IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0211234.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The efficacy of Euler diagrams and linear diagrams for visualizing set cardinality using proportions and numbers

Author

Listed:
  • Gem Stapleton
  • Peter Chapman
  • Peter Rodgers
  • Anestis Touloumis
  • Andrew Blake
  • Aidan Delaney

Abstract

This paper presents the first empirical investigation that compares Euler and linear diagrams when they are used to represent set cardinality. A common approach is to use area-proportional Euler diagrams but linear diagrams can exploit length-proportional straight-lines for the same purpose. Another common approach is to use numerical annotations. We first conducted two empirical studies, one on Euler diagrams and the other on linear diagrams. These suggest that area-proportional Euler diagrams with numerical annotations and length-proportional linear diagrams without numerical annotations support significantly better task performance. We then conducted a third study to investigate which of these two notations should be used in practice. This suggests that area-proportional Euler diagrams with numerical annotations most effectively supports task performance and so should be used to visualize set cardinalities. However, these studies focused on data that can be visualized reasonably accurately using circles and the results should be taken as valid within that context. Future work needs to determine whether the results generalize both to when circles cannot be used and for other ways of encoding cardinality information.

Suggested Citation

  • Gem Stapleton & Peter Chapman & Peter Rodgers & Anestis Touloumis & Andrew Blake & Aidan Delaney, 2019. "The efficacy of Euler diagrams and linear diagrams for visualizing set cardinality using proportions and numbers," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 14(3), pages 1-25, March.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0211234
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0211234
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0211234
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0211234&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0211234?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. repec:cup:judgdm:v:5:y:2010:i:5:p:411-419 is not listed on IDEAS
    2. Anestis Touloumis & Alan Agresti & Maria Kateri, 2013. "GEE for Multinomial Responses Using a Local Odds Ratios Parameterization," Biometrics, The International Biometric Society, vol. 69(3), pages 633-640, September.
    3. Luana Micallef & Peter Rodgers, 2014. "eulerAPE: Drawing Area-Proportional 3-Venn Diagrams Using Ellipses," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 9(7), pages 1-18, July.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Hansel Tookes & Chanelle Diaz & Hua Li & Rafi Khalid & Susanne Doblecki-Lewis, 2015. "A Cost Analysis of Hospitalizations for Infections Related to Injection Drug Use at a County Safety-Net Hospital in Miami, Florida," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 10(6), pages 1-11, June.
    2. Mikael Laakso & Andrea Polonioli, 2018. "Open access in ethics research: an analysis of open access availability and author self-archiving behaviour in light of journal copyright restrictions," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 116(1), pages 291-317, July.
    3. Carlos Alberto GÓMEZ SILVA, 2014. "Clasificación de colegios según las Pruebas SABER 11 del ICFES en el Período 2001-2011: un Análisis Longitudinal a Través del Uso de Modelos Marginales (MM)," Archivos de Economía 12314, Departamento Nacional de Planeación.
    4. J. Perin & J. S. Preisser & C. Phillips & B. Qaqish, 2014. "Regression analysis of correlated ordinal data using orthogonalized residuals," Biometrics, The International Biometric Society, vol. 70(4), pages 902-909, December.
    5. Lei Sun & Hui Liu & Lin Zhang & Jia Meng, 2015. "lncRScan-SVM: A Tool for Predicting Long Non-Coding RNAs Using Support Vector Machine," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 10(10), pages 1-16, October.
    6. de Nooy, Wouter & Leydesdorff, Loet, 2015. "The dynamics of triads in aggregated journal–journal citation relations: Specialty developments at the above-journal level," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 9(3), pages 542-554.
    7. Charles Warwick & Joseph Salsovic & Junichi Hachisuka & Kelly M. Smith & Tayler D. Sheahan & Haichao Chen & James Ibinson & H. Richard Koerber & Sarah E. Ross, 2022. "Cell type-specific calcium imaging of central sensitization in mouse dorsal horn," Nature Communications, Nature, vol. 13(1), pages 1-17, December.
    8. Matthias Buntins & Katja Buntins & Frank Eggert, 2016. "Psychological tests from a (fuzzy-)logical point of view," Quality & Quantity: International Journal of Methodology, Springer, vol. 50(6), pages 2395-2416, November.
    9. Dale Bowman & E. Olusegun George, 2017. "Weighted least squares estimation for exchangeable binary data," Computational Statistics, Springer, vol. 32(4), pages 1747-1765, December.
    10. Alan Agresti & Maria Kateri, 2019. "The class of CUB models: statistical foundations, inferential issues and empirical evidence," Statistical Methods & Applications, Springer;Società Italiana di Statistica, vol. 28(3), pages 445-449, September.
    11. Yuqi Tian & Bryan E. Shepherd & Chun Li & Donglin Zeng & Jonathan S. Schildcrout, 2023. "Analyzing clustered continuous response variables with ordinal regression models," Biometrics, The International Biometric Society, vol. 79(4), pages 3764-3777, December.
    12. Nooraee, Nazanin & Molenberghs, Geert & van den Heuvel, Edwin R., 2014. "GEE for longitudinal ordinal data: Comparing R-geepack, R-multgee, R-repolr, SAS-GENMOD, SPSS-GENLIN," Computational Statistics & Data Analysis, Elsevier, vol. 77(C), pages 70-83.
    13. Thomas, Robert D. & Davis, John W. & Cuccaro, Paula M. & Gemeinhardt, Gretchen L., 2022. "Assessing associations between insecure income and US workers’ health: An IPUMS-MEPS analysis," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 309(C).
    14. Rishi Kumar, 2018. "Different Approaches to Identify the Poor: Do They converge?," Social Indicators Research: An International and Interdisciplinary Journal for Quality-of-Life Measurement, Springer, vol. 139(2), pages 589-610, September.
    15. Alan Agresti, 2014. "Two Bayesian/frequentist challenges for categorical data analyses," METRON, Springer;Sapienza Università di Roma, vol. 72(2), pages 125-132, August.
    16. Ronald Herrera & Ursula Berger & Jon Genuneit & Jessica Gerlich & Dennis Nowak & Wolff Schlotz & Christian Vogelberg & Erika Von Mutius & Gudrun Weinmayr & Doris Windstetter & Matthias Weigl & Katja R, 2017. "Chronic Stress in Young German Adults: Who Is Affected? A Prospective Cohort Study," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 14(11), pages 1-13, October.
    17. Stefano Biagetti & Debora Zurro & Jonas Alcaina-Mateos & Eugenio Bortolini & Marco Madella, 2021. "Quantitative Analysis of Drought Management Strategies across Ethnographically-Researched African Societies: A Pilot Study," Land, MDPI, vol. 10(10), pages 1-15, October.
    18. Gómez Silva Carlos Alberto, 2016. "Clasificación de colegios según las pruebas Saber 11 del ICFES: un análisis usando modelos marginales (MM)," Revista Sociedad y Economía, Universidad del Valle, CIDSE, vol. 0(30), pages 11-404, January.
    19. Daniel Fernández & Louise McMillan & Richard Arnold & Martin Spiess & Ivy Liu, 2022. "Goodness-of-Fit and Generalized Estimating Equation Methods for Ordinal Responses Based on the Stereotype Model," Stats, MDPI, vol. 5(2), pages 1-14, June.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0211234. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.