# data[].attributes.headline
Here is a list of the average age people got married in each U.S. state.

# data[].attributes.subject
Here is a list of the average age people got married in each U.S. state.

# data[].attributes.body
Alabama | 26
Alaska | 25
Arkansas | 25
Arizona | 26
California | 27
Colorado | 26
Delaware | 27
Florida | 27
Georgia | 26
Hawaii | 27
Idaho | 24
Illinois | 28
Indiana | 26
Iowa | 26
Kansas | 26
Kentucky | 25
Louisiana | 27
Maine | 27
Maryland | 28
Massachusetts | 29
Michigan | 27
Minnesota | 27
Mississippi | 26
Missouri | 26
Montana | 26
Nebraska | 26
Nevada | 26
New Hampshire | 27
New Jersey | 26
New Mexico | 26
New York | 29
North Carolina | 26
North Dakota | 26
Ohio | 27
Oklahoma | 25
Oregon | 26
Pennsylvania | 28
Rhode Island | 28
South Carolina | 27
South Dakota | 26
Tennessee | 26
Texas | 26
Utah | 24
Vermont | 29
Virginia | 27
Washington | 26
Washington DC | 30
West Virginia | 27
Wisconsin | 27
Wyoming | 25

# data[].attributes.body
Mean | 26.52
Median  | 26
Mode | 26
Range | 6
Midrange | 27
Standard Deviation | 1.21621695

# data[].attributes.body
I chose this data set because I thought it would be interesting to see the average age of marriage in each U.S. state. Many people are often pressured into thinking that they need to marry at a young age such as 19-23 years, myself included. However, in recent years that pressure has decreased and people are marrying a little later in life. My data set shows that the youngest average age was 24, the oldest was 30, and the age with the highest frequency was 26.

Surprisingly, my data was not very spread out. It only included a cluster of 7 ages which were 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, and 30. So the range was 6. Due to this small range, and no outliers, the standard deviation was 1.21621695. Since my range was so small I was also able to just list each age instead of having to group ages which made the data easier to present as well.

After reviewing the one variable statistics from Excel I was not surprised that the mean, median, mode, and midrange were so close in value. The statistics are as follows, mean: 26.52, median: 26, mode: 26, and midrange: 27. Since the range and standard deviation were so small, the other statistics ended up being so close. So, I think that any of these four statistics would be reliable in seeing what the highest frequency was.

I think the histogram illustrated the data the best overall because of how clear and concise the data was presented. The y-axis showed the exact frequency number so there is little confusion about the value. The bars also easily show the frequency and you don’t have to worry about reading the numbers. For example, the tallest bar is the highest frequency, and the shortest bar is the lowest frequency. In contrast, the line graph displayed it poorly. To me it looks random and you can’t tell what the highest or lowest frequency was. I think a line graph would be best to show a gradual increase or decrease over time.