Skip to main content Accesibility Help
×
×
Home

Merging Graphics and Text to Better Convey Experimental Results: Designing an “Enhanced Bar Graph”

  • William D. Berry (a1) and Matthew Hauenstein (a1)
Abstract

We propose a format for presenting experimental results that combines a graph’s strength in facilitating general-pattern recognition with a table’s strength in displaying numerical results. The format supplements a conventional bar graph with additional text labels and graphics but also can be based on a dot plot. The resulting enhanced bar graph conveys general patterns about treatment effects; displays point estimates and confidence intervals for all key quantities of interest relevant to testing hypotheses (e.g., first differences in the mean of the dependent variable); and clarifies the interpretation of these quantities as treatment effects. Presenting information in a single figure avoids the need to devote scarce journal space to both a graph and a table. Moreover, an enhanced bar graph prevents readers from having to move back and forth between a graph and a table of numerical results—thereby reducing their cognitive load and facilitating their understanding of the findings.

Copyright
References
Hide All
Al-Ubaydli, Omar, McCabe, Kevin, and Twieg, Peter. 2014. “Can More Be Less? An Experimental Test of the Resource Curse.” Journal of Experimental Political Science 1: 3958.
Broockman, David E. 2014. “Mobilizing Candidates: Political Actors Strategically Shape the Candidate Pool with Personal Appeals.” Journal of Experimental Political Science 1: 104–19.
Chandler, Paul and Sweller, John. 1992. “The Split-Attention Effect as a Factor in the Design of Instruction.” British Journal of Educational Psychology 62: 233–46.
Cleveland, William S. 1984. “Graphical Methods for Data Presentation: Full-Scale Breaks, Dot Charts, and Multibased Logging.” The American Statistician 38: 270–80.
Druckman, James N., Green, Donald P., Kuklinski, James H., and Lupia, Arthur. 2006. “The Growth and Development of Experimental Research in Political Science.” American Political Science Review 100: 627–36.
Gelman, Andrew, Pasarica, Cristian, and Dodhia, Rahul. 2002. “Let’s Practice What We Preach: Turning Tables into Graphs.” The American Statistician 56: 121–30.
Gillan, Douglas J., Wickens, Christopher D., Hollands, J. G., and Melody Carswell, C.. 1998. “Guidelines for Presenting Quantitative Data in HFES Publications.” Human Factors 40: 2841.
Healy, Andrew, Kuo, Alexander G., and Malhotra, Neil. 2014. “Partisan Bias in Blame Attribution: When Does It Occur?” Journal of Experimental Political Science 1: 144–58.
Hink, Jessica K., Wogalter, Michael S., and Eustace, Jason K.. 1996. “Display of Quantitative Information: Are Grables Better than Plain Graphs or Tables?” Proceedings of the Human Factors and Ergonomics Society, 40th Annual Meeting, 1155–9.
Jacoby, William G. 2006. “The Dot Plot: A Graphical Display for Labeled Quantitative Values.” The Political Methodologist 14: 614.
Jacoby, William G. and Schneider, Saundra. 2010. “Graphical Displays for Political Science Journal Articles.” Paper presented at the Visions in Methodology Conference, Iowa City, IA, March.
Kastellec, Jonathan P. and Leoni, Eduardo L.. 2007. “Using Graphs Instead of Tables in Political Science.” Perspectives on Politics 5: 755–71.
Kosslyn, Stephen Michael. 2006. Graph Design for the Eye and Mind. Cary, NC: Oxford University Press.
Krupnikov, Yanna and Levine, Adam Seth. 2014. “Cross-Sample Comparisons and External Validity.” Journal of Experimental Political Science 1: 5980.
Lane, David M. and Sándor, Anikó. 2009. “Designing Better Graphs by Including Distributional Information and Integrating Words, Numbers, and Images.” Psychological Methods 14: 239–57.
Mironova, Vera and Whitt, Sam. 2014. “Ethnicity and Altruism after Violence: The Contact Hypothesis in Kosovo.” Journal of Experimental Political Science 1: 170–80.
Stadelmann, David, Portmann, Marco, and Eichenberger, Reiner. 2014. “Full Transparency of Politicians’ Actions Does Not Increase the Quality of Political Representation.” Journal of Experimental Political Science 1: 1623.
Sweller, John, Chandler, Paul, Tierney, Paul, and Cooper, Martin. 1990. “Cognitive Load as a Factor in the Structuring of Technical Material.” Journal of Experimental Psychology: General 119: 176–92.
Wainer, Howard. 1997. “Improving Tabular Displays, with NAEP Tables as Examples and Inspirations.” Journal of Educational and Behavioral Statistics 22: 130.
Recommend this journal

Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this journal to your organisation's collection.

PS: Political Science & Politics
  • ISSN: 1049-0965
  • EISSN: 1537-5935
  • URL: /core/journals/ps-political-science-and-politics
Please enter your name
Please enter a valid email address
Who would you like to send this to? *
×
Type Description Title
PDF
Supplementary materials

Berry and Hauenstein supplementary material
Online Appendix

 PDF (1.0 MB)
1.0 MB

Metrics

Altmetric attention score

Full text views

Total number of HTML views: 0
Total number of PDF views: 0 *
Loading metrics...

Abstract views

Total abstract views: 0 *
Loading metrics...

* Views captured on Cambridge Core between <date>. This data will be updated every 24 hours.

Usage data cannot currently be displayed