The following is the peer review of the Presentation proposal by [name of team completing peer review]. The team members that participated in this review are
Luis Estrada - @lestrada
Content: Is the research question well designed and is the data being used relevant to the research question?
Yes. The research questions were well defined. The first questions was trying deduce whether people can distinguish coffee acidity/bitterness based on objective data or the actual acidity and bitterness, and whether peoples coffee preferences can play a role in helping identify objective coffee flavors. This is a really interesting questions, because as was pointed out in the presentation there are over 50 different acids that give coffee flavor which can change based on roasts and blends. The second question was trying to figure out if there was any correlation between political affiliation and coffee preference.
Content: Did the team use appropriate visualizations and did they interpret them accurately?
Visualizations were straightforward and easy to follow. I liked the highlighted aspect of the bar charts, although it did interfere a bit with the lighter roast colors. Could have also filtered out the NA responses to make a bit cleaner plots.
Interesting to see how more people got the medium/dark roast coffee bitterness wrong. I wonder why that is?
Creativity and Critical Thought: Is the project carefully thought out? Are the limitations carefully considered? Does it appear that time and effort went into the planning and implementation of the project?
Yes. The project was really well though out and researched. As someone who chose the same data set for this project, I hadn't even considered the approach that was taken for this presentation. Was really intriguing to me especially to learn more about the science of coffee.
In additional to political affiliation, it would be interesting to plot age, gender, education level etc..
Slides: Are the slides well organized, readable, not full of text, featuring figures with legible labels, legends, etc.?
Readable. Concise. Not to wordy. Labels were legible.
Professionalism: How well did the team present? Does the presentation appear to be well practiced? Are they reading off of a script? Did everyone get a chance to say something meaningful about the project?
Great presentation. It was smooth, well rehearsed and did not appear to be scripted. Overall great job!
The following is the peer review of the Presentation proposal by [name of team completing peer review]. The team members that participated in this review are
Luis Estrada - @lestrada
Content: Is the research question well designed and is the data being used relevant to the research question? Yes. The research questions were well defined. The first questions was trying deduce whether people can distinguish coffee acidity/bitterness based on objective data or the actual acidity and bitterness, and whether peoples coffee preferences can play a role in helping identify objective coffee flavors. This is a really interesting questions, because as was pointed out in the presentation there are over 50 different acids that give coffee flavor which can change based on roasts and blends. The second question was trying to figure out if there was any correlation between political affiliation and coffee preference.
Content: Did the team use appropriate visualizations and did they interpret them accurately? Visualizations were straightforward and easy to follow. I liked the highlighted aspect of the bar charts, although it did interfere a bit with the lighter roast colors. Could have also filtered out the NA responses to make a bit cleaner plots. Interesting to see how more people got the medium/dark roast coffee bitterness wrong. I wonder why that is?
Creativity and Critical Thought: Is the project carefully thought out? Are the limitations carefully considered? Does it appear that time and effort went into the planning and implementation of the project? Yes. The project was really well though out and researched. As someone who chose the same data set for this project, I hadn't even considered the approach that was taken for this presentation. Was really intriguing to me especially to learn more about the science of coffee. In additional to political affiliation, it would be interesting to plot age, gender, education level etc..
Slides: Are the slides well organized, readable, not full of text, featuring figures with legible labels, legends, etc.? Readable. Concise. Not to wordy. Labels were legible.
Professionalism: How well did the team present? Does the presentation appear to be well practiced? Are they reading off of a script? Did everyone get a chance to say something meaningful about the project? Great presentation. It was smooth, well rehearsed and did not appear to be scripted. Overall great job!