Demographics details for Picayune, MS vs Pea ridge, AR
Population Overview
Compare main population characteristics in Picayune, MS vs Pea ridge, AR.
| Data | Picayune | Pea ridge |
|---|---|---|
| Population | 11,826 | 7,852 |
| Median Age | 38.3 years | 35.6 years |
| Median Income | $35,649 | $93,113 |
| Married Families | 27.0% | 42.0% |
| Poverty Level | 21% | 8% |
| Unemployment Rate | 4.5 | 3.5 |
Population Comparison: Picayune vs Pea ridge
- In Picayune, the population is higher at 11,826, compared to 7,852 in Pea ridge.
- Residents in Picayune have a higher median age of 38.3 years compared to 35.6 years in Pea ridge.
- Pea ridge has a higher median income of $93,113, compared to $35,649 in Picayune.
- In Pea ridge, the percentage of married families is higher at 42.0%, compared to 27.0% in Picayune.
- Picayune has a higher poverty level at 21% compared to 8% in Pea ridge.
- The unemployment rate in Picayune is higher at 4.5%, compared to 3.5% in Pea ridge.
Demographics
Demographics Picayune vs Pea ridge provide insight into the diversity of the communities to compare.
| Demographic | Picayune | Pea ridge |
|---|---|---|
| Black | 38 | 4 |
| White | 55 | 70 |
| Asian | Data is updating | 1 |
| Hispanic | 2 | 9 |
| Two or More Races | 5 | 15 |
| American Indian | Data is updating | 1 |
Demographics Comparison: Picayune vs Pea ridge
- A higher percentage of Black residents are in Picayune at 38% compared to 4% in Pea ridge.
- The percentage of White residents is higher in Pea ridge at 70% compared to 55% in Picayune.
- In Pea ridge, the Asian population stands at 1%, greater than 0% in Picayune.
- Pea ridge has a higher percentage of Hispanic residents at 9%, compared to 2% in Picayune.
- The percentage of residents identifying as two or more races is higher in Pea ridge at 15%, compared to 5% in Picayune.
- In Pea ridge, the percentage of American Indian residents is higher at 1%, compared to 0% in Picayune.
Health Statistics
The health statistics provide insights into prevalent health conditions in two communities.
| Health Metric | Picayune | Pea ridge |
|---|---|---|
| Mental Health Not Good | 18.4% | 18.0% |
| Physical Health Not Good | 14.3% | 11.7% |
| Depression | 24.0% | 25.0% |
| Smoking | 23.3% | 17.9% |
| Binge Drinking | 13.3% | 17.0% |
| Obesity | 44.0% | 34.8% |
| Disability Percentage | 21.0% | 12.0% |
Health Statistics Comparison: Picayune vs Pea ridge
- More residents in Picayune report poor mental health at 18.4% compared to 18.0% in Pea ridge.
- Higher depression rates are seen in Pea ridge at 25.0% versus 24.0% in Picayune.
- Smoking is more prevalent in Picayune at 23.3% compared to 17.9% in Pea ridge.
- More residents engage in binge drinking in Pea ridge at 17.0% compared to 13.3% in Picayune.
- Obesity rates are higher in Picayune at 44.0% compared to 34.8% in Pea ridge.
- Disability percentages are higher in Picayune at 21.0% compared to 12.0% in Pea ridge.
Education Levels
The educational attainment in the area helps gauge the workforce's skill level and economic potential.
| Education Level | Picayune | Pea ridge |
|---|---|---|
| No Schooling | 0.6% (73) | 0.3% (23) |
| High School Diploma | 17.8% (2,108) | 17.7% (1,390) |
| Less than High School | 11.8% (1,392) | 9.8% (773) |
| Bachelor's Degree and Higher | 10.1% (1,200) | 14.4% (1,131) |
Education Levels Comparison: Picayune vs Pea ridge
- A higher percentage of residents in Picayune have no formal schooling at 0.6% compared to 0.3% in Pea ridge.
- A higher percentage of residents in Picayune hold a high school diploma at 17.8% compared to 17.7% in Pea ridge.
- More residents in Picayune have less than a high school education at 11.8% compared to 9.8% in Pea ridge.
- In Pea ridge, a larger share of residents have a bachelor's degree or higher at 14.4% compared to 10.1% in Picayune.
Crime and Safety
Understanding crime rates and safety measures is crucial for assessing the livability of a city or town. Crime levels can vary significantly from one neighborhood to another, influenced by various factors such as population density and local amenities. For instance, areas with high foot traffic, like train stations, might experience different crime dynamics compared to quieter residential neighborhoods. Evaluating these patterns helps in making informed decisions about safety and community well-being.