Notice: On April 23, 2014, Statalist moved from an email list to a forum, based at statalist.org.
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: st: Re: Odds ratio graph - selecting order of bars
From
David Hoaglin <[email protected]>
To
[email protected]
Subject
Re: st: Re: Odds ratio graph - selecting order of bars
Date
Wed, 10 Jul 2013 10:59:47 -0400
Nick,
If the aim is to show variations in totals, no bars are needed: Just
plot a point for each total. Naomi Robbins has a good example in
which the horizontal variable is time. For such data, it may be
appropriate to connect the points by line segments. It may work to
plot and trace each of the components, in addition to the total.
If you were referring to Ed Tufte's other books on graphics, you may
have meant to say that he wrote them _after_ the one that I cited. For
completeness, here are the other three (all published by Graphics
Press):
Envisioning Information (1990)
Visual Explanations (1997)
Beautiful Evidence (2006).
Ed has written books on topics other than graphics.
David Hoaglin
On Wed, Jul 10, 2013 at 9:53 AM, Nick Cox <[email protected]> wrote:
> I share many of David's prejudices about graphics, but not all.
> Stacked or divided bars are, in my view, also over-used in total, but
> whenever the primary aim is to show variations in totals and a
> secondary aim is to show components, it is dubious whether equivalent
> charts based on separated bars or dot charts necessarily work better.
>
> Statistical graphics is, like many fields, an odd mixture of sound
> logic, arbitrary convention and occasional fallacy. I've experimented
> with groups of students (typical age 20) showing them bar charts and
> dot charts (in the sense of -graph dot-) of the same data, and there
> is an overwhelming preference for bar charts. Repeatedly the
> justification is just familiarity. These students prefer a graph form
> they have known for a decade or more and are unwilling to go for
> something cleaner and simpler. Naturally, the answer is to keep on
> pushing.
>
> In terms of David's (excellent) references, it is too often forgotten,
> or not appreciated, that Edward Tufte wrote several books before the
> one cited here. Cleveland's 1985 book went to a second edition in
> 1994; he self-published from Hobart Press. Robbins' book has just been
> reissued in a cheaper form by Chart House.
>
> Nick
> [email protected]
*
* For searches and help try:
* http://www.stata.com/help.cgi?search
* http://www.stata.com/support/faqs/resources/statalist-faq/
* http://www.ats.ucla.edu/stat/stata/