Skip to main content
Cross Validated

Return to Answer

deleted 1 character in body
Source Link
Nick Cox
Nick Cox
  • 59.5k
  • 8
  • 136
  • 212

In the physics field there is a rule that the whole paper/report should be understandable only from quick look at the plots. So I would mainly adviceadvise that they should be self-explanatory.
This also implies that you must always check whether your audience is familiar with some kind of plot -- I had once made a big mistake assuming that every scientist knows what boxplots are, and then waistedwasted an hour to explain it.

In the physics field there is a rule that the whole paper/report should be understandable only from quick look at the plots. So I would mainly advice that they should be self-explanatory.
This also implies that you must always check whether your audience is familiar with some kind of plot -- I had once made a big mistake assuming that every scientist knows what boxplots are, and then waisted an hour to explain it.

In the physics field there is a rule that the whole paper/report should be understandable only from quick look at the plots. So I would mainly advise that they should be self-explanatory.
This also implies that you must always check whether your audience is familiar with some kind of plot -- I had once made a big mistake assuming that every scientist knows what boxplots are, and then wasted an hour to explain it.

Post Made Community Wiki by whuber♦
Source Link
user88
user88

In the physics field there is a rule that the whole paper/report should be understandable only from quick look at the plots. So I would mainly advice that they should be self-explanatory.
This also implies that you must always check whether your audience is familiar with some kind of plot -- I had once made a big mistake assuming that every scientist knows what boxplots are, and then waisted an hour to explain it.