Statalist The Stata Listserver


[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date index][Thread index]

Re: st: RE: Bargraphs, order, SD


From   Ronan Conroy <[email protected]>
To   [email protected]
Subject   Re: st: RE: Bargraphs, order, SD
Date   Mon, 11 Jun 2007 12:35:15 +0100

On 11 Meith 2007, at 12:00, Nick Cox wrote:

Biologists in particular seems overly fond of just
showing means (+/- sd, se, or constant * se) in what
Stata user Paul Seed has called detonator plots.

A dotplot with means and sds added (see -dotplot-)
shows far more information.
It's a lazy habit, and one which has been opposed by the guidelines of the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors since their initial publication in 1979. The guidelines state:

Describe statistical methods with enough detail to enable a knowledgeable reader with access to the original data to verify the reported results. When possible, quantify findings and present them with appropriate indicators of measurement error or uncertainty (such as confidence intervals).

Note that the appropriate indicator of measurement error is the confidence interval. There is also disconcerting research which shows the extent to which error bars are misunderstood by readers.

http://psyphz.psych.wisc.edu/~shackman/belia_PsychMeth2005.pdf

Does anyone know of a serious reason for putting error bars in graphs? The one I always get is "but the journal will expect it" or "but everyone does it", neither of which is a defense.

=============
Ronan Conroy
[email protected]
Royal College of Surgeons in Ireland
+353 (0)1 402 2431
+353 (0)87 799 97 95
http://www.flickr.com/photos/ronanconroy/


*
* For searches and help try:
* http://www.stata.com/support/faqs/res/findit.html
* http://www.stata.com/support/statalist/faq
* http://www.ats.ucla.edu/stat/stata/




© Copyright 1996–2024 StataCorp LLC   |   Terms of use   |   Privacy   |   Contact us   |   What's new   |   Site index