1). What data set will you use for your final report?
I will be using the dataset titled, "Motor Fatalities by Road User" provided by the Government of British Columbia's data website.
2). Describe the data set. What kind of data does it contain?
The dataset is an excel file dating from 1996 to 2016 that states the amount of motor vehicle related fatalities in B.C divided by motor vehicle driver, motor vehicle passenger, pedestrian, cyclist, and other.
3). Is there anything about your data that you don’t understand? (i.e.
what a column heading means). How will you find this out?
In the dataset, it is very ambiguous what the section "other" is referring to. I believe possibly this could refer to people killed by something that isn't a motor vehicle like a train for example. Something I could look into is if there is a report on train related fatalities. The term "motor vehicle driver" is also interesting because it is unclear from the data set if a motorcyclist for example falls under this category. I will look into the motor vehicle act to get a clearer definition of what a "motor vehicle" is. It also does not give you the gross amount of fatalities per year which makes it difficult to see if there is an increase or decrease in fatalities from the data set.
4). What are some questions you hope to answer with your data? List at
least three. (you don’t need the answers at this point)
I hope to see if there is an increase or decrease in motor vehicle fatalities. I also wish to discover what the term "other" means in the dataset. Finally, I would like to find out if there is a direct correlation between driver and passenger deaths.
You're right that the term "other" is ambiguous. It makes me wonder what exactly is being left out of this dataset. Your questions are certainly thought-provoking, especially about whether there is a direct correlation between driver and passenger deaths. However, I'm unsure whether your dataset can support these questions. Without categories such as location, or any information about the victims (age? sex? ethnicity?), or reason for the collision (DUI? distracted driver? speeding? who was at fault?), or any information about the vehicle (year? type? was it totaled?), I think you might struggle to find your answers.
ReplyDeleteI definitely agree that the category "other" could be defined clearly and allow a better understanding of the data you plan to review. I think that looking at the safest mode of transportation would be an interesting question that you may want to look at. I do feel the Data set chosen could have been better represented with more information. Definitely something you already plan to look into. Great start.
ReplyDeleteThere is a lot you could do with this data set. I agree I think that other could fit a bunch of different categories of motor incidents. I think it would be interesting looking into the the trend over the years. You could see if there is an increase or decrease over the years.
ReplyDeleteI’m in agreement with you that the term “other” could be better defined. Your summary of what information your data shows is efficient. One thing that could be improved is the colour-coding because it’s hard to tell what year the viewer is looking at in correspondence with the four rows that the fatalities are divided into. If you did one colour for each year, alternating blue and white, it would be easier to differentiate one year from the next.
ReplyDelete