Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

I've stopped using box plots (2021)

nightingaledvs.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 258 posts

Re: I've stopped using box plots (2021)

#71

Post by SillyUsername »

nosianu wrote: post #64
SillyUsername wrote: post #13

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

I did not vote, but I can understand it - because of your first sentence already: > So the diagram should not be used because of an education problem with some audiences? You dismiss the problem of education as if that is free - but information is physical and spreading it takes significant amounts of time and energy, brains are what they are and hard to change, so this is so obviously a very significant problem that…

Fair enough, it is irritating, especially as although I am not the expert the author is, I am advance qualified in this field and passionate about the "best tool for the job" depending on what you want to convey Vs data clarity for a general audience (which from what I now believe, is the author's point of view)

Re: I've stopped using box plots (2021)

#72

Post by treflop »

rcxdude wrote: post #41
treflop wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I agree. The author simply used the wrong chart. The author's example has a bimodal distribution (TWO peaks) and chooses a type of chart that has ONE peak (a box plot). A little baffling tbh.

Well, to start with, how would you determine that about your distribution in the first place? And if that works well enough, why use a box plot afterwards?

Well usually when you are analyzing some data, you toss it into the most basic chart like a histogram.

And a histogram for the author's example is perfectly acceptable to show that single data series.

But imagine if you have 10 different normal data series and you want to compare their medians and distributions between each other... well are you going to put 10 histograms side by side and expect the reader to compare them? No -- that's where the box and whisker plot shines.

Re: I've stopped using box plots (2021)

#73

Post by Ringz »

ohmyiv wrote: post #47
ozyschmozy wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> There are very real use cases for box plots, The author argues otherwise, can you give an example of a use case where box plots would be preferable to the alternatives the author suggests?

> There are very real use cases for box plots, > The author argues otherwise No, in the article he says he wouldn't recommend them _in most_ situations. It's a part that a lot of people here seemed to have missed whether arguing for or against box plots. >Despite making more visual sense than box plots, I still wouldn’t recommend these design concepts or box plots in most situations because… (Emphasis mine)

From the article:

„So, no, I can’t think of any situations when a box plot would be the truly best choice, other than those in which the audience demands box plots because that’s what they’re used to seeing. If you can think of any such situations, though, please let me know on LinkedIn or Twitter.“

„Other reviewers suggested that the conclusion should be that box plots are a useful chart type, but only for statistically savvy audiences. Again, I’m going a step further, suggesting that even those audiences would be better served by other chart types in virtually all situations.“

Re: I've stopped using box plots (2021)

#75

Post by cjk2 »

ohmyiv wrote: post #65
cjk2 wrote: post #10

No you shouldn’t stop using box plots. You should use them for when they are appropriate - showing location and spread. And not shape! There’s absolutely no information on modality or distribution presented past quartiles and limits. They are mostly useful for comparing batches not analysing an individual batch. The author doesn’t know what they are talking about and is telling people as if they do. If he read any of…

> No you shouldn’t stop using box plots. You should use them for when they are appropriate Yes, the author is aware of that. They even stated so: > Despite making more visual sense than box plots, I still wouldn’t recommend these design concepts or box plots in most situations because… Seems a few people missed the "in most situations" part. He's saying he stopped using them for whatever reasons because it isn't work…

The author doesn't use the correct terminology and does not understand box plots themselves so they are in no position to explain them to anyone. They explain in terms of absolutes with no rational or scientific explanation and entirely miss the point of the methodology and tools. That is a not a good position to start or a good person to take advice from.

Not only that, the cases presented are likely better dealt with via inference tests. But the author's knowledge doesn't extend that far. And even going as far left, the posed question isn't even defined in the article. So how was a suitable methodology chosen? Well it wasn't - lets just throw this pretty picture up and whine about it.

The author is way out of their depth and should retract the article and take a formal, accredited statistics course.

Re: I've stopped using box plots (2021)

#76

Post by lolc »

rcxdude wrote: post #42
sigmoid10 wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you want to see why that is not fully correct you should read the article. For a box plot you need to calculate mean, variance and certain percentiles. These values don't make sense if your distribution does not follow a certain shape (because these values unambiguously define such a shape). See the examples in the article for what happens if you still try to use them in those cases. You can still extract the valu…

The mean and variance are not features of a box plot. Box plots show the quartiles, which are about the cumulative distribution.

Which is why I find the article so compelling because I'd always read box plots as being about variance. To me the plot implied a quite normal distribution.

Re: I've stopped using box plots (2021)

#77

Post by amelius »

sigmoid10 wrote: post #12

>box plots always make distributions look bell shaped I feel like this is where the confusion stems from for the author and everyone else here. Box plots don't make anything bell shaped (they don't change the distribution), they assume that your data follows a bell/gaussian shape. This is correct in cases where the central limit theorem can be applied (which is almost everywhere) - but when that is not the case, the…

A bell shape has no minimum/maximum, like the box has.

Re: I've stopped using box plots (2021)

#78

Post by cqqxo4zV46cp »

These335 wrote: post #57

Sure there are alternatives and I agree with the author's criticisms overall. But boxplots are a staple in statistics, and if your audience can reasonably be assumed to have some level of statistical training then boxplots are perfectly reasonable in my opinion.

Would you care to address the specific argument that the author makes about not using box plots with audiences? I swear, statisticians are among the most inertia-prone groups of people that I’ve ever worked with. You need a certain degree of “do it this way because it’s done this way” to deal with the amount of BS going on in this field.

Re: I've stopped using box plots (2021)

#80

Post by cqqxo4zV46cp »

SillyUsername wrote: post #8

So the diagram should not be used because of an education problem with some audiences? Isn't that a bit like banning cars because some people can't drive? Some diagrams are simply not for mass consumption and this is one, particularly because it is designed to illustrate an interpretation of ranges instead of the direct/linear representation of the raw data. Of course I'd illustrate this fact as a Venn diagram compar…

If this is your approach, the only way you ever could’ve made anything actually useful is by sheer coincidence. Box plots, and their alternatives, are communication tools. Do you not care to find a more clear way to communicate? In drawing an immediate comparison with banning cars, you’re being completely unjustifiably standoffish.
Post reply on HN