From 7ac68e82aab0b6697a761733cf3199e351a2f829 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: joselinb <52760876+joselinb@users.noreply.github.com> Date: Tue, 16 Jan 2024 12:58:38 -0500 Subject: [PATCH 1/4] week 1 reflection - Joselin Barbosa --- week1.md | 3 +++ 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+) diff --git a/week1.md b/week1.md index e69de29..70c8e81 100644 --- a/week1.md +++ b/week1.md @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +https://datainnovation.org/2018/03/visualizing-income-mobility-across-racial-and-gender-groups/ + +This animated data visualization was published by The New York Times to show how based on your gender and race the likeliness of income mobility if you were raised by a poor family. The data visualization that’s pictured in this article compares the lives of 50,000 American Black and White women. It demonstrates although Black and White women have similar individual earnings, they do not have the same household incomes. In fact, White Women tend to have higher household incomes. I think this is a good visualization and it highlights differences and similarities between groups well. The colors chosen for the visualization are distinct enough to be able to track the different dots on the screen. I also like the way it’s designed so that you can visually see how the people that are poor are at the bottom and the people that are getting richer move up the graph. I enjoy that it is an animated visualization so the viewer can actually “follow” the dots or perhaps the life of an individual person and see if they rise in economic status. I would have preferred a bolder color or a different way to display the labels such as “poor adult” and “lower middle class adult” since it does get harder to read them as more dots pile in. Ultimately, visualizations like these could be use to promote policies that can help Americans achieve economic mobility and move out of poverty. From e75720d2d49dfa41eda5d10ea1ad96cbc6d32835 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: joselinb <52760876+joselinb@users.noreply.github.com> Date: Tue, 6 Feb 2024 09:45:52 -0500 Subject: [PATCH 2/4] Update week4.md --- week4.md | 3 +++ 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+) diff --git a/week4.md b/week4.md index e69de29..1a3c591 100644 --- a/week4.md +++ b/week4.md @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +https://flowingdata.com/2022/03/01/change-in-common-household-types-in-the-u-s/ + +To illustrate changes in common household types in the U.S. this article uses an alluvial diagram. It's a combination of a flowchart and stacked area chart. The graph shows how we went from it being more common to be a married household with kids in the 1970s to living alone or married with no children in 2020. Overtime, Americans have waited longer to get married and have fewer to no kids. The visualization dooes a very good job at showing the changes over time. It does get harder to follow what each color means, specially as some sections get smaller and smaller. At first glance, I didn't even notice the single father at the bottom of the graph. I think a simpler way to showcase this data would be through a line graph. The colors used by the visualization are generally good, with an exception of the two yellows. The yellow that signifies married couple with children and the yellow that signifies a single mother are too similar that it gets slightly confusing. From 19a9079a313f95ff691212125250f4a6e66e61c2 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: joselinb <52760876+joselinb@users.noreply.github.com> Date: Tue, 13 Feb 2024 15:15:59 -0500 Subject: [PATCH 3/4] Update week5.md --- week5.md | 3 +++ 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+) diff --git a/week5.md b/week5.md index e69de29..25bf26b 100644 --- a/week5.md +++ b/week5.md @@ -0,0 +1,3 @@ +https://stats.stackexchange.com/questions/622611/is-this-data-visualization-of-heat-and-cold-deaths-misleading + +I found this data visualization as a part of a discourse on whether or not this visualization was misleading and climate change propaganda. The visualization is meant to show country level cold and heat annual raw death rates broken down by age group. I do find the having two different scales for excess death rate to be deceiving. The way the visual is split in two it makes the viewer want to draw comparisons between both, although the scale is not the same. Also, the break in the x-axis I feel is not really necessary. I think a better way to bring the point across would be to separate the data into two separate graphs. Although the visualization intends to draw comparisons between the different European countries, the design could be improved. They have total bars as well for the four regions and the different saturation for them is confusing. I definitely think the whole visualization should be redesigned. This was used as a part of a scholarly journal, so I believe a better representation of the data should've been used. From e1fe5b059c69e84404ca052eb67a774d98de3cb7 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: joselinb <52760876+joselinb@users.noreply.github.com> Date: Tue, 13 Feb 2024 15:16:13 -0500 Subject: [PATCH 4/4] Update week5.md --- week5.md | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/week5.md b/week5.md index 25bf26b..018c606 100644 --- a/week5.md +++ b/week5.md @@ -1,3 +1,3 @@ https://stats.stackexchange.com/questions/622611/is-this-data-visualization-of-heat-and-cold-deaths-misleading -I found this data visualization as a part of a discourse on whether or not this visualization was misleading and climate change propaganda. The visualization is meant to show country level cold and heat annual raw death rates broken down by age group. I do find the having two different scales for excess death rate to be deceiving. The way the visual is split in two it makes the viewer want to draw comparisons between both, although the scale is not the same. Also, the break in the x-axis I feel is not really necessary. I think a better way to bring the point across would be to separate the data into two separate graphs. Although the visualization intends to draw comparisons between the different European countries, the design could be improved. They have total bars as well for the four regions and the different saturation for them is confusing. I definitely think the whole visualization should be redesigned. This was used as a part of a scholarly journal, so I believe a better representation of the data should've been used. +I found this data visualization as a part of a discourse on whether or not this visualization was misleading and climate change propaganda. The visualization is meant to show country level cold and heat annual raw death rates broken down by age group. I do find the having two different scales for excess death rate to be deceiving. The way the visual is split in two it makes the viewer want to draw comparisons between both, although the scale is not the same. Also, the break in the x-axis I feel is not really necessary. I think a better way to bring the point across would be to separate the data into two separate graphs. Although the visualization intends to draw comparisons between the different European countries, the design could be improved. They have total bars as well for the four regions and the different saturation for them is confusing. I definitely think the whole visualization should be redesigned. This was used as a part of a scholarly journal, so I believe a better representation of the data should've been used.