A growing body of literature suggests manipulating some graphing conventions can affect visual analysis and adherence to graphing conventions varies widely in single case design publications. Yet use of graphing conventions by the wider population of behavior analysts is largely unexplored. The current study examined relations among types of graphing conventions (established versus unestablished functions), demographic variables (e.g., education level, primary job setting), and likelihood of revision ratings reported by 631 board certified behavior analysts (BCBAs, BCaBAs, and BCBA-Ds). Statistically significant differences in ratings were detected across types of conventions and demographic categories. Master's level BCBAs in clinical roles were more likely to revise conventions that affect visual analysis than conventions whose functions are unknown, whereas there were no differences between types of conventions for doctoral level BCBAs in academic roles. We discuss these findings in the context of audience control of graphing conventions.