Abstract
1. Graphs in research articles can increase the comprehension of
statistical data but may mislead readers if poorly designed. Previous
literature has found that the two most frequently used plot types - bar
charts and dot and whisker plots - are a poor way to represent data
because they only show the summary statistics of data, not their
distribution, potentially hiding important information. 2. Calls have
been made encouraging abandonment of bar charts and the use of more
informative plot types, such as boxplots, violin plots, univariate
scatter plots, and dot plots. We compare these plot types to assess
their relative strengths and weaknesses to represent four different
distributions of the data commonly observed in biological studies,
finding that all the assessed plot types are either difficult to read at
large sample sizes or misrepresent certain distributions of data. 3. We
present an analysis of the plot types used in four ecology and
conservation journals covering multiple areas of these research fields,
finding widespread use of uninformative bar charts and dot and whisker
plots (60 % of all plots showing one-dimensional data from multiple
groups for the purpose of comparison). Some articles presented more
informative figures by combining plot types, generally boxplots and a
second layer such as a flat violin plot, to better display the data.
This shows an appetite for more effective plot types within conservation
and ecology, which may further increase if an accurate and user-friendly
plot types were made available. 4. In response to this, we propose sea
stack plots, which combine vertical histograms and summary statistics,
and allow for an accurate representation of different data
distributions, thereby largely overcoming the weaknesses associated with
other alternatives to uninformative plots. We provide a tool to create
sea stack plots with our R package ‘seastackplot’, available through
GitHub.