Search for: All records

Attempting to make sense of a phenomenon or crisis, social media users often share data visualizations and interpretations that can be erroneous or misleading. Prior work has studied how data visualizations can mislead, but do misleading visualizations reach a broad social media audience? And if so, do users amplify or challenge misleading interpretations? To answer these questions, we conducted a mixed-methods analysis of the public's engagement with data visualization posts about COVID-19 on Twitter. Compared to posts with accurate visual insights, our results show that posts with misleading visualizations garner more replies in which the audiences point out nuanced fallacies and caveats in data interpretations. Based on the results of our thematic analysis of engagement, we identify and discuss important opportunities and limitations to effectively leveraging crowdsourced assessments to address data-driven misinformation. 

Data visualizations can empower an audience to make informed decisions. At the same time, deceptive representations of data can lead to inaccurate interpretations while still providing an illusion of data-driven insights. Existing research on misleading visualizations primarily focuses on examples of charts and techniques previously reported to be deceptive. These approaches do not necessarily describe how charts mislead the general population in practice. We instead present an analysis of data visualizations found in a real-world discourse of a significant global event---Twitter posts with visualizations related to the COVID-19 pandemic. Our work shows that, contrary to conventional wisdom, violations of visualization design guidelines are not the dominant way people mislead with charts. Specifically, they do not disproportionately lead to reasoning errors in posters' arguments. Through a series of examples, we present common reasoning errors and discuss how even faithfully plotted data visualizations can be used to support misinformation online.