HW2
natalia zagoriti
2024-01-26
getwd()## [1] "/Users/nataliazagoriti/Downloads"First things first: setting up your environment
Remember: you always need to do this step first and include all the packages you need
# List of packages
packages <- c("tidyverse", "fst", "modelsummary", "viridis") # add any you need here
# Install packages if they aren't installed already
new_packages <- packages[!(packages %in% installed.packages()[,"Package"])]
if(length(new_packages)) install.packages(new_packages)
# Load the packages
lapply(packages, library, character.only = TRUE)## ── Attaching core tidyverse packages ──────────────────────── tidyverse 2.0.0 ──
## ✔ dplyr 1.1.4 ✔ readr 2.1.5
## ✔ forcats 1.0.0 ✔ stringr 1.5.1
## ✔ ggplot2 3.4.4 ✔ tibble 3.2.1
## ✔ lubridate 1.9.3 ✔ tidyr 1.3.0
## ✔ purrr 1.0.2
## ── Conflicts ────────────────────────────────────────── tidyverse_conflicts() ──
## ✖ dplyr::filter() masks stats::filter()
## ✖ dplyr::lag() masks stats::lag()
## ℹ Use the conflicted package (<http://conflicted.r-lib.org/>) to force all conflicts to become errors
## Loading required package: viridisLite## [[1]]
## [1] "lubridate" "forcats" "stringr" "dplyr" "purrr" "readr"
## [7] "tidyr" "tibble" "ggplot2" "tidyverse" "stats" "graphics"
## [13] "grDevices" "utils" "datasets" "methods" "base"
##
## [[2]]
## [1] "fst" "lubridate" "forcats" "stringr" "dplyr" "purrr"
## [7] "readr" "tidyr" "tibble" "ggplot2" "tidyverse" "stats"
## [13] "graphics" "grDevices" "utils" "datasets" "methods" "base"
##
## [[3]]
## [1] "modelsummary" "fst" "lubridate" "forcats" "stringr"
## [6] "dplyr" "purrr" "readr" "tidyr" "tibble"
## [11] "ggplot2" "tidyverse" "stats" "graphics" "grDevices"
## [16] "utils" "datasets" "methods" "base"
##
## [[4]]
## [1] "viridis" "viridisLite" "modelsummary" "fst" "lubridate"
## [6] "forcats" "stringr" "dplyr" "purrr" "readr"
## [11] "tidyr" "tibble" "ggplot2" "tidyverse" "stats"
## [16] "graphics" "grDevices" "utils" "datasets" "methods"
## [21] "base"Loading Data into R
Let’s load our data. We will first work with France.
france_data <- read.fst("france_data.fst")
hungary_data <- read.fst("hungary_data.fst")
sweden_data <- read.fst("sweden_data.fst")
italy_data <- read.fst("italy_data.fst")
spain_data <- read.fst("spain_data.fst")Task 1
Provide code and answer.
Prompt: in the tutorial, we calculated the average trust in others for France and visualized it. Using instead the variable ‘Trust in Parliament’ (trstplt) and the country of Spain (country file provided on course website), visualize the average trust by survey year. You can truncate the y-axis if you wish. Provide appropriate titles and labels given the changes. What are your main takeaways based on the visual (e.g., signs of increase, decrease, or stall)?
spain_data <- spain_data %>%
mutate(
trstplt = ifelse(trstplt %in% c(77, 88, 99), NA, trstplt), )
table(spain_data$trstplt)##
## 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
## 5165 1830 2329 2441 2085 2890 1154 639 355 80 71spain_data$year <- NA
replacements <- c(2002, 2004, 2006, 2008, 2010, 2012, 2014, 2016, 2018, 2020)
for(i in 1:10){
spain_data$year[spain_data$essround == i] <- replacements[i]
}table(spain_data$year)##
## 2002 2004 2006 2008 2010 2012 2014 2016 2018 2020
## 1729 1663 1876 2576 1885 1889 1925 1958 1668 2283trust_by_year <- spain_data %>%
group_by(year) %>%
summarize(mean_trust = mean(trstplt, na.rm = TRUE))
trust_by_year## # A tibble: 10 × 2
## year mean_trust
## <dbl> <dbl>
## 1 2002 3.41
## 2 2004 3.66
## 3 2006 3.49
## 4 2008 3.32
## 5 2010 2.72
## 6 2012 1.91
## 7 2014 2.23
## 8 2016 2.40
## 9 2018 2.55
## 10 2020 1.94Visualize
ggplot(trust_by_year, aes(x = year, y = mean_trust)) +
geom_line(color = "blue", size = 1) + # Line to show the trend
geom_point(color = "red", size = 3) + # Points to highlight each year's value
labs(title = "Trust in Parliament in Spain (2002-2020)",
x = "Survey Year",
y = "Average Trust (0-10 scale)") +
ylim(0, 10) + # Setting the y-axis limits from 0 to 10
theme_minimal()## Warning: Using `size` aesthetic for lines was deprecated in ggplot2 3.4.0.
## ℹ Please use `linewidth` instead.
## This warning is displayed once every 8 hours.
## Call `lifecycle::last_lifecycle_warnings()` to see where this warning was
## generated.
Based on the visual, values ranging from 0-10, where 0 is “No trust at all” and 10 is “Complete trust”, we can conclude that there is low trust in parliament in Spain throughout all the years from 2002 to 2020. The highest value was around 3.75 during 2002 and kept decreasing when it reached the lowest value during 2012 of little over 1.5. After 2012 there was a slight rise in trust in parliament, but dropped again in 2020. The graph shows a general decline in trust throughout the years among Spanish citizens.
Task 2
Provide answer only.
Prompt and question: Based on the figure we produced above called task2_plot, tell us: what are your main takeaways regarding France relative to Italy and Norway? Make sure to be concrete and highlight at least two important comparative trends visualized in the graph.
Based on the figure “task2_plot” and comparing France relative to Italy and Norway, we can say that all three countries have shown a gradual decline in the trust of a political party from 1920 until 2000.Despite this decline, Norway consistently maintains the highest proportion, France ranks in the middle, and Italy consistently shows the lowest proportion of individuals feeling close to a political party. Initially, France had a higher proportion of individuals feeling close to a political party compared to Italy and Norway, but it experienced a sharper decline in party affiliation over the years. Italy surpassed France in party affiliation around the 1960 cohort despite both countries experiencing continuous decreases since 1950. Despite France’s decline, it consistently maintains a higher level of political party closeness compared to Norway, whose decrease is steadier. While France and Italy show continuous decreases since 1950, France still holds a larger proportion compared to Italy. Norway’s decrease is steadier than France’s, indicating varying trends in political affiliation dynamics among the three countries.
Task 3
Provide code and answer.
Question: What is the marginal percentage of Italian men who feel close to a particular political party?
italy_data <- read.fst("italy_data.fst")italy_data <- italy_data %>%
mutate(
gndr = case_when(
gndr == 1 ~ "Male",
gndr == 2 ~ "Female",
TRUE ~ NA_character_ # Set anything that is not 1 or 2 to NA
),
lrscale = case_when(
lrscale %in% 0:3 ~ "Left", # Left-wing (0 to 3)
lrscale %in% 7:10 ~ "Right", # Right-wing (7 to 10)
TRUE ~ NA_character_ # Moderate (4, 5, 6) and special codes (77, 88, 99) set to NA
)
) lrscale_percentages <- italy_data %>% # Begin with the dataset 'italy_data'
filter(!is.na(lrscale), !is.na(gndr)) %>% # Filter out rows where 'lrscale' or 'gender' is NA (missing data)
group_by(gndr, lrscale) %>% # Group the data by 'gender' and 'lrscale' categories
summarise(count = n(), .groups = 'drop') %>% # Summarise each group to get counts, and then drop groupings
mutate(percentage = count / sum(count) * 100) # Calculate percentage for each group by dividing count by total count and multiplying by 100
lrscale_percentages # The resulting dataframe## # A tibble: 4 × 4
## gndr lrscale count percentage
## <chr> <chr> <int> <dbl>
## 1 Female Left 930 23.9
## 2 Female Right 955 24.5
## 3 Male Left 924 23.7
## 4 Male Right 1084 27.8The marginal percentage of Italian men who feel close to a left particular political party is 23.7% while the marginal percentage of Italian men who feel close to a right particular political party is 27.8%
Task 4
Provide code and output only.
Prompt: In the tutorial, we calculated then visualized the percentage distribution for left vs. right by gender for France. Your task is to replicate the second version of the visualization but for the country of Sweden instead.
sweden_data <- read.fst("sweden_data.fst")sweden_data <- sweden_data %>%
mutate(
gndr = case_when(
gndr == 1 ~ "Male",
gndr == 2 ~ "Female",
TRUE ~ NA_character_
),
lrscale = case_when(
lrscale %in% 0:3 ~ "Left",
lrscale %in% 7:10 ~ "Right",
TRUE ~ NA_character_
)
) lrscale_percentages <- sweden_data %>%
filter(!is.na(lrscale), !is.na(gndr)) %>%
group_by(gndr, lrscale) %>%
summarise(count = n(), .groups = 'drop') %>%
mutate(percentage = count / sum(count) * 100)
lrscale_percentages ## # A tibble: 4 × 4
## gndr lrscale count percentage
## <chr> <chr> <int> <dbl>
## 1 Female Left 2296 23.0
## 2 Female Right 2530 25.3
## 3 Male Left 2062 20.6
## 4 Male Right 3107 31.1lrscale_plot <- ggplot(lrscale_percentages, aes(x = lrscale, y = percentage, fill = lrscale)) +
geom_bar(stat = "identity", position = position_dodge()) + # Dodged bar chart
facet_wrap(~ gndr, scales = "fixed") + # Fixed scales for y-axis across facets
scale_fill_brewer(palette = "Set1") + # Distinct colors for Left and Right
labs(
title = "Political Orientation (Left vs. Right) by Gender in Sweden",
x = "Political Orientation",
y = "Percentage of Respondents",
fill = "Orientation"
) +
theme_minimal() + # Minimal theme for clarity
theme(legend.position = "bottom") # Legend at the bottom
# Display the ggplot object
lrscale_plot
Task 5
Provide code and answer: In Hungary, what is the conditional probability of NOT feeling close to any particular party given that the person lives in a rural area?
hungary_data <- read.fst("hungary_data.fst")hungary_data <- hungary_data %>%
mutate(
geo = recode(as.character(domicil),
'1' = "Urban",
'2' = "Urban",
'3' = "Rural",
'4' = "Rural",
'5' = "Rural",
'7' = NA_character_,
'8' = NA_character_,
'9' = NA_character_)
) %>%
filter(!is.na(clsprty), !is.na(geo))hungary_data <- hungary_data %>%
filter(!is.na(clsprty)) %>%
mutate(
clsprty = case_when(
clsprty == 1 ~ "Yes",
clsprty == 2 ~ "No"
)
) %>%
filter(!is.na(clsprty)) # Calculate conditional probabilities, excluding NAs
cond <- hungary_data %>%
count(clsprty, geo) %>%
group_by(geo) %>%
mutate(prob = n / sum(n))
cond## # A tibble: 4 × 4
## # Groups: geo [2]
## clsprty geo n prob
## <chr> <chr> <int> <dbl>
## 1 No Rural 6275 0.554
## 2 No Urban 2395 0.512
## 3 Yes Rural 5055 0.446
## 4 Yes Urban 2283 0.488In Hungary, the conditional probability of NOT feeling close to any particular party given that the person lives in a rural area is 55.4%.