AI explanation
The 'i don't always' meme featured the Most Interesting Man in the World, who famously said, "I don't always drink beer, but when I do, I prefer Dos Equis." As this meme gained popularity, it led to a surge in Dos Equis sales. The increased demand for Dos Equis meant more production, requiring additional construction of facilities to meet the needs, thus leading to an increased demand for construction laborers in North Dakota.Create a meme inspired by the i dont always meme that in some way references The number of construction laborers in North Dakota. Try to emulate the style of the meme - don’t violate the copyright, just make it look and feel like the original meme.
This image generation prompt was also generated by AI, using the following sequence:
*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.
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 increases in Popularity of the 'i dont always' meme positively influenced The number of construction laborers in North Dakota.\Make it sound serious until the end.
AI academic paper
The I Don't Always Meme: A Construction of Popularity and Labor Force in North Dakota The Journal of Humorous Cultural Studies Jan 2024 |
Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You are a witty academic researcher. Your writing sounds like it belongs in a statistics journal.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 Popularity of the 'i dont always' meme and The number of construction laborers in North Dakota. Make it seem dry like academic research paper, but with lots of subtle hidden offhand remarks, jokes, goofy observations, and puns.
Make the title punny if you can come up with clever pun. If not, make it sound serious.
Your research team used data from Google Trends and Bureau of Larbor Statistics to assess this nagging question. You found a correlation coefficient of 0.9706808 and p < 0.01 for 2006 to 2022.
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]]
The "I Don't Always" Meme: A Construction of Popularity and Labor Force in North Dakota
[[ABSTRACT]]
This paper investigates the unexpected and offbeat relationship between the popularity of the "I Don't Always" meme and the number of construction laborers in North Dakota. Using data from Google Trends and the Bureau of Labor Statistics spanning from 2006 to 2022, we observed a correlation coefficient of 0.9706808 with p < 0.01, uncovering an intriguing connection that prompts us to put "I do always" trust in statistical analysis and wonder whether the meme has been silently constructing the labor force in the Peace Garden State. Our findings provide a comical yet empirical insight into the influence of internet memes on labor dynamics, shedding light on the unexplored realm of meme economics and the structural humor of labor trends. As our research unfolds, we invite the academic community to join us in donning our hard hats and meme-ingful discussions on this unexpected correlation.
Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You are a witty academic researcher. Your writing sounds like it belongs in a statistics journal.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 Popularity of the 'i dont always' meme and The number of construction laborers in North Dakota. Make it seem dry like academic research paper, but with lots of subtle hidden offhand remarks, jokes, goofy observations, and puns. Sneak in some jokes and clever puns about science, research, statistics, and the variables.
Here is the title and abstract of the paper:
[[TITLE]]
The "I Don't Always" Meme: A Construction of Popularity and Labor Force in North Dakota
[[ABSTRACT]]
This paper investigates the unexpected and offbeat relationship between the popularity of the "I Don't Always" meme and the number of construction laborers in North Dakota. Using data from Google Trends and the Bureau of Labor Statistics spanning from 2006 to 2022, we observed a correlation coefficient of 0.9706808 with p < 0.01, uncovering an intriguing connection that prompts us to put "I do always" trust in statistical analysis and wonder whether the meme has been silently constructing the labor force in the Peace Garden State. Our findings provide a comical yet empirical insight into the influence of internet memes on labor dynamics, shedding light on the unexplored realm of meme economics and the structural humor of labor trends. As our research unfolds, we invite the academic community to join us in donning our hard hats and meme-ingful discussions on this unexpected correlation.
-------
Your response should start like this:
[[INTRODUCTION]]
ChatGPT:
[[INTRODUCTION]]
The field of economics is often characterized by its serious demeanor and focus on quantitative analysis. However, in the digital age, the intersection of memes and economic trends presents an opportunity to inject some levity into our research pursuits. In light of this, our study delves into the curious relationship between the popularity of the "I Don't Always" meme and the number of construction laborers in North Dakota. Yes, you read that correctly - we are delving into the world of internet memes and their potential influence on labor force dynamics. It may seem far-fetched, but as we embark on this investigation, we encourage you to keep an open mind and a sense of humor as we navigate the statistical landscape.
The "I Don't Always" meme, featuring the iconic character "The Most Interesting Man in the World," has permeated the online sphere with its humorous and often absurd taglines. While it has garnered fame for its comedic value, our study aims to uncover whether this seemingly lighthearted digital content has quietly exerted an impact on the construction labor market in North Dakota. As we embark on this endeavor, we are reminded of a famous meme-inspired quote: "I don't always conduct statistical analyses, but when I do, I prefer intriguing and unexpected correlations".
The state of North Dakota, often referred to as the Peace Garden State, provides a unique backdrop for our investigation. Known for its expansive prairies and robust energy sector, North Dakota's labor force dynamics have been shaped by a multitude of factors. Nevertheless, our examination aims to shed light on the less conventional influences, exploring whether internet memes have made their mark on the state's labor landscape. In the words of the meme itself, "I don't always explore meme economics, but when I do, I uncover correlations that defy expectations."
As we embark on this unconventional journey, we invite you to join us in adopting a meme-ingful approach to economic analysis and statistical scrutiny. Our findings promise to bring a touch of whimsy to the often sober realm of economic research, and we look forward to uncovering the unexpected connections that lie beneath the surface of meme culture and labor trends. With hard hats on and statistical tools in hand, let us delve into the fascinating confluence of internet memes and labor dynamics, bearing in mind the ever-relevant meme-worthy wisdom: "I don't always conduct research, but when I do, I strive to find the humor in data-driven insights".
Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You are a witty academic researcher. Your writing sounds like it belongs in a statistics journal.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 Popularity of the 'i dont always' meme and The number of construction laborers in North Dakota. Make it seem dry like academic research paper, but with lots of subtle hidden offhand remarks, jokes, goofy observations, and puns.
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]]
The "I Don't Always" Meme: A Construction of Popularity and Labor Force in North Dakota
[[ABSTRACT]]
This paper investigates the unexpected and offbeat relationship between the popularity of the "I Don't Always" meme and the number of construction laborers in North Dakota. Using data from Google Trends and the Bureau of Labor Statistics spanning from 2006 to 2022, we observed a correlation coefficient of 0.9706808 with p < 0.01, uncovering an intriguing connection that prompts us to put "I do always" trust in statistical analysis and wonder whether the meme has been silently constructing the labor force in the Peace Garden State. Our findings provide a comical yet empirical insight into the influence of internet memes on labor dynamics, shedding light on the unexplored realm of meme economics and the structural humor of labor trends. As our research unfolds, we invite the academic community to join us in donning our hard hats and meme-ingful discussions on this unexpected correlation.
-------
And here is the introduction section that led to this literature review:
[[INTRODUCTION]]
The field of economics is often characterized by its serious demeanor and focus on quantitative analysis. However, in the digital age, the intersection of memes and economic trends presents an opportunity to inject some levity into our research pursuits. In light of this, our study delves into the curious relationship between the popularity of the "I Don't Always" meme and the number of construction laborers in North Dakota. Yes, you read that correctly - we are delving into the world of internet memes and their potential influence on labor force dynamics. It may seem far-fetched, but as we embark on this investigation, we encourage you to keep an open mind and a sense of humor as we navigate the statistical landscape.
The "I Don't Always" meme, featuring the iconic character "The Most Interesting Man in the World," has permeated the online sphere with its humorous and often absurd taglines. While it has garnered fame for its comedic value, our study aims to uncover whether this seemingly lighthearted digital content has quietly exerted an impact on the construction labor market in North Dakota. As we embark on this endeavor, we are reminded of a famous meme-inspired quote: "I don't always conduct statistical analyses, but when I do, I prefer intriguing and unexpected correlations".
The state of North Dakota, often referred to as the Peace Garden State, provides a unique backdrop for our investigation. Known for its expansive prairies and robust energy sector, North Dakota's labor force dynamics have been shaped by a multitude of factors. Nevertheless, our examination aims to shed light on the less conventional influences, exploring whether internet memes have made their mark on the state's labor landscape. In the words of the meme itself, "I don't always explore meme economics, but when I do, I uncover correlations that defy expectations."
As we embark on this unconventional journey, we invite you to join us in adopting a meme-ingful approach to economic analysis and statistical scrutiny. Our findings promise to bring a touch of whimsy to the often sober realm of economic research, and we look forward to uncovering the unexpected connections that lie beneath the surface of meme culture and labor trends. With hard hats on and statistical tools in hand, let us delve into the fascinating confluence of internet memes and labor dynamics, bearing in mind the ever-relevant meme-worthy wisdom: "I don't always conduct research, but when I do, I strive to find the humor in data-driven insights".
-------
Your response should start like this:
[[LITERATURE REVIEW]]
ChatGPT:
[[LITERATURE REVIEW]]
The present literature review is structured to provide a comprehensive overview of the relevant scholarly research and theoretical underpinnings pertaining to the peculiar link between the surging popularity of the "I Don't Always" meme and the presence of construction laborers in the state of North Dakota. While the initial foray into this inquiry may elicit bemusement, it is imperative to embark upon this exploratory odyssey with a discerning eye for the unexpected and a penchant for unraveling the comedic enigma that underlies this unconventional correlation.
Smith (2015), in their seminal work "Economic Implications of Internet Memes: Beyond LOLcats," delves into the uncharted terrain of meme economics, laying the groundwork for the examination of comical digital phenomena and their potential impact on economic spheres. Their inquiry into the whimsical yet potent influence of internet memes on consumer behavior and labor markets sets the stage for our own investigation, igniting a spark of scholarly curiosity in the interface between internet humor and labor force dynamics.
In a similar vein, Doe (2018) ponders the metaphorical construction of digital culture in "Viral Ventilation: Unraveling the Threads of Internet Memes," offering an insightful reckoning of the ways in which memes permeate the societal fabric and, in turn, trickle into the tapestry of labor trends. Through a nuanced analysis of viral dissemination and cultural diffusion, Doe highlights the potential for memes to surreptitiously infiltrate realms beyond the boundaries of internet discourse, thus priming the theoretical groundwork for our exploration into the unexpected ties between the "I Don't Always" meme and the construction labor milieu in North Dakota.
Jones (2020) further contributes to the discourse with their work "Memes, Mirth, and Money: A Jest at Economic Theory," in which they espouse a thought-provoking thesis on the playful yet potent repercussions of internet memes on economic phenomena. Jones' witty exposition on the idiosyncrasies of meme culture serves as a poignant reminder of the latent influence that memes may wield, challenging traditional economic paradigms and prompting a reevaluation of the interconnectedness between digital jest and real-world labor dynamics.
Whilst these scholarly contributions have laid a sturdy foundation for the examination of meme economics and its implications for labor dynamics, it is worth noting the unexpected sources of inspiration that have surreptitiously crept into the scholarly periphery. Admittedly, the conceptual intersection of construction labor and meme popularity appears vastly unexplored, rendering it an uncharted territory infused with whimsy and potential mischievous connections.
In this vein, the research team cannot help but draw parallels to real-world narratives and fictional accounts that, though seemingly disconnected, harbor an intangible semblance to the surprising correlation at hand. Works such as "Economic Woes and Wit: A Cultural Critique Through Literary Lenses" by A. Reader (2016) point to the intersecting realms of economic discourse and humorous insight, laying bare the possibility of unforeseen links between seemingly incongruous phenomena. Furthermore, fictional narratives such as Terry Pratchett's "Making Money" and Douglas Adams' "The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy" offer tongue-in-cheek glimpses into the complexities of economics and absurd realities, echoing the unanticipated interplay between humor, economic vicissitudes, and the idyllic state of North Dakota.
Additionally, the research team acknowledges the intriguing parallels that board games such as "Monopoly" and "The Settlers of Catan" offer to our current investigation, hinting at the playful negotiations and strategic maneuvers that underpin labor markets and economic exchanges. These subtle echoes of amusement and strategic witticism lend an unexpected layer of depth to our examination, fortifying the notion that humor and labor dynamics may indeed converge in unforeseen and humorous ways.
As the literature review unfurls, it is evident that the confluence of meme culture and labor dynamics beckons us into a labyrinth of unexpected connections, compelling us to embrace a juxtaposition of incongruity and statistical inquiry. Through these seemingly disparate yet curiously intertwined strands of scholarship and inspiration, the research team endeavors to navigate the uncharted waters of meme economics with a blend of levity, analytical rigor, and an unwavering commitment to the pursuit of scholarly jocularity.
Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You are a witty academic researcher. Your writing sounds like it belongs in a statistics journal.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 Popularity of the 'i dont always' meme and The number of construction laborers in North Dakota. Make it seem dry like academic research paper, but with lots of subtle hidden offhand remarks, jokes, goofy observations, and puns. 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 Google Trends and Bureau of Larbor Statistics . You used data from 2006 to 2022
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]]
The "I Don't Always" Meme: A Construction of Popularity and Labor Force in North Dakota
[[ABSTRACT]]
This paper investigates the unexpected and offbeat relationship between the popularity of the "I Don't Always" meme and the number of construction laborers in North Dakota. Using data from Google Trends and the Bureau of Labor Statistics spanning from 2006 to 2022, we observed a correlation coefficient of 0.9706808 with p < 0.01, uncovering an intriguing connection that prompts us to put "I do always" trust in statistical analysis and wonder whether the meme has been silently constructing the labor force in the Peace Garden State. Our findings provide a comical yet empirical insight into the influence of internet memes on labor dynamics, shedding light on the unexplored realm of meme economics and the structural humor of labor trends. As our research unfolds, we invite the academic community to join us in donning our hard hats and meme-ingful discussions on this unexpected correlation.
[[INTRODUCTION]]
The field of economics is often characterized by its serious demeanor and focus on quantitative analysis. However, in the digital age, the intersection of memes and economic trends presents an opportunity to inject some levity into our research pursuits. In light of this, our study delves into the curious relationship between the popularity of the "I Don't Always" meme and the number of construction laborers in North Dakota. Yes, you read that correctly - we are delving into the world of internet memes and their potential influence on labor force dynamics. It may seem far-fetched, but as we embark on this investigation, we encourage you to keep an open mind and a sense of humor as we navigate the statistical landscape.
The "I Don't Always" meme, featuring the iconic character "The Most Interesting Man in the World," has permeated the online sphere with its humorous and often absurd taglines. While it has garnered fame for its comedic value, our study aims to uncover whether this seemingly lighthearted digital content has quietly exerted an impact on the construction labor market in North Dakota. As we embark on this endeavor, we are reminded of a famous meme-inspired quote: "I don't always conduct statistical analyses, but when I do, I prefer intriguing and unexpected correlations".
The state of North Dakota, often referred to as the Peace Garden State, provides a unique backdrop for our investigation. Known for its expansive prairies and robust energy sector, North Dakota's labor force dynamics have been shaped by a multitude of factors. Nevertheless, our examination aims to shed light on the less conventional influences, exploring whether internet memes have made their mark on the state's labor landscape. In the words of the meme itself, "I don't always explore meme economics, but when I do, I uncover correlations that defy expectations."
As we embark on this unconventional journey, we invite you to join us in adopting a meme-ingful approach to economic analysis and statistical scrutiny. Our findings promise to bring a touch of whimsy to the often sober realm of economic research, and we look forward to uncovering the unexpected connections that lie beneath the surface of meme culture and labor trends. With hard hats on and statistical tools in hand, let us delve into the fascinating confluence of internet memes and labor dynamics, bearing in mind the ever-relevant meme-worthy wisdom: "I don't always conduct research, but when I do, I strive to find the humor in data-driven insights".
-------
Your response should start like this:
[[METHODOLOGY]]
ChatGPT:
[[METHODOLOGY]]
In order to unravel the enigmatic connection between the popularity of the "I Don't Always" meme and the number of construction laborers in North Dakota, our research team undertook a robust and, dare we say, memeorable methodology. We embarked on a quest to harness the power of data from the abyss of the internet, seeking to marry the realms of statistical analysis and meme culture. By employing an eclectic mix of statistical wizardry and internet sleuthing, we endeavored to extract insights from the depths of Google Trends and the Bureau of Labor Statistics.
Our first step involved delving into the vast expanse of Google Trends, where the ebbs and flows of meme popularity and search interest converge. We meticulously scoured the digital domain for "I Don't Always" meme data, leveraging the prowess of search analytics to gauge its allure across the years. Through this method, we aimed to capture the zeitgeist of meme culture and distill the essence of its influence on the virtual tapestry of the interwebs.
Simultaneously, our intrepid researchers ventured into the labyrinthine archives of the Bureau of Labor Statistics, sifting through the statistical debris to unearth the trove of labor force data pertaining to North Dakota. With our fingers on the pulse of employment trends, we sought to decipher the labor landscape and uncover any underlying correlations that may have surreptitiously emerged amidst the data.
Once the data were in our possession, we harnessed the might of statistical tools to perform correlation analyses and construct scatterplots that would lay bare the relationship between the "I Don't Always" meme and the number of construction laborers in North Dakota. Through the application of rigorous statistical methodologies, we endeavored to unveil the coalescence of humor and labor dynamics, all while maintaining a sense of scholarly whimsy befitting the unprecedented nature of our endeavor.
To ensure the robustness of our findings, we extended our analysis to encompass the entire span from 2006 to 2022, allowing us to capture the evolutionary trajectory of the "I Don't Always" meme and its potential interplay with the labor force in North Dakota. By casting our net wide across the temporal continuum, we sought to extract meaningful patterns from the ebb and flow of internet memes and labor market dynamics, all the while embracing the unpredictability that comes with venturing into uncharted research territory.
In summary, our methodology stood as a testament to the marriage of empirical rigor and meme-inspired curiosity, embodying the ethos of scholarly jest in the pursuit of groundbreaking insights. Armed with data, statistical acumen, and a dash of meme magic, our research team ventured forth into this whimsical inquiry, bringing a touch of levity to the realm of economic analysis and statistical scrutiny.
Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You are a witty academic researcher. Your writing sounds like it belongs in a statistics journal.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 Popularity of the 'i dont always' meme and The number of construction laborers in North Dakota. Make it seem dry like academic research paper, but with lots of subtle hidden offhand remarks, jokes, goofy observations, and puns. 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 Google Trends and Bureau of Larbor Statistics .
For the time period 2006 to 2022, you found a correlation 0.9706808, r-squared of 0.9422213, and p < 0.01.
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]]
The "I Don't Always" Meme: A Construction of Popularity and Labor Force in North Dakota
[[ABSTRACT]]
This paper investigates the unexpected and offbeat relationship between the popularity of the "I Don't Always" meme and the number of construction laborers in North Dakota. Using data from Google Trends and the Bureau of Labor Statistics spanning from 2006 to 2022, we observed a correlation coefficient of 0.9706808 with p < 0.01, uncovering an intriguing connection that prompts us to put "I do always" trust in statistical analysis and wonder whether the meme has been silently constructing the labor force in the Peace Garden State. Our findings provide a comical yet empirical insight into the influence of internet memes on labor dynamics, shedding light on the unexplored realm of meme economics and the structural humor of labor trends. As our research unfolds, we invite the academic community to join us in donning our hard hats and meme-ingful discussions on this unexpected correlation.
-------
And here is the methodology section that led to this result:
[[METHODOLOGY]]
The field of economics is often characterized by its serious demeanor and focus on quantitative analysis. However, in the digital age, the intersection of memes and economic trends presents an opportunity to inject some levity into our research pursuits. In light of this, our study delves into the curious relationship between the popularity of the "I Don't Always" meme and the number of construction laborers in North Dakota. Yes, you read that correctly - we are delving into the world of internet memes and their potential influence on labor force dynamics. It may seem far-fetched, but as we embark on this investigation, we encourage you to keep an open mind and a sense of humor as we navigate the statistical landscape.
The "I Don't Always" meme, featuring the iconic character "The Most Interesting Man in the World," has permeated the online sphere with its humorous and often absurd taglines. While it has garnered fame for its comedic value, our study aims to uncover whether this seemingly lighthearted digital content has quietly exerted an impact on the construction labor market in North Dakota. As we embark on this endeavor, we are reminded of a famous meme-inspired quote: "I don't always conduct statistical analyses, but when I do, I prefer intriguing and unexpected correlations".
The state of North Dakota, often referred to as the Peace Garden State, provides a unique backdrop for our investigation. Known for its expansive prairies and robust energy sector, North Dakota's labor force dynamics have been shaped by a multitude of factors. Nevertheless, our examination aims to shed light on the less conventional influences, exploring whether internet memes have made their mark on the state's labor landscape. In the words of the meme itself, "I don't always explore meme economics, but when I do, I uncover correlations that defy expectations."
As we embark on this unconventional journey, we invite you to join us in adopting a meme-ingful approach to economic analysis and statistical scrutiny. Our findings promise to bring a touch of whimsy to the often sober realm of economic research, and we look forward to uncovering the unexpected connections that lie beneath the surface of meme culture and labor trends. With hard hats on and statistical tools in hand, let us delve into the fascinating confluence of internet memes and labor dynamics, bearing in mind the ever-relevant meme-worthy wisdom: "I don't always conduct research, but when I do, I strive to find the humor in data-driven insights".
-------
Your response should start like this:
[[RESULTS]]
ChatGPT:
[[RESULTS]]
The analysis yielded a remarkably strong correlation of 0.9706808 between the popularity of the "I Don't Always" meme and the number of construction laborers in North Dakota. This correlation was accompanied by an r-squared value of 0.9422213, underscoring the robustness of the relationship observed. The p-value of less than 0.01 further attests to the significance of this unexpected connection, prompting us to scrutinize whether meme culture has been surreptitiously influencing the labor force in the Peace Garden State.
Figure 1 presents a scatterplot illustrating the striking correlation between the variables, depicting a trend that would make even the most intriguing man in the world raise an eyebrow in bemusement. The scatterplot showcases the alignment between the increasing popularity of the "I Don't Always" meme and the concurrent rise in the number of construction laborers, inviting a chuckle at the unanticipated harmony between online humor and real-world labor dynamics.
Our results, though initially met with raised eyebrows and quizzical looks, have provided empirical evidence of a connection that invites a humorous yet contemplative outlook on the influence of internet memes on the labor market. The statistically significant correlation prompts us to entertain the notion that perhaps the "Dos Equis" man's enigmatic persona has quietly wielded a tangible impact on the labor force dynamics in North Dakota. These findings nudge us to contemplate the omnipresent influence of digital culture on socioeconomic phenomena, compelling us to adopt a meme-ingful approach to economic analysis and labor trends.
In conclusion, our statistical exploration has brought to light an unexpected and amusing connection between the "I Don't Always" meme and the construction labor force in North Dakota, offering a lighthearted yet thought-provoking glimpse into the interplay between internet culture and economic dynamics. As we stand on the precipice of a new era of meme-infused economic analysis, we invite fellow researchers to join us in embracing the levity and insight that this peculiar relationship has to offer. After all, in the words of the "Most Interesting Man," "I don't always expect statistical correlations, but when I do, I find them in the most unexpected places."
Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You are a witty academic researcher. Your writing sounds like it belongs in a statistics journal.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 Popularity of the 'i dont always' meme and The number of construction laborers in North Dakota. Make it seem dry like academic research paper, but with lots of subtle hidden offhand remarks, jokes, goofy observations, and puns. 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]]
The "I Don't Always" Meme: A Construction of Popularity and Labor Force in North Dakota
[[ABSTRACT]]
This paper investigates the unexpected and offbeat relationship between the popularity of the "I Don't Always" meme and the number of construction laborers in North Dakota. Using data from Google Trends and the Bureau of Labor Statistics spanning from 2006 to 2022, we observed a correlation coefficient of 0.9706808 with p < 0.01, uncovering an intriguing connection that prompts us to put "I do always" trust in statistical analysis and wonder whether the meme has been silently constructing the labor force in the Peace Garden State. Our findings provide a comical yet empirical insight into the influence of internet memes on labor dynamics, shedding light on the unexplored realm of meme economics and the structural humor of labor trends. As our research unfolds, we invite the academic community to join us in donning our hard hats and meme-ingful discussions on this unexpected correlation.
[[LITERATURE REVIEW]]
The present literature review is structured to provide a comprehensive overview of the relevant scholarly research and theoretical underpinnings pertaining to the peculiar link between the surging popularity of the "I Don't Always" meme and the presence of construction laborers in the state of North Dakota. While the initial foray into this inquiry may elicit bemusement, it is imperative to embark upon this exploratory odyssey with a discerning eye for the unexpected and a penchant for unraveling the comedic enigma that underlies this unconventional correlation.
Smith (2015), in their seminal work "Economic Implications of Internet Memes: Beyond LOLcats," delves into the uncharted terrain of meme economics, laying the groundwork for the examination of comical digital phenomena and their potential impact on economic spheres. Their inquiry into the whimsical yet potent influence of internet memes on consumer behavior and labor markets sets the stage for our own investigation, igniting a spark of scholarly curiosity in the interface between internet humor and labor force dynamics.
In a similar vein, Doe (2018) ponders the metaphorical construction of digital culture in "Viral Ventilation: Unraveling the Threads of Internet Memes," offering an insightful reckoning of the ways in which memes permeate the societal fabric and, in turn, trickle into the tapestry of labor trends. Through a nuanced analysis of viral dissemination and cultural diffusion, Doe highlights the potential for memes to surreptitiously infiltrate realms beyond the boundaries of internet discourse, thus priming the theoretical groundwork for our exploration into the unexpected ties between the "I Don't Always" meme and the construction labor milieu in North Dakota.
Jones (2020) further contributes to the discourse with their work "Memes, Mirth, and Money: A Jest at Economic Theory," in which they espouse a thought-provoking thesis on the playful yet potent repercussions of internet memes on economic phenomena. Jones' witty exposition on the idiosyncrasies of meme culture serves as a poignant reminder of the latent influence that memes may wield, challenging traditional economic paradigms and prompting a reevaluation of the interconnectedness between digital jest and real-world labor dynamics.
Whilst these scholarly contributions have laid a sturdy foundation for the examination of meme economics and its implications for labor dynamics, it is worth noting the unexpected sources of inspiration that have surreptitiously crept into the scholarly periphery. Admittedly, the conceptual intersection of construction labor and meme popularity appears vastly unexplored, rendering it an uncharted territory infused with whimsy and potential mischievous connections.
In this vein, the research team cannot help but draw parallels to real-world narratives and fictional accounts that, though seemingly disconnected, harbor an intangible semblance to the surprising correlation at hand. Works such as "Economic Woes and Wit: A Cultural Critique Through Literary Lenses" by A. Reader (2016) point to the intersecting realms of economic discourse and humorous insight, laying bare the possibility of unforeseen links between seemingly incongruous phenomena. Furthermore, fictional narratives such as Terry Pratchett's "Making Money" and Douglas Adams' "The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy" offer tongue-in-cheek glimpses into the complexities of economics and absurd realities, echoing the unanticipated interplay between humor, economic vicissitudes, and the idyllic state of North Dakota.
Additionally, the research team acknowledges the intriguing parallels that board games such as "Monopoly" and "The Settlers of Catan" offer to our current investigation, hinting at the playful negotiations and strategic maneuvers that underpin labor markets and economic exchanges. These subtle echoes of amusement and strategic witticism lend an unexpected layer of depth to our examination, fortifying the notion that humor and labor dynamics may indeed converge in unforeseen and humorous ways.
As the literature review unfurls, it is evident that the confluence of meme culture and labor dynamics beckons us into a labyrinth of unexpected connections, compelling us to embrace a juxtaposition of incongruity and statistical inquiry. Through these seemingly disparate yet curiously intertwined strands of scholarship and inspiration, the research team endeavors to navigate the uncharted waters of meme economics with a blend of levity, analytical rigor, and an unwavering commitment to the pursuit of scholarly jocularity.
[[RESULTS]]
The analysis yielded a remarkably strong correlation of 0.9706808 between the popularity of the "I Don't Always" meme and the number of construction laborers in North Dakota. This correlation was accompanied by an r-squared value of 0.9422213, underscoring the robustness of the relationship observed. The p-value of less than 0.01 further attests to the significance of this unexpected connection, prompting us to scrutinize whether meme culture has been surreptitiously influencing the labor force in the Peace Garden State.
Figure 1 presents a scatterplot illustrating the striking correlation between the variables, depicting a trend that would make even the most intriguing man in the world raise an eyebrow in bemusement. The scatterplot showcases the alignment between the increasing popularity of the "I Don't Always" meme and the concurrent rise in the number of construction laborers, inviting a chuckle at the unanticipated harmony between online humor and real-world labor dynamics.
Our results, though initially met with raised eyebrows and quizzical looks, have provided empirical evidence of a connection that invites a humorous yet contemplative outlook on the influence of internet memes on the labor market. The statistically significant correlation prompts us to entertain the notion that perhaps the "Dos Equis" man's enigmatic persona has quietly wielded a tangible impact on the labor force dynamics in North Dakota. These findings nudge us to contemplate the omnipresent influence of digital culture on socioeconomic phenomena, compelling us to adopt a meme-ingful approach to economic analysis and labor trends.
In conclusion, our statistical exploration has brought to light an unexpected and amusing connection between the "I Don't Always" meme and the construction labor force in North Dakota, offering a lighthearted yet thought-provoking glimpse into the interplay between internet culture and economic dynamics. As we stand on the precipice of a new era of meme-infused economic analysis, we invite fellow researchers to join us in embracing the levity and insight that this peculiar relationship has to offer. After all, in the words of the "Most Interesting Man," "I don't always expect statistical correlations, but when I do, I find them in the most unexpected places."
-------
Your response should start like this:
[[DISCUSSION]]
ChatGPT:
[[DISCUSSION]]
The remarkably strong correlation observed between the surging popularity of the "I Don't Always" meme and the increasing number of construction laborers in North Dakota arguably leaves us in a state of bemusement akin to finding unexpected humor in labor force dynamics. Our statistical analysis has propelled us into a whimsical odyssey through the uncharted terrain of meme economics, underscoring the profound and, dare we say, rib-tickling influence that internet memes may wield on the construction labor milieu.
Our findings corroborate the prior research by Smith (2015) and Doe (2018), who set the stage for unveiling the unforeseen influence of internet memes on economic domains. While one might assume that memes are merely a source of amusement, our research unearths a statistical confluence that invites us to construct a bridge between the virtual world of internet humor and the tangible realities of labor dynamics. It appears that the "Dos Equis" man's enigmatic presence has not only captured the imagination of internet denizens but has quietly orchestrated a tangible impact on the labor force in the Peace Garden State.
The robust correlation coefficient and the r-squared value serve as a testament to the undeniable resonance between meme popularity and construction labor trends, evoking a wry smile as we recognize the comedic synchronicity between the "Dos Equis" man's iconic catchphrase and labor force dynamics. It seems that this unexpected correlation has, in fact, constructed a bridge between statistical inquiry and an unbridled sense of humor, inviting us to embrace the fusion of levity and analytical precision in our exploration of meme economics.
Furthermore, our results echo the innovative work of Jones (2020), who humorously challenged traditional economic paradigms and teased out the playful yet potent repercussions of internet memes on economic phenomena. Indeed, the line between jocularity and genuine economic influence appears to be as blurred as the outline of a meme in low resolution. This correlation prompts a reevaluation of the interconnectedness between digital jest and real-world labor dynamics, nudging us to embrace a meme-ingful approach to economic analysis and labor trends.
As we stand on the precipice of a new era of meme-infused economic analysis, we must acknowledge the unexpected sources of inspiration that tend to surreptitiously infiltrate scholarly discourse. The parallels drawn to real-world narratives and fictional accounts, although seemingly tangential, harbor an intangible semblance to the surprising correlation at hand. The subtle echoes of amusement and strategic witticism offer a playful reminder of the unanticipated interplay between humor, economic vicissitudes, and the picturesque landscape of North Dakota.
While our investigation has shed light on this whimsical correlation, it is imperative to exercise caution in inferring causation from correlation, especially in the realm of unexpected and quirky connections. Future research endeavors may delve into elucidating the underlying mechanisms that propagate this amiable association, unveiling the subtle threads that intertwine the "I Don't Always" meme with the labor dynamics in North Dakota. This calls for a continued scholarly exploration, conducted with a discerning eye for the unexpected and a penchant for unraveling the comedic enigma that underlies this unconventional correlation.
In closing, the unexpected and endearing connection between the "I Don't Always" meme and the construction labor force in North Dakota beckons us to indulge in a lighthearted yet contemplative exploration of the interplay between internet culture and economic dynamics. Our research underscores the capacity for memes to construct an unconventional yet statistically significant bridge between virtual hilarity and tangible labor market trends, inviting us to foster a meme-ingful approach to scholarly inquiry and economic analysis. After all, in the words of the "Most Interesting Man," "I don't always expect statistical correlations, but when I do, I find them in the most unexpected places."
Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You are a witty academic researcher. Your writing sounds like it belongs in a statistics journal.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 Popularity of the 'i dont always' meme and The number of construction laborers in North Dakota. Make it seem dry like academic research paper, but with lots of subtle hidden offhand remarks, jokes, goofy observations, and puns. 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]]
The "I Don't Always" Meme: A Construction of Popularity and Labor Force in North Dakota
[[ABSTRACT]]
This paper investigates the unexpected and offbeat relationship between the popularity of the "I Don't Always" meme and the number of construction laborers in North Dakota. Using data from Google Trends and the Bureau of Labor Statistics spanning from 2006 to 2022, we observed a correlation coefficient of 0.9706808 with p < 0.01, uncovering an intriguing connection that prompts us to put "I do always" trust in statistical analysis and wonder whether the meme has been silently constructing the labor force in the Peace Garden State. Our findings provide a comical yet empirical insight into the influence of internet memes on labor dynamics, shedding light on the unexplored realm of meme economics and the structural humor of labor trends. As our research unfolds, we invite the academic community to join us in donning our hard hats and meme-ingful discussions on this unexpected correlation.
[[INTRDUCTION]]
The field of economics is often characterized by its serious demeanor and focus on quantitative analysis. However, in the digital age, the intersection of memes and economic trends presents an opportunity to inject some levity into our research pursuits. In light of this, our study delves into the curious relationship between the popularity of the "I Don't Always" meme and the number of construction laborers in North Dakota. Yes, you read that correctly - we are delving into the world of internet memes and their potential influence on labor force dynamics. It may seem far-fetched, but as we embark on this investigation, we encourage you to keep an open mind and a sense of humor as we navigate the statistical landscape.
The "I Don't Always" meme, featuring the iconic character "The Most Interesting Man in the World," has permeated the online sphere with its humorous and often absurd taglines. While it has garnered fame for its comedic value, our study aims to uncover whether this seemingly lighthearted digital content has quietly exerted an impact on the construction labor market in North Dakota. As we embark on this endeavor, we are reminded of a famous meme-inspired quote: "I don't always conduct statistical analyses, but when I do, I prefer intriguing and unexpected correlations".
The state of North Dakota, often referred to as the Peace Garden State, provides a unique backdrop for our investigation. Known for its expansive prairies and robust energy sector, North Dakota's labor force dynamics have been shaped by a multitude of factors. Nevertheless, our examination aims to shed light on the less conventional influences, exploring whether internet memes have made their mark on the state's labor landscape. In the words of the meme itself, "I don't always explore meme economics, but when I do, I uncover correlations that defy expectations."
As we embark on this unconventional journey, we invite you to join us in adopting a meme-ingful approach to economic analysis and statistical scrutiny. Our findings promise to bring a touch of whimsy to the often sober realm of economic research, and we look forward to uncovering the unexpected connections that lie beneath the surface of meme culture and labor trends. With hard hats on and statistical tools in hand, let us delve into the fascinating confluence of internet memes and labor dynamics, bearing in mind the ever-relevant meme-worthy wisdom: "I don't always conduct research, but when I do, I strive to find the humor in data-driven insights".
[[RESULTS]]
The analysis yielded a remarkably strong correlation of 0.9706808 between the popularity of the "I Don't Always" meme and the number of construction laborers in North Dakota. This correlation was accompanied by an r-squared value of 0.9422213, underscoring the robustness of the relationship observed. The p-value of less than 0.01 further attests to the significance of this unexpected connection, prompting us to scrutinize whether meme culture has been surreptitiously influencing the labor force in the Peace Garden State.
Figure 1 presents a scatterplot illustrating the striking correlation between the variables, depicting a trend that would make even the most intriguing man in the world raise an eyebrow in bemusement. The scatterplot showcases the alignment between the increasing popularity of the "I Don't Always" meme and the concurrent rise in the number of construction laborers, inviting a chuckle at the unanticipated harmony between online humor and real-world labor dynamics.
Our results, though initially met with raised eyebrows and quizzical looks, have provided empirical evidence of a connection that invites a humorous yet contemplative outlook on the influence of internet memes on the labor market. The statistically significant correlation prompts us to entertain the notion that perhaps the "Dos Equis" man's enigmatic persona has quietly wielded a tangible impact on the labor force dynamics in North Dakota. These findings nudge us to contemplate the omnipresent influence of digital culture on socioeconomic phenomena, compelling us to adopt a meme-ingful approach to economic analysis and labor trends.
In conclusion, our statistical exploration has brought to light an unexpected and amusing connection between the "I Don't Always" meme and the construction labor force in North Dakota, offering a lighthearted yet thought-provoking glimpse into the interplay between internet culture and economic dynamics. As we stand on the precipice of a new era of meme-infused economic analysis, we invite fellow researchers to join us in embracing the levity and insight that this peculiar relationship has to offer. After all, in the words of the "Most Interesting Man," "I don't always expect statistical correlations, but when I do, I find them in the most unexpected places."
-------
Your response should start like this:
[[CONCLUSION]]
ChatGPT:
[[CONCLUSION]]
In the illustrious words of the enigmatic "Most Interesting Man," our exploration has unveiled a correlation that is truly "in the most unexpected places." Our findings have provided empirical evidence of an eyebrow-raising relationship between the "I Don't Always" meme and the number of construction laborers in North Dakota. The robust correlation coefficient of 0.9706808, accompanied by an r-squared value of 0.9422213, remains unyielding in its statistical quirkiness. As we traverse the uncharted territory of meme economics and labor dynamics, we are left pondering whether the Dos Equis man’s alluring persona has indeed constructed tangible impacts on the labor force in the Peace Garden State. The scatterplot, portraying the harmonious alignment of meme popularity and labor trends, beckons a chuckle at the confounding alliance between online humor and real-world workforce composition.
This study beckons us to embrace a meme-ingful approach to economic analysis and labor trends. Despite the initial skepticism, our investigation has revealed an unexpected and amusing connection that peeks beneath the surface of internet culture and delves into the structural humor of labor dynamics. As we don our hard hats and immerse ourselves in statistical exploration, we invite our colleagues to join us in celebrating the levity and insight that this peculiar relationship has to offer. "I don't always trust statistical analyses," but when I do, I prefer them with a side of unexpected correlations.
In the depths of this meme-infused economic analysis, we can confidently declare that further research in this area is unnecessary. After all, the most interesting connections have been revealed, and it's time to embrace the whimsy that leaves us chuckling and contemplating in equal measure.
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 The I Don't Always Meme: A Construction of Popularity and Labor Force in North Dakota. Respond only with the name of a fictional academic journal.
ChatGPT:
The Journal of Humorous Cultural Studies
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 The I Don't Always Meme: A Construction of Popularity and Labor Force in North Dakota. Respond only with the name of a fictional organization.
ChatGPT:
The Institute of Meme Studies and Cultural Analysis
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 The I Don't Always Meme: A Construction of Popularity and Labor Force in North Dakota with an abstract of This paper investigates the unexpected and offbeat relationship between the popularity of the "I Don't Always" meme and the number of construction laborers in North Dakota. Using data from Google Trends and the Bureau of Labor Statistics spanning from 2006 to 2022, we observed a correlation coefficient of 0.9706808 with p < 0.01, uncovering an intriguing connection that prompts us to put "I do always" trust in statistical analysis and wonder whether the meme has been silently constructing the labor force in the Peace Garden State. Our findings provide a comical yet empirical insight into the influence of internet memes on labor dynamics, shedding light on the unexplored realm of meme economics and the structural humor of labor trends. As our research unfolds, we invite the academic community to join us in donning our hard hats and meme-ingful discussions on this unexpected correlation.
ChatGPT:
"I Don't Always" meme, construction labor force, North Dakota, Google Trends, Bureau of Labor Statistics, meme popularity, statistical analysis, meme economics, labor trends, internet memes, correlation coefficient, Peace Garden State, labor dynamics
*There is a bunch of Python happening behind the scenes to turn this prompt sequence into a PDF.
Discover a new correlation
View all correlations
View all research papers
Report an error
Data details
Popularity of the 'i dont always' memeDetailed data title: Relative volume of Google searches for 'i dont always meme' (without quotes, in the United States)
Source: Google Trends
Additional Info: Relative search volume is a unique Google thing; the shape of the chart is accurate but the actual numbers are meaningless.
See what else correlates with Popularity of the 'i dont always' meme
The number of construction laborers in North Dakota
Detailed data title: BLS estimate of construction laborers in North Dakota
Source: Bureau of Larbor Statistics
See what else correlates with The number of construction laborers in North Dakota
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 = 0.9422213 (Coefficient of determination)
This means 94.2% of the change in the one variable (i.e., The number of construction laborers in North Dakota) is predictable based on the change in the other (i.e., Popularity of the 'i dont always' meme) over the 17 years from 2006 through 2022.
p < 0.01, which is statistically significant(Null hypothesis significance test)
The p-value is 1.07E-10. 0.0000000001074710169493142100
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 0.97 in 1.07E-8% of random cases. Said differently, if you correlated 9,304,834,256 random variables You don't actually need 9 billion variables to find a correlation like this one. I don't have that many variables in my database. You can also correlate variables that are not independent. I do this a lot.
p-value calculations are useful for understanding the probability of a result happening by chance. They are most useful when used to highlight the risk of a fluke outcome. For example, if you calculate a p-value of 0.30, the risk that the result is a fluke is high. It is good to know that! But there are lots of ways to get a p-value of less than 0.01, as evidenced by this project.
In this particular case, the values are so extreme as to be meaningless. That's why no one reports p-values with specificity after they drop below 0.01.
Just to be clear: I'm being completely transparent about the calculations. There is no math trickery. This is just how statistics shakes out when you calculate hundreds of millions of random correlations.
with the same 16 degrees of freedom, Degrees of freedom is a measure of how many free components we are testing. In this case it is 16 because we have two variables measured over a period of 17 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.
[ 0.92, 0.99 ] 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.
2006 | 2007 | 2008 | 2009 | 2010 | 2011 | 2012 | 2013 | 2014 | 2015 | 2016 | 2017 | 2018 | 2019 | 2020 | 2021 | 2022 | |
Popularity of the 'i dont always' meme (Relative popularity) | 7.08333 | 3.5 | 2.54545 | 3.55556 | 3.8 | 9.81818 | 38.8333 | 58.25 | 53.0833 | 62.0833 | 50.5833 | 37.8333 | 31.6667 | 31.25 | 22.25 | 14.5 | 14.6667 |
The number of construction laborers in North Dakota (Construction Laborers) | 2390 | 2630 | 2410 | 2110 | 2490 | 3120 | 4380 | 5790 | 6220 | 6350 | 5380 | 4960 | 4610 | 4660 | 4210 | 3910 | 3560 |
Why this works
- Data dredging: I have 25,153 variables in my database. I compare all these variables against each other to find ones that randomly match up. That's 632,673,409 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.
- 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. - 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.
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([7.08333,3.5,2.54545,3.55556,3.8,9.81818,38.8333,58.25,53.0833,62.0833,50.5833,37.8333,31.6667,31.25,22.25,14.5,14.6667,])
array_2 = np.array([2390,2630,2410,2110,2490,3120,4380,5790,6220,6350,5380,4960,4610,4660,4210,3910,3560,])
array_1_name = "Popularity of the 'i dont always' meme"
array_2_name = "The number of construction laborers in North Dakota"
# 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:
- High resolution line chart
The image linked here is a Scalable Vector Graphic (SVG). It is the highest resolution that is possible to achieve. It scales up beyond the size of the observable universe without pixelating. You do not need to email me asking if I have a higher resolution image. I do not. The physical limitations of our universe prevent me from providing you with an image that is any higher resolution than this one.
If you insert it into a PowerPoint presentation (a tool well-known for managing things that are the scale of the universe), you can right-click > "Ungroup" or "Create Shape" and then edit the lines and text directly. You can also change the colors this way.
Alternatively you can use a tool like Inkscape. - High resolution line chart, optimized for mobile
- Alternative high resolution line chart
- Scatterplot
- Portable line chart (png)
- Portable line chart (png), optimized for mobile
- Line chart for only Popularity of the 'i dont always' meme
- Line chart for only The number of construction laborers in North Dakota
- AI-generated correlation image
- The spurious research paper: The I Don't Always Meme: A Construction of Popularity and Labor Force in North Dakota
Bravo! Your evaluation rocks!
Correlation ID: 5143 · Black Variable ID: 25150 · Red Variable ID: 12687