Undergraduate Thesis Formatting Guide (Series) 04: The Figure/Table System — Why Captions, Numbering, and In‑Text References Must Come as a Set

In an undergraduate thesis, figures and tables typically serve two evidence tasks:

1. Compress information: present large amounts of data/structure in a scannable visual object
2. Carry evidence: let readers see the evidence itself within the claim → evidence → explanation chain

So formatting is not aesthetics. It ensures figures/tables have three working properties:

• Locatable: the reader can find the correct figure/table when you point to it
• Citable: you can refer to it precisely in discussion (“see Figure 3‑2”)
• Traceable: the source/data/production method is not a black box

---

Treat a figure/table as an independent object. For an object to be usable in a document system, it needs three things:

1. Identity card: a number (Figure 1 / Table 2‑1)
2. Instruction label: a caption (what it is and how to read it)
3. Call site: an in‑text reference (what role it plays in your argument)

If any one is missing, the figure/table degrades into “an inserted picture”.

• Figure without reference: the reader doesn’t know what you use it to prove
• Reference without number/title: the reader cannot locate it or discuss it precisely
• Number/title without explanation: the reader may see it but can’t tell what you want them to notice

That’s the structural reason it must be a set.

---

Readers usually do not start by staring at the graphic. They typically scan in this order:

(1) Title/number → (2) axes/column labels/units → (3) the main visual body → (4) notes/source

This means formatting is about designing a stable path so the reader can answer within ~10 seconds:

• What is this figure/table about? (caption)
• What quantity am I looking at? What are the units? (labels)
• What is the key difference/trend? (visual)
• Can I trust this? Where is it from? (notes/source)

So captions, units, notes, and sources are not “extras”; they are necessary cues.

---

Reader tasks differ:

• Figures: show shape, trend, structure; readers rely on visual differences
• Tables: show precise numeric comparison; readers rely on row/column positioning

So common constraints differ for good reasons:

• tables emphasize alignment, consistent units, clear column headers
• figures emphasize units/axis meaning, legend, and explanatory notes

We do not prescribe fonts/line thickness here, but the “reader task difference” itself is valuable guidance.

---

Numbering reduces location cost:

• Advisor comment: “What is the data source for Figure 2‑3?”
• Defense: “Explain the difference in the third column of Table 4‑1.”

Without numbering, discussion becomes “the chart on page ten‑something”, which is slow and ambiguous.

5.1 Why “chapter-based numbering” is common

“Figure 3‑2” carries structure: it implies the figure belongs to Chapter 3, which helps build the chapter → evidence mapping.

Whether to number by chapter is template‑specific, but the general principle is: numbering should be stable and scalable.

---

Where a figure/table belongs is determined by the argument, not by “where there is space”.

A stable pattern is:

state the point → cite the figure/table → explain what to look at

Example (structure only):

• “To show the trend of X, see Figure 2‑1.” (call)
• “Figure 2‑1 shows … (explain what difference matters).”
• “This supports … (connect back to the claim).”

If you only write “as shown in the figure below”, readers don’t know what is shown and why it matters.

---

Two common failures:

• too short: “Results”, “Comparison chart” — no variables/objects/scope
• too long: a paragraph stuffed into the caption — high scan cost

A good caption is closer to a one‑sentence instruction: what object, under what condition, and what the reader should notice.

You can later expand to discipline‑specific structured captions; here we focus on why captions must exist.

---

A common debate is “isn’t it enough to cite sources in the reference list?”

But when readers look at a figure/table, they usually won’t flip to the end immediately.

Placing key source information near the figure/table:

• allows immediate questioning and verification
• prevents “black‑box evidence”
• distinguishes self‑made vs. adapted vs. directly reproduced, reducing academic integrity risk

We don’t prescribe exact wording here; we emphasize the requirement: figures/tables must have traceable cues nearby.

---

1. No in‑text reference: the figure/table never enters the argument
2. Ambiguous reference: “as shown below” while there are multiple figures on the page
3. Unstable numbering: after inserting a figure, later numbers are not updated globally
4. Caption missing variables/units: readers don’t know what numbers mean
5. Table as a screenshot: not searchable/copyable, and often breaks in PDF clarity
6. Untraceable source: “from the internet” or no source note at all

All of these make figures/tables non‑citable objects.

---

10.1 Object completeness

• every figure/table has number + caption
• numbering is unique, continuous (no duplicates/skips)

10.2 Argument-chain closure

• every figure/table is referenced at least once in the body (avoid “orphan” figures/tables)
• references point to a specific number (avoid ambiguity like “as shown below”)

10.3 Minimum readability (not aesthetic micro-rules)

• figures: axes/units/legend/necessary notes exist
• tables: column headers/units/alignment logic exist (numbers are comparable)

10.4 Traceability

• a source/self‑made note exists (especially for adapted/external data)
• if a source cue exists, it can be mapped to the reference list or a data-source description