The Daily Mail had an article earlier this year reporting some research which stated that people are happy at the age of 15, gradually drop off in satisfaction until the age of 45, then get happier again until a peak at 74. There are a few potential problems I can see with the research (asking people to self-report on their happiness has always seemed pretty dodgy, and have they properly controlled for some years just being less happy than others?) But that's not the issue here. The issue is the "graph" they used to illustrate the research.
Let's have a look at it:
Let's have a look:
Why did the Mail choose to go with the inumerate version? Apart from the obvious, I genuinely can't see how theirs is better than mine on any dimension, and it's pretty obvious in which ways it's worse.
HT to Dave in the comments at BishopBlog