I don't get why people flip out over circular bar graphs βͺπ. #SciComm #DataVisualization 𧡠1/5 
If you believe the circular bar chart is good, why put the same data in a table, too?
Why not just have the "second dose" ππ data in the table?
Or make another circular bar chart βͺπ for the second dose data? 2/5
Why not just have the "second dose" ππ data in the table?
Or make another circular bar chart βͺπ for the second dose data? 2/5
The colour scheme seems completely arbitrary. Different colours represent anywhere from a 1% difference in "first dose" π percentages (people in their 70s vs. people 80 and older) to a 16% difference (people 18-29 vs. younger teens). 3/5
This circular bar graph βͺπΒ works as well as it does because the percentages have the SAME rank order as age group., both for "first dose" π and "second dose" ππ.
If that wasn't the case, I think this would be MUCH harder to interprets. 4/5
If that wasn't the case, I think this would be MUCH harder to interprets. 4/5
Is a standard bar graph π all that bad? 5/5
Of course, AFTER I tweet I realize π³ that the "second dose" ππ data IS in the circle bar graph βπ at the start of the bars at the 12 h position. π.
Which speaks to the point of this graph being hard to interpret. 6/5
Which speaks to the point of this graph being hard to interpret. 6/5
β’ β’ β’
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
γ
