|
Hey folks, Did you know that March is Women’s History Month? Each year The Economist updates what they call the “Glass Ceiling Index”. This is a measure of “the role and influence of women in the workforce”. It’s an aggregate of ten factors including the gender gap in wages, work force participation, and higher education. Sadly, the article is behind a paywall. They also haven’t made their data publicly available. Regardless, you can get a static copy of the article through archiv.is. Here’s the graphic that appears to most popular when you google for the index. What stands out to you about this figure? To me, it’s interesting that the countries at the top tend to stay at the top and those in the bottom tend to stay at the bottom. The countries in the middle are a bit of a jumbled mess. Poland has taken a nose dive since 2016 while Britain has climbed. The U.S. has been pretty steady between 18th and 20th place. One critique is that this shows the relative trends and not the absolute. All the countries could be getting better on each factor, but we wouldn’t see it here. We’d only see whether a country is improving at the same, better, or worse rate than other countries. Graphically, what stands out to you? What would interest you most to see done in R? Here are my first thoughts… At first glance, this is a line plot with 30 lines. Line plots can be generated using Alternatively, we could try using A second interesting component to the figure is that the lines/polygons are colored according to the ranking from 2024. Normally, we could pull this off with A third element that catches my eye is the order of the lines. They appear to have been laid down on the “plotting canvas” in ranked order. We’ll need to make sure this happens with our recreation. This is the type of thing I’d do with A fourth element that stands out to me is that the countries are ordered on the left side for 2016 and the right side for 2024. The left side is easy enough to do with setting the y-axis text in Finally, the x-axis has the four digit year for 2016 and the last two digits of each year for the even years that follow. That’s easy enough to do with Oof. This is going to be challenging! But, I’m excited to learn more about
|
Hey folks! Before launching into this week’s visualization, I’m looking for a bit of feedback. Since November, I’ve settled into a new routine with this newsletter and the YouTube channel. Each week this newsletter introduces a visualization at a 30,000 ft view or discusses a specific topic in some depth (example). The following Monday I post a video critiquing the visualization (example). Then on Wednesday (or Tuesday like this past week), I livestream a video where I recreate the...
Hey folks! I just got back from a seminar. I’m still trying to stretch out my eyes from straining to see the small text on each slide! If you don’t know why I’m brining this up, then you must have missed the videos I posted earlier this week. I was discussing the factors we should consider when converting figures designed for papers to figures designed to a slide deck. You can see me critique a figure from my own lab here and the livestream where I refactor the figure can be found here. I’d...
Hey folks, I was a student-invited speaker at the Syracuse University Biology department this week. It was great to meet with them and hear how they are benefiting from these newsletters and my videos. As much as I love posting newsletters and videos, seeing people light up at ideas, laugh at my jokes, and tell me how they are using what I teach them is like jet fuel. I actually gave two talks. One talk covered what I’ve learned about data visualization by critiquing, recreating, and remaking...