Sorry for not making any census-related updates for the past few months.  I had started to get bored and was working on other meaningful projects.

Nevertheless, I can’t believe I haven’t done this graph yet:

Where did these cliques come from?

As I’ve mentioned before, these cliques/labels/social groupings are automatically generated from survey input.  I didn’t come up with them, you guys did.  When there is enough data to be considered statistically significant, the clique is surfaced.  (Thats why bulls were added later).

What Cliques are people actually aware of?

This graph shows the top 17 cliques, ordered by the percent of people who are aware  of each clique.  At 93%, almost everyone knows what a Bear is, 1-in-3 know what a Chaser is, but very few people are aware of Bulls or Gainers.

This graph is pretty even across every dimension—age, clique, location, etc—except when it comes to Chickens.

What is a Chicken?  WIth only 21 people self-identifying as Chicken I can’t say what an average Chicken looks like.  Whatever they are, it seems to only be used by older generations and folks in the UK.  It has completely fallen out of use by the younger generation:

image

Chasers, Gainers, Bulls and Muscle Cubs are the most clique-conscious (aware of 18+ cliques on average) while Twinks and people who don’t associate with cliques are the least aware (10 or less on average).

At what point do these labels become bonafide Social Groups?  Bears and Cubs are certainly qualified with >90% awareness, but what about Bulls?  Only 1-in-5 people are aware of their existence.