Respond to at least two of your peers’ work, commenting on your peer’s assessment of the graph they chose. Responses could include suggestions for further resources, questions of clarification, or provide context and insight. Avoid simple posts of agreement; if you agree, explain why, and then thoughtfully further the conversation.
Requirements
9 hours agoRe: Week 4 | Discussion – How to Spot a Misleading Graph
I chose Graph 1: Los Angeles Climate Information
What do the horizontal (x) and vertical (y) axes represent on the graph?
The horizontal axes in this graph represent the months in the year. January through December.
The vertical axes measures temperatures in Fahrenheit degrees, and also, inches 1 through 6, in precipitation throughout the year.
As well, there are two line graphs to represent the average lowest and highest temperature.
What information are you missing, if any, in order to be able to fully understand this graph?
In the description of the graph, I don’t believe that there is any information not included to understand the graph. However, the graph itself is missing that these numbers are averages, and we do not know what year we are graphing.
What point might a person try to make by including this graph in an article, advertisement, or presentation?
The point of the graph is to demonstrate the average temperatures and precipitation throughout the year in Los Angeles. A point someone might try to make with the use of this graph is to show how little precipitation we receive here in Los Angeles.
Why could this graph be considered misleading? How might you recreate the graph so that it is no longer misleading? Identify the purpose for the inclusion of the graph in the article.
This graph could be misleading because it does not emphasis on average numbers, or year. I would recreate the labeling of the graph to demonstrate that these are average numbers, and a specific year. Those who live in LA, know that temperatures can definitely exceed 80+ degree weather during the summer in recent years, so we don’t know what year they’re using for their graph.
Do you think this graph is potentially misleading because of the way it was drawn? Why or why not?
I do not think the drawing of the graph is misleading because in Los Angeles we do not ever fall below 40 degrees in the year on average, and again due to not knowing what year is being graphed, we can not assume that this specific year reached over 80 degrees on average. As well, our months never change in a year, and again due to not knowing the year, we cannot assume we received over 6 inches in precipitation.
9 hours agoWeek 4 | Discussion – How to Spot a Misleading Graph
Graph 3: Global Under-five, Infant and Neonatal Mortality Rates, 1990-2016
What do the horizontal (x) and vertical (y) axes represent on the graph?
The horizontal (x) axes on the graph represent the years of 1990-2016 in which data was collected for under-five, infant, and neonatal mortality rates. The vertical (y) axes represent the percentage of mortality rates from 0-100 in an increment of 10.
What information are you missing, if any, in order to be able to fully understand this graph?
The information presented is an adequate amount of information to understand the graph. The only information I believe is missing is recent data collection for mortality rates of neonatal, infant and under-five in the year 2018. The graph shows the year 2018, but no data is included to determine whether the mortality rates are decreasing or increasing. I think it is necessary to present recent information about the mortality rates to the readers.
What point might a person try to make by including this graph in an article, advertisement, or presentation?
The point a person is trying to make by including this graph is to show the decline of mortality rates in neonatal, infants, and under-five within a 16-year period. It is showing the readers how within the 16-year period the mortality rates are declining which can promote advancement in healthcare.
Why could this graph be considered misleading? How might you recreate the graph so that it is no longer misleading? Identify the purpose of the inclusion of the graph in the article.
This graph can be considered misleading because of the inconsistency of the year gap on the horizontal (x) axes. It is showing a gradual decline, but it is misleading because it is not separated equally. If the horizontal (x) axes had a consistent gap or provided every year or every two years, then the decline would show an extension of the decline. Preferably, the vertical (y) axes should be incremented by 5 instead of 10 to show accuracy in the decline. Otherwise, the graph is distinctive in the separate mortality rates in neonatal, infants, and under-five.
Do you think this graph is potentially misleading because of the way it was drawn? Why or why not?
At first glance, the graph demonstrates a gradual decline, but when looking into the details you can see the drawing of this graph is misleading. The horizontal (x) axes are inconsistent in the years and the vertical (y) axes are shortened by the increments of ten.
