Bear Attacks in North America
I’m like “really scared” of bears.
Are you?
Well! we may or may not both be scared of bears, but I’m quite sure we are both interested in the statistics of bear attacks, specifically in North America.
Which is why I wrote this post to present a few statistics and answer a few questions relating to bear attacks in North America.
There exist other posts that have discussed on this topic.
Which is why this post is divided into two main sections. The first section is this one, which will answer a few questions we may have about bear attacks in North America with the help of a Dashboard Visualization. The second section will compare this post and visualization to the original post from which this one was inspired from.
After we list some of the questions to be answered, we shall look at some of the biases that may occur in the course of data collection, processing and Insights.
Here are some of the questions this post addresses:
- How many males or females are attacked in a month for all the years?
- How many attacks occurred in a year?
- Which months did attacks take place in a given year?
- For a particular attack, is it a wild or captive attack?
- Number of wild or captive attacks in a year.
Just to name a few. Navigate the dashboard and you will be able to answer even more questions.
Now let’s look at some Limitations and Bias that occur in the process of data collection, processing and Insights.
Data Collection
At the level of data collection,
When a bear attack incident happens, if there were no eye witnesses or cameras, it will be difficult to conclude on the type of bear that attacked since the person involved in the attack may not be able to keep track of the type of bear due to stress. In this case we have some missing values.
We may as well have situations where the person attacked is not willing to share any information with the team collecting the data. This is response Bias.
Also, there may be situations that an attack occurs and the data collection team is not aware of it.
Data Processing
At the level of processing the data collected,
Some attacks may actually occur in some areas but since they are either not recorded or have missing values, we have Missingness Bias here.
Insights
This point seem to be clear for now.
Why is the Visualization on this Post better than the Original Visualization from MakeoverMonday?
Annotation
The new visualization has a full scale annotation on how to navigate through the dashboard and give the user a nice user experience. The dashboard has been made very interactive and provides sufficient information to handle the curiosity of the user.
While the original visualization does not give sufficient annotations on how to navigate the viz in other to make efficient use of it. The original Visualization does not also label the x and y axis.
Alignments
The new visualization aligns the filters and annotations just beside where they work and interact. Related elements on the dashboard are placed close by each other to make the user not to stress finding where different elements belong on the dashboard.
The original visualization doesn’t really make mush use of alignment since it has little or no annotations and filters.
Layout
The new visualization makes use of two adjacent sheets to make navigating from one sheet to the other as easy as possible. This layout choice has greatly reduced how much work is done on a single sheet, but providing more efficient information per sheet.
The original visualization has just a single sheet and does not contain enough information from the available dataset.
Chart Choice
The new visualization makes use of two bar charts to display clearly show more details about the bear attacks.
While the original visualization makes use of just one bar chart which does not show enough information to the user.
Takeaways
- In the month of August, we have had 28 bear attacks.
- In 1980, we had 7 bear attacks.
Thank you for reading.
