• Skip to main content
  • Skip to primary sidebar
  • Skip to footer

eagereyes

Visualization and Visual Communication

  • Explore
    • Starter Pack
    • Blog Calendar
    • Blogroll
    • eagereyesTV YouTube Videos
  • Practical
    • Basics
    • Pie Charts
    • Techniques
    • Book Reviews
    • Journalism
  • Academic
    • Speaking Mistakes
    • Acceptance Rates
    • Papers
    • Conference Reports
    • Lists of Influences
    • Criticism
    • Peer Review
  • Admin
    • About
    • Contact
    • License
New eagereyesTV Video and Series: Chart Appreciation

Robert Kosara / September 23, 2020

New eagereyesTV Video and Series: Chart Appreciation

Time to breathe new life into my little YouTube channel, which I’m calling eagereyesTV. I’m doing so with the start of a new series I’m calling Chart Appreciation. Each episode will be on one particular visualization, news piece, or interactive. As the first one, I picked Hannah Fairfield’s Driving Safety, in Fits and Starts from 2012.

This is one of my favorite charts ever and it uses the connected scatterplot, a technique I have a special fondness for. So it seemed like a good starting point for this new series. I put a lot more work into the animations than I have ever before, and have also generally upped my game in terms of editing, as well as video and sound quality. The video is actually in 4K, so if you have the required hardware you can enjoy it at full resolution!

As usual, you can watch it on YouTube or directly here. Though I would really appreciate it if you could head over to YouTube to subscribe to the channel or maybe even give the video a thumbs-up!

Driving Safety, in Fits and Starts can be found on the New York Times website. The paper about the connected scatterplot I mention towards the end is work with Steven Franconeri and Steve Haroz from 2016.

I obviously intend to make more videos in this series, and in general (since the channel has been dormant for a while). I’d appreciate any comments and thoughts you have, positive or… constructive. I’ve put an absurd amount of work into this video, so I hope somebody finds it interesting.

Filed Under: Blog 2012 Tagged With: eagereyesTV

Robert Kosara is Senior Research Scientist at Tableau Software, and formerly Associate Professor of Computer Science. His research focus is the communication of data using visualization. In addition to blogging, Robert also runs and tweets. Read More…

Reader Interactions

Comments

  1. Nick Desbarats says

    September 23, 2020 at 7:33 am

    Firstly, I love this video. Interesting content and great sequencing of ideas, reveals, overall production quality. Congratulations from someone who also finds himself making a lot of videos these days…
    Secondly, I’ve never been crazy about this chart. Its one strength, IMHO, is that it does a great job of grabbing the reader’s attention (which, obviously has a certain value). In every other respect, I suspect that, if tested, it would perform worse than two line charts stacked one on top of the other (so that the years line up vertically). The two-line version would be much quicker/easier to grasp (it would require less explanation than what you had to provide in the video), and all of the insights that you mentioned would be more visually obvious. Not as visually interesting as a connected scatterplot, but probably more cognitively fluent and insight-generating. Another design worth testing would be a “0%-origin” line chart, which pegs the first year (1950) at 0% for both series and shows both lines in the same chart as % deviations from 1950.

    Reply
    • Robert Kosara says

      September 23, 2020 at 7:52 am

      Thanks! I think it very much depends on what your criteria are. We did test the connected scatterplot against dual-axis line charts for that paper I mention (linked above as well). I’m not so sure that another chart would be more “insight-generating” – a chart that makes you stop and ponder it for a while is going to give you more than one that looks like every other chart. Seeing how changes align in time is also pretty difficult with line charts, no matter if dual-axis or stacked.

      Reply
      • Nick Desbarats says

        September 23, 2020 at 1:02 pm

        Thanks Robert. I look forward to reading the paper.
        After looking at this chart a little more, though, I started to get even more uncomfortable with it.
        One concern is that people can only ponder the data if they can figure out how to interpret the chart, and I wonder how many people put in the time and effort to figure out how to interpret this chart (not just how to *read* it, but what it *means*). The “what it means” part took some effort for me, effort that Joe NYT reader may or may not be willing to expend.
        A larger concern is that I suspect that many people –consciously or unconsciously– will interpret this chart basically as a line chart with time represented linearly from left to right. But it’s not, and this could lead to some significant misperceptions. For example, the change from 1973 to 1974 looks similar to the change from 2004 to 2011 but, in reality, the 1973-1974 change was far “steeper”. Another example: The period from 1992 to 2005 looks like a brief pause in a steep decline, but it’s not brief at all, representing almost a quarter of the entire time span shown in the chart. I’d worry that even people who consciously realize that time isn’t being represented as a linear, left-to-right scale could still be prone to these misperceptions.
        Ultimately, the true pattern of change of these metrics over time (especially “Vehicle miles driven per capita”) is extremely difficult to perceive accurately, even when one correctly understands how to interpret the chart, and I see that as a major problem because the story is about the patterns of change of those metrics over time.
        There are other potential perceptual problems, as well. For example, the change from 1973 to 1974 looks huge because that line segment is very long, but “Vehicle miles dirven per capita” only experienced a small change during that time. Maybe it was just me, but I had to constantly and consciously remind myself to correct for these misperceptions as I was interpreting the chart.

        Reply

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Primary Sidebar

More Blog 2012 Articles

  • Four Values Can Still Be Worth A Chart
  • Tapestry, The Conference About Storytelling With Data
  • Listen To Me Dispense My Wisdom on the Data Stories Podcast!
  • All Responses to Gelman and Unwin in One Convenient Posting
  • A Scholarly Discussion with Andrew Gelman and Anthony Unwin

Recently Popular

  • Data: Continuous vs. Categorical
  • The Simple Way to Scrape an HTML Table: Google Docs
  • Stacked Bars Are the Worst
  • Understanding Pie Charts
  • The Dearth of Videos about Visualization
  • How The Rainbow Color Map Misleads
  • What is Visualization? A Definition
  • Facebook
  • GitHub
  • LinkedIn
  • RSS
  • Twitter
  • YouTube

Subscribe via Email

Footer

  • About
  • Contact
  • License

Copyright © 2006–2021 Robert Kosara · All original materials are available under CC-BY-SA