"First, it is generally inadvisable to attempt to portray a series of more than four or five categories by means of pie charts. If, for example, there are six, eight, or more categories, it may be very confusing to differentiate the relative values portrayed, especially if several small sectors are of approximately the same size. Second, the pie chart may lose its effectiveness if an attempt is made to compare the component values of several circles, as might be found in a temporal or geographical series. In such case the one-hundred percent bar or column chart is more appropriate. Third, although the proportionate values portrayed in a pie chart are measured as distances along arcs about the circle, actually there is a tendency to estimate values in terms of areas of sectors or by the size of subtended angles at the center of the circle." (Calvin F Schmid, "Handbook of Graphic Presentation", 1954)
"Percentages offer a fertile field for confusion. And like the ever-impressive decimal they can lend an aura of precision to the inexact. […] Any percentage figure based on a small number of cases is likely to be misleading. It is more informative to give the figure itself. And when the percentage is carried out to decimal places, you begin to run the scale from the silly to the fraudulent." (Darell Huff, "How to Lie with Statistics", 1954)
"The eye can accurately appraise only very few features of a diagram, and consequently a complicated or confusing diagram will lead the reader astray. The fundamental rule for all charting is to use a plan which is simple and which takes account, in its arrangement of the facts to be presented, of the above-mentioned capacities of the eye." (William L Crum et al, "Introduction to Economic Statistics", 1938)
"Besides being easier to construct than a bar chart, the line chart possesses other advantages. It is easier to read, for while the bars stand out more prominently than the line, they tend to become confusing if numerous, and especially so when they record alternate increase and decrease. It is easier for the eye to follow a line across the face of the chart than to jump from bar top to bar top, and the slope of the line connecting two points is a great aid in detecting minor changes. The line is also more suggestive of movement than arc bars, and movement is the very essence of a time series. Again, a line chart permits showing two or more related variables on the same chart, or the same variable over two or more corresponding periods." (Walter E Weld, "How to Chart; Facts from Figures with Graphs", 1959)
"If two or more data paths ate to appear on the graph, it is essential that these lines be labeled clearly, or at least a reference should be provided for the reader to make the necessary identifications. While clarity seems to be a most obvious goal, graphs with inadequate or confusing labeling do appear in publications, The user should not find identification of data paths troublesome or subject to misunderstanding. The designer normally should place no more than three data paths on the graph to prevent confusion - particularly if the data paths intersect at one or more points on the Cartesian plane." (Cecil H Meyers, "Handbook of Basic Graphs: A modern approach", 1970)
"The information on a plot should be relevant to the goals of the analysis. This means that in choosing graphical methods we should match the capabilities of the methods to our needs in the context of each application. [...] Scatter plots, with the views carefully selected as in draftsman's displays, casement displays, and multiwindow plots, are likely to be more informative. We must be careful, however, not to confuse what is relevant with what we expect or want to find. Often wholly unexpected phenomena constitute our most important findings." (John M Chambers et al, "Graphical Methods for Data Analysis", 1983)
"Confusion and clutter are failures of design, not attributes of information. And so the point is to find design strategies that reveal detail and complexity - rather than to fault the data for an excess of complication. Or, worse, to fault viewers for a lack of understanding. Among the most powerful devices for reducing noise and enriching the content of displays is the technique of layering and separation, visually stratifying various aspects of the data.
"What about confusing clutter? Information overload? Doesn't data have to be ‘boiled down’ and ‘simplified’? These common questions miss the point, for the quantity of detail is an issue completely separate from the difficulty of reading. Clutter and confusion are failures of design, not attributes of information. Often the less complex and less subtle the line, the more ambiguous and less interesting is the reading. Stripping the detail out of data is a style based on personal preference and fashion, considerations utterly indifferent to substantive content." (Edward R Tufte, "Envisioning Information", 1990)
"Grouped area graphs sometimes cause confusion because the viewer cannot determine whether the areas for the data series extend down to the zero axis. […] Grouped area graphs can handle negative values somewhat better than stacked area graphs but they still have the problem of all or portions of data curves being hidden by the data series towards the front."
"Technically, there is no limit as to the number of data series that can be plotted on a single graph. Practically, if the number goes above three or four the graph becomes confusing." (Robert L Harris, "Information Graphics: A Comprehensive Illustrated Reference", 1996)
"When it comes to drawing a picture of continuous data, you need to think through carefully where one interval ends and the next one begins. Failing to do this can result in overlaps or gaps between adjacent intervals, which can cause confusion." (Alan Graham, "Developing Thinking in Statistics", 2006)
"Arbitrary category sequence and misplaced pie chart emphasis lead to general confusion and weaken messages. Although this can be used for quite deliberate and targeted deceit, manipulation of the category axis only really comes into its own with techniques that bend the relationship between the data and the optics in a more calculated way. Many of these techniques are just twins of similar ruses on the value axis. but are none the less powerful for that." (Nicholas Strange, "Smoke and Mirrors: How to bend facts and figures to your advantage", 2007)
"Using colour, itʼs possible to increase the density of information even further. A single colour can be used to represent two variables simultaneously. The difficulty, however, is that there is a limited amount of information that can be packed into colour without confusion." (Brian Suda, "A Practical Guide to Designing with Data", 2010)
"Bear in mind is that the use of color doesn’t always help. Use it sparingly and with a specific purpose in mind. Remember that the reader’s brain is looking for patterns, and will expect both recurrence itself and the absence of expected recurrence to carry meaning. If you’re using color to differentiate categorical data, then you need to let the reader know what the categories are. If the dimension of data you’re encoding isn’t significant enough to your message to be labeled or explained in some way - or if there is no dimension to the data underlying your use of difference colors - then you should limit your use so as not to confuse the reader." (Noah Iliinsky & Julie Steel, "Designing Data Visualizations", 2011)
"Graphs should not be mere decoration, to amuse the easily bored. A useful graph displays data accurately and coherently, and helps us understand the data. Chartjunk, in contrast, distracts, confuses, and annoys. Chartjunk may be well-intentioned, but it is misguided. It may also be a deliberate attempt to mystify." (Gary Smith, "Standard Deviations", 2014)
"Uncertainty confuses many people because they have the unreasonable expectation that science and statistics will unearth precise truths, when all they can yield is imperfect estimates that can always be subject to changes and updates." (Alberto Cairo, "How Charts Lie", 2019)
"Bad complexity neither elucidates important salient points nor shows coherent broader trends. It will obfuscate, frustrate, tax the mind, and ultimately convey trendlessness and confusion to the viewer. Good complexity, in contrast, emerges from visualizations that use more data than humans can reasonably process to form a few salient points." (Scott Berinato, "Good Charts : the HBR guide to making smarter, more persuasive data visualizations", 2023)
