Data is Beautiful

3549 readers

28 users here now

Be respectful

founded 2 years ago

MODERATORS

KnowledgeIsPower@mander.xyz

Beaver@lemmy.ca

WanderingPhoenix@mander.xyz

Net favorability of seven billionaires (infosec.pub)

submitted 3 days ago* (last edited 3 days ago) by Ondore@lemmy.world to c/dataisbeautiful@mander.xyz

17 comments fedilink hide all child comments

Source

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] SlurpingPus@lemmy.world 1 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (1 children)

I would prefer a table if I needed the figures that I could use. A bar chart is for a quick comparison by its very nature, and the left one suggests that the Toyota is using four times less fuel than the Honda.

[–] TropicalDingdong@lemmy.world 2 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (1 children)

Toyota is using four times less fuel than the Honda.

Only if you didn't read the figure. Which is the point. A car person would never make that mistake.

And I promise, in figure making, we are almost always adjust axis to represent the range of the data. It would be ridiculous not to. It would be a waste of real-estate for any journal or paper. If you are writing a Science paper, you get 5 figures, total. You have to do as much with them as you can. There are plenty of times when we might only adjust in 1/2 of a dimension, but usual its the whole

[–] SlurpingPus@lemmy.world 1 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Thanks for admitting that you make useless charts on which the reader has to read the figures anyway. Hopefully there comes a time when you realize you should've just used tables instead.

[–] TropicalDingdong@lemmy.world 2 points 2 days ago

admitting that you make useless charts

I mean, if the referees with literally decades of experience doing science communication have a problem with them, I'll change them. I have never had to because I have a basic understanding of what makes a good figure.