6 ms·

I can't take anyone seriously who publishes a pie-chart like this: https://ars.els-cdn.com/content/image/1-s2.0-S0304389420319944-gr3_lrg.jpg https://ars.els-cd

by tomthe 4y ago

I can't take anyone seriously who publishes a pie-chart like this: https://ars.els-cdn.com/content/image/1-s2.0-S0304389420319944-gr3_lrg.jpg https://ars.els-cdn.com/content/image/1-s2.0-S03043894203199...

palijer 4y ago
That seems a rather arbitrary trait to dismiss a researcher for. It is possible to be correct with flawed design choices.
- tomthe 4y ago
  Yes, you are of course right. One shouldn't dismiss good work because of some flaws. But anyway... this is a rather silly pie chart and I wonder how this was able to pass through multiple authors and peer-review.
  - civilized 4y ago
    The popular conception of science is really outdated in this respect. Peer review still matters, but most meaningful peer review happens post-publication, not pre-publication. People should not take published papers as reliable statements of "what the science says". Scientists are not going to expend a lot of effort on the thankless work of peer review, taking time away from their own careers, purely out of professional integrity and the goodness of their hearts. And their competency to do so is uneven at best anyway. What happens when the people who wrote this paper review other people's data?
  - kylebenzle 4y ago
    Can ANYONE actually say what is wrong with it? I see no issue other than ascetically it could be better but it shows the data correctly.
- slim 4y ago
  that pie chart to the left is not poor design choice. it demonstrates actual incompetency.
  - deleted 4y ago
    [deleted]
  - trzy 4y ago
    Why? The labels are given in absolute units but they are correct.
    - austinjp 4y ago
      The pie totals 200%.
    - wmeredith 4y ago
      One of the labels has a typo.
    - zamfi 4y ago
      The issue is that the pie chart included a slice for the total and then two slices for each of the two components that sum to the total.
  - civilized 4y ago
    I didn't get it at first but you're right, it's horrifying. They put the total and the breakdown into the same pie chart.
    - svachalek 4y ago
      Yup. Something I wouldn't consider adequate work from a 6th grader.
  - hex4def6 4y ago
    Oh man. I was annoyed by the breakout of the second pie chart which seemed needlessly confusing. But the left one is worse for double counting everything. And it has a typo! ("Analys"[sic]). That doesn't really bode well for how much rigor the rest of paper had, either in its creation or review(s).
- User23 4y ago
  Honestly communicating your results is just as important as getting good ones, and a junk chart like that is at best gratuitously confusing. I'd say everyone should have to read Edward Tufte, but everyone has and it didn't much help. 90% of the Q&A at his seminars is people asking questions that are variants of "but I'm used to doing it the old bad way, so isn't that really just as good?"[1] It was mildly amusing watching Mr. Tufte grow increasingly exasperated realizing just how few of his students had learned anything from the experience. I imagine that was a big part of why he retired to become a sculptor. [1] My personal pet peeve is the obsession designers appear to have with ensuring that there are no visible indications of which part of their design is meant to be clicked on.
Agentlien 4y ago
Is that because the "Consumables ingested" on the right side looks like Pac-Man eating the other two categories?
- Calavar 4y ago
  The pie chart on the left double counts everything. The total is represented as a slice in the pie chart.
  - amelius 4y ago
    Probably a case of automatically converting an Excel column into a pie chart.
    - hombre_fatal 4y ago
      That's what came to mind. And they simply selected a pie chart instead of a bar chart, and it wasn't super wrong because they were trying to show subcomponents of a larger value. Meh. Not worth the HN thread. It's like picking apart why someone wrote code in a suboptimal/messy way when in reality they just wanted to get something done under a constraint, and the author would totally agree if they were here to defend themselves. Yet here are people saying the author can never be taken seriously because of it.
  - Agentlien 4y ago
    I didn't think anything of it at first but that is indeed a strange design. Especially since the right part is a breakdown of one of the pieces.
deleted 4y ago
[deleted]
dredmorbius 4y ago
You might care to state why the chart is problematic.
- chrisma0 4y ago
  "Total number identified" is one of the pie slices, the other slices are subsets of this slice.
  - dredmorbius 4y ago
    Fair enough, thanks. The charts themselves would be better expressed as a Sankey flow, perhaps.
throwaway4220 4y ago
You would probably never go to a doctor if you go to a medical conference. The number of red spelling lines from word you see on graphs would make you throw up lol

by tomthe 4y ago

palijer 4y ago

That seems a rather arbitrary trait to dismiss a researcher for. It is possible to be correct with flawed design choices.

tomthe 4y ago
Yes, you are of course right. One shouldn't dismiss good work because of some flaws. But anyway... this is a rather silly pie chart and I wonder how this was able to pass through multiple authors and peer-review.
- civilized 4y ago
  The popular conception of science is really outdated in this respect. Peer review still matters, but most meaningful peer review happens post-publication, not pre-publication. People should not take published papers as reliable statements of "what the science says". Scientists are not going to expend a lot of effort on the thankless work of peer review, taking time away from their own careers, purely out of professional integrity and the goodness of their hearts. And their competency to do so is uneven at best anyway. What happens when the people who wrote this paper review other people's data?
- kylebenzle 4y ago
  Can ANYONE actually say what is wrong with it? I see no issue other than ascetically it could be better but it shows the data correctly.
slim 4y ago
that pie chart to the left is not poor design choice. it demonstrates actual incompetency.
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]
- trzy 4y ago
  Why? The labels are given in absolute units but they are correct.
  - austinjp 4y ago
    The pie totals 200%.
  - wmeredith 4y ago
    One of the labels has a typo.
  - zamfi 4y ago
    The issue is that the pie chart included a slice for the total and then two slices for each of the two components that sum to the total.
- civilized 4y ago
  I didn't get it at first but you're right, it's horrifying. They put the total and the breakdown into the same pie chart.
  - svachalek 4y ago
    Yup. Something I wouldn't consider adequate work from a 6th grader.
- hex4def6 4y ago
  Oh man. I was annoyed by the breakout of the second pie chart which seemed needlessly confusing. But the left one is worse for double counting everything. And it has a typo! ("Analys"[sic]). That doesn't really bode well for how much rigor the rest of paper had, either in its creation or review(s).
User23 4y ago
Honestly communicating your results is just as important as getting good ones, and a junk chart like that is at best gratuitously confusing. I'd say everyone should have to read Edward Tufte, but everyone has and it didn't much help. 90% of the Q&A at his seminars is people asking questions that are variants of "but I'm used to doing it the old bad way, so isn't that really just as good?"[1] It was mildly amusing watching Mr. Tufte grow increasingly exasperated realizing just how few of his students had learned anything from the experience. I imagine that was a big part of why he retired to become a sculptor. [1] My personal pet peeve is the obsession designers appear to have with ensuring that there are no visible indications of which part of their design is meant to be clicked on.

Agentlien 4y ago

Is that because the "Consumables ingested" on the right side looks like Pac-Man eating the other two categories?

Calavar 4y ago
The pie chart on the left double counts everything. The total is represented as a slice in the pie chart.
- amelius 4y ago
  Probably a case of automatically converting an Excel column into a pie chart.
  - hombre_fatal 4y ago
    That's what came to mind. And they simply selected a pie chart instead of a bar chart, and it wasn't super wrong because they were trying to show subcomponents of a larger value. Meh. Not worth the HN thread. It's like picking apart why someone wrote code in a suboptimal/messy way when in reality they just wanted to get something done under a constraint, and the author would totally agree if they were here to defend themselves. Yet here are people saying the author can never be taken seriously because of it.
- Agentlien 4y ago
  I didn't think anything of it at first but that is indeed a strange design. Especially since the right part is a breakdown of one of the pieces.

deleted 4y ago

[deleted]

dredmorbius 4y ago

You might care to state why the chart is problematic.

chrisma0 4y ago
"Total number identified" is one of the pie slices, the other slices are subsets of this slice.
- dredmorbius 4y ago
  Fair enough, thanks. The charts themselves would be better expressed as a Sankey flow, perhaps.

throwaway4220 4y ago

You would probably never go to a doctor if you go to a medical conference. The number of red spelling lines from word you see on graphs would make you throw up lol