Improving Corruption Risk Management in the Slovak Republic

Annex M. Box plot of the likelihood of communicating a risk with jitter

Figure A ‎M.1. More observations reported a likelihood of communicating of over 50% in treatment 1 and 2, than in control group

Box plot of the likelihood of communicating a risk by treatment group, with jitter visualising the spread of the observations

Note: The number of observations responding over 50 is perceivably higher in treatment 1 and in treatment 2 (note the concentration of observations close to and around 100), compared to the control group. The number of respondents indicating a likelihood of communicating a risk that is less than 50, is also noticeably lower in treatment 1 and treatment 2, compared to the control group (note the sparser concentration of observations between 0 and 50 in treatment 1 and 2, compared to control). This visualisation illustrates that the higher likelihood of communicating a risk in treatment 1 and treatment 2, compared to control, is due to a higher number of respondents indicating a likelihood of communicating a risk of above 50%, compared to the control group.