[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

From |
"Nick Cox" <n.j.cox@durham.ac.uk> |

To |
<statalist@hsphsun2.harvard.edu> |

Subject |
RE: st: graph hbox [with a discursus on intuition] |

Date |
Fri, 12 Jun 2009 11:27:21 +0100 |

Whenever my students report that Stata is "not intuitive" they often appear to mean "unlike Excel", with which I can only agree. Sometimes they mean something more like "not familiar". Also, when people claim that something is not intuitive, they can only mean "not intuitive to me", as age-old discussions in philosophy and psychology underline how difficult it is to get a really good handle on somebody else's intuition, or lack of it. (Of course, you can _discuss_ intuitions, or compare what people _do_ as guides to their intuitions, but philosophers professionally prefer permanent puzzlement.) Any way, there are real psychologists on the list who should know about this sort of thing, so I will focus on the question. In terms of coordinate geometry y conventionally means vertical axis. My recollection of my reading of the history is that this convention does go back to Descartes, just as your high school [secondary school [ lyc\'ee [ Gymnasium [ ... ]]]] textbook or teacher may have told you. In terms of statistics y conventionally means dependent variable [response, outcome, criterion, ...], as we all know. It seems that this convention was solidified by R.A. Fisher in the 1920s. These conventions are not usually thought to clash, so that for example there is a strong convention to plot response on the vertical axis of a scatter plot (although there can be other conventions too: in the Earth and environmental sciences it is common to plot height above or depth below sea level on the vertical axis). This convention is so strong that statistically minded people often don't think about it and even many introductory statistics books never spell it out. However, in the case of box plots and bar charts there can be some tension. Both horizontal and vertical flavours are to be found and everyone seems to agree that the choice between them is essentially aesthetic or pragmatic, i.e. what looks or works better. (With a graph that should usually be the same choice.) Often I find myself arguing that horizontal would be better because then text labels explaining categories can be indeed horizontal. Otherwise you can get what has been called giraffe graphics.) So, what often happens is also precisely what Liz appears to be doing, trying out one version and then the other, and seeing which one likes better. Stata's rule with -graph *box- and -graph *bar- is that y means response, regardless of which geometric axis is used. This rule has one very big practical advantage: Change your mind and you need only change one thing: box to hbox, or vice versa, and similarly with bar and hbar. (My students have had credit cards since they were knee-high and usually spell that visa versa.) If these programs worked like -twoway-, changing your mind could mean changing e.g. -yti()- yla() ytic()- to their x-cousins, or vice versa. Several changes would be needed, which would often be fiddly and fallible. I think that's why it is the way it is. Once you've got used to it, you will be surprised that you ever found it puzzling (just like, say, quantum mechanics or cricket). On a different note, -stripplot- from SSC has a -box- option but is a wrapper for -twoway- and follows the -twoway- rules that y increases upwards and x increases rightwards. Nick n.j.cox@durham.ac.uk Elizabeth Allred Thanks Scott. I see now that hbox and hbar share this odd characteristic--whether the numeric axis is vertical or horizontal it's the "y" axis. It is certainly NOT intuitive. Liz >>> On 6/11/2009 at 4:06 PM, in message <c25482390906111306n74396993t1da139037e215e12@mail.gmail.com>, Scott Merryman <scott.merryman@gmail.com> wrote: > With -graph hbox- the numerical is still the y-axis. Try > > -graph hbox px, over(nxs) yline(70) ylab(50(20)160)- > > Scott > > > On Thu, Jun 11, 2009 at 2:58 PM, Elizabeth Allred > <lizard@hsph.harvard.edu> wrote: >> >> I always seem to have difficulty with Stata graphics. >> >> I'm drawing several box and whiskers plots. I want to mark a critical value > on each plot and I want the axes and tick marks to be the same on all of > them. Given that my grouping variable has 6 categories and the labels are > rather long, hbox(horizontal boxes) rather than box (vertical boxes) gives I > nicer picture. However, I find I am unable to mark a critical value with a > vertical line nor am I able to specify tick marks when I use hbox. >> >> This works fine: >> graph box px, over(nxs) yline(70) ylab(50(20)160) >> >> This does not: >> graph hbox px, over(nxs) xline(70) xlab(50(20)160) >> >> I see absolutely no reason why there shouldn't be "symmetry" in these > commands. >> >> Would somebody suggest a workaround? * * For searches and help try: * http://www.stata.com/help.cgi?search * http://www.stata.com/support/statalist/faq * http://www.ats.ucla.edu/stat/stata/

**References**:**st: graph hbox***From:*"Elizabeth Allred" <lizard@hsph.harvard.edu>

**Re: st: graph hbox***From:*Scott Merryman <scott.merryman@gmail.com>

**Re: st: graph hbox***From:*"Elizabeth Allred" <lizard@hsph.harvard.edu>

- Prev by Date:
**st: fixed effects with xtreg** - Next by Date:
**Re: st: fixed effects with xtreg** - Previous by thread:
**Re: st: graph hbox** - Next by thread:
**st: -MVNP- Coefficient Estimates. How to standardize coefficients?** - Index(es):

© Copyright 1996–2014 StataCorp LP | Terms of use | Privacy | Contact us | What's new | Site index |