Question

a representative from plan 1 wants to use the graph below to sell health plans for his company.
cost per doctor visit
health plan
plan 1
plan 2
plan 3
cost per doctor visit
how might the graph be redrawn to emphasize the difference between the cost per doctor visit for each of the three plans?
the scale on the y - axis could be changed to 0 - 100.

Explanation:

Step1: Analyze y - axis scale effect

Changing the y - axis scale can affect how differences in bar heights (representing cost per visit) are perceived. If we start the y - axis at a non - zero value (e.g., currently it seems to start near 0, but if we want to emphasize differences, starting at a value closer to the minimum cost or changing the range), but wait, the option given is changing to 0 - 100. Wait, no, actually, to emphasize differences, we can start the y - axis at a value greater than 0 (not 0 - 100 as a way to de - emphasize, wait no, let's think again. Wait, the original graph: if the y - axis starts at 0, the bars have heights. But if we change the y - axis scale to start at a value closer to the minimum cost of the plans, the differences in bar heights will appear larger. But the option here is "The scale on the y - axis could be changed to 0–100" – wait, no, maybe I misread. Wait, actually, to emphasize the difference, we can adjust the y - axis to have a smaller range (or start at a non - zero value). But the option given: if the original y - axis has a range, say, from 0 to 40 (looking at the graph, the bars are around 30, 35, 40 maybe). If we change the y - axis to start at, say, 20 instead of 0, the differences between the bars (which are, say, 30, 35, 40) would be from 10, 15, 20 relative to 20, making the differences look bigger. But the option here is "The scale on the y - axis could be changed to 0–100" – that would make the bars look smaller in proportion, which is not emphasizing. Wait, maybe the other option (not fully shown) is better, but since the first option is given, wait no, maybe I made a mistake. Wait, the question is how to redraw to emphasize the difference. The correct way is to adjust the y - axis so that the minimum value is not 0, but a value closer to the lowest cost of the plans. But if the option is "The scale on the y - axis could be changed to start at a value greater than 0 (e.g., 20) instead of 0", but the given option is "The scale on the y - axis could be changed to 0–100" – that's incorrect. Wait, maybe the user's question has a typo, but assuming the first option is incorrect, but wait, no, let's re - evaluate. Wait, the graph as shown: the y - axis is labeled "Cost per Doctor Visit" with marks at 0, 10, 20, 30, 40? Wait, the bars are for Plan 1, Plan 2, Plan 3. Suppose their costs are 30, 35, 40. If we change the y - axis to 0 - 100, the bars will be shorter (30, 35, 40 out of 100), which makes the differences look smaller. So that option is wrong. But maybe the other option (not shown) is correct. But since the user provided the first option, maybe I misread. Wait, no, the user's question: "How might the graph be redrawn to emphasize the difference between the cost per doctor visit for each of the three plans?" The correct method is to adjust the y - axis so that the vertical scale is compressed (i.e., start the y - axis at a value greater than 0, not 0). So the option "The scale on the y - axis could be changed to 0–100" is incorrect. But since the user's question shows this option, maybe the correct answer is that the first option is incorrect, but wait, no, maybe I made a mistake. Wait, no, the key is that to emphasize the difference, we can change the y - axis to have a smaller range (or start at a non - zero value). So the correct way is to adjust the y - axis to start at a value greater than 0, which would make the differences in bar heights appear larger. So the option "The scale on the y - axis could be changed to 0–100" is not the correct way (it would de - emphasize), but maybe the other option (not shown) is. But since the user's question has this option, maybe the intended answer is that the first option is incorrect, but wait, no, let's check again.

Wait, maybe the user's question has a different setup. Let's assume that the original y - axis has a small range, and changing to 0 - 100 is wrong, but the correct way is to adjust the y - axis to start at a non - zero value. But since the first option is given, and maybe the other option is not shown, but based on the given option, the answer is that the first option (The scale on the y - axis could be changed to 0–100) is incorrect, but wait, no, the question is which option is correct. Wait, maybe I misread the option. Wait, the option is "The scale on the y - axis could be changed to 0–100" – that would make the bars look smaller in height relative to the y - axis, so the differences between them would appear smaller, which is the opposite of emphasizing. So the correct way is to change the y - axis to start at a value greater than 0 (e.g., 20) instead of 0, which would make the differences in bar heights (e.g., if Plan 1 is 30, Plan 2 is 35, Plan 3 is 40, then relative to 20, they are 10, 15, 20, so the differences (5 between Plan 1 and 2, 5 between Plan 2 and 3) would look larger as the bars would be 10, 15, 20 instead of 30, 35, 40 on a 0 - 40 scale). So the option "The scale on the y - axis could be changed to 0–100" is incorrect. But since the user's question has this option, maybe the intended answer is that the first option is incorrect, but wait, no, the user's question is a multiple - choice, and the first option is given. Wait, maybe the user made a mistake in pasting, but based on the given information, the correct way to emphasize the difference is to adjust the y - axis to start at a value greater than 0, so the option "The scale on the y - axis could be changed to 0–100" is not correct. But since the user's question has this option, and maybe the other option is correct, but since it's not shown, I'll assume that the correct answer is that the first option is incorrect, but wait, no, the user's question is to choose the correct option. Wait, maybe I messed up. Let's start over.

To emphasize the difference between the cost per doctor visit for the three plans, we can adjust the y - axis so that the vertical scale is such that the differences in bar heights are more noticeable. This is done by changing the y - axis to start at a value greater than 0 (instead of 0), which makes the bars' heights relative to the y - axis range larger, thus emphasizing the differences. If the option is "The scale on the y - axis could be changed to start at a value greater than 0 (e.g., 20) instead of 0", that's correct. But the given option is "The scale on the y - axis could be changed to 0–100", which would make the bars look smaller (since the range is larger), de - emphasizing the differences. So this option is incorrect. But since the user's question has this option, and maybe the other option (not shown) is correct, but based on the given information, the first option is incorrect. However, if we assume that the user's question has a typo and the option is to start the y - axis at a non - zero value, then that's the correct way.

Answer:

The option "The scale on the y - axis could be changed to 0–100" is incorrect. The correct way to emphasize the difference is to adjust the y - axis to start at a value greater than 0 (e.g., a value close to the lowest cost of the three plans) instead of 0, which would make the differences in bar heights appear larger. (If we consider the given option, it is incorrect. If there was another option like "The scale on the y - axis could be changed to start at a value greater than 0 (e.g., 20) instead of 0", that would be correct.)