Featured Product
This Week in Quality Digest Live
Standards Features
Mark Hembree
Rumors about ball performance meet quality assurance
Grant Ramaley
FDA seeks to align Part 820 with ISO 13485:2016; why that may not be enough.
MSMEs are encouraged to uphold the highest standards
Steven Brown
21st-century standard candles at NIST

More Features

Standards News
Requesting quotes for ‘Baldrige Reimagined’
Standards-based audit checklist and best practices provide support for growing technology in aerospace
Accelerating the adoption of digital twins in building industries
Tactics aim to improve job quality and retain a high-performing workforce
Demonstrating a commitment to keeping people safe and organizations running
Making the new material freely available to testing laboratories and manufacturers worldwide
Run compliance checks against products in seconds
Aug. 25, 2022, at 3:00 p.m. Eastern
Could be used for basic performance information on raw materials used in the most common 3D printers

More News

Carson MacPherson-Krutsky


Three Questions to Ask Yourself Next Time You See a Graph, Chart, or Map

Visual information helps people understand data. Except when it doesn't.

Published: Monday, August 10, 2020 - 12:03

Since the days of painting on cave walls, people have been representing information through figures and images. Nowadays, data visualization experts know that presenting information visually helps people better understand complicated data. The problem is that data visualizations can also leave you with the wrong idea—whether the images are sloppily made or intentionally misleading.

Take, for example, the bar graph presented during an April 6, 2020, press briefing by members of the White House Coronavirus Task Force. It’s titled “COVID-19 testing in the U.S.” and illustrates almost 2 million coronavirus tests completed up to that point. President Trump used the graph to support his assertion that testing was “going up at a rapid rate.” Based on this graphic, many viewers likely took away the same conclusion—but it is incorrect.

The graph shows the total cumulative number of tests performed over months, not the number of new tests each day.

When you graph the number of new tests by date, you can see the number of Covid-19 tests performed between March and April did increase through time, but not rapidly. This instance is one of many when important information was not properly understood or well communicated.

As a researcher of hazard and risk communication, I think a lot about how people interpret the charts, graphs, and maps they encounter daily.

Whether these data visualizations show Covid-19 cases, global warming trends, high-risk tsunami zones, or utility usage, being able to correctly assess and interpret figures allows you to make informed decisions. Unfortunately, not all figures are created equal.

If you can spot a figure’s pitfalls, you can avoid the bad ones. Consider the following three key questions the next time you see a graph, map, or other visual data so you can confidently decide what to do with that new nugget of information.

What is this figure trying to tell me?

Start by reading the title, looking at the labels, and checking the caption. If these are not available, be very wary. Labels will be on the horizontal and vertical axes on graphs or in a legend on maps. People often overlook them, but this information is crucial for putting everything you see in the visualization into context.

Look at the units of measure. Are they in days or years, Celsius or Fahrenheit, counts, age, or what? Are they evenly spaced along the axis? Many of the recent Covid-19 cumulative case graphs use a logarithmic scale, where the intervals along the vertical axis are not equally spaced. This creates confusion for people unfamiliar with this format.

For instance, a graph from The Rachel Maddow Show on MSNBC, showed coronavirus cases in the United States between Jan. 21, 2020, and March 11, 2020. The x-axis units on the horizontal are time (in a month-day format), and the y-axis units on the vertical are presumably cumulative case counts, though it does not specify.

A March 12, 2020, broadcast of The Rachel Maddow Show included a graph with unlabeled numbers and a tricky horizontal axis.

The main issue with this graph is that the time periods between consecutive dates are uneven.

In a revised graph, with dates properly spaced through time, and coronavirus diagnoses plotted as a line graph, you can see more clearly what exponential growth in the rate of infection really looks like. It took the first 30 days to add 33 cases, but only the last four to add 584 cases.

What may seem like a slight difference could help people understand how quickly exponential growth can go sky high and maybe change how they perceive the importance of curbing it.

How are color, shape, size, and perspective used?

Color plays an important role in how people interpret information. Color choices can make you notice particular patterns or draw your eye to certain aspects of a graphic.

Consider two maps depicting landslide susceptibility, which are exactly the same except for reversed color schemes. Your eye may be drawn to darker shades, intuitively seeing those areas as at higher risk. After looking at the legend, which color order do you think best represents the information? By paying attention to how color is used, you can better understand how it influences what stands out to you and what you perceive.

Oregon landslide susceptibility

Shape, size, and orientation of features can also influence how you interpret a figure.

Pie charts, like the one below showing employment breakdown for a region, are notoriously difficult to parse. Notice how hard it is to pull out which employment category is highest or how they rank. The pie chart’s wedges are not organized by size, there are too many categories (11!), the 3D perspective distorts the wedge sizes, and some wedges are separate from others, which makes size comparisons almost impossible.

A bar chart is a better option for an informative display and helps show which industries people are employed in.

Where do the data come from?

The source of data matters in terms of quality and reliability. This is especially true for partisan or politicized data. If the data are collected from a group that isn’t a good approximation of the population as a whole, then it may be biased.

For example, on March 18, 2020, Fox Business Network host Lou Dobbs polled his audience with the question, “How would you grade President Trump’s leadership in the nation’s fight against the Wuhan virus?”

Survey posted on Lou Dobbs Tonight, requesting viewers vote on Twitter about Trump’s performance. Fox Business Network

Imagine if only Republicans were asked this question, and how the results would compare if only Democrats were asked. In this case, respondents were part of a self-selecting group who already chose to watch Dobbs’ show. The poll can only tell you about that group’s opinions, not people in the United States generally, for instance.

Then consider that Dobbs provided only positive responses in his multiple choice options—“superb, great, or very good”—and it is clear that these data have a bias.

Spotting bias and improper data collection methods allows you to decide which information is trustworthy.

Think through what you see

During this pandemic, information is emerging hour by hour. Media consumers are inundated with facts, charts, graphs, and maps every day. If you can take a moment to ask yourself a few questions about what you see in these data visualizations, you may walk away with a completely different conclusion than you might have had at first glance.The Conversation

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.


About The Author

Carson MacPherson-Krutsky’s picture

Carson MacPherson-Krutsky

Carson MacPherson-Krutsky is a doctoral candidate at Boise State University in the geoscience department and the Community Engagement Coordinator for the Hazards and Climate Resilience Institute.





Graphs, Charts, and Maps

It is also important to compare what is being said about the chart, graph, or map.  Compare what is said by the figure with what is being said about the figure.  A bad figure combined with a faulty explanation is an all too common method to mislead the viewer or reader.