Someone with an IQ of 105 seems to be five times as smart as someone with an IQ of 93. Because IQ apparently is exponential.
EXPECTATIONS
$LAYYYTER
🩵 avery cochrane 🩵
Misplaced Lens Cap
Claire Keane
macklin celebrini has autism
Aqua Utopia|海の底で記憶を紡ぐ
2025 on Tumblr: Trends That Defined the Year
art blog(derogatory)
TVSTRANGERTHINGS
official daine visual archive

No title available
No title available
Not today Justin
todays bird
Fai_Ryy
hello vonnie
will byers stan first human second
Stranger Things

★
seen from Indonesia
seen from Türkiye
seen from United States
seen from Türkiye
seen from United States
seen from Japan
seen from United States

seen from United Kingdom

seen from United Kingdom
seen from United States
seen from United States
seen from United States
seen from Türkiye
seen from United States
seen from United Kingdom
seen from Türkiye

seen from Brazil

seen from United States
seen from Ecuador
seen from Vietnam
@abbreviatedyaxis
Someone with an IQ of 105 seems to be five times as smart as someone with an IQ of 93. Because IQ apparently is exponential.
Courtesy of @wtf-viz via twitter
Ugh!
I love and hate this video. I think it is important to point out and discuss the exception to the rules, but this video fails to point out that most people do not intentionally lie with statistics, but do so in an unintentional, misleading way out of ignorance.
Yes, a lack of context does far more damage than just abbreviating the axis, but that’s a cart-before-the-horse argument to me. I worked with good-hearted journalists and now, work with great stats and research people everyday and most of the time, it’s innocent ignorance that causes them to travel down the road to mislead their readers and in turn, leave out a lot of context.
They not only abbreviate axis because whatever software they use did it for them, but don’t think enough about the story to even make up for it with context. Particularly with stats, research, and eval people, they’re worried first with presenting sound numbers that the “story” is the last thing they think of.
With journalists, the story is their main objective, but unintentionally exaggerate the numbers to further the story and miss out on a lot of truth-telling. They are so desperate sometimes to show that they don’t think about the statistical significance of their numbers and do not necessarily have the skills to determine if the change is worth exaggerating or showing in the first place.
Sometimes a change in numbers is significant, but sometimes, it’s not. You need a combination of solid statistical knowledge and a desire to tell clear, truthful stories when it comes to building charts, info design, data vis, etc. Just as it’s easy to lose the story by starting charts at zero, it’s also VERY easy to tell stories that don’t actually exist or aren’t significant by using numbers to build credibility. And that’s why I won’t shut up about the y-axis!
Double axis! Pew pew pew!
Would have much more interesting as a scatter plot.
https://twitter.com/uscensusbureau/status/661589314153877505
Truncated, double axis strikes again!
https://twitter.com/albertocairo/status/651490262297001984
Some good points from this blog from Ann K. Emery, but I would venture to add another rule, disagreeing with her visual metaphor: never plot bar charts with a truncated y-axis.
In bar charts, it’s the length of the bar that indicates the measure of data. Therefore, it is essential while using this visual metaphor to keep the length equal to the data.
A better, more accurate way to show this data from the start would be a trend chart. The data are already over time, making a trend chart the better fit regardless of a truncated y-axis.
More at Ann’s Blog: http://annkemery.com/be-careful-with-the-y-axis/
Truncated + double axes = double trouble
https://twitter.com/Birdyword/status/651369369835053056
https://twitter.com/ECONdailycharts/status/599228157238124544
What is this, uh .... I can’t..... even...what?
https://twitter.com/BBGVisualData/status/599201504466247680
https://twitter.com/williamsonchris/status/585720603333828610
https://twitter.com/TheEconomist/status/583144032316076033
http://www.gallup.com/poll/182165/americans-continue-view-energy-situation-less-serious.aspx
http://blog.plot.ly/post/113557928802/four-mistakes-to-avoid-if-youre-analyzing-data
I think this counts. I’ve looked at this guy several times and I still can’t figure out what the pie pieces or the size of the pies even mean.
https://twitter.com/WSJGraphics/status/583303562891018240
https://twitter.com/WSJGraphics/status/583679545066319874
http://www.marketwatch.com/story/how-to-buy-stocks-now-if-youve-missed-this-massive-bull-market-2015-04-02?mod=mw_share_twitter
http://www.vox.com/2015/1/26/7906333/mitt-romney-mormon-2016