88
submitted 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) by Blaze@reddthat.com to c/dataisbeautiful@mander.xyz

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

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

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] RootBeerGuy@discuss.tchncs.de 7 points 2 months ago

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 2 months ago

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 2 months ago

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 2 months ago

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

[-] r_se_random@sh.itjust.works 1 points 2 months ago

Wow, thanks for checking on that

[-] grubberfly@mander.xyz 1 points 2 months ago

yes, 928 children and 205 parents it seems.

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

[-] RootBeerGuy@discuss.tchncs.de 1 points 2 months ago

Oh, completely missed that, thanks!

[-] Sas@beehaw.org 1 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months 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.

this post was submitted on 25 Jun 2024
88 points (100.0% liked)

Data is Beautiful

1020 readers
45 users here now

Be respectful

founded 3 months ago
MODERATORS