We can work on What do visualizations tell us about this data?

If you would like to generate different data than what was cleaned and analyzed in week 4, you may. Clearly state that the data is different and the source of the data in the research paper. You do not need a compelling reason, so do not spend time trying to justify your choice. You may use data that is available within the libraries of R, as well. However, you will need to include what cleaning or analysis was necessary prior to creating visualizations.

Sometimes visualizations are for a brief, some are for marketing, but they are all designed to tell a story. In research, visualizations are used to test assumptions, as well.

After creating visualizations in R, write a research paper and describe:
What visualization(s) were chosen to represent the data, why, and what this type of visualization can reveal about the data.
How was your data prepared for visualization?
What knowledge was gained about your data from visualizing the data in the manner chosen?
Describe 2 visualization techniques that would not work with your data and why.
Could you see any way to discretely misrepresent your data visually?
The following documents should be submitted for full credit:
The research paper with the data visualizations
The .r file with your code
Raw data, if it is not internal to R.

Sample Solution

The Marshall plan was a US program acquainted with recuperate the Western European nations after WW2. The intentions behind the arrangement boil down to three wide strands that are monetary, political and compassionate. Every understanding spotlights on at least one of these perspectives. In the Kolko’s contention they plot that the Americans economy and flourishing was the main thought process behind the presentation of the Marshall plan. That it was presented as the US depended on the European nations exchange to grow. A fluctuated contention comes from David Rees, he guarantees that the arrangement was essentially to guard Europe from socialism and to restore the nations. At long last, Daniel Yergins key contention is one where financial matters and legislative issues were intentions. He contends that the arrangement was to merge the Western circle by remaking the economy, which simultaneously would keep the socialists out. The intentions each impactsly affect the Marshall plans presentation. Kolko’s investigation and clarification Joyce and Gabriel Kolko, writing in ‘The restrictions of intensity’, clarify that they had a direct view on the intentions behind the presentation of the Marshall plan. They straightforwardly suggest the principle factor behind it was that the US needed to restore the American economy by which they would “sponsor United States trades” and “forever impact and shape Western Europe’s inside monetary arrangement”. The main contention that the Kolkos present is that of financial personal circumstance and extension in Europe. A point that they make right off the bat in the work is the arrangement was the “result of genuine caution with which Washington saw the bearing of the world economy”. The Kolkos contend that the USAs thriving was dependant on the arrangement. They guarantee the US is “an incredible country remaking its expected financial rivals from the remnants of war”. This point, the Kolkos state, was key as they saw it is an endeavor by the US “to grow their market to dodge inward emergency” and furthermore “secure their own prompt additions” by presenting the Marshall plan. This inner emergency they accept was the dollar hole and fare excess, as after the battle there wasn’t sufficient dollars in Europe to buy American products, along these lines their fares were developing with nobody to get them. Henry G Aubrey, a US financial specialist noted “dollars were scant to such an extent that the market analysts were discussing a perpetual dollar lack”. Kolko considered this to be a quick intention as without the dollars in Europe it would “further separate” the US economy. In this way, the Kolkos guarantee the intention behind the arrangement is to “restore typical exchanging designs through which the whole world would acknowledge thriving and harmony”. The Kolkos further grow this purpose of inner emergency by saying that a noticeable risk to the US was that the exchange set up by European nations to give their nations premise needs would stick, along these lines forever barring the US and stopping their development. Another component to the Kolkos contention is that the US couldn’t mitigate the monetary issue they were looking in their nation without anyone else as the Kolkos guarantee they were a “entrepreneur country incapable to grow its interior market”. The Kolkos have little compassion toward the US and contend that due to the “huge unsalable excess” that had developed, the point of American success was dependant to the reconstructing of European urban communities, with no interest of individuals or settling their issues. They propose that the reconstructing was vital and a primary thought process behind the Marshall plan as it was this that would permit success in the nations to getting back to ordinary levels and thus have the cash to pay for the US merchandise, and fuel their point of an American domain. In the Kolko’s book, they are plainly hostile to US, which is found in their reactions of the arrangement and its point. This could be on the grounds that around the time they were writing in 1972, American international strategy was vigorously under investigation from America, this is apparent as during this time troops were being removed from Vietnam because of the tenacious reaction from the American public Kolko tended to the issues of the international strategy as irrelevant and was famously against industrialist. Antiquarians have said it was “nothing unexpected: Kolko had been a communist” which clarify his perspectives on the Americans narrow minded personal circumstance. Rees investigation and clarification Rees writing in the “Time of control” has a differentiating contention to the Kolkos as he has a focal spotlight on the regulation of socialism similar to a key intention. Rees contends that the intentions behind the Marshall plan “originates from the occasions of 7 November 1917, with the effective raging of the Petrograd Winter Palace” and the profound established philosophical contrasts that he noted as “grave contrasts” at Potsdam. From this we can see that Rees first contention for the intentions of the Marshall plan and his primary contention was that it was absolutely safeguarding Europe from socialism. The regulation approach that streamed over into the premise of the Marshall plan was of “guarded nature” and “empowering… the endurance of free foundations”. Rees contended that the socialist philosophy would impact those in Europe because of their absence of structure after the war, he accepted “American assessment was starting to see that it couldn’t let Europe… tumble to the Soviets as a matter of course”. To help his contention that philosophy was a key intention he cites Truman “the steady danger of flighty Soviet moves brought about an air of frailty… among the people groups of Western Europe”. This underscores Rees contention that the Marshall plan was acquainted with battle the “inexorably dubious” Soviet arrangement. It additionally demonstrates that philosophy was a drawn out factor behind the presentation of the Marshall Plan as he saw that the US and Soviets would consistently be on a philosophical crash course, because of those early occasions as said before. An optional contention that Rees presents is that an intention behind the presentation of the Marshall plan was helpful. Differentiating the Kolko’s view that Americas thought process behind the Marshall plan was for childish reasons. Rees contends that Americas interest was more centered around really ensuring Europe, as opposed to focussing just on their own advantages. He says that “American force was as yet a definitive assurance of Western aggregate security”, this underlines that the Americans expected to ensure Europe and their “free organizations”. Rees specifies that “the whole landmass would need to be restored with US help”. The language features that in Rees’ eyes it was tied in with fixing Europe with the US’ help as hero’s, not the US doing it to their greatest advantage. David Rees contention for the thought processes behind the Marshall plan are conservative, and were composed during the 1960s when the basic impression of the Cold War that the USA were protecting opportunity and free enterprise. This standpoint can without much of a stretch be clarified as the sources he utilizes are generally official records from the US government “Unfamiliar relations of the United States”, and journals and reference index’s from US representatives. Yergin investigation and clarification A third works that researches the thought processes behind the Marshall Plan comes from Daniel Yergin in The Shattered Peace. His translation of the intentions is that the political scene in Europe and the divisions between the US and socialism were answerable for the plans presentation. Yergin additionally addresses the monetary elements that play into the political clash and the effect it has on the Communists impact in Europe. In any case, these were of a helpful sort and were not to do to pass the time interest for the Americans as the Kolko’s accepted they were. He depicts Europe as being in “a monetary emergency with groundbreaking political implications” and that the Marshall plans two points were “to end a dreaded socialist development… and to settle a worldwide financial climate good for free enterprise”. Yergin claims that the two variables combine to frame the Marshall plan. Yergin recommends that the Truman convention was falling flat, as US strategy was centered around acting against the soviet circle. He deciphers this just like a drawn out rationale behind the arrangement and that it was acquainted with make a move in US policymaking towards making a Western Sphere to impede any additionally spread of the socialist system. He contends that the Marshall plan was “the last incredible exertion, utilizing the amazing and appealing attraction of the American economy, to draw these nations out of the Soviet circle”. Yergin utilizes Truman’s point that “There are different spots where we can be powerful”, featuring how a united Western Sphere is more critical than a debilitated Soviet circle. To expand this Yergin separates the union of Europe and says that the recuperation of Germany was a thought process behind the arrangement as he accepted the security and improvement of the other western nations depended on its endurance. He says “Western Germany was introduced as basic for the recuperation of its non-socialist neighbors”. Yergin stresses that West Germany expected to become “incorporated into a Western framework”. This rationale would deflect a socialist intrigue and forestall a “dreaded socialist development into Western Europe”. Another region Yergin contends was an inspiration driving the Marshall plan was compassionate guide to Europe. Yergin claims that this was generally done through financial assistance. Yergin contends an explanation the arrangement was presented was “to cover the whole scope of European monetary issues”. He makes it understood however that the intention behind this was less to do with the “looming American depression”,which Kolko contends is the focal point of the arrangement. In any case, more based around aiding Europe from its “monetary emergency” and forestalling its “total breakdown”. Yergin likewise makes a reasonable point that the monetary thought processes wer>

Is this question part of your Assignment?

We can help

Our aim is to help you get A+ grades on your Coursework.

We handle assignments in a multiplicity of subject areas including Admission Essays, General Essays, Case Studies, Coursework, Dissertations, Editing, Research Papers, and Research proposals

Header Button Label: Get Started NowGet Started Header Button Label: View writing samplesView writing samples