[Editor’s Note: This piece has been edited from the original. Mostly to remove profanity :).]

[Author’s Note: Quyen is censoring me. :(]

[Editor’s Note: I was censored when we went backpacking with your grandfather so. I can declare an issue of the buzz a no swearing zone if I want to.]

[Author’s Note: :(]

[Editor’s Note: rough.]

Howdy! Quyen has generously given me this platform to crash out about graphs. Boy, I did not know I had such strong opinions about this. Let me set the scene. Wednesday February 11th, I’m lying on the couch when Quyen comes home from AMS council. She pulls out her phone and shows me a couple graphs that were included in a presentation about student opinions on proposed fee increase referenda that will appear on the ballot this election. This sets off a cascade of feelings as my little Research-Pilled brain attempts to understand how we got here. Before I begin my Crash Out™, I’d like to say that I have nothing personally against the presenters, I’m sure y’all are chill. However, the presentation of these survey results was blatantly misleading and a textbook example of bad dissemination of results. 

Now, without further ado: 

I know, right? Where to even begin? I guess the lack of transparency of methods is as good as any. Girls… what scale did we use? What questions did we ask? There’s a reason methods are an important thing to report. It is fundamental to understanding the data presented to us and what conclusions it allows us to draw. In general, you need to report what you asked. If you ask things on, say, a 5-point Likert scale, you need to report those scores as you collected them. You can’t arbitrarily lump together responses, especially not when you pair “neutral” with “supporters”. In what world does that make sense? Why even include “neutral” on your scale if you are not going to report it as a distinct response? If you don’t want “neutral” responses then do a forced choice scale where it isn’t even an option. “Neutral” needs to be treated as a valid and distinct response—you can’t group “abstains” with “yes”s. Also, what is the point of using a scale that has multiple options if you are going to reduce it to a binary “supporter/potential supporter” anyways? Speaking of, “potential supporters”? Are you kidding me? That is meaningless. You can say that about literally anything. What in the “everybody is a potential friend you just haven’t met yet” is this? You don’t get to do that when reporting results of a survey. It is deceptive and misleading. Especially when you are not transparent on precisely what you asked. What was a 1 on the scale? What was a 5 (or a 7, or whatever because we don’t know how many points were on the scale). Was it “strongly disagree” to “strongly agree”? “Very unlikely” to “very likely”? Look at any methods section with self-report measures, and they will always tell you what scale they used and what high vs low scores represent. What was presented gave us so little to work with. The AMS claims that the survey was to assess sentiment and not a preliminary vote. Sure, fine, that makes sense. But what is the point of doing that if you are going to be deceptive when reporting the results? How can you make a plan on how to sway voters if you misrepresent your data and obscure the full picture? 

Another thing I took issue with—the use of the word “significantly”. I’m sure you’ve seen that nifty little term floating around in research. When we’re talking about the results of a survey like this, where they were supposedly testing to see if knowing where the money was going made students more likely to support the fee increase referendum, the term “significantly” tends to be taken to mean “statistically significant”. That is to say, the probability of the difference observed between before and after was greater than chance. I’m sure many of you are familiar with significance testing. I’m in psychology and we use the p <.05 threshold to determine statistical significance. Now, I don’t think a t-test or any analyses were done on this data beyond throwing it into a couple of hideous graphs (I will get to this), so the use of the word “significantly” is the misleading cherry on top of a deceptive sundae. 

To end on a slightly lighter note, let me talk about the graphs themselves. The visuals. I’m sure most of us have seen our fair share of graphs and have likely made a couple ourselves. When I was a young, fresh-faced second year psychology major taking my required PSYC 218, I learned some important “dos and don’ts” of graph making that have stuck with me. Most critically, don’t include unnecessary noise. It's distracting, ugly, and gets in the way of understanding a graph. Now, I admit, these presenters’ infraction was relatively minor, but it upset me nonetheless. Gradients. Really y’all? Gradients? They are ugly and add nothing to the presentation. I know Powerpoint sometimes automatically applies one to shapes but like… even if that is what happened, would it be so hard to just change it? Not to mention the dark background (with yet another, weirder gradient). Y’all there is a reason graphs tend to have white backgrounds—it makes them more legible and the contrast of colours really helps with accessibility. You want your bars to stand out from the background and a white background tends to be the best option for contrast. 

In conclusion, be transparent. You’re a university student at a research institution. Honestly and accurately reporting your findings is critical. You need to give your audience everything they need to know to understand your results and you need to understand and be clear about the limits of what your data can tell you. I know it seems semantic, but be careful about your language. Don’t use the language of “significant” unless you’ve done significance testing to back it up. Also, if you’re going to be misleading and deceptive, don’t make it so obvious as to include “neutral” with the “supporters”. That’s such a red flag gang. 

[Editor’s note: Matthew and Claire (the referendum coordinators) do seem really nice! And Claire was super knowledgeable when I talked to them two councils ago — I think they have a good sense of direction for how to pull these referenda past the finish line. But these graphs were a very big flop.]

Other News

New Ubyssey Merch

You’ve seen the press passes. You’ve seen those iconic blue press vests amongst the crowds of protests. Some of us even have press hats! Like old timey reporters. But there is one realm of apparel that The Ubyssey has yet to have the gall to enter. Until now. Introducing……………..

The Press Tampon!!!!

I’ve proposed the name: The tampyssey. But that’s a bit risky in the pronunciation department. I’d also accept the tambyssey (though that’s not as fun).

Also pitched to the Deputy Managing Editor (for some reason he wasn’t that keen on the tampyssey) were Press Pads and the Ubycup (A diva cup but themed after our dingbat.)

Now, no one has actually started making these. But don’t worry, I’ve already found a supplier: Custom Condoms UK

DO YOU SEE THE VISION???????? CONVINCE SPENCER. If Doug was allowed to make Ubyssey golf balls to hand out to…. anyone who seemed UBC-aged, surely we can do this to support women.

[Partner’s note: Please don’t encourage her. I’m begging you. It’s a bit for you, but I need to live with her.]

[Editor’s Note: I asked how much was reasonable to spend on the Tampyssey and was told $100. And then $50. And now I’ve been told if I spend any money on the Tampyssey, my partner won’t speak to me for a week. But if the deputy managing editor spends money on this………………..]

New Columnist!!!

Y’all should send your love! Fiona’s Close Up is awesome.

That’s All!

Oops I forgot to take the time to swap over to a different newsletter service :/. Next time, trust. Speaking of next time, I’ve been considering…. what if I went back to nightlies during the election period? Would be a silly funny throwback. But also I will have so many other responsibilities that week that it might not be possible. Perhaps I shall try and be content to fail. We’ll see.

Anyways, I’ve been putting a lot of thought into a summer project that I’m excited about. I’ve been bullied about spending so much time on it because I spent like a 7 hour car ride working on it, then spent the night working on it, then woke up and continued working on it. It’ll be big if it happens. Not to spoil, but I have a very clever name for at least one (1) aspect of it that I hope becomes a thing.

Hope you folks enjoy your reading week. Get lots of rest or lots of work or lots of vacationing or lots of rotting in bed in the liminal state of horror and exhaustion as you mindlessly subject yourselves to the horror of the world.

See y’all in a fortnight at 10:03 pm. Until then, buzz on, my busy bees!

Closing my teeth and opening my mouth since 2025