« Get Involved with the R Consortium | Main | Because it's Friday: Witness the Illusion »

April 15, 2016

Comments

Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

Why did you select a wide graph aspect ratio? It implies the effect is not as originally reported when a careful look at the axes suggests it's very much like originally reported. I'm not arguing that you're attempting to deceive or say anything different. But, by making the aspect ratio of the graph the same as the original this would have been immediately obvious and any differences would also have been easily discovered. (Ideally the size would be the same up to the corresponding year and then have the new year added on, so a little wider is reasonable)

(As an aside, I'm sure if you had written Fox requesting the data I'm sure he would have obliged.)

It's a nice suggestion to explicitly compare the existing data and the data I scraped. My original intent for this exercise was simply to get an update dataset, quickly, and I turned to scraping.

I use landscape orientation (approximately golden ratio) for most of my plots, out of habit and convenience. This ratio works well in presentations. Since I didn't set out to compare, but to update, this was not part of the story I planned to tell.

I like your idea to compare and will do this in a follow-up post.

I'm sure John Fox would share the data. In fact he already did - in the Ecdat package I referenced. But that wouldn't have been nearly as interesting ;-)

Hi Andrie,

I just posted the latest data: http://r4stats.com/2016/04/19/rs-growth-continues-to-accelerate/

Cheers,
Bob

The comments to this entry are closed.

Search Revolutions Blog




Got comments or suggestions for the blog editor?
Email David Smith.
Follow revodavid on Twitter Follow David on Twitter: @revodavid
Get this blog via email with Blogtrottr
‚Äč