Data Visualization and Cholera: An Unexpected Connection
Necessity is the mother of invention, and in the mid-1800s, understanding the spread of cholera was a matter of life and death.
Cholera was a ruthlessly efficient killer, with both rapid onset and severe symptoms. By the time the disease made its way to London and New York in the early 1830s, hundreds of thousands of people had died across Europe, Africa, and Asia.
Not only our personal and national interests, […] it may be said without exaggeration, [that cholera] concerns the whole human race.
– Thomas Whiteside Hime
Needless to say, the human race was concerned. Thanks to high-speed printing press technology, daily newspaper circulations were rising dramatically, and this allowed journalists to experiment with new reporting techniques, including charting data.
At the time, the chart above was such a novel approach that it required four paragraphs to explain how to read it. People of that era were simply not used to seeing data in a visual form. At a glance though, the chart is extremely effective at communicating a grim message: cholera had ravaged New York City over the summer of 1849.
Despite the concerted push to eradicate the disease, the medical community was still largely in the dark about how to prevent future outbreaks. Because doctors could treat numerous patients without falling ill, it was assumed that a miasmic environment (i.e. slums, densely-packed housing) was causing the spread.
Data Viz in the Time of Cholera
Today, we have tools that allow us to map just about anything, but in the mid-1800s, mapping data was still an innovative concept.
As early as the 1830s, geographers began using spatial analysis to study cholera epidemiology. The heat map below shows which sections of Paris were hardest hit by a recent outbreak of cholera.
In 1854, Dr. John Snow was convinced that cholera was spreading via tainted water and decided to display neighborhood mortality data directly on a map. This method clearly revealed a cluster of cases around a specific pump.
View the full version of the map here
The result is one of the most influential maps in modern history.
In addition to the real-world utility the map provided in helping physicians understand how cholera was spreading, it also exemplified a seismic shift in thinking that opened up new avenues for data to be analyzed and displayed.
Despite the tragic circumstances of the time period, we can be thankful that the urgency of the situation allowed the world’s pioneering researchers, journalists, and physicians to experiment with new data visualization techniques to better understand the world.
Visualizing the Decline of Confidence in American Institutions
Americans rely on several institutions for their services and safety—but how has their confidence in institutions changed since 1975?
Every day, the public relies on a number of major institutions for services and safety. From banks and governments, to media and the military—these institutions play an important role in shaping life as we know it.
Yet, today’s interactive data visualization from Overflow Data shows that America’s confidence in institutions has drastically waned. The data relies on the General Social Survey (GSS) to provide a 40-year overview of how sentiment has changed with respect to 13 different institutions.
Select an institution from the drop-down menu below to see how confidence has changed over time
The Erosion of Confidence
Overall, confidence in most institutions has eroded. Americans find it especially hard to trust their government: the “great deal of confidence” metrics for Congress, the Supreme Court, and the Executive Branch were low to begin with, and have declined further since 1975.
That said, the biggest overall drop belongs to the press, which saw 50% of surveyed Americans saying they have “hardly any confidence” in it in 2016. This is nearly a three-fold increase from 1975, when that number was just 19%. Of course, with the rise of fake news in more recent years, the erosion of confidence in media doesn’t seem to be slowing down.
Here’s a look at the two extremes of sentiment regarding the studied institutions, showing how the opposite measures of “hardly any confidence” and a “great deal of confidence” have changed since 1975:
|🏦 Banks & Financial Institutions||Hardly any||10.9%||31.2%||+20.3 p.p.|
|Great deal||32.3%||14.1%||-18.2 p.p.|
|🗳️ Congress||Hardly any||26.2%||52.6%||+26.4 p.p.|
|Great deal||13.6%||5.9%||-7.7 p.p.|
|🏫 Education||Hardly any||13.0%||17.5%||+4.5 p.p.|
|Great deal||31.5%||25.6%||-5.9 p.p.|
|🏛️ Executive Branch||Hardly any||29.7%||42.4%||+12.7 p.p.|
|Great deal||13.4%||12.8%||-0.6 p.p.|
|🏬 Major Companies||Hardly any||22.9%||17.3%||-5.6 p.p.|
|Great deal||20.5%||18.3%||-2.2 p.p.|
|🏥 Medicine||Hardly any||17.8%||13.4%||-4.4 p.p.|
|Great deal||51.8%||50.6%||-1.2 p.p.|
|🎖️ Military||Hardly any||14.8%||7.6%||-7.2 p.p.|
|Great deal||36.3%||53.4%||+17.1 p.p.|
|💪 Organized Labor||Hardly any||31.5%||22.6%||-8.9 p.p.|
|Great deal||10.2%||13.9%||+3.7 p.p.|
|🙏 Religion||Hardly any||23.0%||26.4%||+3.4 p.p.|
|Great deal||25.8%||20.0%||-5.8 p.p.|
|📰 Press||Hardly any||19.0%||50.0%||+31 p.p.|
|Great deal||24.5%||7.6%||-16.9 p.p.|
|🥼 Scientific Community||Hardly any||7.4%||6.1%||-1.3 p.p.|
|Great deal||41.7%||42.1%||+0.4 p.p.|
|📺 Television||Hardly any||23.4%||43.1%||+19.7 p.p.|
|Great deal||18.4%||9.8%||-8.6 p.p.|
|⚖️ U.S. Supreme Court||Hardly any||19.2%||17.4%||-1.8 p.p.|
|Great deal||31.8%||26.3%||-5.5 p.p.|
Banks and financial institutions have also suffered a bad rep in the public eye. Their “great deal of confidence” metric has dropped sharply from 32.3% to 14.1% in four decades.
One major exception is the military, which emerges as the most trusted institution. Americans’ faith in the military has also shown the most improvement, with a 17.1 p.p increase in a “great deal of confidence” since 1975.
The Split Widens Further
While measuring public confidence in institutions can be subjective, it provides an understanding of where Americans want to see change and reform take place.
For more on how Americans perceive different institutions and the issues that affect them, see how the public is divided based on political affiliation.
All the S&P 500 Women CEOs in One Timeline (2000-2019)
Since the turn of the century, only a meager 5.6% of S&P 500-indexed companies have been led by women. Today’s interactive timeline highlights their tenures.
All the S&P 500 Women CEOs in One Timeline (2000-2019)
Gender equality has made significant strides since the days of Rosie the Riveter. The iconic wartime image continues to symbolize womens’ empowerment in the present—especially in politics and the workforce.
Yet, the higher and further women get in their careers, it’s clear that barriers still remain. Today’s interactive timeline comes to us from Alex Architektonidis of BoardEx, and it tracks all the women chief executive officers (CEOs) of companies listed in the S&P 500 index since the turn of the century.
The kicker? Across the 500 large-cap companies in the index, only 70 women have ever held the position of CEO or similar titles—and only 28 women currently have this status.
Which Industries Have the Most Women CEOs?
The S&P 500 covers approximately 80% of the U.S. equity market by capitalization. Since the index is fluid and regularly updated, women CEOs were selected based on whether their company was listed in the index during their tenure.
Out of all the sectors represented on the timeline, the top categories are retail with 14 women CEOs, engineering and tech with 10 women CEOs, and finance with 9 women CEOs. Food & beverage and utilities are tied with 7 women CEOs each.
Women Leading in the Corporate World
Topping the list is Marion Osher Sandler, the first and longest-serving woman CEO in the United States. She held the title for nearly 27 years at Golden West Financial Corp (from 1980 to 2006), a company she co-founded and grew to $125 billion in assets.
The next person in line for the longest female-led CEO term is Debra A Cafaro, from the healthcare-focused real estate investment trust Ventas Inc. Cafaro has been CEO of Ventas for 20 years, and generated a cumulative total return of 2,559% since 1999—the S&P average for returns over the same time period was only 215%.
Only two women CEOs show up more than twice on the timeline. The first is Meg Cushing Whitman, who served as President/CEO of Ebay from 1998–2008, Chairman/President/CEO of HP Inc. from 2011–2015, and finally as the CEO of Hewlett Packard from 2015 to 2018. In total, Whitman has spent over 16 years as CEO of these S&P 500 companies.
However, Carol Ann Bartz also has an impressive CV, with nearly 17 years as a CEO under her belt. Bartz was the Chairman/President/CEO of the software corporation Autodesk from 1992–2006, and later on at Yahoo from 2009 to 2011.
The most recent addition to this list is Julie Spellman Sweet, who became the CEO of Accenture on September 1st. She was previously the CEO of Accenture’s North American division, and has been crowned on Fortune’s “Most Powerful Women” list from 2016–2018 consecutively. Sweet’s appointment aligns well with Accenture’s corporate diversity targets—the company is aiming for 25% women in managing director roles globally by 2020.
There’s More Work To Be Done
There’s a growing body of evidence that corporate diversity improves a company’s financial bottom line. A recent CNBC analysis shows that in 2019, over half of female CEOs led their company’s stocks to outperform the S&P 500 index, with some even showing quadruple-digit percentage returns (as previously mentioned with Ventas).
Despite womens’ contributions to nearly half the labor force and consistent success as CEOs, they are disproportionately represented higher up the ladder. Women CEOs still lead a meager 5.6% of S&P 500 companies overall—in fact, women CEO appointments are actually slowing down, averaging less than 6% since 2015.
Such stunted growth is setting back equality at the C-suite level drastically. A joint report between the non-profit Lean In and the consulting firm McKinsey & Co. offers some insight into the reasons underlying this disparity:
Since 2015… corporate America has made almost no progress in improving women’s representation. From the outset, fewer women than men are hired at the entry level. And at every subsequent step, the representation of women further declines.
Markets10 months ago
The Jeff Bezos Empire in One Giant Chart
Maps1 year ago
Mercator Misconceptions: Clever Map Shows the True Size of Countries
Advertising9 months ago
Meet Generation Z: The Newest Member to the Workforce
Misc12 months ago
24 Cognitive Biases That Are Warping Your Perception of Reality
Advertising8 months ago
How the Tech Giants Make Their Billions
Technology10 months ago
The 20 Internet Giants That Rule the Web
Chart of the Week10 months ago
Chart: The World’s Largest 10 Economies in 2030
Environment9 months ago
The World’s 25 Largest Lakes, Side by Side