The Use of First Names to Evaluate Reports of Gender and Its Effect on the Distribution of Married and

Unmarried Couple Households

Martin O’Connell and Gretchen Gooding

Fertility and Family Statistics Branch

US Census Bureau

Poster presented at the Annual Meeting of the Population Associationof America, Los Angeles, CA, March 30-April 1, 2006. This report is releasedto inform interested parties of ongoing research and to encourage discussion. The views expressed on statistical, methodological, or technical issues arethose of the authors and not necessarily those of the U.S. Census Bureau.

Classifying Unmarried Couple Households Household classification depends on reports of relationship and gender.

Sex is usually the best reported item on surveys1, but reports of names may sometimes seem inconsistent with reports on gender.

Distribution of coupled households in Census 2000:

1 Less than 1 percent had inconsistent responses on the Census 2000 Content Reinterview Survey.

60 million coupled households

Three Types of Coupled Households

91%

1%8%

Married Couple

Opposite-SexUnmarried Couple

Same-SexUnmarried Couple

Why Study Reponses to Names and Gender?

Minor errors in reporting gender can have a substantial impact on the overall estimates of unmarried couple households. The 1996 Federal Defense of Marriage Act instructs federal agencies

only to recognize opposite-sex marriages.

"In determining the meaning of any Act of Congress, or of any ruling, regulation, or interpretation of the various administrative bureaus and agencies of the United States, the word 'marriage' means only a legal union between one man and one woman as husband and wife, and the word 'spouse' refers only to a person of the opposite sex who is a husband or a wife."

Current Census Bureau editing programs assign reported same-sex “married” couples to same-sex “unmarried” couples.

With several states issuing marriage licenses to same-sex couples, the issues of collecting, processing, editing, and presenting estimates of same-sex couples will become more important, especially when examining estimates for specific states and cities.

What This Project Will Examine—

Can a person’s first name be used to verify reports of gender?

How accurate is the reporting of names?

What would be the effect on different household estimates when using a person’s name to alter reports of gender?

How sensitive would these estimates be to changes in responses of gender?

2004 American Community Survey

To address these issues, two data sources are used in this presentation :

First, the 2004 American Community Survey (ACS).

This survey will be used to illustrate differences in the reporting of gender for specific names by: Major Census divisions Age cohorts

The 2004 ACS selected a nationwide sample of 838,000 households.

Starting in 2005, it consisted of 3 million households in the yearly

sample.

2004 Test Census of New York

Second, the 2004 Test Census of New York. We will examine— The likelihood that a person’s name is male or female Age and race differences in reporting masculine or feminine names The gains or losses to different types of households if first names are

used to verify/change reports of gender

The 2004 Test Census of New York was conducted in the county of Queens. Overall, there were 130,756 households.

The test census consisted of 60,244 “coupled households.”

91%

7% 2%

Married Couple

Opposite-Sex UnmarriedCouple

Same-Sex UnmarriedCouple

2004 Test Census Items on Name, Relationship, and Gender

Common Errors in Collecting Names Inconsistencies in the collection of names on forms may result

from the following types of errors: Scanning errors of forms Keying errors of names Respondent/enumerator misspellings Illegible handwriting Transposing first and last names—e.g., Mary Thomas written as

Thomas Mary Concatenating names—e.g., Jack’s son as Jackson Names with non-alphabetic characters (e.g. *, @, $, 4)

(Spaces and hyphens are accepted)

Are All Names Created Equal? The same name may be correctly reported as being a different sex

for several reasons: Geographical Ethnic/cultural Different age cohorts

Source: U.S. Census Bureau, American Community Survey 2004.

Gender of Some Names May Change Over Time While Others May Remain the Same

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

<10 10-19 20-29 30-39 40+

Age Cohort in 2004

Perc

en

t R

ep

ort

ing

Male

John

Morgan

Leslie

Elizabeth

Methodological Issues

Considerations when using a first name to override reported sex responses: Develop an objective/statistical indicator with a variable range Define acceptable levels for altering a sex response—e.g. should name be

“male” 50%, 90%, 99% of the time to override a response of “female” Evaluate impact of procedure on estimates for all couple types—anyone

can make a mistake Indicator should be sensitive to geographical variations Indicator should be usable in large scale processing applications

2004 Test Census of New York First Name Index

On each person’s record, there is a first name index: Based on millions of observations in the 2000 Census of New York

State name dictionary Index = (people with that name who were male)/(all people) Index ranges from 0 to 1000 A high value, e.g. 990, means 990 out of every 1000 people with that

name in 2000 reported themselves as male—a very masculine name A low value, e.g. 50, means that only 50 out of every 1000 people were

reported as male—or that 950 were female—a very feminine name

For consistency purposes for this presentation: Index scale reverses for females A value of 990 for females now indicates that 990 out of 1000 people

with that name in 2000 reported themselves as female Index scale for males unchanged

First Name Index Characteristics

The majority of men (50%) and women (59%) had first names very strongly associated with their sex (Index = 990–1000).

Only 1% had first names that were inconsistent with their reported sex (Index <= 10).

However, there are some shortfalls in the applicability of this index for the total population: 11% of people did not report their names 7-8% had first names that could not be found in the dictionary Using first names to invalidate sex responses may not cover large

segments of the population

Coverage and Properties

For men in the 2004 Test Census: Name not reported or not in dictionary higher for

• Men 15 to 44• Chinese, Korean, Asian Indian men

Highest percent of men with first name indices 990-1000 • Older men• Whites and Blacks

Percent of men with first name indices 100 or less• About 1% for all ages• About 2% for Korean, Asian Indian men

Similar patterns were found for women.

Percent of Males With First Name Index 100 or Less

1 Includes specified race in combination with other races.

Note: An index less than 100 indicates that 900 out of every 1000 people with this name reported that they were female in Census 2000.

Source: U.S. Census Bureau, Test Census of New York, 2004.

0.9

0.8

0.8

0.8

0.6

0.7

0.7

0.9

1.4

1.3

0.3

0.3

0.3

0.3

0.3

0.3

0.1

0.2

0.4

0.2

0.2

0.2

0.2

0.2

0.1

0.3

0.4

0.7

0.3

0.40-14

15-29

30-44

45-64

65+

White

Black

Chinese

Korean

Asian Indian

Ag

eR

ace1

0-10 11-50 51-100

1.5

1.3

1.3

1.3

1.1

1.1

1.3

1.4

2.3

2.0

Index values

First Name Index: Characteristics of Coupled Households

For couples in the 2004 Test Census: Name not reported or not in dictionary

• Lowest for opposite-sex unmarried couples• Highest for same-sex couples

Couples with first name indices 990-1000—indicating high agreement between reported sex in 2004 and gender orientation of name

• Highest proportion for opposite-sex unmarried couples• Lowest proportion for same-sex couples, especially for male

partners and female householders Couples with first name indices 100 or less—indicating low agreement

between reported sex in 2004 and gender orientation of name• About 1% for married couples and opposite-sex unmarried

couples • Data suggests that errors in marking sex item may affect 8-16% of

male same-sex couples and 10-27% of female same-sex couples.

Percent of People Not Reporting First Name or First Name Not Found in Names

Dictionary

Source: U.S. Census Bureau, Test Census of New York, 2004

9.3

9.9

6.7

6.8

12.2

16.4

11.3

17.9

7.9

8.5

4.4

4.8

5.1

7.1

9.3

7.7

Husband

Wife

Male

Female

Householder

Partner

Householder

Partner

Marr

ied

Co

up

les

Op

po

sit

e-S

ex

Co

up

les

Male

-M

ale

Co

up

les

Fem

ale

-F

em

ale

Co

up

les

No report Not in dictionary

17.2

18.4

11.1

11.6

17.3

23.5

20.6

25.6

Percent of People With First Name Index Over 500

Note: An index greater than 500 indicates that more than half of the males/females with this name reported they were male/female in Census 2000.

Source: U.S. Census Bureau, Test Census of New York, 2004

7.5

5.6

5.1

4.5

4.8

4.7

4.3

2.5

2.2

2.1

2.3

1.8

2.4

2.0

0.5

18.2

12.5

18.6

12.6

13.9

12.1

5.4

8.8

51.2

57.4

60.6

66.6

53

38.3

37.3

47.3

3.6

Husband

Wife

Male

Female

Householder

Partner

Householder

Partner

Mar

ried

Co

up

les

Op

po

site

-Sex

Co

up

les

Mal

e-M

ale

Co

up

les

Fem

ale-

Fem

ale

Co

up

les

501-899 900-949 950-989 990-1000

79.4

77.7

86.4

86.0

73.5

57.5

48.3

60.9

Index values

Percent of People With First Name Index 100 or Less

*Total percent for index values 0-100.

Note: An index less than 100 indicates that 900 out of every 1000 males/females with this name reported that they were of a different sex in Census 2000.

Source: U.S. Census Bureau, Test Census of New York, 2004.

5.1

13.4

18.3

5.9

1.8

2.4

7.7

3.6

0.8

0.5

0.7

0.9

Husband

Wife

Male

Female

Householder

Partner

Householder

Partner

Mar

ried

Co

up

les

Op

po

site

-Sex

Co

up

les

Mal

e-M

ale

Co

up

les

Fem

ale-

Fem

ale

Co

up

les

0-10 11-50 51-100Index values

0.9*

1.1*

0.8*

1.0*

7.7

16.3

26.7

10.4

Using First Names To Edit Sex Responses:

How willing are you to accept a first name over a sex response? The lower the index level of a respondent’s first name, the more

frequently that name was associated with the opposite sex• Index 0-10 = 99% of people with that name were of the opposite

sex in Census 2000• Index 0-50 = 95% were of the opposite sex• Index 0-100 = 90% were of the opposite sex

By using different index ranges• Respondents can be reassigned their sex on basis of first names• Different levels of name “acceptance” produce changes in

estimates of household types

Who’s sex can change? Anyone—reassignment rules apply to all people in all household types Regardless of sex or living arrangement, anyone can mistakenly mark

a form

Estimates of Married and Unmarried Couple Households After Reassigning Sex of

Respondent at Different First Name Index Levels

Household type Original distribution 0-10 0-50 0-100Total 60,244 60,244 60,244 60,244Married couples 55,026 54,692 54,537 54,349Opposite-sex couples 4,112 4,103 4,092 4,076Same-sex couples 1,106 1,449 1,615 1,819 Male partners 664 831 935 1,043 Female partners 442 618 680 776

Distribution after sex reassignment at different

index levels

Note: Sex of respondent in Census 2004 Test was reassigned to opposite sex if their first name index was in this range.

Source: U.S. Census Bureau, Test Census of New York, 2004.

Estimates of Same-Sex Couples After Reassigning Sex, by First Name Index Level

and Transfer Source

Source: U.S. Census Bureau, Test Census of New York, 2004.

442 337 293 288

664541 515 507

28 49 68

543 758956

Originaldistribution

0-10 level 0-50 level 0-100 level

Female Same-Sex Couples Male Same-Sex Couples

Opposite-Sex Couples Married Couples

1,106

1,4491,615

1,819

Source of same-sex couples:

Results of Model Simulation

Overall results for same-sex couple estimates: An increase from 1,106 to 1,449 using most conservative index level

(0-10) Increases continue to 1,819 at 0-100 level

Less than 1% decline in opposite-sex couples. Married-couples experience greatest loss:

From 55,026 to 54,349 using 0-100 index level Although low index levels are reported by a small percentage of

married couples• Magnitude of this population produces relatively large additions to

the same-sex population

Net increase in same-sex couples to 1,819 at 0-100 level: Loss of 311 from original sample Offset by transfer of 956 married couples and 68 opposite-sex couples

Summary

First names offer the potential to edit/verify reports of sex on questionnaires.

Problems to face if considering this option: Not all population groups report names Geographical/cultural differences in gender of names Choosing the degree of uncertainty in deciding if a name is “Male” or

“Female”

Using 2004 Test Census of New York data and Census 2000 names dictionary: Objective first name index was developed Reassignment of sex was made at different levels of acceptance Model simulation showed losses to same-sex couples greatly offset by

gains to this population from married couples

Conclusion: using first names to invalidate reported sex response will yield more same-sex couples than originally reported.

Contact Information

Fertility and Family Statistics Branch

Phone: 301-763-2416

• Martin T. O’Connell

E-mail: Martin.T.Oconnell@census.gov

• Gretchen E. Gooding

E-mail: Gretchen.E.Gooding@census.gov