Data Visualization Analysis
The Data Team at The Economist released a data visualization illustrating the rising cost of the cryptocurrency Bitcoin in correlation to the number of Google searches for "Bitcoin" from 2013 to 2017. The data visualization itself was released on November 29th, 2017
It took a bit of time understand that the visualization was trying to compare the cost of Bitcoin to the Google search volume from 2013-2017. After I made this discovery, it didn’t make much sense to me as to why the graph was attempting to make that correlation. The article itself is about the bubble of cryptocurrency. I think this specific graph doesn't pertain well to the article. There is also no clear explanation as to why the Google search volume peaks at 100 or what specific word or words are being googled.
To make this visualization less confusing I think the data team at The Economist could have done without the google search volume portion of the graph. Instead, the graph should have illustrated the rising cost of bitcoin from 2013-2017, that way the data visualization and the article would have been more cohesive.
I think this data set would have been easier to understand if a bar chart had been used instead. A bar chart would have better illustrated both the rising cost of bitcoin as well as the Google search volume in a way that would be easier for your eyes to see. In this double line graph, from 2014-2016 the numbers are so close it's hard to clearly distinguish the two figures, it also caused a lot of overlap to occur. What I liked about this double line graph is that the baseline started at zero and the right axis was clear and easy to understand that it was showing the rising cost of Bitcoin.
Although this visualization was not interactive, I think it would have been beneficial if it were. Interactive data visualization works best when few things are being illustrated and ideally over short periods of time to ensure the viewer isn't having to remember large amounts of information. In the case of this data visualization, two things are being compared over a span of 5 years. I think that could easily be illustrated in an interactive data visualization.
I definitely agree that comparing the cost of Bitcoin to the amount Google searching related to Bitcoin seems odd. And as you said, if the article and the visualization don't make the correlation clear, then what is the point? Your suggestions for improvement also make sense! Having some interactive elements and more details to explain the research, numbers, and overall correlation would make a difference.
ReplyDeleteI agree that the comparison of Bitcoin to Google searches seems like an odd choice of information to publish, as I'm not too sure what we're going to do with this. I don't see a legend in this visualization...which line represents what?
ReplyDeleteHello Aisha,
ReplyDeleteI like how you pointed out the weaknesses of this data visualization. Comparing the illustration with the content of the initial article uncovered the very troubling aspects that you noticed. I am curious as to why the authors chose to compare these two values. Do you think the authors were trying to portray the public's growing interest in Bitcoins as a factor that helped increase its price?
Like the other commenters, I too agree with the odd comparison of Bitcoin to Google searches. The lack of legend in the visualization only adds to the confusion. You pointed this out as well, but it does take a few minutes to gather what the visualization is trying to illustrate. A good viz should aide the article, not hinder it like this one seemingly does. Overall you did a good job in pointing out the pros and cons of this viz!
ReplyDelete