Uneducated Physical Therapists

I'm working on a project in which I'm subtracting the education of individuals via ACS data, and using BLS typical education needed for employment to create a variable of "underemployment". As I was doing this, I noticed a high number of physical therapists with the maximum negative value, signifying no high school education but practicing as a physical therapist, which requires a professional degree. A physical therapist aide is 'OCCP' = 3620 while a physical therapist is 3610, so I'm wondering if ACS retroactively fixes these types of errors. For instance, there is a 29 year old who apparently completed no grade school education (SCHL = 1) in Georgia. There are 35 of these physical therapists, 5 chiropractors, 2 judicial law clerks, and an audiologist. I weighted some other occupations which are aggregated in ACS but not BLS so the "underemployment" variable has fractional value almost as low in "Lawyers, and judges, magistrates, and other judicial workers" as well as "other life scientists". My dataset is the 5-year 2018-2022 population national population files aggregated (a, b, c, and d). 

Parents
  • Oh, I love a good data mystery!

    Two thoughts...

    1 - Have you checked whether or not those records were imputed (using the relevant imputation flag variables)?

    2 - There are some data that are recoded for logical consistency, and some that are not. I don't know all of the rules (have never seen them published) but I have seen enough inconsistent data in the workforce-related variables (occupation, industry, education, journey-to-work, etc...) to think that there are few logical consistency checks there (if any). So if it's not an imputed response, it may just be wonky* respondent behavior.

    *Technical term. Wink

Reply
  • Oh, I love a good data mystery!

    Two thoughts...

    1 - Have you checked whether or not those records were imputed (using the relevant imputation flag variables)?

    2 - There are some data that are recoded for logical consistency, and some that are not. I don't know all of the rules (have never seen them published) but I have seen enough inconsistent data in the workforce-related variables (occupation, industry, education, journey-to-work, etc...) to think that there are few logical consistency checks there (if any). So if it's not an imputed response, it may just be wonky* respondent behavior.

    *Technical term. Wink

Children