this post was submitted on 25 Jun 2024
91 points (96.9% liked)

Data is Beautiful

2366 readers
1 users here now

Be respectful

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
 

Source of data: https://dataverse.harvard.edu/dataset.xhtml?persistentId=doi:10.7910/DVN/T0HSJ1

Edit: removed OC as it's not (sorry)

top 18 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] FiniteBanjo 22 points 1 year ago (2 children)

I don't really understand how to read this, so only 96% of 5' 4" boys are taller than their 5' 2" father? What?

[–] Wilzax@lemmy.world 23 points 1 year ago

96% of males with a 5'4" mother and a 5'2" father are taller than 5'2"

[–] SpeakinTelnet@sh.itjust.works 17 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Y=mothers height. X=Fathers height

%=considering the height of both parents what % of girl/boy are taller than their mother/father

[–] FiniteBanjo 4 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Ah, got it got it, sorry for my confusion lol.

[–] SpeakinTelnet@sh.itjust.works 11 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Don't worry. I was confused as well. This is a case of dataisnotsobeautiful

[–] FiniteBanjo 0 points 1 year ago

I think I just needed breakfast before I could appreciate it.

[–] tombruzzo@lemm.ee 13 points 1 year ago

Pepsi lookin' ass chart

[–] witty_username@feddit.nl 10 points 1 year ago

How about daughters taller than father and sons taller than mother?

[–] RootBeerGuy@discuss.tchncs.de 8 points 1 year ago (2 children)

I might miss the point, but the height is dependent on both parents genetically, so just comparing mothers with daughters is a bit like the usual "correlation does not equal causation" thingie, or not?

[–] tehevilone@lemmy.world 16 points 1 year ago (2 children)

The X and Y are just labeled weird, both graphs reference father's height has the X and mother's height as the Y

[–] r_se_random@sh.itjust.works 5 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Yeah, but there is no graph comparing son vs mother and daughter vs father.

And it seems like an odd thing to omit.

[–] tehevilone@lemmy.world 9 points 1 year ago (2 children)

If I'm reading the referenced link right, the data is from 1886(?), so it's not terribly recent, either.

[–] grubberfly@mander.xyz 1 points 1 year ago

yes, 928 children and 205 parents it seems.

wonder how the trend shown here has changed in almost 150 years...

[–] r_se_random@sh.itjust.works 1 points 1 year ago

Wow, thanks for checking on that

[–] RootBeerGuy@discuss.tchncs.de 1 points 1 year ago

Oh, completely missed that, thanks!

[–] Sas@beehaw.org 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

That's exactly what this is showing. The x axis is the fathers height and the y-axis the mothers height so you see daughters change of being taller going up when their dads are bigger. For sons the chance of being bigger than their father goes up with tall mothers.

Wouldn't the most determining factor here be the height of the chosen partner?

[–] GravitySpoiled@lemmy.ml 1 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

.dta

~~Are they series?~~ Edit: are they serious?