3) There are many problems with the verbal description. The shape of the distribution of hike distances is skewed to the right, because the longer tail is at the high end, not skewed to the left. Even though 2.0 miles is the mode of the distances, it is not true as claimed that most (more than half of all hikes) are 2.0 miles. The 9.5 mile hike is an outlier and should be commented on. There is also a type of granularity in that almost half of the hikes are an integer number of miles, but that’s hard to say the way this dotplot was constructed (automatically by Minitab instead of considering a more meaningful scaling for the context). Finally, one important and glaring problem with the verbal description is that it makes no reference to the context. Reading this description, one has no idea whether the data are distances of hikes or scores on an exam or hours of sleep in a week or … The description should not only refer to the fact that the data are hike distances, but it should also identify the measurement units of the hike distances as miles.