about · email me · subscribe
Spurious correlation #1,905 · View random

A linear line chart with years as the X-axis and two variables on the Y-axis. The first variable is US household spending on housekeeping supplies and the second variable is The number of food and tobacco roasting, baking, and drying machine operators and tenders in Indiana.  The chart goes from 2003 to 2022, and the two variables track closely in value over that time. Small Image
Download png
, svg

AI explanation

As US household spending on housekeeping supplies decreased, there was less demand for cleaning and maintenance around the house. This led to an influx of food and tobacco roasting, baking, and drying machine operators and tenders in Indiana as people discovered creative ways to multitask and use their kitchen appliances for both cooking and light housekeeping. It's like the old saying goes, "Why clean the counters when you can just bake off the mess?"

Model: dalle-3
Prompt: Generate a comic-book-style illustration with muted colors and a dotted halftone pattern from the 1960s, depicting a bustling Indiana factory scene. In the foreground, a group of workers tends to large roasting, baking, and drying machines. Behind the factory, there is a busy household stocked with shelves of housekeeping supplies being used to keep the home tidy and organized. The workers are depicted wearing traditional factory uniforms, and the household is bustling with activity, showcasing the 1960s lifestyle. Keep the visual depiction simple, avoiding any words or speech bubbles. 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: US household spending on housekeeping supplies and The number of food and tobacco roasting, baking, and drying machine operators and tenders in Indiana. 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: Realistic a Polaroid photo Macabre A comic-book-style illustration with muted colors and a dotted halftone pattern from the 1960s Concept art
ChatGPT: A comic-book-style illustration with muted colors and a dotted halftone pattern from the 1960s

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 US household spending on housekeeping supplies and The number of food and tobacco roasting, baking, and drying machine operators and tenders in Indiana together. Keep the description simple.
ChatGPT: In a bustling Indiana factory, a group of workers tends to large roasting, baking, and drying machines, while nearby, a busy household is stocked with shelves of housekeeping supplies being used to keep the home tidy and organized.

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 comic-book-style illustration with muted colors and a dotted halftone pattern from the 1960s ] and depicting this scene: In a bustling Indiana factory, a group of workers tends to large roasting, baking, and drying machines, while nearby, a busy household is stocked with shelves of housekeeping supplies being used to keep the home tidy and organized. Keep the visual depiction simple. Do not include any words or speech bubbles.
ChatGPT: Generate a comic-book-style illustration with muted colors and a dotted halftone pattern from the 1960s, depicting a bustling Indiana factory scene. In the foreground, a group of workers tends to large roasting, baking, and drying machines. Behind the factory, there is a busy household stocked with shelves of housekeeping supplies being used to keep the home tidy and organized. The workers are depicted wearing traditional factory uniforms, and the household is bustling with activity, showcasing the 1960s lifestyle. Keep the visual depiction simple, avoiding any words or speech bubbles.

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

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

Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106 (fine-tuned)
System prompt: You provide humorous responses in the form of plausible sounding explanations for correlations. You assume the correlation is causative for the purpose of the explanation even if it is ridiculous. You do not chat with the user, you only reply with the causal connection explanation and nothing else.
User prompt: Please make up a funny explanation for how a decrease in US household spending on housekeeping supplies caused The number of food and tobacco roasting, baking, and drying machine operators and tenders in Indiana to increase.

AI academic paper

(Because p < 0.01)
Whisk Away: Exploring the Interplay Between US Household Spending on Housekeeping Supplies and the Count of Food and Tobacco Roasting, Baking, and Drying Machine Operators and Tenders in Indiana

The Journal of Domestic Economics and Occupational Dynamics

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 US household spending on housekeeping supplies and The number of food and tobacco roasting, baking, and drying machine operators and tenders in Indiana. Make it seem dry like academic research paper, but with lots of subtle hidden offhand remarks, jokes, goofy observations, and puns.

Make the title seem clever.

Your research team used data from Bureau of Labor Statistics and Bureau of Larbor Statistics to assess this nagging question. You found a correlation coefficient of -0.7131344 and p < 0.01 for 2003 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]]
"Whisk Away: Exploring the Interplay Between US Household Spending on Housekeeping Supplies and the Count of Food and Tobacco Roasting, Baking, and Drying Machine Operators and Tenders in Indiana"

[[ABSTRACT]]
This paper delves into the whimsically mundane yet oddly intriguing connection between US household spending on housekeeping supplies and the workforce engaged in the alchemical realm of food and tobacco roasting, baking, and drying machine operation in the Hoosier State. Leveraging data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics and the Bureau of Labor Statistics, our study weaves together the complex tapestry of consumer behavior and labor dynamics. The findings reveal a striking correlation coefficient of -0.7131344, with a p-value less than 0.01 for the period spanning 2003 to 2022, suggesting a coiling dance between the two seemingly disparate economic elements. The implications of this correlation provide fodder for contemplation, sparking humor and curiosity in the scholarly community as we ponder the delightful enigma of this unexpected association.


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 US household spending on housekeeping supplies and The number of food and tobacco roasting, baking, and drying machine operators and tenders in Indiana. 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]]
"Whisk Away: Exploring the Interplay Between US Household Spending on Housekeeping Supplies and the Count of Food and Tobacco Roasting, Baking, and Drying Machine Operators and Tenders in Indiana"

[[ABSTRACT]]
This paper delves into the whimsically mundane yet oddly intriguing connection between US household spending on housekeeping supplies and the workforce engaged in the alchemical realm of food and tobacco roasting, baking, and drying machine operation in the Hoosier State. Leveraging data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics and the Bureau of Labor Statistics, our study weaves together the complex tapestry of consumer behavior and labor dynamics. The findings reveal a striking correlation coefficient of -0.7131344, with a p-value less than 0.01 for the period spanning 2003 to 2022, suggesting a coiling dance between the two seemingly disparate economic elements. The implications of this correlation provide fodder for contemplation, sparking humor and curiosity in the scholarly community as we ponder the delightful enigma of this unexpected association.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[INTRODUCTION]]



ChatGPT:
[[INTRODUCTION]]

In the world of economic research, we often revel in uncovering unexpected connections and unraveling the intricacies of seemingly unrelated variables. The interplay between US household spending on housekeeping supplies and the count of food and tobacco roasting, baking, and drying machine operators and tenders in Indiana may appear as banal as a loaf of bread, but our investigation has unearthed a delightful confluence of consumer behavior and labor dynamics.

As we delve deep into the labyrinthine data provided by the Bureau of Labor Statistics and the Bureau of Economic Analysis, we find ourselves captivated by the whimsical dance of statistics. Oh, the joy of discovering a correlation coefficient of -0.7131344, with a p-value less than 0.01 from 2003 to 2022! It's as if the data had decided to perform a culinary pas de deux, leaving us both amused and bemused by the enigmatic association between household spending and the realm of food and tobacco roasting, baking, and drying machine operation.

Upon closer scrutiny, the correlation between these variables unfolds like a carefully choreographed performance. One can almost envision the housekeeping supplies sneaking away from the shopping cart, only to be intercepted by the industrious hands of roasting, baking, and drying machine operators in Indiana, forming an oddly endearing symbiotic relationship. It's as if the coffeemakers and vacuum cleaners were engaging in a tango with the convection ovens and tobacco dryers, all while the economists in the audience scratch their heads in bewildered amusement.

This unexpected correlation offers a fascinating glimpse into the interconnected web of economic activity, where the mundane and the industrial collide in a delightful display of statistical whimsy. As we unravel the implications of this peculiar association, we invite our fellow scholars to join us in savoring the flavorful bouquet of economic surprises, for in the world of research, even the most mundane variables can reveal the most tantalizing secrets.


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 US household spending on housekeeping supplies and The number of food and tobacco roasting, baking, and drying machine operators and tenders in Indiana. 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. Then name some movies that you watched that are tangentially related to the topic.

Here is the title and abstract of the paper:
[[TITLE]]
"Whisk Away: Exploring the Interplay Between US Household Spending on Housekeeping Supplies and the Count of Food and Tobacco Roasting, Baking, and Drying Machine Operators and Tenders in Indiana"

[[ABSTRACT]]
This paper delves into the whimsically mundane yet oddly intriguing connection between US household spending on housekeeping supplies and the workforce engaged in the alchemical realm of food and tobacco roasting, baking, and drying machine operation in the Hoosier State. Leveraging data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics and the Bureau of Labor Statistics, our study weaves together the complex tapestry of consumer behavior and labor dynamics. The findings reveal a striking correlation coefficient of -0.7131344, with a p-value less than 0.01 for the period spanning 2003 to 2022, suggesting a coiling dance between the two seemingly disparate economic elements. The implications of this correlation provide fodder for contemplation, sparking humor and curiosity in the scholarly community as we ponder the delightful enigma of this unexpected association.

-------

And here is the introduction section that led to this literature review:
[[INTRODUCTION]]
In the world of economic research, we often revel in uncovering unexpected connections and unraveling the intricacies of seemingly unrelated variables. The interplay between US household spending on housekeeping supplies and the count of food and tobacco roasting, baking, and drying machine operators and tenders in Indiana may appear as banal as a loaf of bread, but our investigation has unearthed a delightful confluence of consumer behavior and labor dynamics.
As we delve deep into the labyrinthine data provided by the Bureau of Labor Statistics and the Bureau of Economic Analysis, we find ourselves captivated by the whimsical dance of statistics. Oh, the joy of discovering a correlation coefficient of -0.7131344, with a p-value less than 0.01 from 2003 to 2022! It's as if the data had decided to perform a culinary pas de deux, leaving us both amused and bemused by the enigmatic association between household spending and the realm of food and tobacco roasting, baking, and drying machine operation.
Upon closer scrutiny, the correlation between these variables unfolds like a carefully choreographed performance. One can almost envision the housekeeping supplies sneaking away from the shopping cart, only to be intercepted by the industrious hands of roasting, baking, and drying machine operators in Indiana, forming an oddly endearing symbiotic relationship. It's as if the coffeemakers and vacuum cleaners were engaging in a tango with the convection ovens and tobacco dryers, all while the economists in the audience scratch their heads in bewildered amusement.
This unexpected correlation offers a fascinating glimpse into the interconnected web of economic activity, where the mundane and the industrial collide in a delightful display of statistical whimsy. As we unravel the implications of this peculiar association, we invite our fellow scholars to join us in savoring the flavorful bouquet of economic surprises, for in the world of research, even the most mundane variables can reveal the most tantalizing secrets.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[LITERATURE REVIEW]]



ChatGPT:
[[LITERATURE REVIEW]]

The intriguing interplay between US household spending on housekeeping supplies and the count of food and tobacco roasting, baking, and drying machine operators and tenders in Indiana has piqued the curiosity of researchers and economists alike. As improbable as it may seem, the relationship between these seemingly disparate variables has been a subject of curiosity and investigation for many scholars.

Smith et al. (2015) provide an initial examination of consumer spending on domestic products and its potential influence on the labor market in their study "Economic Dynamics of Household Expenditures." The authors navigate through the labyrinth of consumer behavior, shedding light on the intricate connections between household purchases and workforce dynamics. However, little did they know that their serious inquiry into economic patterns would set the stage for a comedic performance of statistical serendipity.

As we further explore the whimsical terrain of economic connections, Doe (2019) presents a comprehensive analysis of the labor market in Indiana in "Labor Force Dynamics in the Heartland." While their focus primarily centers on the demographic shifts and industrial trends, an observant reader might catch a subtle wink from the data, hinting at the impending rendezvous between mops and microfiber cloths with industrial-scale baking and roasting equipment.

Jones (2017) takes a more direct approach in "Economic Intersections: Unraveling Unexpected Correlations," delving into the intricate web of economic variables and their surprising interactions. Little did Jones know that the most unexpected intersection lay in the unlikeliest of places - the domestic aisles of the average American household, intertwining with the bustling world of food and tobacco roasting, baking, and drying machine operation.

Transitioning from scholarly articles, we venture into the realm of non-fiction books that lay the groundwork for our whimsical exploration. "Spills, Thrills, and Dollar Bills: The Economics of Clean Living" by Dr. Suds McBroom offers a bubbly insight into the world of household products and their economic influence, while "Flour Power: A Culinary and Economic Odyssey" by B. Ready provides a delectable journey through the economics of baking, tantalizing the taste buds and tickling the funny bone of economic enthusiasts.

Moving beyond the world of non-fiction, we take a lighthearted diversion into the realm of fiction that seems oddly reminiscent of our research pursuits. "The Scent of Success" by Penny Pine weaves a tale of corporate intrigue set in the aromatic world of household fragrances, while "The Baker's Dilemma" by Patty Punslinger provides a comedic escapade through the trials and tribulations of a baking business in a small Indiana town.

In a nod to the visual arts, we draw inspiration from movies that tangentially touch upon the subject at hand. "The Roast and the Furious" and its sequels depict high-speed culinary competitions where roasting takes on a whole new meaning, while "The Vacuum Cleaner Diaries" offers a whimsical take on the secret lives of household appliances.

The convergence of these sources and anecdotes serves to highlight the veritable feast of literary and cultural influences that color our exploration of the entwined worlds of household spending and culinary machinery operation. As we bring this humorous tapestry of literature to bear, we invite our readers to join us in savoring the comedic intricacies that underpin our scholarly pursuit of economic whimsy.


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 US household spending on housekeeping supplies and The number of food and tobacco roasting, baking, and drying machine operators and tenders in Indiana. 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 Bureau of Labor Statistics and Bureau of Larbor Statistics . You used data from 2003 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]]
"Whisk Away: Exploring the Interplay Between US Household Spending on Housekeeping Supplies and the Count of Food and Tobacco Roasting, Baking, and Drying Machine Operators and Tenders in Indiana"

[[ABSTRACT]]
This paper delves into the whimsically mundane yet oddly intriguing connection between US household spending on housekeeping supplies and the workforce engaged in the alchemical realm of food and tobacco roasting, baking, and drying machine operation in the Hoosier State. Leveraging data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics and the Bureau of Labor Statistics, our study weaves together the complex tapestry of consumer behavior and labor dynamics. The findings reveal a striking correlation coefficient of -0.7131344, with a p-value less than 0.01 for the period spanning 2003 to 2022, suggesting a coiling dance between the two seemingly disparate economic elements. The implications of this correlation provide fodder for contemplation, sparking humor and curiosity in the scholarly community as we ponder the delightful enigma of this unexpected association.

[[INTRODUCTION]]
In the world of economic research, we often revel in uncovering unexpected connections and unraveling the intricacies of seemingly unrelated variables. The interplay between US household spending on housekeeping supplies and the count of food and tobacco roasting, baking, and drying machine operators and tenders in Indiana may appear as banal as a loaf of bread, but our investigation has unearthed a delightful confluence of consumer behavior and labor dynamics.
As we delve deep into the labyrinthine data provided by the Bureau of Labor Statistics and the Bureau of Economic Analysis, we find ourselves captivated by the whimsical dance of statistics. Oh, the joy of discovering a correlation coefficient of -0.7131344, with a p-value less than 0.01 from 2003 to 2022! It's as if the data had decided to perform a culinary pas de deux, leaving us both amused and bemused by the enigmatic association between household spending and the realm of food and tobacco roasting, baking, and drying machine operation.
Upon closer scrutiny, the correlation between these variables unfolds like a carefully choreographed performance. One can almost envision the housekeeping supplies sneaking away from the shopping cart, only to be intercepted by the industrious hands of roasting, baking, and drying machine operators in Indiana, forming an oddly endearing symbiotic relationship. It's as if the coffeemakers and vacuum cleaners were engaging in a tango with the convection ovens and tobacco dryers, all while the economists in the audience scratch their heads in bewildered amusement.
This unexpected correlation offers a fascinating glimpse into the interconnected web of economic activity, where the mundane and the industrial collide in a delightful display of statistical whimsy. As we unravel the implications of this peculiar association, we invite our fellow scholars to join us in savoring the flavorful bouquet of economic surprises, for in the world of research, even the most mundane variables can reveal the most tantalizing secrets.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[METHODOLOGY]]



ChatGPT:

[[METHODOLOGY]]

To untangle the enigmatic association between US household spending on housekeeping supplies and the count of food and tobacco roasting, baking, and drying machine operators and tenders in Indiana, our research team embarked on a convoluted yet exhilarating journey through the digital realm, primarily relying on the archives of the Bureau of Labor Statistics and the Bureau of Labor Statistics. Our time machine, a.k.a. the internet, allowed us to harness data from the years 2003 to 2022, providing us with a rich tapestry of information that we lovingly refer to as "data à la mode."

The first dish on our experimental menu was a delectable concoction of regression analysis, diligently garnished with variables such as average household spending on cleaning products and the number of food and tobacco roasting, baking, and drying machine operators and tenders gainfully employed in the charming state of Indiana. These succulent statistical morsels were lovingly marinated in rigorous mathematical models, seasoned with the finest p-values and correlation coefficients, and slow-cooked to statistical perfection using the finest computing contraptions at our disposal.

We employed an eclectic mix of data transformation and normalization techniques to ensure that our statistical stew was free from lumps and anomalies, creating a silky-smooth blend of variables that would make any data connoisseur’s palate sing with statistical euphoria. Upon achieving this harmonious blend, we lovingly crafted charts and graphs, aspiring to be the Picasso of data visualization, to illustrate the interplay between household spending on housekeeping supplies and the count of industrious food and tobacco roasting, baking, and drying machine operators and tenders in the savory landscape of Indiana.

In the spirit of academic culinary creativity, we basted our methodology with a non-linear regression model, allowing the flavors of our variables to meld and intermingle in a fanciful dance of mathematical measurement. This model acted as our trusty microscope, magnifying the intricate dance of the variables, revealing the subtle interactions and correlations that unfolded like a gastronomic opera on the statistical stage.

The final dish on our menu was a sumptuous multivariate analysis, a recipe concocted to tease out the nuances and complexities of the relationship between household spending and the industrious activities of food and tobacco roasting, baking, and drying machine operation. This sumptuous feast of statistical techniques served as our pièce de résistance as we dined on the tantalizing findings that emerged from this delightful statistical banquet.

Thus, our methodology was a carefully curated blend of data wizardry, statistical seasoning, and a pinch of academic mischief, resulting in a flavorful exploration of the entwined realms of US household spending and the diligent workforce of Indiana.


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 US household spending on housekeeping supplies and The number of food and tobacco roasting, baking, and drying machine operators and tenders in Indiana. 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 Bureau of Labor Statistics and Bureau of Larbor Statistics .

For the time period 2003 to 2022, you found a correlation -0.7131344, r-squared of 0.5085607, 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]]
"Whisk Away: Exploring the Interplay Between US Household Spending on Housekeeping Supplies and the Count of Food and Tobacco Roasting, Baking, and Drying Machine Operators and Tenders in Indiana"

[[ABSTRACT]]
This paper delves into the whimsically mundane yet oddly intriguing connection between US household spending on housekeeping supplies and the workforce engaged in the alchemical realm of food and tobacco roasting, baking, and drying machine operation in the Hoosier State. Leveraging data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics and the Bureau of Labor Statistics, our study weaves together the complex tapestry of consumer behavior and labor dynamics. The findings reveal a striking correlation coefficient of -0.7131344, with a p-value less than 0.01 for the period spanning 2003 to 2022, suggesting a coiling dance between the two seemingly disparate economic elements. The implications of this correlation provide fodder for contemplation, sparking humor and curiosity in the scholarly community as we ponder the delightful enigma of this unexpected association.

-------

And here is the methodology section that led to this result:
[[METHODOLOGY]]
In the world of economic research, we often revel in uncovering unexpected connections and unraveling the intricacies of seemingly unrelated variables. The interplay between US household spending on housekeeping supplies and the count of food and tobacco roasting, baking, and drying machine operators and tenders in Indiana may appear as banal as a loaf of bread, but our investigation has unearthed a delightful confluence of consumer behavior and labor dynamics.
As we delve deep into the labyrinthine data provided by the Bureau of Labor Statistics and the Bureau of Economic Analysis, we find ourselves captivated by the whimsical dance of statistics. Oh, the joy of discovering a correlation coefficient of -0.7131344, with a p-value less than 0.01 from 2003 to 2022! It's as if the data had decided to perform a culinary pas de deux, leaving us both amused and bemused by the enigmatic association between household spending and the realm of food and tobacco roasting, baking, and drying machine operation.
Upon closer scrutiny, the correlation between these variables unfolds like a carefully choreographed performance. One can almost envision the housekeeping supplies sneaking away from the shopping cart, only to be intercepted by the industrious hands of roasting, baking, and drying machine operators in Indiana, forming an oddly endearing symbiotic relationship. It's as if the coffeemakers and vacuum cleaners were engaging in a tango with the convection ovens and tobacco dryers, all while the economists in the audience scratch their heads in bewildered amusement.
This unexpected correlation offers a fascinating glimpse into the interconnected web of economic activity, where the mundane and the industrial collide in a delightful display of statistical whimsy. As we unravel the implications of this peculiar association, we invite our fellow scholars to join us in savoring the flavorful bouquet of economic surprises, for in the world of research, even the most mundane variables can reveal the most tantalizing secrets.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[RESULTS]]



ChatGPT:

[[RESULTS]]

The data spanning from 2003 to 2022 unveiled a captivating correlation between US household spending on housekeeping supplies and the count of food and tobacco roasting, baking, and drying machine operators and tenders in the state of Indiana. Our analysis yielded a correlation coefficient of -0.7131344, indicating a notable inverse relationship between the two variables. The r-squared value of 0.5085607 further accentuates the strength of this connection, providing compelling evidence to support the observed correlation. Additionally, the p-value of less than 0.01 signifies the statistical significance of our findings, offering a robust foundation for the implications derived from this curious association.

Figure 1 presents a scatterplot, showcasing the striking correlation between US household spending on housekeeping supplies and the count of food and tobacco roasting, baking, and drying machine operators and tenders in Indiana. The visual representation of this connection serves as a testament to the whimsical nature of our exploratory journey, providing a glimpse into the delightful dance of statistical eccentricity.

These results paint a vivid picture of the intricate interplay between consumer behavior and labor dynamics, demonstrating the unexpected harmony between the everyday purchases of housekeeping supplies and the labor force engaged in the captivating world of food and tobacco processing. The seemingly unassuming variables have joined hands in a statistical waltz, inviting scholars to partake in the whimsical spectacle of economic discovery.


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 US household spending on housekeeping supplies and The number of food and tobacco roasting, baking, and drying machine operators and tenders in Indiana. 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]]
"Whisk Away: Exploring the Interplay Between US Household Spending on Housekeeping Supplies and the Count of Food and Tobacco Roasting, Baking, and Drying Machine Operators and Tenders in Indiana"

[[ABSTRACT]]
This paper delves into the whimsically mundane yet oddly intriguing connection between US household spending on housekeeping supplies and the workforce engaged in the alchemical realm of food and tobacco roasting, baking, and drying machine operation in the Hoosier State. Leveraging data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics and the Bureau of Labor Statistics, our study weaves together the complex tapestry of consumer behavior and labor dynamics. The findings reveal a striking correlation coefficient of -0.7131344, with a p-value less than 0.01 for the period spanning 2003 to 2022, suggesting a coiling dance between the two seemingly disparate economic elements. The implications of this correlation provide fodder for contemplation, sparking humor and curiosity in the scholarly community as we ponder the delightful enigma of this unexpected association.

[[LITERATURE REVIEW]]
The intriguing interplay between US household spending on housekeeping supplies and the count of food and tobacco roasting, baking, and drying machine operators and tenders in Indiana has piqued the curiosity of researchers and economists alike. As improbable as it may seem, the relationship between these seemingly disparate variables has been a subject of curiosity and investigation for many scholars.
Smith et al. (2015) provide an initial examination of consumer spending on domestic products and its potential influence on the labor market in their study "Economic Dynamics of Household Expenditures." The authors navigate through the labyrinth of consumer behavior, shedding light on the intricate connections between household purchases and workforce dynamics. However, little did they know that their serious inquiry into economic patterns would set the stage for a comedic performance of statistical serendipity.
As we further explore the whimsical terrain of economic connections, Doe (2019) presents a comprehensive analysis of the labor market in Indiana in "Labor Force Dynamics in the Heartland." While their focus primarily centers on the demographic shifts and industrial trends, an observant reader might catch a subtle wink from the data, hinting at the impending rendezvous between mops and microfiber cloths with industrial-scale baking and roasting equipment.
Jones (2017) takes a more direct approach in "Economic Intersections: Unraveling Unexpected Correlations," delving into the intricate web of economic variables and their surprising interactions. Little did Jones know that the most unexpected intersection lay in the unlikeliest of places - the domestic aisles of the average American household, intertwining with the bustling world of food and tobacco roasting, baking, and drying machine operation.
Transitioning from scholarly articles, we venture into the realm of non-fiction books that lay the groundwork for our whimsical exploration. "Spills, Thrills, and Dollar Bills: The Economics of Clean Living" by Dr. Suds McBroom offers a bubbly insight into the world of household products and their economic influence, while "Flour Power: A Culinary and Economic Odyssey" by B. Ready provides a delectable journey through the economics of baking, tantalizing the taste buds and tickling the funny bone of economic enthusiasts.
Moving beyond the world of non-fiction, we take a lighthearted diversion into the realm of fiction that seems oddly reminiscent of our research pursuits. "The Scent of Success" by Penny Pine weaves a tale of corporate intrigue set in the aromatic world of household fragrances, while "The Baker's Dilemma" by Patty Punslinger provides a comedic escapade through the trials and tribulations of a baking business in a small Indiana town.
In a nod to the visual arts, we draw inspiration from movies that tangentially touch upon the subject at hand. "The Roast and the Furious" and its sequels depict high-speed culinary competitions where roasting takes on a whole new meaning, while "The Vacuum Cleaner Diaries" offers a whimsical take on the secret lives of household appliances.
The convergence of these sources and anecdotes serves to highlight the veritable feast of literary and cultural influences that color our exploration of the entwined worlds of household spending and culinary machinery operation. As we bring this humorous tapestry of literature to bear, we invite our readers to join us in savoring the comedic intricacies that underpin our scholarly pursuit of economic whimsy.

[[RESULTS]]
The data spanning from 2003 to 2022 unveiled a captivating correlation between US household spending on housekeeping supplies and the count of food and tobacco roasting, baking, and drying machine operators and tenders in the state of Indiana. Our analysis yielded a correlation coefficient of -0.7131344, indicating a notable inverse relationship between the two variables. The r-squared value of 0.5085607 further accentuates the strength of this connection, providing compelling evidence to support the observed correlation. Additionally, the p-value of less than 0.01 signifies the statistical significance of our findings, offering a robust foundation for the implications derived from this curious association.
Figure 1 presents a scatterplot, showcasing the striking correlation between US household spending on housekeeping supplies and the count of food and tobacco roasting, baking, and drying machine operators and tenders in Indiana. The visual representation of this connection serves as a testament to the whimsical nature of our exploratory journey, providing a glimpse into the delightful dance of statistical eccentricity.
These results paint a vivid picture of the intricate interplay between consumer behavior and labor dynamics, demonstrating the unexpected harmony between the everyday purchases of housekeeping supplies and the labor force engaged in the captivating world of food and tobacco processing. The seemingly unassuming variables have joined hands in a statistical waltz, inviting scholars to partake in the whimsical spectacle of economic discovery.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[DISCUSSION]]



ChatGPT:

[[DISCUSSION]]

The results of our study offer a delightful confirmation of the peculiar relationship between US household spending on housekeeping supplies and the count of food and tobacco roasting, baking, and drying machine operators and tenders in Indiana. Astoundingly, the correlation coefficient of -0.7131344 stands as a testament to the exquisite dance of statistical whimsy that underpins this unlikely nexus. While one might be tempted to scoff at the notion of mops and baking ovens synchronizing their economic rhythms, our findings have unequivocally validated the presence of this captivating association.

If we reflect on the scholarly work that set the stage for our investigation, we find a wink from the jocular muses of fate. Smith et al. (2015) waded through the labyrinth of consumer behavior, perhaps unknowingly paving the way for the rollicking encounter of cleaning solvents with the clinking machinery of culinary operations in Indiana. Doe (2019) and Jones (2017), in their somber economic analyses, unwittingly stoked the embers of laughter, setting the scene for the merry jest of statistical serendipity that pervades our study.

The alignment of our results with these prior inquiries not only bolsters the credibility of our findings but also beckons the scholarly community to jocularly embrace the captivating enigma that we have unearthed. The statistical waltz of household spending and industrial operation in Indiana deftly supplants conventional wisdom with the whimsical charm of unexpected correlations, offering a delightful repast for the discerning palate of economic curiosity.

Indeed, the interplay between these seemingly unrelated variables serves as a jocund testament to the capricious nature of statistical relationships. Our study not only contributes a touch of levity to the scholarly arena but also serves as a whimsical reminder that amidst the labyrinthine corridors of data analysis, the merry dance of statistical peculiarities awaits, ready to regale the discerning observer with its unforeseen revelries.


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 US household spending on housekeeping supplies and The number of food and tobacco roasting, baking, and drying machine operators and tenders in Indiana. 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]]
"Whisk Away: Exploring the Interplay Between US Household Spending on Housekeeping Supplies and the Count of Food and Tobacco Roasting, Baking, and Drying Machine Operators and Tenders in Indiana"

[[ABSTRACT]]
This paper delves into the whimsically mundane yet oddly intriguing connection between US household spending on housekeeping supplies and the workforce engaged in the alchemical realm of food and tobacco roasting, baking, and drying machine operation in the Hoosier State. Leveraging data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics and the Bureau of Labor Statistics, our study weaves together the complex tapestry of consumer behavior and labor dynamics. The findings reveal a striking correlation coefficient of -0.7131344, with a p-value less than 0.01 for the period spanning 2003 to 2022, suggesting a coiling dance between the two seemingly disparate economic elements. The implications of this correlation provide fodder for contemplation, sparking humor and curiosity in the scholarly community as we ponder the delightful enigma of this unexpected association.

[[INTRDUCTION]]
In the world of economic research, we often revel in uncovering unexpected connections and unraveling the intricacies of seemingly unrelated variables. The interplay between US household spending on housekeeping supplies and the count of food and tobacco roasting, baking, and drying machine operators and tenders in Indiana may appear as banal as a loaf of bread, but our investigation has unearthed a delightful confluence of consumer behavior and labor dynamics.
As we delve deep into the labyrinthine data provided by the Bureau of Labor Statistics and the Bureau of Economic Analysis, we find ourselves captivated by the whimsical dance of statistics. Oh, the joy of discovering a correlation coefficient of -0.7131344, with a p-value less than 0.01 from 2003 to 2022! It's as if the data had decided to perform a culinary pas de deux, leaving us both amused and bemused by the enigmatic association between household spending and the realm of food and tobacco roasting, baking, and drying machine operation.
Upon closer scrutiny, the correlation between these variables unfolds like a carefully choreographed performance. One can almost envision the housekeeping supplies sneaking away from the shopping cart, only to be intercepted by the industrious hands of roasting, baking, and drying machine operators in Indiana, forming an oddly endearing symbiotic relationship. It's as if the coffeemakers and vacuum cleaners were engaging in a tango with the convection ovens and tobacco dryers, all while the economists in the audience scratch their heads in bewildered amusement.
This unexpected correlation offers a fascinating glimpse into the interconnected web of economic activity, where the mundane and the industrial collide in a delightful display of statistical whimsy. As we unravel the implications of this peculiar association, we invite our fellow scholars to join us in savoring the flavorful bouquet of economic surprises, for in the world of research, even the most mundane variables can reveal the most tantalizing secrets.

[[RESULTS]]
The data spanning from 2003 to 2022 unveiled a captivating correlation between US household spending on housekeeping supplies and the count of food and tobacco roasting, baking, and drying machine operators and tenders in the state of Indiana. Our analysis yielded a correlation coefficient of -0.7131344, indicating a notable inverse relationship between the two variables. The r-squared value of 0.5085607 further accentuates the strength of this connection, providing compelling evidence to support the observed correlation. Additionally, the p-value of less than 0.01 signifies the statistical significance of our findings, offering a robust foundation for the implications derived from this curious association.
Figure 1 presents a scatterplot, showcasing the striking correlation between US household spending on housekeeping supplies and the count of food and tobacco roasting, baking, and drying machine operators and tenders in Indiana. The visual representation of this connection serves as a testament to the whimsical nature of our exploratory journey, providing a glimpse into the delightful dance of statistical eccentricity.
These results paint a vivid picture of the intricate interplay between consumer behavior and labor dynamics, demonstrating the unexpected harmony between the everyday purchases of housekeeping supplies and the labor force engaged in the captivating world of food and tobacco processing. The seemingly unassuming variables have joined hands in a statistical waltz, inviting scholars to partake in the whimsical spectacle of economic discovery.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[CONCLUSION]]



ChatGPT:

[[CONCLUSION]]

In conclusion, our investigation into the correlation between US household spending on housekeeping supplies and the count of food and tobacco roasting, baking, and drying machine operators and tenders in Indiana has unveiled a delightful enigma within the economic realm. The statistical tango between these variables has left us both astounded and entertained, akin to witnessing a synchronised ballet performance by the quirkiest of statistical odd couples. It seems as though the laundry detergents and fabric softeners have found a savory partnership with the tobacco dryers and bread ovens, crafting a whimsically charming saga of economic association.

The robust correlation coefficient of -0.7131344, reminiscent of a deftly executed magic trick, has not only piqued our curiosity but stands as a testament to the captivating interplay between the esoteric world of consumer behavior and the industrious labor force. The visual allure of Figure 1, akin to a Mona Lisa of statistical peculiarity, showcases the enchanting allure of this unexpected correlation, inviting the scholarly community to indulge in the lighthearted revelry of economic revelation.

As we reflect on the unfolding narrative of this correlation, one cannot help but marvel at the intricacies of the economic stage, where the most mundane variables can tango with the unlikeliest of counterparts. We urge our esteemed colleagues to relish in the whimsical marvel of this statistical oddity and embrace the sheer unpredictability of economic performances. With a theatrical flair, we assert that further research in this area may not be needed - for the curtain has not only closed but exited stage left, leaving behind a lingering enigma for the scholarly community to savor.


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 Whisk Away: Exploring the Interplay Between US Household Spending on Housekeeping Supplies and the Count of Food and Tobacco Roasting, Baking, and Drying Machine Operators and Tenders in Indiana. Respond only with the name of a fictional academic journal.

ChatGPT:

The Journal of Domestic Economics and Occupational Dynamics


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 Whisk Away: Exploring the Interplay Between US Household Spending on Housekeeping Supplies and the Count of Food and Tobacco Roasting, Baking, and Drying Machine Operators and Tenders in Indiana. Respond only with the name of a fictional organization.

ChatGPT:

Association for Domestic Economics and Labor Statistics


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 Whisk Away: Exploring the Interplay Between US Household Spending on Housekeeping Supplies and the Count of Food and Tobacco Roasting, Baking, and Drying Machine Operators and Tenders in Indiana with an abstract of This paper delves into the whimsically mundane yet oddly intriguing connection between US household spending on housekeeping supplies and the workforce engaged in the alchemical realm of food and tobacco roasting, baking, and drying machine operation in the Hoosier State. Leveraging data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics and the Bureau of Labor Statistics, our study weaves together the complex tapestry of consumer behavior and labor dynamics. The findings reveal a striking correlation coefficient of -0.7131344, with a p-value less than 0.01 for the period spanning 2003 to 2022, suggesting a coiling dance between the two seemingly disparate economic elements. The implications of this correlation provide fodder for contemplation, sparking humor and curiosity in the scholarly community as we ponder the delightful enigma of this unexpected association.

ChatGPT:

US household spending, housekeeping supplies, food and tobacco roasting, baking and drying machine operators, US Bureau of Labor Statistics, Indiana labor dynamics, consumer behavior, correlation coefficient, economic elements, scholarly community, unexpected association

*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

US household spending on housekeeping supplies
Detailed data title: Annual US household spend on housekeeping supplies, as a percentage of total household spend
Source: Bureau of Labor Statistics
See what else correlates with US household spending on housekeeping supplies

The number of food and tobacco roasting, baking, and drying machine operators and tenders in Indiana
Detailed data title: BLS estimate of food and tobacco roasting, baking, and drying machine operators and tenders in Indiana
Source: Bureau of Larbor Statistics
See what else correlates with The number of food and tobacco roasting, baking, and drying machine operators and tenders in Indiana

Correlation r = -0.7131344 (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 = 0.5085607 (Coefficient of determination)
This means 50.9% of the change in the one variable (i.e., The number of food and tobacco roasting, baking, and drying machine operators and tenders in Indiana) is predictable based on the change in the other (i.e., US household spending on housekeeping supplies) over the 20 years from 2003 through 2022.

p < 0.01, which is statistically significant(Null hypothesis significance test)
The p-value is 0.00042. 0.0004161556185096540600000000
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 -0.71 in 0.042% of random cases. Said differently, if you correlated 2,403 random variables Which I absolutely did.
with the same 19 degrees of freedom, Degrees of freedom is a measure of how many free components we are testing. In this case it is 19 because we have two variables measured over a period of 20 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.

[ -0.88, -0.4 ] 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.
20032004200520062007200820092010201120122013201420152016201720182019202020212022
US household spending on housekeeping supplies (Household spend)1.296031.368821.316561.322311.287321.295411.343061.272111.23731.18581.262231.181421.17011.151611.257081.220111.215181.364661.19981.07857
The number of food and tobacco roasting, baking, and drying machine operators and tenders in Indiana (Laborers)370340310220160130120360450430190310380370350320370190330880




Why this works

  1. 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.
  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. Y-axis doesn't start at zero: I truncated the Y-axes of the graph above. I also used a line graph, which makes the visual connection stand out more than it deserves. Nothing against line graphs. They are great at telling a story when you have linear data! But visually it is deceptive because the only data is at the points on the graph, not the lines on the graph. In between each point, the data could have been doing anything. Like going for a random walk by itself!
    Mathematically what I showed is true, but it is intentionally misleading. Below is the same chart but with both Y-axes starting at zero.
  5. Inverted Y-axis: I inverted the Y-axis on the chart above so that the lines would move together. This is visually pleasing, but not at all intuitive. Below is a line graph that does not invert the Y-axis.




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([1.29603,1.36882,1.31656,1.32231,1.28732,1.29541,1.34306,1.27211,1.2373,1.1858,1.26223,1.18142,1.1701,1.15161,1.25708,1.22011,1.21518,1.36466,1.1998,1.07857,])
array_2 = np.array([370,340,310,220,160,130,120,360,450,430,190,310,380,370,350,320,370,190,330,880,])
array_1_name = "US household spending on housekeeping supplies"
array_2_name = "The number of food and tobacco roasting, baking, and drying machine operators and tenders in Indiana"

# 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?

You're a rater extraordinaire!


Correlation ID: 1905 · Black Variable ID: 19971 · Red Variable ID: 7818
about · subscribe · emailme@tylervigen.com · twitter

CC BY 4.0