CHARTPOLICEChart Police

Crime taxonomy · Words and context

Incorrect or unsubstantiated attribution

Crediting a change to a cause the chart cannot prove.

What it looks like

A title, caption or annotation says a policy, leader, product or event caused the change shown, but the chart cannot support it: the change started before the cause, there is no comparison group, or other obvious drivers are ignored. It also covers a cited source that could not have produced the data shown.

Example

Example (Incorrect or unsubstantiated attribution): Two years picked from a long decline, and the whole drop credited to a 2015 policy.UNPROVEN CAUSE
The crime. Two years picked from a long decline, and the whole drop credited to a 2015 policy.
The same data shown honestly: The full series shows the fall began years earlier, a similar city without the policy fell as much, and the note names the other drivers: cleaner buses and taxis, fewer diesel cars, more remote work.FIXED
The fix. The full series shows the fall began years earlier, a similar city without the policy fell as much, and the note names the other drivers: cleaner buses and taxis, fewer diesel cars, more remote work.

Why it is bad

How to fix it

  1. Describe what changed, and claim a cause only when the evidence supports it.
  2. Show the trend before the cause, so readers can see whether it changed course.
  3. Add a comparison: a similar place, group or period without the policy or event.
  4. Name the other drivers (technology, the economy, a pandemic, a new measurement method) and say how they were accounted for.
  5. Quote what the cited source actually concluded, and link to it.
When it is not a crime. Causal titles are fine when the evidence is there, such as a controlled study, a clear break in the trend at the moment of the cause, or a comparison group that did not change.