D6 Misleading graphs

.docx

School

Saint Mary's College of California *

*We aren’t endorsed by this school

Course

MISC

Subject

Economics

Date

Nov 24, 2024

Type

docx

Pages

2

Uploaded by rupalisrivastava

Report
1. Specific data names and information are absent from the graph. It is difficult to appropriately understand the graph in the absence of clear information about what the bars represent. Its clarity would increase with the addition of axis labels, a title, and a succinct description. 2. Although there are no particular data points or context, the graph seems to highlight a deteriorating trend under the Obama administration. It would be useful to add the real unemployment rates and the related periods in order to offer a more accurate perspective. 3. Because of the graph's constrained y-axis range, it can be deceptive. The range is too small (34 to 42), which inflates the percentage increase. A more realistic depiction of the data might be possible with a broader y-axis range that includes numbers lower than 34. 4. The picture on the right could be deceptive since it seems to depict a large fluctuation even if the temperature difference is not that great. Misunderstandings could be avoided by modifying the scale or making it more obvious. 5. The vertical axis scale of the graph is inconsistent, which may be deceptive. In order to provide an equitable depiction, both axes ought to begin at zero. The apparent gap between Republicans and Democrats is overstated by the existing scale. 6. Pie charts' representation of proportions can lead to deception. It is puzzling why this pie chart is deemed deceptive without more information. It would be beneficial to provide background or go over the particular problems with the graphic. 7. The y-axis's 94 million beginning point may be deceptive since it overstates the data's visual effect. A more realistic depiction of the welfare data would result from starting the axis at zero. Hello Kimberly You have provided great insight into understanding misleading graphs. The scale of Graph 2 is deceptive, giving the impression that drops are rises. Graph 3 is inaccurate in depicting the tax change. In Graph 4, the increase in temperature from winter to summer is normal. Graph 5's scale, which obscures the slight variation, may confuse. Graph 6's equal-sized portions give false information regarding percentage disparities. You also made two mentions of Graph 6. In Graph 7, the growth in welfare spending appears lower than it is due to the beginning point. Overall, you have provided some great insights.  Hello, Dong Jun You provided some excellent ideas for this week's discussion topic, and you have undoubtedly raised some excellent concerns about the misleading graphics. You made a point. I concur that the final data point in Graph 2 is erroneous. Graph 3's Y-axis scale accentuates the change. The party difference is larger in Graph 5 due to its non-zero start. The picture of support is distorted in Graph 6 since the percentages are more than 100. In Graph 7, the ascent is shown by the high Y-axis start. You have a great understanding of these deceptive scales!
Hello Scarlett, I agree with what you have noticed. Although the gap in Graph 1 may deter pupils, it oversimplifies a difficult problem. Graph 2 is ambiguous; it appears to be stagnating while also declining. Additional research is required. Graph 3 highlights the possible consequences of tax breaks ending, which might affect public sentiment. Graph 4 persuasively depicts the effects of climate change and calls for action. Because Graph 5 lacks context, it is susceptible to misunderstandings. The exaggeration in Graph 6 misleads viewers. The Democratic viewpoint in Graph 7 raises questions about objectivity. You have insightful observations on the subtleties and possible biases!
Your preview ends here
Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version
  • Access to all documents
  • Unlimited textbook solutions
  • 24/7 expert homework help