This is great! I think the survey team didn’t do a per capita visualisation because response rates will probably vary a lot between countries for reasons other than the number of EAs per capita.
To provide another data point, @Alix Pham from EA Switzerland put together a sheet with attendees per capita for EAG London this year and just now I made a quick chart.
Obviously, due to the location of the event, some countries will be over-represented and others under-represented, but I think it might be a more accurate representation of per capita rates in Europe (with the exception of the UK).
NB some of these countries have a very low number of attendees, e.g. Iceland only had one attendee. I made the below to visualise this.
I think the survey team didn’t do a per capita visualisation because response rates will probably vary a lot between countries for reasons other than the number of EAs per capita.
We have reported this previously in both EAS 2018 and EAS 2019. We didn’t report it this year because the per capita numbers are pretty noisy (at least among the locations with the highest EAs per capita, which tend to be low population countries).
The last time we reported this was 2020, with the caveat that “Iceland, Luxembourg and Cyprus, nevertheless have very low numbers of EA (<5) respondents. This graph doesn’t leave out any countries with particularly high numbers of EAs, in absolute terms, though Poland and China are missing despite having >10.”
We’ll discuss the details more in the post we are putting together on this (hoping to release this month), but there is indeed quite a lot of noise when you look at EAs per capita, and in particular the highest EAs per capita countries, due to small populations and small numbers of respondents, often close to zero (e.g. small countries can jump in and out of the top rankings based on having 5 or 0 respondents in a year). In the full post we’ll additionally examine results for composites of years (e.g. 2020-2022), and which countries outperform what a model would predict (though that will be heavily caveated).
Nice! Yes good idea to use EAG data—I wonder if it would interact with which countries have an EAGx of their own, e.g. are some people in Germany or Netherlands or wherever else less likely to come to EAG when they know they can go to a conference domestically later in the year? Perhaps it would only be a small effect.
This is great! I think the survey team didn’t do a per capita visualisation because response rates will probably vary a lot between countries for reasons other than the number of EAs per capita.
To provide another data point, @Alix Pham from EA Switzerland put together a sheet with attendees per capita for EAG London this year and just now I made a quick chart.
Obviously, due to the location of the event, some countries will be over-represented and others under-represented, but I think it might be a more accurate representation of per capita rates in Europe (with the exception of the UK).
NB some of these countries have a very low number of attendees, e.g. Iceland only had one attendee. I made the below to visualise this.
Wait up, the USA didn’t even make the list...?!
Surprising, although I guess this is just because there are plenty of EAGs in the US already.
They were second largest in absolute terms, 214 attendees. But that means only 0.6 per million, putting them in 24th place in the per capita ranking.
In absolute terms, the top 4 ranking was: UK (675), US (214), DE (95), NL (61). Why am I giving a top 4 ranking instead of a top 3 ranking? No reason…
Yeh, as we note here:
The last time we reported this was 2020, with the caveat that “Iceland, Luxembourg and Cyprus, nevertheless have very low numbers of EA (<5) respondents. This graph doesn’t leave out any countries with particularly high numbers of EAs, in absolute terms, though Poland and China are missing despite having >10.”
We’ll discuss the details more in the post we are putting together on this (hoping to release this month), but there is indeed quite a lot of noise when you look at EAs per capita, and in particular the highest EAs per capita countries, due to small populations and small numbers of respondents, often close to zero (e.g. small countries can jump in and out of the top rankings based on having 5 or 0 respondents in a year). In the full post we’ll additionally examine results for composites of years (e.g. 2020-2022), and which countries outperform what a model would predict (though that will be heavily caveated).
Nice! Yes good idea to use EAG data—I wonder if it would interact with which countries have an EAGx of their own, e.g. are some people in Germany or Netherlands or wherever else less likely to come to EAG when they know they can go to a conference domestically later in the year? Perhaps it would only be a small effect.