Error bars considered harmful: Exploring alternate encodings for mean and error

IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics

Volumn 20, Issue 12, 2014, Pages 2142-2151

  Correll, Michael ^a   Gleicher, Michael ^a  

^a University of Wisconsin   (United States)

Author keywords

crowd sourcing; empirical evaluation; information visualization; Visual statistics

Indexed keywords

CROWD-SOURCING; EMPIRICAL EVALUATIONS; ENCODINGS; ERROR BARS; INFORMATION VISUALIZATION;

ADULT; COMPUTER GRAPHICS; CROWDSOURCING; EMPIRICAL RESEARCH; FEMALE; HUMAN; MALE; STATISTICAL DISTRIBUTION; TASK PERFORMANCE; YOUNG ADULT;

ADULT; COMPUTER GRAPHICS; CROWDSOURCING; EMPIRICAL RESEARCH; FEMALE; HUMANS; MALE; STATISTICAL DISTRIBUTIONS; TASK PERFORMANCE AND ANALYSIS; YOUNG ADULT;

EID: 84910082477     PISSN: 10772626     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1109/TVCG.2014.2346298     Document Type: Article

References (35)

1. A. P. Association. Concise rules of APA style. American Psychological Association, 2005.
2. S. Belia, F. Fidler, J. Williams, and G. Cumming. Researchers misunderstand confidence intervals and standard error bars. Psychological Methods, 10(4):389-96, Dec. 2005.
3. N. Boukhelifa, A. Bezerianos, T. Isenberg, and J. Fekete. Evaluating sketchiness as a visual variable for the depiction of qualitative uncertainty. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics, 18(12):2769-2778, 2012.
4. W. S. Cleveland and R. McGill. A color-caused optical illusion on a statistical graph. The American Statistician, 37(2):101-105, 1983.
5. W. S. Cleveland and R. McGill. Graphical perception: Theory, experimentation, and application to the development of graphical methods. Journal of the American statistical association, 79(387):531-554, 1984.
6. J. Cohen. The earth is round (p <.05). The American Psychologist, 49(12): 997, 1994.
7. M. Correll, D. Albers, S. Franconeri, and M. Gleicher. Comparing averages in time series data. In Proceedings of the 2012 ACM annual conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, pages 1095-1104. ACM, May 2012.
8. M. Correll and M. Gleicher. Error bars considered harmful. In IEEE Visualization Poster Proceedings. IEEE, Oct 2013.
9. G. Cumming and S. Finch. Inference by eye: confidence intervals and how to read pictures of data. The American Psychologist, 60(2):170-80, 2005.
10. N. Gershon. Visualization of an imperfect world. IEEE Computer Graphics and Applications, 18(4):43-45, 1998.
11. N. Goldstein. The Associated Press Stylebook and Libel Manual. Fully Revised and Updated. ERIC, 1994.
12. M. Harrower and C. A. Brewer. Colorbrewer. org: an online tool for selecting colour schemes for maps. The Cartographic Journal, 40(1):27-37, 2003.
13. J. Hintze and R. Nelson. Violin plots: a box plot-density trace synergism. The American Statistician, 1998.
14. J. Hullman, E. Adar, and P. Shah. Benefitting infovis with visual difficulties. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics, 17(12):2213-2222, 2011.
15. H. Ibrekk and M. G. Morgan. Graphical communication of uncertain quantities to nontechnical people. Risk Analysis, 7(4):519-529, 1987.
16. O. Inbar. Graphical representation of statistical information in situations of judgment and decision-making. Phd. thesis, Ben-Gurion University of the Negev, 2009.
17. C. H. Jackson. Displaying uncertainty with shading. The American Statistician, 62(4):340-347, 2008.
18. D. H. Johnson. The insignificance of statistical significance testing. The Journal of Wildlife Management, pages 763-772, 1999.
19. P. Kampstra. Beanplot: A boxplot alternative for visual comparison of distributions. Journal of Statistical Software, 28(1):1-9, 2008.
20. I. M. Lipkus and J. G. Hollands. The visual communication of risk. Journal of the National Cancer Institute. Monographs, 27701(25):149-63, Jan. 1999.
21. A. MacEachren. Visualizing uncertain information. Cartographic Perspective, 13(3):10-19, 1992.
22. A. M. MacEachren, R. E. Roth, J. O'Brien, B. Li, D. Swingley, and M. Gahegan. Visual semiotics & uncertainty visualization: An empirical study. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics, 18(12):2496-2505, 2012.
23. L. Micallef, P. Dragicevic, and J.-D. Fekete. Assessing the effect of visualizations on bayesian reasoning through crowdsourcing. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics, 18(12):2536-2545, 2012.
24. G. E. Newman and B. J. Scholl. Bar graphs depicting averages are perceptually misinterpreted: The within-the-bar bias. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 19(4):601-607, 2012.
25. R. S. Nickerson. Null hypothesis significance testing: a review of an old and continuing controversy. Psychological Methods, 5(2):241-301, June 2000.
26. K. Potter, J. Kniss, R. Riesenfeld, and C. R. Johnson. Visualizing summary statistics and uncertainty. Computer Graphics Forum, 29(3):823-832, 2010.
27. F. L. Schmidt. Statistical significance testing and cumulative knowledge in psychology: Implications for training of researchers. Psychological Methods, 1(2):115-129, 1996.
28. F. L. Schmidt and J. Hunter. Eight common but false objections to the discontinuation of significance testing in the analysis of research data. In L. L. Harlow, S. A. Mulaik, and J. H. Steiger, editors, What if there were no significance tests?, pages 37-64. Psychology Press, 2013.
29. W. A. Stock and J. T. Behrens. Box, line, and midgap plots: Effects of display characteristics on the accuracy and bias of estimates of whisker length. Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics, 16(1):1-20, 1991.
30. A. Toet, J. van Erp, and S. Tak. The perception of visual uncertainty representation by non-experts. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics, 20(6):935-943, 2014.
31. J. G. Trafton, S. P. Marshall, F. Mintz, and S. B. Trickett. Extracting explicit and implict information from complex visualizations. In Proceedings of the Second International Conference on Diagrammatic Representation and Inference, pages 206-220. Springer-Verlag, 2002.
32. A. Tversky and D. Kahneman. Judgment under Uncertainty: Heuristics and Biases. Science, 185(4157):1124-31, Sept. 1974.
33. T. van der Geest and R. van Dongelen. What is beautiful is useful-visual appeal and expected information quality. In IEEE International Professional Communication Conference, pages 1-5. IEEE, 2009.
34. L. Wilkinson. Statistical methods in psychology journals: Guidelines and explanations. American Psychologist, 54(8):594, 1999.
35. J. Wood, P. Isenberg, T. Isenberg, J. Dykes, N. Boukhelifa, and A. Slingsby. Sketchy rendering for information visualization. IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics, 18(12):2749-2758, 2012.