I think you're making things too complicated by trying to do a join inside ddply
. If I were to use dplyr
I would probably do something more like this:
names_to_encode <- structure(list(name = structure(c(2L, 2L, 1L, 1L, 3L, 3L), .Label = c("jane", "john", "madison"), class = "factor"), year = c(1890, 1990, 1890, 1990, 1890, 2012)), .Names = c("name", "year"), row.names = c(NA, -6L), class = "data.frame")
ssa_demo <- structure(list(name = c("jane", "jane", "john", "john", "madison", "madison"), year = c(1890L, 1990L, 1890L, 1990L, 1890L, 1990L), female = c(372, 771, 56, 81, 0, 1407), male = c(0, 8, 8502, 29066, 14, 145)), class = c("tbl_df", "tbl", "data.frame"), row.names = c(NA, -6L), .Names = c("name", "year", "female", "male"))
names_to_encode$name <- as.character(names_to_encode$name)
names_to_encode$year <- as.integer(names_to_encode$year)
tmp <- left_join(ssa_demo,names_to_encode) %.%
group_by(year,name) %.%
summarise(female = sum(female),
male = sum(male)) %.%
mutate(proportion_male = round((male / (male + female)), digits = 4),
proportion_female = round((female / (male + female)), digits = 4)) %.%
mutate(gender = ifelse(proportion_female == 0.5,"either",
ifelse(proportion_female > 0.5,"female","male")))
Note that 0.1.1 is still a little finicky about the types of join columns, so I had to convert them. I think I saw some activity on github that suggested that was either fixed in the dev version, or at least something they're working on.