Search results

The Chitwan Valley Family Study (CVFS) is a comprehensive family panel study of individuals, households, and communities in the Chitwan Valley of Nepal. The study was initially designed to investigate the influence of changing community and household contexts on population outcomes such as marital and childbearing processes. Over time, the goals of the study expanded to investigate family dynamics, intergenerational influences, child health, migration, labor force participation, attitudes and beliefs, mental health, agricultural production, environmental change, and many other topics. The data include full life histories for more than 10,000 individuals, tracking and interviews with all migrants, continuous measurement of community change, over 25 years of demographic event registry, and many other data collections. For additional information regarding the Chitwan Valley Family Study, please visit the Chitwan Valley Family Study Website. A Data Guide for this study is available as a web page and for download.

Principal Investigators

• William G. Axinn, University of Michigan
• Dirgha Ghimire, University of Michigan
• Jordan Smoller, Massachusetts General Hospital

The Displaced New Orleans Residents Pilot Study was designed to examine the current location, well-being, and plans of people who lived in the city of New Orleans when Hurricane Katrina struck on August 29, 2005. The study is based on a representative sample of pre-Katrina dwellings in New Orleans. Fieldwork focused on tracking respondents wherever they currently resided, including back to New Orleans. Respondents were administered a short paper-and-pencil interview by mail, by telephone, or in person. The pilot study was fielded in the fall of 2006, approximately one year after Hurricane Katrina. The goal of DNORPS was to assess the feasibility of the study design and thereby to lay the groundwork for launching a major longitudinal study of displaced New Orleans residents.

ICPSR only holds the public data for the pilot study. The main study (DNORS) was carried out 2009-2010. These data are not yet publicly available, but for more information, visit the RAND Corporation website.

The Mexican Health and Aging Study (MHAS) is a national longitudinal study of adults 50 years and older in Mexico. The study is a collaborative effort among researchers from the Universities of Pennsylvania, Maryland, and Wisconsin in the United States, and the Instituto Nacional de Estadistica, Geografia e Informatica (INEGI) in Mexico.

The baseline survey includes a nationally representative sample of Mexicans aged 50 and over and their spouse/partners regardless of their age. A direct interview was sought with each individual, and proxy interviews were obtained when poor health or temporary absence precluded a direct interview. Topics covered include: health behavior and health status, childhood and family background, migration history, sources and amounts of income, and housing environment.

The MHAS is partly supported by the National Institutes of Health/National Institute on Aging and the INEGI in Mexico. The MHAS was designed as a longitudinal study with protocols highly comparable to the Health and Retirement Study (HRS) of the United States.

In 1995-1996, the MacArthur Midlife Research Network carried out a national survey of over 7,000 Americans aged 25 to 74 [ICPSR 2760]. The purpose of the study was to investigate the role of behavioral, psychological, and social factors in understanding age-related differences in physical and mental health. The study was innovative for its broad scientific scope, its diverse samples (which included siblings of the main sample respondents and a national sample of twin pairs), and its creative use of in-depth assessments in key areas (e.g. daily diary of stressful experiences [ICPSR 3725] and cognitive functioning [ICPSR 3596]) on a subset of participants. A detailed description of the study and findings generated by it are available at: http://www.midus.wisc.edu

With support from the National Institute on Aging, a follow-up of the original Midlife Development in the United States (MIDUS) sample was conducted in 2004 (MIDUS 2 [ICPSR 4652]). The daily stress and cognitive functioning projects were repeated and expanded at MIDUS 2; in addition the protocol was expanded to include biomarkers and neuroscience.

In 2013 a third wave (MIDUS 3) of survey data was collected on longitudinal participants. Data collection for this follow-up wave largely repeated baseline assessments (e.g., phone interview and extensive self-administered questionnaire), with additional questions in selected areas such as economic recession experiences. Cognitive functioning data were also collected at the same time, while data collection for the daily diary, biomarker, and neuroscience projects commenced in 2017.

MIDUS also maintains a Colectica portal, which allows users to interact with variables across waves and create customized subsets. Registration is required.

Downloads of Add Health require submission of the following information, which is shared with the original producer of Add Health: supervisor name, supervisor email, and reason for download. A Data Guide for this study is available as a web page and for download.

The National Longitudinal Study of Adolescent to Adult Health (Add Health), 1994-2018 [Public Use] is a longitudinal study of a nationally representative sample of U.S. adolescents in grades 7 through 12 during the 1994-1995 school year. The Add Health cohort was followed into young adulthood with four in-home interviews, the most recent conducted in 2008 when the sample was aged 24-32. Add Health combines longitudinal survey data on respondents' social, economic, psychological, and physical well-being with contextual data on the family, neighborhood, community, school, friendships, peer groups, and romantic relationships.

Add Health Wave I data collection took place between September 1994 and December 1995, and included both an in-school questionnaire and in-home interview. The in-school questionnaire was administered to more than 90,000 students in grades 7 through 12, and gathered information on social and demographic characteristics of adolescent respondents, education and occupation of parents, household structure, expectations for the future, self-esteem, health status, risk behaviors, friendships, and school-year extracurricular activities. All students listed on a sample school's roster were eligible for selection into the core in-home interview sample. In-home interviews included topics such as health status, health-facility utilization, nutrition, peer networks, decision-making processes, family composition and dynamics, educational aspirations and expectations, employment experience, romantic and sexual partnerships, substance use, and criminal activities. A parent, preferably the resident mother, of each adolescent respondent interviewed in Wave I was also asked to complete an interviewer-assisted questionnaire covering topics such as inheritable health conditions, marriages and marriage-like relationships, neighborhood characteristics, involvement in volunteer, civic, and school activities, health-affecting behaviors, education and employment, household income and economic assistance, parent-adolescent communication and interaction, parent's familiarity with the adolescent's friends and friends' parents.

Add Health data collection recommenced for Wave II from April to August 1996, and included almost 15,000 follow-up in-home interviews with adolescents from Wave I. Interview questions were generally similar to Wave I, but also included questions about sun exposure and more detailed nutrition questions. Respondents were asked to report their height and weight during the course of the interview, and were also weighed and measured by the interviewer.

From August 2001 to April 2002, Wave III data were collected through in-home interviews with 15,170 Wave I respondents (now 18 to 26 years old), as well as interviews with their partners. Respondents were administered survey questions designed to obtain information about family, relationships, sexual experiences, childbearing, and educational histories, labor force involvement, civic participation, religion and spirituality, mental health, health insurance, illness, delinquency and violence, gambling, substance abuse, and involvement with the criminal justice system. High School Transcript Release Forms were also collected at Wave III, and these data comprise the Education Data component of the Add Health study.

Wave IV in-home interviews were conducted in 2008 and 2009 when the original Wave I respondents were 24 to 32 years old. Longitudinal survey data were collected on the social, economic, psychological, and health circumstances of respondents, as well as longitudinal geographic data. Survey questions were expanded on educational transitions, economic status and financial resources and strains, sleep patterns and sleep quality, eating habits and nutrition, illnesses and medications, physical activities, emotional content and quality of current or most recent romantic/cohabiting/marriage relationships, and maltreatment during childhood by caregivers. Dates and circumstances of key life events occurring in young adulthood were also recorded, including a complete marriage and cohabitation history, full pregnancy and fertility histories from both men and women, an educational history of dates of degrees and school attendance, contact with the criminal justice system, military service, and various employment events, including the date of first and current jobs, with respective information on occupation, industry, wages, hours, and benefits. Finally, physical measurements and biospecimens were also collected at Wave IV, and included anthropometric measures of weight, height and waist circumference, cardiovascular measures such as systolic blood pressure, diastolic blood pressure, and pulse, metabolic measures from dried blood spots assayed for lipids, glucose, and glycosylated hemoglobin (HbA1c), measures of inflammation and immune function, including High sensitivity C-reactive protein (hsCRP) and Epstein-Barr virus (EBV).

Wave V data collection took place from 2016 to 2018, when the original Wave I respondents were 33 to 43 years old. For the first time, a mixed mode survey design was used. In addition, several experiments were embedded in early phases of the data collection to test response to various treatments. A similar range of data was collected on social, environmental, economic, behavioral, and health circumstances of respondents, with the addition of retrospective child health and socio-economic status questions. Physical measurements and biospecimens were again collected at Wave V, and included most of the same measures as at Wave IV.

The overall goal of Wave VI was to better understand life course trajectories, determinants, and consequences of critical dimensions of aging, health, and health disparities among U.S. early midlife adults. Data collection took place from 2022 to 2025, with participants between the ages of 39 and 51, with an average age of 44. Beyond longitudinal survey measures, newly added questions included those on cumulative stress, discrimination, despair, work-life balance, memory, physical limitations, and caregiving. Continuing from previous waves, home exams collected physical measurements and biospecimens with most of the same measures as Wave V.

The National Long-Term Care Survey (NLTCS) has completed six waves, nominally at five-year intervals, 1982, 1984, 1989, 1994, 1999, and 2004. The NLTCS is a nationally-representative sample both of the community and of institutionalized populations and is longitudinal in that sample persons join the survey once they reach 65 years of age and stay in the survey until they either die or are lost to follow-up. At each wave, a screener questionnaire is administered to the sample which divides the sample into three parts: the non-disabled (frequently called screen-outs), the disabled but living in the community, and the disabled living in an institution. About 5,000 people die between waves and are replaced by a sample of about that size of people who have become age 65 since the prior wave. Because of budget considerations it usually has not been possible to continue the entire non-disabled sample into the next wave. Instead a sample of the non-disabled is drawn to keep the total sample size for a wave at about 20,000. One of the interesting and useful features of the NLTCS is that data are collected on help that the sample person receives from informal caregivers.

The NLTCS is a very data-rich resource with many components, including disability measures, medical conditions, attained education levels, and income. Numerous papers have used it as a source of data addressing a wide variety of topics related to aging and disability.

Ancillary surveys have been added to measure other characteristics of the 65 and older population, to include a Caregiver Survey to acquire data on informal caregivers themselves (done in 1989, 1999, and 2004) and Next-of-Kin (NOK) surveys administered to sample persons who had died between 1982 and 1984 and again between 1994 and 1999. The sample has been frequently supplemented to compensate for low representation in some survey components, in particular the 75 years and older and 95 years and older components. In 1999 physical specimens were drawn from a sample of persons who responded to the survey. These physical specimens (blood where possible, alternatively a buccal wash) are subject to a genetic analysis and, in the case of blood, to a panel of proteins believed to be particularly important to health.

NLTCS Survey Data

Survey data are available in ASCII and SAS format.

The Analytic Data File, a file of derived variables for all waves of the survey incorporates correction factors and consistency checking. The Analytic Data File covers all waves of the survey and is available in both ASCII and SAS formats. Final versions of data for all waves, up to and including 1999 and a beta version for 2004, have been released and are supported by documentation.

The National Survey of America's Families (NSAF) is a household survey that provides a comprehensive look at quantitative measures of the well-being of children, adults, and their families. While the focus of the survey is at the state level, the scope is national -- with a primary emphasis on low-income families. NSAF information was gathered from interviews conducted with the Most Knowledgeable Adult (MKA), the person in the household who was most knowledgeable about the questions being asked about the respondent, their spouse/partner (if applicable) and the focal child (or children). Data were collected from more than 40,000 families in two stages. First, a screener interview was administered to determine whether a household was eligible to complete the second, extended interview.

Two types of extended interviews were administered. Option A interviews were used in households with children under age 18. Option B interviews were used in childless adult households and also with emancipated minors. The extended interview was divided into several sections and is labeled A through P below:

• A. Student Status. This section contained two questions that asked whether the respondent was a student and whether that household was the respondent's usual residence.

• B. Health Status and Satisfaction. These questions asked about the respondent's satisfaction with health care, access to health care, the health status of the focal children, and the health status of the respondent.

• C. Parent/Child/Family Interaction and Education. This series of questions asked about education for focal children. Questions addressed the focal child's current grade (or the last grade completed) and the child's attitudes toward school and schoolwork, skipping school, suspensions, and changing schools. Questions were also asked about children over 11 years old working for pay and attending summer school.

• D. Household Roster. In this section, the name, age, and sex of all persons living in the household were recorded, and relationships between all household members were investigated.

• E. Health Care Coverage. Information was gathered about current health insurance coverage for the respondent, the respondent's spouse/partner, and the focal children. Questions were also asked about characteristics of that coverage and of periods in which family members had no insurance coverage.

• F. Health Care Use and Access. This section gathered information about health status, health care services received, and necessary health care services that were postponed during the preceding 12 months. Questions on routine care, overnight stays in hospitals, dental care, mental health care, women's health care, well-child care, and prescription medicines were also included.

• G. Child Care. In this section, respondents were queried as to child care arrangements including Head Start, child care centers, before- or after-school care, and babysitters. Questions were asked about the total number of hours per week in each care situation, the typical number of children cared for, the typical number of adult child care providers, and child care costs.

• H. Nonresidential Parent/Father. These questions determined whether a focal child had a nonresident parent, how often the child saw his/her nonresident parent, whether the nonresident parent provided financial support, and whether nonresident parents were required by child support orders to provide financial support.

• I. Employment and Earnings. This section contained a series of questions about the employment and earnings of the respondent and the spouse/partnerfor the current and preceding year. Topics included employment status, occupation, industry, employer-provided health insurance, hours worked, and earnings. Some questions were also asked about the earnings of other family members.

• J. Family Income. Family income also was identified from a wide variety of sources other than earnings from employment. These sources included public assistance (e.g., Aid to Families with Dependent Children [AFDC], General Assistance, Emergency Assistance, or vouchers), Food Stamps, child support, foster care payments, financial assistance from friends or relatives, unemployment compensation, workers' compensation or veterans' payments, Supplemental Security Income, Social Security, pension or annuity income, interest or dividend income, income from rental property, or any other income source.

• K. Welfare Program Participation. This section gathered detailed information about AFDC and Food Stamp benefits that the respondent might have received within the preceding two years. For both types of assistance, periods in which the respondent's benefits were reduced or eliminated were identified, as were strategies for coping during such times. Current AFDC or Food Stamp recipients were asked about any requirements they had to fulfill (e.g., job search, training, etc.) in order to receive these benefits. Recipients were also asked questions about awareness of time limits and experiences with diversion. For respondents with children, questions were asked about benefits received in the previous year through the supplemental food program for Women, Infants, and Children (WIC) and free or reduced-cost school breakfast and lunch programs.

• L. Education and Training. This series of questions inquired about the highest grade completed, highest degree earned, participation in job training programs during the previous year, and classes taken for credit during the previous year.

• M. Housing and Economic Hardship. Questions covered the respondent's living arrangements, the name(s) of the lease- or mortgage- holder(s) in the household, and the amount of rent or mortgage paid monthly. Information was collected about financial contributions by the respondent or his/her spouse or partner to children under 18 years old living outside the household. The effect of economic hardship on the family's food consumption and ability to pay for housing costs was also assessed.

• N. Issues, Problems, and Social Services. Questions in this section covered the respondent's state of mind, feelings about his or her child (or children), constructive activities the child (or children) might have been involved with, the availability of social services in their community, problems the child (or children) might have had in the preceding year and efforts to obtain help for those problems, and the respondent's involvement in volunteer and religious activities.

• O. Race, Ethnicity, and Nativity. Race and ethnicity were asked for the respondent, the spouse/partner, and the focal child (or children). For household members who were born outside the United States, country of origin and citizenship questions were asked.

• P. Closing. At the end of the survey, respondents were asked their opinions about welfare and working and about raising children. Closing questions asked for the respondent's ZIP code and, in households with foreign-born individuals, tracing information for use in a follow-up survey.

The 1997 NSAF data are available in nine parts and are organized into hierarchical, flat household-, family-, person-, adult-, and child-level files. A description of each is provided below:

1. Focal Child Data. This dataset contains data elements from the extended interview that are specific to focal children (FC1 and FC2). Select data items that were asked only of MKAs are also included. Information in this dataset is primarily from sections N (Issues, Problems, and Social Services) and P (Closing) of the extended interview. The dataset contains one record for each focal child.

2. Adult Pair Data. Included in this dataset is information collected from the extended interview about both the respondent and the respondent's spouse/partner. There is one observation per respondent and one per spouse (where applicable). Information in this dataset is primarily from sections I (Employment and Earnings) and L (Education and Training) of the extended interview.

3. Random Adult Data. Information in this person-level dataset is specific to a randomly selected adult, either the respondent or the spouse/partner. This situation occurs only in sections E (Health Insurance Coverage) and F (Health Care Access and Utilization) of the extended interview.

4. Childless Adult Data. This dataset contains data elements from the extended interview that are asked only of the respondent in Option B interviews. Variables in this dataset come mainly from section N (Issue, Problems, and Social Services) and P (Closing). There is one record per Option B interview in the dataset.

5. Family-Respondent Data. Information in this dataset centers around information about the family's use of health care and social services. This family-level dataset contains one observation per respondent. Because there could be more than one respondent per family, family-respondent level variables may have different values within a single family.

6. Household Data. This household-level dataset contains general information about the household such as the demographic characteristics of its members. Also contained in this dataset are administrative and process data such as housing subsidies, public housing, the number of bedrooms in the house, whether the home was owned or rented, and information pertaining to screeners and the completion of interviews.

7. Person Data. This dataset contains one observation for each person living in the household. Included in this dataset is demographic information as well as information on current health insurance status and income.

8. Social Family Data. Included in this dataset are items asked about the social family and variables aggregated at the social family level. The social family includes not only married partners and their children, but also unmarried partners, all of their children, and members of the extended family (anyone related by blood to the MKA, the spouse/partner, or their children). Among the survey items included are those variables indicating whether anyone in the social family had a particular type of income and health insurance. Also included are variables summarizing information across all members of a social family, such as the number of family members. There is one record for each social family.

9. CPS Family Data. Since the social family definition was used in fielding the NSAF, this dataset includes only variables created using the Current Population Survey (CPS) definition of family. A CPS family includes the householder, spouse of family householder, children in the family, and other relatives of the family household respondent. There is one record for each CPS family in this dataset.

The National Survey of America's Families (NSAF) is a household survey that provides a comprehensive look at quantitative measures of the well-being of children, adults, and their families. While the focus of the survey is at the state level, the scope is national -- with a primary emphasis on low-income families. NSAF information was gathered from interviews conducted with the Most Knowledgeable Adult (MKA), the person in the household who was most knowledgeable about the questions being asked about the respondent, their spouse/partner (if applicable) and the focal child (or children). Data were collected from more than 40,000 families in two stages. First, a screener interview was administered to determine whether a household was eligible to complete the second, extended interview.

Two types of extended interviews were administered. Option A interviews were used in households with children under age 18. Option B interviews were used in childless adult households and also with emancipated minors. The extended interview was divided into several sections and is labeled A through P below:

• A. Student Status. This section contained two questions that asked whether the respondent was a student and whether that household was the respondent's usual residence.

• B. Health Status and Satisfaction. These questions asked about the respondent's satisfaction with health care, access to health care, the health status of the focal children, and the health status of the respondent. It also covered questions about the respondent's awareness of specific insurance programs such as Medicaid, and those associated with the Children's Health Insurance Program (CHIP).

• C. Parent/Child/Family Interaction and Education. This series of questions asked about education for focal children. Questions addressed the focal child's current grade (or the last grade completed) and the child's attitudes toward school and schoolwork, skipping school, suspensions, and changing schools. Questions were also asked about children over 11 years old working for pay and attending summer school.

• D. Household Roster. In this section, the name, age, and sex of all persons living in the household were recorded, and relationships between all household members were investigated.

• E. Health Care Coverage. Information was gathered about current health insurance coverage for the respondent, the respondent's spouse/partner, and the focal children. Questions were also asked about characteristics of that coverage and of periods in which family members had no insurance coverage.

• F. Health Care Use and Access. This section gathered information about health status, health care services received, and necessary health care services that were postponed during the preceding 12 months. Questions on routine care, overnight stays in hospitals, dental care, mental health care, women's health care, well-child care, and prescription medicines were also included.

• G. Child Care. In this section, respondents were queried as to child care arrangements including Head Start, child care centers, before- or after-school care, and babysitters. Questions were asked about the total number of hours per week in each care situation, the typical number of children cared for, the typical number of adult child care providers, and child care costs.

• H. Nonresidential Parent/Father. These questions determined whether a focal child had a nonresident parent, how often the child saw his/her nonresident parent, whether the nonresident parent provided financial support, and whether nonresident parents were required by child support orders to provide financial support.

• I. Employment and Earnings. This section contained a series of questions about the employment and earnings of the respondent and the spouse/partner for the current and preceding year. Topics included employment status, occupation, industry, employer-provided health insurance, hours worked, and earnings. Some questions were also asked about the earnings of other family members.

• J. Family Income. Family income was also identified from a wide variety of sources other than earnings from employment. These sources included public assistance (e.g., Temporary Assistance for Needy Families [TANF], General Assistance, Emergency Assistance, or vouchers), Food Stamps, child support, foster care payments, financial assistance from friends or relatives, unemployment compensation, workers' compensation or veterans' payments, Supplemental Security Income, Social Security, pension or annuity income, interest or dividend income, income from rental property, or any other income source.

• K. Welfare Program Participation. This section gathered detailed information about TANF and Food Stamp benefits that the respondent might have received within the preceding two years. For both types of assistance, periods in which the respondent's benefits were reduced or eliminated were identified, as were strategies for coping during such times. Current TANF or Food Stamp recipients were asked about any requirements they had to fulfill (e.g., job search, training, etc.) in order to receive these benefits. Recipients were also asked questions about awareness of time limits and experiences with diversion. For respondents with children, questions were asked about benefits received in the previous year through the supplemental food program for Women, Infants, and Children (WIC) and free or reduced-cost school breakfast and lunch programs. Additional questions were asked about respondent experiences in obtaining government assistance for child care and health insurance through Medicaid and CHIP, and receipt and/or the use of the Earned Income Tax Credit (EITC) in any year between 1999 and 2002.

• L. Education and Training. This series of questions inquired about the highest grade completed, highest degree earned, participation in job training programs during the previous year, and classes taken for credit during the previous year.

• M. Housing and Economic Hardship. Questions covered the respondent's living arrangements, the name(s) of the lease- or mortgage- holder(s) in the household, and the amount of rent or mortgage paid monthly. Information was collected about financial contributions by the respondent or his/her spouse or partner to children under 18 years old living outside the household. The effect of economic hardship on the family's food consumption and ability to pay for housing costs was also assessed.

• N. Issues, Problems, and Social Services. Questions in this section covered the respondent's state of mind, feelings about his or her child (or children), constructive activities the child (or children) might have been involved with, the availability of social services in their community, problems the child (or children) might have had in the preceding year and efforts to obtain help for those problems, and the respondent's involvement in volunteer and religious activities.

• O. Race, Ethnicity, and Nativity. Race and ethnicity were asked for the respondent, the spouse/partner, and the focal child (or children). For household members who were born outside the United States, country of origin and citizenship questions were asked.

• P. Closing. At the end of the survey, respondents were asked their opinions about welfare and working and about raising children. Respondents' ZIP code and address were also requested.

• The 2002 NSAF data are available in nine parts and are organized into hierarchical, flat household-, family-, person-, adult-, and child-level files. A description of each is provided below:

  1. Focal Child Data. This dataset contains data elements from the extended interview that are specific to focal children (FC1 and FC2). Select data items that were asked only of MKAs are also included. Information in this dataset is primarily from sections N (Issues, Problems, and Social Services) and P (Closing) of the extended interview. The dataset contains one record for each focal child.

  2. Adult Pair Data. Included in this dataset is information collected from the extended interview about both the respondent and the respondent's spouse/partner. There is one observation per respondent and one per spouse (where applicable). Information in this dataset is primarily from sections I (Employment and Earnings) and L (Education and Training) of the extended interview.

  3. Random Adult Data. Information in this person-level dataset is specific to a randomly selected adult, either the respondent or the spouse/partner. This situation occurs only in sections E (Health Insurance Coverage) and F (Health Care Access and Utilization) of the extended interview.

  4. Childless Adult Data. This dataset contains data elements from the extended interview that are asked only of the respondent in Option B interviews. Variables in this dataset come mainly from section N (Issue, Problems, and Social Services) and P (Closing). There is one record per Option B interview in the dataset.

  5. Family-Respondent Data. Information in this dataset centers around information about the family's use of health care and social services. This family-level dataset contains one observation per respondent. Because there could be more than one respondent per family, family-respondent level variables may have different values within a single family.

  6. Household Data. This household-level dataset contains general information about the household such as the demographic characteristics of its members. Also contained in this dataset are administrative and process data such as housing subsidies, public housing, the number of bedrooms in the house, whether the home is owned or rented, and information pertaining to screeners and the completion of interviews.

  7. Person Data. This dataset contains one observation for each person living in the household. Included in this dataset is demographic information as well as information on current health insurance status and income.

  8. Social Family Data. Included in this dataset are items asked about the social family and variables aggregated at the social family level. The social family includes not only married partners and their children, but also unmarried partners, all of their children, and members of the extended family (anyone related by blood to the MKA, the spouse/partner, or their children). Among the survey items included are those variables indicating whether anyone in the social family had a particular type of income and health insurance. Also included are variables summarizing information across all members of a social family, such as the number of family members. There is one record for each social family.

  9. CPS Family Data. Since the social family definition was used in fielding the NSAF, this dataset includes only variables created using the Current Population Survey (CPS) definition of family. A CPS family includes the householder, spouse of family householder, children in the family, and other relatives of the family household respondent. There is one record for each CPS family in this dataset.

The National Survey of Families and Households (NSFH), Wave 1 (1987-1988) is the first of three waves in a longitudinal survey that was designed to study the causes and consequences of changes happening in families and households within the United States. At a time when the range of family structures was becoming more and more diverse, this study permitted a close examination of the resulting family compositions and household operations. One adult per household was randomly selected as the primary respondent, and there was a total of 13,007 respondents. In addition to the main interview conducted with the primary respondent, a shorter, self-administered questionnaire was given to the spouse or cohabitating partner, and also administered to the householder if he or she was a relative of the primary respondent.

A considerable amount of life-history information was collected, such as the respondent's family living arrangements in childhood, departures and returns to the parental home, and histories of marriage, separation, divorce, cohabitation, adoption, child custody arrangements, and stepfamily relations. Respondents were also asked about the relationship of household members to each other and the quality of their relationships with their parents, children, and in-laws. Information on economic well-being was also collected, including earnings from wages, self-employment income, interest, dividends, investments, pensions, Social Security, public assistance, and child support/alimony. Demographic information collected includes sex, age, marital status, education, and employment.

The National Survey of Families and Households (NSFH), Wave 2 1992-1994, a longitudinal population-based survey of families and households in the United States, investigates the causes and consequences of changes in American family and household structure. This is the second wave of a three part survey. The current study, NSFH Wave 2, is the second follow up and was conducted in 1992-1994. The sample included all NSFH Wave 1 main respondents and spouse/partner with focal children and all other NSFH Wave 1 main respondents ages 45 and over in 2000, as well as their NSFH Wave 1 spouse/partner.

The Wave 2 survey included the following components: (1) an interview of all surviving members of the original sample via face-to-face personal interview, (2) a personal interview with the current spouse or cohabiting partner almost identical to the interview with the main respondent, (3) a personal interview with the original spouse or partner of the primary respondent in cases where this relationship had ended, (4) a telephone interview with "focal children" who were originally aged 13-18 in Wave 1, (5) a short telephone interview with "focal children" who were originally aged 5-12 in Wave 1, (6) short proxy interviews with a surviving spouse or other relative in cases where the original respondent had died or was too ill to interview, and (7) a telephone interview with a randomly-selected parent of the main respondent. Demographic information collected includes sex, age, marital status, education, and employment

The Toledo Adolescent Relationships Study (TARS) explores the relationship qualities and the subjective meanings that motivate adolescent behavior. More specifically, this study seeks to examine the nature and meaning of adolescent relationship experiences (e.g. with family, peers, and dating partners) in an effort to discover how experiences associated with age, gender, race, and ethnicity influence the meaning of dating relationships. The study further investigates the relative impact of dating partners and peers on sexual behavior and contraceptive practices, as well as involvement in other problem behaviors that can contribute independently to sexual risk-taking. The longitudinal design of the Toledo Adolescent Relationships Study (TARS) includes a schedule of follow-up interviews occurring one, three, five, ten, and about eighteen years after the initial interview. Additional waves have since been conducted.

Wave 1 of TARS includes detailed data collected from both parents and adolescent respondents about their relationship experiences, including self-reported data from parents, parent-reported data about adolescent respondents, and self-reported data from adolescent respondents. These data are available as a combined dataset organized by adolescent respondent.

The Toledo Adolescent Relationships Study (TARS) includes several waves of data collection available through ICPSR. Please see the ICPSR Series page for available studies.

These data are part of NACJD's Fast Track Release and are distributed as they were received from the data depositor. The files have been zipped by NACJD for release, but not checked or processed except for the removal of direct identifiers. Users should refer to the accompanying readme file for a brief description of the files available with this collection and consult the investigator(s) if further information is needed.

This study explores the relationship qualities and the subjective meanings that motivate adolescent behavior. More specifically, this study seeks to examine the nature and meaning of adolescent relationship experiences (e.g., with family, peers, and dating partners) in an effort to discover how experiences associated with age, gender, race, and ethnicity influence the meaning of dating relationships. The study further investigates the relative impact of dating partners and peers on sexual behavior and contraceptive practices, as well as involvement in other problem behaviors that can contribute independently to sexual risk taking.

The longitudinal design of the Toledo Adolescent Relationships Study (TARS) includes a schedule of follow-up interviews occurring one, three, and five years after the initial interview. Four prior waves of data have been collected (2001, 2002, 2004, and 2006). Data were collected from adolescent respondents through structured in-home interviews utilizing laptop computers.

In addition, the fifth wave, conducted in 2011 when the participants were young adults, builds on prior waves by adding quantitative and qualitative assessments of intimate partner violence (IPV).

Prior research on parental incarceration has documented negative effects on various forms of child well-being ranging from conduct problems to academic deficits and eventually, an intergenerational cycle of criminal justice involvement. Yet as the National Academy of Sciences committee report on incarceration recently concluded, existing research has not adequately assessed the range of other family circumstances and disadvantages that may co-vary with the parent's criminal justice system involvement, and knowledge about basic mechanisms underlying incarceration effects remains markedly incomplete. This study builds on, a ten-year mixed method longitudinal study, the Toledo Adolescent Relationships Study (TARS), that has focused on the lives of a sample of men and women interviewed first as adolescents and four additional times across the transition to adulthood. The TARS study contains data involving patterns and seriousness of parental offending over the complete study period, as well as about other time-varying factors hypothesized to mediate incarceration-child well-being associations.

The primary goal of this study is to collect survey data to examine the effect of parental incarceration on a range of child well-being outcomes, including conduct problems, academic readiness/achievement and emotional and physical health, among children born to participants in the TARS study. Child well-being outcomes includes internalizing and externalizing problems, academic readiness/attainment, and emotional and physical health. This study also includes parental disadvantages across the three subgroups of system contact, including variation in objective and subjective indicators of economic marginality, relationship difficulties, perceived stress, depression, and lack of social support.

The Youth Development Study (YDS) was initiated as a school-based study of adolescent children and their parents to examine the consequences of formative experiences in adolescence for mental health, value formation, educational achievement, and multiple facets of behavioral adjustment. Particular attention was directed to the impacts of early work experience. Data were also obtained about parent-child and peer relationships and experiences in school. As the study continued, the focus shifted to adult development and attainment and, most recently, mid-life adjustment and health. This comprehensive longitudinal study now encompasses three generations: the initial cohort studied from adolescence to mid-life (G2), their parents (G1), and their adolescent children (G3). Data from three generations in the same families enable study of intergenerational relationships and differences in the experience of adolescence and transition to adulthood across parent and child cohorts. The YDS covers a wide range of topics of interest to sociologists, social psychologists, developmental psychologists, and life course scholars, including the development and impacts of agentic resources, socioeconomic attainment, processes of inter- and intra-generational mobility, objective and subjective work conditions, family relationships, intergenerational relationships, mental and physical health, and well-being.

In-school administration of paper surveys during the first four years of the study was supplemented by mailed surveys. Subsequent data collection took place entirely by mail, with 19 surveys conducted between 1988 and 2011. A final survey was conducted on-line in 2019. Survey data was obtained from the parents (G1) of this cohort during the first and fourth waves of the study (1988 and 1991). Surveys of the children (G3) began in 2009, continued in 2010 and 2011 (by mail) and in 2019-2020 (online).

The Youth Development Study measures a wide range of formative experiences and both psychological and behavioral variables, using survey methodology.

The G1 surveys obtained information about socioeconomic background as well as attitudes toward teenage employment, the parents' own employment as teenagers, their current work experiences, and educational expectations for their children.

The G2 surveys during the high school years included detailed questions about students' work and volunteer experiences, as well as experiences in their family, school, and peer groups, with an emphasis on the ways that working affected other life domains, mental health, and well-being. Shorter surveys containing many of the same topics were administered to students in 1992, 1993, and 1994, and included questions about current family and living arrangements. In 1995, a full survey was administered covering the wide range of topics included in previous surveys as well as information about career plans and life events that had occurred in the past five years. G2 Waves 9 through 19 (1997-2011) included many of the same questions contained in earlier surveys and additional sections that focused on the respondents' educational experiences, family relationships, sources of living expenses, and health and well-being. The most recent G2 survey (2019), administered on-line, included questions about support of aging parents. The YDS is unique in its coverage of both objective and subjective work experiences from adolescence to mid-life.

The topics covered by the G3 surveys are very similar to the G2 variables described above. Variables in each G2 and G3 wave are included in cross-wave codebooks, available at the Data Archive Codebook website.

For an overview of the Youth Development Study, see Mortimer, Jeylan T. (2012) "The Evolution, Contributions, and Prospects of the Youth Development Study: An Investigation in Life Course Social Psychology." Social Psychology Quarterly 75(1, March):5-27.