about · email me · subscribe
Spurious correlation #5,427 · 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 Arkansas and the second variable is ING Groep's stock price (ING).  The chart goes from 2002 to 2016, and the two variables track closely in value over that time. Small Image
Download png
, svg

AI explanation

The more Democrat votes for Senators in Arkansas, the more it led to political stability, or should I say, "Senatorial stability". And investors love a good 'ole democratic cushion, keeping the stock price ING the right direction.

Model: dalle-3
Prompt: Generate a surreal image showcasing a bustling town square in Arkansas, where a large crowd of people is lining up to cast their votes for Democratic Senators. On one side of the square, a colossal graph rises, displaying the steadily ascending stock price of ING Groep, catching the eye of passersby. As more and more Democratic votes are tallied, the graph for ING's stock price continues to climb, mirroring the calm and stability that the Democratic Senatorial support brings to the area. The scene exudes a sense of confidence and assurance, with people smiling and investors feeling positive about the future. Please note, there will not be any words or speech bubbles in the image. 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 Arkansas and ING Groep's stock price (ING). 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: a meme Minimalism a funny image macro Celtic art Macabre
ChatGPT: a meme

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 Arkansas and ING Groep's stock price (ING), in the following situation: The more Democrat votes for Senators in Arkansas, the more it led to political stability, or should I say, "Senatorial stability". And investors love a good 'ole democratic cushion, keeping the stock price ING the right direction.. Keep the description simple.
ChatGPT: Picture a bustling town square in Arkansas, where a large crowd of people is lining up to cast their votes for Democratic Senators. On one side of the square, a giant graph displaying the steadily rising stock price of ING Groep catches the eye of passersby. As more and more Democratic votes are tallied, the graph for ING's stock price continues to climb, mirroring the calm and stability that the Democratic Senatorial support brings to the area. The scene exudes a sense of confidence and assurance, with people smiling and investors feeling positive about the future.

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: [ a meme ] and depicting this scene: Picture a bustling town square in Arkansas, where a large crowd of people is lining up to cast their votes for Democratic Senators. On one side of the square, a giant graph displaying the steadily rising stock price of ING Groep catches the eye of passersby. As more and more Democratic votes are tallied, the graph for ING's stock price continues to climb, mirroring the calm and stability that the Democratic Senatorial support brings to the area. The scene exudes a sense of confidence and assurance, with people smiling and investors feeling positive about the future. Keep the visual depiction simple. Do not include any words or speech bubbles.
ChatGPT: Generate a surreal image showcasing a bustling town square in Arkansas, where a large crowd of people is lining up to cast their votes for Democratic Senators. On one side of the square, a colossal graph rises, displaying the steadily ascending stock price of ING Groep, catching the eye of passersby. As more and more Democratic votes are tallied, the graph for ING's stock price continues to climb, mirroring the calm and stability that the Democratic Senatorial support brings to the area. The scene exudes a sense of confidence and assurance, with people smiling and investors feeling positive about the future. Please note, there will not be any words or speech bubbles in the image.

*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 increases in Democrat votes for Senators in Arkansas positively influenced ING Groep's stock price (ING). Include one good pun.

AI academic paper

(Because p < 0.01)
Voting Democrat on the Arkansas INGroove: Exploring the Political-Economic Relationship between Senator Votes and ING Groep's Stock Price

The Journal of Political Economy and Financial Markets

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 Arkansas and ING Groep's stock price (ING). You can't resist a good dad joke. Add a relevant dad joke related to the content every couple of sentences.

Make the title a clever pun.

Your research team used data from MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse and LSEG Analytics (Refinitiv) to assess this nagging question. You found a correlation coefficient of 0.9351250 and p < 0.01 for 2002 to 2016.

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]]
Voting Democrat on the Arkansas INGroove: Exploring the Political-Economic Relationship between Senator Votes and ING Groep's Stock Price

[[ABSTRACT]]
In this study, we delve into the curious relationship between Democrat votes for Senators in Arkansas and ING Groep's stock price. Our examination incorporates data from the MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, and LSEG Analytics (Refinitiv), covering the years 2002 to 2016. With a correlation coefficient of 0.9351250 and a p-value of less than 0.01, the connection between these seemingly disparate elements cannot be brushed off as a mere coincidence - it's as clear as the elephant in the room, or should we say, the donkey in the legislature!

By applying rigorous statistical analysis, we have uncovered fascinating insights that may leave you pondering, much like the Senate floor during a filibuster. Our findings offer a fresh perspective on the entwined nature of politics and the financial world, provoking thought and the occasional chuckle - like a dad joke slipped into a serious academic paper. So, grab your reading glasses and join us as we navigate the wild crossroads of politics and economics, shedding light on a connection that is more compelling than a politician's campaign promise!


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 Arkansas and ING Groep's stock price (ING). You can't resist a good dad joke. Add a relevant dad joke related to the content every couple of sentences. Stay serious and dry most of the time, but then occasionally let your wit shine through.

Here is the title and abstract of the paper:
[[TITLE]]
Voting Democrat on the Arkansas INGroove: Exploring the Political-Economic Relationship between Senator Votes and ING Groep's Stock Price

[[ABSTRACT]]
In this study, we delve into the curious relationship between Democrat votes for Senators in Arkansas and ING Groep's stock price. Our examination incorporates data from the MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, and LSEG Analytics (Refinitiv), covering the years 2002 to 2016. With a correlation coefficient of 0.9351250 and a p-value of less than 0.01, the connection between these seemingly disparate elements cannot be brushed off as a mere coincidence - it's as clear as the elephant in the room, or should we say, the donkey in the legislature!

By applying rigorous statistical analysis, we have uncovered fascinating insights that may leave you pondering, much like the Senate floor during a filibuster. Our findings offer a fresh perspective on the entwined nature of politics and the financial world, provoking thought and the occasional chuckle - like a dad joke slipped into a serious academic paper. So, grab your reading glasses and join us as we navigate the wild crossroads of politics and economics, shedding light on a connection that is more compelling than a politician's campaign promise!

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[INTRODUCTION]]



ChatGPT:
[[INTRODUCTION]]

The intertwining of politics and economics has long been a subject of intrigue, akin to the timeless question of whether the chicken or the egg came first. As the global economy experiences the ebb and flow of financial tides, the impact of political decisions on corporate entities has gained increasing attention. In this vein, our study sets out to explore the intricate relationship between Democrat votes for Senators in Arkansas and the stock price of ING Groep, delving into a realm where financial markets and political landscapes converge like unexpected dance partners at a masquerade ball.

Speaking of unexpected pairings, it's like trying to fathom why people park on driveways and drive on parkways - a perplexing conundrum that mirrors the curious connection we unravel in this study. As we take the plunge into this uncharted territory, our investigation draws on the exceptional dataset provided by the MIT Election Data and Science Lab, the Harvard Dataverse, and LSEG Analytics (Refinitiv), covering the years 2002 to 2016. The correlation coefficient of 0.9351250 we've unearthed dances around like a lively tune at a political rally, accompanied by a p-value that winks suggestively at us, indicating that the observed relationship is statistically significant. It's almost as clear as the donkey in the legislature!

Now, let's not get too caught up in the numbers, though they do have a certain charm - like the comforting predictability of a dad joke. Our aim here is not merely to present figures and statistical mumbo jumbo but to unravel the story they tell - an intricate tale that oscillates between the Capitol and the trading floor, much like a political debate happening on a stock ticker.

As we embark on this intellectual journey, our study seeks to shed light on the implications of political environments on the financial realm, much like a lantern illuminating a dark alleyway. Together, let's unravel the mystery behind this unexpected relationship, as intriguing as a bipartisan agreement in Congress!

Stay tuned for our findings, as we venture deeper into the labyrinth of political-economic connections, aiming to provide insights that are as illuminating as a clever wordplay.


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 Arkansas and ING Groep's stock price (ING). 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. Then devolve ever further, and mention something completely ridiculous, like you conducted literature review by reading CVS receipts.

Here is the title and abstract of the paper:
[[TITLE]]
Voting Democrat on the Arkansas INGroove: Exploring the Political-Economic Relationship between Senator Votes and ING Groep's Stock Price

[[ABSTRACT]]
In this study, we delve into the curious relationship between Democrat votes for Senators in Arkansas and ING Groep's stock price. Our examination incorporates data from the MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, and LSEG Analytics (Refinitiv), covering the years 2002 to 2016. With a correlation coefficient of 0.9351250 and a p-value of less than 0.01, the connection between these seemingly disparate elements cannot be brushed off as a mere coincidence - it's as clear as the elephant in the room, or should we say, the donkey in the legislature!

By applying rigorous statistical analysis, we have uncovered fascinating insights that may leave you pondering, much like the Senate floor during a filibuster. Our findings offer a fresh perspective on the entwined nature of politics and the financial world, provoking thought and the occasional chuckle - like a dad joke slipped into a serious academic paper. So, grab your reading glasses and join us as we navigate the wild crossroads of politics and economics, shedding light on a connection that is more compelling than a politician's campaign promise!

-------

And here is the introduction section that led to this literature review:
[[INTRODUCTION]]
The intertwining of politics and economics has long been a subject of intrigue, akin to the timeless question of whether the chicken or the egg came first. As the global economy experiences the ebb and flow of financial tides, the impact of political decisions on corporate entities has gained increasing attention. In this vein, our study sets out to explore the intricate relationship between Democrat votes for Senators in Arkansas and the stock price of ING Groep, delving into a realm where financial markets and political landscapes converge like unexpected dance partners at a masquerade ball.
Speaking of unexpected pairings, it's like trying to fathom why people park on driveways and drive on parkways - a perplexing conundrum that mirrors the curious connection we unravel in this study. As we take the plunge into this uncharted territory, our investigation draws on the exceptional dataset provided by the MIT Election Data and Science Lab, the Harvard Dataverse, and LSEG Analytics (Refinitiv), covering the years 2002 to 2016. The correlation coefficient of 0.9351250 we've unearthed dances around like a lively tune at a political rally, accompanied by a p-value that winks suggestively at us, indicating that the observed relationship is statistically significant. It's almost as clear as the donkey in the legislature!
Now, let's not get too caught up in the numbers, though they do have a certain charm - like the comforting predictability of a dad joke. Our aim here is not merely to present figures and statistical mumbo jumbo but to unravel the story they tell - an intricate tale that oscillates between the Capitol and the trading floor, much like a political debate happening on a stock ticker.
As we embark on this intellectual journey, our study seeks to shed light on the implications of political environments on the financial realm, much like a lantern illuminating a dark alleyway. Together, let's unravel the mystery behind this unexpected relationship, as intriguing as a bipartisan agreement in Congress!
Stay tuned for our findings, as we venture deeper into the labyrinth of political-economic connections, aiming to provide insights that are as illuminating as a clever wordplay.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[LITERATURE REVIEW]]



ChatGPT:
[[LITERATURE REVIEW]]

As we venture into uncharted waters, it is essential to anchor our discussion in existing literature. Smith et al. (2010) explored the impact of political events on stock prices, observing a notable link between election outcomes and market movements. Similarly, Doe and Jones (2014) analyzed the correlation between specific political decisions and financial indicators, shedding light on the intricate dance of politics and economics.

Now, let's take a leisurely stroll through some real non-fiction literature that could shine a light on our curious topic. "Winning Elections: Political Strategy in Lawmaking" by Mark D. Brewer provides insight into the nuances of political decision-making, while "Financial Markets and the Political Environment" by Stephen Valdez explores the intersection of politics and market dynamics.

But wait, just like a plot twist in a mystery novel, let's switch to some fiction books that sound like they're about politics and finance but aren't. "The Wealth of Nations" by Adam Smith - oops, it's actually about economics! And how about "The Political Mind: A Cognitive Scientist's Guide to Your Brain and Its Politics" by George Lakoff? Oh, wait, that's about cognitive science and politics. Talk about a literary plot twist!

Continuing our quest for knowledge, we also delved into the world of unconventional sources, because why not? "Johnny's CVS Adventures: A Study of Political-Economic Relationships Through the Lens of Receipts" - okay, we made that one up, but who knows what insights could be hiding in those crumpled receipts?

Just like a good dad joke, our literature review journey has its unexpected twists and turns, offering a lighthearted perspective on a complex subject. So, grab your popcorn and get ready for the exhilarating ride as we dive further into the unexpected relationship between Democrat votes in Arkansas and the stock price of ING Groep!


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 Arkansas and ING Groep's stock price (ING). You can't resist a good dad joke. Add a relevant dad joke related to the content every couple of sentences. Stay serious and dry most of the time, but then occasionally let your wit shine through.

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 LSEG Analytics (Refinitiv) . You used data from 2002 to 2016

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]]
Voting Democrat on the Arkansas INGroove: Exploring the Political-Economic Relationship between Senator Votes and ING Groep's Stock Price

[[ABSTRACT]]
In this study, we delve into the curious relationship between Democrat votes for Senators in Arkansas and ING Groep's stock price. Our examination incorporates data from the MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, and LSEG Analytics (Refinitiv), covering the years 2002 to 2016. With a correlation coefficient of 0.9351250 and a p-value of less than 0.01, the connection between these seemingly disparate elements cannot be brushed off as a mere coincidence - it's as clear as the elephant in the room, or should we say, the donkey in the legislature!

By applying rigorous statistical analysis, we have uncovered fascinating insights that may leave you pondering, much like the Senate floor during a filibuster. Our findings offer a fresh perspective on the entwined nature of politics and the financial world, provoking thought and the occasional chuckle - like a dad joke slipped into a serious academic paper. So, grab your reading glasses and join us as we navigate the wild crossroads of politics and economics, shedding light on a connection that is more compelling than a politician's campaign promise!

[[INTRODUCTION]]
The intertwining of politics and economics has long been a subject of intrigue, akin to the timeless question of whether the chicken or the egg came first. As the global economy experiences the ebb and flow of financial tides, the impact of political decisions on corporate entities has gained increasing attention. In this vein, our study sets out to explore the intricate relationship between Democrat votes for Senators in Arkansas and the stock price of ING Groep, delving into a realm where financial markets and political landscapes converge like unexpected dance partners at a masquerade ball.
Speaking of unexpected pairings, it's like trying to fathom why people park on driveways and drive on parkways - a perplexing conundrum that mirrors the curious connection we unravel in this study. As we take the plunge into this uncharted territory, our investigation draws on the exceptional dataset provided by the MIT Election Data and Science Lab, the Harvard Dataverse, and LSEG Analytics (Refinitiv), covering the years 2002 to 2016. The correlation coefficient of 0.9351250 we've unearthed dances around like a lively tune at a political rally, accompanied by a p-value that winks suggestively at us, indicating that the observed relationship is statistically significant. It's almost as clear as the donkey in the legislature!
Now, let's not get too caught up in the numbers, though they do have a certain charm - like the comforting predictability of a dad joke. Our aim here is not merely to present figures and statistical mumbo jumbo but to unravel the story they tell - an intricate tale that oscillates between the Capitol and the trading floor, much like a political debate happening on a stock ticker.
As we embark on this intellectual journey, our study seeks to shed light on the implications of political environments on the financial realm, much like a lantern illuminating a dark alleyway. Together, let's unravel the mystery behind this unexpected relationship, as intriguing as a bipartisan agreement in Congress!
Stay tuned for our findings, as we venture deeper into the labyrinth of political-economic connections, aiming to provide insights that are as illuminating as a clever wordplay.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[METHODOLOGY]]



ChatGPT:

[[METHODOLOGY]]

To unravel the enigmatic connection between Democrat votes for Senators in Arkansas and the stock price of ING Groep, we employed a multi-faceted approach that combines elements of statistical analysis, economic theory, and a touch of whimsy – much like a delicate soufflé crafted from the finest ingredients. Our data, akin to a gold mine twinkling with potential, was meticulously sourced from the MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, and LSEG Analytics (Refinitiv) to ensure comprehensive coverage spanning the years 2002 to 2016.

Our methodology for this study can be likened to an intricate ballet performance, where each move is carefully calculated yet exudes a sense of fluidity and grace. We leveraged rigorous statistical techniques, including regression analysis, time series modeling, and cross-sectional data analysis, to scrutinize the relationship between Democrat votes for Senators in Arkansas and ING Groep’s stock price from various angles – much like a curious spectator observing a captivating performance from different vantage points.

To sweeten the pot, our analysis also incorporated economic indicators such as GDP growth, market volatility, and legislative events – a flavorful blend of ingredients akin to a chef infusing a dish with the perfect medley of spices for that extra oomph. This holistic approach allowed us to consider the nuanced interplay of economic factors and political decision-making, shedding light on the dynamic nature of the relationship under investigation.

Furthermore, our study ventured into the realm of sentiment analysis by examining media coverage and public discourse surrounding political events and their potential impacts on financial markets. Like a seasoned detective unraveling a compelling mystery, we scrutinized news articles, social media trends, and public statements, seeking to capture the elusive essence of public sentiment and its influence on market dynamics.

In a nod to the offbeat, we applied a quantitative narrative analysis, dissecting anecdotes, and colorful expressions related to political developments and market reactions. This unconventional yet insightful approach provided a deeper understanding of the storytelling nature of financial markets and the role of political narratives in shaping investor sentiment – much like a captivating twist in a classic novel that leaves readers intrigued and delighted.

In summary, our multi-layered methodology harnessed the power of unorthodox yet robust analytical tools, offering a fresh perspective that is as refreshing as a clever punchline delivered at an unexpected moment. With a touch of analytical rigor and a sprinkle of creativity, our study ventures into uncharted territory, embracing the interplay of politics and economics in a manner that’s as enigmatic as a dad joke that catches you off guard.


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 Arkansas and ING Groep's stock price (ING). You can't resist a good dad joke. Add a relevant dad joke related to the content every couple of sentences. Stay serious and dry most of the time, but then occasionally let your wit shine through.

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 LSEG Analytics (Refinitiv) .

For the time period 2002 to 2016, you found a correlation 0.9351250, r-squared of 0.8744587, 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]]
Voting Democrat on the Arkansas INGroove: Exploring the Political-Economic Relationship between Senator Votes and ING Groep's Stock Price

[[ABSTRACT]]
In this study, we delve into the curious relationship between Democrat votes for Senators in Arkansas and ING Groep's stock price. Our examination incorporates data from the MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, and LSEG Analytics (Refinitiv), covering the years 2002 to 2016. With a correlation coefficient of 0.9351250 and a p-value of less than 0.01, the connection between these seemingly disparate elements cannot be brushed off as a mere coincidence - it's as clear as the elephant in the room, or should we say, the donkey in the legislature!

By applying rigorous statistical analysis, we have uncovered fascinating insights that may leave you pondering, much like the Senate floor during a filibuster. Our findings offer a fresh perspective on the entwined nature of politics and the financial world, provoking thought and the occasional chuckle - like a dad joke slipped into a serious academic paper. So, grab your reading glasses and join us as we navigate the wild crossroads of politics and economics, shedding light on a connection that is more compelling than a politician's campaign promise!

-------

And here is the methodology section that led to this result:
[[METHODOLOGY]]
The intertwining of politics and economics has long been a subject of intrigue, akin to the timeless question of whether the chicken or the egg came first. As the global economy experiences the ebb and flow of financial tides, the impact of political decisions on corporate entities has gained increasing attention. In this vein, our study sets out to explore the intricate relationship between Democrat votes for Senators in Arkansas and the stock price of ING Groep, delving into a realm where financial markets and political landscapes converge like unexpected dance partners at a masquerade ball.
Speaking of unexpected pairings, it's like trying to fathom why people park on driveways and drive on parkways - a perplexing conundrum that mirrors the curious connection we unravel in this study. As we take the plunge into this uncharted territory, our investigation draws on the exceptional dataset provided by the MIT Election Data and Science Lab, the Harvard Dataverse, and LSEG Analytics (Refinitiv), covering the years 2002 to 2016. The correlation coefficient of 0.9351250 we've unearthed dances around like a lively tune at a political rally, accompanied by a p-value that winks suggestively at us, indicating that the observed relationship is statistically significant. It's almost as clear as the donkey in the legislature!
Now, let's not get too caught up in the numbers, though they do have a certain charm - like the comforting predictability of a dad joke. Our aim here is not merely to present figures and statistical mumbo jumbo but to unravel the story they tell - an intricate tale that oscillates between the Capitol and the trading floor, much like a political debate happening on a stock ticker.
As we embark on this intellectual journey, our study seeks to shed light on the implications of political environments on the financial realm, much like a lantern illuminating a dark alleyway. Together, let's unravel the mystery behind this unexpected relationship, as intriguing as a bipartisan agreement in Congress!
Stay tuned for our findings, as we venture deeper into the labyrinth of political-economic connections, aiming to provide insights that are as illuminating as a clever wordplay.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[RESULTS]]



ChatGPT:

[[RESULTS]]

The analysis of the data collected revealed a striking correlation between Democrat votes for Senators in Arkansas and the stock price of ING Groep, with a correlation coefficient of 0.9351250. This connection was further supported by the r-squared value of 0.8744587, indicating that approximately 87.45% of the variance in ING's stock price could be explained by the Democrat votes for Senators in Arkansas. The p-value of less than 0.01 lends robust support to the statistical significance of this relationship, putting to rest any doubts that this correlation might simply be a case of political "spin" influencing the financial markets.

Now, on to the figures. The scatterplot (Fig. 1) depicts a conspicuous pattern between the two variables, resembling two dance partners moving in tandem - a bit like a Democrat and a Republican finding common ground. This visual representation vividly illustrates the strength of the correlation, much like a well-timed punchline in a serious conversation.

The findings of our study underline the unexpectedly tight link between political affiliations in Arkansas and the performance of a key player in the global financial stage, ING Groep. As we navigate through this perplexing labyrinth of political-economic interactions, it becomes clear that the influence of legislative decisions on the financial world is as real as a banker's bonus.

In conclusion, our research unearths a correlation that highlights the nuanced interplay between political processes and economic outcomes, showing that the relationship between Democrat votes for Senators in Arkansas and ING Groep's stock price is more concrete than a campaign pledge. This insight prompts us to ponder the profound impact of political dynamics on market sentiment, much like a well-crafted pun that leaves you chuckling long after the punchline.


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 Arkansas and ING Groep's stock price (ING). You can't resist a good dad joke. Add a relevant dad joke related to the content every couple of sentences. Stay serious and dry most of the time, but then occasionally let your wit shine through.

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]]
Voting Democrat on the Arkansas INGroove: Exploring the Political-Economic Relationship between Senator Votes and ING Groep's Stock Price

[[ABSTRACT]]
In this study, we delve into the curious relationship between Democrat votes for Senators in Arkansas and ING Groep's stock price. Our examination incorporates data from the MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, and LSEG Analytics (Refinitiv), covering the years 2002 to 2016. With a correlation coefficient of 0.9351250 and a p-value of less than 0.01, the connection between these seemingly disparate elements cannot be brushed off as a mere coincidence - it's as clear as the elephant in the room, or should we say, the donkey in the legislature!

By applying rigorous statistical analysis, we have uncovered fascinating insights that may leave you pondering, much like the Senate floor during a filibuster. Our findings offer a fresh perspective on the entwined nature of politics and the financial world, provoking thought and the occasional chuckle - like a dad joke slipped into a serious academic paper. So, grab your reading glasses and join us as we navigate the wild crossroads of politics and economics, shedding light on a connection that is more compelling than a politician's campaign promise!

[[LITERATURE REVIEW]]
As we venture into uncharted waters, it is essential to anchor our discussion in existing literature. Smith et al. (2010) explored the impact of political events on stock prices, observing a notable link between election outcomes and market movements. Similarly, Doe and Jones (2014) analyzed the correlation between specific political decisions and financial indicators, shedding light on the intricate dance of politics and economics.
Now, let's take a leisurely stroll through some real non-fiction literature that could shine a light on our curious topic. "Winning Elections: Political Strategy in Lawmaking" by Mark D. Brewer provides insight into the nuances of political decision-making, while "Financial Markets and the Political Environment" by Stephen Valdez explores the intersection of politics and market dynamics.
But wait, just like a plot twist in a mystery novel, let's switch to some fiction books that sound like they're about politics and finance but aren't. "The Wealth of Nations" by Adam Smith - oops, it's actually about economics! And how about "The Political Mind: A Cognitive Scientist's Guide to Your Brain and Its Politics" by George Lakoff? Oh, wait, that's about cognitive science and politics. Talk about a literary plot twist!
Continuing our quest for knowledge, we also delved into the world of unconventional sources, because why not? "Johnny's CVS Adventures: A Study of Political-Economic Relationships Through the Lens of Receipts" - okay, we made that one up, but who knows what insights could be hiding in those crumpled receipts?
Just like a good dad joke, our literature review journey has its unexpected twists and turns, offering a lighthearted perspective on a complex subject. So, grab your popcorn and get ready for the exhilarating ride as we dive further into the unexpected relationship between Democrat votes in Arkansas and the stock price of ING Groep!

[[RESULTS]]
The analysis of the data collected revealed a striking correlation between Democrat votes for Senators in Arkansas and the stock price of ING Groep, with a correlation coefficient of 0.9351250. This connection was further supported by the r-squared value of 0.8744587, indicating that approximately 87.45% of the variance in ING's stock price could be explained by the Democrat votes for Senators in Arkansas. The p-value of less than 0.01 lends robust support to the statistical significance of this relationship, putting to rest any doubts that this correlation might simply be a case of political "spin" influencing the financial markets.
Now, on to the figures. The scatterplot (Fig. 1) depicts a conspicuous pattern between the two variables, resembling two dance partners moving in tandem - a bit like a Democrat and a Republican finding common ground. This visual representation vividly illustrates the strength of the correlation, much like a well-timed punchline in a serious conversation.
The findings of our study underline the unexpectedly tight link between political affiliations in Arkansas and the performance of a key player in the global financial stage, ING Groep. As we navigate through this perplexing labyrinth of political-economic interactions, it becomes clear that the influence of legislative decisions on the financial world is as real as a banker's bonus.
In conclusion, our research unearths a correlation that highlights the nuanced interplay between political processes and economic outcomes, showing that the relationship between Democrat votes for Senators in Arkansas and ING Groep's stock price is more concrete than a campaign pledge. This insight prompts us to ponder the profound impact of political dynamics on market sentiment, much like a well-crafted pun that leaves you chuckling long after the punchline.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[DISCUSSION]]



ChatGPT:

[[DISCUSSION]]

Tackling the perplexing intersection of political decision-making and financial market dynamics, our study has unveiled a noteworthy relationship between Democrat votes for Senators in Arkansas and the stock price of ING Groep. The results of our analysis, which demonstrated a robust correlation between these variables, not only confirm but also extend the findings of prior research in this area. Just like a good dad joke, this unexpected connection brings an element of surprise, leaving us with raised eyebrows and the occasional chuckle.

Connecting the Dots: Prior research by Smith et al. (2010) and Doe and Jones (2014) emphasized the impact of political events and decisions on stock prices, echoing the significance of our own findings. The literature review took us down some unexpected pathways, much like a windy road trip, shedding light on the tangled web of political and economic relationships. Furthermore, the notable correlation identified in our study stands as a testament to the tangible influence of political decisions on financial markets, akin to a politician's steadfast campaign promise.

Unexpected Twists: As we revisited the literature review, we couldn't help but delve into the unconventional sources, much like a daring leap into the unknown. These meandering detours, while light-hearted, offered a novel perspective on our research area, reminiscent of a good dad joke that catches you off guard. We found ourselves navigating through a maze of information, much like a reader trying to solve a complex riddle.

Serious Results: Our study's results add a significant piece to the puzzle, reinforcing the symbiotic relationship between political decisions and economic outcomes. The magnitude of the correlation coefficient and the r-squared value underscores the strength and explanatory power of this connection, highlighting the gravity of the influence that political dynamics can exert on financial markets. This unexpected linkage between Democrat votes in Arkansas and the stock price of ING Groep not only elicits surprise but also compels us to reflect on the intricate dance of politics and economics, akin to a well-timed punchline in a serious conversation.

Dad Joke Interlude: Why did the economist bring a ladder to the bar? Because he heard ING Groep's stock price was going through the roof!


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 Arkansas and ING Groep's stock price (ING). You can't resist a good dad joke. Add a relevant dad joke related to the content every couple of sentences. Stay serious and dry most of the time, but then occasionally let your wit shine through.

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]]
Voting Democrat on the Arkansas INGroove: Exploring the Political-Economic Relationship between Senator Votes and ING Groep's Stock Price

[[ABSTRACT]]
In this study, we delve into the curious relationship between Democrat votes for Senators in Arkansas and ING Groep's stock price. Our examination incorporates data from the MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, and LSEG Analytics (Refinitiv), covering the years 2002 to 2016. With a correlation coefficient of 0.9351250 and a p-value of less than 0.01, the connection between these seemingly disparate elements cannot be brushed off as a mere coincidence - it's as clear as the elephant in the room, or should we say, the donkey in the legislature!

By applying rigorous statistical analysis, we have uncovered fascinating insights that may leave you pondering, much like the Senate floor during a filibuster. Our findings offer a fresh perspective on the entwined nature of politics and the financial world, provoking thought and the occasional chuckle - like a dad joke slipped into a serious academic paper. So, grab your reading glasses and join us as we navigate the wild crossroads of politics and economics, shedding light on a connection that is more compelling than a politician's campaign promise!

[[INTRDUCTION]]
The intertwining of politics and economics has long been a subject of intrigue, akin to the timeless question of whether the chicken or the egg came first. As the global economy experiences the ebb and flow of financial tides, the impact of political decisions on corporate entities has gained increasing attention. In this vein, our study sets out to explore the intricate relationship between Democrat votes for Senators in Arkansas and the stock price of ING Groep, delving into a realm where financial markets and political landscapes converge like unexpected dance partners at a masquerade ball.
Speaking of unexpected pairings, it's like trying to fathom why people park on driveways and drive on parkways - a perplexing conundrum that mirrors the curious connection we unravel in this study. As we take the plunge into this uncharted territory, our investigation draws on the exceptional dataset provided by the MIT Election Data and Science Lab, the Harvard Dataverse, and LSEG Analytics (Refinitiv), covering the years 2002 to 2016. The correlation coefficient of 0.9351250 we've unearthed dances around like a lively tune at a political rally, accompanied by a p-value that winks suggestively at us, indicating that the observed relationship is statistically significant. It's almost as clear as the donkey in the legislature!
Now, let's not get too caught up in the numbers, though they do have a certain charm - like the comforting predictability of a dad joke. Our aim here is not merely to present figures and statistical mumbo jumbo but to unravel the story they tell - an intricate tale that oscillates between the Capitol and the trading floor, much like a political debate happening on a stock ticker.
As we embark on this intellectual journey, our study seeks to shed light on the implications of political environments on the financial realm, much like a lantern illuminating a dark alleyway. Together, let's unravel the mystery behind this unexpected relationship, as intriguing as a bipartisan agreement in Congress!
Stay tuned for our findings, as we venture deeper into the labyrinth of political-economic connections, aiming to provide insights that are as illuminating as a clever wordplay.

[[RESULTS]]
The analysis of the data collected revealed a striking correlation between Democrat votes for Senators in Arkansas and the stock price of ING Groep, with a correlation coefficient of 0.9351250. This connection was further supported by the r-squared value of 0.8744587, indicating that approximately 87.45% of the variance in ING's stock price could be explained by the Democrat votes for Senators in Arkansas. The p-value of less than 0.01 lends robust support to the statistical significance of this relationship, putting to rest any doubts that this correlation might simply be a case of political "spin" influencing the financial markets.
Now, on to the figures. The scatterplot (Fig. 1) depicts a conspicuous pattern between the two variables, resembling two dance partners moving in tandem - a bit like a Democrat and a Republican finding common ground. This visual representation vividly illustrates the strength of the correlation, much like a well-timed punchline in a serious conversation.
The findings of our study underline the unexpectedly tight link between political affiliations in Arkansas and the performance of a key player in the global financial stage, ING Groep. As we navigate through this perplexing labyrinth of political-economic interactions, it becomes clear that the influence of legislative decisions on the financial world is as real as a banker's bonus.
In conclusion, our research unearths a correlation that highlights the nuanced interplay between political processes and economic outcomes, showing that the relationship between Democrat votes for Senators in Arkansas and ING Groep's stock price is more concrete than a campaign pledge. This insight prompts us to ponder the profound impact of political dynamics on market sentiment, much like a well-crafted pun that leaves you chuckling long after the punchline.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[CONCLUSION]]



ChatGPT:

[[CONCLUSION]]

In wrapping up our investigation, we've uncovered a correlation that's as unwavering as a well-built dam: the tight link between Democrat votes for Senators in Arkansas and ING Groep's stock price. This unsuspected kinship succeeded in proving itself to be more than just a political "spiel" affecting financial markets. The revealed connection not only sheds light on the complex interplay between political processes and economic outcomes but also provides an unexpected lens through which to view the dynamism of market sentiment - it's as thought-provoking as a good dad joke.

The dance between Democrat votes and ING Groep's stock price, with a correlation coefficient of 0.9351250, showcased a strong and unequivocal partnership, akin to a politician and their trusty podium. Moreover, the r-squared value of 0.8744587 lent further credence to the robustness of this association, as dependable as a reliable ally during a campaign.

The scatterplot vividly illustrated this synchronized tango between political affiliations in Arkansas and ING Groep's stock performance. It resonated with the rhythm of a harmonious agreement, much like finding common ground across party lines, and served as a visual testament to the gravity of our findings.

In light of these revelatory discoveries, we are firmly convinced that no further research is needed in this area. The findings not only underline the intricate relationship between seemingly disparate realms but also serve as a compelling reminder that there's more to the interplay of politics and economics than meets the eye. The correlation between Democrat votes for Senators in Arkansas and ING Groep's stock price stands as an intriguing and unexpected twist in the narrative of finance and politics, much like a well-timed punchline in a serious conversation. It prompts us to consider the profound impact of political dynamics on market sentiment and leaves us nodding in agreement, like in response to a well-crafted pun that leaves you chuckling long after the punchline. And just as a dad joke aficionado knows, once you've found the perfect punchline, there's no need to keep searching.


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 Voting Democrat on the Arkansas INGroove: Exploring the Political-Economic Relationship between Senator Votes and ING Groep's Stock Price. Respond only with the name of a fictional academic journal.

ChatGPT:

The Journal of Political Economy and Financial Markets


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 Voting Democrat on the Arkansas INGroove: Exploring the Political-Economic Relationship between Senator Votes and ING Groep's Stock Price. Respond only with the name of a fictional organization.

ChatGPT:

The Society for Political-Economic Inquiry and 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 Voting Democrat on the Arkansas INGroove: Exploring the Political-Economic Relationship between Senator Votes and ING Groep's Stock Price with an abstract of In this study, we delve into the curious relationship between Democrat votes for Senators in Arkansas and ING Groep's stock price. Our examination incorporates data from the MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, and LSEG Analytics (Refinitiv), covering the years 2002 to 2016. With a correlation coefficient of 0.9351250 and a p-value of less than 0.01, the connection between these seemingly disparate elements cannot be brushed off as a mere coincidence - it's as clear as the elephant in the room, or should we say, the donkey in the legislature!
By applying rigorous statistical analysis, we have uncovered fascinating insights that may leave you pondering, much like the Senate floor during a filibuster. Our findings offer a fresh perspective on the entwined nature of politics and the financial world, provoking thought and the occasional chuckle - like a dad joke slipped into a serious academic paper. So, grab your reading glasses and join us as we navigate the wild crossroads of politics and economics, shedding light on a connection that is more compelling than a politician's campaign promise!

ChatGPT:

Arkansas, Democrat, voting, Senator, ING Groep, stock price, political-economic relationship, MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, LSEG Analytics, correlation coefficient, p-value, statistical analysis, politics, economics, financial world

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

ING Groep's stock price (ING)
Detailed data title: Opening price of ING Groep (ING) on the first trading day of the year
Source: LSEG Analytics (Refinitiv)
Additional Info: Via Microsoft Excel Stockhistory function

See what else correlates with ING Groep's stock price (ING)

Correlation r = 0.9351250 (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 = 0.8744587 (Coefficient of determination)
This means 87.4% of the change in the one variable (i.e., ING Groep's stock price (ING)) is predictable based on the change in the other (i.e., Votes for Democratic Senators in Arkansas) over the 6 years from 2002 through 2016.

p < 0.01, which is statistically significant(Null hypothesis significance test)
The p-value is 0.0062. 0.0061766334898373900000000000
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 0.94 in 0.62% of random cases. Said differently, if you correlated 162 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.

[ 0.51, 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.
200220042008201020142016
Votes for Democratic Senators in Arkansas (Total votes)433386580973804678288156334174400602
ING Groep's stock price (ING) (Stock price)25.723.6338.9610.3813.8713.2




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.




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([433386,580973,804678,288156,334174,400602,])
array_2 = np.array([25.7,23.63,38.96,10.38,13.87,13.2,])
array_1_name = "Votes for Democratic Senators in Arkansas"
array_2_name = "ING Groep's stock price (ING)"

# 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: 5427 · Black Variable ID: 26204 · Red Variable ID: 1736
about · subscribe · emailme@tylervigen.com · twitter

CC BY 4.0