, the number of hours

the respondent was enrolled per week, whether she completed the program, and whether she used the skills acquired

in the program on her current or last job. Subsequent surveys have updated information about training experiences

and certifications.

Since 1980, the survey has fielded two series of questions, one dealing with the respondent’s participation in onthe-job training (OJT), and the other with other training

courses or educational programs. The OJT series includes

questions about the duration and intensity of the training

and whether the respondent was still attending or had completed the program. The second training series collects data

on the respondent’s participation in any other training program, including whether the program was an apprenticeship.
CHAPTER 5: NLS OF MATURE AND YOUNG WOMEN 81

4. Schooling information (school records, aptitude, IQ)

Mature Women. Selected surveys gathered information on

the educational status and attainment of respondents in the

Mature Women cohort. The initial survey asked about the

highest grade of regular school the respondent had attended,

whether that grade had been completed, the type of curriculum (such as vocational, commercial, or college preparatory)

she had followed, and whether she had completed any additional coursework since earning a diploma. Interviewers

updated school attainment information during the 1977, 1987,

1989, and 1995–2003 surveys.

Various interviews have gathered information on

whether the respondent had attended high school and

whether or when she had received a diploma or a GED. College attendance information—including type of degree received, field of study, and the number of weeks and hours

per week spent on college education—also has been collected during selected surveys. Finally, data on current school

enrollment status, the highest grade of school attended, and

whether that grade was completed are available in early survey years for each family member living in the respondent’s

household.

Young Women. A primary focus of the Young Women surveys was on schooling and the transition from school to

work. Therefore, the interviews of this cohort regularly collected information regarding both the respondent’s enrollment in regular schooling and her subsequent educational

attainment. In addition, a separate 1968 survey of high

schools attended by respondents in this cohort provides

details on school characteristics and respondent test scores.

The following types of school-related information are

available for respondents in this cohort: The respondent’s

current school enrollment status, the grade she is currently

attending, the highest grade she has completed, the date she

received a diploma or equivalent, whether she had ever attended college, the type of college degree she earned, the

type of curriculum she followed in high school and college,

her college field of study, the types of financial assistance

she received, the amount of college tuition paid, and the

type of school (public or private) that she attended.

During 1968, a special set of questions gathered information from the respondent on her high school and college

experiences. These questions asked for details on her participation in high school extracurricular activities, the amount

of time she spent on homework, and the high school subjects she liked and disliked.

In several survey years, Young Women were asked about

their educational aspirations and expectations. Information

gathered includes the years of education the respondent

desired, the college degree she wanted, the years of education she expected to get, and, if she planned on attending

college, the type of college she expected to attend and her

specific field of study.

A special school survey mailed directly to each school

in 1968 collected information on secondary schools attended

by respondents in this cohort. Data included characteristics

of the school (such as type of school, student enrollment by

grade, expenditure per pupil, and number of books in library)

and characteristics of the school’s teachers and counselors

(for example, number of teachers and counselors, salaries).

A set of constructed variables summarizes characteristics,

such as the ratio of students to teachers, and provides an

index of overall school quality.

The school survey also recorded respondents’ grade

point averages and individual test scores from instruments

such as the Otis/Beta/Gamma, California Test of Mental

Maturity, Lorge-Thorndike Intelligence Test, and the Scholastic Aptitude Test (available for selected respondents). An

“IQ score” created from these data is available for more than

3,300 of the Young Women respondents. Finally, the school

survey collected information about respondents’ behavior

in school in regard to absenteeism, disciplinary actions, and

so forth.

5. Retirement status and plans, pensions

Mature Women. All but two surveys since 1977 have sought

information on respondents’ retirement plans, expectations,

and eligibility for various pension plans. Questions fielded

from 1979–86 asked the age at which the respondent expected to stop working, her eligibility to receive Social Security or Railroad Retirement benefits, and the number of years

for which she has been employed in jobs covered by Social

Security. These surveys also recorded the age at which she

would be eligible for full rather than reduced benefits, the

number of years for which she worked for each employer,

and the type of provider for her pension plan. In addition,

each respondent reported the sources of income she expected

during retirement, and, if she did not expect to receive pension benefits, the reason.

The 1989 survey collected the above information separately for both respondents and their spouses. In addition,

this survey included a very large section devoted to pension

questions. This series determined the most important pension plan for the respondent, the most important pension

plan for her spouse, and any other pension or survivor’s

benefits for which she was eligible through her spouse’s (or

former spouse’s) employment or military service. This section also asked for the characteristics of each pension provider, the characteristics of each plan, and locator information

used for the pension-matching project described below.

With this information, the Institute for Social Research

at the University of Michigan conducted a special pensionmatching project in conjunction with the Census Bureau.
82 CHAPTER 5: NLS OF MATURE AND YOUNG WOMEN

The locator information enabled the Census Bureau to obtain pension plan summary descriptions from respondents’

employers. These plans were then coded using a protocol

developed for the Survey of Consumer Finances. A total of

1,329 respondents (out of 1,900 households reporting pension eligibility) participated in at least 1 of 815 different pension plans. Users can find these data on the cross-cohort

CD that includes the Mature and Young Women data sets.

Each survey of the Mature Women since 1992 has included questions that gather details on up to four pension

plans, updating the 1989 information. In addition to the material in these sections, the income-asset section of the questionnaire examined the retirement income received by the

respondent and her spouse from various sources (such as

Social Security, pensions, and disability benefits) during most

survey years.

Young Women. Recent surveys of the Young Women have

(1) added “retired” as a reason why the respondent was not

in the labor force during the survey week, (2) recorded

whether a retirement pension program is available through

the respondent’s employer, and (3) determined amounts of

income received by the respondent and her spouse during

the past calendar year from retirement-related sources such

as Social Security.

The 1991 and 1995–2003 surveys included questions on

pension coverage and vesting rights for respondents who

indicated that their employer provided a retirement pension

program. Respondents enrolled in an employer’s pension

program gave information on the method used to determine

their benefit amount (either defined benefit or defined contribution) and whether they were vested in the pension plan.

Those not vested answered questions about the number of

years until vesting and what would happen if they left the

employer before that time. Specific sources of pension income during the past 12 months for the respondent and her

spouse were determined during the 1993–2003 surveys.

6. Volunteer work and leisure-time activities

Mature and Young Women. Respondents gave information

in selected surveys on the number of weeks and number of

hours per week they spent during the past year in unpaid

volunteer work. Respondents also were asked about the

type(s) of organization(s) in which they volunteered. Occasional questions further asked why the respondent engaged

in volunteer work, whether she held an office or position

within the volunteer organization(s), and whether she participated in volunteer work to change social conditions. In

1967 (Mature Women) or 1983 (Young Women), respondents

answered a single question about how they spent their time

when they were not engaged in housework or working for

pay.

7. Income and assets

Mature and Young Women. The survey regularly asks about

the total income received by each respondent’s family during the past year; it also covers the amount of income received by the respondent herself and by her spouse from

various sources during that period. Sources include wages

and salary, business or farm income, unemployment compensation, rental income, interest and dividends, child support, alimony, Social Security, disability payments, public

assistance, Food Stamps, and pension benefits.

In 1995–2003, special sections addressed to women who

had been widowed since their last interview determined the

type and amount of benefits or other assistance that the

widow had received in connection with her husband’s death.

Sources of income recorded include insurance, Social Security, pensions, and family members.

A series of questions on family assets and debts collects details on (1) whether the respondent and her spouse

owned their own home, other types of real estate, or automobiles and, if so, the total market value and amount owed on

each; (2) the value of other assets such as savings accounts,

U.S. Savings Bonds, stocks or bonds, and personal loans;

and (3) whether there were other personal debts, such as

money owed to stores, physicians, hospitals, or banks. In

selected years, the respondent has stated whether she believes that her overall financial position is better, worse, or

about the same as it was a few years earlier. In recent survey

years, respondents have been asked about the income and

assets of partners.

8. Physical well-being, healthcare, and health

insurance

Mature and Young Women. A comprehensive set of healthrelated variables is available for respondents. This information includes the respondent’s health status, perceived

changes in her health over time, specific health conditions

she has experienced, types of health-related problems, and

data on her health insurance coverage. For all interviews,

life status of respondents in both cohorts at the time of the

interview is indicated by the presence or absence of “deceased” as a reason for noninterview.

Various surveys have asked respondents to rate their

health. Periodic questions ask if the respondent considers

her health to have changed over time. Self-reported height

and weight measurements are available for Mature Women

interviewed in 1992 and 1997–2001 and for Young Women

interviewed in 1991, with another weight measurement obtained for both cohorts in 1995. In 2003, self-reports on weight

were collected for both cohorts, but interviewers measured

respondent height whenever possible. Respondents provided information about specific diseases that limit or pre-
CHAPTER 5: NLS OF MATURE AND YOUNG WOMEN 83

vent them from working during the post-1989 surveys of the

Mature Women and the 1973 and 1991–2003 surveys of the

Young Women.

During multiple surveys, interviewers asked respondents whether they experienced health-related problems such

as pain, tiring easily, weakness, aches, or swelling. A second

series, fielded during the same surveys, asked the respondent whether she ever had difficulty performing a predetermined set of activities such as walking, using stairs, or

standing for long periods.

The survey collected information on occupation-related

health problems at multiple survey points. Respondents identified specific workplace conditions that would hamper their

ability to work, such as places that were hot or damp or

places that had fumes or noise. The 1980 survey of Young

Women included a series of questions asking the respondent to rate conditions at her current job. In 1991, Young

Women stated whether they had ever been refused employment or been unable to hold a job or stay in school because

of health issues.

The 1991 and 1993 Young Women surveys gathered information about the number of times the respondent had had

an overnight hospital stay during the past 12 months and

how often the respondent had been treated at clinics or by

physicians during the past 5 years. In the 2003 survey, both

the Mature and Young Women were asked more detailed

questions concerning any hospital stays. The data set also

includes health insurance information, collected during the

1981, 1986, and post-1989 surveys of Mature Women and

the post-1988 surveys of young women. The 1995–2003

surveys of both cohorts included questions about respondents’ menopausal status and hormone use during menopause. Finally, the 1995 survey of both cohorts of women

and the 1997–2003 Mature Women surveys asked respondents whether they had driven a motor vehicle in the past 12

months, the distance they drove, whether they drove at

night, and why they stopped driving, if applicable.

9. Alcohol and cigarette use

Mature and Young Women. The 1989 and 1995–2003 Mature Women surveys and the 1991–2003 Young Women surveys included several questions for respondents who

reported drinking alcoholic beverages. Though the details

vary by year, questions typically focus on the frequency

and intensity of alcohol use in the past month and since the

last interview. In 1991, Young Women respondents also were

asked two questions concerning alcohol use over their lifetime.

Several recent surveys have gathered cigarette use data

from these cohorts. The 1989 Mature Women survey and

the 1991 Young Women survey first asked whether respondents currently smoked. Those who did reported the age at

which they had started smoking regularly and the number of

cigarettes or packs they smoked per day. Respondents who

reported smoking in the past but not at the time of the interview were asked for the number of cigarettes or packs smoked

per day, the age at which they had last smoked regularly, and

the age at which they had first started smoking. The 1993

Young Women survey asked whether respondents currently

smoked and, for those who did, the number of cigarettes or

packs they smoked per day. The 1995–2003 surveys of both

cohorts simply determined whether respondents smoked at

the time of the interview.

10. Attitudes, aspirations, and psychological

well-being

Mature and Young Women. A collection of attitude, aspiration, and psychological well-being variables is available for

respondents in each cohort. Selected surveys have administered the Center for Epidemiological Studies Depression

(CES-D) Scale (Radloff, 1977) and the Internal-External

Locus of Control Scale (Rotter, 1966). Periodic questions

have investigated the respondent’s occupational aspirations;

her attitudes toward life in general, women working, her current job, and retirement; and her general knowledge of the

world of work (Young Women only).

11. Geographic and environmental data

Mature and Young Women. Three sets of variables provide

information on the respondent’s current residence. The first

set broadly defines the geographic area in which the respondent resided. This definition includes the name of the census division (New England, Middle Atlantic, Pacific, and so

on), whether the respondent’s region of residence was located in the South or in a non-South region of the United

States, and whether her residence was in a Standard Metropolitan Statistical Area (SMSA).

The second set of variables compares the State or SMSA

of the respondent’s current residence with those of her previous residence and current job. Users can find information

on the characteristics of the respondent’s environment in a

third set of variables detailing the size of the labor force and

the unemployment rate for the labor market of the

respondent’s current residence. However, beginning in the

early 1990s, most of the variables in the last two sets were

eliminated.

Other geographic variables available for these cohorts

include a set of geographic mobility questions fielded during 1982, 1989, 1992, and 1997 for Mature Women and during

1983, 1988–93, and 1997 for Young Women. These questions provide information about the date on which the respondent moved to her current residence, the location of her

previous residence, the number of years she had lived there,
84 CHAPTER 5: NLS OF MATURE AND YOUNG WOMEN

and the reason why she moved. Additionally, the 1992 and

1995 surveys of Mature Women and the 1983, 1988, 1991,

and 1995 surveys of Young Women collected information

about a second residence of the respondent, including which

months the respondent lives in this second residence, the

year in which she began spending time there, and a comparison of the second residence’s location with that of the primary residence.

Beginning with the 1995 survey of both cohorts, the

data include an interviewer-recorded observation of the type

of area (farm, city, suburb, and so on) and the type of residence (detached house, apartment, trailer, and so forth) in

which the respondent lives.

Research Data Centers. Geographic information collected

during interviews with the Mature Women and Young

Women is now available for research use at the Census

Bureau’s Research Data Centers. The cohort-specific files

contain the respondent identification number, survey year,

and State code. Researchers may match these files to the

NLS data sets. Currently, the Research Data Centers have

available, by survey year, the Federal Information Processing Standards (FIPS) State codes, which represent the State

of residence for each interviewed respondent. Having the

State variables allows researchers to determine the census

regions and divisions.

There are plans to add more geographic variables in the

near future. These may include variables for county, Consolidated Metropolitan Statistical Area (CMSA), Primary

Metropolitan Statistical Area (PMSA), ZIP Code, census

tract, and latitude and longitude of residence. In addition,

selected environmental variables at the county and Metropolitan Statistical Area (MSA) level may eventually be added.

The Census Bureau developed the Research Data Centers to give researchers access to valuable data in a setting

designed to safeguard respondent confidentiality. Researchers interested in reviewing more detailed information on the

procedures to follow in applying for access to a Research

Data Center should visit the http://www.bls.gov/nls Web site.

12. Demographics, family background, and household

composition

Mature and Young Women. The surveys have collected

data regarding each respondent’s race, nationality, origin, or

descent; date of birth; and age. They also have determined

whether the respondent’s residence at age 15 (Mature

Women) or age 14 (Young Women) was in an urban or rural

area. Information on family background includes the birthplace of the respondent’s parents and grandparents, the relationship of the respondent to the person(s) with whom she

lived at age 15 (Mature Women) or age 14 (Young Women),

the occupation of and highest grade completed by her mother

and father, and the life status of both the respondent’s parents and in-laws. Mature Women also have provided information on the place of residence and health of their parents

and in-laws. The 1993 survey of Young Women recorded the

sex, age, educational attainment, and fertility of the

respondent’s biological siblings (living or deceased).

Every interview except the 1968 mail survey of Mature

Women has collected detailed information on the composition of the household in which the respondent lived. For as

many as 20 family members (during the early survey years)

or household members (later survey years) living in the

respondent’s household during the survey, the following

information is available: The relationship of each member to

the respondent, the household member’s age or date of birth,

and the number of weeks and hours worked in the previous

year. Selected surveys also asked about each household

member’s occupation, current school enrollment status, highest grade of school attended, whether that grade was completed, and the years of education the respondent predicted

that person would complete.

13. Marital and fertility histories

Mature Women. Every interview except the 1968 mail survey asked about the respondent’s current marital status.

Selected interviews have collected information regarding timing of marital transitions (such as the month and year of the

respondent’s marriage(s) and whether the marriage(s) ended

in divorce or widowhood). A series of variables constructed

in the early survey years provides a profile of the

respondent’s marital and family status at various interview

points, indicating whether she was married and residing with

her spouse and her children at the time of the survey. For the

early years, created variables also describe the timing of the

respondent’s marriage in relationship to work, school, and

the birth of her first child.

Regularly collected information about each child living

in the respondent’s household at the time of the interview

includes that child’s age, date of birth, and sex. Post-1976

surveys specified whether a nonbiological child was an

adopted son or daughter, or an adopted son or daughter by

marriage. For both biological and nonbiological children,

these surveys also collected more detailed information, such

as the child’s life status, residency status, enrollment status,

and highest grade completed. Selected surveys contain information about the total number of children of specific ages

who live at home. Most surveys asked about the number

and relationship of the respondent’s dependents, excluding

her husband. The marital and fertility histories of up to four

living children were collected during the 1986 interview. Finally, the 1987–97 and 2001–03 surveys have asked for the

number of the respondent’s children currently enrolled in

college and the amount of financial support provided by the
CHAPTER 5: NLS OF MATURE AND YOUNG WOMEN 85

respondent and her husband. Similar information about children in college was collected in 1999 and 2003 as part of the

children and transfers section of the survey.

Young Women. Every survey collects current marital status;

respondents reported timing of marital transitions (see above)

during selected interviews. A set of constructed variables

tracks transitions between various marital states from 1968–

73. Created variables also provide information regarding the

timing of the respondent’s marriage in relationship to work,

school, and the birth of her first child.

Regularly collected information about each child living

in the respondent’s household at the time of the interview

includes that child’s age, date of birth, and sex. Most surveys collected information about the number of dependents

the respondent had (excluding her husband) and her relationship to dependents living outside the household. Beginning in 1973, more detailed information on biological and

nonbiological children was collected, including the child’s

life status, residency status, school enrollment status, and

highest grade completed. Post-1982 surveys specified

whether a nonbiological child was an adopted son or daughter, or an adopted son or daughter by marriage. Finally, the

1991–97 and 2001–03 surveys have recorded the number of

the respondent’s children currently enrolled in college, and

the amount of financial support provided to them by the

respondent and her husband. Similar information about children in college was collected in 1999 and 2003 as part of the

children and transfers section of the survey.

An expanded series of questions in the 1985 survey

asked about children living outside the household. This

series determined the date on which the respondent had last

lived with the child, the frequency of contact and duration of

visits, where and how far from the respondent the child lived,

and the amount of financial support the respondent had provided to the child over the previous 12 months. Children

who lived together outside the respondent’s household were

identified.

Additional information gathered during the 1971, 1973,

1978, and 1982–91 interviews includes fertility expectations;

the respondent stated the number of children she considered ideal, the number she expected to have during the next

5 years, and the date by which she expected to have her next

child. Finally, the 1970, 1972, and 1973 questionnaires included a series of questions detailing how a child’s birth had

changed the respondent’s labor force status.

14. Childcare arrangements

Mature and Young Women. Five of the early interviews of

the Mature Women cohort collected information on the types

and locations of childcare arrangements; all but seven of the

Young Women surveys obtained similar information. The

information collected included details regarding costs, the

number of hours during which childcare was required, the

type of childcare arrangements the respondent used, her attitude toward childcare or daycare centers, and the impact of

childcare availability on her job search behavior. The 1971

survey of each cohort included an expanded series of questions identifying the types of childcare arrangements for the

respondent’s children and her preferred care arrangements.

Information on the extent of the respondent’s responsibility

for various household tasks, including childcare, was collected during seven Mature Women surveys between 1974

and 1989 and five Young Women interviews from 1975 to

1985.

The 1993 and 1995 surveys of Young Women and the

1995 survey of Mature Women examined the respondent’s

responsibility for the care, in her household, of any of her

own children under age 18. If the respondent was responsible for care, followup questions determined care arrangements, the total cost of care, and the effect of this

responsibility on the respondent’s employment.

15. Care of ill and disabled persons

Mature Women. In most years, respondents have stated

whether the health of a spouse or family member affected

their employment opportunities. The respondent’s care of ill

and disabled persons has been explored in more detail in

each survey since 1982, except for the 1986 survey. In 1982,

1984, and 1987–2003, the survey asked respondents whether

they regularly spent time caring for a relative or friend outside of their household, and the number of hours allocated

to this task each week. The 1984, 1987, and 1989 surveys

included questions about care of household members as part

of the household chores series. Details were collected on

whether the respondent cared for an ill or disabled person in

the household, her relationship to that person, and the total

hours spent on all chores (including this caregiving). Although the household chores series was discontinued in

1992, the respondents continued to be asked similar questions about caring for ill or disabled household members.

Respondents reporting such activity stated their relationship to each person and the total hours per week spent caring for all ill or disabled household members.

The parental transfers section of the 1997 and 2001 questionnaires included a series of questions on whether transfers of time for activities such as “caretaking” had taken

place over the preceding 12 months. The child transfers

section of the 1999 and 2003 surveys includes similar questions about the respondent’s children.

In 1995–2003, respondents who had been widowed since

their last interview answered an additional set of questions

about their husband’s needs during the last year of his life,

including whether the respondent provided special nursing
86 CHAPTER 5: NLS OF MATURE AND YOUNG WOMEN

care for her husband, the number of hours per day such care

was required, and how this affected the respondent’s employment opportunities. The 1990 Older Men survey asked

similar questions of widowed women whose spouses had

been members of that cohort.

Young Women. As part of the household chores series, the

1987 survey sought information about whether the respondent provided care to household members who were ill or

disabled. Beginning with the 1991 survey, additional questions determined whether the respondent regularly spent time

helping or caring for household members who were chronically ill or disabled or for friends or relatives who did not

reside in the respondent’s household. Followup questions

established the number of hours a week the respondent spent

providing care.

The parental transfers section of the 1993, 1997, and

2001 questionnaires included a series of questions about

whether transfers of time for activities such as “caretaking”

had taken place over the past 12 months. The child transfers

section includes similar questions about the respondent’s

children in the 1999 survey. Like the Mature Women surveys, the 1995–2003 Young Women surveys asked respondents who identified themselves as widowed since the last

interview about their role in caring for their husband in the

year before his death.

16. Household chores

Mature and Young Women. A comprehensive set of questions, asked of the Mature Women eight times starting in

1974 and of the Young Women five times beginning in 1975,

collected information on the amount of time the respondent

spent on all household tasks and her responsibility for

specific household chores. The core set of household chores

about which information was gathered included tasks such

as grocery shopping, childcare, cooking, cleaning the house,

and yardwork. The early to mid-1980s interviews added the

tasks of family bill paying and care of chronically ill or disabled household members.

Although some variation occurs across survey years,

the basic series determined how responsible the respondent

felt for each household chore, whether she performed each

task with another family member or with hired help, and, if

she shared a task, the amount of time she contributed to the

task. Respondents also reported the total number of hours

per week they usually spent on these tasks.

In response to a separate question, women in both cohorts have also periodically stated their attitude toward doing housework in their own home.

17. Transfers

Mature and Young Women: Parents and transfers. Prior to

the 1993 survey of Young Women, a limited amount of data

was collected about parents and transfers. Both the Mature

Women and Young Women cohorts periodically reported

the life status of their and their husband’s parents; the 1992

survey of Mature Women and the 1993 survey of Young

Women also recorded the parents’ cause of death, if applicable. The income section in some recent surveys includes

a question about any inheritance the respondent has received.

In 1993, the Young Women responded to a detailed series of questions about transfers of time and money to and

from their parents and their husband’s parents; both cohorts

answered these questions in 1997 and 2001. Stepparents are

included in the collection if they are currently married to a

biological parent. In each year, this section began with the

collection of biographical and health information for the

respondent’s and her husband’s parents. If any parent was

deceased, the 1997 and 2001 survey rounds asked questions

concerning that parent’s estate (for example, if it was settled,

if she received any amount, if it was equally distributed).

Information was then gathered about the parents’ residences,

income, assets, and debts. Finally, questions examined the

nature and extent of transfers of time and money from respondents to their parents. Transfers mentioned include

gifts, loans, financial support, personal care, and household

chores or errands. In 1993 and 2001, these questions also

asked about transfers from the parents to the respondents.

The 2003 survey retained the estate questions asked in 1997

and 2001, but all other 2003 transfers information refers to

transfers between respondents and their children.

In 1997, the Mature Women survey included questions

about transfers of time and money that respondents had

received from their daughters who were in the Young Women

cohort. Although the sample does not represent all mothers

and daughters, researchers can use these data to compare

mothers’ and daughters’ perceptions about the transfers

daughters have made to their mothers. The 2001 Mature

Women surveys did not include this series about transfers

from daughters.

Mature and Young Women: Children and transfers. The

1999 and 2003 surveys asked both Mature and Young Women

about transfers involving the respondent’s children. Included in the data collection is information on biological,

adopted, and stepchildren of both the respondent and her

husband. The transfers section initially collects demographic

data and residence information for all children not residing in
CHAPTER 5: NLS OF MATURE AND YOUNG WOMEN 87

the household (these data are collected in the household

roster for coresident children). The respondent then answers questions about the assets and debts of each child

age 19 or older, as well as each child ages 14 to 18 who is

married or has children. The section also includes a series of

questions regarding shared living arrangements of the respondent and her children, if the children meet these same

age requirements.

After collecting this preliminary information, the survey

asks the respondent to report transfers of time and money to

and from up to five children meeting the universe requirements described above. Included are questions regarding

loans, gifts, and other financial assistance, as well as time

transferred for childcare, personal care, chores, and errands.

The 1999 Young Women survey included a set of questions for respondents who have a mother in the Mature

Women cohort. These Young Women described transfers of

time and money to and from their mothers, providing researchers with an opportunity to assess the quality of the

transfers data.

Data files and documentation

Data for the NLS of Mature Women (1967–2001) and the NLS

of Young Women (1968–2001) are released on the cross-cohort CD and also are available as separate downloadable

files from the http://www.bls.gov/nls Web site. These files

contain the longitudinal record of each respondent, as well

as information from the 1968 Young Women school survey

and the 1989 Mature Women pension-matching project. Included in the data are: (1) Raw responses to the set of questions administered during the 1967–2001 surveys of Mature

Women and 1968–2001 surveys of Young Women; (2) a series of edited and created variables based on these raw responses; (3) selected demographic, household, and

residential data provided by the Census Bureau from its administrative records; (4) respondent- and school-specific information gathered during the separately administered 1968

survey of the high schools attended by respondents in the

Young Women cohort; and, on the CD, (5) the 1989 pension

plan characteristic data for Mature Women (as an ASCII file).

Each data set includes documentation files and is accompanied by search and extraction software that enables

users to easily peruse, select, and extract variables. Chapter

8 provides more technical information on the NLS data format and extraction software, as well as descriptions of supplementary documentation items available for the NLS of Mature

and Young Women.

References

Radloff, Lenore Sawyer. “The CES-D Scale: A Self-Report

Depression Scale for Research in the General Population.” Applied Psychological Measurement 1,3 (Summer 1977): 385–401.

Rhoton, Patricia. “Attrition and The National Longitudinal

Surveys of Labor Market Experience: Avoidance, Control and Correction.” Columbus, OH: Center for Human

Resource Research, The Ohio State University, 1984.

Rhoton, Patricia and Nagi, Karima. “Attrition by Wealth in

the Original NLS Cohorts.” Columbus, OH: Center for

Human Resource Research, The Ohio State University,

1991.

Rotter, Julian B. “Generalized Expectancies for Internal vs.

External Control of Reinforcements.” Psychological

Monographs 80,1 (1966): 1–28.

Zagorsky, Jay and Rhoton, Patricia. “Attrition and the National Longitudinal Surveys’ Mature Women Cohort.”

Columbus, OH: Center for Human Resource Research,

The Ohio State University, 1998.

Zagorsky, Jay and Rhoton, Patricia. “Attrition and the National Longitudinal Surveys’ Young Women Cohort.”

Columbus, OH: Center for Human Resource Research,

The Ohio State University, 1998.

Selected variables by cohort and year: Mature

and Young Women

Tables 5.6 and 5.7 depict selected variables from the main

data files of the NLS of Mature and Young Women. The top

row of the tables lists the years in which the women have

been surveyed; the first column gives some of the variables

that have been collected. An asterisk (*) indicates that information for the designated variable was obtained for the cohort in the year indicated. “R” used in variable descriptions

stands for “respondent”; “H” stands for “husband” of the

respondent. Researchers should be aware that, in some instances, the variable descriptions in the tables represent a

group of questions, and not single response items.
88 CHAPTER 5: NLS OF MATURE AND YOUNG WOMEN

Table 5.6. Selected Mature Women variables by survey year: Respondents ages 30 to 44 in 1967 

Variable 67 68 69 71 72 74 76 77 79 81 82 84 86 87 89 92 95 97 99 01 03

I. LABOR MARKET EXPERIENCE VARIABLES 

A. Current labor force and employment status 

Survey week labor force and employment status * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

Hours worked in survey week * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

Weeks worked (time frames vary) * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

Usual hours worked during weeks worked * * * * * * * * * *

Weeks unemployed (time frames vary) * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

Spells of unemployment in past year * * * * * * * * * * * *

Weeks out of labor force (time frames vary) * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

B. Characteristics of current or last job 

Occupation, industry, class of worker * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

Start date and stop date * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

Hours per week usually worked * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

Hourly rate of pay * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

Commuting time, costs * * * * * * * * 

Covered by collective bargaining * * * * * * * * * * * *

Is R union member * * * * * * * * * * * *

Work for employer at home * * * * * * *

Firm size * * * * * * *

Shift worked * * * * * * * * * * *

Fringe benefits available * * * * * * * * *

Displaced worker * * * * * * *

Supervises others * * * * * * * *

C. Work experience prior to initial survey 

Occupation, industry, class of worker, start date, 

stop date, and reason for leaving (series): 

First job after leaving school (never-married 

R’s) * 

Longest job since leaving school (nevermarried R’s) * 

Longest job between school and marriage * 

Longest job between marriage and first birth * 

Longest job since first birth * 

Number of years since leaving school in which 

R worked 6 months or more * 

D. Work experience since previous survey 

Occupation, industry, class of worker, hours per 

week, start date, stop date, and reason for 

leaving intervening jobs (through 1987) or 

employers (beginning in 1989) (details vary) 

 * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
CHAPTER 5: NLS OF MATURE AND YOUNG WOMEN 89

Table 5.6. Selected Mature Women variables by survey year: Respondents ages 30 to 44 in 1967 

Variable 67 68 69 71 72 74 76 77 79 81 82 84 86 87 89 92 95 97 99 01 03

Interfirm mobility (details vary) * * * * * * * * * * * * * 

Promotions (any, effects) * * * * * * * * *

II. HUMAN CAPITAL AND OTHER SOCIOECONOMIC VARIABLES 

A. Early formative influences 

Age or date of birth * * * * * * * * *

Nationality or ethnicity * * * * 

Type of residence at age 15 * 

Person(s) R lived with at age 15 * 

Occupation of head of household when R was 

15 * 

Highest grade completed by father and mother * 

Occupation of mother when R was 15 * 

B. Migration 

Years at current residence * 

Comparison of birthplace to current residence * 

Geographic mobility (details vary) * * * * * * * * * * 

C. Education 

Current enrollment status * * * * * * * *

Highest grade completed * * * * * * * * *

High school curriculum * 

Year of high school diploma or GED * * * * * * *

Math courses taken in high school * 

College (attended, duration, hours per week 

attended, field of study, highest degree 

received) 

 * * * * * * * * * * * * *

D. Training 

On-the-job training (did R take, duration, hours 

per week, did R complete) * * * * * * * * * * * *

Additional or other training or educational 

program (type, sponsor, duration, hours per 

week attended, reason took, did R complete, 

certificate, use on job) 

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

E. Health and physical condition 

Self-rating of health * * * * * * * *

Comparison of R’s condition with past * * * * * * * * * * *

Does health limit work or housework * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

Duration of health limitations * * * * * * * * * * * *

Problematic activities (stooping, kneeling, and 

so forth) * * * * * * * * *

Problematic working conditions (noise, smoke, 

and so forth) * * * * * * 
90 CHAPTER 5: NLS OF MATURE AND YOUNG WOMEN

Table 5.6. Selected Mature Women variables by survey year: Respondents ages 30 to 44 in 1967 

Variable 67 68 69 71 72 74 76 77 79 81 82 84 86 87 89 92 95 97 99 01 03

Alcohol and cigarette use * * * * * *

Height and weight (details vary) * * * * * *

Menopausal status and hormone use during 

menopause 

 * * * * *

Extent R drives an automobile * * * * *

Types of health conditions (cancer, diabetes, 

and so forth) * * * * *

Insurance coverage (R’s, other family 

members’) * * * * * * * *

Does others’ health limit work (details vary) * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

Accidents (on-the-job, how, when) * * * * 

Is R able to go outdoors, use public 

transportation, or perform personal care without 

help 

 * * * * * 

Is R able to go shopping, manage money, do 

light housework, do heavy housework * 

F. Marital and family characteristics 

Marital status * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

Marital history (details vary) * * * * * * * * * * * * *

Husband’s attitude toward R’s working * * * * * 

Life status of R’s and R’s husband’s parents * * * * * * * * * * * * *

Number of dependents * * * * * * * * * * * * * 

New information or update on all children born 

or adopted * * * * 

Number and ages of children in household * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

Childcare arrangements (type, cost, 

preferences, attitude toward, hypothetical use, 

effect on work) (details vary) 

* * * * * * 

Childcare (extent of responsibility) * * * * * 

Any children in college last 12 months; amount 

of support from R and spouse * * * * * * *

Family or household (starting in 1989) 

members: age, sex, relationship to R, 

education, employment status (details vary) 

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

Unrelated household members (relationship to 

R, sex, age) * * * * 

Household activities (responsibility for, attitude

toward, hours per week spent on) (details vary) * * * * * * * * * 

Responsibility for care of chronically ill or 

disabled * * * * * * * * *

Frequency of contact with family and friends * 

G. Characteristics of R’s husband; characteristics of R’s partner, beginning in 1995 

Current labor force status * * * * * * *

Usual weeks worked * 
CHAPTER 5: NLS OF MATURE AND YOUNG WOMEN 91

Table 5.6. Selected Mature Women variables by survey year: Respondents ages 30 to 44 in 1967 

Variable 67 68 69 71 72 74 76 77 79 81 82 84 86 87 89 92 95 97 99 01 03

Firm size * 

Covered by Social Security or Railroad 

Retirement * 

Covered by collective bargaining or union 

contract * * * * * *

Is spouse or partner union member * * * * * *

Job search activity in past month * * * * *

Retirement plans, expectations, status * * * * * *

Weeks and hours worked 1982–86 * 

Detailed information on employers since 1987 or 

since last interview (occupation, industry, class of 

worker, rate of pay, start and stop date, hours 

worked, shift worked) 

 * * * * * *

Unemployment of husband (weeks) * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

Does husband’s health limit his work * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

Duration of husband’s limitations * * * * * * * * * * * * *

H. Questions asked of widows 

Husband’s medical care in 12 months before 

death * * * * *

How medical costs were paid * * * * *

R’s care of husband * * * * *

Death benefits paid to R (amount, source, lump 

sum or periodic payment) * * * * *

Financial assistance to R from family members * * * * *

I. Financial characteristics 

Total net family assets * * * * * * * * * * * *

Total family income * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

Income from farm or business * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

Wage or salary income * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

Unemployment compensation income * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

Supplemental unemployment benefits income * * * * * * * * * *

Income from public assistance * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

Social Security income * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

Pension income * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

Disability income * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

Rental income * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

Interest or dividend income * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

Total market value of Food Stamps received * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

Income from AFDC/TANF * * * * * * * * * * * * *

Alimony payments * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

Child support payments * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
92 CHAPTER 5: NLS OF MATURE AND YOUNG WOMEN

Table 5.6. Selected Mature Women variables by survey year: Respondents ages 30 to 44 in 1967 

Variable 67 68 69 71 72 74 76 77 79 81 82 84 86 87 89 92 95 97 99 01 03

Amount of financial assistance received from 

others * * * * * * * * * *

Income from other sources * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

J. Transfers (“H” refers to “husband” of the respondent) 

 Life status of R’s parents, age * * * * * * * * * * *

 Cause of death of R’s parents * 

 Life status of H’s parents, age * * * * * * * * * 

 Health status of R’s and H’s parents * * 

 Do R’s or H’s parents live in nursing home * * 

 Marital status of R’s and H’s parents * * 

 Distance R’s and H’s parents live from R * * * * * 

 Yearly income of R’s and H’s parents * 

 Do R’s and H’s parents own home; value * 

Amount of R’s and H’s parents’ assets and 

debts * * 

 Transfers of time to R’s and H’s parents * * 

 Transfers of money to R’s and H’s parents * * 

 Transfers of time from R’s and H’s parents * 

 Transfers of money from R’s and H’s parents * 

 Did R’s parents have will * * *

 Amount of parents’ estate * * *

If R has a daughter in the Young Women 

cohort: 

 Transfers of time from daughter to R or H * 

 Transfers of money from daughter to R or H * 

Sex, age and date of birth, highest grade 

completed of R’s and H’s children * *

 Relationship of child(ren) to R * *

 Residence of child(ren) and distance from R * *

Do child(ren) and child(ren)’s spouse own 

home; value * *

 Amount of child(ren)’s assets and debts * *

 Transfers of time to and from child(ren) * *

Transfers of money to and from child(ren) * *

 Does R have will; who are beneficiaries * *

K. Attitudes and perspectives 

 How R feels about job * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

 What does R like best and least about job * * * * * * * * * * * * 

Would R continue to work if had enough money 

to live on * * * * * * * * * * * 
CHAPTER 5: NLS OF MATURE AND YOUNG WOMEN 93

Table 5.6. Selected Mature Women variables by survey year: Respondents ages 30 to 44 in 1967 

Variable 67 68 69 71 72 74 76 77 79 81 82 84 86 87 89 92 95 97 99 01 03

Which is more important: high wages or liking 

work * * * * * * 

 Attitude toward women working * * * * * 

Rotter Internal-External Locus of Control score 

(shortened version in 2001) * * * * 

 CES-Depression Scale * * * * * *

 Attitude toward women and retirement * * * * * 

 Way R is feeling these days * * * * * * * * * * * * *

Discrimination (R ever experienced, type, ways 

experienced, practiced by employers) (details 

vary) 

 * * * * * * * 

Has R progressed, held own, or moved 

backward * * 

Have job pressures increased, decreased, or 

remained the same * * 

Job requirements, satisfaction, importance of 

work * 

L. Retirement 

 Expected age at retirement * * * * * 

Will R be eligible for Social Security or Railroad

Retirement benefits * * * * 

Characteristics of current employer’s pension 

plan * * * * * * * * * *

 R’s knowledge of employer’s pension plan * * * * * * *

Years employed in jobs covered by Social 

Security or Railroad Retirement * * * * 

Eligible for other pensions, type, number of 

years worked on jobs * * * * * 

 Eligible for spouse’s benefits, type * * * * * * * *

Expected age at retirement (spouse) * * * * * 

Spouse eligible for Social Security or Railroad 

Retirement benefits * * * * *

Spouse eligible for other retirement benefits, 

type (details vary) * * * * * * 

R and spouse have personal retirement plan 

(details vary) * * * * 

 Sources of retirement income * * * * * * * * * *

 Retirement health insurance coverage * * * * * *

 Detailed pension plan coverage * * * * * *

 Pension plan characteristics data (SCF) * 

M. Hypothetical job offer 

 Would R accept * * * * * * * * * * * 

 Hours per week would work * * * * * * * * * 
94 CHAPTER 5: NLS OF MATURE AND YOUNG WOMEN

Table 5.6. Selected Mature Women variables by survey year: Respondents ages 30 to 44 in 1967 

Variable 67 68 69 71 72 74 76 77 79 81 82 84 86 87 89 92 95 97 99 01 03

 Rate of pay required * * * * * * * * * 

 Kind of work desired * * * * * 

N. Volunteer work 

 Did any unpaid volunteer work * * * * * *

 Hours per week worked, organization * * * * * *

 Why volunteered * * *

III. ENVIRONMENTAL VARIABLES 

A. Residence 

 Region of residence (South or non-South) * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

 Does R live in SMSA * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 

 Mover or nonmover status * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

 Comparison of State, county, SMSA * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 

 Comparison of State, county * * * * * *

B. Characteristics 

 Size of local area labor force * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 

 Local area unemployment rate * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 

 Index of demand for female labor * * * * 
CHAPTER 5: NLS OF MATURE AND YOUNG WOMEN 95

Table 5.7. Selected Young Women variables by survey year: Respondents ages 14 to 24 in 1968 

Variable 68 69 70 71 72 73 75 77 78 80 82 83 85 87 88 91 93 95 97 99 01 03

I. LABOR MARKET EXPERIENCE VARIABLES 

A. Current labor force and employment status 

Survey week labor force and employment 

status * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 

Hours worked in survey week * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 

Weeks worked (time frames vary) * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 

Usual hours worked during weeks worked * * * * * * * * * 

Weeks unemployed (time frames vary) * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 

Spells of unemployment in past year * * * * * * * * * * * * * 

Weeks out of labor force (time frames vary) * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 

B. Characteristics of current or last job 

Occupation, industry, class of worker * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 

Start date and stop date * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 

Hours per week usually worked * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 

Work schedule (worked and preferred) * * * 

Shift worked * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 

Fringe benefits available * * * * * * * * * * * * 

Detailed fringe benefit series * * * * * * 

Hourly rate of pay * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 

Work at home for employer * * * * * * * * 

Promotions (any, effects) * * * * * * * * 

Firm size * * * * * * * * 

Supervises others * * * * * * * * 

Displaced worker * * * * * * * * 

Commuting time, costs * * * * * 

Type of training for this job * 

Covered by collective bargaining * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 

Is R union member * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 

Did R ever hold unionized job * 

C. Work experience prior to initial survey 

Occupation and industry of job held during 

last year of high school * 

Occupation, industry, class of worker, start 

date, stop date, and reason for leaving first 

job after school 

* 

D. Work experience since previous survey 

Interfirm mobility (details vary) * * * * * * * * * * * * 
96 CHAPTER 5: NLS OF MATURE AND YOUNG WOMEN

Table 5.7. Selected Young Women variables by survey year: Respondents ages 14 to 24 in 1968 

Variable 68 69 70 71 72 73 75 77 78 80 82 83 85 87 88 91 93 95 97 99 01 03

Occupation, industry, class of worker, hours 

per week, start date, stop date, and reason 

for leaving intervening jobs (through 1983) 

or employers (beginning in 1988) (details 

vary) 

 * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 

II. HUMAN CAPITAL AND OTHER SOCIOECONOMIC VARIABLES 

A. Early formative influences 

Age or date of birth * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 

Nationality or ethnicity * * * * * 

Type of residence at age 14 and age 18 * 

Person(s) R lived with at age 14 * * 

Occupation of household head when R was 

14 * 

Highest grade completed by father * * 

Highest grade completed by mother * 

Were magazines, newspapers, and library 

cards available in home at age 14 * 

Parental encouragement to continue 

education past high school * * 

B. Migration 

Years at current residence * 

Geographic mobility (details vary) * * * * * * * * * * * * * 

Comparison of birthplace to current 

residence * 

C. Education 

Current enrollment status * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 

Highest grade completed * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 

Reason stopped attending high school * * * * * * 

Is current school public * * * * * * * 

High school curriculum * * * * * * 

High school subjects enjoyed most and 

least * 

High school activities * 

Index of high school quality * 

Index of college quality * * 

College attended, highest degree received, 

field of study * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 

College tuition (full-time amount) * * * * * * * 

College financial aid types, amount * * * * * * * * * 

Reason R left college * * * * * 

Reason R’s college plans have changed * * * * * 
CHAPTER 5: NLS OF MATURE AND YOUNG WOMEN 97

Table 5.7. Selected Young Women variables by survey year: Respondents ages 14 to 24 in 1968 

Variable 68 69 70 71 72 73 75 77 78 80 82 83 85 87 88 91 93 95 97 99 01 03

Math courses in high school * 

D. Training outside regular school 

Any training or educational program (did R 

take, did R complete, type, sponsor, reason 

took, duration, hours per week, reason not 

completed) 

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * 

Other training or educational program (did R 

take, did R complete, type, apprenticeship 

program, sponsor, reason took, duration, 

hours per week) 

 * * * * * * * * * * * * * 

On-the-job training (did R take, did R 

complete, duration, hours per week 

attended) 

 * * * * * * * * * * * * * 

Program enrolled in at last interview (type, 

did R complete, duration) * * * * * * * * * * * 

Training used on current job (universes 

vary) * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 

E. Health and physical condition 

Comparison of R’s condition with past * * * * * * * * * * * * * 

Does health limit work * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 

Does health limit school activity * * * * 

Does health limit housework * * * * * * * 

Duration of health limitations * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 

Problematic activities (stooping, kneeling, 

and so forth) * * * * * * * 

Problematic working conditions (noise, heat, 

and so forth) * * * * 

Accidents (on-the-job, how, when) * 

Does health permit going outdoors, using 

public transportation, or personal care * * * * 

Does others’ health limit R’s work * * * * * * * * * 

Insurance coverage of R and family 

members * * * * * * * * 

Cigarette; alcohol use * * * * * * * 

Height and weight (details vary) * * * 

Menopausal status and hormone use * * * * * 

Extent to which R drives an automobile * 

Types of health conditions (cancer, diabetes, 

and so forth) * * * * * * 

F. Marital and family characteristics 

Marital status * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 

Husband’s attitude toward R working * * * * 

Marital history * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 
98 CHAPTER 5: NLS OF MATURE AND YOUNG WOMEN

Table 5.7. Selected Young Women variables by survey year: Respondents ages 14 to 24 in 1968 

Variable 68 69 70 71 72 73 75 77 78 80 82 83 85 87 88 91 93 95 97 99 01 03

New information or update on all children 

born or adopted * * * * * * * * * * 

Number of dependents * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 

Parents (weeks worked, full-time, 

occupation) * * * * * * 

Number and ages of children in household * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 

Any children in college last 12 months; 

amount of support from R and spouse * * * * * * 

Childcare arrangements (type, cost) 

(universes and details vary) * * * * * * * * * * * * * 

Number of children R expects and number 

R considers ideal * * * * * * * * * 

Family or household (starting in 1988) 

members: Relationship to R, sex, age, 

education, employment status 

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 

Unrelated household members: 

Relationship to R, age, sex * * * * * 

Household activities: Responsibility, hours 

per week spent * * * * * 

Did R’s husband ever have a unionized job * * 

Did R’s father ever have a unionized job * 

Responsibility for care of chronically ill or 

disabled * * * * * * * * 

G. Characteristics of R’s husband; characteristics of R’s partner, beginning in 1995 

Current labor force status * * * * * * * * * * 

Usual weeks worked * 

Firm size * 

Covered by Social Security or Railroad 

Retirement * * 

Covered by collective bargaining or union 

contract * * * * * * 

Is spouse or partner union member * * * * * * 

Job search activity in past month * * * * * 

Retirement plans, expectations, status * * * * * * 

Weeks and hours worked 1990–92 * 

Detailed data on employers since 1987 or 

last interview (occupation, industry, class of 

worker, rate of pay, start and stop date, 

hours worked, shift worked) 

 * * * * * * 

Unemployment of husband (weeks) * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 

Husband’s health limits work, limitations * * * * * * * * * * * * * 

H. Questions asked of widows 

Husband’s medical care in 12 months before 

death * * * * * 
CHAPTER 5: NLS OF MATURE AND YOUNG WOMEN 99

Table 5.7. Selected Young Women variables by survey year: Respondents ages 14 to 24 in 1968 

Variable 68 69 70 71 72 73 75 77 78 80 82 83 85 87 88 91 93 95 97 99 01 03

How medical costs were paid * * * * * 

R’s care of husband * * * * * 

Financial assistance to R from family 

members * * * * * 

Death benefits paid to R (amount, source, 

lump sum or periodic payment) * * * * * 

I. Financial characteristics 

Total net family assets * * * * * * * * * * * * * 

Total family income * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 

Income from farm or business * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 

Wage or salary income * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 

Unemployment compensation income * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 

Supplemental unemployment benefits 

income * * * * * * * * * * 

Disability income * * * * * * * * * * 

Rental income * * * * * * * * * * 

Interest and dividend income * * * * * * * * * * 

Total market value of Food Stamps received * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 

Income from AFDC/TANF * * * * * * * * * * 

Income received from public assistance * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 

Income from Social Security or Railroad 

Retirement * * * * * * * * * 

Pension income * * * * * * 

Alimony payments * * * * * * * * * * * * * 

Child support payments * * * * * * * * * * * * * 

Financial assistance received from others * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 

Income from other sources * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 

J. Transfers (“H” refers to “husband” of the respondent) 

Life status of R’s parents, age * * * * * * * 

Cause of death of R’s parents * 

Life status of H’s parents, age * * * * 

Health status of R’s and H’s parents * * * 

Do R’s or H’s parents live in nursing home * * * 

Marital status of R’s and H’s parents * * * 

Distance R’s and H’s parents live from R * * * 

Yearly income of R’s and H’s parents * * 

Do R’s and H’s parents own home; value * * 

Amount of R’s and H’s parents’ assets and 

debts * * * 

Transfers of time to R’s and H’s parents * * * 
100 CHAPTER 5: NLS OF MATURE AND YOUNG WOMEN

Table 5.7. Selected Young Women variables by survey year: Respondents ages 14 to 24 in 1968 

Variable 68 69 70 71 72 73 75 77 78 80 82 83 85 87 88 91 93 95 97 99 01 03

Transfers of money to R’s and H’s parents * * * 

Transfers of time from R’s and H’s parents * 

Transfers of money from R’s and H’s 

parents * 

Did R’s parents have will * * 

Amount of parents’ estate * * * 

Sex, age and date of birth, highest grade 

completed of R’s and H’s children * * 

Relationship of child(ren) to R * * 

Residence of child(ren) and distance from R * * 

Do child(ren) and child(ren)’s spouse own 

home; value * * 

Amount of child(ren)’s assets and debts * * 

Transfers of time to and from child(ren) * * 

Transfers of money to and from child(ren) * * 

Does R have will; who are beneficiaries * * 

If R has a mother in the Mature Women 

cohort: 

Mother’s marital status * 

Amount of mother’s and mother’s husband

assets and debts * 

Transfers of time to and from R and mothe * 

Transfers of money to and from R and 

mother * 

K. Attitudes and perspectives 

How R feels about job * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 

What R likes best and least about job * * * * * * * * * * * 

Attitude toward homemaking * * * * 

Would R continue to work if had enough 

money to live on * * * * * 

Which is more important: high wages or 

liking work * * * 

Attitude toward women working * * * * * 

Facet-Specific Job Satisfaction Index * 

Would R like more education or training * * * * * * * 

Educational goal * * * * * * * 

What would R like to be doing when 35 

years old * * * * * * * * * * * * * 

What would R like to be doing when 50 

years old and 5 years from now * * * * 

Knowledge of World of Work score * 
CHAPTER 5: NLS OF MATURE AND YOUNG WOMEN 101

Table 5.7. Selected Young Women variables by survey year: Respondents ages 14 to 24 in 1968 

Variable 68 69 70 71 72 73 75 77 78 80 82 83 85 87 88 91 93 95 97 99 01 03

Rotter Internal-External Locus of Control 

score (shortened version in 2001) * * * * * * 

CES-Depression Scale * * * * * * 

Way feeling these days * * * * * * * * * * * * 

IQ score * 

Discrimination ever experienced, type 

(expanded in 1988) * * * * * * * * 

Has R progressed, held own, moved 

backward * * * 

Attitudes toward retirement * * * * 

L. Hypothetical job offer 

Would R accept * * * * * * * * * * * 

Hours per week would work * * * * * * * * * * * 

Rate of pay, kind of work required * * * * * * * * * * * 

M. Volunteer work 

Did any unpaid volunteer work * * * * * 

Hours per week worked, organization * * * * * 

Why volunteered * * * 

N. Retirement 

Expected age at retirement * 

Characteristics of current employer’s pension 

plan * * * * * * 

R’s knowledge of employer’s pension plan * * * * * 

Eligible for other pensions, type, number of 

years worked on jobs * 

Eligible for spouse’s benefits * * * * * 

Spouse eligible for other retirement benefits, 

type * 

R and spouse have personal retirement 

plan * * * * * 

Sources of retirement income * 

Retirement health insurance coverage * * * * * 

Detailed pension plan coverage * * * * * 

III. ENVIRONMENTAL VARIABLES 

A. Residence 

Region of residence (South or non-South) * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 

Did R live in SMSA * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 

Mover or nonmover status * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 

Comparison of State, county, SMSA * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 

Comparison of State, county * * * * * * * 
102 CHAPTER 5: NLS OF MATURE AND YOUNG WOMEN

Variable 68 69 70 71 72 73 75 77 78 80 82 83 85 87 88 91 93 95 97 99 01 03

B. Characteristics 

Size of local area labor force * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 

Local area unemployment rate * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 

Index of demand for female labor * * * * * * 

Accredited college in local area * * * 

Table 5.7. Selected Young Women variables by survey year: Respondents ages 14 to 24 in 1968
CHAPTER 6: NLS OF OLDER AND YOUNG MEN 103

Initial 10-year Final

Cohort survey survey survey

Older Men 1966 1976 1990

Total 5,020 3,487 12,092

Nonblack 3,600 2,521 1,603

Blacks 1,420 966 489

Young Men 1966 1976 1981

Total 5,225 3,695 3,398

Nonblack 3,787 2,848 2,622

Blacks 1,438 847 776

THE NLS ORIGINAL COHORTS:

OLDER AND YOUNG MEN

The NLS of Older Men and the NLS of Young Men beganin the mid-1960s because the U.S. Department of Labor

was interested in studying the employment patterns of two

groups of men. Respondents to the NLS of Older Men were

a group of men in their 40s and 50s who were making decisions about the timing and extent of their labor force withdrawal and were planning for retirement. The NLS of Young

Men comprised men in their teens and early 20s, who were

completing school and making decisions about pursuing

additional training or schooling, entering the workforce, or

joining the military. Although surveys have been discontinued with these cohorts, the data are included on the crosscohort CD or can be downloaded from the NLS Web site at

http://www.bls.gov/nls.

Chapter organization

This chapter begins with a summary of the NLS men’s

samples and special features of the sampling design. Next,

users will find information on the interviews, fielding periods, retention rates, and sampling weights for the cohorts.

The chapter continues with descriptions of the topical content of the data sets and information on the specific data files

and documentation available for each cohort. Finally, tables

provide further detail on the types of questions asked during the men’s surveys and the survey years in which they

were included.

The samples

The U.S. Census Bureau established the two cohorts of men

through two household screenings. From the first household screening in early 1966, 5,518 Older Men ages 45 to 59

as of April 1, 1966, were designated for interview. Following

a second screening in September 1966, 5,713 Young Men

ages 14 to 24 as of April 1, 1966, were selected for interview.

Each sample group served to represent the civilian,

noninstitutionalized population of men in the same age group

residing in the United States at the time the samples were

selected. To meet the survey requirement of providing separate, statistically reliable estimates for black Americans, blacks

were to be represented in the sample at twice their expected

rate in the population.

Both of the men’s cohorts were first interviewed during

1966. Of the 5,518 Older Men identified during the household screenings, 5,020 (91 percent) participated in the 1966

survey. Of the 5,713 Young Men designated for interview,

5,225 (91 percent) completed the initial interview in 1966. Table

6.1 presents, by race, the numbers of respondents in the two

NLS men’s cohorts interviewed during the initial survey and

two subsequent surveys.

Multiple-respondent households

Older and Young Men. The sampling design used by the

Census Bureau to select respondents for the four 1960s cohorts made it possible for any given NLS household to include a mix of respondents from the same cohort or different

cohorts. At the time the samples were drawn, one-third of

the Older Men shared their household with at least one other

NLS respondent; more than three-quarters of the Young Men

resided with at least one other NLS respondent. A matching

1Interviews were also conducted with 2,206 widows or other

family members of deceased respondents; these interviews collected information about both the original member of the cohort

and his widow.

Table 6.1. Number of respondents interviewed by

cohort and race: Older and Young Men
104 CHAPTER 6: NLS OF OLDER AND YOUNG MEN

process, conducted after interviews were completed with

each of the 1960s cohorts, identified common relationships

in these multiple-respondent households during the early

survey years. Variables in the data files identify each of the

respondents belonging to a multiple-respondent household

at the time of the screening.

Table 6.2 presents the numbers of matched respondent

pairs for the NLS of Older and Young Men by cohort and

relationship. During the initial survey years, 492 Older Men

respondents shared a household with a wife who was a respondent in the Mature Women cohort, 963 Older Men lived

with a daughter who was a member of the Young Women

cohort, and 1,039 Older Men resided with a son who was a

respondent in the Young Men cohort. Originally, 574 Young

Men respondents shared a household with a wife who was a

respondent in the Young Women cohort and 1,620 Young

Men lived with a mother who was a member of the Mature

Women cohort. In addition, some of the original Young Men

lived with siblings participating in the surveys: 902 shared a

household with a brother who also was a respondent in the

Young Men cohort and 1,243 Young Men lived with a sister

who was a member of the Young Women cohort. Attrition

and mortality of one or more members have reduced the number of pairs for whom data are available across survey years.

These pairs offer unique samples for a number of research topics. However, the original cohorts do not contain

nationally representative samples of spouses and siblings

of all ages and living arrangements. For example, sibling

pairs represent only those who were fairly close in age and

both in the sampled age range at the time of the initial survey.

Researchers should be aware of these statistical sampling

issues when using NLS data to study siblings and spouses.

Interviews and fielding periods

Older Men. Respondents in the Older Men cohort completed 12 interviews from 1966 through 1983 and an additional interview sponsored by the National Institute on Aging

in 1990. Interviewers from the Census Bureau conducted all

of the surveys. Interviewers administered seven of these

surveys personally and conducted five by telephone; the

third survey of this cohort, in 1968, was mailed to the respondents. While the first several interviews took place during

the spring, the fielding of most surveys occurred from July

through September. The 1990 interviews of living respondents and widows or other family members of deceased respondents took place from October through December.

Paper-and-pencil instruments (PAPI) were used exclusively

during the 1966–90 interviews of this cohort. Interviews

with the Older Men have ceased.

Young Men. The Young Men cohort participated in 12 surveys from 1966 through 1981. Interviewers from the Census

Bureau conducted all of the surveys. Interviewers administered eight surveys in person and conducted four by telephone. The fielding period typically lasted from October

through December. PAPI instruments were used exclusively

for all interviews with this cohort. The last interviews with

the Young Men were conducted in 1981.

Number

Cohort relationships: Young Men of pairs

Young Men-Older Men 1,099

Son-father (same household) 1,039

Son-father (different household) 60

Young Men-Young Women 2,398

Brother-sister (same household) 1,243

Brother-sister (different household) 571

Husband-wife (same household) 574

Husband-wife (different household) 10

Young Men-Mature Women 1,671

Son-mother (same household) 1,620

Son-mother (different household) 51

Young Men-Young Men 902

Brothers (same household) 902

Table 6.2. Number of respondent pairs by cohort and relationship identified during the initial survey

years: Older and Young Men

Number

Cohort relationships: Older Men of pairs

Older Men-Mature Women 506

Husband-wife (same household) 492

Father-daughter (same household) 11

Brother-sister (same household) 3

Older Men-Young Women 988

Father-daughter (same household) 963

Father-daughter (different household) 25

Older Men-Young Men 1,099

Father-son (same household) 1,039

Father-son (different household) 60
CHAPTER 6: NLS OF OLDER AND YOUNG MEN 105

Attrition

Older Men. Attrition from the Older Men sample remained

relatively low through the late 1960s; 87 percent of the original 5,020 respondents were still participating in 1969. In the

1970s and early 1980s, several factors, including respondent

mortality, contributed to the gradual rise in attrition. At the

time of the last interview in 1990, the retention rate, calculated as the percentage of base-year respondents interviewed

in a given year, was approximately 42 percent. Table 6.3

presents the total number of respondents interviewed during each survey and the corresponding retention rate.

With the exception of the 1990 resurvey, respondents

institutionalized in jail or long-term care facilities were not

interviewed. Through 1983, the Census Bureau enforced a

policy of not interviewing those respondents who refused

to be interviewed or were not interviewed for any reason for

2 consecutive years. As of the 1983 survey, the major groups

not interviewed included 1,498 respondents reported as deceased by the Census Bureau, 686 respondents who refused

an interview, and 159 who were dropped from the sample

after 2 consecutive years of noninterview. The Census Bureau attempted to include nearly all dropped respondents (or

a surviving family member of deceased respondents) in the

1990 resurvey.

The 1990 resurvey of the NLS of Older Men was unique

in that interviewers surveyed two respondent groups. Participants included 2,092 cohort members, or more than 41

percent of the original sample, and 2,206 widows or other

family members of deceased respondents. Because the survey obtained information from this second sample group

about the life experiences of the deceased sample member,

the 1990 survey had a total data collection completion rate of

86 percent of the original sample. Of the eligible respondents, only 235 living Older Men were not interviewed in

1990; 154 of these refused an interview. No widow or other

family member was interviewed for 487 deceased respondents.

Young Men. When surveys ceased for the Young Men cohort in 1981, 3,398 (almost 65 percent) of the original 5,225

respondents were interviewed. Table 6.3 presents the total

number of respondents interviewed at each survey point

and the corresponding retention rates. By the time of the

1981 survey, the major groups not interviewed included 866

respondents who refused an interview, 545 respondents

dropped from the sample after 2 consecutive years of

noninterview, 139 respondents reported as deceased by the

1

Retention rate is defined as the percentage of base-year respondents who were interviewed in any given survey year. Included in the calculations are deceased and institutionalized

respondents, as well as those serving in the military. 2

In addition to the 2,092 surviving members of the original

sample interviewed during 1990, interviews were also completed

with 1,341 widows and 865 other family members who supplied

data about deceased respondents. 3 “Reason for Noninterview” variables are available for 1990,

but because coding categories differ substantially from those

used in the 1967 through 1983 survey years, the retention rate in

1990 for living respondents only is omitted from this table.

Older Men Young Men

Response rate, Response rate,

Type of Total Retention living Type of Total Retention living

Year interview interviewed rate1 respondents only interview interviewed rate1 respondents only

1966 Personal 5,020 100.0 100.0 Personal 5,225 100.0 100.0

1967 Personal 4,744 94.5 95.6 Personal 4,790 91.7 91.9

1968 Mail 4,648 92.6 95.1 Personal 4,318 82.6 83.0

1969 Personal 4,381 87.3 91.5 Personal 4,033 77.2 77.7

1970 — — — — Personal 3,993 76.4 77.1

1971 Personal 4,175 83.2 90.3 Personal 3,987 76.3 77.2

1973 Telephone 3,951 78.7 88.7 Telephone 4,014 76.8 78.0

1975 Telephone 3,732 74.3 87.2 Telephone 3,977 76.1 77.4

1976 Personal 3,487 69.5 83.4 Personal 3,695 70.7 72.0

1978 Telephone 3,219 64.1 80.2 Telephone 3,538 67.7 69.3

1980 Telephone 3,001 59.8 78.7 Telephone 3,438 65.8 67.5

1981 Personal 2,832 56.4 76.3 Personal 3,398 65.0 66.8

1983 Telephone 2,633 52.5 74.8 — — — —

1990 Personal 22,092 41.5 3— — —— —

Table 6.3. Interview schedules and retention rates: Older and Young Men
106 CHAPTER 6: NLS OF OLDER AND YOUNG MEN

Census Bureau, and 111 respondents who were in the Armed

Forces and thus not eligible for interview. As with the Older

Men cohort, institutionalized respondents were not interviewed.

Sampling weights

Older and Young Men. The Center for Human Resource

Research (CHRR) at The Ohio State University created sampling weights for each cohort after the initial interview and

adjusted them after each subsequent interview. These

weights account for the overrepresentation of blacks in the

initial sample and for persons who were not interviewed.

Analysis of each of the cohorts indicates that the reweighting

scheme used to compensate for nonresponse has allowed

the samples to remain representative (Parnes, 1992; Rhoton,

1984).

Major data elements

Surveys of the men’s cohorts have collected two basic types

of information: (1) Core data on each respondent’s work and

nonwork experiences, education and training, family income,

household composition, marital status, and health, and (2)

supplementary data specific to the age, sex, and stage of life

or labor market attachment of the cohort (for example, military service information, retirement plans and experiences,

leisure-time activities, and volunteer work).

This section provides brief summaries of the major data

elements available for respondents in the NLS of Older and

Young Men. Certain data elements were collected longitudinally, while others are available only for selected survey

years; not all data elements are present for all respondents.

Readers should keep in mind that some categories are

cohort-specific and may not be applicable to respondents in

both cohorts. For example, the Older Men surveys focused

on collecting information about retirement planning, health

conditions, insurance coverage, and the ways in which respondents spent their leisure time. The surveys of the

younger cohort traced in detail the respondents’ educational

experiences, occupational aspirations, training investments,

and career choices. The descriptions of the data elements

note differences in data collection between the male cohorts.

Because the descriptions below are not comprehensive,

readers interested in additional information should review

the topical descriptions of variables found in the Older and

Young Men User’s Guide, examine the detailed variable tables

provided at the end of this chapter, acquire copies of the

survey instruments, and browse the documentation files

contained in the Older Men and Young Men data set available online. The Older and Young Men User’s Guide can be

downloaded from the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics Web

site at http://www.bls.gov/nls.

Data elements for the NLS of Older and Young Men are

discussed in the order presented in figure 6.1.

1. Work and nonwork experiences

Older and Young Men. Each survey collected information

regarding the labor force status of respondents during the

survey week. Employed respondents provided details about

their occupation, class of worker, rate of pay, hours worked

per week, and attitude toward their current job. Employed

respondents also reported the number of weeks they were

employed; reference periods varied by survey. Additional

questions asked during selected surveys collected information about the respondent’s job or job-related activities (such

as the shift worked, union membership, commuting time, tenure, types of fringe benefits, and eligibility for retirement

benefits).

Respondents who reported being unemployed or out of

the labor force provided data about their activities. Included

is information on method(s) the respondent used to seek

employment, the number of weeks he spent looking for work,

his plans to seek employment, the number of weeks he spent

out of the labor force, and his reasons for not seeking work.

Selected surveys collected detailed information for up

to seven intervening jobs. Specific data include start and

stop dates for each job, the number of hours worked, the

occupation and industry, the respondent’s class of worker,

his rate of pay, and his reason for leaving the job.

1 Work and nonwork experiences

2 Work-related discrimination

3 Training investments

4 Schooling information (school records, aptitude, IQ)

5 Military experiences

6 Retirement plans and experiences

7 Volunteer work and leisure-time activities

8 Income and assets

9 Physical well-being, health care, and health insurance

10 Alcohol and cigarette use

11 Attitudes, aspirations, and psychological well-being

12 Geographic and environmental data

13 Demographics, family background, and household

composition

14 Marital history, children, and dependents

15 Household chores

Figure 6.1. Data elements in the NLS of Older

and Young Men
CHAPTER 6: NLS OF OLDER AND YOUNG MEN 107

2. Work-related discrimination

Older and Young Men. Older Men answered questions on

work-related discrimination during the 1971, 1976, and 1980

interviews; the Young Men responded to these questions in

1971 and 1976. In general, each series of questions asked the

respondent whether he had experienced a particular type of

discrimination because of age, race, religion, or sex during a

specified period. A followup question asked for information

on the type(s) of discrimination experienced.

3. Training investments

Older Men. Every personal interview of the Older Men (except the 1990 survey) collected information on the training

experiences of the respondents. The initial survey asked (1)

whether the respondent had been enrolled in a vocational or

commercial training program while in high school and (2)

whether he had ever been enrolled in a business or technical

training program, a program offered by a company training

school, an Armed Forces training program, or another type

of apprenticeship or vocational training program since he

had stopped his regular schooling. If he had, the questionnaire collected details about each training program.

Subsequent surveys updated this information with data

on additional training courses or educational programs in

which the respondent had enrolled either on the job or elsewhere. Core information was gathered on type, length, sponsor, completion status, and use on current job, as well as

hours per week spent in the training, the reason the respondent did not complete, and the reason for enrollment in additional training. The 1971 survey collected details on the

plans of the respondent to take additional training courses.

A special set of questions fielded during 1981 gathered information on respondents’ participation in retirement training programs and the usefulness of those programs in their

plans for various aspects of retirement living.

Young Men. The 1966 survey gathered information about

the respondent’s plans for additional education or training

and asked whether he had ever been enrolled in a business

or technical training program, a program offered by a company training school, or another vocational or apprenticeship training program since he had stopped his regular

schooling. If he had, the interviewer collected details about

each training program. These details included the type of

training; number of months and hours per week spent in

training; whether the program was completed and, if not, the

reason; and use of the skills acquired in the training program

on the respondent’s current or last job.

Subsequent surveys updated this training record by

collecting the same details about programs in which the respondent had enrolled since the date of his last interview. In

addition, the 1970 and 1975 surveys collected retrospective

data on any training or educational courses taken prior to

October 1967 and asked about the respondent’s plans to

enroll in training courses in the future. Beginning with the

1973 interview, the surveys included questions about

whether the respondent had participated in an apprenticeship program; the 1975 survey fielded a retrospective set of

questions on apprenticeships. The military service series

included questions on the types of training the respondent

had taken while in the Armed Forces and the length of each

training program. This series also asked whether the respondent used skills acquired in the training program on his

current or last job.

4. Schooling information (school records, aptitude, IQ)

Older Men. Respondents in the Older Men cohort provided

information on their educational status and attainment at

selected survey points. The initial survey collected information on the highest grade the respondent had attended and

completed and asked whether he had been enrolled in a vocational or commercial curriculum during high school. The

1976 interview gathered information on the highest grade

completed by the respondent, the year of his high school

graduation, the year he last attended college, whether he

had earned a college degree, and, if so, the highest college

degree he attained.

Some surveys include information on current school

enrollment, highest grade attended, and highest grade completed for each family member living in the respondent’s

household at the time of the interview.

Young Men. A primary focus of the Young Men surveys was

on schooling and the transition from school to work. Therefore, the interviews of this cohort regularly collected information on both the respondent’s enrollment in regular

schooling and his educational attainment. In addition, a separate 1968 survey of high schools attended by respondents in

this cohort provides details on school characteristics and

testing information for the respondent.

Each respondent has provided the following types of

school-related information: His current school enrollment

status, the grade he currently attends, the highest grade he

has completed, the date he received a high school diploma or

equivalent, whether he had ever attended college, the type

of college degree he earned, the type of his high school and

college curricula, his college field of study, the type(s) of

financial assistance he received, college tuition amounts he

paid, the type of school (public or private) he attended, and

the geographic location of each school he attended.

During 1968, a special set of questions gathered information from the respondent about his experiences in high

school and college. Details include his participation in high
108 CHAPTER 6: NLS OF OLDER AND YOUNG MEN

school extracurricular activities, the amount of time he spent

on homework, the high school subjects he liked and disliked,

and his overall attitude toward his high school years. Those

who had attended college answered questions on the college fields of study they liked and disliked, their attitude

toward their college years, and their educational aspirations.

Multiple surveys collected data on the educational aspirations and expectations of the Young Men. Available information includes the number of years of education the

respondent desired; the college degree he desired; the years

of education he expected; and, for each respondent who

planned on attending college, the type of college he expected

to attend, his intended field of study, and his expected responsibility for expenses.

A separate school survey mailed directly to each school

in 1968 collected information on the secondary schools attended by respondents in this cohort. Data included characteristics of the school (for example, type of school, student

enrollment by grade, expenditures per pupil, number of books

in library) and characteristics of the school’s teachers and

counselors (number of teachers and counselors, salaries, and

so forth). A set of constructed variables summarizes attributes, such as the ratio of students to teachers, and provides an index of overall school quality.

The school survey also recorded respondents’ grade

point averages and individual test scores from instruments

such as the Otis/Beta/Gamma, California Test of Mental

Maturity, Lorge-Thorndike Intelligence Test, and the Scholastic Aptitude Test (available for select respondents). An

“IQ score” created from these data is available for more than

3,300 Young Men respondents. Finally, the school survey

collected information about respondents’ behavior in school

in regard to absenteeism, disciplinary actions, and so on.

5. Military experiences

Older Men. The data set makes available a limited amount of

information on respondents’ military service. The 1967 and

1976 surveys asked whether a respondent had ever served

in the Armed Forces. Those who had served provided information on the general period(s) of service (for example, during World War II, peacetime before 1950) in the 1967 survey;

the 1976 survey gathered start and stop dates for up to two

periods of active duty. The initial survey collected information on the respondent’s participation in vocational training

while in the Armed Forces. The final four surveys of the

Older Men asked about income from Armed Forces pensions.

Young Men. Multiple surveys sought information on the

military experiences of respondents in this cohort. The survey first asked whether the respondent had ever served in

the Armed Forces. If he had, followup questions determined

the branch in which he served, the rank he held, whether he

had enlisted or been drafted, and the number of months he

spent on active duty. Training questions asked about the

kinds of training he received, the length of his training, and

whether the skills he acquired were used in a recent job. The

military occupation he held for the longest time, whether he

felt that his military service had helped or hurt his career, and

the date he separated from active duty also were determined.

In addition, the 1967–71 surveys asked all age-eligible respondents for their current draft classification and, if applicable, the reason for their 1-Y or 4-F rejection.

6. Retirement plans and experiences

Older Men. The retirement plans, expectations, and experiences of the Older Men constituted an important part of

each interview’s data collection. Surveys regularly asked

about each respondent’s retirement plans and expectations,

including the age at which he expected to stop working,

whether a compulsory retirement plan would require him to

stop working at a given age, what that age was, and whether

he would work longer if he could. The respondent also provided information about the types of activities he expected

to engage in after retirement, his attitudes toward work and

retirement, his eligibility for Social Security or other pension

benefits, the specific characteristics of the employer pension plan for which he was eligible, and the total income he

expected during retirement.

Details on the respondent’s retirement experiences include information on whether he had ever retired voluntarily

or involuntarily from a regular job, the date and reason, any

ways in which the respondent’s employer encouraged the

retirement decision, and whether the respondent would have

continued to work either full or part time had the employer

allowed. The surveys also determined the respondent’s attitude toward and satisfaction with his retirement and asked

about the specific retirement or leisure activities in which he

had engaged over the previous 12 months. Finally, this section of the survey covered the respondent’s residential moves

since retirement; the proximity of and assistance received

from his network of friends, relatives, and area community

service agencies; and household income received from pensions, Social Security or Railroad Retirement, and disability.

Every survey of this cohort has included “retired” as a reason for not being in the labor force during the survey week.

7. Volunteer work and leisure-time activities

Older Men. Certain surveys of the Older Men collected

information on how the respondent had spent his leisure

time during the previous year. These surveys recorded

whether the respondent had participated in leisure-time activities such as sports, reading books, pursuing hobbies,

visiting friends or relatives, maintaining a home, attending
CHAPTER 6: NLS OF OLDER AND YOUNG MEN 109

the theater, performing volunteer work, or taking trips. They

also determined the extent of his participation in these activities.

8. Income and assets

Older and Young Men. The surveys regularly asked about

the total income received by the respondent’s family during

the past year and about the amount of income received from

various sources during that period by the respondent himself, his spouse, or other family members. Income sources

include wages and salary, business and farm income, unemployment compensation, rental income, interest and dividends, Social Security, disability payments, public assistance,

Food Stamps, pension benefits (Older Men), and child support and alimony (Young Men).

A series of questions on family assets and debts collected details on (1) whether the respondent and his spouse

owned their own home, other types of real estate, or automobiles and, if so, the total market value and amount owed on

each; (2) the value of other assets, such as savings accounts,

U.S. Savings Bonds, stocks or bonds, and personal loans;

and (3) whether there were other personal debts such as

money owed to stores, physicians, hospitals, or banks. In

1967, 1969, 1971, and 1990, the Older Men stated whether

they believed that their overall financial position was better,

worse, or about the same as it was a few years earlier; respondents in the Young Men cohort answered the same

question in 1967 through 1971.

9. Physical well-being, healthcare, and health

insurance

Older Men. A comprehensive set of health-related variables

is available for respondents in the Older Men cohort. This

data collection includes information on the respondent’s

health status, perceived changes in his health over time, types

of health-related problems and specific health conditions he

has experienced, hospitalizations or medical care he has received, and characteristics of his health insurance coverage.

Respondents also stated whether their health limited or prohibited working and whether any health problems were the

result of work-related accidents. Respondents surveyed in

1973 and 1990 reported their height and weight.

Two separate series of questions have asked Older Men

respondents to evaluate their health. The first, fielded during seven surveys, asked each respondent to rate his health

as excellent, good, fair, or poor when compared to the health

of his male peers. The second, included in six surveys, determined the respondent’s general satisfaction with his health

condition.

During 1971, 1976, 1981, and 1990, respondents stated

whether they had experienced certain health-related problems such as pain, fatigue, weakness, fainting spells or dizziness, anxiety or depression, or shortness of breath. A second series of questions, fielded during the same surveys,

asked the respondent whether he had ever had any difficulty

performing a predetermined set of activities, such as walking, using stairs, or standing for long periods.

Each survey (except 1968) collected information on the

respondent’s health limitations and their impact on the kind

or amount of work that he could do. A supplemental series of

questions, fielded during 1966, 1969, 1976, 1981, and 1990,

asked the respondent whether his health had prevented him

from working altogether. The 1976 survey determined

whether any of the respondent’s reported health problems

were the result of an accidental injury and whether the most

serious injury had occurred on the job.

In the 1990 survey, respondents reported specific health

conditions they had experienced during the 12-month period

before the interview. This survey gathered information on

whether the respondent needed help with activities such as

bathing, dressing, walking, shopping for personal items, or

managing money; it also asked who helped him complete

each activity.

Two surveys collected details on the respondent’s use

of the medical system. The 1981 survey included a series of

questions on the respondent’s use of emergency medical

assistance. The 1990 survey asked respondents and widows of deceased respondents for information regarding hospitalizations, care by a physician, and residency in a nursing

or convalescent home during the past 12 months or during

the 12 months before the respondent’s death.

The 1981 and 1990 surveys asked whether the respondent and his spouse were covered by health insurance. Further questions recorded the types of insurance (for example,

Medicare, veterans’ benefits) for which each was eligible.

For all interviews except the 1990 survey, the life status

of respondents at the time of the interview is indicated by

the designation “deceased” as the reason for noninterview.

In the 1990 survey, age at death and cause of death are available for sample members whom the Census Bureau believed

to be deceased. For these sample members, the Census Bureau obtained death certificates from State vital records departments and recorded information on up to four

contributing causes of death. These administrative data

supplement the cause of death information on 2,166 deceased

respondents that was collected directly from the widows or

other family members surveyed in 1990.

Young Men. Data include information on perceived changes

in the respondent’s health status over time, the types of

health-related problems he experienced, whether any of his

health problems was the result of a work-related accident,

and whether he worked in an unhealthy or dangerous environment.
110 CHAPTER 6: NLS OF OLDER AND YOUNG MEN

At three survey points, respondents stated whether they

considered their health to have changed over the past few

years. Height and weight measurements of respondents interviewed during 1973 also are available. The 1971, 1976, and

1981 surveys asked whether the respondent had experienced

certain health-related problems such as pain, tiring easily,

weakness, or shortness of breath. A second series, fielded in

the same surveys, asked the respondent whether he had

ever had any difficulty performing a predetermined set of

activities such as walking, using stairs, standing for long

periods, stooping, lifting heavy weights, or reaching. Multiple surveys asked whether the respondent’s health condition limited his work or prevented him from working and, if it

did, how long he had experienced that restriction. The 1976

survey determined whether any of the reported health problems was the result of an accidental injury and whether the

most serious injury had occurred on the job.

Both the regularly fielded health series and selected

administrations of a set of job satisfaction questions have

addressed other health issues related to the respondent’s

job and general working conditions. At multiple survey

points, respondents identified one or more specific characteristics of their workplace that they would have trouble

working around because of their health. The 1978 and 1981

surveys included a series of descriptive statements about

the working conditions associated with the respondent’s

current job.

For all interviews, the life status of respondents at the

time of the interview is indicated by a designation of “deceased” as the reason for noninterview.

10. Alcohol and cigarette use

Older Men. The 1990 survey collected information on the

frequency and quantity of respondents’ alcohol consumption in the past 12 months. If the respondent had consumed

at least 12 drinks during adulthood, he provided data on his

lifetime consumption of alcohol. Similar information was

supplied by the widows or other family members of those

respondents who were deceased.

The 1990 survey also collected information from both

respondents and widows on the respondent’s current and

past use of cigarettes. This series included data on the age

at which the respondent had started smoking regularly, the

age at which he had last smoked regularly, and the number of

cigarettes he smoked on an average day.

11. Attitudes, aspirations, and psychological

well-being

Older Men. A collection of attitude, aspiration, and psychological well-being variables is available for this cohort. The

Older Men responded to selected administrations of the

Center for Epidemiological Studies Depression (CES-D)

Scale (Radloff, 1977), the Internal-External Locus of Control Scale (Rotter, 1966), the Short Portable Mental Status

Questionnaire (Pfeiffer, 1975), and the Bradburn Affect Balance Scale (Bradburn, 1969). Periodic questions also investigated the respondent’s attitude toward his current job,

women working, various life events, and life in general.

Young Men. Members of this cohort also have responded to

a variety of attitude, aspiration, and psychological well-being questions. Information from the Internal-External Locus of Control Scale (Rotter, 1966) is available for the Young

Men, as are answers to periodic questions gathering information about the respondent’s general knowledge of the

world of work; his educational and occupational aspirations;

and his attitudes toward his current job, women working,

and life in general.

12. Geographic and environmental data

Older and Young Men. Three sets of variables provide information on the respondent’s current residence. The first

set broadly defines the geographic area in which the respondent resided. This definition includes the name of the census division (New England, Middle Atlantic, Pacific, and so

forth), whether the respondent’s region of residence was

located in the South or a non-South region of the United

States, and whether his residence was in a Standard Metropolitan Statistical Area (SMSA). In addition, the 1990 survey of the Older Men collected information about a second

residence of the respondent.

The second set of variables compares the respondent’s

current State or SMSA with those of his previous residence,

the location of his current job, and his birthplace. A third

series of variables details characteristics of the respondent’s

environment, including the size of the labor force and the

unemployment rate for the labor market of the respondent’s

current residence.

Research Data Centers. Geographic information collected

during interviews with the Older Men and Young Men is

now available for research use at the Census Bureau’s Research Data Centers. The cohort-specific files contain the

respondent identification number, survey year, and State

code. Researchers may match these files with the NLS data

sets. Currently, the Research Data Centers have available,

by survey year, the Federal Information Processing Standards (FIPS) State codes, which represent the State of residence for each interviewed respondent. Having the State

variables allows researchers to determine the census regions

and divisions.

There are tentative plans to add more geographic variables in the future. These may include variables for county,
CHAPTER 6: NLS OF OLDER AND YOUNG MEN 111

Consolidated Metropolitan Statistical Area (CMSA), Primary

Metropolitan Statistical Area (PMSA), ZIP Code, census

tract, and latitude and longitude of residence. In addition,

selected environmental variables at the county and Metropolitan Statistical Area (MSA) level may eventually be added.

The Census Bureau developed the Research Data Centers to give researchers access to valuable data in a setting

designed to safeguard respondent confidentiality. Researchers interested in reviewing more detailed information on the

procedures to follow in applying for access to a Research

Data Center should visit the http://www.bls.gov/nls Web site.

13. Demographics, family background, and household

composition

Older and Young Men. The surveys have collected data

regarding each respondent’s race, nationality, date of birth,

age, and residential community at age 15 (Older Men) or age

14 (Young Men). Background information on the families of

respondents includes the birthplace of the respondent’s parents and grandparents, the relationship of the respondent to

the person(s) with whom he lived at age 14 or 15, the occupation and highest grade completed by his father or the head of

his household, and the life status of both the respondent’s

parents and his wife’s parents.

Each interview collected detailed information on the

composition of the respondent’s household. For as many as

20 family members (during the early survey years) or household members (later survey years) who were living in the

respondent’s household at the time of the survey, data include the individual’s relationship to the respondent, age or

date of birth, occupation, current school enrollment status,

highest grade of school attended, whether that grade was

completed, and the number of weeks and hours per week the

individual worked in the past year.

14. Marital history, children, and dependents

Older and Young Men. Every survey except the 1968 mail

survey for the Older Men asked about the respondent’s current marital status. Selected interviews collected information on the timing of marital transitions.

The 1981 survey of Young Men included a series of

questions on the type and timing of up to four marital changes

the respondent had experienced since he was last interviewed. During the 1990 interview of Older Men, widows of

deceased respondents provided information on their current

marital status; their marital status at the time of the

respondent’s death; the date of their marriage to the respondent; and the date of their most recent marriage, divorce, or

widowhood.

Data on the children or dependents of Older and Young

Men include the respondent’s total number of children; the

number of his children (under age 18) who lived in the household; and, for each child living in the household at the survey date, the child’s age, date of birth, and whether the child

was the respondent’s son or daughter. Surveys after 1978

for the Older Men and after 1976 for the Young Men asked

whether the child was an adopted, step-, or foster child. Selected surveys also determined the respondent’s relationship to each child living outside the household.

On a regular basis, the interviews gathered information

on the number of the respondent’s dependents, excluding

his wife. Selected surveys provided details on the number

and relationship of dependents who lived outside the

respondent’s household. Questions in the 1981 survey of

Older Men asked for information about whether the

respondent’s children were currently dependent upon him

or likely to become dependent upon him in the future.

The 1990 survey of Older Men updated this information

on the respondent’s children and dependents. Details include the number of living children of the respondent, the

number of dependent sons and daughters, the number of

children residing with the respondent, and the number of

living children not residing in the respondent’s household.

In 1981, the Young Men answered a set of questions on

the number of children the respondent considered ideal, the

number he wanted to have, and when he expected his next

child to be born.

15. Household chores

Young Men. The 1981 survey collected information on the

total number of hours per week the respondent usually spent

performing household chores and the frequency with which

he performed specific tasks such as cooking, washing laundry, grocery shopping, or caring for young children.

Data files and documentation

The NLS of Older Men (1966–90) and the NLS of Young Men

(1966–81) data set contains the longitudinal record of each

respondent, as well as information from the 1968 school survey. Included are: (1) Raw responses to the questions administered during the 1966–90 surveys of Older Men and the

1966–81 surveys of Young Men; (2) a series of edited and

created variables based on these raw responses; (3) selected

demographic, household, and residential data provided by

the Census Bureau from its administrative records; (4) death

certificate data obtained in 1990 from State vital records departments (Older Men only); and (5) respondent- and schoolspecific information gathered during the separately

administered 1968 survey of the high schools attended by

respondents in the Young Men cohort.

Like those for the other NLS cohorts, the Older and

Young Men data set is available for download at the http://

www.bls.gov/nls Web site. The files include documentation
112 CHAPTER 6: NLS OF OLDER AND YOUNG MEN

and are accompanied by search and extraction software that

enables users to easily peruse, select, and extract variables.

Chapter 8 provides more technical information on the NLS

data format and extraction software, as well as descriptions

of supplementary documentation items available for the NLS

of Older and Young Men.

References

Bradburn, Norman M. The Structure of Psychological WellBeing. Chicago: Aldine Publishing Co., 1969.

Parnes, Herbert S., ed. “The NLS Older Male Sample Revisited: A Unique Data Base for Gerontological Research.

A Description of the Data Base and Illustrative Tables.”

Columbus, OH: Center for Human Resource Research,

The Ohio State University, 1992.

Pfeiffer, Eric, M.D. “A Short Portable Mental Status Questionnaire for the Assessment of Organic Brain Deficit in

Elderly Patients.” Journal of the American Geriatrics

Society 23,10 (October 1975): 433–41.

Radloff, Lenore Sawyer. “The CES-D Scale: A Self-Report

Depression Scale for Research in the General Population.” Applied Psychological Measurement 1,3 (Summer 1977): 385–401.

Rhoton, Patricia. “Attrition and The National Longitudinal

Surveys of Labor Market Experience: Avoidance, Control and Correction.” Columbus, OH: Center for Human

Resource Research, The Ohio State University, 1984.

Rotter, Julian B. “Generalized Expectancies for Internal vs.

External Control of Reinforcements.” Psychological

Monographs 80,1 (1966): 1–28.

Selected variables by cohort and year: Older

and Young Men

Tables 6.4 and 6.5 depict selected variables from the main

data files of the NLS of Older and Young Men. The top row

of the tables lists the years in which the men have been

surveyed; the first column gives some of the variables that

have been collected. An asterisk (*) indicates that information for the designated variable was obtained for the cohort

in the year indicated. “R” used in variable descriptions stands

for “respondent.” Users should be aware that, in some instances, the variable descriptions in the tables represent a

group of questions and not single response items. In 1990,

the interviews of widows of the original Older Men respondents included questions about the respondent and also

about the situation of the widow; both sets of questions are

reflected in the table.
CHAPTER 6: NLS OF OLDER AND YOUNG MEN 113

Table 6.4. Selected Older Men variables by survey year: Respondents ages 45 to 59 in 1966 

Variable 66 67 68 69 71 73 75 76 78 80 81 83 90 90

widow

90 widow 

report on 

spouse 

I. LABOR MARKET EXPERIENCE VARIABLES 

A. Current labor force and employment status 

 Survey week labor force and employment status * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 

 Hours worked in survey week * * * * * * * * 

 Weeks worked (time frames vary) * * * * * * * * * * * * * 

 Usual hours worked during weeks worked * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 

 Weeks unemployed (time frames vary) * * * * * * * * * * * * * 

 Spells of unemployment in past year * * * * 

 Weeks out of labor force (time frames vary) * * * * * * * * * * * * * 

B. Characteristics of current or last job 

 Occupation, industry, class of worker * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 

 Start date and stop date * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 

 Hours per week usually worked * * * * * * * * * * * 

 Hourly rate of pay * * * * * * * * * * * 

 Commuting time, costs * * 

 Covered by collective bargaining * * * * 

 Is R union member * * * * 

 Job satisfaction * 

Years, weeks, or hours widow worked between 

R’s last interview and R’s death * 

Years, weeks, or hours widow worked since R’s 

death * 

C. Work experience prior to initial survey 

Occupation, industry, class of worker, hours per 

week, start date, stop date, and reason for 

leaving both first job and longest job since 

leaving school 

* 

D. Work experience since previous survey 

Occupation, industry, class of worker, hours per 

week, start date, stop date, and reason for 

leaving intervening jobs (details vary) 

 * * * * * * * * 

Interfirm mobility (details vary) * * * * * * * * * * * 

II. HUMAN CAPITAL AND OTHER SOCIOECONOMIC VARIABLES 

A. Early formative influences 

Nationality * 

Type of residence at age 15 * 

Person(s) R lived with at age 15 * 

Occupation of head of household when R was 15 * 

Highest grade completed by father * 
114 CHAPTER 6: NLS OF OLDER AND YOUNG MEN

Table 6.4. Selected Older Men variables by survey year: Respondents ages 45 to 59 in 1966 

Variable 66 67 68 69 71 73 75 76 78 80 81 83 90 90

widow

90 widow 

report on 

spouse 

If R lived with mother at age 15, did she work for 

pay

 * 

Foreign language spoken in home when R was 

15 * 

B. Migration 

 Years at current residence * * 

 Comparison of birthplace to current residence * 

 Geographic mobility (details vary) * * * * * * * 

 Part-year residence * 

C. Education 

 Highest grade completed * * 

 High school curriculum * 

College (year last attended, earned degree, 

highest degree received) * 

D. Training outside regular school 

 Has R taken * * * * * * 

 Type of training * * * * * * 

 Sponsor of training * * * * * 

 Duration * * * * * * 

 Hours per week attended * * * * * 

 Did R complete * * * * * * 

 Reason decided to take * * * * * 

 Does R use training on current job * * * * * * 

E. Health and physical condition 

 Self-rating of health * * * * * * * 

 Comparison of R’s condition with past * * * * * * * 

 Attitude toward health condition * * * * * * 

 Does health limit work * * * * * * * * * * * 

 Duration of health limitations * * * * * * 

Uses glasses, hearing aid, other special 

equipment * 

Problematic activities and working conditions * * * * 

Types of special health problems in past 12 

months * 

 Medical care (eligibility for insurance benefits) * 

Type and cost of health insurance coverage for R 

and for his wife * 

Accidents (on-the-job, how, when) * 
CHAPTER 6: NLS OF OLDER AND YOUNG MEN 115

Table 6.4. Selected Older Men variables by survey year: Respondents ages 45 to 59 in 1966 

Variable 66 67 68 69 71 73 75 76 78 80 81 83 90 90

widow

90 widow 

report on 

spouse 

Are R and his wife able to go outdoors, use 

public transportation, or do personal care without 

help 

 * * * * 

Assistance needed by R and his wife in daily 

living * 

Height, weight * * 

Does wife’s health limit her work * * * * * * * 

 Can wife go outdoors without help * 

 Duration of wife’s limitations * * * * * * 

 Does health of family members limit R’s work * 

 Does health of wife limit R’s work * * * * 

R ever smoked cigarettes, age at first and last 

use, quantity smoked per day * * 

Frequency and quantity of alcohol consumed by 

R during last 12 months of life and during adult 

life 

 * * 

Use and frequency of use of medical care 

(hospitalization, nursing home, or doctors’ care) 

during past 12 months (or prior to death) 

 * * 

 R ill before death and, if so, length of illness * 

Widow provided nursing care for R, time 

required, impact on widow’s employment status * 

 Parties responsible for R’s medical expenses * 

Total cost of medical expenses in year before 

death * 

 Evaluation of health cost burdens in past year * 

 Main cause of R’s death * 

F. Marital and family characteristics 

 Marital status * * * * * * * * * * * * * 

 Marital history (details vary) * * * * 

 Number of dependents * * * * * * * * * * * * 

 Life status of R’s and R’s wife’s parents * * * * * * 

Number and ages of children in household * * * * * * * * * * * * * 

Last household composition (relationship to R 

and his widow, age, highest grade attended, 

weeks worked, hours per week worked, 

occupation) 

 * * 

Family members in household (relationship to R, 

sex, age, enrollment status, employment status) * * * * * * * * * * * * * 

Unrelated household members (relationship to R, 

sex, age, enrollment status, employment status, 

reason living together) 

 * * * * 

 Frequency of contact with children * * 
116 CHAPTER 6: NLS OF OLDER AND YOUNG MEN

Table 6.4. Selected Older Men variables by survey year: Respondents ages 45 to 59 in 1966 

Variable 66 67 68 69 71 73 75 76 78 80 81 83 90 90

widow

90 widow 

report on 

spouse 

Wife’s work experience (longest job, retirement 

expectations and plans) * 

G. Financial characteristics 

 Total net family assets * * * * * * * 

 Total family income * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 

Income from farm or business * * * * * * * * * * * * * 

 Wage or salary income * * * * * * * * * * * * * 

 Unemployment compensation income * * * * * * * * * 

Income from supplemental unemployment 

benefits * * * * 

 Income from rent, interest, or dividends * * * * * * * * * * * * * 

 Public assistance income * * * * * * * * * * * * * 

 Disability income * * * * * * * * 

 SSI income * * * * * * * 

 Total market value of Food Stamps received * * * * * * * * * * * 

 Social Security income, pension income * * * * * * * * * * * * * 

 Insurance income * 

Amount of financial assistance received from 

others * * * * * * 

 Income from other sources * * * * * * * * * * * * * 

 Sources and amounts of widow’s death benefits * 

 Evaluation of overall financial situation * * 

H. Military service 

 Dates of service * 

I. Attitudes/perspectives 

 How does R feel about job * * * * * * * * * * 

Evaluation of total work career * 

 What R likes best and least about job * * * * 

Would R continue to work if had enough money 

to live on * * 

What is more important:, high wages or liking 

work * 

 Rotter Internal-External Locus of Control score * * * * 

Attitude toward women working * * 

 Attitude toward R’s marriage * 

 Attitudes toward selected aspects of life * * * * * * 

 Pfeiffer cognitive functioning scale * * 

 CES-Depression Scale * 

 Bradburn Affect Balance Scale * * * 
CHAPTER 6: NLS OF OLDER AND YOUNG MEN 117

Table 6.4. Selected Older Men variables by survey year: Respondents ages 45 to 59 in 1966 

Variable 66 67 68 69 71 73 75 76 78 80 81 83 90 90

widow

90 widow 

report on 

spouse 

Discrimination (R ever experienced, type, way in 

which experienced) * * * 

Has R progressed, held own, or moved 

backward * * 

Have job pressures increased, decreased, or 

remained the same * * 

J. Retirement 

 Leisure activities * * * 

 Expected age of retirement * * * * * * * * * * * * 

 R’s plans after retirement * * * * * * * * 

 Compulsory retirement plan * * * * * * * * * 

Timing of retirement (reason retired, did 

employer encourage, would R continue to work if 

allowed) 

 * * * * * * 

 R ever retired and, if so, year retired * * 

 Attitudes toward retirement * * * * * * * 

 Wife’s attitude toward R’s retirement * 

 Friends’ attitude toward R’s retirement * 

Characteristics of current employer’s pension 

plan * * 

 Amount of expected retirement income * * * 

Use of various community services in past 12 

months * 

Type and frequency of contact and geographic 

proximity of R to children, other relatives, friends * 

 Automobile usage of R and spouse * 

To whom R would turn for financial or other help * 

 Geographic mobility since retirement * * 

 Retirement preparation course taken * 

K. Hypothetical job offer 

 Would R accept * * * * * * * * * * 

 Hours per week would work * * * * * * * 

Rate of pay, kind of work required to accept * * * * * * * * * * 

L. Volunteer work 

 Has R done any volunteer work * * 

 Number of weeks and hours per week performed * * 

III. ENVIRONMENTAL VARIABLES 

A. Residence 

 South or non-South * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 

 Does R live in SMSA * * * * * * * * * * * * 
118 CHAPTER 6: NLS OF OLDER AND YOUNG MEN

Table 6.4. Selected Older Men variables by survey year: Respondents ages 45 to 59 in 1966 

Variable 66 67 68 69 71 73 75 76 78 80 81 83 90 90

widow

90 widow 

report on 

spouse 

 Mover or nonmover status * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 

 Comparison of State, county, SMSA * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 

B. Characteristics 

 Size of local area labor force * * * * * * * * * * * * 

 Local area unemployment rate * * * * * * * * * * * * 
CHAPTER 6: NLS OF OLDER AND YOUNG MEN 119

Table 6.5. Selected Young Men variables by survey year: Respondents ages 14 to 24 in 1966 

Variable 66 67 68 69 70 71 73 75 76 78 80 81

I. LABOR MARKET EXPERIENCE VARIABLES 

A. Current labor force and employment status 

 Survey week labor force and employment status * * * * * * * * * * * * 

 Hours worked in survey week * * * * * * * * 

 Weeks worked (time frames vary) * * * * * * * * * * * * 

 Usual hours worked during weeks worked * * * * * * * * 

 Weeks unemployed, out of labor force (time frames vary) * * * * * * * * * * * * 

 Spells of unemployment in past year * * * * * * * * 

B. Characteristics of current or last job 

 Occupation, industry, class of worker * * * * * * * * * * * * 

 Start date and stop date * * * * * * * * * * * * 

 Hours per week usually worked * * * * * * * * * * * 

 Hourly rate of pay * * * * * * * * * * * * 

 Commuting time, costs * * * * * 

 Covered by collective bargaining * * * * * * * 

 Is R union member * * * * * * * 

 Job Characteristics Inventory * 

 Fringe benefits available * * 

 Shift worked * * * * 

C. Work experience prior to initial survey 

 Occupation and industry of job held during last year in high school * 

Occupation, industry, class of worker, start date, stop date, and reason 

for leaving first job after leaving school (details vary) * 

D. Work experience since previous survey 

Occupation, industry, class of worker, hours per week, start date, stop 

date, and reason for leaving intervening jobs (details vary) * * * * * * * 

 Interfirm mobility (details vary) * * * * * * * * * * * 

II. HUMAN CAPITAL AND OTHER SOCIOECONOMIC VARIABLES 

A. Early formative influences 

 Nationality * 

 Type of residence at age 14 and age 18 * 

 Person(s) R lived with at age 14 * 

 Occupation of head of household when R was 14 * 

 Highest grade completed by father and mother * 

Were magazines, newspapers, library cards available in home when R was

age 14 * 

 Parental encouragement to continue education past high school * * * 

B. Migration 

Years at current residence * 
120 CHAPTER 6: NLS OF OLDER AND YOUNG MEN

Table 6.5. Selected Young Men variables by survey year: Respondents ages 14 to 24 in 1966 

Variable 66 67 68 69 70 71 73 75 76 78 80 81

Comparison of birthplace to current residence * 

Geographic mobility * * * * * * * * 

C. Education 

Current enrollment status * * * * * * * * * * * * 

Highest grade completed * * * * * * * * * * * * 

Reason stopped attending high school * * * * * * 

Is current school public * * * * * * * * 

High school curriculum * * * * * * * 

High school subjects enjoyed most and least * 

High school activities * 

Index of high school quality * 

Index of college quality * * 

College (attended, highest degree received, field of study) * * * * * * 

College tuition (full-time amount) * * * * * * * 

Financial aid in college (types and amount) * * * * * * * * * 

Reason R left college * * * * * 

Reason R’s college plans have changed * * * * * 

D. Training outside regular school 

Any training or educational program (did R take, current enrollment 

status, type, sponsor, duration, hours per week attended) (details vary) * * * * * * * * * * * * 

 Does R use additional training on current job * * * * * * * 

E. Health and physical condition 

 Does health limit work * * * * * * * * * * 

 Does health limit school activity * * * * * * 

 Duration of health limitations * * * * * * 

 Problematic activities and working conditions * * * 

 Accidents (on-the-job, how, when) * 

 Comparison of R’s condition with past * * * 

Is R able to go outdoors, use public transportation, or do personal care 

without help * * * 

 Does wife’s health limit her work; duration of wife’s limitations * * * * * * 

Does others’ health limit R’s work * * * 

F. Marital and family characteristics 

 Marital status * * * * * * * * * * * * 

 Marital history * * * * 

Number of dependents * * * * * * * * * * * * 

 Parents: Life status, weeks worked, full-time, occupation * * * * 

 Number and ages of children in household * * * * * * * * * * * * 

 Number of children R expects to have, and number he considers ideal * 
CHAPTER 6: NLS OF OLDER AND YOUNG MEN 121

Table 6.5. Selected Young Men variables by survey year: Respondents ages 14 to 24 in 1966 

Variable 66 67 68 69 70 71 73 75 76 78 80 81

Family members: Relationship to R, age, sex, education, employment 

status * * * * * * * * * * * * 

 Unrelated household members: Relationship to R, sex, age * * * 

 Household activities (responsibility for, hours per week spent on) * 

G. Financial characteristics 

 Total net family assets * * * * * 

 Total family income * * * * * * * * * * * * 

 Income from farm or business * * * * * * * * * * * * 

 Wages or salary income * * * * * * * * * * * * 

 Unemployment compensation income * * * * * * * * * * * * 

 Income from supplemental unemployment benefits * * 

 Disability income * 

 Rental income * 

 Interest income * 

 Total market value of Food Stamps received * * * 

 Income from AFDC/TANF * 

 Income from public assistance * * * 

 Amount of financial assistance received from others * * * * * * * * * * 

 Income from other sources * * * * * * * * * * * * 

H. Military service 

 Ever served in * * * * * * * * 

 Branch of Armed Forces served in * * * * * 

 Months spent in Armed Forces * * * * * 

 Military occupation held longest * * * * * 

 How entered Armed Forces * * * * * 

 Did military service help/hurt career * * * 

 Rank held in Armed Forces * * * * 

Primary training received (did R complete, duration, type, used on job) * * * * * 

GI (VA) benefits (ever used, type) * * 

 Draft (classification, reason rejected) * * * * * 

 Disability (discharged for, service-connected, compensation rating) * * 

I. Attitudes/perspectives 

 How does R feel about job * * * * * * * * * 

What R likes best and least about job * * * * * * * * * 

 Facet-Specific Job Satisfaction Index * * 

 Would R continue to work if he had enough money to live on * * * 

 What is more important:, high wages or liking work * 

 Would R like to receive more education or training * * * * * * * 

 Educational goal and expected education * * * * * 
122 CHAPTER 6: NLS OF OLDER AND YOUNG MEN

Table 6.5. Selected Young Men variables by survey year: Respondents ages 14 to 24 in 1966 

Variable 66 67 68 69 70 71 73 75 76 78 80 81

 What kind of work would R like to be doing at age 30 * * * * * * * * * 

 Knowledge of World of Work score * 

 Rotter Internal-External Locus of Control score * * * 

 IQ score * 

 Attitude toward women working * * * 

 Discrimination (ever experienced, type) * * 

 Has R progressed, held his own, or moved backward * * 

 Have job pressures increased, decreased, or remained the same * 

J. Hypothetical job offer 

 Would R accept * * * * * * * * * * 

 Kind of work required to accept * * * * * * * * * * 

 Hours per week would work * * * * * * * * * * 

 Rate of pay required to accept * * * * * * * * * * 

III. ENVIRONMENTAL VARIABLES 

A. Residence 

 South or non-South * * * * * * * * * * * * 

 Does R live in SMSA * * * * * * * * * * * * 

 Mover or nonmover status * * * * * * * * * * * * 

 Comparison of State, county, SMSA * * * * * * * * * * * * 

B. Characteristics 

 Size of local labor force * * * * * * * * * * * * 

 Local area unemployment rate * * * * * * * * * * * * 

 Accredited college in local area * * * 
CHAPTER 7: A SAMPLER OF NLS RESEARCH 123

A SAMPLER OF NLS RESEARCH

Since the late 1960s, the National Longitudinal Surveys(NLS) have served as a rich source of data for researchers in a broad range of disciplines. The first journal article

using NLS data appeared in the November 1969 issue of the

Bureau of Labor Statistics’ Monthly Labor Review. Coauthored by Herbert S. Parnes and Ruth S. Spitz, the study

examined labor mobility among respondents in the NLS Older

Men and Young Men cohorts.

Since that time, nearly 400 different professional journals have reviewed and published some 1,700 NLS-based

research papers. In addition, more than 2,000 working papers, government reports, monographs, dissertations, and

presentations have used NLS data, making the NLS a frequently used source of data for both academic and policyoriented research.

Although most of the academic research articles have

appeared in economics and sociology journals, NLS data

also are used by researchers in other disciplines such as

medicine, psychology, education, law, political science, and

geography. NLS-based research also appears in special-interest journals that focus on topics such as aging, children

and adolescents, the family, careers and occupations, substance use, and criminology.

This chapter presents a sampler of NLS-based journal

articles published over the past 5 years, grouped by field of

study. The range of categories reflects the breadth of research domains currently using NLS data. A bibliography of

annotated citations for all known NLS research is available

on the Internet at http://www.nlsbibliography.org. Finally,

bibliographies of research based on NLSY79 fertility,

childcare, and child development data are detailed in chapter

10.

AGING

Gustman, Alan L. and Steinmeier, Thomas L. “Retirement in

Dual-Career Families: A Structural Model.” Journal of

Labor Economics 18,3 (July 2000): 503–45.

Valentine, Sean; Valentine, W. Robert; and Dick, James. “Intrinsic and Extrinsic Motivators and Older Employees’

Attitudes towards Their Current Jobs.” Perceptual and

Motor Skills 87,2 (October 1998): 407–10.

ALCOHOLISM AND DRUG USE

Buster, Maury A. and Rodgers, Joseph Lee. “Genetic and

Environmental Influences on Alcohol Use: DF Analysis

of NLSY Kinship Data.” Journal of Biosocial Science

32,2 (April 2000): 177–89.

Caces, M. F.; Harford, Thomas C.; and Aitken, S. S. “Prescription and Non-Prescription Drug Use: A Longitudinal Study.” Journal of Substance Abuse 10,2 (1998):

115–26.

Curran, Patrick J.; Muthen, Bengt O.; and Harford, Thomas

C. “The Influence of Changes in Marital Status on Developmental Trajectories of Alcohol Use in Young

Adults.” Journal of Studies on Alcohol 59,6 (November 1998): 647–58.

Desimone, Jeffrey. “Is Marijuana a Gateway Drug?” Eastern Economic Journal 24,2 (Spring 1998): 149–63.

Dooley, David and Prause, Joann. “Underemployment and

Alcohol Misuse in the National Longitudinal Survey of

Youth.” Journal of Studies on Alcohol 59,6 (November

1998): 669–80.

Glied, Sherry. “Youth Tobacco Control: Reconciling Theory

and Empirical Evidence.” Journal of Health Economics

21,1 (January 2002): 117–35.

Harford, Thomas C. and Muthen, Bengt O. “Adolescent and

Young Adult Antisocial Behavior and Adult Alcohol Use

Disorders: A Fourteen-Year Prospective Follow-Up in a

National Survey.” Journal of Studies on Alcohol 61,4

(July 2000): 524–28.

Jennison, Karen M. and Johnson, Kenneth A. “Alcohol

Dependence in Adult Children of Alcoholics: Longitudinal Evidence of Early Risk.” Journal of Drug Education 28,1 (1998): 19–37.

Kaestner, Robert. “A Note on the Effect of Minimum Drinking Age Laws on Youth Alcohol Consumption.” Con-
124 CHAPTER 7: A SAMPLER OF NLS RESEARCH

temporary Economic Policy 18,3 (July 2000): 315–25.

Koch, Steven F. and Ribar, David C. “A Siblings Analysis of

the Effects of Alcohol Consumption Onset on Educational Attainment.” Contemporary Economic Policy

19,2 (April 2001): 162–74.

Muthen, Bengt O. and Muthen, Linda K. “The Development

of Heavy Drinking and Alcohol-Related Problems from

Ages 18 to 37 in a U. S. National Sample.” Journal of

Studies on Alcohol 61,2 (March 2000): 290–300.

Oldham, Greg R. and Gordon, Benjamin I. “Job Complexity

and Employee Substance Use: The Moderating Effects

of Cognitive Ability.” Journal of Health and Social

Behavior 40,3 (September 1999): 290–306.

Pacula, Rosalie Liccardo. “Does Increasing the Beer Tax

Reduce Marijuana Consumption?” Journal of Health

Economics 17,5 (October 1998): 557–85.

Veazie, Mark A. and Smith, Gordon S. “Heavy Drinking, Alcohol Dependence, and Injuries at Work among Young

Workers in the United States Labor Force.” Alcoholism: Clinical and Experimental Research 24,12 (December 2000): 1811–19.

CHILDREN AND ADOLESCENTS

Argys, Laura M.; Peters, H. Elizabeth; Brooks-Gunn, Jeanne;

and Smith, Judith R. “The Impact of Child Support on

Cognitive Outcomes of Young Children.” Demography

35,2 (May 1998): 159–73.

Averett, Susan L.; Gennetian, Lisa Anoush; and Peters, H.

Elizabeth. “Patterns and Determinants of Paternal Child

Care during a Child’s First Three Years of Life.” Marriage and Family Review 29,2-3 (2000): 115–36.

Berry, E. Helen; Shillington, Audrey M.; Peak, Terry; and

Hohman, Melinda M. “Multi-Ethnic Comparison of Risk

and Protective Factors for Adolescent Pregnancy.”

Child and Adolescent Social Work Journal 17,2 (April

2000): 79–96.

Blau, David M. “The Effect of Child Care Characteristics on

Child Development.” The Journal of Human Resources

34,4 (Fall 1999): 786–822.

Cleveland, Hobart Harrington; Jacobson, Kristen C.; Lipinski,

John J.; and Rowe, David C. “Genetic and Shared Environmental Contributions to the Relationship between

the Home Environment and Child and Adolescent

Achievement.” Intelligence 28, 1 (2000): 69–86.

Driscoll, Anne K. and Moore, Kristin A. “The Relationship

of Welfare Receipt to Child Outcomes.” Journal of Family and Economic Issues 20,1 (Spring 1999): 85–113.

Eamon, Mary Keegan. “Structural Model of the Effects of

Poverty on Externalizing and Internalizing Behaviors of

Four- to Five-Year-Old Children.” Social Work Research

24,3 (September 2000): 143–54.

Fischhoff, Baruch; Parker, Andrew M.; Bruine De Bruin,

Wändi; Downs, Julie; Palmgren, Claire; Dawes, Robyn;

and Manski, Charles F. “Teen Expectations for Significant Life Events.” Public Opinion Quarterly 64,2 (Summer 2000): 189–205.

Griesler, P. C. and Kandel, Denise B. “Ethnic Differences in

Correlates of Adolescent Cigarette Smoking.” Journal

of Adolescent Health 23,3 (September 1998): 167–80.

Guo, Guang. “The Timing of the Influences of Cumulative

Poverty on Children’s Cognitive Ability and Achievement.” Social Forces 77,1 (September 1998): 257–87.

Hart, Daniel; Atkins, Robert; and Ford, Debra. “Family Influences on the Formation of Moral Identity in Adolescence: Longitudinal Analyses.” Journal of Moral

Education 28,3 (September 1999): 375–86.

Harvey, Elizabeth. “Short-Term and Long-Term Effects of

Early Parental Employment on Children of the National

Longitudinal Survey of Youth.” Developmental Psychology 35,2 (March 1999): 445–59.

Heymann, S. Jody and Earle, Alison. “The Impact of Welfare

Reform on Parents’ Ability to Care for Their Children’s

Health.” American Journal of Public Health 89,4 (April

1999): 502–5.

Hockaday, Catheryn Michele; Crase, Sedahlia Jasper; Shelley,

Mack C.; and Stockdale, Dahlia F. “A Prospective Study

of Adolescent Pregnancy.” Journal of Adolescence 23,4

(August 2000): 423–38.

Hofferth, Sandra L. and Reid, Lori Lynn. “Early Childbearing

and Children’s Achievement Over Time.” Perspectives

on Sexual and Reproductive Health 34, 1 (January/February 2002): 41–49.

Jekielek, Susan M. “Parental Conflict, Marital Disruption

and Children’s Emotional Well-Being.” Social Forces

76,3 (March 1998): 905–36.
CHAPTER 7: A SAMPLER OF NLS RESEARCH 125

Kruse, Douglas L. and Mahony, Douglas. “Illegal Child Labor in the United States: Prevalence and Characteristics.” Industrial and Labor Relations Review 54,1

(October 2000): 17–40.

Levine, Phillip B. and Zimmerman, David J. “Children’s Welfare Exposure and Subsequent Development.” Human

Resources Abstracts 35, 4 (December 2000).

Ludwig, Jens Otto. “Information and Inner City Educational

Attainment.” Economics of Education Review 18,1

(February 1999): 17–30.

McCulloch, Andrew; Wiggins, Richard D.; Joshi, Heather;

and Sachdev, Darshan. “Internalizing and Externalizing

Children’s Behaviour Problems in Britain and the US:

Relationships to Family Resources.” Children & Society 14 (2000): 368–83.

McLoyd, Vonnie C. and Smith, Julia. “Physical Discipline

and Behavior Problems in African American, European

American, and Hispanic Children: Emotional Support as

a Moderator.” Journal of Marriage and the Family

64,1 (February 2002): 40–53.

Morrison, Donna Ruane and Coiro, Mary Jo. “Parental Conflict and Marital Disruption: Do Children Benefit When

High-Conflict Marriages Are Dissolved?” Journal of

Marriage and the Family 61,3 (August 1999): 626–37.

Padilla, Yolanda Chavez; Boardman, Jason D.; Hummer, Robert A.; and Espitia, Marilyn. “Is the Mexican American

‘Epidemiologic Paradox’ Advantage at Birth Maintained

through Early Childhood?” Social Forces 80,3 (March

2002): 1101–23.

Strauss, Richard S. “Childhood Obesity and Self-Esteem.”

Pediatrics 105,1 (January 2000): N1–N5.

Waldfogel, Jane. “Child Welfare Research: How Adequate

Are the Data?” Children and Youth Services Review

22,9-10 (2000), 705–41.

Yoshikawa, Hirokazu. “Welfare Dynamics, Support Services,

Mothers’ Earnings, and Child Cognitive Development:

Implications for Contemporary Welfare Reform.” Child

Development 70,3 (May–June 1999): 779–801.

CRIMINOLOGY

Arum, R. and Beattie, I. R. “High School Experience and the

Risk of Adult Incarceration.” Criminology 37,3 (August 1999): 515–39.

Butcher, Kristin F. and Piehl, Anne Morrison. “Cross-City

Evidence on the Relationship between Immigration and

Crime.” Journal of Policy Analysis and Management

17,3 (Summer 1998): 457–93.

Glaeser, Edward L. and Sacerdote, Bruce. “Why Is There

More Crime in Cities?” Journal of Political Economy

107,6, part 2 (December 1999): S225–S258.

Gould, Eric D.; Weinberg, Bruce A.; and Mustard, David B.

“Crime Rates and Local Labor Market Opportunities in

the United States: 1979–1997.” Review of Economics

and Statistics 84,1 (February 2002): 45–61.

Grogger, Jeffrey. “Market Wages and Youth Crime.” Journal of Labor Economics 16,4 (October 1998): 756–91.

Kowaleski-Jones, Lori. “Staying Out of Trouble: Community Resources and Problem Behavior among High-Risk

Adolescents.” Journal of Marriage and the Family

62,2 (May 2000): 449–64.

Tanner, Julian; Davies, Scott; and O’Grady, Bill. “Whatever

Happened to Yesterday’s Rebels? Longitudinal Effects

of Youth Delinquency on Education and Employment.”

Social Problems 46,2 (May 1999): 250–74.

ECONOMICS

Alon, Sigal; Donahoe, Debra; and Tienda, Marta. “The Effects of Early Work Experience on Young Women’s Labor Force Attachment.” Social Forces 79,3 (March 2001):

1005–34.

Altonji, Joseph G. and Dunn, Thomas Albert. “An

Intergenerational Model of Wages, Hours, and Earnings.” Journal of Human Resources 35,2 (Spring 2000):

221–58.

Bartel, Ann P. and Sicherman, Nachum. “Technological

Change and Wages: An Interindustry Analysis.” Journal of Political Economy 107,2 (April 1999): 285–325.

Bernhardt, Annette; Morris, Martina; Handcock, Mark S.;

and Scott, Marc A. “Trends in Job Instability and Wages

for Young Adult Men.” Journal of Labor Economics

17,4, part 2 (October 1999): S65–S90.

Bowlus, Audra Jann. “U.S.-Canadian Unemployment Rate

and Wage Differences among Young, Low-Skilled Males

in the 1980s.” Canadian Journal of Economics/Revue

canadienne d’economique 31,2 (May/mai 1998): 437–

64.
126 CHAPTER 7: A SAMPLER OF NLS RESEARCH

Bratsberg, Bernt and Terrell, Dek. “Experience, Tenure, and

Wage Growth of Young Black and White Men.” The

Journal of Human Resources 33,3 (Summer 1998): 658–

82.

Buchinsky, Moshe and Hunt, Jennifer. “Wage Mobility in

the United States.” Review of Economics and Statistics

81,3 (August 1999): 351–68.

Cancian, Maria; Haveman, Robert H.; Kaplan, Thomas;

Meyer, Daniel R.; and Wolfe, Barbara L. “Work, Earnings, and Well-Being after Welfare: What Do We Know?”

Focus 20,2 (Spring 1999): 22–25.

Cancian, Maria and Meyer, Daniel R. “Work After Welfare:

Women’s Work Effort, Occupation, and Economic WellBeing.” Social Work Research 24,2 (June 2000): 69–86.

Cobb-Clark, Deborah A. and Dunlop, Yvonne. “The Role of

Gender in Job Promotions.” Monthly Labor Review

122,12 (December 1999): 32–38.

Coff, Russell W. “How Buyers Cope with Uncertainty When

Acquiring Firms in Knowledge-Intensive Industries:

Caveat Emptor.” Organization Science 10,2 (March/

April 1999): 144–61.

Davila, Alberto; Pagan, Jose A.; and Grau, Montserrat

Viladrich. “The Impact of IRCA on the Job Opportunities and Earnings of Mexican-American and HispanicAmerican Workers. (Immigration Reform and Control

Act).” International Migration Review 32,1 (Spring

1998): 79–95.

Dougherty, Christopher. “Occupational Breaks, Their Incidence and Implications for Training Provision: CaseStudy Evidence from the National Longitudinal Survey

of Youth.” International Journal of Manpower 20,5

(1999): 309–23.

Dunn, Thomas and Holtz-Eakin, Douglas. “Financial Capital, Human Capital, and the Transition to Self-Employment: Evidence from Intergenerational Links.” Journal

of Labor Economics 18,2 (April 2000): 282–305.

Ewing, Bradley T. “Athletes and Work.” Economics Letters

59,1 (April 1998): 113–17.

Ewing, Bradley T. and Payne, James E. “The Trade-off between Supervision and Wages: Evidence of Efficiency

Wages from the NLSY.” Southern Economic Journal

66,2 (October 1999): 424–32.

Ferber, Marianne A. and Waldfogel, Jane. “The Long-Term

Consequences of Nontraditional Employment.”

Monthly Labor Review 121,5 (May, 1998): 3–12.

Francesconi, Marco. “Labour Force Transitions among

Married Women in the USA.” Labour 13,4 (December

1999): 775–96.

Ganzach,Yoav and Pazy, Asya. “Within-Occupation Sources

of Variance in Incumbent Perception of Job Complexity.” Journal of Occupational and Organizational Psychology 74,1 (March 2001): 95–108.

Gardecki, Rosella and Neumark, David B. “Order from Chaos?

The Effects of Early Labor Market Experiences on Adult

Labor Market Outcomes.” Industrial and Labor Relations Review 51,2 (January 1998): 299–322.

Goldsmith, Arthur H.; Veum, Jonathan R.; and Darity Jr., William. “Working Hard for the Money? Efficiency Wages

and Worker Effort.” Journal of Economic Psychology

21,4 (August 2000): 351–85.

Grossberg, Adam J. “The Effect of Formal Training on Employment Duration.” Industrial Relations 39,4 (October 2000): 578–99.

Hamermesh, Daniel S. “The Changing Distribution of Job

Satisfaction.” Journal of Human Resources 36,1 (Winter 2001): 1–30.

Handcock, Mark S.; Morris, Martina; and Bernhardt, Annette.

“Comparing Earnings Inequality Using Two Major Surveys.” Monthly Labor Review 123,3 (March 2000): 48–

61.

Hayward, Mark D.; Friedman, Samantha; and Chen, Hsinmu.

“Career Trajectories and Older Men’s Retirement.” Journals of Gerontology, Series B, Psychological Sciences

and Social Sciences 53,2 (March 1998): S91–S103.

Hill, Elizabeth T. “Post-School-Age Training among Women:

Training Methods and Labor Market Outcomes at Older

Ages.” Economics of Education Review 20,2 (April

2001): 181–91.

Hirsch, Barry T. and Schumacher, Edward J. “Unions, Wages,

and Skills.” The Journal of Human Resources 33,1 (Winter 1998): 201–19.

Johnson, William R.; Kitamura, Yuichi; and Neal, Derek A.

“Evaluating a Simple Method for Estimating Black-White

Gaps in Median Wages.” The American Economic Re-
CHAPTER 7: A SAMPLER OF NLS RESEARCH 127

view 90,2 (May 2000): 339–43.

Keane, Michael P. and Wolpin, Kenneth I. “Eliminating Race

Differences in School Attainment and Labor Market

Success.” Journal of Labor Economics 18,4 (October

2000): 614–52.

Keith, Kristen K. and McWilliams, Abagail. “The Returns to

Mobility and Job Search by Gender.” Industrial and

Labor Relations Review 52,3 (April 1999): 460–77.

Kletzer, Lori G. “Job Displacement.” Journal of Economic

Perspectives 12,1 (Winter 1998): 115–36.

Knoke, David and Ishio, Yoshito. “The Gender Gap in Company Job Training.” Work and Occupations 25,2 (May

1998): 141–67.

Latimer, Melissa. “A Contextual Analysis of the Effects of

Gender and Place on Workers’ Incomes.” Sociological

Spectrum 20,3 (July-September 2000): 345–56.

Leigh, Duane E. and Gifford, Kirk D. “Workplace Transformation and Worker Upskilling: The Perspective of Individual Workers.” Industrial Relations 38,2 (April 1999):

174–91.

Lewis, Danielle and Terrell, Dek. “Experience, Tenure, and

the Perceptions of Employers.” Southern Economic

Journal 67,3 (January 2001): 578–97.

Light, Audrey L. and McGarry, Kathleen. “Job Change Patterns and the Wages of Young Men.” Review of Economics and Statistics 80,2 (May 1998): 276–86.

Loeb, Susanna and Corcoran, Mary. “Welfare, Work Experience, and Economic Self-Sufficiency.” Journal of Policy

Analysis and Management 20,1 (Winter 2001): 1–20.

Loewenstein, Mark A. and Spletzer, James R. “General and

Specific Training: Evidence and Implications.” Journal

of Human Resources 34,4 (Fall 1999): 710–33.

MacLeod, W. Bentley and Parent, Daniel. “Job Characteristics, Wages, and the Employment Contract.” Federal

Reserve Bank of St. Louis Review 81,3 (May/June 1999):

13–27.

Mitra, Aparna. “Cognitive Skills and Black-White Wages in

the United States Labor Market.” Journal of SocioEconomics 29,4 (2000): 389–401.

Mohanty, Madhu S. “Determination of Participation Decision, Hiring Decision, and Wages in a Double Selection

Framework: Male-Female Wage Differential in the U.S.

Labor Market Revisited.” Contemporary Economic

Policy 19,2 (April 2001): 197–212.

Mulligan, Casey B. “Galton versus the Human Capital Approach to Inheritance.” Journal of Political Economy

107,6, part 2 (December 1999): S184–S224.

Neal, Derek A. “The Complexity of Job Mobility among

Young Men.” Journal of Labor Economics 17,2 (April

1999): 237–61.

Oettinger, Gerald S. “Seasonal and Sectoral Patterns in Youth

Employment.” Monthly Labor Review 123,4 (April 2000):

6–12.

Parent, Daniel. “Industry-Specific Capital and the Wage Profile: Evidence from the National Longitudinal Survey of

Youth and the Panel Study of Income Dynamics.” Journal of Labor Economics 18,2 (April 2000): 306–23.

Pergamit, Michael R. and Veum, Jonathan R. “What Is a

Promotion?” Industrial and Labor Relations Review

52,4 (July 1999): 581–601.

Petterson, Stephen Mark. “Black-White Differences in Reservation Wages and Joblessness—A Replication.” The

Journal of Human Resources 33,3 (Summer 1998): 758–

70.

Polachek, Solomon W. and Robst, John Michael. “Employee

Labor Market Information: Comparing Direct World of

Work Measures of Workers’ Knowledge to Stochastic

Frontier Estimates.” Labour Economics 5,2 (June 1998):

231–42.

Reid, Lori Lynn. “Devaluing Women and Minorities: The

Effects of Race/Ethnic and Sex Composition of Occupations on Wage Levels.” Work and Occupations 25,4

(November 1998): 511–36. Special Issue on Social Inequality in the Workplace.

Rosenzweig, Mark R. and Wolpin, Kenneth I. “Natural ‘Natural Experiments’ in Economics.” Journal of Economic

Literature 38,4 (December 2000): 827–74.

Rothstein, Donna S. “Supervisory Status and Upper-Level

Supervisory Responsibilities: Evidence from the

NLSY79.” Industrial and Labor Relations Review 54,3

(April 2001): 663–80.

Sen, Bisakha. “How Important Is Anticipation of Divorce in
128 CHAPTER 7: A SAMPLER OF NLS RESEARCH

Married Women’s Labor Supply Decisions? An

Intercohort Comparison Using NLS Data.” Economics

Letters 67,2 (May 2000): 209–16.

Solberg, Eric J. “Using Occupational Preference in Estimating Market Wage Discrimination: The Case of the Gender Pay Gap.” The American Journal of Economics and

Sociology 58,1 (January 1999): 85–113.

Veum, Jonathan R. “Training, Wages, and the Human Capital Model.” Southern Economic Journal 65,3 (January

1999): 526–38.

Western, Bruce and Beckett, Katherine. “How Unregulated

is the U.S. Labor Market? The Penal System as a Labor

Market Institution.” American Journal of Sociology

104,4 (January 1999): 1030–60.

Williams, Donald R. “Consequences in Self-Employment for

Women and Men in the United States.” Labour Economics 7,5 (September 2000): 665–87.

Wunnava, Phanindra V. and Ewing, Bradley T. “Union-Nonunion Differentials and Establishment Size: Evidence

from the NLSY.” Journal of Labor Research 20,2 (Spring

1999): 177–83.

EDUCATION

Arkes, Jeremy. “What Do Educational Credentials Signal

and Why Do Employers Value Credentials?” Economics of Education Review 18,1 (February 1999): 133–41.

Barron, John M.; Ewing, Bradley T.; and Waddell, Glen R.

“The Effects of High School Athletic Participation on

Education and Labor Market Outcomes.” The Review

of Economics and Statistics 82,3 (August 2000): 409–

21.

Berends, Mark; Grissmer, David W.; Kirby, Sheila Nataraj;

and Williamson, Stephanie. “The Changing American

Family and Student Achievement Trends.” Research in

Sociology of Education and Socialization 12 (1999):

67–101.

Blackwell, Debra L. and McLaughlin, Diane K. “Do Rural

Youth Attain Their Educational Goals?” Rural Development Perspectives 13,3 (April 1999): 37–44.

Bratsberg, Bernt and Ragan, James F. Jr. “The Impact of

Host-Country Schooling on Earnings: A Study of Male

Immigrants in the United States.” Journal of Human

Resources 37,1 (Winter 2002): 63–105.

Broussard, C. Anne and Joseph, Alfred Louis. “Tracking: A

Form of Educational Neglect?” Social Work in Education 20,2 (April 1998): 110–20.

Cameron, Stephen V. and Heckman, James J. “The Dynamics

of Educational Attainment for Black, Hispanic, and White

Males.” Journal of Political Economy 109,3 (June

2001): 455–99.

Cawley, John; Heckman, James; and Vytlacil, Edward. “On

Policies to Reward the Value Added by Educators.”

Review of Economics and Statistics 81,4 (November

1999): 720–27.

Eamon, Mary Keegan. “Effects of Poverty on Mathematics

and Reading Achievement of Young Adolescents.”

Journal of Early Adolescence 22,1 (February 2002): 49–

74.

Ganzach,Yoav. “Parents’ Education, Cognitive Ability, Educational Expectations and Educational Attainment: Interactive Effects.” British Journal of Educational

Psychology 70,3 (September 2000): 419–41.

Ginther, Donna K. “Alternative Estimates of the Effect of

Schooling on Earnings.” Review of Economics and Statistics 82,1 (February 2000): 103–16.

Gratsberg, Bernt and Ragan, James F. “The Impact of HostCountry Schooling on Earnings.” Journal of Human

Resources 37,1 (Winter 2002): 63–105.

Hauser, Robert M. and Kuo, Hsiang-Hui Daphne. “Does the

Gender Composition of Sibships Affect Women’s Education Attainment?” The Journal of Human Resources

33,3 (Summer 1998): 644–57.

Heckman, James J. and Vytlacil, Edward. “Identifying the

Role of Cognitive Ability in Explaining the Level of and

Change in the Return to Schooling.” Review of Economics and Statistics 83,1 (February 2001): 1–12.

Hight, Joseph E. “Young Worker Participation in Post-School

Education and Training.” Monthly Labor Review 121,6

(June 1998): 14–21.

Hoxby, Caroline M. “Does Competition among Public

Schools Benefit Students and Taxpayers?” American

Economic Review 90,5 (December 2000): 1209–38.

Joseph, Alfred Louis. “The Impact of Tracking: An Examination of Outcomes.” Journal of Poverty 2,1 (1998): 1–21.
CHAPTER 7: A SAMPLER OF NLS RESEARCH 129

Light, Audrey L. “In-School Work Experience and the Returns to Schooling.” Journal of Labor Economics 19,1

(January 2001): 65–93.

Light, Audrey L. and Strayer, Wayne Earle. “From Bakke to

Hopwood: Does Race Affect Attendance and Completion?” Review of Economics and Statistics 84,1 (February 2002): 34–44.

Manski, Charles F. and Pepper, John V. “Monotone Instrumental Variables: With an Application to the Returns to

Schooling.” Econometrica 68,4 (July 2000): 997–1010.

Monks, James. “The Returns to Individual and College Characteristics: Evidence from the National Longitudinal

Survey of Youth.” Economics of Education Review 19,3

(June 2000): 279–89.

Murnane, Richard J.; Willett, John B.; and Boudett, Kathryn

Parker. “Do Male Dropouts Benefit from Obtaining a

GED, Postsecondary Education, and Training?” Evaluation Review 23,5 (October 1999): 475–503.

Murnane, Richard J.; Willett, John B.; and Tyler, John H.

“Who Benefits from Obtaining a GED? Evidence from

High School and Beyond.” Review of Economics and

Statistics 82,1 (February 2000): 23–37.

Myerson, Joel; Rank, Mark R.; Raines, Fredric Q.; and

Schnitzler, Mark A. “Race and General Cognitive Ability: The Myth of Diminishing Returns to Education.”

Psychological Science 9,2 (March 1998): 139–42.

Nixon, Lucia A. and Robinson, Michael D. “The Educational

Attainment of Young Women: Role Model Effects of

Female High School Faculty.” Demography 36,2 (May

1999): 185–94.

Parcel, Toby L. and Dufur, Mikaela J. “Capital at Home and at

School: Effects on Student Achievement.” Social

Forces 79,3 (March 2001): 881–911.

Rich, Lauren M. and Kim, Sun-Bin. “Patterns of Later Life

Education among Teenage Mothers.” Gender & Society 13,6 (December 1999): 798–817.

Sandefur, Gary D. and Wells, Thomas. “Does Family Structure Really Influence Educational Attainment?” Social

Science Research 28,4 (December 1999): 331–57.

FAMILY STUDIES

Argys, Laura M.; Averett, Susan L.; and Rees, Daniel I.

“Welfare Generosity, Pregnancies, and Abortions

among Unmarried Recipients.” Journal of Population

Economics 13,4 (2000): 569–94.

Argys, Laura M.; Peters, H. Elizabeth; and Waldman, Donald

M. “Can the Family Support Act Put Some Life Back

into Deadbeat Dads?” Journal of Human Resources

36,2 (Spring 2001): 226–52.

Baharudin, Rozumah and Luster, Tom. “Factors Related to

the Quality of the Home Environment and Children’s

Achievement.” Journal of Family Issues 19,4 (July 1998):

375–403.

Baydar, Nazli; Greek, April; and Gritz, R. Mark. “Young Mothers’ Time Spent at Work and Time Spent Caring for Children.” Journal of Family and Economic Issues 20,1

(Spring 1999): 61–84.

Blackburn, McKinley L. “Welfare Effects on the Marital

Decisions of Never-Married Mothers.” Journal of Human Resources 35,1 (Winter 2000): 116–42.

Blau, David M. and Robins, Philip K. “A Dynamic Analysis

of Turnover in Employment and Child Care.” Demography 35,1 (February 1998): 83–96.

Caputo, Richard K. “The Intergenerational Transmission of

Grandmother-Grandchild Co-Residency.” Journal of

Sociology and Social Welfare 28,1 (March 2001): 79–86.

Dickert-Conlin, Stacy and Chandra, Amitabh. “Taxes and

the Timing of Births.” Journal of Political Economy

107,2 (February 1999): 161–77.

Emery, Robert E.; Waldron, Mary; Kitzmann, Katherine M.;

Aaron, Jeffrey. “Delinquent Behavior, Future Divorce

or Nonmarital Childbearing, and Externalizing Behavior

among Offspring: A 14-Year Prospective Study.” Journal of Family Psychology 13,4 (December 1999): 568–

79.

Gorman, Elizabeth H. “Bringing Home the Bacon: Marital

Allocation of Income-Earning Responsibility, Job Shifts,

and Men’s Wages.” Journal of Marriage and the Family 61,1 (February 1999): 110–22.

Han, Wen-Jui; Waldfogel, Jane; and Brooks-Gunn, Jeanne.

“The Effects of Early Maternal Employment on Later

Cognitive and Behavioral Outcomes.” Journal of Marriage and Family 63, 2 (May 2001): 336–54.

Hiedemann, Bridget; Suhomlinova, Olga; and O’Rand, An-
130 CHAPTER 7: A SAMPLER OF NLS RESEARCH

gela M. “Economic Independence, Economic Status,

and Empty Nest in Midlife Marital Disruption.” Journal

of Marriage and the Family 60,1 (February 1998): 219–

31.

Lang, Kevin and Zagorsky, Jay L. “Does Growing Up with a

Parent Absent Really Hurt?” Journal of Human Resources 36,2 (Spring 2001): 253–73.

Lerman, Robert I. and Sorensen, Elaine. “Father Involvement with Their Nonmarital Children: Patterns, Determinants, and Effects on Their Earnings.” Marriage and

Family Review Special Issue: Fatherhood: Research,

Interventions and Policies 29,2-3, Part I (2000): 137–58.

Levine, Judith A.; Pollack, Harold; and Comfort, Maureen E.

“Academic and Behavioral Outcomes among the Children of Young Mothers.” Journal of Marriage and

Family 63,2 (May 2001): 355–69.

Menaghan, Elizabeth G.; Mott, Frank L.; Cooksey, Elizabeth

C.; and Jekielek, Susan M. “Work and Family Patterns:

Effects across Generations.” Journal of Socio-Economics 29,6 (2000): 587–90.

Morrison, Donna Ruane and Ritualo, Amy R. “Routes to

Children’s Economic Recovery after Divorce: Are Cohabitation and Remarriage Equivalent?” American Sociological Review 65,4 (August 2000): 560–80.

Ricciuti, Henry N. “Single Parenthood and School Readiness in White, Black, and Hispanic 6- and 7-Year-Olds.”

Journal of Family Psychology 13,3 (September 1999):

450–65.

Rodgers, Joseph Lee; Cleveland, Hobart Harrington; Van Den

Oord, Edwin; and Rowe, David C. “Resolving the Debate Over Birth Order, Family Size, and Intelligence.”

American Psychologist 55, 6 (June 2000): 599–612.

Sandefur, Gary D. and Cook, Steven T. “Permanent Exits

from Public Assistance: The Impact of Duration, Family,

and Work.” Social Forces 77,2 (December 1998): 763–

86.

Taniguchi, Hiromi. “The Timing of Childbearing and

Women’s Wages.” Journal of Marriage and the Family 61,4 (November 1999): 1008–19.

Zavodny, Madeline. “Do Men’s Characteristics Affect

Whether a Nonmarital Pregnancy Results in Marriage?”

Journal of Marriage and the Family 61,3 (August 1999):

764–73.

GEOGRAPHY

Borjas, George J. “To Ghetto or Not to Ghetto: Ethnicity and

Residential Segregation.” Journal of Urban Economics 44,2 (September 1998): 228–53.

Glaeser, Edward L. and Mare, David C. “Cities and Skills.”

Journal of Labor Economics 19,2 (April 2001): 316–42.

Reagan, Patricia and Olsen, Randall J. “You Can Go Home

Again: Evidence from Longitudinal Data.” Demography 37,3 (August 2000): 339–50.

Yankow, Jeffrey Jon. “The Wage Dynamics of Internal Migration within the United States.” Eastern Economic

Journal 25,3 (Summer 1999): 265–78.

HEALTH AND MEDICAL SCIENCES

Averett, Susan L. and Korenman, Sanders D. “Black-White

Differences in Social and Economic Consequences of

Obesity.” International Journal of Obesity 23,2 (February 1999): 166–73.

Cawley, John. “An Instrumental Variables Approach to Measuring the Effect of Body Weight on Employment Disability.” Health Services Research 35,5, pt 2 (December

2000): 1159–79.

Faith, Myles S.; Manibay, Elizabeth; Kravitz, Meredyth;

Griffith, John; and Allison, David B. “Relative Body

Weight and Self-Esteem among African Americans in

Four Nationally Representative Samples.” Obesity Research 6,6 (November 1998): 430–37.

Fu, Haishan and Goldman, Noreen. “The Association between Health-Related Behaviours and the Risk of Divorce in the USA.” Journal of Biosocial Science 32,1

(January 2000): 63–88.

Gilleskie, Donna B. and Lutz, Byron F. “The Impact of Employer-Provided Health Insurance on Dynamic Employment Transitions.” Journal of Human Resources 37,1

(Winter 2002): 129–62.

Kaskutas, L. A.; Greenfield, T.; Lee, M. E.; and Cote, J.

“Reach and Effects of Health Messages on Drinking

during Pregnancy.” Journal of Health Education 29,1

(Jan/Feb 1998): 11–18.

Maranto, Cheryl L. and Stenoien, Ann Fraedrich. “Weight

Discrimination: A Multidisciplinary Analysis.” Employee Responsibilities and Rights Journal 12,1 (March
CHAPTER 7: A SAMPLER OF NLS RESEARCH 131

2000): 9–24.

Millar, Wayne J. and Chen, Jiajian. “Maternal Education and

Risk Factors for Small-for-Gestational-Age Births.”

Health Reports 10,2 (Autumn 1998): 43–51 (Eng.); 47–

56 (Fre.).

Mott, Joshua Adam. “Personal and Family Predictors of

Children’s Medically Attended Injuries That Occurred

in the Home.” Injury Prevention 5,3 (September 1999):

189–93.

Pavalko, Eliza K. and Smith, Brad. “The Rhythm of Work:

Health Effects of Women’s Work Dynamics.” Social

Forces 77,3 (March 1999): 1141–62.

Pavalko, Eliza K. and Woodbury, Shari. “Social Roles as

Process: Caregiving Careers and Women’s Health.”

Journal of Health and Social Behavior 41,1 (March

2000): 91–105.

Reardon, David C. and Cougle, Jesse R. “Depression and

Unintended Pregnancy in the National Longitudinal

Survey of Youth: A Cohort Study.” British Medical

Journal 324,7330 (January 2002): 151–52.

Rodgers, Joseph Lee; Rowe, David C.; and Buster, Maury.

“Nature, Nurture and First Sexual Intercourse in the

USA: Fitting Behavioural Genetic Models to NLSY Kinship Data.” Journal of Biosocial Science 31,1 (January

1999): 29–41.

Strauss, John and Thomas, Duncan. “Health, Nutrition, and

Economic Development.” Journal of Economic Literature 36,2 (June 1998): 766–817.

Strauss, Richard S. and Knight, Judith. “Influence of the

Home Environment on the Development of Obesity in

Children.” Pediatrics 103,6 (June 1999): e85.

Thorpe, K. E. and Florence, Curtis Samuel, II. “Health Insurance among Children: The Role of Expanded Medicaid

Coverage.” Inquiry—The Journal of Health Care Organization Provision and Financing 35,4 (Winter 1998):

369–79.

Van Den Oord, Edwin and Rowe, David C. “Racial Differences in Birth Health Risk: A Quantitative Genetic Approach.” Demography 37,3 (August 2000): 285–98.

Waldron, Ingrid; Weiss, Christopher C.; and Hughes, Mary

Elizabeth. “Interacting Effects of Multiple Roles on

Women’s Health.” Journal of Health and Social Behavior 39,3 (September 1998): 216–36.

Zimmer, Martha Hill and Zimmer, Michael. “Socioeconomic

Determinants of Smoking Behavior during Pregnancy.”

The Social Science Journal 35,1 (1998): 133–42.

PSYCHOLOGY

Bullers, Susan. “Selection Effects in the Relationship between Women’s Work/Family Status and Perceived Control.” Family Relations 48,2 (April 1999): 181–88.

Corwyn, Robert Flynn. “The Factor Structure of Global SelfEsteem among Adolescents and Adults.” Journal of

Research in Personality 34,4 (December 2000): 357–79.

Evans, Martin G. “On the Symmetry of G.” Psychological

Reports 85,3, Pt 2—Special Issue (December 1999): 1059–

69.

Lewis, Susan K.; Ross, Catherine E.; and Mirowsky, John.

“Establishing a Sense of Personal Control in the Transition to Adulthood.” Social Forces 77,4 (June 1999):

1573–99.

Rowe, David C.; Vesterdal, Wendy J.; and Rodgers, Joseph

Lee. “Herrnstein’s Syllogism: Genetic and Shared Environmental Influences on IQ, Education, and Income.”

Intelligence 26,4 (1999): 405–23.

Valentine, Sean. “Locus of Control as a Dispositional Determinant of Men’s Traditional Sex-Role Attitudes.” Psychological Reports 85,3, part 1 (December 1999): 1041–44.

SOCIOLOGY AND DEMOGRAPHY

Eckstein, Zvi and Wolpin, Kenneth I. “Estimating the Effect

of Racial Discrimination on First Job Wage Offers.”

Review of Economics and Statistics 81,3 (August 1999):

384–92.

Gordon, Rachel A. “Multigenerational Coresidence and

Welfare Policy.” Journal of Community Psychology 27,5

(September 1999): 525–49.

Gordon, Rachel A. and Chase-Lansdale, P. Lindsay. “Availability of Child Care in the United States: A Description

and Analysis of Data Sources.” Demography 38, 2 (May

2001): 299–316.

Graefe, Deborah Roempke and Lichter, Daniel T. “Life Course

Transitions of American Children: Parental Cohabitation,

Marriage, and Single Motherhood.” Demography 36,2
132 CHAPTER 7: A SAMPLER OF NLS RESEARCH

(May 1999): 205–17.

Greenwell, Lisa; Leibowitz, Arleen A.; and Klerman, Jacob

Alex. “Welfare Background, Attitudes, and Employment

among New Mothers.” Journal of Marriage and the

Family 60,1 (February 1998): 175–93.

Guo, Guang and VanWey, Leah K. “Sibship Size and Intellectual Development: Is the Relationship Causal?”

American Sociological Review 64,2 (April 1999): 169–

87.

Joyce, Theodore J.; Kaestner, Robert; and Korenman, Sanders D. “On the Validity of Retrospective Assessments

of Pregnancy Intention.” Demography 39,1 (February

2002): 199–213.

Klawitter, Marieka Marjorie; Plotnick, Robert D.; and

Edwards, Mark Evan. “Determinants of Initial Entry onto

Welfare by Young Women.” Journal of Policy Analysis

and Management 19,4 (Fall 2000): 527–46.

Klepinger, Daniel H.; Lundberg, Shelly; and Plotnick, Robert

D. “How Does Adolescent Fertility Affect the Human

Capital and Wages of Young Women?” Journal of Human Resources 34,3 (Summer 1999): 421–48.

Klerman, Jacob Alex and Leibowitz, Arleen A. “Job Continuity among New Mothers.” Demography 36,2 (May 1999):

145–55.

Lewis, Susan Kay and Oppenheimer, Valerie K. “Educational

Assortative Mating across Marriage Markets: Non-Hispanic Whites in the United States.” Demography 37,1

(February 2000): 29–40.

Maxwell, Nan L. “Fertility Policy and Employment: Implications from the Former Soviet Union.” Population Research and Policy Review 17 (1998): 351–68.

McLeod, Jane D. and Nonnemaker, James M. “Poverty and

Child Emotional and Behavioral Problems: Racial/Ethnic Differences in Processes and Effects.” Journal of

Health and Social Behavior 41,2 (June 2000): 137–61.

Mizell, Charles Andre. “Racial and Gender Variations in the

Process Shaping Earnings’ Potential: The Consequences of Poverty in Early Adulthood.” Journal of

Sociology and Social Welfare 27,2 (June 2000): 113–38.

Moffitt, Robert A.; Reville, Robert; and Winkler, Anne E.

“Beyond Single Mothers: Cohabitation and Marriage

in the AFDC Program.” Demography 35,3 (August 1998):

259–78.

Nock, Steven L. “The Consequences of Premarital Fatherhood.” American Sociological Review 63,2 (April 1998):

250–63.

Ribar, David C. “The Socioeconomic Consequences of

Young Women’s Childbearing: Reconciling Disparate

Evidence.” Journal of Population Economics 12,4 (November 1999): 547–65.

Roscigno, Vincent J. “Family/School Inequality and African-American/Hispanic Achievement.” Social Problems 47,2 (May 2000): 266–90.

Rosenzweig, Mark R. “Welfare, Marital Prospects, and

Nonmarital Childbearing.” Journal of Political

Economy 107,6, part 2 (December 1999): S3–S32.

Smith, Judith R.; Brooks-Gunn, Jeanne; Klebanov, Pamela

K.; and Lee, Kyunghee. “Welfare and Work: Complementary Strategies for Low-Income Women?” Journal

of Marriage and the Family 62,3 (August 2000): 808–

21.

Tittle, Charles R. and Rotolo, Thomas. “IQ and Stratification: An Empirical Evaluation of Herrnstein and Murray’s

Social Change Argument.” Social Forces 79,1 (September 2000): 1–28.

Tsang, Chiu-Wai Rita and Dietz, Tracy L. “The Unrelenting

Significance of Minority Statuses: Gender, Ethnicity,

and Economic Attainment since Affirmative Action.”

Sociological Spectrum 21,1 (January-March 2001): 61–

80.

Valentine, Sean and Mosley, Gordon. “Acculturation and

Sex-Role Attitudes among Mexican Americans: A Longitudinal Analysis.” Hispanic Journal of Behavioral

Sciences 22,1 (February 2000): 104–13.

SURVEY METHODOLOGY AND DATA QUALITY

Falaris, Evangelos M. and Peters, H. Elizabeth. “Survey Attrition and Schooling Choices.” The Journal of Human

Resources 33,2 (Spring 1998): 531–54.

Fendrich, Michael and Kim, Julia Yun Soo. “Multiwave Analysis of Retest Artifact in the National Longitudinal Survey of Youth Drug Use.” Drug and Alcohol Dependence

62,3 (May 2001): 239–53.

Hellerstein, Judith K. and Imbens, Guido W. “Imposing
CHAPTER 7: A SAMPLER OF NLS RESEARCH 133

Moment Restrictions from Auxiliary Data by Weighting.” Review of Economics and Statistics 81,1 (February 1999): 1–14.

Horowitz, Joel L. and Manski, Charles F. “Censoring of Outcomes and Regressors Due to Survey Nonresponse:

Identification and Estimation Using Weights and Imputations.” Journal of Econometrics 84,1 (May 1998): 37–

58.

Kilburn, M. Rebecca; Hanser, L.M.; and Klerman, Jacob Alex.

“Estimating AFQT Scores for National Education Longitudinal Study (NELS) Respondents.” Peace Research

Abstracts Journal 37,4 (August 1, 2000).

MaCurdy, Thomas E.; Mroz, Thomas; and Gritz, R. Mark.

“An Evaluation of the National Longitudinal Survey on

Youth.” The Journal of Human Resources 33,2 (Spring

1998): 345–436.

Raley, R. Kelly; Harris, Kathleen Mullan; and Rindfuss,

Ronald R. “The Quality and Comparability of Child Care

Data in U.S. Surveys.” Social Science Research 29,3

(September 2000): 356–81.

Shillington, Audrey M. and Clapp, John D. “Self-Report Stability of Adolescent Substance Use: Are There Differences for Gender, Ethnicity, and Age?” Drug and

Alcohol Dependence 60,1 (June 2000): 19–27.

Yates, Julie A. and Rothstein, Donna Suzann. “The Newest

National Longitudinal Survey: The National Longitudinal Survey of Youth, 1997.” Industrial Relations 38,4

(October 1999): 604–10.

Zagorsky, Jay L. “Young Baby Boomers’ Wealth.” Review of

Income and Wealth Series 45,2 (June 1999): 135–56.
134 CHAPTER 8: NLS DATA SETS AND DOCUMENTATION

NLS DATA SETS AND DOCUMENTATION

National Longitudinal Survey (NLS) data are available onCDs and as downloadable files on the Internet. Each

data set contains data and documentation files, as well as

software that allows users to peruse the NLS data set, select

variables of interest, and create extract files. Electronic and

paper-copy documentation items accompany the data and

aid in its use.

This chapter first describes the current data releases

and features of the search and extraction software. Following this discussion, readers will find descriptions of the various documentation items that will assist them in their work.

Electronic and paper-copy documentation items for the

NLSY97, the NLSY79, the NLSY79 children and young adults,

and the original cohorts are reviewed in separate subsections within this chapter.

NLS User Services Office

The data items discussed in this chapter are available through

NLS User Services. Individuals wishing to order NLS data

and paper documentation can check pricing information,

download data, and place orders through the http://

www.bls.gov/nls Web site. Chapter 10 describes various publications and research reports. Questions or problems can

be addressed to NLS User Services using the following information:

NLS User Services Office

(614) 442-7366

usersvc@postoffice.chrr.ohio-state.edu

Note to individuals ordering geocode data. To protect the

confidentiality of respondents, the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) grants access to NLSY79, NLSY79 young adult,

and NLSY97 geocode files only to researchers in the United

States who agree in writing to adhere to the BLS confidentiality policy and whose projects further the mission of BLS to

conduct sound, legitimate research in the social sciences.

Researchers interested in learning more about the NLS

geocode program or downloading the application should see

the NLS Web site at http://www.bls.gov/nls. Some geographic

information collected during interviews with the original cohorts is available for research use at the U.S. Census Bureau’s

Research Data Centers. Information about applying for access to these data also is available on the NLS Web site.

Note to customers outside the continental United States.

For data sets or documents that are not available electronically, CDs and paper copies can be ordered. To cover costs,

NLS User Services must charge handling fees to individuals

ordering NLS data or documentation to be shipped to an

address outside of the continental United States. Upon receipt of an order, User Services will calculate the cost for the

materials and the type of mail service (air or surface) specified on the order form and will notify the customer of the

amount of the handling charges for that order. NLS materials

will be shipped upon receipt, in U.S. dollars, of both the cost

of the items ordered and the handling fee.

Current data releases

Figure 8.1 lists the NLS data sets currently available to the

public. Researchers can download data files and accompanying documentation directly to a computer or server for

free. For a fee, researchers can order data files on CD, as well

as paper versions of NLS documentation. To download free

data files, view pricing information, or order data CDs and

paper documentation, see the NLS Web site at

http://www.bls.gov/nls.

NLSY97 data

The National Longitudinal Survey of Youth 1997 (NLSY97)

data are available to researchers in three data sets:

z The NLSY97 main file contains the data and documentation from survey rounds 1 through 5, together with

search and extraction software. The data set holds the

data elements—described in detail in chapter 2—from

the youth questionnaires; the rounds 1 through 5 household income updates; the round 1 parent questionnaire;

and the round 1 screener, household roster, and nonresident roster questionnaire. This data set includes a

set of ASVAB scores and information from high school

transcripts collected in round 3.

z The NLSY97 event history file, including main file data,

contains all of the data on the main file, as well as the

search and extraction software. Also included are a number of created event history variables describing the

youth’s employment, education, marriage, and program

participation through round 4. This data set includes a
CHAPTER 8: NLS DATA SETS AND DOCUMENTATION 135

set of ASVAB scores and information from high school

transcripts collected in round 3.

z The NLSY97 geocode data CD, including main file

and event history data, contains all of the main file data

and documentation, the created event history variables,

and detailed geographic data. Because the geographic

data are confidential, only individuals who complete the

BLS geocode application process can obtain this file.

Information on obtaining this file can be found at

http://www.bls.gov/nls.

The NLSY97 main file and event history data are available on

the cross-cohort CD or can be downloaded from the Internet;

the geocode file is available only on CD.

NLSY79 data

Data from the National Longitudinal Survey of Youth 1979

(NLSY79) are available in two data sets:

z The NLSY79 main file with work history data contains

data and documentation, together with search and extraction software, for the NLSY79 main interviews from

1979 to 2000 (more than 69,000 variables). It also contains more than 12,000 variables for the NLSY79 work

histories from 1979 to 2000. This data set holds all of the

data elements described in chapter 3 for the main NLSY79

interviews, except for the detailed NLSY79 geocode data

and the kinship proximity variables.

z The NLSY79 geocode data CD with main file and work

history data contains the constructed NLSY79 geocode

files from 1979 to 2000 (approximately 100 variables per

year), the NLSY79 main survey data for the same years,

and the NLSY79 work histories. This CD holds all data

elements described in chapter 3, except for the kinship

proximity variables. Because the CD contains detailed

confidential geographic data, it is available only to individuals who satisfactorily complete the BLS geocode

application process. Information on obtaining this file

can be found at http://www.bls.gov/nls.

The NLSY79 main file and work history data are available on

the cross-cohort CD or can be downloaded from the Internet;

the geocode file is available only on CD. Researchers interested in the NLSY79 women’s support network data described in chapter 3 should contact NLS User Services

(e-mail: usersvc@postoffice.chrr.ohio-state.edu).

1

Data from the round 5 survey will be available in mid-2003.

2

Data from the 2002 survey will be available by the end of

2003.

Figure 8.1. NLS data files

NLSY97 • NLSY97 main files Rounds 1–41

• NLSY97 event history file with main files

NLSY79 • NLSY79 main files with work history data 1979–20002

Children of the NLSY79 • NLSY79 child and young adult main files 1986–20003 (child)

1994–20003

 (young adult)

• NLSY79 young adult main file preliminary release 2002

Mature and Young Women • NLS of Mature and Young Women 1967–2001 (Mature Women)

1968–2001 (Young Women)

Older and Young Men • NLS of Older Men and Young Men 1966–90 (Older Men)

1966–81 (Young Men)

Cross-cohort • Current public release of all cohorts

NLSY97 • NLSY97 geocode file with main files, event history data Rounds 1-41

NLSY79 • NLSY79 geocode data with main files, work history data 1979-20002

NLSY79 young adults • NLSY79 young adult geocode data with main files 1994-20003

Cohort Data Files Survey years

Available by Download

Available on CD

3

Processing of the 2002 data should be complete by spring

2004.
136 CHAPTER 8: NLS DATA SETS AND DOCUMENTATION

NLSY79 child and young adult data

The NLSY79 child and young adult file contains data and

documentation, together with search and extraction software,

for the NLSY79 1986–2000 child data collections and the 1994–

2000 NLSY79 young adult surveys. This includes all child

data elements described in chapter 4 and the complete main

NLSY79 file for 1979–2000. Children and young adults and

their mothers can be linked by case identification code. This

data set is available on the cross-cohort CD or can be downloaded from the NLS Web site at http://www.bls.gov/nls. The

NLSY79 young adult geocode CD contains the all data from

the child and young adult public-use file, along with geocode

data for the young adults from 1994 through 2000. This CD

also includes the 1979–2000 data from the main NLSY79, including geocode and work history variables. Information on

obtaining the young adult geocode CD can be found online

at http://www.bls.gov/nls.

Original cohort data

The NLS Mature Women and Young Women data sets contain data and documentation, together with search and extraction software, for the 1967–2001 surveys of the Mature

Women and the 1968–2001 surveys of the Young Women.

These data sets are available on the cross-cohort CD or as

separate files that can be downloaded from the http://

www.bls.gov/nls Web site. Included are all of the data elements described in chapter 5, with the Mature Women pension plan data available as a separate file.

The NLS Older Men and Young Men data sets contain all of

the information described in chapter 6 for the 1966–90 surveys of the Older Men and the 1966–81 surveys of the Young

Men. These files are included on the cross-cohort CD or can

be downloaded from the http://www.bls.gov/nls Web site.

NLS software

NLS Investigator search and extraction software is present

on the cross-cohort CD and in all downloadable data files.

The CD also includes installation and usage instructions.

The Windows software features a user-friendly interface and

allows the user to perform the following five functions:

1. SEARCH the NLS documentation files for categories of

variables clustered by topical area. NLSY97, NLSY79,

NLSY79 children, and Mature and Young Women

searches can be based on (1) topical area of interest

(Jobs, Income, Geo92, and so forth) or (2) any word or

combination of words found within the variable titles

(for example, “Activity [and] Survey [and] Week” or

“Child [and] Age”). Due to differences in data structuring, search by area of interest is not currently available

for the Older and Young Men; any word searches are

available. Researchers can also choose specific variables by reference number or question number, or look

at all variables collected during a given survey year.

2. VIEW a screen image of each variable’s codebook information (including coding categories and frequencies for

the full universe of respondents) or view data for a given

respondent by identification code (for instance, case

#260).

3. SELECT variables for inclusion in an extract specification file that will be used to generate the data and documentation files described below.

4. EXTRACT data for the full universe of respondents or

for a sample restricted by race, sex, number of cases, or

user-specified Boolean equation, and produce a raw

ASCII data file (with SAS or SPSS control cards), a Dbase

file, or a STATA dictionary file.

5. DOCUMENT an extracted file by producing a listing of

all extracted variables, including each variable’s reference number, title, area of interest (if available), number

of valid cases, and minimum-maximum-mean values, or a

codebook file depicting the coding categories, full universe frequencies, verbatim question text and question

number, reference number, and variable title.

More information about searching for variables of interest is provided in the user’s guides for the individual cohorts. A representation of typical Investigator extract screens

appears in figure 8.2. Using the NLSY97 data, these example

screens show a combined survey year and “any word” search

for the respondent’s wage and salary income in 1998, as reported in round 3 (1999).

Codebook documentation

Each NLS CD and downloaded data set contains data, documentation in the form of codebook pages, and Investigator

search and extraction software. The codebook is the principal element of the documentation system and, for each variable in the file, contains information intended to be complete

and self-explanatory. In figure 8.2, the codebook information

for the example wage and salary variable can be seen in the

gray-shaded window labeled “NLS-Codebook.” For each

variable, the codebook depicts a reference number, question

title (and question text, in many cases), variable description,

coding information, frequency distribution, and source. For

the original cohorts and the NLSY79, derivations are provided for certain created variables. Codebooks for the original cohorts contain universe information for the early years

and most recent surveys; separate flowcharts present universe information for the middle years. The codebook also

lists the previous and next survey questions; hyperlinks

permit users to page through the codebook in the order that

questions were asked in the interview.

The codebook contains references to pertinent attachments and appendixes that provide supplementary coding
CHAPTER 8: NLS DATA SETS AND DOCUMENTATION 137

Figure 8.2. Search and extraction screens for the NLS Windows software
138 CHAPTER 8: NLS DATA SETS AND DOCUMENTATION

NLSY97 Main/event history Geocode

Technical Sampling Report Geocode Codebook Supplement (†)

Survey Instruments (†)

Interviewer Reference Manuals (†)

Codebook Supplement (†)

and variable creation procedures. For the NLSY79 child file,

the codebook also includes source information on whether a

given variable is created or is a direct pickup from one of the

mother/child supplements.

In addition to viewing codebook pages electronically,

users can generate and print codebook pages and variable

lists using the Investigator software. This feature enables

researchers to customize the documentation for their particular research needs and to select and print information for

any or all pertinent variables.

NLS user’s guides and supplemental

documentation

Extensive additional documentation is included with the data

set, can be downloaded separately, or is available only in

paper form. When available, documentation such as the

questionnaire, codebook supplement, and user’s guide is

included with the CD and downloaded data set. All documentation items that can be downloaded are found on the

http://www.bls.gov/nls Web site.

Individuals ordering an NLS cross-cohort CD will automatically receive the following items:

1. Installation, usage, and maintenance instructions

2. Current paper editions of the appropriate cohort’s user’s

guide and the NLS Handbook

3. A subscription to the quarterly NLS newsletter, NLS

News, which is also available for free at http://

www.bls.gov/nls

Users downloading data from the http://www.bls.gov/nls Web

site will receive the first two items listed electronically; the

third is an option the user can choose while placing the order.

For detailed descriptions of the user’s guides and the

NLS newsletter, see chapter 10 of this handbook. Information about viewing errata on the Internet also is provided in

chapter 10. Any additional documentation items necessary

to constitute a complete documentation set are priced separately; contact NLS User Services for more information (email: usersvc@postoffice.chrr.ohio-state.edu).

Available for each NLS data set is a set of supplemental

documentation items, such as technical background reports,

interviewer’s reference manuals, and various attachments and

appendixes that provide coding information and variable creFigure 8.3. NLS supplemental documentation items

Documentation items described in this chapter

Cohort (†) indicates that the item is updated after each survey round

NLSY79 Main Work history

Technical Sampling Report Appendix 18 in main Codebook Supplement

TSR Addendum (†)

Household Screener and Interviewer’s Manual Geocode

PAY–Attachment 106 Geocode Codebook Supplement (†)

Addendum–AFQT Score Creation Procedure

NLSY High School Transcript Survey

Survey Instruments (†)

Codebook Supplement (†)

Interviewer Reference Manuals (†)

Flowcharts (1979–92)

NLSY79 Child/ Child Assessment Instruments (†) NLSY79 Child Handbook

Young Adult Child Assessment Tables (†) NLSY79 Children 1992 Description and Evaluation

Child/Young Adult Data Users Guide (†) Young Adult Attachments (†)

Original Cohorts Survey Instruments (†) Codebook Supplements (†)

Interviewer Reference Manuals/Field Mature Women Older Men

Representative Manuals (†) Young Women Young Men

Flowcharts
CHAPTER 8: NLS DATA SETS AND DOCUMENTATION 139

ation procedures. Figure 8.3 lists the documentation items

available for each cohort; detailed descriptions of these items

follow in the same order. Items identified with a (†) are updated—either wholly or in part—for the most recent data

release. Purchasers of any NLS data set must have access to

all relevant documentation.

NLSY97 documentation

Supplemental documentation for the NLSY97 includes a number of different items. Documentation items that are new or

updated for the latest release are identified with a (†).

NLSY97 main file and event history

Technical Sampling Report—Youth Survey. This technical

manual, published by the National Opinion Research Center

(NORC) at the University of Chicago, describes the procedures used to select the sample. The manual includes weights

and standard errors for the initial survey year.

Survey instruments (†). This set of fielding materials serves

to collect information from cohort respondents or other subjects of the survey during each interview. NLS User Services

provides a new set of survey instruments, including a copy

of the questionnaire and questionnaire supplements, for each

survey year. The electronic codebook also incorporates

questionnaire information.

Interviewer Reference Manuals (†). Included with each

NLSY97 questionnaire is an interviewer’s reference manual.

This document reproduces computerized help screens that

provide NORC interviewers with detailed question-by-question instructions for coding each survey year’s questionnaire and other supplementary survey instruments.

Codebook Supplement (†). Reissued with each data release,

the Codebook Supplement contains variable creation procedures and supplementary coding information not present

in the electronic version of the codebook.

Attachment:

1. 1990 Census Industrial and Occupational Classification Codes. This document lists the three-digit 1990

census codes used to classify job and training information (U.S. Census Bureau, 1990 Census of Population

Alphabetical Index of Industries and Occupations,

Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1991).

Appendixes:

1. Education and Training Variable Creation (†). This

document provides the programs for several created

variables related to education and training. Education

variables include enrollment status, type of school, date

received diploma, highest grade completed, number of

schools attended, and PIAT math score. Created variables for training indicate whether the respondent received a certificate or license as the result of a training

program, and the date on which the most recent certificate or license was received.

2. Employment Variable Creation (†). This appendix provides programs for created employment variables, including hourly rate of pay, hourly monetary

compensation, number of weeks worked, total tenure at

job, and number of jobs held.

3. Family Background and Formation Variable Creation

(†). This appendix of created variable programs contains those dealing with family background, such as

household size, marital status, fertility and parental status, and marriage and cohabitation history.

4. Geographic Variable Creation. Several variables in the

main data set provide information about the

respondent’s area of residence, permitting researchers

to identify key characteristics of the area without needing the geocode CD. Included in this appendix is a summary of the four census geographic regions, an

explanation of the MSA/central city status variable, and

the definition for the rural vs. urban variable.

5. Income and Assets Variable Creation (†). This document provides the creation procedures for income and

assets created variables. These include household net

worth and gross household income, as well as receipt of

public assistance.

6. Event History Creation and Documentation (†). This

appendix explains the structure of the event history variables and describes the creation process.

7. Continuous Month Scheme and Crosswalk (†). This

document explains the structure of the event history

month-by-month and week-by-week status arrays and

provides crosswalks from continuous month/week numbers to actual month and year dates.

8. Instrument Rosters (†). In each survey round, a number of rosters are used to organize information during

various parts of the interview. This appendix identifies

these rosters and shows how they are used in different

parts of the survey. It also lists the variable names,

titles, and reference numbers for the various instrument

rosters used in each round.

9. Family Process and Adolescent Outcome Measures.

This document, which is provided separately from the

Codebook Supplement, summarizes the creation procedures for the various scales and indexes created by Child

Trends, Inc. The appendix also presents the results of

Child Trends’ statistical analyses of the scales, indexes,

and a number of related attitude and behavior variables.

10. CAT-ASVAB scores. This appendix describes the administration of the CAT-ASVAB to NLSY97 respondents
140 CHAPTER 8: NLS DATA SETS AND DOCUMENTATION

during round 1. It also discusses the process used to

create scores for each respondent who participated in

the test.

11. Collection of the Transcript Data, Wave 1. To help researchers understand the variables from respondent

transcripts collected in round 3, this appendix describes

the data collection instruments, data-entry and coding

process, and resulting school- and respondent-specific

variables.

NLSY97 geocode file

The documentation for the NLSY97 geocode CD consists of

a codebook supplement with additional coding information

not present within the electronic version of the codebook.

This documentation is distributed only to NLS researchers

who complete the BLS geocode application process. The

application process is described at http://www.bls.gov/nls.

The application also can be downloaded from this site.

Geocode Codebook Supplement (†). This publication contains attachments relating to the NLSY97 geocode CD, as

well as an introduction that discusses key aspects of the

geocode CD. Brief descriptions of the contents of each document are provided below.

Attachments:

100. 1990 Census Bureau State and County Codes. This

attachment provides coding information for the State

and county variables included on the NLSY97 geocode

CD-ROM. These variables use the current Federal Information Processing Standards (FIPS) codes.

101. MSA Codes. This document lists the Metropolitan Statistical Area (MSA) coding scheme used for NLSY97

geocode variables. The various sections also include

Consolidated Metropolitan Statistical Area (CMSA)

codes, New England Consolidated Metropolitan Area

(NECMA) codes, and Primary Metropolitan Statistical

Area (PMSA) codes.

102. IPEDS Data and College Identification Codes. This

attachment briefly describes the coding schemes used

to identify the postsecondary educational institutions

attended by respondents and lists codes assigned by

survey personnel to institutions not represented in the

Integrated Postsecondary Education Data System

(IPEDS) coding schemes.

NLSY79 documentation

Documentation items for the NLSY79 files include various

technical reports and round-specific documents that provide critical information on each data collection round. Those

documentation items that are new or updated, either wholly

or in part, for the latest release are identified with a (†).

NLSY79 main file

Survey design, sampling, and fielding procedures. The following documents provide technical information about the

main NLSY79 and separately administered surveys, such as

the 1980 high school survey and 1980–83 transcript data

collections.

Technical Sampling Report—Youth Survey. This technical

manual, published by NORC in 1983, describes the selection

procedures for the civilian and military youth samples. It

includes weights and standard errors for the initial survey

years. Updates to this document are released as an addendum.

Technical Sampling Report Addendum (†). This supplement to the 1983 Technical Sampling Report presents, in

tabular form, the standard errors and design effects for each

survey from l982 through the latest round of the NLSY79.

Household Screener and Interviewer’s Manual (1978).

Used for the 1978 preliminary screening of households from

which the two civilian youth samples were drawn, this manual

contains instructions provided to NORC interviewers, question-by-question specifications for the household screener

interview form, and a completed sample screener.

Profiles of American Youth—Attachment 106. This attachment provides general and technical information about the

1980 administration of the ASVAB (Armed Services Vocational Aptitude Battery) to NLSY79 respondents. Included

are technical notes on the ASVAB scale scores, an annotated

bibliography of U.S. Department of Defense publications, an

example of the test score report, and various brochures disseminated to participating respondents.

Addendum—AFQT Score Creation Procedures. This addendum to Attachment 106 provides information on the creation of two Armed Forces Qualification Test scores, the

AFQT80 and AFQT89, along with tables for converting

subtest raw scores to standard scores. This set of variables

was added to the NLSY79 data set beginning with the round

12 release.

NLSY High School Transcript Survey: Overview and Documentation. This document contains background information on the sample design, fieldwork, and types of variables

collected during the three rounds of this special survey effort. It includes the transcript survey codebook, instructions for coding courses, course codes, and copies of the

transcript coding form and school questionnaire. Finally, it

presents references to other technical reports prepared by
CHAPTER 8: NLS DATA SETS AND DOCUMENTATION 141

the sponsoring agency, the National Center for Research in

Vocational Education.

Round-specific documents. Each data release includes either complete or partial updates to the following round-specific documents:

Survey instruments (†). The set of fielding materials used

during each interview serves to collect information from cohort respondents or other subjects of the survey. In years

during which a paper-and-pencil interview was conducted, a

new set of survey instruments was issued for each survey

year and typically included a copy of the questionnaire,

questionnaire supplements, the various versions of the

household interview forms, the employer supplement, and a

jobs calendar. In years during which computer-assisted personal interviewing was done, these items are all incorporated into one survey instrument.

Codebook Supplement (†). Reissued with each data release,

the Codebook Supplement contains variable creation procedures and supplementary coding information. The electronic version of the codebook for the NLSY79 is included in

the data set. This information is contained in the following

numbered attachments and appendixes:

Attachments:

3. Industry and Occupation Codes. This attachment compiles: (1) The three-digit 1970 census classifications

used to code job and training information, as well as

occupational aspiration information (U.S. Census Bureau, 1970 Census of Population Alphabetical Index of

Industries and Occupations, Washington, DC: U.S.

Government Printing Office, 1971); (2) the three-digit

1980 census codes that have been used (in addition to

the 1970 codes), beginning with the 1982 survey, to classify respondents’ current or most recent job (U.S. Census Bureau, 1980 Census of Population Alphabetical

Index of Industries and Occupations, Washington, DC:

U.S. Government Printing Office, 1981); and (3) the 1977

military occupational specialty codes used to classify

responses to the 1979–85 questions on military jobs and

military occupations (U.S. Department of Defense, Occupational Conversion Manual: Enlisted/Officer/Civilian, DOD 1312.1M. Arlington, VA: Defense Manpower

Data Center).

4. Fields of Study in College. This document provides the

coding classifications for the variables regarding major

fields of study and subspecialties at colleges attended.

5. Index of Labor Unions and Employee Associations. This

index provides codes for the 1979 questions regarding

the name of the union/employee association at jobs #1

through #5 (for example, R00937.–R00941.).

6. Other Kinds of Training Codes. Listed in this attachment are the various categories of occupational training

used to code the 1979 survey question on types of other

training programs in which a respondent was enrolled

for at least 1 month (R01348., R01353., R01358., R01363.).

7. Other Certificates Codes. This list defines codes for

the various types of certifications (practical nurse, welding, insurance, chef, and so forth) that a respondent had

ever received as of the 1979 interview (R01376., R01377.,

R01378., R01379.).

8. Health Codes. This modified version of the International Classification of Diseases (ICD-9) codes (International Classification of Diseases, Volumes 1 and 2,

Geneva, WHO, 1977–78) was used to classify types of

health problems limiting the amount or kind of work that

a respondent could do (1979–82 surveys) or occurring

as a result of a work-related injury or illness (1988–90

and 1992–2000 surveys). These codes also were used

in 1998–2000 to classify major health problems of biological parents for respondents 40 years or older. Also

included is a list of numeric codes identifying the parts

of the body affected by health problems or work-related

injury or illness.

100. Geographic Regions. This attachment lists the States

making up each of the four regions used in ‘South/

Non-South Place of Birth,’ ‘South/Non-South Place of

Residence at Age 14,’ and such yearly variables as ‘Region of Residence.’

101. Country Codes. Provided in this document are the foreign country codes for respondents’ country of

residence, country of parents’ birthplace, and country

of citizenship at the time of immigration.

102. State FIPS Codes. The Federal Information Processing

Standards are used to code respondents’ State of birth

and State of residence.

103. Religion Codes. This list contains the various denominational categories used to code the religion questions

in 1979 (R00103.10 and R00104.10) and 1982 (R06558.,

R06583., R06586., R06613., and R06616.).

Appendixes:

1. Employment Status Recode (ESR) Variable Creation

1979–1998 (†). This appendix provides the adapted

PL/I version of the U.S. Census Bureau’s FORTRAN

program used to create the measure of main labor force

activity during the survey week from 1979–93. Beginning in 1994, the SPSS formula for creating the variable

is provided; this formula corresponds closely to the revised formula provided by the U.S. Census Bureau for

the Current Population Survey (CPS).

2. Total Net Family Income Variable Creation 1979–2000

(†). Contained in this appendix is the PL/I code for 1979–

96 and the SPSS code for 1998–2000 used to create the
142 CHAPTER 8: NLS DATA SETS AND DOCUMENTATION

*KEY* income variable for each survey year, as well as

the poverty level and poverty status variables.

3. Job Satisfaction Measures 1979–1982 and 1988. This

document provides background information and yearly

reference numbers for both the scale items and global

satisfaction measures of the modified Quality of Employment Survey scale administered in the 1979–82 and

1988 surveys. It includes additional references and a

methodology for constructing the full scale.

4. Job Characteristic Index 1979 and 1982. This appendix gives background information, reference numbers,

questionnaire locations, and additional references for

the job complexity questions asked in these 2 survey

years.

5. Supplemental Fertility File Variables (†). This discussion provides a brief overview of the contents of the

1979–92 and 1994–2000 Fertility and Relationship History/Created area of interest on the main NLSY79 data

file, background information on the 1982 and 1994 data

quality checks, and information on the availability of

additional reports assessing the NLSY79 fertility data.

6. SMSA Urban-Rural Creation (†). Contained in this

appendix are the decision rules used to create the ‘Current Residence in SMSA’ variables and the ‘Is R’s Current Residence Urban/Rural?’ variable series.

7. Unemployment Rate (†). This discussion explains how

the variable ‘Unemployment Rate of Labor Market of

Current Residence’ is created.

8. Highest Grade Completed and Enrollment Status Variable Creation (†). This document contains the code

used to create the *KEY* 1990–2000 variables ‘Highest

Grade Completed as of May 1 Survey Year’ and ‘Enrollment Status as of May 1 Survey Year.’ It includes a

discussion of the revised versions of the 1979–2000

‘Highest Grade Completed’ variables, which were released for the first time with the 1994 data.

9. Linking Employers through Survey Years. This appendix identifies the procedures and variables necessary for linking employers reported across contiguous

interview years.

11. NLSY79 Round 12 (1990) Survey Administration

Methods. This appendix briefly describes the computerassisted personal interviewing (CAPI) and paper-administered personal interviewing (PAPI) techniques

employed during the 1990 NLSY79 interviews.

12. Most Important Job Learning Activities (1993–1994).

Provided in this document are value labels for the eight

1993/1994 variables that identify method(s) used by respondents in learning to perform job duties associated

with their current or most recent job.

13. Introduction to the 1993 through 2000 CAPI Questionnaires and Codebooks (†). This discussion introduces readers to the new documentation items and terms

used in the CAPI survey instruments beginning in 1993

and alerts the users of these data to important changes

in the way some variables are coded, documented, and

generated.

14. 1993–2000 Instrument Rosters (†). This consolidated

list provides subject content and matching reference

numbers for various types of roster items occurring in

the CAPI surveys.

15. Recipiency Event Histories (†). This appendix describes

the logic of the new CAPI event history format used to

collect information on unemployment, AFDC/TANF,

Food Stamps, and other welfare recipiency. It also describes the process whereby the RECIPIENCY event

histories (month-by-month and yearly) are created.

16. 1994 Recall Experiment. This discussion explains how

the 1994 recall experiment was designed to examine the

effects on the accuracy and consistency of respondents’

recall when the frequency of survey administration was

changed from annual to biennial. A subsample of

NLSY79 respondents who were interviewed in both 1992

and 1993 answered questions in 1994 referring to the

period since their 1992 interview. These data were then

compared with respondents’ answers to the 1993 survey for possible discrepancies.

17. Interviewer Characteristics Data. This appendix describes the data available regarding the characteristics

of NLSY79 interviewers; this information is based on

NORC’s interviewer personnel files. These new data

permit researchers to link interviewers with the respondents they interviewed. The 1998 data release contained

interviewer data through the 1996 survey; 1998 interviewer information is included on the 2000 data release.

18. Overview of the NLSY79 Work History Data. This appendix introduces users to the work history data. It

describes the creation of the data set, the programs used

to create it, and the input variables.

19. SF-12 Summary Scores. This appendix explains the

administration of the SF-12 health scale, a brief inventory of self-reported mental and physical health. This

was administered to respondents who had turned 40

since their last interview as part of the age 40+ health

module.

Interviewer Reference Manuals (†). Accompanying each

NLSY79 questionnaire is an interviewer’s reference manual,

called the Question-by-Question Specifications (Q by Q).

This document provides NORC interviewers with background information on the NLSY79 and, where necessary,

detailed question-by-question instructions for coding each

survey year’s questionnaire, employer supplement, household interview forms, and other supplementary survey instruments. Beginning with the 1993 interviews, copies of the

interviewer CAPI help screens are incorporated as part of
CHAPTER 8: NLS DATA SETS AND DOCUMENTATION 143

Federal Interagency Committee on Education (FICE)

code variables first present on the 1994 release.

Appendixes:

7. Unemployment Rate (†). This discussion explains how

the continuous and collapsed versions of the variable

‘Unemployment Rate for Labor Market of Current Residence’ were created.

10. Geocode Documentation (†). This appendix provides

background information on the creation of the original

1979–82 geocode tape and later updates on the modification of those data for the 1979–2000 release.

NLSY79 child and young adult documentation

Documentation for the child file includes survey instruments

(often called “supplements”), a child and young adult data

users guide, a child handbook covering assessment procedures and data collected from 1986–90, and summary reports

evaluating data collections since 1990. Those items identified with a (†) are updated, either wholly or in part, for the

latest data release. Researchers using the NLSY79 child file

who make extensive use of data derived from the mother’s

record should consider ordering the relevant NLSY79 main

file documentation items as well as the child materials.

Other summary reports also are available to researchers

working with the child data; chapter 10 of this document

provides descriptions and ordering information.

Child Assessment Instruments (†). Depending on the year,

the child survey includes a Child Supplement, a Child SelfAdministered Supplement for children 10 years of age and

older, and a Mother Supplement. The mode of administration—paper or CAPI—also varies depending on the year.

The young adults (NLSY79 children age 15 and older) are

administered the CAPI Young Adult Questionnaire, as well

as the paper Young Adult Survey—Self-Report Booklet. The

2000 survey incorporated these young adult self-report questions into the CAPI questionnaire, so no paper instrument

was used.

Child Assessment Tables (†). These year-specific reports

contain descriptive tables based on the NLSY79 child assessment data. They provide detailed distributions of raw

and normed scores by age and race or ethnicity for overall

scales, as well as for any relevant subscales. The tables are

available for each child assessment year starting with 1994.

Child and Young Adult Data Users Guide (†). This guide is

updated for each data release. It provides information on the

contents of the data, characteristics of the child and mother

samples, sampling constraint issues of which users should

be aware, and a discussion of each child assessment administered during the interviews. The guide to the 2000 data is

each Q by Q. All users must have access to a copy of the

latest Q by Q.

Flowcharts. These schematic diagrams, available for the

1979–92 surveys, depict the often complex skip patterns in

the main questionnaire and questionnaire supplements.

NLSY79 work history documentation

Appendix 18, “Overview of the NLSY79 Work History Data”

(found in the main NLSY79 codebook supplement), introduces users to the work history data. It describes the creation of the data set, the programs used to create it, and the

input variables.

NLSY79 geocode file

The documentation for the NLSY79 geocode CD consists of

a codebook supplement with additional coding information

and variable creation descriptions not present within the electronic version of the codebook. This documentation is distributed only to NLS researchers who complete the BLS

geocode application process. The application process is

described at http://www.bls.gov/nls. The application also can

be downloaded from this site.

Geocode Codebook Supplement (†). This publication contains a set of attachments and appendixes. Brief descriptions of the contents of each document are provided below.

Items identified with a (†) are updated for the latest release of

data.

Attachments:

100. Geographic Regions. This document lists the States

making up each of the four regions used in coding such

variables as ‘Region of Residence,’ ‘South/Non-South

Place of Birth,’ and ‘South/Non-South Place of Residence at Age 14.’

101. Country Codes (†). Provided in this document are the

foreign country codes for respondents’ country of residence, country of parents’ birthplace, and country of

citizenship at the time of immigration.

102. State FIPS Codes. The Federal Information Processing

Standards are used to code respondents’ State of birth

and State and county of residence.

104. SMSA Codes (†). This attachment contains coding information used to classify the respondent’s SMSA,

MSA, CMSA, or PMSA of residence at each interview

date.

105. Addendum to FICE Codes (†). This document provides

supplementary identification codes for colleges and

universities not listed in the Education Directory:

Colleges and Universities (1981–82 and 1982–83

supplement) published by the National Center for Education Statistics. It includes information on the revised
144 CHAPTER 8: NLS DATA SETS AND DOCUMENTATION

now available.

NLSY79 Child Handbook (1986–90). This document summarizes the administration of child assessments during the

1986–90 period.

NLSY79 Children 1992 Description and Evaluation. This

publication describes the 1992 child assessment data, including completion rates for assessments by age, race, and

ethnicity. It offers indepth discussions of outcomes over

time and evaluates the validity of the assessments.

NLSY79 young adult attachments (†). These numbered attachments provide supplementary coding information not

contained in the codebook, as well as the electronic question-by-question specifications available to the interviewers. Starting in 2000, these were incorporated into the

questionnaire.

3. 1970 Census Industry/Occupation Codes. This attachment contains the three-digit 1970 census classifications

used to code job and training information and Employer

Supplements (U.S. Census Bureau, 1970 Census of

Population Alphabetical Index of Industries and Occupations, U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, DC, 1971).

4. 1990 Census Industry/Occupation Codes. This document lists the three-digit 1990 census classifications

used for double coding of occupation and industry for

the CPS job (U.S. Census Bureau, 1990 Census of Population Alphabetical Index of Industries and Occupations, U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, DC,

1991).

5. Electronic Question-by-Question Specifications. This

attachment lists the help screens available to the interviewer during the administration of the CAPI questionnaire and indicates the question numbers that were

linked to these screens.

NLS original cohort documentation

Documentation items for each original cohort data file are

specific to the cohort. Relevant documentation includes a

set of questionnaires, a codebook supplement, interviewer

reference manuals, and flowcharts. Those items identified

with a (†) are updated, either wholly or in part, for the most

recent release of data for each cohort.

Sets of survey instruments (†). A unique set of survey instruments serves to collect information from respondents during

each interview. Each cohort has a separate set of questionnaires; new questionnaires are issued for each survey year.

A set of survey instruments includes not only copies of each

survey’s questionnaire, but also copies of the household

record cards used before 1995 to record information on the

composition of each respondent’s household.

Interviewer Reference Manuals/Field Representative’s

Manuals (†). Accompanying each questionnaire is a field

reference manual that provides Census Bureau field representatives with background information on the NLS, respondent locating instructions, and detailed

question-by-question instructions for coding and otherwise

completing the questionnaire and household record cards.

Flowcharts. Universe information and skip patterns for

1977–93 questionnaires are provided within separate flowcharts, available for purchase by single year or by set. The

cohort codebooks contain comparable information for earlier years. For CAPI administrations of the surveys of women

beginning in 1995, this type of information is incorporated in

the questionnaire.

Codebook Supplements (†). This set of numbered attachments and appendixes contains cohort-specific supplementary coding and variable creation information not present in

the codebook. A listing of the contents of each codebook

supplement follows below. Contents of the Mature Women

supplement appear first, followed by those for the Young

Women, Older Men, and Young Men.

Mature Women codebook supplement

Attachments:

2. Census of Population Industry and Occupational Classification Codes. This document provides the occupation-industry coding assignments made by Census

Bureau personnel from the verbal descriptions obtained

in the interviews. Codes from 1960, 1980, 1990, and 2000

have been used with this cohort; table 8.1 summarizes

the survey years and jobs for which each scheme is

available. This attachment also contains a copy of the

Duncan Socioeconomic Index, an ordinal prestige scale

assigning a rank of 0 through 97 to each of the threedigit 1960 census occupations.

4. Bose Index. This list provides a mean occupational prestige score for each of the three-digit 1960 occupation

codes for the Mature and Young Women cohorts.

5. Employment Status Recodes. This attachment describes

the methodology used by the Census Bureau to calculate each respondent’s employment status from the CPS

questions asked in each NLS interview. It provides (1)

definitions of ‘working,’ ‘with a job but not at work,’

‘unemployed,’ and ‘not in the labor force’; (2) the decision rules used to assign or recode respondents to a

particular labor force status; and (3) Census Bureau

methodology for dealing with exceptions to the rules.
CHAPTER 8: NLS DATA SETS AND DOCUMENTATION 145

Appendixes:

3. State Names and State Codes by Census Division Listing

4. Derivations for R02847. (Reason left Current Job 1967)

5. Source for Occupational Atypicality Codes

6. Derivations for R02872.50 (Occupational Training 1967–

1972)

7. Derivations for R00792.50 (Training Prior to 1972)

8. Derivations for R00744.05 (Number of Years Worked

Before 1967 in Occupation)

9. Derivations for 1977 *KEY* Variables

10. New Geographical and Environmental Variables 1967–

1977

11. Derivations for 1971 *KEY* Variables

12. Derivations for 1972 *KEY* Variables

18. Union Categories—Copy of Coding Instructions for

Name of Union or Employee Association

19. Derivations for 1982 *KEY* Variables

20. Derivations for 1987 *KEY* Variables

21. Derivations for 1989 *KEY* Variables

22. Derivations for 1992 *KEY* Variables

23. Geometric Progression Coding (†)

24. Pension Plan Data Documentation (†)

36. Summary of the Major Differences between the 1995

and Earlier Surveys

37. Summary of 1995 Data Cleaning Issues

38. Derivations for 1995 *KEY* and Other Created Variables

39. Summary of 1997 Data Cleaning Issues

40. Derivations for 1997 *KEY* and Other Created Variables

41. Derivations for 1999 *KEY* and Other Created Variables

42. Derivations for 2001 *KEY* and Other Created Variables

Young Women codebook supplement

Attachments:

2. Census of Population Industry and Occupational Classification Codes. This document provides the occupation-industry coding assignments made by Census

Bureau personnel from the verbal descriptions obtained

in the interviews. Codes from 1960, 1980, 1990, and 2000

have been used with this cohort; table 8.1 summarizes

the survey years and jobs for which each scheme is

available. This attachment also contains a copy of the

Duncan Socioeconomic Index, an ordinal prestige scale

assigning a rank of 0 through 97 to each of the threedigit 1960 census occupations.

4. Bose Index. This list provides a mean occupational prestige score for each of the three-digit 1960 occupation

codes for the Young Women and Mature Women cohorts.

5. Employment Status Recodes. This attachment describes

the methodology used by the Census Bureau to calculate each respondent’s employment status from the CPS

questions asked in each NLS interview. It provides (1)

definitions of ‘working,’ ‘with a job but not at work,’

‘unemployed,’ and ‘not in the labor force’; (2) the decision rules used to assign or recode respondents to a

particular labor force status; and (3) Census Bureau

methodology for dealing with exceptions to the rules.

Appendixes:

1. Fields of Study in College—Instructions for the Coding

Scheme

2. State Names and State Codes by Census Division Listing

4. Listing of Median Education for Different Occupations

5. Source for Occupational Atypicality Scores

6. Supplemental Edit Specifications for *KEY* Variables:

R03297., R03292., R03294., R03293., R03295.

7. Listing of Correction to Employment Status Recode for

1968 and 1969

9. Determinants of Early Labor Market Success: App. A

10. Determinants of Early Labor Market Success: App. B

11. Determinants of Early Labor Market Success: App. C

12. Determinants of Early Labor Market Success: Method

for Variable Construction

18. Union Categories—Copy of Coding Instructions for

Name of Union or Employee Association

20. Derivations for R05007., R05012. (Marital Status Patterns)

21. Rules for Revising Variables Rep (Month/Yr Since Left

Table 8.1. Mature and young women industry and occupation coding systems by survey year

Coding system Mature women Young women

1960 codes 1967–92 1967–93

1980 codes—current/last job only 1984, 1986 1983–87

1980 codes—current/last job and dual job only 1987–92 1988, 1991

1980 codes—all jobs 1995–99 1993–99

1990 codes—current/last job and dual job only 1992 —

1990 codes—all jobs 1995–99 1993–99

2000 codes—all jobs 1995-2001 1995-2001
146 CHAPTER 8: NLS DATA SETS AND DOCUMENTATION

School)

22. GED/SVP/Job-Level/Job Family Values

23. Derivations for R05031.–R05047. (Occupation and Other

Job Information before Birth of Child)

24. Derivations for R05049.–R05060. (Occupation and Other

Job Information after Birth of Child)

25. New Geographic and Environmental Variables for 1968–

1978

26. Derivations for 1978 *KEY* Variables

27. Source for the Job Characteristics Index

28. Source for the Job Satisfaction Measures

29. Reason for Preference in Union Certification Election

(Item 10e, 1982, R07627.)

30. Derivations for the 1983 *KEY* Variables

31. Listing of Changes in 1983 Survey Made after Questionnaire Printed

32. Derivations for the 1988 *KEY* Variables

33. Derivations for the 1991 *KEY* Variables

34. Derivations for the 1993 *KEY* Variables

35. Geometric Progression Coding

36. Summary of the Major Differences between the 1995

and Earlier Surveys

37. Summary of 1995 Data Cleaning Issues

38. Derivations for 1995 *KEY* and Other Created Variables

39. Summary of 1997 Data Cleaning Issues

40. Derivations for 1997 *KEY* and Other Created Variables

41. Derivations for 1999 *KEY* and Other Created Variables

42. Derivations for 2001 *KEY* and Other Created Variables

Older Men codebook supplement

Attachments:

2. Census of Population Industry and Occupational Classification Codes. This document provides the occupation-industry coding assignments made by Census

Bureau personnel from the verbal descriptions obtained

in the interviews. The 1960 census classifications have

been used to code all occupation and industry variables

for all survey years. In addition, the Census Bureau

double coded the current or last job held by the respondent using the 1960 and 1980 classifications in 1983.

This attachment also contains a copy of the Duncan

Socioeconomic Index, an ordinal prestige scale assigning a rank of 0 through 97 to each of the three-digit 1960

census occupations.

5. Employment Status Recodes. This attachment describes

the methodology used by the Census Bureau to calculate each respondent’s employment status from the CPS

questions asked in each NLS interview. It provides (1)

definitions of ‘working,’ ‘with a job but not at work,’

‘unemployed,’ and ‘not in the labor force’; (2) the decision rules used to assign or recode respondents to a

particular labor force status; and (3) Census Bureau

methodology for dealing with exceptions to the rules.

Appendixes:

1. Table Used for Determining Cutoff Points for Poverty

Status Variables

2. Additional Instructions to Interviewers for the 1969 Survey

3. State Names and State Codes by Census Division Listing

4. Explanation for Census Processing of Weeks on Layoff

(R00737. in 1967 and R01248. in 1969)

5. New Geographic and Environmental Variables 1966–1976

18. Union Categories—Copy of Coding Instructions for

Name of Union or Employee Association

19. Derivations for 1981 *KEY* Variables

27. Procedures for Calculating the 1990 Weights (R06013.10,

R06013.20, R07113.10, R07113.20, R07113.30)

28. Derivations for 1990 *KEY* Variables

29. Summary of Major Differences Between the 1990 and

Earlier Surveys

30. Explanation for the 1990 Created Social Security Variables (R06743.10–R06743.30)

31. Derivations for Collapsed Occupation and Industry Variables (R07092.–R07098.)

32. Procedures for Coding Cause of Death—Supplemental

Death Certificates

Young Men codebook supplement

Attachments:

2. Census of Population Industry and Occupational Classification Codes. This document provides the occupation-industry coding assignments made by Census

Bureau personnel from the verbal descriptions obtained

in the interviews. The 1960 census classifications have

been used to code all occupation and industry variables

for all survey years; only the 1960 codes were used with

this cohort. This attachment also contains a copy of the

Duncan Socioeconomic Index, an ordinal prestige scale

assigning a rank of 0 through 97 to each of the threedigit 1960 census occupations.

5. Employment Status Recodes. This attachment describes

the methodology used by the Census Bureau to calculate each respondent’s employment status from the CPS

questions asked in each NLS interview. It provides (1)

definitions of ‘working,’ ‘with a job but not at work,’

‘unemployed,’ and ‘not in the labor force’; (2) the decision rules used to assign or recode respondents to a

particular labor force status; and (3) Census Bureau

methodology for dealing with exceptions to the rules.

Appendixes:

1. Fields of Study in College—Instructions for the Coding

Scheme
CHAPTER 8: NLS DATA SETS AND DOCUMENTATION 147

2. State Names and State Codes by Census Division Listing

3. Codes for Enlisted Men and Officers in the Military

4. Listing of Median Education for Different Occupations

5. Listing of Corrections to Employment Status Recode for

1966, 1967, 1968, and 1969

6. Listing of the Method Used to Create Respondent’s

Father and Mother 1966 Variables

7. Derivatives for Creation of Dropped Variable Used to

Create R02958.

8. Derivations Used to Create Enrollment Pattern 1966–

1969

9. Determinants of Early Labor Market Success: App. A

10. Determinants of Early Labor Market Success: App. B

11. Determinants of Early Labor Market Success: App. C

12. Determinants of Early Labor Market Success: Method

for Variable Construction

13. Dual Labor Market Theory: Appendix A (Primary and

Secondary Jobs)

14. Edits for R02997.

15. Decision Criteria for Construction of Variables for Date

Last Attended School

16. Listing of Corrections Made for 21 Variables (R02315.–

R02317., R02320.–R02322., R02611.–R02622.)

17. Work Experience Variables: Time Reference for the 1970

Work History Section

18. Union Categories—Coding Instructions for Name of

Union or Employee Association

19. GED/SVP/Job-Level/Job-Family and 3 Digit Occupation

Code

20. Derivation for R03836. and Number of Weeks *KEY*

Variables Between 1975 and 1976

21. New Geographic and Environmental Variables 1966–1976

22. Source for the Job Characteristics Index

23. Source for the Job Satisfaction Measures

24. Derivations for R03035., R03829., R03833.

25. Reason for Preference in Union Certification Elections

26. Derivations for R08114.–R08118.
148 CHAPTER 9: CONFIDENTIALITY AND CONSENT

CONFIDENTIALITY AND CONSENT

 1 Providing information about risks is particularly relevant for

medical studies in which participants could suffer adverse reactions to drugs or treatments. Although the National Longitudinal

Surveys have included health-related topics, information about these

topics has been obtained only through questions asked of respondents, rather than through any medical exams or procedures. As

such, NLS respondents bear no risk of participating. 2

 Surveys that are funded through Federal grants to universities

and other organizations generally do not have to undergo this OMB

Like all surveys, the National Longitudinal Surveys (NLS)rely on the cooperation of respondents to provide relevant, accurate, and timely information that researchers and

policymakers can use to understand economic and social

phenomena. At a minimum, securing cooperation requires

survey administrators to explain clearly to potential respondents the uses of the survey and the importance of each

respondent’s information to the success of the survey. Ethical survey practice entails more than just convincing members of the survey sample to participate, however. Sample

members need to be informed about how their confidentiality will be protected, how their information will be used,

whether participation is voluntary or mandatory, the estimated amount of time it will take to complete the survey, and

any risks of participating.1 After survey administrators provide this and other relevant information to potential respondents, those potential respondents can provide what is called

their “informed consent” to participate.

The NLS program has established a variety of procedures for ensuring respondent confidentiality and obtaining

informed consent. These procedures comply with Federal

law and the policies and guidelines of the U.S. Office of

Management and Budget (OMB), the U.S. Bureau of Labor

Statistics (BLS), and the U.S. Census Bureau. This chapter

describes the process of protecting respondent confidentiality and gaining informed consent in the National Longitudinal Survey of Youth 1979 (NLSY79), the National

Longitudinal Survey of Youth 1997 (NLSY97), and the National Longitudinal Survey of Women (NLSW).

OMB procedures

OMB is responsible for setting overall statistical policy among

Federal agencies. For example, OMB has established standards on collecting information on race and ethnicity, industry, occupation, and geographic location. OMB also has

established standards on the manner and timing of data releases for such principal economic indicators as the gross

domestic product, the national unemployment rate, and the

Consumer Price Index. In addition, OMB sets standards on

whether and how much respondents to Federal surveys can

be paid for their participation, an issue of particular concern

in the NLS program.

Another of OMB’s responsibilities is to review the procedures and questionnaires that Federal agencies use in collecting information from 10 or more respondents. Federal

data collections reviewed by OMB include administrative

data, such as the tax forms that the Internal Revenue Service

requires individuals and corporations to complete. OMB

also reviews all censuses and surveys that Federal agencies

conduct, either directly or through contracts.2

OMB examines a variety of issues during these reviews,

such as:

• The amount of time (and money, if any) that the agency

collecting the information estimates respondents will

spend to provide the requested information

• The agency’s efforts to reduce the burden on respondents of providing the information

• The purpose and necessity of the data collection, including whether it duplicates the objectives of other

Federal data collections

• The ways in which the agency obtains informed consent from potential respondents to participate in the data

collection

• The policies and procedures that the agency has established to ensure respondent confidentiality

review process unless the grantee in turn contracts with a Federal

statistical agency such as the Census Bureau to collect the data. In

place of OMB review, surveys funded through grants typically

must undergo a competitive peer-review process established by

the agency administering the grant, and that review process examines the procedures for maintaining respondent confidentiality and

obtaining the informed consent of the participants. In addition,

such surveys also typically are scrutinized by an institutional review board established at the grantee’s institution.
CHAPTER 9: CONFIDENTIALITY AND CONSENT 149

3 In the NLS program, OMB must review all data collections for the

NLSW, NLSY97, NLSY79, and NLSY79 Children under age 21. In

the NLSY79 Children survey, interviews with respondents age 21

and older are not subject to OMB review because those interviews

are not funded through the contract with BLS. Instead, those interviews are funded through a competitive grant from the National

Institute of Child Health and Human Development to The Ohio

State University Center for Human Resource Research. Virtually

• The statistical methods used to select representative

samples, maximize response rates, and account for

nonresponse

• The payment of money or the giving of gifts to respondents

• The questionnaire itself, including the quality of its design and whether it includes questions that respondents

may regard as sensitive

These OMB reviews are very thorough. From the time an

agency prepares an OMB information collection request until

the time OMB approves the data collection, the process typically takes 7 months or more and includes multiple layers of

review within the agency and at OMB. These reviews are

helpful in improving survey quality and ensuring that agencies treat respondents properly, both in terms of providing

them with information about the data collection and its uses

and protecting respondent confidentiality.

The review process also provides the general public

with two opportunities to submit written comments about

the proposed data collection. The agency conducting the

data collection publishes a notice in the Federal Register

describing the data collection and inviting the public to request copies of the information collection request, questionnaires, and other materials that the agency eventually will

submit to OMB. The public is invited to submit written comments to the agency sponsoring the data collection within

60 days from the time the Federal Register notice is published. In the history of the NLS program, the public very

rarely has submitted comments to BLS, but when comments

are received, they are summarized in the information collection request that ultimately is submitted to OMB.

After the request has been submitted to OMB, the

agency sponsoring the data collection then publishes a second notice in the Federal Register and invites the public to

submit comments directly to OMB within 30 days. Again, in

the history of the NLS program, the public very rarely, if ever,

has submitted comments to OMB.

Once OMB has received the information collection request, they have 60 days to review the package, ask followup

questions, suggest changes (or, occasionally, insist upon

changes) to the survey questionnaire or procedures, and

ultimately grant approval.

After OMB grants approval, the sponsoring agency can

begin contacting potential respondents and collecting information from them. The process of contacting potential NLS

respondents begins with sending them an advance letter

several weeks before interviews are scheduled to begin. The

advance letter serves several purposes. The obvious purpose is to inform respondents that an interviewer will be

contacting them soon, but BLS and the organizations that

conduct the surveys for BLS also use the letter to thank

respondents for their previous participation and to encourage them to participate in the upcoming round. Another

important objective of the advance letter is to remind reand

how respondents’ confidentiality will be protected by BLS

and the organizations that conduct the surveys for BLS. An

example of an advance letter is shown in figure 1.

Institutional review boards

In addition to OMB review, each of the National Longitudinal Surveys is reviewed and approved by an institutional

review board (IRB) at the institutions that manage and conduct the surveys under contract with BLS. Those institutions are The Ohio State University and the National Opinion

Research Center (NORC) at the University of Chicago. BLS

and OMB do not require these reviews; rather, the reviews

are required under the policies of the universities. Obtaining

approval from the IRBs involves completing a form signed

by the Principal Investigator, providing a summary of the

research project and submitting a description of the consent

procedures and forms used in the survey. Additional documentation includes a copy of any materials used to recruit

respondents, a detailed summary of the survey questionnaire, and any other information regarding the risks to humans of participating in the survey.3

The NLS project staff at The Ohio State University Center for Human Resource Research (CHRR) and at NORC obtain approval from their respective IRBs prior to the start of

each round of data collection. Because each survey includes

only an interview and no invasive medical procedures, the

IRBs typically focus on respondent compensation, consent

procedures, and confidentiality protections for special populations, such as incarcerated or disabled respondents. Prisons, schools, and other institutions in which NLS sample

members may reside often request the IRB approval statethe same procedures are used to conduct the NLSY79 Children

interviews for respondents age 21 and older as are used for younger

respondents, so OMB presumably would approve the data collection if asked to do so. Data collection for the NLSY79 Children age

21 and older is subject to the approval of the institutional review

boards at The Ohio State University and the University of Chicago.
150 CHAPTER 9: CONFIDENTIALITY AND CONSENT

Date 

Respondent First and Last Name 

Street Address 

City, State Zip Code 

Dear [Respondent First Name], 

In a country increasingly committed to volunteerism, we on the National Longitudinal Survey of Youth 

1979 (NLSY79) appreciate your continued participation in this study, which is sponsored by the Bureau of 

Labor Statistics of the U.S. Department of Labor. The economic, political, and military challenges faced 

by our country in recent months make the study even more important. Many leaders in business, 

education, and government believe that these circumstances could lead to long-term changes. 

The time that you volunteer every two years provides policy makers and researchers in a variety of fields 

with a wealth of information about the experiences of your generation and changes in your life. You 

alone can make this contribution, as you cannot be replaced. Your participation is vital to the success of 

this important research project. 

We remain extremely grateful to you for your continuing participation and look forward to speaking with 

you again in 2002. The interview will take about 60 minutes to complete. At the end of the interview, 

you will receive $40 in appreciation for your time. If you'd like, we'll gladly provide you with a 

certificate confirming that you completed 5 hours worth of community service. 

As always, the information you provide is protected under the Privacy Act and will be held in confidence 

to the full extent permitted by law. (Please see the Privacy Act statement on the back of this letter.) In 

case you have questions, the OMB control number for this survey is 1220-0109. Without this number, 

we would not be able to conduct this survey. (Please see the Disclosure Notice on the back of this letter.) 

One of our interviewers from NORC at the University of Chicago will be contacting you in the coming 

weeks to set up a convenient appointment for your interview. In the meantime, if you have any questions 

about the study, please feel free to call us toll free at 1-877-853-5908 or send us an e-mail at 

NLS79@norcmail.uchicago.edu. More information about the NLS and the Bureau of Labor Statistics is 

available online at http://www.bls.gov/nls. 

We look forward to talking with you soon! And again, thank you!

Sincerely, 

 Dr. Charles R. Pierret 

 Program Director 

 National Longitudinal Surveys

Figure 9.1 NLSY79 round 20 advance letter
CHAPTER 9: CONFIDENTIALITY AND CONSENT 151

ment and application as evidence that appropriate procedures are being followed and to judge whether to permit NLS

interviewers to have access to individuals for whom the institutions are responsible.

Federal laws

Three Federal laws govern policies and procedures for protecting respondent confidentiality and obtaining informed

consent in the NLS program: the Privacy Act of 1974, the

Confidential Information Protection and Statistical Efficiency

Act (CIPSEA) of 2002, and Title 13 of the United States Code.

The Privacy Act is discussed in the section on the NLSY79

and NLSY97 cohorts, as well as in the section on the NLSW

cohort. CIPSEA, which applies to all data collected by Federal agencies under a pledge of confidentiality for exclusively

statistical purposes, also is discussed in both sections. Title

13 applies only to the NLSW and is described in that section

of this chapter.

NLSY79 and NLSY97 cohorts

The Privacy Act of 1974 protects the confidentiality of participants in the NLSY79 and NLSY97. BLS policy requires

that advance letters sent to potential respondents in these

surveys include on the back of the letter the BLS Privacy Act

statement shown in figure 2.

In addition to the Privacy Act statement, BLS also requires that advance letters sent to potential NLSY79 and

NLSY97 respondents include on the back of the letters the

Disclosure Notice shown in figure 3.

To be sure, the Privacy Act statement includes language

that may be confusing to some respondents, particularly

those not familiar with the nuances of legal writing. For that

reason, the advance letter itself typically is written in a friendlier, less formal style to inform respondents about how their

confidentiality will be protected and how their information

will be used. In addition, survey interviewers are trained

how to answer questions from respondents about how their

privacy will be protected.

Interviewers explain to potential respondents that all

the employees who work on the surveys at BLS, NORC, and

CHRR are required to sign an affidavit stating that they will

not disclose the identities of survey respondents to anyone

The Bureau of Labor Statistics estimates that it will take an average of 60 minutes per

respondent to complete this survey. If you have any comments regarding this estimate

or any other aspect of the survey including suggestions for reducing the time needed

to respond, you may send them to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, National Longitudinal Surveys, 2 Massachusetts Ave., N.E., Washington DC 20212.

Figure 9.3. BLS Disclosure Notice used in the NLSY79 and NLSY97

Figure 9.2. Privacy Act statement used in the NLSY79 and NLSY97

In accordance with the Privacy Act of 1974, as amended (5 U.S.C. 552a), you are hereby

notified that this survey is sponsored by the U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor

Statistics, under authority of 29 U.S.C. 2. Your participation is vital to the success of the

survey and is voluntary. The information collected in this survey will be used by BLS and

other researchers to understand the labor market experience of individuals over time. BLS

makes available to the general public and other federal agencies conducting labor force research information that is not individually identifiable. Under written agreements to protect

the confidentiality and security of identifying information, BLS provides potentially identifying geographic information to researchers to conduct specific research projects that further

the mission and function of BLS. Unless required by law, or necessary for litigation or legal

proceedings, and except as provided in the Privacy Act or as indicated in this statement, we

will hold personal identifiers (for example, name, address, or social security number) in confidence and will not release them to the public. BLS may release identifying data to the

National Opinion Research Center (NORC) and the Ohio State University, and contractors,

grantees, and their employees or volunteers who are working on this project for BLS and

who need access to the material, or to the National Archives and Records Administration or

the General Services Administration for records management purposes.
152 CHAPTER 9: CONFIDENTIALITY AND CONSENT

who does not work on the NLS program and is therefore not

legally authorized to have such information. In fact, no one

at BLS has access to information about respondents’ identities, and only a few staff members at NORC and CHRR who

need such information to carry out their job duties have access to information about respondents’ identities.

Interviewers also explain that the answers respondents

provide will be made available to researchers at BLS and

other government agencies, universities, and private research

organizations, but only after all personal identifiers—such

as names, addresses, Social Security numbers, and places of

work—have been removed. In addition, the publicly available data files exclude any information about the States,

counties, metropolitan areas, and other, more detailed geographic locations in which respondents live, making it much

more difficult to infer the identities of respondents.

Respondents are told that some researchers are granted

special access to data files that include geographic information, but only after those researchers undergo a thorough

application process at BLS and sign a written agreement

making them official agents of BLS and requiring them to

protect the confidentiality of respondents. In no case are

researchers provided with information on the personal identities of respondents.

Finally, the reference in the Privacy Act statement to the

National Archives and Records Administration and the General Services Administration may be confusing to some potential respondents, because those Federal agencies are not

involved in the administration of the surveys. Interviewers

explain to respondents that NLS data and materials will be

made available to those agencies because they are responsible for storing the Nation’s historical documents. The information provided to those agencies does not include

respondents’ personal identities, however.

CIPSEA, a new Federal law that was signed by President Bush on December 17, 2002, also protects the confidentiality of participants in the NLSY79 and NLSY97 by ensuring

that individuals who provide information to BLS under a

pledge of confidentiality for statistical purposes will not have

that information disclosed in identifiable form to anyone not

authorized to have it. In addition, CIPSEA ensures that the

information respondents provide will be used only for statistical purposes. While it always has been the BLS policy to

protect respondent data from disclosure through the Privacy

Act and by claiming exemptions to the Freedom of Information Act, this new law is important because it specifically

protects data collected from respondents for statistical purposes under a pledge of confidentiality. This new law

strengthens the ability of BLS to assure respondents that,

when they supply information to BLS, their information will

be protected. In addition, CIPSEA includes fines and penalties for any knowing and willful disclosure of specific information to unauthorized persons by any officer, employee, or

agent of BLS. Since the enactment of the Trade Secrets Act

and the Privacy Act, BLS officers, employees, and agents

have been subject to criminal penalties for the mishandling

of confidential data, and the fines and penalties under CIPSEA

are consistent with those prior laws. CIPSEA now makes

such fines and penalties uniform across all Federal agencies

that collect data for exclusively statistical purposes under a

pledge of confidentiality.

The organizations involved in the NLS program have

never had an instance in which a respondent’s identity was

illegally disclosed, but these organizations continuously

monitor their security procedures and improve them when

necessary. Protecting the privacy of NLS respondents entails considerable responsibilities for BLS, the organizations

that conduct the surveys for BLS, and the researchers who

use the data. Indeed, researchers in particular may become

frustrated that they cannot obtain access to all the data that

they want or that they must undergo a long review process

at BLS to obtain some types of data. It is important to remember, however, that protecting respondent confidentiality must remain paramount. Any action that might jeopardize

respondent confidentiality and erode the confidence of respondents could harm response rates in the NLS program

and in other government or academic surveys. Thus, without the safeguards in place to protect respondent confidentiality, researchers would have far less data available to work

with than they currently enjoy.

Contractors’ role in maintaining respondent confidentiality. BLS, NORC, and CHRR are responsible for following the

Federal requirements and maintaining their own security procedures. As mentioned earlier, all officers, employees, and

agents of BLS are required to sign affidavits stating that

they will not disclose the identities of survey respondents to

anyone who does not work on the NLS program and is therefore not legally authorized to have such information. Each

contractor has in place procedures to ensure that the data

are secure at each point in the survey process. (See the Data

Handling section of this chapter for more information.)

Like all contractor staff, field interviewers are agents of

BLS and are required to sign the BLS nondisclosure affidavit

before working on the NLSY79 or NLSY97. All interviewers

also must undergo a background check when they are hired.

Confidentiality is stressed during training and enforced at all

times. Field interviewers receive specific instructions in their

reference manuals to remind them of the appropriate procedures when locating or interacting with respondents or contacts.

At the end of each interview, interviewers ask respondents to provide information on family members, friends, or

neighbors who can be contacted if the interviewers are unable to locate the sample member in a subsequent round of

interviews. The interviewers then use those contacts to help
CHAPTER 9: CONFIDENTIALITY AND CONSENT 153

in locating sample members who have moved. When contacting a sample member’s relatives, friends, or neighbors

about the sample member’s whereabouts, interviewers never

disclose the name of the survey they are conducting. They

are instructed to maintain the confidentiality of any relative,

friend, or neighbor who provides information about the

sample member’s whereabouts.

Answering machines can pose problems when interviewers are contacting sample members because it is difficult to confirm that the interviewer is calling a sample

member’s correct telephone number or that other household

members will not hear the message. For those reasons, interviewers are instructed not to leave messages on answering

machines.

When interviewers contact the appropriate household,

they ask to speak with the sample member or the parent of a

sample member under age 18. Interviewers introduce themselves and state the purpose of the call by saying that they

are from the National Opinion Research Center at the University of Chicago and are calling concerning a national survey.

The name of the survey is not disclosed to anyone but the

sample member.

Special situations. The NLSY79 and NLSY97 are general

population surveys and include a variety of sample members

with special circumstances, such as incarcerated individuals, other institutionalized persons, disabled persons, those

with limited English proficiency, and so forth.

Incarcerated respondents. Incarcerated respondents constitute the largest group requiring special accommodations.

Project procedures regarding incarcerated respondents involve extra efforts to protect their confidentiality. These

procedures include obtaining a private room in which to conduct an in-person interview, a guarantee from the institution

that a telephone interview is not monitored, parental consent for incarcerated respondents under the age of 18 (in

addition to their own consent), and compliance with the regulations of correctional facilities regarding payment for survey participation.

Respondents with limited English proficiency. Some respondents lack fluency in English and are more comfortable using

another language. It is not possible to accommodate all of

the different languages other than English that respondents

might speak, but the NLSY79 and NLSY97 historically have

made special arrangements for respondents and their parents who speak Spanish, the most commonly spoken language other than English among respondents. NORC staff

members translate advance letters and other informational

materials into Spanish to enable respondents and the parents of minor respondents to provide their informed consent

based on information that is written in the language that

they understand best. Survey questionnaires also have been

translated into Spanish to ensure that the surveys are administered consistently, an alternative much preferable to

having Spanish-speaking interviewers translate the Englishlanguage questionnaire during the interview. The first 20

rounds of the NLSY79 and the first 6 rounds of the NLSY97

included a Spanish version of the questionnaire, but, because the number of respondents who speak only Spanish

has continued to decline, it no longer is cost-effective to

continue programming a computerized Spanish questionnaire. For that reason, Spanish questionnaires will not be

used starting with round 7 (2003-04) of the NLSY97 and round

21 (2004) of the NLSY79. Advance letters and other informational materials still will be available in Spanish, however.

Sensitive subjects. The NLSY79 and NLSY97 have included

questions on income and assets, religion, relationships with

parents and other family members, sexual experiences, abortion, drug and alcohol use, criminal activities, homelessness,

runaway episodes, and other topics that are potentially sensitive for respondents to discuss. Respondents are advised

at the start of the interview that they can choose not to

answer any questions that they prefer not to answer. During

training, interviewers undergo exercises to teach them how

to allay the concerns of respondents about answering sensitive questions and encourage them to respond. Interviewers are instructed not to coerce respondents into answering

questions that they prefer not to answer, however.

All questions in the NLSY79 and most questions in the

NLSY97 are read to the respondent by an interviewer. The

respondent then provides an answer, and the interviewer

records that answer on a laptop computer. For especially

sensitive questions, some respondents might be reluctant to

answer truthfully—or at all—if they have to tell an interviewer their answers, even though interviewers can face criminal and civil penalties if they disclose the respondents’

identities or answers to anyone not authorized to receive

that information.

Obviously, it is important that respondents answer all

questions truthfully, so the NLSY97 includes a self-administered portion of the questionnaire to reduce the potential

reluctance to respond to sensitive questions. In this mode

of data collection, the interviewer hands the laptop computer to the respondent and asks the respondent to read the

questions and enter his or her responses with the keyboard.

Sometimes, respondents have literacy problems or disabilities that prevent them from reading the questions on the

computer screen. For this reason, the interviewer also provides the respondent with a set of headphones that plug

into the computer and enable the respondent to listen to a

computer-generated recording of someone reading the questions. While the respondent completes this computer-assisted self-interview, the interviewer does not see the
154 CHAPTER 9: CONFIDENTIALITY AND CONSENT

respondent’s answers and, in fact, does not even see what

questions the respondent is answering. Even in the selfadministered portion of the survey, however, respondents

still have the option not to respond to individual questions.

Guidelines for e-mailing sample members. At the end of

each interview, respondents are asked to provide information that will help interviewers contact them during subsequent rounds of the surveys. In addition to the information

collected about relatives, friends, or neighbors, interviewers

also obtain the e-mail addresses of sample members who

have them. During round 5 of the NLSY97 (conducted during 2001-2002) and round 20 of the NLSY79 (conducted during 2002), the NLS contractors began using e-mail as a means

to contact a small number of sample members who were hard

to reach by other means. The following guidelines were

enacted to ensure confidentiality:

1. The name of the survey (NLSY97 or NLSY79) is not

contained in the subject line or text of the e-mail message. Some sample members may share the use of an email address with other household members, so the

survey name is omitted from the message to prevent

other household members from learning the specific

name of the survey.

2. E-mail is sent from one NORC address. Field interviewers are not permitted to use their individual e-mail accounts to contact sample members.

Respondents knowing respondents. One feature of the

sample design in the NLSY79 and NLSY97 is that there often

are multiple respondents within the same original household,

either siblings or, occasionally, spouses. It obviously is not

possible in these cases to prevent family members from knowing that a relative is in the survey sample, but interviewers

take steps to ensure that each respondent’s answers remain

private and are not revealed to other family members.

Consent from NLSY97 respondents and parents. Because

of the young ages of this cohort in the initial survey years,

additional measures were taken to obtain informed consent

from minors and their parents. Consent procedures for

rounds 1 through 5 of the NLSY97 included the following

protocol:

1. For respondents age 17 and younger, parents were asked

to complete a written Parental Permission to Interview

Youth form prior to the youth’s completion of the interview. Respondents themselves were asked to complete

a written Youth Assent to Participate form prior to completing the interview. This protocol also applied to respondents who were in prison or whose interviews were

completed by a proxy. (Proxy interviews are conducted

in cases in which a disabled respondent could complete

the interview only with the assistance of a parent, guardian, or other caretaker.) Respondents who were age 17

or younger and had attained independence or were considered “self-supportive” were not required to have a

parent complete a permission form.

2. Whether or not a parent permission form was required,

all youths, regardless of age, signed a consent form prior

to completing the interview.

Through the completion of round 5 data collection in May

2002, a significant proportion of NLSY97 sample members

required signed parental permission because they had not

yet reached age 18 or established legal independence.

As of January 1, 2003, all NLSY97 sample members were

at least age 18. Beginning in round 6, consent procedures

changed to align with procedures of other large surveys of

adults. Respondents age 18 and older now verbally consent

prior to completing the interview. They read the same consent statement used in previous rounds, but they no longer

need to sign any documents.4 For incarcerated respondents

and respondents whose interviews are completed by proxy,

the NLS program continues to require signed consent as an

additional safeguard against possible coercion.

Consent from NLSY79 respondents and Young Adults age

18 and older. Respondents are able to review the confidentiality and consent information presented in the advance letter. The respondent gives verbal consent to participate at

the beginning of the interview.

Children of the NLSY79, parental consent. In the Children

of the NLSY79, the biological children of female NLSY79

sample members are assessed, and the mothers are interviewed about their children. Children ages 4 to 14 are given

a variety of assessments depending on their age; children

younger than age 4 are not assessed. The mother’s consent

is required for these assessments to be administered. The

field interviewer asks the mother to sign a consent form. The

back of the parental permission form has the BLS Privacy

Act statement and Disclosure Notice shown in figures 2 and

3 of this chapter. In the rare cases in which the child is not

assessed but the mother is interviewed by telephone about

the child, the mother gives verbal consent over the telephone.

The field interviewer signs the consent form and returns it to

the central office of the NLS contractor for secure storage.

Children ages 10 to 14 are asked a series of questions

4

 Data collection for round 6 began in November 2002, when approximately 250 respondents were still age 17. Interviews with

these respondents were postponed until January 2003, when all

had reached age 18.
CHAPTER 9: CONFIDENTIALITY AND CONSENT 155

Young Adults under age 18, parental consent. Parental permission is required for young adults ages 15 to 17 who undergo an interview modeled on the questionnaire used in the

main NLSY79. For telephone interviews, the field interviewer

asks to speak to the parent and requests permission from

that parent to interview the young adult. When the parent

grants permission, the interviewer signs the consent form

and returns it to the central office of the NLS contractor for

secure storage.

NLSW cohort

The NLSW is conducted for BLS by the Census Bureau.

Title 13 of the U.S. Code authorizes the Census Bureau to

conduct censuses and surveys and protects the confidentiality of respondents. Title 13 requires that information collected from respondents by the Census Bureau remain

confidential. The information can be used only for statistical

purposes at secure locations by Census Bureau employees

who have been specifically authorized to have access to

NLSW data. Individuals not employed by the Census Bureau can have access to confidential NLSW data only if they

have obtained “Special Sworn Status” from the Census Bureau to use the data. Title 13 provides specific penalties for

violations of the confidentiality of companies, establishments, households, or individuals. Publication of NLSW

data must not include details that can identify individuals

participating in the survey. Wrongful disclosure of confidential information could result in substantial monetary fines

and jail time. The Census Bureau’s internal Disclosure Review Board sets the confidentiality rules for all data releases.

The NLS of Older Men and NLS of Young Men also were

conducted by the Census Bureau, and, although those surveys no longer are conducted, Title 13 continues to protect

the confidentiality of respondents.

The Privacy Act also applies to the NLSW. The law

requires the Census Bureau to provide NLSW sample members with information about the purpose of the survey, the

legal authority for conducting the survey, and the ways in

which the information about participants will be used. The

Privacy Act also requires the Census Bureau to inform sample

members that their participation is voluntary, rather than

mandatory, and that there are no consequences to sample

members who choose not to participate. This information

enables NLSW sample members to provide their informed

consent to participate.

CIPSEA also applies to information collected by the

Census Bureau for exclusively statistical purposes under a

pledge of confidentiality.

The information provided to NLSW sample members

about their confidentiality and reporting burden is similar to

but slightly different from the information provided to sample

members in the NLSY79 and NLSY97. Perhaps the most significant difference is that the advance letters sent to NLSW

sample members are signed by the Director of the Census

Bureau, rather than by the Director of the NLS program at

BLS. NLSW advance letters also do not include the BLS

Privacy Act statement shown in figure 2 or the BLS Disclosure Notice shown in figure 3. Instead, the back of the advance letter sent to NLSW sample members provides

information in a question-and-answer format about confidentiality and reporting burden. The information presented

on the back of the advance letter for the 2001 NLSW is shown

in figure 4.

If the sample member receives the advance letter and

agrees to participate, the Census Bureau regards that agreement as informed consent and proceeds with the interview.

If the sample member has not received the advance letter

when the Census Bureau interviewer visits or calls on the

telephone to conduct an interview, the interviewer either

hands the sample member a copy of the advance letter or

reads her a statement that contains the information required

to obtain informed consent. If the sample member agrees to

participate, the interviewer proceeds with the interview.

The great majority of NLSW interviews are by self-response, meaning the sample member answers the questions.

If the sample member is unable to respond because of a physical or mental condition, a proxy respondent can provide the

information if the sample member is present. Because the

proxy respondent usually is a family member living in the

same household as the sample member, the Census Bureau

assumes that the proxy has sufficient knowledge to respond

on behalf of the sample member. The interviewer follows the

same informed-consent protocol described earlier. That is,

the interviewer makes sure that the proxy respondent has

received a copy of the advance letter or has been read the

statement that contains the information required to obtain

informed consent.

Census Bureau interviewers are required to sign an affidavit affirming their responsibilities to protect the confidentiality of respondents. Interviewers receive training that

stresses the importance of protecting respondent confidentiality. This training and the interviewer reference manuals

explain the appropriate procedures to follow when locating

or interacting with respondents or contacts. These procedures are similar to those that interviewers from NORC must

follow when conducting the NLSY79 and NLSY97, as described earlier in this chapter.

through a self-administered questionnaire on a variety of

potentially sensitive topics. After the mother verbally agrees

that the child may answer these questions, the interviewer

reads a consent statement to the child and obtains verbal

consent. This consent statement is similar to the statement

used with older respondents but has been cognitively tested

and revised to ensure that it is appropriate for preteens.
156 CHAPTER 9: CONFIDENTIALITY AND CONSENT

Figure 9.4. Confidentiality and reporting burden information in 2001 NLSW advance letter

SOME COMMONLY ASKED QUESTIONS 

WHY IS THIS SURVEY IMPORTANT? 

Because of your help, the Department of Labor, as well as economists, sociologists, and 

other researchers, will get a clearer picture of how work-related decisions influence 

people’s lives. If you are married, information about your husband will help provide a 

more complete picture. Policymakers can use the work information we obtain to shape 

economic policy. This is a voluntary survey, and there are no penalties for not answering 

questions. However, missing responses seriously hamper our ability to make statements 

and predictions about the country as a whole. Your answers represent hundreds of other 

women your age. We hope we can count on your participation again this year. 

WHO AUTHORIZES THIS SURVEY? 

The Census Bureau is conducting this survey for the Department of Labor. It is 

authorized under Title 29, Section 2, of the United States Code. The Office of 

Management and Budget (OMB) has approved this survey and has assigned 1220-0110 

as the survey’s control number and an expiration date of December 31, 2001. Without 

OMB approval and this number, we would not be able to conduct this survey. 

WHO SEES MY ANSWERS? 

We want to reassure you that your confidentiality is completely protected. We are 

conducting this survey under the authority of Title 13, United States Code, Section 8.

Section 9 of this law requires us to keep all information about you and your household 

strictly confidential. We may use this information only for statistical purposes. 

HOW CAN I PREPARE FOR THE INTERVIEW? 

We will be asking questions about your family life, your participation in the labor force, 

health insurance and pension coverage, and special employment problems. If you are 

married, we will ask similar questions about your husband. It would be helpful if you 

would give some thought to these topics before the field representative visits. 

HOW MUCH TIME WILL THE INTERVIEW TAKE? 

Based on past years, we expect the average interview to take about 60 minutes. Since not 

everyone will complete all parts of the questionnaire, actual times do vary. Your 

interview may be somewhat shorter or longer depending on your circumstances. If you 

have any comments regarding this survey or recommendations for reducing its length, 

send them to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, Office of Employment and Unemployment 

Statistics, National Longitudinal Surveys Division, Project 1220-0110, Washington, DC 

20212.
CHAPTER 9: CONFIDENTIALITY AND CONSENT 157

Disclosure limitation. Disclosure limitation is the process

for protecting the confidentiality of data. An improper disclosure of data occurs when someone can use published

statistical information to identify an individual who has provided information under a pledge of confidentiality. Using

disclosure limitation procedures, the Census Bureau modifies or removes the characteristics that put confidential information at risk for disclosure. Although it may appear that

a table shows information about a specific individual, the

Census Bureau has taken steps to disguise the original data

while making sure the results are still useful. Under these

restrictions, survey contractors and researchers are prevented from receiving certain information on NLSW respondents, particularly information on geographic location,

employer names, school names, and some income data.

Research Data Centers. The Census Bureau’s Center for

Economic Studies has established a number of Research Data

Centers throughout the United States. At Research Data

Centers, researchers may have access to confidential data

sets collected by the Census Bureau, with appropriate safeguards to protect respondent confidentiality.

Geographic information collected during NLSW interviews is now available for researchers to use at the Research

Data Centers. The cohort-specific files contain the respondent identification number, survey year, and State code.

Researchers may match these files to the NLSW data sets.

The Research Data Centers currently have available the Federal Information Processing Standards (FIPS) State codes

for each survey year. Having the State variables also enables researchers to identify the census regions and divisions. For more information about geographic data available

for the NLSW, see chapter 5 of this Handbook. More information about the Research Data Centers is available online

at http://www.ces.census.gov.

Data handling in all NLS cohorts

An important part of maintaining respondent confidentiality

is the careful handling and storage of data. Steps taken by

BLS, the Census Bureau, CHRR, and NORC to ensure the

confidentiality of all respondents to the NLS include maintaining secure networks, restricting access to geographic

variables, and topcoding income and asset values.

Network security. The data that are stored and handled at

each NLS organization’s site are done so with maximum security in place. During data collection, transmission, and

storage, password protection and encryption are used to

secure the data. Standard protocols for network security are

followed at each organization’s site. Detailed information

about these arrangements is not provided to the public to

prevent anyone from circumventing these safeguards.

Restricting access to geographic information. Geographic

information about NLSY79 or NLSY97 respondents is available only to researchers who are designated agents of BLS.

These researchers must agree in writing to adhere to the BLS

confidentiality policy, and their projects must further the mission of BLS and the NLS program to conduct sound, legitimate research in the social sciences. Applicants must

provide a clear statement of their research methodology and

objectives and explain how the geographic variables are necessary to meet those objectives. For more information about

obtaining access to geographic variables in the NLSY79 and

NLSY97, see the NLS Web site at http://www.bls.gov/nls.

Because of the confidentiality restrictions followed by

the Census Bureau, geographic information for the NLSW is

available only at Census Research Data Centers. For more

details, see the NLSW section earlier in this chapter and

chapter 5 of this Handbook.

Topcoding of income and asset variables. Another step taken

to ensure the confidentiality of NLS respondents who have

unusually high income and asset values is to “topcode” those

values in NLS data sets. Values that exceed a certain level

are recoded so that they do not exceed the specified level. In

each survey round, income and asset variables that include

high values are identified for topcoding. For example, the

wage and salary income variable usually is topcoded, but

variables indicating the amount received from public assistance programs are not. Notes in the codebooks for topcoded

income and asset variables provide more information about

the exact calculations used to topcode each variable. Additional information about topcoding is provided in the user’s

guides for each NLS cohort.
158 CHAPTER 10: FOR MORE INFORMATION

FOR MORE INFORMATION

I

n addition to this Handbook, the Bureau of Labor Statis

tics (BLS) and the Center for Human Resource Research

(CHRR) at The Ohio State University prepare and distribute

a variety of materials designed to inform the research community about the National Longitudinal Surveys (NLS) program. This chapter describes the various documents

available to the public, including general and technical publications, special summary reports, bibliographies, and research papers. Persons wishing to order any item should

check for item availability online at the http://

www.bls.gov/nls Web site.

NLS News

All purchasers of NLS data and other interested persons

receive this complimentary quarterly newsletter. Previous

issues of NLS News can be found at http://www.bls.gov/nls.

The newsletter contains:

• Updates on the status and availability of the various

NLS data releases

• Notices of errors found in the data files or documentation

• Citations for completed NLS research

• Topical information on areas of interest in the surveys

• Other information of general interest to the NLS research

community

Technical manuals

NLS User’s Guides. These guides to accessing NLS data

and documentation are designed for researchers working with

one or more of the NLS data sets. Separate cohort-specific

guides are published in conjunction with each survey round

for the continuing cohorts—the NLS of Mature Women, the

NLS of Young Women, NLSY79, and NLSY97. These documents function to (1) introduce the reader to the NLS program, the various NLS cohorts, and the public-use data

releases; (2) present discussions of important subsets of

NLS variables; and (3) describe the components of the NLS

documentation system. The user’s guide for each NLS cohort can be viewed on the BLS Web site

(http://www.bls.gov/nls) or ordered in hardcopy form from

NLS User Services.

The user’s guides discuss sampling design and fielding

procedures, sample representativeness and attrition, sample

sizes and retention rates, reasons for noninterview, created

variables, and weighting for all cohorts, as well as design

effects for the NLSY79 and NLSY97. Each guide also contains topical discussions of sets of NLS variables, including

variable summaries, references to relevant survey instruments

or documentation items, and cautionary notes to users about

any inconsistencies in, or special considerations in using,

those sets of variables. Finally, the guides describe the paper copy and electronic documentation items distributed with

each data set. Included are discussions of the organization

and content of the NLS data-collection instruments; the NLS

Investigator search and extraction software that facilitates

identification of variables of interest; and the NLS codebook

system that provides core information on each variable’s

coding categories, frequency distribution, universe, and

source.

Figure 10.1 lists the topical areas of discussion for the

NLSY97 guide, and figure 10.2 lists the topics in the NLSY79,

Mature Women, and Young Women guides.

NLSY79 child documentation. The NLSY79 child documentation informs data users about certain nuances of the

various assessments and the limitations of these data; it then

provides specific instructions on how to properly access

and use the child assessment variables. Of particular interest are discussions of the nature of the mother and child

samples and the longitudinal nature of the child assessment

data. A report, entitled “Patterning of Child Assessment

Completion Rates in the NLSY: 1986–1996” (CHRR, 1998)

documents patterns of assessment completion through the

1996 survey. The NLSY79 2000 Child and Young Adult

Data Users Guide (CHRR, 2002) provides additional important information for users of these data; for specific tabular

information, users should refer to the 1994–2000 NLSY79

Child Assessments Selected Tables reports (CHRR, 1997, 1998,

2000, 2002). The NLSY79 Child Handbook (1986–90) summarizes the overall administration of child assessments.

Together, these manuals and reports describe each of

the child assessments administered during the biennial child

surveys and the criteria used in their selection. They supply

information regarding the field procedures used in administering the child and young adult interviews, the interviewer
CHAPTER 10: FOR MORE INFORMATION 159

Figure 10.1. NLS User’s Guide topical areas: NLSY97

Aptitude, achievement, and intelligence scores

Achievement tests

Administration of the CAT-ASVAB

PIAT Math Test

Education

College experience

Educational status and attainment

School-based learning programs

School experience

School and transcript surveys

Employment

Employers and jobs

Fringe benefits

Gaps in employment

Industry

Job search

Labor force status

Occupation

Self-employment characteristics

Tenure

Time spent at work

Wages

Work experience

Event history

Expectations, attitudes, behaviors, and time use

Alcohol use

Attitudes

Autonomy and parental control

Cigarette use

Crime, delinquency, and arrest

Drug use

Expectations

Sexual activity and dating

Time use

Family background and demographic characteristics

Age of respondent

Sex

Geographic indicators

Household and neighborhood environment

Household composition

Nonresident characteristics

Parent characteristics

Race and ethnicity

Youth history

Health

Income, program participation, and assets

Assets and debts

Income

Program participation

Marital history and fertility

Fertility, pregnancy, and children

Marital and marriage-like relationships

Training

Figure 10.2. Figure NLS User’s Guide topical areas: Mature Women (MW), Young Women (YW), and

 NLS79 (79)

Age

Alcohol use

Aptitude, achievement, and intelligence scores (YW, 79)

Attitudes and expectations

Child care

Cigarette use

Class of worker

Crime, delinquency, and arrest records (YW, 79)

Discrimination

Drug use (79)

Educational attainment

Family background

Fertility

Fringe benefits

Sex (79)

Geographic residence and environmental characteristics

Government training and jobs programs (79)

Health

High school survey and college information (YW)

Household composition

Income and assets

Industries

Job characteristics (YW, 79)

Job satisfaction

Job search

Jobs and employers (79)

Labor force status

Marital status and marital transitions

Military (79)

Occupations

Pension benefits and pension plans

Poverty status and public assistance support sources

Race, ethnicity, and nationality

School and transcript surveys (79)

School discipline (YW, 79)

Sexual activity and contraception (79)

Social Security and disability (MW, YW)

Time and tenure with employers (79)

Training

Transfers (YW, MW)

Wages

Work experience

Work history data (79)
160 CHAPTER 10: FOR MORE INFORMATION

training required, and the types of field conditions encountered. Indicators of the reliability and validity of the assessments are presented, as well as references to other studies

that used the same or similar measures. The documents discuss the scoring of the child assessments and the types of

summary scores available. Descriptive materials about the

assessments include tabular information relating the distribution of the various outcome scores to a number of child

and maternal characteristics, correlations among assessments, selected reliability coefficients, and a discussion of

potential biases due to attrition. The data user’s guide also

provides comprehensive information on the young adult

surveys.

Summary reports

Also available to users are several reports that summarize

either special data collections or selected sets of NLS variables. The following reports currently are distributed:

NLS Older Male Sample Revisited. This volume introduces

the reader to the 1990 resurvey of the NLS Older Men cohort,

to which 2,092 members of the original sample and 2,206 widows or other family members of deceased sample members

responded. The document first describes the purpose and

content of the 1990 survey; seven additional sections on

mortality, physical well-being, emotional well-being, family

and friendship support systems, economic well-being, current and prospective labor market activity, and status of the

widows provide an overview of the data. The 56 tables and

accompanying descriptive text in the seven sections (1) describe and illustrate the categories of data that were collected, (2) record the sizes of various subsets of the sample

(for example, the number of men who were employed in the

year preceding the survey), (3) present some simple relationships that invite more sophisticated analysis, and (4) provide some evidence on the reliability and validity of several

of the psychological scales used in the survey. Although

the tabulations presented within this volume are based on

preliminary data, researchers will find the results useful in

developing their research plans and deciding whether the

database meets their needs.

Patterning of Child Assessment Completion Rates in the

NLSY79: 1986–1996. This paper examines completion rate

patterns in the child data for the period 1986–96 by looking

for evidence of changes in interview quality, changes associated with the transition to CAPI interviewing, and connections between child or family characteristics and

completion patterns. The report focuses on the completion

rates of the PIAT Math Test, PIAT Reading Test, and the

Behavior Problems Index.

NLSY79 Children: 1992 Description and Evaluation. This

report describes the 1992 child assessment data, including

completion rates for all assessments by the respondent’s

age, race, and ethnicity. Systematically explored within a

multivariate context are (1) the independent association between a wide range of socioeconomic and demographic characteristics and all of the 1992 assessment scores, and (2) the

extent to which the full range of 1986 assessment scores are

useful predictors of many of the 1992 scores.

This analysis provides information about the internal

validities of many of the NLSY79 child assessments, particularly those targeting the younger children in 1986. The report explores the extent to which hyperactivity of the child or

the presence of others in the testing environment affects a

child’s performance on a number of the 1992 assessments.

The Ten-and-Over Years: Self-Reports from the Children

of the NLSY79: 1990 Tabulations and Summary Discussion. This report describes the sample of 1,116 children age

10 and older who responded to the Child Self-Administered

Supplement during the 1990 survey. That instrument collected self-reports on a wide range of topics, including parent-child activities and decision making, school satisfaction,

after-school employment, and religious involvement. Other

topics included in the administration were friendship networking; dating and sexual initiation; future education, family, and career expectations; and substance use and

participation in other illicit activities. This report presents

narrative overviews of the types of data collected and tabular summaries of these data.

Children of the NLSY79: 1988 Tabulation & Summary

Discussion. This document describes the child assessment

data collected in the 1988 round of the NLSY79. The tables

present the characteristics of the children and their mothers,

the distribution of scores and completion rates for each assessment, and correlations between assessment scores and

subscores in 1988, as well as selected cross-year correlations between 1986 and 1988 assessment scores. These data

may be useful in clarifying issues of reliability and validity.

Maternal-Child Health Data from the NLSY79: 1988 Tabulations and Summary Discussion. This report provides narrative descriptions and tabular summaries of the prenatal,

infant, and child health information collected during the 1983–

88 NLSY79 rounds. It describes a range of maternal pre- and

postnatal behaviors, including prenatal care, use of

sonograms and amniocentesis, cigarette and alcohol use,

and infant feeding. This report also discusses the health

status information collected biennially for all NLSY79 children. Brief descriptions highlight data quality and other sub-
CHAPTER 10: FOR MORE INFORMATION 161

stantive issues of interest.

NLS bibliography database

NLS User Services maintains an up-to-date archive of NLS

research. The electronic NLS database stores records of

more than 3,900 NLS-based journal articles, working papers,

conference papers, monographs, theses, and dissertations

published during the past three decades. Updates to the

bibliographic database are ongoing and new records are accessible as soon as the record is entered into the database.

The NLS bibliographic database, accessible live on the

Internet at the http://www.nlsbibliography.org Web site, allows users to search, retrieve, and print customized listings

of NLS research. Each search produces an annotated bibliography of all citations matching user specifications. Users

may conduct database retrievals using any of the search

fields described below; search types can be combined to

produce more refined results.

AUTHOR: Select one or more authors from the list of more

than 2,000 authors of NLS research and retrieve all citations by the author(s) selected.

TITLE: Select a single title from the title list (such as “What

Researchers Have Learned from the NLS about Youth

Unemployment”) or search the title field by supplying

the specific title term(s) to be found (for instance, titles

of research entries containing the words “siblings” [or]

“brothers” [or] “sisters”).

SOURCE: Choose a source of NLS research, such as a journal name (for example, Econometrica) or the name of a

professional conference (such as Population Association of America). It is then possible to retrieve a list of all

NLS research from that source or to search the title field

by supplying the specific source term(s) to be found

(for instance, citation sources containing “conference”

or “school of”).

KEYWORD: Select one or more of the 600 keywords that

describe the research projects and retrieve all citations

to which those topical keywords have been assigned.

ABSTRACT: Supply terms to search the abstract fields of

the citations. This search is useful when the supplied

term does not exist as a keyword or has not been assigned to a citation.

COHORT: Select one or more of the NLS sample groups

(such as the Mature Women) and retrieve citations associated with the selected cohort(s).

FORMAT: Select one or more of the types of publications

(such as monographs, journal articles, or working papers) and retrieve all citations of each type.

YEAR: Select one or more years of publication and retrieve

all citations published in the selected year(s).

ADVANCED: Combine many of the above search types to

form a complex search strategy. Searches that may be

combined are those for author, format, keyword, cohort,

and year.

FULL-TEXT: Search for text in any of the citation text fields:

Titles, abstracts, and keywords. This search is useful to

find newly emerging research terms before they are indexed as keywords.

User submission form. Web users may now submit a new

citation to the bibliography or correct an existing citation.

The process involves filling out a short online form that is

then sent by e-mail to the NLS Bibliography staff for review

and entry into the database.

NLSY79 child bibliographies

Bibliographies present research based on the NLSY79 fertility, childcare, and child development data collections. Updated periodically, these topical publications list published

articles, monographs, theses, reports, and presentations that

use data from the NLSY79 and Children of the NLSY79.

“Research Using NLSY79 Data on Fertility, Child Care, &

Child Development” (Bibliography No. 1 in Series)

“Child Assessment Research” (Bibliography No. 2 in Series)

Error updates

Prior to working with an NLS data file, users should make

every effort to acquire current information on data or documentation errors. Several methods are used to notify users

of errors in the data files or documentation and to provide

corrected information for those persons who acquired an

NLS data set from CHRR. The most up-to-date list of errors

can be obtained on the BLS Web site (http://

www.bls.gov/nls) by choosing the appropriate cohort and

then clicking on the heading “Errata.” Errors discovered

after the release of a data file are distributed in hardcopy

form to current data purchasers along with the data set. Error notices and information on how to acquire the corrected

data or documentation also appear in NLS News, the quarterly NLS newsletter, available online at http://

www.bls.gov/nls.

Research analyses

CHRR research reports. NLS User Services continues to

distribute NLS research reports prepared over the past three

decades by CHRR’s research staff. These reports include (1)

the individual cohort research volumes, which present analyses of data from round-specific data collections of the Older

Men, Young Men, Mature Women, Young Women, and