about · email me · subscribe
Spurious correlation #5,356 · View random

A linear line chart with years as the X-axis and two variables on the Y-axis. The first variable is Votes for Democratic Senators in Oklahoma and the second variable is Google searches for 'where do birds go when it rains'.  The chart goes from 2004 to 2020, and the two variables track closely in value over that time. Small Image
Download png
, svg

AI explanation

As Democrat votes for Senators in Oklahoma decreased, key environmental policies were not as strongly supported. This led to a noticeable lack of government-funded bird umbrellas in the state. With fewer designated rainy day shelters for avian constituents, the birds had to take matters into their own wings and find alternative accommodations when it rained. This unforeseen consequence left both the avian and human populations pondering the age-old question of avian evaporative precipitation practices, prompting a collective shift in curiosity towards the mysterious and elusive rainy day itineraries of our feathered friends.

Model: dalle-3
Prompt: Generate an image in the style of pop art that depicts a whimsical Oklahoma scene. In the foreground, showcase a variety of colorful birds seeking shelter under makeshift umbrellas and natural cover during a rainstorm. In the background, illustrate a collage of Google search boxes displaying queries regarding birds' behavior in the rain. With bold lines and vibrant colors, capture the essence of the diminishing support for environmental policies and the collective curiosity around the avian population. The depiction should include only scenes, people, and objects, it should not include text or speech bubbles.
This image generation prompt was also generated by AI, using the following sequence:

Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You select one of a few potential scene descriptors that seems to go along with the variables described. You respond only with the scene descriptions provided and say nothing else.
User prompt: Here are two variables: Votes for Democratic Senators in Oklahoma and Google searches for 'where do birds go when it rains'. Given these, which of the following image style descriptions seems most appropriate? Pick the one that seems to be related to one of the variables at hand. Please respond with only one of the following potential descriptions: Cute 2D animation Low poly Pop art Charcoal Cubism
ChatGPT: Pop art

Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You describe simple visual scenes that depict the two variables stated. You combine both variables into one scene.
User prompt: Please describe a visual scene that prominently depicts both Votes for Democratic Senators in Oklahoma and Google searches for 'where do birds go when it rains', in the following situation: As Democrat votes for Senators in Oklahoma decreased, key environmental policies were not as strongly supported. This led to a noticeable lack of government-funded bird umbrellas in the state. With fewer designated rainy day shelters for avian constituents, the birds had to take matters into their own wings and find alternative accommodations when it rained. This unforeseen consequence left both the avian and human populations pondering the age-old question of avian evaporative precipitation practices, prompting a collective shift in curiosity towards the mysterious and elusive rainy day itineraries of our feathered friends.. Keep the description simple.
ChatGPT: In a charming scene in Oklahoma, the diminishing votes for Democratic Senators are evident as the environmental policies lose support. As a result, government-funded bird umbrellas are scarce, leading to birds seeking their own shelter during rain. Against the backdrop of the declining political support, people are observed conducting Google searches about where birds go when it rains, showing a collective curiosity about the avian population's rainy day habits.

Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You write and improve image generation prompts for DALLE-3. You maintain the same subjects, but enhance the visuals.
User prompt: Please respond with an image generation prompt that would be likely to create an interesting visual using DALLE-3, using the following style: [ Pop art ] and depicting this scene: In a charming scene in Oklahoma, the diminishing votes for Democratic Senators are evident as the environmental policies lose support. As a result, government-funded bird umbrellas are scarce, leading to birds seeking their own shelter during rain. Against the backdrop of the declining political support, people are observed conducting Google searches about where birds go when it rains, showing a collective curiosity about the avian population's rainy day habits. Keep the visual depiction simple. Do not include any words or speech bubbles.
ChatGPT: Generate an image in the style of pop art that depicts a whimsical Oklahoma scene. In the foreground, showcase a variety of colorful birds seeking shelter under makeshift umbrellas and natural cover during a rainstorm. In the background, illustrate a collage of Google search boxes displaying queries regarding birds' behavior in the rain. With bold lines and vibrant colors, capture the essence of the diminishing support for environmental policies and the collective curiosity around the avian population.

*Variations in the User Prompts from chart to chart are just the result of random number generation in Python. I wrote a few arrays of various styles and methods to ask questions to change up the results. Every time this site writes an explanation or generates an image, the script picks from each at random.

I sequence the requests into multiple prompts because I find GPT 3.5 to perform much better with short, well-managed contexts. Thus, I track the context directly in Python and only ask ChatGPT targeted questions.

Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106 (fine-tuned)
System prompt: You provide humorous responses in the form of plausible sounding explanations for correlations. You assume the correlation is causative for the purpose of the explanation even if it is ridiculous. You do not chat with the user, you only reply with the causal connection explanation and nothing else.
User prompt: Please make up a funny explanation for how a decrease in Democrat votes for Senators in Oklahoma caused where do birds go when it rains (Google searches for 'where do birds go when it rains') to decrease.

AI academic paper

(Because p < 0.05)
Flock the Vote: A Feathered Approach to Political Analysis in Oklahoma

The Avian Advocate

Jan 2024

Reminder: This paper is AI-generated. Not real!
Quick note: This sequence is long and repetitive. That's how the prompt engineering works for this one. I manage the output in Python to format it into this PDF.




Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You are a researcher writing an academic paper.You write titles and abstracts of goofy academic research papers.
User prompt:
Pretend you are an academic researcher. Your writing sounds like it belongs in a medical or economics journal. However, you frequently crack jokes, make puns, and add unexpected twists in your writing.

Please draft the title and abstract of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between Democrat votes for Senators in Oklahoma and Google searches for 'where do birds go when it rains'. You can't resist a good dad joke. Add a relevant dad joke related to the content every couple of sentences.

Make the title seem clever.

Your research team used data from MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse and Google Trends to assess this nagging question. You found a correlation coefficient of 0.8478510 and p < 0.05 for 2004 to 2020.

Please respond in this format (replace "Lorem ipsum dolor sit" with your title and abstract)

[[TITLE]]
Lorem ipsum dolor sit

[[ABSTRACT]]
Lorem ipsum dolor sit



ChatGPT:
[[TITLE]]
"Flock the Vote: A Feathered Approach to Political Analysis in Oklahoma"

[[ABSTRACT]]
Avian you heard the news? Our groundbreaking research has unraveled the compelling correlation between the Democratic votes for Senators in Oklahoma and the voluminous Google searches for 'where do birds go when it rains'. By delving into data from esteemed sources such as MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, and Google Trends, our findings are nothing short of tweet-worthy.

In this study, we utilized a sophisticated statistical approach and uncovered a correlation coefficient of 0.8478510, with a p-value less than 0.05 for the time frame of 2004 to 2020. This analysis chirps volumes about the interconnectedness between avian curiosity and political inclinations. It seems that when it pours, Oklahomans don't just flock together in polling booths; they also collectively ponder the whereabouts of our feathered friends.

Thus, our research not only sheds light on this captivating correlation but also serves as a gentle reminder that sometimes, the most unexpected and seemingly unrelated inquiries can lead to profound insights. After all, it's for the birds!


Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You are a researcher writing an academic paper.You draft the introduction section of an academic research paper.
User prompt:
Pretend you are an academic researcher. Your writing sounds like it belongs in a medical or economics journal. However, you frequently crack jokes, make puns, or add unexpected twists in your writing.

Please make up the introduction section of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between Democrat votes for Senators in Oklahoma and Google searches for 'where do birds go when it rains'. You can't resist a good dad joke. Add a relevant dad joke related to the content every couple of sentences. Sneak in some jokes and clever puns about science, research, statistics, and the variables.

Here is the title and abstract of the paper:
[[TITLE]]
"Flock the Vote: A Feathered Approach to Political Analysis in Oklahoma"

[[ABSTRACT]]
Avian you heard the news? Our groundbreaking research has unraveled the compelling correlation between the Democratic votes for Senators in Oklahoma and the voluminous Google searches for 'where do birds go when it rains'. By delving into data from esteemed sources such as MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, and Google Trends, our findings are nothing short of tweet-worthy.

In this study, we utilized a sophisticated statistical approach and uncovered a correlation coefficient of 0.8478510, with a p-value less than 0.05 for the time frame of 2004 to 2020. This analysis chirps volumes about the interconnectedness between avian curiosity and political inclinations. It seems that when it pours, Oklahomans don't just flock together in polling booths; they also collectively ponder the whereabouts of our feathered friends.

Thus, our research not only sheds light on this captivating correlation but also serves as a gentle reminder that sometimes, the most unexpected and seemingly unrelated inquiries can lead to profound insights. After all, it's for the birds!

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[INTRODUCTION]]



ChatGPT:
[[INTRODUCTION]]

The connection between voting patterns and external factors has always been a hot topic in political analysis. Just when we thought we've seen it all, our research takes a different flight path. It dives into the realm of internet searches, avian behavior, and political preferences to uncover an unexpected yet intriguing correlation. Yes, you guessed it - we've taken the term "bird's-eye-view" quite literally.

When it comes to political analyses, researchers often gravitate towards conventional variables such as demographics, social and economic indicators, and historical voting patterns. But why not spread our wings and explore the uncharted territory of internet search trends? Our investigation has revealed that the flock mentality of Oklahomans doesn't confine itself only to their voting patterns, but extends to their inquisitiveness about our feathered friends during rainy days.

What do you get when you cross a political scientist with an ornithologist? A statistical pecking order! Our data crunching revealed a striking correlation between the Democratic votes for Senators in Oklahoma and the surge of Google searches for "where do birds go when it rains." This correlation not only raises eyebrows but also compels us to flock to our statistical models and nestle into the nitty-gritty of this unexpected yet compelling relationship.

It's no coincidence that our findings ruffle some feathers in the world of political research. The correlation coefficient of 0.8478510 and the associated p-value less than 0.05 certainly make us want to shout "eureka!" But before we fly the coop with grand conclusions, it's essential to perch on the branches of statistical significance and tread carefully through the fog of causation.

Our research provides a compelling case for the integration of seemingly disparate variables in political analyses. As it turns out, the question "where do birds go when it rains" is not just a whimsical inquiry; it seems to have a nestling place in the political consciousness of Oklahomans. So, the next time someone dismisses an unexpected pattern as "for the birds," just remember that sometimes, even the quirkiest questions can lead to groundbreaking insights. Let's spread our wings and dive into the feathered mysteries of political preferences and avian curiosities.


Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You are a researcher writing an academic paper.You draft a literature review section of an academic research paper, that starts out dry for the first few sentences but then becomes hilarious and goofy.
User prompt:
Pretend you are an academic researcher. Your writing sounds like it belongs in a medical or economics journal. However, you frequently crack jokes, make puns, or add unexpected twists in your writing.

Please make up a literature review section of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between Democrat votes for Senators in Oklahoma and Google searches for 'where do birds go when it rains'. You can't resist a good dad joke. Add a relevant dad joke related to the content every couple of sentences.

Speak in the present tense for this section (the authors find...), as is common in academic research paper literature reviews. Name the sources in a format similar to this: In "Book," the authors find lorem and ipsum.

Make up the lorem and ipsum part, but make it sound related to the topic at hand.

Start by naming serious-sounding studies by authors like Smith, Doe, and Jones - but then quickly devolve. Name some real non-fiction books that would be related to the topic. Then name some real fiction books that sound like they could be related. Perhaps you also got inspiration from some board games that are vaugely related.

Here is the title and abstract of the paper:
[[TITLE]]
"Flock the Vote: A Feathered Approach to Political Analysis in Oklahoma"

[[ABSTRACT]]
Avian you heard the news? Our groundbreaking research has unraveled the compelling correlation between the Democratic votes for Senators in Oklahoma and the voluminous Google searches for 'where do birds go when it rains'. By delving into data from esteemed sources such as MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, and Google Trends, our findings are nothing short of tweet-worthy.

In this study, we utilized a sophisticated statistical approach and uncovered a correlation coefficient of 0.8478510, with a p-value less than 0.05 for the time frame of 2004 to 2020. This analysis chirps volumes about the interconnectedness between avian curiosity and political inclinations. It seems that when it pours, Oklahomans don't just flock together in polling booths; they also collectively ponder the whereabouts of our feathered friends.

Thus, our research not only sheds light on this captivating correlation but also serves as a gentle reminder that sometimes, the most unexpected and seemingly unrelated inquiries can lead to profound insights. After all, it's for the birds!

-------

And here is the introduction section that led to this literature review:
[[INTRODUCTION]]
The connection between voting patterns and external factors has always been a hot topic in political analysis. Just when we thought we've seen it all, our research takes a different flight path. It dives into the realm of internet searches, avian behavior, and political preferences to uncover an unexpected yet intriguing correlation. Yes, you guessed it - we've taken the term "bird's-eye-view" quite literally.
When it comes to political analyses, researchers often gravitate towards conventional variables such as demographics, social and economic indicators, and historical voting patterns. But why not spread our wings and explore the uncharted territory of internet search trends? Our investigation has revealed that the flock mentality of Oklahomans doesn't confine itself only to their voting patterns, but extends to their inquisitiveness about our feathered friends during rainy days.
What do you get when you cross a political scientist with an ornithologist? A statistical pecking order! Our data crunching revealed a striking correlation between the Democratic votes for Senators in Oklahoma and the surge of Google searches for "where do birds go when it rains." This correlation not only raises eyebrows but also compels us to flock to our statistical models and nestle into the nitty-gritty of this unexpected yet compelling relationship.
It's no coincidence that our findings ruffle some feathers in the world of political research. The correlation coefficient of 0.8478510 and the associated p-value less than 0.05 certainly make us want to shout "eureka!" But before we fly the coop with grand conclusions, it's essential to perch on the branches of statistical significance and tread carefully through the fog of causation.
Our research provides a compelling case for the integration of seemingly disparate variables in political analyses. As it turns out, the question "where do birds go when it rains" is not just a whimsical inquiry; it seems to have a nestling place in the political consciousness of Oklahomans. So, the next time someone dismisses an unexpected pattern as "for the birds," just remember that sometimes, even the quirkiest questions can lead to groundbreaking insights. Let's spread our wings and dive into the feathered mysteries of political preferences and avian curiosities.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[LITERATURE REVIEW]]



ChatGPT:
[[LITERATURE REVIEW]]

The literature on the relationship between internet search trends and political behavior presents a robust body of evidence, with seminal works such as Smith's "Digital Footprints in Democracy" and Doe's "Web Wandering: Unconventional Indicators of Voter Sentiment" offering insightful perspectives. Then, there is Jones' "The Data-Driven Citizen: Navigating the Information Highway," a comprehensive exploration of the nexus between online behavior and civic engagement. These works have provided a sturdy branch for our own investigation to perch upon.

Speaking of perching, have you heard about the bird that was considered a featherweight champion? It was a peregrine falcon!

Moving on, while the existing literature sheds light on the influence of internet searches on political attitudes, our study takes a unique flight path by focusing on the correlation between Google searches for "where do birds go when it rains" and Democratic votes for Senators in Oklahoma. This unexpected twist pricks the curiosity of avian enthusiasts and political scientists alike, prompting a reevaluation of the connections between avian wanderings and human decision-making.

In parallel, the influence of external factors on voting behavior has been explored in non-fiction works such as "Political Animals: The Avian Guide to Political Punditry" and "Feathering the Debate: How Bird Behavior Shapes Political Discourse." These texts provide a thoughtful analysis of avian symbolism and its reflection in public opinion. Additionally, fictional novels such as "The Raven's Ballot Box" and "A Murder of Crows: Election Day Intrigue" contribute to the discourse by weaving avian themes into the fabric of political narratives.

Speaking of avian themes, have you ever played That's My Fish! board game? It's a great way to understand competitive behavior and strategic positioning, much like avian and political movements.

Our findings not only align with the trajectory of existing scholarship but also add a feather to its cap by introducing a whimsical yet compelling variable into the political landscape. As we delve deeper into the connection between avian inquisitiveness about inclement weather and political preferences, it becomes clear that sometimes, the most unexpected questions lead to the most riveting answers. And for that, we owe a debt of gratitude to both the winged creatures soaring the skies and the voters casting their ballots.


Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You are a researcher writing an academic paper.You draft the methodology section of an academic research paper.
User prompt:
Pretend you are an academic researcher. Your writing sounds like it belongs in a medical or economics journal. However, you frequently crack jokes, make puns, or add unexpected twists in your writing.

Please make up the methodology section of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between Democrat votes for Senators in Oklahoma and Google searches for 'where do birds go when it rains'. You can't resist a good dad joke. Add a relevant dad joke related to the content every couple of sentences. Sneak in some jokes and clever puns about science, research, statistics, and the variables.

Your research team collected data from all across the internet, but mostly just used information from MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse and Google Trends . You used data from 2004 to 2020

Make up the research methods you don't know. Make them a bit goofy and convoluted.

Here is the title, abstract, and introduction of the paper:
[[TITLE]]
"Flock the Vote: A Feathered Approach to Political Analysis in Oklahoma"

[[ABSTRACT]]
Avian you heard the news? Our groundbreaking research has unraveled the compelling correlation between the Democratic votes for Senators in Oklahoma and the voluminous Google searches for 'where do birds go when it rains'. By delving into data from esteemed sources such as MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, and Google Trends, our findings are nothing short of tweet-worthy.

In this study, we utilized a sophisticated statistical approach and uncovered a correlation coefficient of 0.8478510, with a p-value less than 0.05 for the time frame of 2004 to 2020. This analysis chirps volumes about the interconnectedness between avian curiosity and political inclinations. It seems that when it pours, Oklahomans don't just flock together in polling booths; they also collectively ponder the whereabouts of our feathered friends.

Thus, our research not only sheds light on this captivating correlation but also serves as a gentle reminder that sometimes, the most unexpected and seemingly unrelated inquiries can lead to profound insights. After all, it's for the birds!

[[INTRODUCTION]]
The connection between voting patterns and external factors has always been a hot topic in political analysis. Just when we thought we've seen it all, our research takes a different flight path. It dives into the realm of internet searches, avian behavior, and political preferences to uncover an unexpected yet intriguing correlation. Yes, you guessed it - we've taken the term "bird's-eye-view" quite literally.
When it comes to political analyses, researchers often gravitate towards conventional variables such as demographics, social and economic indicators, and historical voting patterns. But why not spread our wings and explore the uncharted territory of internet search trends? Our investigation has revealed that the flock mentality of Oklahomans doesn't confine itself only to their voting patterns, but extends to their inquisitiveness about our feathered friends during rainy days.
What do you get when you cross a political scientist with an ornithologist? A statistical pecking order! Our data crunching revealed a striking correlation between the Democratic votes for Senators in Oklahoma and the surge of Google searches for "where do birds go when it rains." This correlation not only raises eyebrows but also compels us to flock to our statistical models and nestle into the nitty-gritty of this unexpected yet compelling relationship.
It's no coincidence that our findings ruffle some feathers in the world of political research. The correlation coefficient of 0.8478510 and the associated p-value less than 0.05 certainly make us want to shout "eureka!" But before we fly the coop with grand conclusions, it's essential to perch on the branches of statistical significance and tread carefully through the fog of causation.
Our research provides a compelling case for the integration of seemingly disparate variables in political analyses. As it turns out, the question "where do birds go when it rains" is not just a whimsical inquiry; it seems to have a nestling place in the political consciousness of Oklahomans. So, the next time someone dismisses an unexpected pattern as "for the birds," just remember that sometimes, even the quirkiest questions can lead to groundbreaking insights. Let's spread our wings and dive into the feathered mysteries of political preferences and avian curiosities.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[METHODOLOGY]]



ChatGPT:

You can put a bird on it! Our methodology for uncovering the fascinating correlation between Democratic votes for Senators in Oklahoma and Google searches for 'where do birds go when it rains' was as meticulous as a bird building its nest. We gathered data from a variety of sources, utilizing information spanning over a decade to ensure our analysis had wingspan.

First off, we took to the data skies and sourced public information from MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, and Google Trends. Combining this data, we commenced our statistical goose chase, employing a complex and mind-boggling mix of regression analysis, time-series modeling, and more coding than a flock of birds migrating south for the winter.

Our first step in this avian adventure was to analyze the temporal patterns of Google searches for 'where do birds go when it rains', crafting a statistical aviary of information to unveil the ebb and flow of Oklahomans' curiosity about their feathered companions during inclement weather. We then feathered our nest with a thorough investigation into the patterns of Democratic votes for Senators in Oklahoma, scrutinizing the historical trends and electoral behavior across time.

After this meticulous data collection, we found ourselves knee deep in statistical squawks and screeches. Using sophisticated software and some more computing power than all the brain cells of a parliament of owls combined, we calculated the correlation coefficient between the Democratic votes for Senators in Oklahoma and the Google searches for 'where do birds go when it rains'. Our findings flocked towards a correlation coefficient of 0.8478510, with a p-value less than 0.05, suggesting a statistically significant and robust relationship.

For the skeptics who might think our analysis is just a bunch of hooey, we take pride in mentioning that we carried out various sensitivity analyses, controlled for confounding variables, and ensured our statistical models were as robust as an eagle's nest. We also went to great lengths to validate our findings through various statistical tests and reassurances, leaving no stone unturned in our quest for scientific rigor.

And there you have it - our methodology was as thorough as a titmouse building its nest, ensuring our analysis sets a high benchmark for the intersection of political science and ornithological curiosity. So remember, when it comes to research methodology, you've got to lay the right eggs in the right basket.


Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You are a researcher writing an academic paper.You draft the results section of an academic research paper. You speak in the past tense (you found...).
User prompt:
Pretend you are an academic researcher. Your writing sounds like it belongs in a medical or economics journal. However, you frequently crack jokes, make puns, or add unexpected twists in your writing.

Please make up the results section of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between Democrat votes for Senators in Oklahoma and Google searches for 'where do birds go when it rains'. You can't resist a good dad joke. Add a relevant dad joke related to the content every couple of sentences. Sneak in some jokes and clever puns about science, research, statistics, and the variables.

Your research team collected data from all across the internet, but mostly just used information from MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse and Google Trends .

For the time period 2004 to 2020, you found a correlation 0.8478510, r-squared of 0.7188513, and p < 0.05.

One figure will be included. The figure (Fig. 1) is a scatterplot showing the strong correlation between the two variables. You don't need to specify where; I will add the figure.

Here is the title and abstract of the paper:
[[TITLE]]
"Flock the Vote: A Feathered Approach to Political Analysis in Oklahoma"

[[ABSTRACT]]
Avian you heard the news? Our groundbreaking research has unraveled the compelling correlation between the Democratic votes for Senators in Oklahoma and the voluminous Google searches for 'where do birds go when it rains'. By delving into data from esteemed sources such as MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, and Google Trends, our findings are nothing short of tweet-worthy.

In this study, we utilized a sophisticated statistical approach and uncovered a correlation coefficient of 0.8478510, with a p-value less than 0.05 for the time frame of 2004 to 2020. This analysis chirps volumes about the interconnectedness between avian curiosity and political inclinations. It seems that when it pours, Oklahomans don't just flock together in polling booths; they also collectively ponder the whereabouts of our feathered friends.

Thus, our research not only sheds light on this captivating correlation but also serves as a gentle reminder that sometimes, the most unexpected and seemingly unrelated inquiries can lead to profound insights. After all, it's for the birds!

-------

And here is the methodology section that led to this result:
[[METHODOLOGY]]
The connection between voting patterns and external factors has always been a hot topic in political analysis. Just when we thought we've seen it all, our research takes a different flight path. It dives into the realm of internet searches, avian behavior, and political preferences to uncover an unexpected yet intriguing correlation. Yes, you guessed it - we've taken the term "bird's-eye-view" quite literally.
When it comes to political analyses, researchers often gravitate towards conventional variables such as demographics, social and economic indicators, and historical voting patterns. But why not spread our wings and explore the uncharted territory of internet search trends? Our investigation has revealed that the flock mentality of Oklahomans doesn't confine itself only to their voting patterns, but extends to their inquisitiveness about our feathered friends during rainy days.
What do you get when you cross a political scientist with an ornithologist? A statistical pecking order! Our data crunching revealed a striking correlation between the Democratic votes for Senators in Oklahoma and the surge of Google searches for "where do birds go when it rains." This correlation not only raises eyebrows but also compels us to flock to our statistical models and nestle into the nitty-gritty of this unexpected yet compelling relationship.
It's no coincidence that our findings ruffle some feathers in the world of political research. The correlation coefficient of 0.8478510 and the associated p-value less than 0.05 certainly make us want to shout "eureka!" But before we fly the coop with grand conclusions, it's essential to perch on the branches of statistical significance and tread carefully through the fog of causation.
Our research provides a compelling case for the integration of seemingly disparate variables in political analyses. As it turns out, the question "where do birds go when it rains" is not just a whimsical inquiry; it seems to have a nestling place in the political consciousness of Oklahomans. So, the next time someone dismisses an unexpected pattern as "for the birds," just remember that sometimes, even the quirkiest questions can lead to groundbreaking insights. Let's spread our wings and dive into the feathered mysteries of political preferences and avian curiosities.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[RESULTS]]



ChatGPT:

[[RESULTS]]

Our feather-ruffling research has led to the captivating discovery of a strong positive correlation between the votes cast for Democratic Senators in Oklahoma and the search intensity for "where do birds go when it rains" on Google, with a Pearson correlation coefficient of 0.8478510. This correlation is not just a mere flight of fancy, as the associated r-squared value of 0.7188513 underlines the robustness of this relationship.

As the saying goes, "birds of a feather flock together," and it seems Oklahomans' political allegiances and their avian curiosities tend to flock in parallel. Our findings bring a new dimension to the proverbial phrase, suggesting that not only do like-minded individuals vote together, but they also turn to the virtual skies in unison, searching for answers about our feathered friends. This raises an important question: do the birds of Oklahoma hold the key to understanding political behavior, or are Oklahomans simply fascinated with the mysterious habits of their local avian inhabitants?

Fig. 1 illustrates the impressive correlation between the aforementioned variables. The scatterplot is a visual testament to the substantial relationship that our statistical analysis uncovered. The plot is indeed a feather in our cap, showcasing the significant association between Democratic votes for Senators in Oklahoma and the eagerness to seek avian refuge during inclement weather.

Now, for a joke to lighten the mood: Why do statisticians prefer birds? They always get given "tweet"-ments!

In light of these findings, our research encourages scholars to spread their wings and venture beyond conventional variables in political analyses. It exemplifies that by embracing unconventional inquiries, such as the migratory patterns of birds during rainfall, researchers can unveil unexpected patterns that offer valuable insights into societal behaviors.

This study's outcome not only enriches the field of political analysis but also reminds us that in the vast expanse of data, sometimes the most peculiar questions lead to the most captivating discoveries. As John James Audubon once said, "A true conservationist is a man who knows that the world is not given by his fathers but borrowed from his children." Our research implores us to approach the enigmatic world of data with a similar sense of wonder and curiosity, ready to explore the unexpected correlations that may just be waiting to take flight.


Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You are a researcher writing an academic paper.You draft the discussion section of an academic research paper.
User prompt:
Pretend you are an academic researcher. Your writing sounds like it belongs in a medical or economics journal. However, you frequently crack jokes, make puns, or add unexpected twists in your writing.

Please make up the discussion section of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between Democrat votes for Senators in Oklahoma and Google searches for 'where do birds go when it rains'. You can't resist a good dad joke. Add a relevant dad joke related to the content every couple of sentences. Sneak in some jokes and clever puns about science, research, statistics, and the variables.

Limit your response to 500 tokens.

Here are the title, abstract, literature review, and results sections. Please harken back to 1-2 of the goofy items in the literature review, but pretend to take them completely seriously. Discuss how your results supported the prior research.

Do not write a conclusion. I will add a conclusion after this.

[[TITLE]]
"Flock the Vote: A Feathered Approach to Political Analysis in Oklahoma"

[[ABSTRACT]]
Avian you heard the news? Our groundbreaking research has unraveled the compelling correlation between the Democratic votes for Senators in Oklahoma and the voluminous Google searches for 'where do birds go when it rains'. By delving into data from esteemed sources such as MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, and Google Trends, our findings are nothing short of tweet-worthy.

In this study, we utilized a sophisticated statistical approach and uncovered a correlation coefficient of 0.8478510, with a p-value less than 0.05 for the time frame of 2004 to 2020. This analysis chirps volumes about the interconnectedness between avian curiosity and political inclinations. It seems that when it pours, Oklahomans don't just flock together in polling booths; they also collectively ponder the whereabouts of our feathered friends.

Thus, our research not only sheds light on this captivating correlation but also serves as a gentle reminder that sometimes, the most unexpected and seemingly unrelated inquiries can lead to profound insights. After all, it's for the birds!

[[LITERATURE REVIEW]]
The literature on the relationship between internet search trends and political behavior presents a robust body of evidence, with seminal works such as Smith's "Digital Footprints in Democracy" and Doe's "Web Wandering: Unconventional Indicators of Voter Sentiment" offering insightful perspectives. Then, there is Jones' "The Data-Driven Citizen: Navigating the Information Highway," a comprehensive exploration of the nexus between online behavior and civic engagement. These works have provided a sturdy branch for our own investigation to perch upon.
Speaking of perching, have you heard about the bird that was considered a featherweight champion? It was a peregrine falcon!
Moving on, while the existing literature sheds light on the influence of internet searches on political attitudes, our study takes a unique flight path by focusing on the correlation between Google searches for "where do birds go when it rains" and Democratic votes for Senators in Oklahoma. This unexpected twist pricks the curiosity of avian enthusiasts and political scientists alike, prompting a reevaluation of the connections between avian wanderings and human decision-making.
In parallel, the influence of external factors on voting behavior has been explored in non-fiction works such as "Political Animals: The Avian Guide to Political Punditry" and "Feathering the Debate: How Bird Behavior Shapes Political Discourse." These texts provide a thoughtful analysis of avian symbolism and its reflection in public opinion. Additionally, fictional novels such as "The Raven's Ballot Box" and "A Murder of Crows: Election Day Intrigue" contribute to the discourse by weaving avian themes into the fabric of political narratives.
Speaking of avian themes, have you ever played That's My Fish! board game? It's a great way to understand competitive behavior and strategic positioning, much like avian and political movements.
Our findings not only align with the trajectory of existing scholarship but also add a feather to its cap by introducing a whimsical yet compelling variable into the political landscape. As we delve deeper into the connection between avian inquisitiveness about inclement weather and political preferences, it becomes clear that sometimes, the most unexpected questions lead to the most riveting answers. And for that, we owe a debt of gratitude to both the winged creatures soaring the skies and the voters casting their ballots.

[[RESULTS]]
Our feather-ruffling research has led to the captivating discovery of a strong positive correlation between the votes cast for Democratic Senators in Oklahoma and the search intensity for "where do birds go when it rains" on Google, with a Pearson correlation coefficient of 0.8478510. This correlation is not just a mere flight of fancy, as the associated r-squared value of 0.7188513 underlines the robustness of this relationship.
As the saying goes, "birds of a feather flock together," and it seems Oklahomans' political allegiances and their avian curiosities tend to flock in parallel. Our findings bring a new dimension to the proverbial phrase, suggesting that not only do like-minded individuals vote together, but they also turn to the virtual skies in unison, searching for answers about our feathered friends. This raises an important question: do the birds of Oklahoma hold the key to understanding political behavior, or are Oklahomans simply fascinated with the mysterious habits of their local avian inhabitants?
Fig. 1 illustrates the impressive correlation between the aforementioned variables. The scatterplot is a visual testament to the substantial relationship that our statistical analysis uncovered. The plot is indeed a feather in our cap, showcasing the significant association between Democratic votes for Senators in Oklahoma and the eagerness to seek avian refuge during inclement weather.
Now, for a joke to lighten the mood: Why do statisticians prefer birds? They always get given "tweet"-ments!
In light of these findings, our research encourages scholars to spread their wings and venture beyond conventional variables in political analyses. It exemplifies that by embracing unconventional inquiries, such as the migratory patterns of birds during rainfall, researchers can unveil unexpected patterns that offer valuable insights into societal behaviors.
This study's outcome not only enriches the field of political analysis but also reminds us that in the vast expanse of data, sometimes the most peculiar questions lead to the most captivating discoveries. As John James Audubon once said, "A true conservationist is a man who knows that the world is not given by his fathers but borrowed from his children." Our research implores us to approach the enigmatic world of data with a similar sense of wonder and curiosity, ready to explore the unexpected correlations that may just be waiting to take flight.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[DISCUSSION]]



ChatGPT:

[[DISCUSSION]]

Our findings have taken flight and braved the storm, demonstrating a compelling association between Democratic votes for Senators in Oklahoma and Google searches for 'where do birds go when it rains'. It appears that when it rains, it not only pours but also prompts Oklahomans to ponder the precipitation-related whereabouts of our feathered friends. Our statistical analysis chirps volumes about the remarkable interconnectedness between avian curiosity and political inclinations. It seems like those Googling about birds during rainfall are not just featherbrained enthusiasts; they might just be showing their political feathers too!

While at first glance, this unexpected correlation might seem like a wild goose chase, our results align with prior research that has unearthed perplexing but pertinent connections between seemingly unrelated variables. Just as a wise old owl might predict, our study reaffirms the notion that unconventional inquiries can lead to profound insights. Sometimes, it takes a flight of fancy to uncover the unexpected patterns that nestle in data's enigmatic branches.

Our analysis, with a correlation coefficient of 0.8478510 and a p-value less than 0.05, nests seamlessly within the broader literature on the influence of internet search trends on political behavior. This finding perches on the same branch as the works of Smith and Doe, further fortifying the notion that virtual wanderings can offer meaningful insights into civic engagement. It's clear that the metaphorical aviary of internet searches extends to the complex realm of political attitudes, and our study serves as a wingman in this pursuit of understanding.

Fig. 1, a visual testament to our discoveries, feathers the cap of our analysis and underscores the substantial association between Democratic votes for Senators in Oklahoma and the inclination to seek avian refuge during inclement weather. This visual evidence is not just for the birds; it has us all aflutter with excitement about the broader implications of our findings.

Our feather-ruffling analysis leaves us with one final quip: why don't statisticians trust data from birds? Because it's always hawkward to correlate raven tendencies with political leanings! Our research not only encourages scholars to spread their wings and venture beyond conventional variables in political analyses but also highlights the need for a light-hearted approach to data exploration. In the realm of data analysis, sometimes the most unexpected questions lead to the most captivating discoveries, much like the unpredictable flight patterns of our avian counterparts. So, fellow researchers, let's not be afraid to spread our wings and embrace those uncharted skies of statistical inquiry. After all, sometimes the most unexpected variables are just waiting to take flight from the confines of data's nest.


Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You are a researcher writing an academic paper.You draft the discussion section of goofy academic research papers that sounds like it belongs based on the title and abstract provided.
User prompt:
Pretend you are an academic researcher. Your writing sounds like it belongs in a medical or economics journal. However, you frequently crack jokes, make puns, or add unexpected twists in your writing.

Please make up a short conclusion of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between Democrat votes for Senators in Oklahoma and Google searches for 'where do birds go when it rains'. You can't resist a good dad joke. Add a relevant dad joke related to the content every couple of sentences. Sneak in some jokes and clever puns about science, research, statistics, and the variables.

Limit your response to 300 tokens. At the very end, assert that no more research is needed in this area.

Here are the title, abstract, introduction, and results sections.
[[TITLE]]
"Flock the Vote: A Feathered Approach to Political Analysis in Oklahoma"

[[ABSTRACT]]
Avian you heard the news? Our groundbreaking research has unraveled the compelling correlation between the Democratic votes for Senators in Oklahoma and the voluminous Google searches for 'where do birds go when it rains'. By delving into data from esteemed sources such as MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, and Google Trends, our findings are nothing short of tweet-worthy.

In this study, we utilized a sophisticated statistical approach and uncovered a correlation coefficient of 0.8478510, with a p-value less than 0.05 for the time frame of 2004 to 2020. This analysis chirps volumes about the interconnectedness between avian curiosity and political inclinations. It seems that when it pours, Oklahomans don't just flock together in polling booths; they also collectively ponder the whereabouts of our feathered friends.

Thus, our research not only sheds light on this captivating correlation but also serves as a gentle reminder that sometimes, the most unexpected and seemingly unrelated inquiries can lead to profound insights. After all, it's for the birds!

[[INTRDUCTION]]
The connection between voting patterns and external factors has always been a hot topic in political analysis. Just when we thought we've seen it all, our research takes a different flight path. It dives into the realm of internet searches, avian behavior, and political preferences to uncover an unexpected yet intriguing correlation. Yes, you guessed it - we've taken the term "bird's-eye-view" quite literally.
When it comes to political analyses, researchers often gravitate towards conventional variables such as demographics, social and economic indicators, and historical voting patterns. But why not spread our wings and explore the uncharted territory of internet search trends? Our investigation has revealed that the flock mentality of Oklahomans doesn't confine itself only to their voting patterns, but extends to their inquisitiveness about our feathered friends during rainy days.
What do you get when you cross a political scientist with an ornithologist? A statistical pecking order! Our data crunching revealed a striking correlation between the Democratic votes for Senators in Oklahoma and the surge of Google searches for "where do birds go when it rains." This correlation not only raises eyebrows but also compels us to flock to our statistical models and nestle into the nitty-gritty of this unexpected yet compelling relationship.
It's no coincidence that our findings ruffle some feathers in the world of political research. The correlation coefficient of 0.8478510 and the associated p-value less than 0.05 certainly make us want to shout "eureka!" But before we fly the coop with grand conclusions, it's essential to perch on the branches of statistical significance and tread carefully through the fog of causation.
Our research provides a compelling case for the integration of seemingly disparate variables in political analyses. As it turns out, the question "where do birds go when it rains" is not just a whimsical inquiry; it seems to have a nestling place in the political consciousness of Oklahomans. So, the next time someone dismisses an unexpected pattern as "for the birds," just remember that sometimes, even the quirkiest questions can lead to groundbreaking insights. Let's spread our wings and dive into the feathered mysteries of political preferences and avian curiosities.

[[RESULTS]]
Our feather-ruffling research has led to the captivating discovery of a strong positive correlation between the votes cast for Democratic Senators in Oklahoma and the search intensity for "where do birds go when it rains" on Google, with a Pearson correlation coefficient of 0.8478510. This correlation is not just a mere flight of fancy, as the associated r-squared value of 0.7188513 underlines the robustness of this relationship.
As the saying goes, "birds of a feather flock together," and it seems Oklahomans' political allegiances and their avian curiosities tend to flock in parallel. Our findings bring a new dimension to the proverbial phrase, suggesting that not only do like-minded individuals vote together, but they also turn to the virtual skies in unison, searching for answers about our feathered friends. This raises an important question: do the birds of Oklahoma hold the key to understanding political behavior, or are Oklahomans simply fascinated with the mysterious habits of their local avian inhabitants?
Fig. 1 illustrates the impressive correlation between the aforementioned variables. The scatterplot is a visual testament to the substantial relationship that our statistical analysis uncovered. The plot is indeed a feather in our cap, showcasing the significant association between Democratic votes for Senators in Oklahoma and the eagerness to seek avian refuge during inclement weather.
Now, for a joke to lighten the mood: Why do statisticians prefer birds? They always get given "tweet"-ments!
In light of these findings, our research encourages scholars to spread their wings and venture beyond conventional variables in political analyses. It exemplifies that by embracing unconventional inquiries, such as the migratory patterns of birds during rainfall, researchers can unveil unexpected patterns that offer valuable insights into societal behaviors.
This study's outcome not only enriches the field of political analysis but also reminds us that in the vast expanse of data, sometimes the most peculiar questions lead to the most captivating discoveries. As John James Audubon once said, "A true conservationist is a man who knows that the world is not given by his fathers but borrowed from his children." Our research implores us to approach the enigmatic world of data with a similar sense of wonder and curiosity, ready to explore the unexpected correlations that may just be waiting to take flight.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[CONCLUSION]]



ChatGPT:

[[CONCLUSION]]

As we wrap up our avian adventure in the realm of political intrigue, it's clear that our findings have hatched some truly egg-citing insights. The compelling correlation between the votes for Democratic Senators in Oklahoma and Google searches for "where do birds go when it rains" has certainly spread its wings in the world of political research.


It seems that when it rains, it doesn't just pour in Oklahoma; it also 'pours' forth a trove of avian-related queries. It's as if Oklahomans are not just voting for a senator; they're also casting their 'tern' of attention towards our feathered friends. But before we chirp victory, we must remember that correlation does not always imply causation. After all, just because a bird can fly, doesn't mean it's in government!

As we gently close the chapter on this unexpected yet insightful correlation, our findings chirp the tune of a new era in political analysis. Let's not pigeonhole ourselves into conventional variables; instead, let's embrace the unexpected, spread our wings, and soar towards uncharted territories of inquiry. Who knows, the next groundbreaking discovery may just be a tweet away!

So, in the spirit of our feathered friends, it's time to bid ado to this topic. After all, as they say, "the early bird catches the worm," and in this case, our research caught a fascinating correlation. I think it's safe to say, no more research is needed in this area - this bird has flown the coop!


Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You provide fictional names of academic journals. You say nothing else, and you do not chat with the user.
User prompt: Please provide the name of a funny but plausible sounding research, scientific, or academic journal that would publish a paper entited Flock the Vote: A Feathered Approach to Political Analysis in Oklahoma. Respond only with the name of a fictional academic journal.

ChatGPT:

The Avian Advocate


Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You provide fictional names of nonprofit research organizations and associations. You say nothing else, and you do not chat with the user.
User prompt: Please provide the name of a funny but plausible sounding nonprofit, academic, or scientific association or organization that would sponsor research that resulted in a paper entited Flock the Vote: A Feathered Approach to Political Analysis in Oklahoma. Respond only with the name of a fictional organization.

ChatGPT:

The Avian Political Science Institute


Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You provide potential search keywords separated by commas. You say nothing else, and you do not chat with the user.
User prompt: Please provide potential search keywords for a paper titled Flock the Vote: A Feathered Approach to Political Analysis in Oklahoma with an abstract of Avian you heard the news? Our groundbreaking research has unraveled the compelling correlation between the Democratic votes for Senators in Oklahoma and the voluminous Google searches for 'where do birds go when it rains'. By delving into data from esteemed sources such as MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, and Google Trends, our findings are nothing short of tweet-worthy.
In this study, we utilized a sophisticated statistical approach and uncovered a correlation coefficient of 0.8478510, with a p-value less than 0.05 for the time frame of 2004 to 2020. This analysis chirps volumes about the interconnectedness between avian curiosity and political inclinations. It seems that when it pours, Oklahomans don't just flock together in polling booths; they also collectively ponder the whereabouts of our feathered friends.
Thus, our research not only sheds light on this captivating correlation but also serves as a gentle reminder that sometimes, the most unexpected and seemingly unrelated inquiries can lead to profound insights. After all, it's for the birds!

ChatGPT:

Oklahoma, political analysis, avian, Democratic votes, correlation, Google searches, MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, Google Trends, statistical approach, correlation coefficient, p-value, avian curiosity, political inclinations, polling booths, feathered friends

*There is a bunch of Python happening behind the scenes to turn this prompt sequence into a PDF.



Random correlation

Discover a new correlation

View all correlations

View all research papers

Report an error


Data details

Votes for Democratic Senators in Oklahoma
Detailed data title: Percentage of votes cast for Federal Democrat Senate candidates in Oklahoma
Source: MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse
See what else correlates with Votes for Democratic Senators in Oklahoma

Google searches for 'where do birds go when it rains'
Detailed data title: Relative volume of Google searches for 'where do birds go when it rains' (Worldwide, without quotes)
Source: Google Trends
Additional Info: Relative search volume (not absolute numbers)

See what else correlates with Google searches for 'where do birds go when it rains'

Correlation r = 0.8478510 (Pearson correlation coefficient)
Correlation is a measure of how much the variables move together. If it is 0.99, when one goes up the other goes up. If it is 0.02, the connection is very weak or non-existent. If it is -0.99, then when one goes up the other goes down. If it is 1.00, you probably messed up your correlation function.

r2 = 0.7188513 (Coefficient of determination)
This means 71.9% of the change in the one variable (i.e., Google searches for 'where do birds go when it rains') is predictable based on the change in the other (i.e., Votes for Democratic Senators in Oklahoma) over the 6 years from 2004 through 2020.

p < 0.05, which statistically significant(Null hypothesis significance test)
The p-value is 0.033. 0.0329629154505653860000000000
The p-value is a measure of how probable it is that we would randomly find a result this extreme. More specifically the p-value is a measure of how probable it is that we would randomly find a result this extreme if we had only tested one pair of variables one time.

But I am a p-villain. I absolutely did not test only one pair of variables one time. I correlated hundreds of millions of pairs of variables. I threw boatloads of data into an industrial-sized blender to find this correlation.

Who is going to stop me? p-value reporting doesn't require me to report how many calculations I had to go through in order to find a low p-value!
On average, you will find a correaltion as strong as 0.85 in 3.3% of random cases. Said differently, if you correlated 30 random variables Which I absolutely did.
with the same 5 degrees of freedom, Degrees of freedom is a measure of how many free components we are testing. In this case it is 5 because we have two variables measured over a period of 6 years. It's just the number of years minus ( the number of variables minus one ), which in this case simplifies to the number of years minus one.
you would randomly expect to find a correlation as strong as this one.

[ 0.12, 0.98 ] 95% correlation confidence interval (using the Fisher z-transformation)
The confidence interval is an estimate the range of the value of the correlation coefficient, using the correlation itself as an input. The values are meant to be the low and high end of the correlation coefficient with 95% confidence.

This one is a bit more complciated than the other calculations, but I include it because many people have been pushing for confidence intervals instead of p-value calculations (for example: NEJM. However, if you are dredging data, you can reliably find yourself in the 5%. That's my goal!


All values for the years included above: If I were being very sneaky, I could trim years from the beginning or end of the datasets to increase the correlation on some pairs of variables. I don't do that because there are already plenty of correlations in my database without monkeying with the years.

Still, sometimes one of the variables has more years of data available than the other. This page only shows the overlapping years. To see all the years, click on "See what else correlates with..." link above.
200420082010201420162020
Votes for Democratic Senators in Oklahoma (Percentage of votes)41.244939.183926.133257.53224.578732.7535
Google searches for 'where do birds go when it rains' (Rel. search volume)2.833331.083331.1666710.752.083331.91667




Why this works

  1. Data dredging: I have 25,237 variables in my database. I compare all these variables against each other to find ones that randomly match up. That's 636,906,169 correlation calculations! This is called “data dredging.” Instead of starting with a hypothesis and testing it, I instead abused the data to see what correlations shake out. It’s a dangerous way to go about analysis, because any sufficiently large dataset will yield strong correlations completely at random.
  2. Lack of causal connection: There is probably Because these pages are automatically generated, it's possible that the two variables you are viewing are in fact causually related. I take steps to prevent the obvious ones from showing on the site (I don't let data about the weather in one city correlate with the weather in a neighboring city, for example), but sometimes they still pop up. If they are related, cool! You found a loophole.
    no direct connection between these variables, despite what the AI says above. This is exacerbated by the fact that I used "Years" as the base variable. Lots of things happen in a year that are not related to each other! Most studies would use something like "one person" in stead of "one year" to be the "thing" studied.
  3. Observations not independent: For many variables, sequential years are not independent of each other. If a population of people is continuously doing something every day, there is no reason to think they would suddenly change how they are doing that thing on January 1. A simple Personally I don't find any p-value calculation to be 'simple,' but you know what I mean.
    p-value calculation does not take this into account, so mathematically it appears less probable than it really is.
  4. Very low n: There are not many data points included in this analysis. Even if the p-value is high, we should be suspicious of using so few datapoints in a correlation.
  5. Y-axis doesn't start at zero: I truncated the Y-axes of the graph above. I also used a line graph, which makes the visual connection stand out more than it deserves. Nothing against line graphs. They are great at telling a story when you have linear data! But visually it is deceptive because the only data is at the points on the graph, not the lines on the graph. In between each point, the data could have been doing anything. Like going for a random walk by itself!
    Mathematically what I showed is true, but it is intentionally misleading. Below is the same chart but with both Y-axes starting at zero.




Try it yourself

You can calculate the values on this page on your own! Try running the Python code to see the calculation results. Step 1: Download and install Python on your computer.

Step 2: Open a plaintext editor like Notepad and paste the code below into it.

Step 3: Save the file as "calculate_correlation.py" in a place you will remember, like your desktop. Copy the file location to your clipboard. On Windows, you can right-click the file and click "Properties," and then copy what comes after "Location:" As an example, on my computer the location is "C:\Users\tyler\Desktop"

Step 4: Open a command line window. For example, by pressing start and typing "cmd" and them pressing enter.

Step 5: Install the required modules by typing "pip install numpy", then pressing enter, then typing "pip install scipy", then pressing enter.

Step 6: Navigate to the location where you saved the Python file by using the "cd" command. For example, I would type "cd C:\Users\tyler\Desktop" and push enter.

Step 7: Run the Python script by typing "python calculate_correlation.py"

If you run into any issues, I suggest asking ChatGPT to walk you through installing Python and running the code below on your system. Try this question:

"Walk me through installing Python on my computer to run a script that uses scipy and numpy. Go step-by-step and ask me to confirm before moving on. Start by asking me questions about my operating system so that you know how to proceed. Assume I want the simplest installation with the latest version of Python and that I do not currently have any of the necessary elements installed. Remember to only give me one step per response and confirm I have done it before proceeding."


# These modules make it easier to perform the calculation
import numpy as np
from scipy import stats

# We'll define a function that we can call to return the correlation calculations
def calculate_correlation(array1, array2):

    # Calculate Pearson correlation coefficient and p-value
    correlation, p_value = stats.pearsonr(array1, array2)

    # Calculate R-squared as the square of the correlation coefficient
    r_squared = correlation**2

    return correlation, r_squared, p_value

# These are the arrays for the variables shown on this page, but you can modify them to be any two sets of numbers
array_1 = np.array([41.2449,39.1839,26.1332,57.532,24.5787,32.7535,])
array_2 = np.array([2.83333,1.08333,1.16667,10.75,2.08333,1.91667,])
array_1_name = "Votes for Democratic Senators in Oklahoma"
array_2_name = "Google searches for 'where do birds go when it rains'"

# Perform the calculation
print(f"Calculating the correlation between {array_1_name} and {array_2_name}...")
correlation, r_squared, p_value = calculate_correlation(array_1, array_2)

# Print the results
print("Correlation Coefficient:", correlation)
print("R-squared:", r_squared)
print("P-value:", p_value)



Reuseable content

You may re-use the images on this page for any purpose, even commercial purposes, without asking for permission. The only requirement is that you attribute Tyler Vigen. Attribution can take many different forms. If you leave the "tylervigen.com" link in the image, that satisfies it just fine. If you remove it and move it to a footnote, that's fine too. You can also just write "Charts courtesy of Tyler Vigen" at the bottom of an article.

You do not need to attribute "the spurious correlations website," and you don't even need to link here if you don't want to. I don't gain anything from pageviews. There are no ads on this site, there is nothing for sale, and I am not for hire.

For the record, I am just one person. Tyler Vigen, he/him/his. I do have degrees, but they should not go after my name unless you want to annoy my wife. If that is your goal, then go ahead and cite me as "Tyler Vigen, A.A. A.A.S. B.A. J.D." Otherwise it is just "Tyler Vigen."

When spoken, my last name is pronounced "vegan," like I don't eat meat.

Full license details.
For more on re-use permissions, or to get a signed release form, see tylervigen.com/permission.

Download images for these variables:


View another random correlation

How fun was this correlation?

I'm genuinely thankful for your rating!


Correlation ID: 5356 · Black Variable ID: 26446 · Red Variable ID: 1468
about · subscribe · emailme@tylervigen.com · twitter

CC BY 4.0