There’s an explanation further down in the tweet thread:
So, @JoelMcGuire12 actually used the available data, which is found via this: https://​​pnas.org/​​content/​​118/​​4/​​e2016976118#sec-13. In that, there actually is a drop at the end. I think the paper’s author must have merged some of the income brackets at the top end into one, but not 100%.
Oh. Actually, underlying data and graph in paper don’t seem to match up. [...]
Something is wrong with this plot: it shows experienced well-being decreasing from 400k to 600k, but in the original plot it was an increase.
It would also be clearer if you didn’t swap the colors between the two graphs.
There’s an explanation further down in the tweet thread:
Both charts seem to have the same number of data points so I don’t think this is the answer. I think Joel has plotted a different dataset.
Here is it with the points and colors from the original graph (using http://​​www.graphreader.com/​​v2 Datapoints and log graph: https://​​docs.google.com/​​spreadsheets/​​d/​​14huISqo8Q3sfJALqG6D51o4DbWbPeeqgDm5ysrGxSY8/​​edit?usp=sharing )
Thanks!