Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-t7fkt Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-26T11:48:58.587Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Using Graphs Instead of Tables in Political Science

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  28 November 2007

Jonathan P. Kastellec  and
Eduardo L. Leoni
Jonathan P. Kastellec
Affiliation:
Columbia University, E-mail: [email protected]
Eduardo L. Leoni
Affiliation:
Columbia University, E-mail: [email protected]
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

When political scientists present empirical results, they are much more likely to use tables than graphs, despite the fact that graphs greatly increases the clarity of presentation and makes it easier for a reader to understand the data being used and to draw clear and correct inferences. Using a sample of leading journals, we document this tendency and suggest reasons why researchers prefer tables. We argue that the extra work required in producing graphs is rewarded by greatly enhanced presentation and communication of empirical results. We illustrate their benefits by turning several published tables into graphs, including tables that present descriptive data and regression results. We show that regression graphs emphasize point estimates and confidence intervals and that they can successfully present the results of regression models. A move away from tables towards graphs would improve the discipline's communicative output and make empirical findings more accessible to every type of audience.Jonathan P. Kastellec ([email protected]) and Eduardo L. Leoni ([email protected]) are Doctoral Candidates in Political Science at Columbia University. The authors' names appear in alphabetical order. They would like to thank Andrew Gelman, Rebecca Weitz-Shapiro, Gary King, David Epstein, Jeff Gill, Piero Stanig, and three anonymous reviewers for helpful comments and suggestions. We also thank Noah Kaplan, David Park, and Travis Ridout for generously making their data publicly available. Eduardo Leoni is grateful for support from the Harvard MIT Data Center, where he was a fellow while working on this project.We have created a web site, http://tables2graphs.com, that contains complete replication code for all the graphs that appear in this article, as well as additional graphs that we did not present due to space limitations.

Type
Research Article
Information
Perspectives on Politics , Volume 5 , Issue 4 , December 2007 , pp. 755 - 771
Copyright
© 2007 American Political Science Association

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Ansolabehere, Stephen, and David M. Konisky. 2006. The introduction of voter registration and its effect on turnout. Political Analysis 14 (1): 83–100.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Armstrong, J. Scott. 2007. Significance tests harm progress in forecasting. International Journal of Forecasting 23 (2): 321–27.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Austin, Peter C., and Janet E. Hux. 2002. A brief note on overlapping confidence intervals. Journal of Vascular Surgery 36 (1): 194–95.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bowers, Jake, and Katherine W. Drake. 2005. EDA for HLM: Visualization when probabilistic inference fails. Political Analysis 13 (4): 301–26.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Chambers, John M. Cleveland, William S. Kleiner, and Paul A Tukey. 1983. Graphical Methods for Data Analysis. Murray Hill, NJ: Bell Telephone Laboratories Incorporated.
Cleveland, William S. 1985. The Elements of Graphing Data. Murray Hill, NJ: Bell Telephone Laboratories, Inc.
Cleveland, William S. 1993. Visualizing Data. Murray Hill, NJ: AT&T Bell Laboratories.
Cleveland, William S., Richard A. Becker, and MingJen Shyu. 1996. The visual design and control of trellis display. Journal of Computational and Graphical Statistics 5 (2): 123–55.Google Scholar
Cleveland, William S., and Robert McGill. 1984. The many faces of a scatterplot. Journal of the American Statistical Association 79 (388): 807–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cleveland, William S., and Robert McGill. 1985. Graphical perception and graphical methods for analyzing scientific data. Science 229 (4716): 828–33.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
du Toit, S.H.C., A.G.W. Steyn, and R.H. Stumpf. 1986. Graphical Exploratory Data Analysis. New York: SpringerVerlag.
Epstein, Lee, Andrew D. Martin, and Christina L. Boyd. 2007. On the effective communication of the results of empirical studies, part II. Vanderbilt Law Review 60: 101–46.Google Scholar
Epstein, Lee, Andrew D. Martin, and Matthew M. Schneider. 2006. On the effective communication of the results of empirical studies, part I. Vanderbilt Law Review 59: 1811–871.Google Scholar
Friendly, Michael. 1994. Mosaic displays for multi-way contingency tables. Journal of the American Statistical Association 89 (425): 190–200.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Friendly, Michael. 1999. Extending mosaic displays: Marginal, conditional, and partial views of categorical data. Journal of Computational and Graphical Statistics 8 (3): 373–95.Google Scholar
Friendly, Michael, and Ernest Kwan. 2003. Effect ordering for data displays. Computational Statistics and Data Analysis 43 (4): 509–39.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gelman, Andrew, Boris Shor, Joseph Bafumi, and David Park. 2007. “Rich State, Poor State, Red state, Blue state: What's the matter with Connecticut?” Columbia University technical report.
Gelman, Andrew, Cristian Pasarica, and Rahul Dodhia. 2002. Let's practice what we preach: turning tables into graphs. American Statistician 56 (2): 121–30.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gelman, Andrew, and Hal Stern. 2006. The difference between “significance” and “not significant” is not itself statistically significant. American Statistician 60 (4): 328–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gill, Jeff. 1999. The insignificance of null hypothesis significance testing. Political Research Quarterly 52 (3): 647–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Greene, William H. 1997. Econometric Analysis. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall, Inc.
Hartigan, John A., and Beat Kleiner. 1981. Mosaics for contingency tables. In Computer Science and Statistics: Proceedings of the 13th Symposium on the Interface, ed. W. F. Eddy. New York: SpringerVerlag.
Hartigan, John A., and Beat Kleiner. 1984. A mosaic of television ratings. American Statistician 38 (1): 32–5.Google Scholar
Hintze, Jerry L., and Ray D. Nelson. 1998. Violin plots: A box plot-density trace synergism. American Statistician 52 (2): 181–84.Google Scholar
Hsu, Jason C., and Mario Peruggia. 1994. Graphical representations of Tukey's multiple comparison method. Journal of Computational and Graphical Statistics 3 (2): 143–61.Google Scholar
Iversen, Torben, and David Soskice. 2006. Electoral institutions and the politics of coalitions: Why some democracies redistribute more than others. American Political Science Review 100 (2): 165–81.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Jacoby, William G. 1997. Statistical Graphics for Univariate and Bivariate Data. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
Jacoby, William G. 2006. The dot plot: A araphical display for labeled quantitative values. Political Methodologist 14 (1): 6–14.Google Scholar
Jann, Ben. 2005. Making regression tables from stored estimates. Stata Journal 5 (3): 288–308.Google Scholar
Johnson, Douglas H. 1999. The insignificance of statistical significance testing. Journal of Wildlife Management 63 (3): 763–72.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kaplan, Noah, David K. Park, and Travis N. Ridout. 2006. Dialogue in American political campaigns? An examination of issue convergence in candidate television advertising. American Journal of Political Science 50 (3): 724–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
King, Gary. 1995. Replication, replication. PS: Political Science 28 (3): 443–52.Google Scholar
King, Gary, Michael Tomz, and Jason Wittenberg. 2000. Making the most of statistical analyses: Improving interpretation and presentation. American Journal of Political Science 44 (2): 347–61.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McClurg, Scott D. 2006. The electoral relevance of political talk: Examining disagreement and expertise effects in social networks on political participation. American Journal of Political Science 50 (3): 737–54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Murrell, Paul. 2006. R Graphics. Boca Raton, FL: Chapman & Hall/CRC.
Pekkanen, Robert, Benjamin Nyblade, and Ellis S. Krauss. 2006. Electoral incentives in mixed-member systems: Party, posts, and zombie oliticians in Japan. American Political Science Review 100 (2): 183–93.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Political Analysis: Information for Authors. 2007. available at http://www.oxfordjournals.org/polana/for_authors/general.html. [accessed 24 June 2007].
R Development Core Team. 2006. R: A Language and Environment for Statistical Computing. Vienna, Austria: R Foundation for Statistical Computing.
Sarkar, Deepayan. 2006. lattice: Lattice Graphics. R package version 0.149.
Schenker, Nathaniel, and Jane. F Gentleman. 2001. On judging the significance of differences by examining the overlap between confidence intervals. American Statistician 55 (3): 182–86.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schmidt, Frank L. 1996. Statistical significance testing and cumulative knowledge in psychology: Implications for training of researchers. Psychological Methods 1 (2): 115–29.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schwindt-Bayer, Leslie A. 2006. Still supermadres? Gender and the policy priorities of Latin American legislators. American Journal of Political Science 50 (3): 570–85.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sterne, Jonathan A.C., George Davey Smith, and D.R. Cox. 2001. Sifting the evidence—What's wrong with significance tests? Another comment on the role of statistical methods. British Medical Journal 322 (7280): 226–31.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Stevens, Daniel, Benjamin G. Bishin, and Robert R. Barr. 2006. Authoritarian attitudes, democracy, and policy preferences among Latin American elites. American Journal of Political Science 50 (3): 606–20.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sturtz, Sibylle, Uwe Ligges, and Andrew Gelman. 2005. R2WinBUGS: A package for running WinBUGS from R. Journal of Statistical Software 12 (3): 1–16.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Tufte, Edward R. 1983. The Visual Display of Quantitative Information. Cheshire,CT: Graphics Press.
Tukey, John W. 1977. Exploratory Data Analysis. Reading, MA: AddisonWesley.
Wainer, Howard. 2000. Visual Revelations: Graphical Tales of Fate and Deception From Napoleon Bonaparte To Ross Perot. Mahwah, NJ: LEA, Inc.
Wainer, Howard. 2001. Order in the Court. Chance 14 (2): 43–6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wainer, Howard. 2005. Graphic Discovery: A Trout in the Milk and Other Visual Adventures. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.