steve2:

In answer to your question, yes - but you also need to provide numerical context by showing the absolute numbers next to the percentages.

The graphs would be quite cluttered if the publisher numbers were also provided. Much of the audience of the forum has a *general* idea of numbers anyway.

otherwise readers have no way of knowing whether the 50% increase say in 1956 (to conjure up an imaginary example) represents a relatively small increase (given the small total number for the previous year) **or** a significantly large numerical increase compared with the previous year.

That's the case when there is only a very small sample size, but when percentages vary over a long period of time, there is a clear trend indicating a distinct decline in growth regardless of the *specific* numbers.

Statistics for this *kind* of population are generally expected to have exponential growth, however JW growth rates are considerably below what they should be if growth had continued at a consistent exponential rate. For example, if JW growth from 1950 to 1965 had continued at the same exponential rate, by now there would be about 60 million JWs. But based on their growth rate from 1998 to the present, it may take them as long as 2025 to get to 10 million. (I have selected 1998 here because there is a notable change in the trend from that year onwards compared to the previous period.)

The graph below compares actual (reported) growth with hypothetical growth based on trends from various periods, as indicated in the legend: