The chart of mass shooting casualties leads me to believe this study has underlying bias already.
1) The use of bullets seems like something a media outlet would do to invoke irrational emotional response. I'd hope that if this is a serious scientific study you wouldn't have to resort to such antics.
2) The only chart on this page centers on mass shootings which account for less than 1% of all gun violence. I'd much rather see a comprehensive breakdown of gun violence by incident type (gang, mass, accidental, etc.) and also by weapon (semi-auto handgun, revolver, shotgun, semi-auto rifle, etc.).
EDIT: It would also be nice to see a citation for the underlying chart data.
This is the research leader. Good points on the visuals. I am discussing with Microryza what the appropriate visuals are to convey the urgency of this research in a way that is also appealing to non-academics, while making it clear that we are proposing hypotheses, NOT guaranteeing answers that please one group or another!
1) The use of bullets seems like something a media outlet would do to invoke irrational emotional response. I'd hope that if this is a serious scientific study you wouldn't have to resort to such antics.
2) The only chart on this page centers on mass shootings which account for less than 1% of all gun violence. I'd much rather see a comprehensive breakdown of gun violence by incident type (gang, mass, accidental, etc.) and also by weapon (semi-auto handgun, revolver, shotgun, semi-auto rifle, etc.).
EDIT: It would also be nice to see a citation for the underlying chart data.