Timeline for Box-and-Whisker Plot for Multimodal Distribution
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
18 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Feb 20, 2015 at 23:25 | vote | accept | user1091344 | ||
| Feb 17, 2015 at 20:00 | history | tweeted | twitter.com/#!/StackStats/status/567775725546401792 | ||
| Feb 17, 2015 at 5:31 | answer | added | Livid | timeline score: 9 | |
| Feb 17, 2015 at 3:45 | history | edited | xan |
add data viz tag
|
|
| Feb 17, 2015 at 0:10 | answer | added | Glen_b | timeline score: 25 | |
| Feb 16, 2015 at 23:35 | comment | added | Glen_b | Thanks for the details - it certainly looks like language issues is not the problem. I suppose I should no longer be surprised by the inattention to detail required for such inconsistencies to occur, but I find myself astonished nevertheless. | |
| Feb 16, 2015 at 22:39 | comment | added | Nick Cox | Your evidence doesn't incline us to think well of this book. | |
| Feb 16, 2015 at 22:07 | comment | added | user1091344 | @Glen_b The book is using both. In the first paragraph multimodal, in the second polymodal. I think, two different authors worked on this paragraphs :-) | |
| Feb 16, 2015 at 22:01 | comment | added | user1091344 | @Glen_b Practical Research (from Leedy), Planning and Design, International Edition | |
| Feb 16, 2015 at 21:57 | comment | added | Glen_b | You certainly can use a box-plot - who would stop you? The problem is that the usual boxplot gives no indication of the number of modes (though there are modifications of boxplots that can indicate multimodality). Boxplots are better when interest focuses on inter-group comparisons of location and spread (across many groups) rather than when distributional shape is of direct interest. If multimodality is important to show - especially if there are few groups - I'd strongly suggest using a different display, or perhaps several. (I'll expand my comment into an answer when I can.) | |
| Feb 16, 2015 at 21:54 | review | Low quality posts | |||
| Feb 16, 2015 at 21:59 | |||||
| Feb 16, 2015 at 21:53 | comment | added | Glen_b | Yes, unimodal is correct. What's the name of the book? I wonder if it's a translation (or authors writing in an unfamiliar language) issue. | |
| Feb 16, 2015 at 21:52 | comment | added | user1091344 | @Glen_b I did. In my book, they are speaking of polymodal distrubution. Is unimodal for one peak correct? | |
| Feb 16, 2015 at 21:52 | history | edited | user1091344 | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 1 character in body; edited title
|
| Feb 16, 2015 at 21:49 | comment | added | Nick Cox | Box plots are not always helpful for complicated distribution shapes. Bimodal ... multimodal (I'd guess that to be a more common term than "polymodal") shapes will often be hidden. Much depends on how strong the departure from unimodality is. Otherwise no bell will ring and no error message will ensue. But even a histogram or kernel density estimate can mangle complicated distributions; some regard that as a feature as it's easy to be over-accepting of modes that are just quirks in a sample. I'd say that the only kind of plot that doesn't lose information is a quantile plot. | |
| Feb 16, 2015 at 21:48 | comment | added | Glen_b | The usual term for a distribution with more than one mode would be 'multimodal'. If that's what you mean, please edit to use the usual term. If you mean something else, please define the term. | |
| Feb 16, 2015 at 21:39 | review | First posts | |||
| Feb 16, 2015 at 21:47 | |||||
| Feb 16, 2015 at 21:34 | history | asked | user1091344 | CC BY-SA 3.0 |