Why would a geographer decide to use a proportional symbol map over a dot density map?(1 point)
A proportional symbol map would be better if the information being represented was quantitative data in
the form of percentages.
A proportional symbol map would be better if the information being represented stayed consistent across
similar locations and changed gradually over different distances.
A proportional symbol map would be better if the subject being studied had varying sizes and intensities.
A proportional symbol map would be better if the subject being studied had discrete units which could be
represented individually
A proportional symbol map would be better if the subject being studied had varying sizes and intensities.
A geographer might decide to use a proportional symbol map over a dot density map for several reasons. The main reason is that a proportional symbol map is better suited for representing quantitative data, specifically data in the form of percentages.
To determine which type of map to use, a geographer should consider the nature of the information being represented. If the information stays consistent across similar locations and changes gradually over different distances, a proportional symbol map would be more appropriate. This is because proportional symbol maps use different-sized symbols to represent different levels of the variable being studied, allowing for easy visual comparison and understanding of the data.
Another reason for choosing a proportional symbol map is when studying a subject that has varying sizes and intensities. For example, if a geographer is studying population distribution, the use of proportional symbols can visually represent areas with higher or lower population densities accurately.
Lastly, if the subject being studied has discrete units that can be represented individually, a proportional symbol map is a suitable choice. Dot density maps, on the other hand, tend to show the density of a variable in a given area by using random individual dots to represent individual units. If the subject being studied has distinct units that need to be individually represented, a proportional symbol map would be the better option.
Overall, the choice between a proportional symbol map and a dot density map relies on the specific characteristics of the data being analyzed and the desired representation method for that data.
A geographer might decide to use a proportional symbol map over a dot density map if the information being represented is better suited for this type of visualization. There are several reasons why a proportional symbol map might be preferred:
1. Proportional symbol maps are ideal for representing quantitative data in the form of percentages. This type of map allows the geographer to show the relative sizes or intensities of different locations based on the data being represented.
2. Proportional symbol maps are also effective when the information being represented remains consistent across similar locations and changes gradually over different distances. This allows for a more accurate representation of the data and helps to visualize patterns and trends across a geographic area.
3. When studying a subject with varying sizes and intensities, a proportional symbol map can effectively represent these differences. By using symbols of different sizes or colors, the map can visually depict the variations in the subject being studied.
4. Additionally, if the subject being studied has discrete units that can be represented individually, a proportional symbol map can be a suitable choice. This allows for a clear and concise representation of the data, making it easier to interpret and analyze.
In summary, a geographer may choose to use a proportional symbol map over a dot density map if the information being represented is better suited for this type of visualization, such as quantitative data, consistent changes over distances, varying sizes and intensities, or discrete units.