The graph shows the prices of different brands of sandals. is this graph misleading? why or why not?

a
the scale on the vertical axis goes from $0 to $40 with a regular $5 interval. the difference in the bars is not exaggerated. therefore, the graph is not misleading.

b
the scale on the vertical axis goes from $0 to $40. the interval used on the vertical axis exaggerates the differences between the bars. therefore, the graph is misleading.

c
the scale on the vertical axis goes from $5 to $40 with a regular $5 interval. even though the vertical axis does not start at 0, the difference in the bars is not exaggerated. therefore, the graph is not misleading.

d
the scale on the vertical axis goes from $5 to $40. this scale, along with the irregular interval used on the vertical axis, exaggerates the differences between the bars. therefore, the graph is misleading.

Choice C

scale starts at $5 and goes to $40 with a regular $5 interval

even though we don't start at 0, the difference in bar heights is not exaggerated

graph is not misleading

Explanation:

Choice A is not true because the vertical axis starts at 5 and not 0

Choice B is the same story as choice A.

Choice D is not true because the vertical axis does not use an irregular interval. The interval or tickmark distance is $5 each time. In other words, the value goes up by 5 each time.

So far, choices A, B and D have been crossed off the list. The only thing left is choice C.

Despite the fact that the vertical axis starts at 5, instead of 0, the graph is not misleading. The heights of the bars can be compared to see that brand H is the most expensive brand. So in a sense, we can ignore the data values along the vertical axis and still be able to see that brand H is the most expensive. The other brands are close to one another in cost.

side note: the bar graph should have a zig-zag line at the very bottom of the vertical axis to indicate "we are not starting at y = 0". This is handy if you happen to start with much larger y values.