Table 2 - Time-Use Comparisons for 1990 and 1995 Data
Excel |
CSV
| FEMALE Nonworker |
|
|
|
|
|
| 1995 |
1,172 |
|
42 |
166 |
60 |
| 1995 |
(186)* |
|
(64)* |
(170)* |
(44) |
| 1990 |
1,220 |
|
35 |
127 |
58 |
| 1990 |
(209) |
|
(70) |
(172) |
(61) |
| FEMALE Worker |
|
|
|
|
|
| 1995 |
944 |
313 |
25 |
93 |
65 |
| 1995 |
(226)* |
(249)* |
(49)* |
(132)* |
(44) |
| 1990 |
928 |
284 |
30 |
132 |
65 |
| 1990 |
(357) |
(357) |
(69) |
(191) |
(64) |
| MALE Nonworker |
|
|
|
|
|
| 1995 |
1,171 |
|
30 |
177 |
62 |
| 1995 |
(200)* |
|
(55) |
(184)* |
(46) |
| 1990 |
1,222 |
|
29 |
130 |
59 |
| 1990 |
(211) |
|
(60) |
(183) |
(65) |
| MALE Worker |
|
|
|
|
|
| 1995 |
900 |
365 |
15 |
90 |
70 |
| 1995 |
(233) |
(262)* |
(37)* |
(136)* |
(48) |
| 1990 |
903 |
338 |
20 |
110 |
69 |
| 1990 |
(360) |
(367) |
(59) |
(189) |
(71) |
* denotes significance at 95% level by difference of means test between 1995 and 1990 results. Standard deviations are in parenthesis.
|
