Deception with Graphs
Tanmay Kumar Maity
Department of Statistics, Haldia Govt. College
Graphs are most powerful tool to
represent data visually, easily understood by any
person. It plays an important role in analysing the
data primarily and it is the gateway for extracting
complex pattern from a dataset. Graphs began to
appear around 1770 and became common only
around 1820. Good graphs are extremely helpful
for extracting basic features of complex data; they
help turn the realms of information available
today into knowledge. But similar to the case of
most of the statistical tools graphical
representation may turn to be deceptive for its
improper presentation. Here some misleading
representations of graphs are discussed. Also
some simple metrics to measure the extent of
distortion in graph are given.
Some graphs deceive or mislead. This
may happen because the designer chooses to give
readers the impression of better performance or
results than is actually the situation. Sometimes
corporate or research house may display the
graphs in such a way that it’s tells us the false
things which is not contained in the dataset. In
other cases, the person who prepares graph may
want to be accurate and honest, but may mislead
the reader by a poor choice of a graph form or
poor graph construction. There are several ways
in which a deceptive graph may be constructed:
ƒ Manipulation of axis and scale
ƒ Three Dimensional Effects
ƒ Manipulation of the bar graph and
pictogram
ƒ Omission of data
Manipulation of axis and scale
Most of the distortions in graphical representation
are under this category. It is a well known
practice of manipulating scale of the vertical and
horizontal axis to produce illusion and improper
interpretation. There are different tricks for
producing distortion in the graphs under this
category:
Omitting a scale: Sometimes data are
represented by graphs with missing scale from
one of the axes. Such methods destroy
perspectives. The number of customers served by
ABC Company between 1990 and 2013 is
represented in Fig. 1 with no vertical scale.
However, without a scale on the Y-axis, it is not
known whether this graph represents a growth in
demand of 10 percent, 100 percent or 1,000 percent.
Graphs like these should be avoided.
Manipulating vertical axis: It is a malpractice of
changing the scale of the vertical axis so that the
origin is not started at zero. Sometimes such
graphs are lack of right interpretation for their
visual illusion.
No.  of customers served
1990
1992
1994
1996
1998
2000
2002
2004
2006
2008
2010
2012
Year
Fig. 1: No. of customers served by ABC Company for
1990- 2013
In Fig. 2 the bar diagram represents the results of
a Gallup poll held on March 18-20, 2005 via
telephonic interview with 909 adults of different
parties of the United States about Florida state
court order on Terri Schiavo's feeding tube
removal conducted by CNN/ USA Today. Each
of the people was asked the question “Do you
agree with the court’s decision to have the
feeding tube removed?” Here the origin of the
vertical axis starts at 50 and thus appeared to
show a large gap between Democrats and
Republicans/ Independents. In fact, a majority of
all three groups agrees with the court's decision,
1
62 percent of Democratic respondents agreed,
compared to 54 percent of Republicans, and 54
percent of Independents. The correct
representation is given in Fig. 3.
CNN/ USA Today Gallup Poll:2005
Results by Party
Percentage who agree

65
60
55
50
Democrats Republicans Independents
Party Fig. 5: Average life span of different animal (with
scale break)
Fig. 2: Results of CNN/ USA Today Gallup Poll in
2005 Misleading trends
Manipulation of vertical axis also results in
CNN/ USA Today Gallup Poll:2005 misleading trend in case of line diagram for time
Results by Party series data. Fig. 6 represents the number of
annual deaths in dowry in West Bengal between
Percentage who agree

100
2001 and 2012. It shows an upward trend. This
50 graph turns to be misleading in several ways:
0
Democrats Republicans Independents Changing the vertical scale: Narrower vertical
Party scale than original one will exaggerate the trend
(Fig. 7)
Fig. 3: Correct representation of results of CNN/ USA
Today Gallup Poll in 2005 1500
No. of dowry deaths

1000
Sometimes the vertical scale starts at 0 but
distortion occurs due to the use of scale break. In 500
Fig. 5 the bar graph shows the average life span
0
of different animals with a scale break in y –axis.
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
It looks as if the Horse lives 4 times as long as
camel but that is not true as shown in original
graph (Fig. 4). Year

Fig. 6: Number of annual deaths from dowry in West

Bengal from 2001 to 2012.
Changing maximum of vertical axis: Changing
the maximum value in the vertical axis will
distort the graphs. The trend will be overstated by
the use of smaller maximum (Fig. 8.1) and
understated by the use of larger maximum than
original (Fig. 8.2).

Fig. 4: Average life span of different animal (without

scale break)

2
 Changing ratio of graph dimensions: The trend
1300
No. of dowry deaths
has also been affected by the ratio of graph
1100 dimensions. The trend is overstated than original
900 by using narrow horizontal axis compared to the
vertical axis (Fig. 9.1) and it understates the trend
700
2001 by the use of extended horizontal axis than
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
original graph (Fig. 9.2).
Year

No. of dowry 
1000

deaths
500
Fig. 7: Number of annual deaths from dowry in West 0
Bengal from 2001 to 2012 (origin shifted to 700)

2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012
No. of dowry deaths

Year
1000

500 Fig. 9.2: Number of annual deaths from dowry in

West Bengal from 2001 to 2012.
0
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012

Misleading comparison between two trends

Comparison between two time series may be
Year
deceptive due to the use of improper scaling. A
comparison between number of annual dowry
Fig. 8.1: Number of annual deaths from dowry in deaths in West Bengal and Andhra Pradesh from
West Bengal from 2001 to 2012 (maximum of vertical 2001 to 2012 is shown in Fig. 10.
axis changed to 1350)
ANDHRA PRADESH WEST BENGAL
6000
No. of dowry deaths

5000 2000
4000 1500
Deaths

3000 1000
2000 500
1000
0 0
2001 2003 2005 2007 2009 2011
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
2010
2011
2012

Year
Year

Fig. 10: Number of annual deaths from dowry in West

Fig. 8.2: Number of annual deaths from dowry in Bengal and Andhra Pradesh from 2001 to 2012.
West Bengal from 2001 to 2012 (maximum of vertical
axis changed to 1350).
The difference between the trends of West Bengal
and Andhra Pradesh will be overstated by the use
of narrower vertical scale than original scale (Fig.
No. of dowry deaths

1000 12). If we use broader scale i.e., if the maximum

of vertical axis is increased then the difference
500 between the trends of dowry deaths of the two
states will turn to be understated than original
0
(Fig. 11).
2001
2004
2007
2010

Misleading scatter diagram

Year
Fig. 9.1: Number of annual deaths from dowry in
West Bengal from 2001 to 2012.
Scatter diagram is used for finding the
relationship between two variables. The decision
based on scatter diagram is not always realistic.
Scatter diagram of Steel production vs. number of

3
crimmes against women in India is shoown in Fig. ANDHRA PR
RADESH WEST BENGAL
21. It shows that theree is a strong linear
relaationship between
b Stteel produuction and 1600

Deaths
num mber of crimes againsst women. From this
1100
diagram if one concludes “Crimes
“ agaiinst women
increase as SteelS produuction increeases” the 600
stattement turns to be infeeasible and ridiculous. 2001 2
2003 2005 20
007 2009 2011
Thee fact is thhat the scattter diagram m does not
Year
assure any caause-effect relationship and if it
shoows any relationship thhis may be due to the
effeect of any third factorr on both of o the two Fig. 122: Number of aannual deathss from dowryy in West
varriables. This incidencee is called “spurious Bengall and Andhra Pradesh from m 2001 to 20112
corrrelation”. This
T time thhe third facttor is time (origin of vertical axxis changed too 600).
itseelf and it iss observed that
t both thhe variables
Steeel productio on and Nuumber of crrimes have 1500
0
upw ward trends between the given period 2001 – 0
1000
201 12 (Fig. 22). 500
Misleading 3D
D graphs 0

Sommetimes 3D D graphs crreate illusioon. Fig. 13

shoows a 3D baar diagram representing
r the sale of
sunnglasses in an
a optical shhop from 20 010 – 2013.
Thee representaation is visuaally very atttractive but Year
it appears
a thatt sale of suunglasses inn 2010 and
20111 are moree than the sales of 20122 and 2013
Fig. 133: 3D bar diaggram showingg the number of
resppectively. Thhis illusion gets
g resolved d in 2D bar
sunglassses sold from
m 2010 – 20133 in an opticaal shop
diagram given in Fig. 14 and it is cleear that the
salee of sunglassses in 2010 and 2011 are a same as 2000
No. of sunglasses

that of 2012 annd 2013 respeectively. 1500

ANDHR
RA PRADESH WEST BENGAL 1000
500
6000
0
Deaths

4000
0
2010 2011 2012 2013
2000
0 Year
01 2003 2005
200 5 2007 2009 2011
Year Fig. 144: 2D bar diaggram showingg the number of
sunglassses sold from
m 2010 – 20133 in an opticaal shop

Fig
g. 11: Numberr of annual deeaths from do owry in West less saame and are lowest amoong the four groups.
Benngal and Andhhra Pradesh from
f 2001 to 2012 But in n 2D Pie ddiagram thee picture is totally
(maaximum of verrtical axis shif
ifted to 6000) differeent (Fig. 155) where itt is clear that
t the
distribuution of bloood group O and
a AB are same.
s
3D Pie diagram m may alsoo turn to bee deceptive.
Bloood group diistribution of
o several Arrts students Manip
pulating barr graph and
d pictogram
of a college is represennted throug gh 3D Pie Simplee bar diagram
m may turn to be illusivve when
diagram given in Fig. 15. From
F the figuure one can the barrs are not of
o equal widdth. In Fig. 17, bar
surrely concludee that O is thhe most commmon blood diagram
m represennts the aveerage weeklly food
gro
oup among the studeents. The number n of expendditures amoong the families
f of Texas
studdents with blood
b group A and B are more or betweeen 1986 and 1992. Theree is slightly an
a
 A B AB O
Fig. 177: Average weeekly food exp
penditure by different
d
Fig
g. 15: 3D pie diagram
d show
wing the distrribution of familiess of Texus
diffferent blood groups
g amongg the Arts studdents of a
colllege

11%
%
9%
40%
%

40%

A B AB
B O Fig. 188: Average weeekly food exppenditure by different
d
familiess of Texas (width of the ba
ars are proporrtional
Fig
g. 16: 3D pie diagram
d show
wing the distrribution of to theirr height)
diffferent blood groups
g amongg the Arts studdents of a
colllege
upw
ward trend inn food expennditure. In Fig. 18 the
sam
me data is reppresented byy bar diagram m but
wid
dth of the baars is proporttional to theiir height.
Thiis graph exagggerates exppenditure groowth by
wid
dening the baars as they become
b high
her. This
cou
uld create thee impressionn that expendditures
actu
ually rose more
m sharply over the perriod.
Picctogram also o creates visual
v illusion if the
pictures used inn the diagramm are not off same size.
Thee number person
p ownns different pets in a
cerrtain city are
a presenteed through Pictogram Fig. 199: Misleading pictogram shhowing no. off
giv
ven in Fig.199. The pictuures are diffferent sizes differen
nt pets ownedd by people
andd it appears that
t more peeople own a horse than Omittiing data
anyy other animmal. An imp provement would
w be to
red
draw the picttogram with each of the animals the Graphss created with omittted data remove
samme size and aligned
a with
h one anotherr (Fig. 20). inform
mation from which it is hard to gett proper
concluusion. Fig. 23a and 23b 2 represennts two
scatterr diagram wiith missing categories (year) in
Fig. 23b. In Fig. 23b the growth appears to be 100
more linear with less variation than Fig. 23a. 80
60

Data
40
20
0
2001 2003 2005 2007 2009 2011 2013
Year

Fig. 23a: Regular scatter plot

100
80
60

Data
Fig. 20: Pictogram showing no. of different pets 40
owned by people 20
0
600000 2001 2003 2005 2007 2009 2011 2013
No. of crimes against 

400000
Year
women

200000
0 Fig. 23b: Scatter plot with missing categories
0 40000 80000
Measuring distortion
Steel production (in thousand tonnes)
Several methods have been developed to
determine whether graphs are distorted and to
Fig. 21: Scatter diagram of Steel production vs. quantify this distortion.
Number of crimes against women in India
Lie factor:
500000
No. of  400000 Lie factor =
crime  300000
against  200000 where,
women 100000
0 size of effect = | |
A perfectly accurate graph would exhibit a lie
Year factor of 1. A graph with a high lie factor (>1)
would exaggerate change in the data it represents,
100000 while one with a small lie factor between 0 and 1
Steel  80000 would obscure change in the data.
production 60000
(in '000  Graph discrepancy index (GDI)
40000
tonnes)
20000
0
1 100% , where
a = percentage change depicted in graph
b = percentage change in data
Year The graph discrepancy index also known as
the graph distortion index was originally
Fig. 22: Upward trend for both Steel production proposed by Paul John Steinbart in 1998.
(2001 – 2012) and No. of crime against women (2001 GDI is ranging from -100% to ∞ with 0%
– 2012) percent indicating that the graph has been

6
properly constructed and anything outside the ±5%
margin is considered to be distorted.
Data-ink ratio
Data ink ratio
"Ink" used to display the data
Total "ink" used to display the graphic
The data-ink ratio should be relatively high;
otherwise the chart may have unnecessary
graphics.
Data density
The data density should be relatively high;
otherwise a table may be better suited for
displaying the data.
Conclusions
Graphs are the most effective way to
communicate using data. A good graph reveals
facts about the data that would be difficult or
impossible to detect from a table. The immediate
visual impression of a graph is much stronger
than the impression made by data in numerical
form. Here are some principles for making good
graphs:
ƒ The labels and legends should tell what
variables are plotted, their units, and the
source of the data.
ƒ Attention should be paid to what the eye
sees. The scales should be chosen
carefully. Most of the cases the vertical
scale with origin at 0 gives right
impression about the data. For observing
trend in time series data the ratio of graph
dimension, choosing of scale would play
an important role.
ƒ The eye catching 3D effects without
adding much information should be
avoided. 3D chart is preferable if one have
3-dimensions to display, and then only if
the third dimension can’t be incorporated
into a 2D graph. Otherwise one should use
2D graph.
ƒ Pictogram should be drawn using pictures
of equal size.
ƒ The decision from scatter diagram should
be carefully reviewed before giving final
conclusions such as feasibility of the
relationship between two variables, effect
of third factor etc.
ƒ The graph should be represented in such a
way that the decision is not affected by
missing data.
References
[1] Methodology Manual: Data Analysis:
Displaying Data - Deception with
Graphs, Texas State Auditor's Office, Jan 4,
1996.
[2] A discussion of misleading graphs, Mark
Harbison, Sacramento City College
[3] How to Display Data Badly, Howard Wainer,
(1984), The American Statistician 38 (2):
137–147.
[4] How to lie with statistics (pictures by Irving
Geis) (1954, 31st Printing), Darrell Huff, W.
W. Norton & Company.
[5] The Use and Abuse of Graphs in Annual
Reports: Theoretical Framework and
Empirical Study, Vivien Beattie, Michael
John Jones (1 September 1992), Accounting
and Business Research 22 (88): 291–303.
[6] The visual display of quantitative
information (2006, 2nd ed.), Edward R. Tufte,
Cheshire, Connecticut: Graphics Press.
[7] Visual Revelations: Graphical Tales of Fate
and Deception From Napoleon Bonaparte To
Ross Perot, Howard Wainer, (1 July 2000),
Psychology Press.
[8] en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Misleading_graph
[9] http://gator.gatewayk12.org
[10] http://faculty.atu.edu/mfinan/2043/sec
tion31.pdf
[11] www.data.gov.in
[12] https://www.worldsteel.org/