Bearbeiten: Bitte beschränken Sie die Diskussion auf das Diagramm, damit dies nicht beeinträchtigt wird. Sie schätzen die Gedanken darüber, wie es sowohl die Formatierung als auch das Konzept hätte verbessert werden können
Diagrammnotizen: Die Genehmigung, Missbilligung, Nettogenehmigung und Änderung der Zeitspanne für die palästinensischen Gebiete und ihre Komponenten.
Ergebnisse der jüngsten Umfrage des Palästinensischen Zentrums für Politik und Umfrage (PSR) im Westjordanland und dem Gazastreifen zwischen dem 1. bis 4. Mai 2025.
Unterstützung für den Angriff am 7. Oktober: Während die allgemeine Unterstützung für die Offensive der Hamas am 7. Oktober hoch bleibt, ist im Vergleich zur vorherigen Umfrage, jetzt bei zwei Dritteln, einen Rückgang von vier Prozentpunkten zu verzeichnen. Der Rückgang dieses Prozentsatzes kam aus dem Gazastreifen, der einen Rückgang von 14 Prozentpunkten verzeichnete. Es ist wichtig zu beachten, dass die Unterstützung für diesen Angriff, wie wir später sehen werden, nicht unbedingt Unterstützung für die Hamas bedeutet und keine Unterstützung für Morde oder Gräueltaten gegen Zivilisten bedeutet. Die Unterstützung ergibt sich aus einem anderen Motiv: Die Ergebnisse zeigen, dass mehr als 80% der Palästinenser der Ansicht sind, dass der Angriff das palästinensische Problem im Mittelpunkt der Aufmerksamkeit gesetzt und jahrelang auf regionaler und internationaler Ebene übereinstimmt.
[OC] Excel, VBA (Routineformatierung), Adobe Photoshop.
Datenquelle: https://pcpsr.org/en/node/985Dieses Diagramm soll eine Erweiterung von Diagramm 1 sein
Von itskopter_elikopter
28 Kommentare
[deleted]
Terrorists support terrorism, more at 11.
The fact that anyone would „agree“ with what happened on Oct 7th is disgusting. Slaughter of innocent civilians, rape of women and torture of children is inexcusable under any circumstances. Yet this shows half the population is ok with it? Insanity.
Dang. Fwiw, 66% of polled Israelis want the war to stop. 76% want netanyahu out.
Important to note that this question is not whether or not they think the Oct 7 Massacre was a good thing or not. The vast majority, 90%+ have been shown in polls to think it was a good thing.
What they’re answering, after seeing the consequences of the massacre, is whether or not it was a good strategic decision. In other words, Palestinians think that while the Oct 7 Massacre was a morally good action, but around half of them think the consequences have not been worth it.
> According to a Palestinian Center for Policy and Survey Research (PCPSR) survey published last month, over 90 percent of Palestinians polled believe that “Hamas did not commit the atrocities seen in the videos” on October 7, referring to attacks on civilians. That number rises to a whopping 97% when only including West Bank residents, compared to 83% of Gazans
Reuters
> The results from the latest survey, published on June 12, showed that more than 60% of Palestinians in Gaza reported losing family members in the current war, which has killed more than 39,000 Palestinians. Two-thirds of respondents said they continue to support the Hamas-led Oct. 7 attack on Israel, in which militants killed 1,200 people and took at least 240 hostages,
https://www.npr.org/2024/07/26/g-s1-12949/khalil-shikaki-palestinian-polling-israel-gaza-hamas
(OP put a link to one of the ones from last year, the latest one with the May ’25 data is here: https://pcpsr.org/en/node/997)
Methodology questions comes up whenever PCPSR data is posted. Please keep in mind that these are Palestinian professionals who put significant effort into making sure Palestinian opinions are known for policy makers. They deserve to at least have their methodology read, rather than dismissed as impossible:
>To ensure the safety of our data collectors in the Gaza Strip, interviews were conducted with resident in areas that did not witness armed clashes and whose residents have not been displaced or returned after being displaced, especially after the recent ceasefire during the first three months of this year.
>This poll covers all of the above issues as well as other issues such as domestic condition and the internal balance of power, the peace process and the alternatives available to the Palestinians in light of the current stalemate in that process.
>This survey was conducted face-to-face in both the West Bank and Gaza Strip using tablets or phones.
>When each interview is completed, it is automatically sent directly to our server where only our researchers can access. There is no way for anyone to intercept or manipulate the collected data.
>The sample size of this survey was 1270 people, of whom 830 were interviewed face-to-face in the West Bank (in 83 residential locations) and 440 in the Gaza Strip (in 44 locations). The margin of error stands at +/-3.5%.
>For further details, contact PSR director, Dr. Khalil Shikaki at tel. 02-296 4933 or email
>[pcpsr@pcpsr.org](mailto:pcpsr@pcpsr.org)
>***Methodology of data collection in the Gaza Strip:***
>*The interviews for this poll included 44 census “counting areas ” in all areas of the Gaza Strip, with the exception of some areas whose residents were displaced in the Rafah governorate and some other specific areas of Gaza City, Khan Younis, and the northern Gaza Strip, so that the number of areas that were not accessible stood at 13 counting areas (five in the Rafah governorate, five in Gaza Governorate, two in Khan the Yunis governorate, and one in the northern Gaza Strip). Residents of these 13 displaced counting areas were interviewed in shelters and refugee camps in the same governorate from which they were displaced. These were randomly selected from an updated list of shelters and refugee camps located in their governorates, with the exception of the Rafah governorate, whose residents were displaced to areas in the Khan Younis governorate.*
If you have legitimate concerns or questions, I am sure Dr Shikaki would be very happy to answer them. If you simply don’t bother reading because you have a TikTok level understanding of life on the ground in Gaza… well, consider that this is some smart people’s full time jobs and maybe they’ve thought about it for more than 15 seconds.
In May ’25, how can approval rating in slide 1 be about -10% while 59% in slide 2 think the attacks were correct?
That first chart is not beautiful.
These charts are horrible to parse or understand. Where is the beautiful part?
Is it just me or is this graph kind of ugly
No political thoughts here, but that first chart is really not very intuitive to read.
I find your attempt to downplay the meaning of the answers strange:
„Support for this attack… does not mean support for any killings or atrocities committed against civilians.“
The attack was very explicitly against civilians. It takes an insane logical process to suggest that someone could support the attack without implicitly also supporting killings or atrocities committed against civilians—akin to claiming that someone who supported the holocaust didn’t also support a genocide of Jewish people.
Nothing about this data is beautiful. Probably would give me a headache if I looked at it any longer.
Important lessons in here though about how people who may not suffer the consequences are usually more extreme in their politics.
Putting the maps behind text makes then feel like clutter.
With doing the three separate areas, you either need to separate them into their own charts each or put the bars together on each date.
Certainly not beautiful.
No clear distinction between the three polled groups or clear what the groups stand for? I can’t figure out what HS, JS or RA mean? Oversized labels for things covered in the legend. I still cant understand why the dual y-axis was used and why it doesn’t start at zero?
I will just note on the topic of the data. You can broadly approve of an idea whilst not condoning the actions taken by individuals. Just food for thought so we don’t all have to be so angry online.
That first chart is horrible. Way too much info on the screen to parse visually, ends up being overwhelming, noisy, and overall just unclear. Second chart is fine tho nothing wrong with that.
Contents aside, some viz feedback since it’s a viz sub:
Chart 1
* I’d remove the map behind the X axis. It’s already a busy chart, and this just ups it.
* In a chart like this with a lot of things going on, I sometimes find that copying the first bar off to the side where I can give some room for labels can look more tidy than lots of long arrows reaching into the main area of the chart. Basically, a sample „how to read this“ bar with labels right next to its components.
* Sometimes this also prompts the question of „is this trying to do too much in one place?“ though.
* Your dual Y axes are not labeled. I can figure out that the left one is approval and the right one is change, but labels make that process faster and less ambiguous.
* Your X axis is not labeled. What are HS, JS, RA? At first I figured they might be regions, since chart 2 breaks down by geography. Then I thought maybe it was three different surveying organizations, since you sometimes see that with highly-political surveys. At this point I finally noticed that the low-opacity maps I mentioned in the first bullet actually differ from section to section and confirmed it’s Gaza, then the West Bank, then both.
* So I’m guessing the HS/JS/RA labels are for Hamas, Jewish Settlements, and Ramallah (Authority), or something along those lines?
* With a dual axis chart like this one, I’d highly recommend synchronizing the 0 values. Let 0% approval be on the same line as 0% change.
* Your dates jump 3mos, 3mos, 3mos, then 8mos. Since the bars can show change over time, people may miss that the fourth and fifth ones have a much larger gap between them. Could be worth exploring ways to subtly indicate that, as otherwise users often like to project some linear trend onto the data points over time.
* Optionally, I don’t think every chart element needs its own color here. They already differ in shape/stroke, location, and general function.
Chart 2
* Make the bar label text slightly smaller so it’s not skimming the edges of the bar.
* Purely personal/stylistic, but I sometimes drop the „%“ from stacked bar labels to tidy things up a bit, and I let the axis tick marks and/or label indicate %.
* Slightly darken the gray bar segment color so the white text is a bit more visible.
This is an ugly-ass chart.
What about the 60k+ potential poll voters that have been murdered?
This title is worded so strangely that I can’t tell what you’re trying to say.
Data jumping up and down, meaning less credible??
B-but the Zionists have told me that all Palestinians are Hamas, were they lying???? How could they.
Not really a surprise. What would expect a people who have been brutalised and had their land stolen for 80 years to feel? Shit, I reckon most of the world agrees with them too.
Terrible chart, and obvious bate for political discussion
I wonder how many pro Israel commenters are getting paid $7,000 to post, or if they’re already on Bibi’s payroll.
Any particular reasons you decided not to label the scale??
Also what is hs js? Just make a headline above each graph and don’t make the dates harder to read.
Also secondary Axis and sequence to display change in approval is completely unnecessary.
Let’s geek out over chart creation for a minute.
The guiding principle is that you want to convey as much information as you can with the least amount of ink. Also, you want to use design techniques to emphasise the main message of the chart, rather than using it for decoration’s sake. Have a look at Edward Tufte’s excellent „[The Visual Display Of Quantitative Information](https://www.amazon.com.au/Visual-Display-Quantitative-Information-Edward/dp/0961392142/)“ from your local library for more on this kind of thing.
In this particular chart, I think the main point of it is how net approval rating for the October 7th massacre has gone down over time. The net approval line you’ve drawn is therefore the most important part of the chart, and we need to emphasise that more than it is now. Here are my suggestions:
* Remove the unnecessary items – Remove the maps. They don’t add information to the chart, and the extra ink needed to draw them distracts the eye from the rest of the chart. Remove the blue diamonds with the change numbers in them. This information is already shown by the net approval bars themselves, and writing down a number in a blue diamond makes the viewer have to process what that number means unnecessarily, and also distracts from the impact of the chart.
* Go greyscale – The bars are not the main point, they’re context for the main point, so let’s make them greyscale. Change the orange and green bars to black and grey instead. I like the fact that they’re not filled in as it makes the net approval lines pop more, although you might experiment with having single thin lines for the bars instead as this is even cleaner.
* Emphasise the net approval lines – Let them be the only thing on the chart that’s in colour, so they leap out to the viewer as the most important thing on the slide. To show that net approval rating is now in negative territory, make the net approval lines above 0% be in green, and the ones below 0% be in red.
* Show space between groups – I’ve only just realised we’re looking at net approvals in three locations, „HS“, „JS“ and „RA“. I’d make the difference between these locations more distinct, by having space between each group so we can see them as groups.You’ll need to make the x axis’s font small enough to fit a label that explains what „HS“ and „JS“ and „RA“ are, writing them out in full, and also having room to put the month and year on the x axis.
This way, you’ll have conveyed as much information as you can with the least ink, and used graphical techniques that help convey to the reader the point you really want to make.
I tried to read the title 4 times then gave up