1. Thats because the "year event occured" is the actual year that event had happened so it would be used to explain the variable which is why it is on the vertical axis, while the "estimated year event occured" is a self estimate to the year that event had occured which is why it is on the horizontal axis.
2. The Scatter plot would look like a straight line with no variance betwwen the values.
1. The variable used as the explanatory was number of strikes an lockouts. This depicts that throughout the years the number of strikes declined.
2. The relationship between both are direct and positive, as one increases the other does too.
3. The second scatter plot shows how strikes and lockouts have declined exponentially during the years. It depicts a direct negative relationship
4. Between the two graphs the variables are related regardless of their opposite relationships. One is negative and the other positive, the variable of strikes is present in both.
1. The aspects of the data that the bargraph helps to represent are the different factors that contribute in the salaries of Governors in the states in comparison to personal income per capita. The bar graph allows for a more side-by-side clear comparison.
2. The scatterplot helps identify relationships between any two variables. The association between the two variables present in the scatterplot would be a positive one. As income per capita increases, so does a govevrnor's salary.
1. After seeing all the states, the trend in the data remains the same, there is a positive association between both variables.
2. There are a few outliers in the scatterplot, being the ones that have a lower income per capita and a higher governor's salary.
Back