Graphical integrity issues in open access publications: Detection and patterns of proportional ink violations

Academic graphs are essential for communicating complex scientific ideas and results. To ensure that these graphs truthfully reflect underlying data and relationships, visualization researchers have proposed several principles to guide the graph creation process. However, the extent of violations of...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Acuna, D.E (Author), Huang, T.-Y (Author), Zhuang, H. (Author)
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Public Library of Science 2021
Subjects:
Online Access:View Fulltext in Publisher
LEADER 03068nam a2200505Ia 4500
001 10.1371-journal.pcbi.1009650
008 220427s2021 CNT 000 0 und d
020 |a 1553734X (ISSN) 
245 1 0 |a Graphical integrity issues in open access publications: Detection and patterns of proportional ink violations 
260 0 |b Public Library of Science  |c 2021 
856 |z View Fulltext in Publisher  |u https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pcbi.1009650 
520 3 |a Academic graphs are essential for communicating complex scientific ideas and results. To ensure that these graphs truthfully reflect underlying data and relationships, visualization researchers have proposed several principles to guide the graph creation process. However, the extent of violations of these principles in academic publications is unknown. In this work, we develop a deep learning-based method to accurately measure violations of the proportional ink principle (AUC = 0.917), which states that the size of shaded areas in graphs should be consistent with their corresponding quantities. We apply our method to analyze a large sample of bar charts contained in 300K figures from open access publications. Our results estimate that 5% of bar charts contain proportional ink violations. Further analysis reveals that these graphical integrity issues are significantly more prevalent in some research fields, such as psychology and computer science, and some regions of the globe. Additionally, we find no temporal and seniority trends in violations. Finally, apart from openly releasing our large annotated dataset and method, we discuss how computational research integrity could be part of peer-review and the publication processes. © 2021 Zhuang et al. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited. 
650 0 4 |a Article 
650 0 4 |a audiovisual aid 
650 0 4 |a Audiovisual Aids 
650 0 4 |a Biomedical Research 
650 0 4 |a computer graphics 
650 0 4 |a Computer Graphics 
650 0 4 |a data analysis 
650 0 4 |a Databases, Factual 
650 0 4 |a deep learning 
650 0 4 |a factual database 
650 0 4 |a geographic distribution 
650 0 4 |a graphical integrity issue 
650 0 4 |a human 
650 0 4 |a Humans 
650 0 4 |a image analysis 
650 0 4 |a image processing 
650 0 4 |a Image Processing, Computer-Assisted 
650 0 4 |a information processing 
650 0 4 |a medical research 
650 0 4 |a open access publishing 
650 0 4 |a open access publishing 
650 0 4 |a Open Access Publishing 
650 0 4 |a peer review 
650 0 4 |a procedures 
650 0 4 |a proportional ink violation 
650 0 4 |a psychology 
650 0 4 |a reproducibility 
650 0 4 |a Reproducibility of Results 
650 0 4 |a trend study 
700 1 |a Acuna, D.E.  |e author 
700 1 |a Huang, T.-Y.  |e author 
700 1 |a Zhuang, H.  |e author 
773 |t PLoS Computational Biology