|
Hey folks! This week I have a figure for you from the New York Times based on a poll they did with Siena that describes Americans’ sentiments concerning Israel’s actions in their war with Gaza. What does it say to me? This plot is saying that more Americans think that Israel is intentionally killing civilians than they did in December 2023. The change in percentage of people in the other categories seems to decrease accordingly. What do you like? I love slope plots! I think they’re a great strategy for showing the change in a variable between two time points. As always, I am a fan of the NY Times minimalist aesthetic to plots. What don’t you like? Although the war has been in the news for several years now, I’m not sure that Americans - in general - have a very good sense of what’s going on or how Israel is waging the war. This somewhat comes through in the percentage that don’t have an opinion. For December 2023 the three categories only add to 72% and for September 2025 they add to 81%. I feel like that’s a big pool of people with no opinion. How would I make this in R? Good question! Several things stand out to me. First, the slope plot itself. There are lines and points at the end of the lines. I imagine having a data frame with three columns - date, sentiment, and percentage. I’d map the date to the x-axis and the percentage to the y-axis. Then I’d group and color the lines by the sentiment. We can draw the lines with Second, the points and lines are labelled. The plot includes the percentage of respondents with each of the three sentiments at each date. The text label uses a bold font for “Intentionally” and “Unintentionally” and a regular font for the third category. I actually forget if I can vectorize the Third, I already mentioned the x-axis line. I’ll need to figure out how to get the x-axis text to not be centered under the tick. Again, I’m not sure if I can vectorize the Finally, they have some fun stuff going on with their titles and captions! I count three bits of text above the plot. Within What do you think about this plot? I’d love to get your insights. It’s likely you have an idea that is better than mine or at least having a try at. Stay tuned for a future YouTube video when I try to implement this figure.
|
Hey folks, It has been great to see the high level of engagement with my weekly critique videos on YouTube. I have really enjoyed making them and have learned a lot about current practices in data visualization. The one problem with these videos is that they’re a bit like an autopsy. We can figure out what went well or what didn’t work in a published figure. But we can’t do much to improve the published figure. What if we could do critiques before submitting our papers, preparing a...
Hey folks, This week I want to share with you a figure that resembles many a type of figure that I see in a lot of genomics papers. I’d consider it a data visualization meme - kind of like how you’re “required” to have a stacked bar plot if you’re doing microbiome research or a dynamite plot if you’re publishing in Nature :) This figure was included in the paper, “Impact of intensive control on malaria population genomics under elimination settings in Southeast Asia” that was published...
Hey folks! I hope you enjoyed last week’s series on the radial volcano plot (newsletter, critique video, livestream). I think it did a good job of illustrating the various reasons I think it’s valuable to recreate figures, even if we don’t like how they display the data. Something I didn’t really emphasize in last week’s newsletter was that by recreating a figure, we can make sure that the data are legit. I’m surprised by the number of signals I’ve been finding where authors using tools like...