about · email me · subscribe
Spurious correlation #4,529 · View random

A linear line chart with years as the X-axis and two variables on the Y-axis. The first variable is US Tree Nut Consumption per Person and the second variable is Votes for the Republican Presidential candidate in West Virginia.  The chart goes from 2000 to 2020, and the two variables track closely in value over that time. Small Image
Download png
, svg

AI explanation

As tree nut consumption rose, more people started cracking up at political jokes, inadvertently swaying their support towards the Republican candidate who promised a “butter" future. “When it comes to politics, it’s all about finding the ‘republican’ right mix of almonds and cashews to win over the voters!”

Model: dalle-3
Prompt: [An image that looks like it is a scene from a Pixar movie] A colorful, sun-dappled view of a West Virginia backyard. A picnic table is the centerpiece, with a group of anthropomorphic animals gathered around it. Squirrels, raccoons, and chipmunks sit together, sharing a bowl of mixed tree nuts – almonds, cashews, and walnuts. As they munch on the nuts, their eyes light up with joy and laughter, and the atmosphere is filled with a sense of conviviality. In the background, a large red banner with the Republican party symbol flutters in the breeze. A charismatic red squirrel, representing the Republican presidential candidate, stands atop a small platform, making a passionate speech about a "butter" future, accompanied by resolute gestures and nods. The audience of animals cheers and nods in agreement, their faces reflecting the sense of unity and hope fostered by the gathering. The scene is infused with warm, golden light and a sense of nostalgia, reminiscent of a heartfelt Pixar movie. 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 Tree Nut Consumption per Person and Votes for the Republican Presidential candidate in West Virginia. 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: An image that looks like it is a scene from a Pixar movie Pop art Surrealism Photorealism Sci-fi fantacy
ChatGPT: An image that looks like it is a scene from a Pixar movie

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 Tree Nut Consumption per Person and Votes for the Republican Presidential candidate in West Virginia, in the following situation: As tree nut consumption rose, more people started cracking up at political jokes, inadvertently swaying their support towards the Republican candidate who promised a “butter" future. “When it comes to politics, it’s all about finding the ‘republican’ right mix of almonds and cashews to win over the voters!”. Keep the description simple.
ChatGPT: Picture a barbeque in West Virginia where people are gathered around a picnic table. On one side, there is a bowl of mixed tree nuts – almonds, cashews, and walnuts. As the tree nut consumption per person increases, more and more people are laughing and chuckling at political jokes. Meanwhile, in the background, a large red banner with the Republican party symbol is visible. The Republican presidential candidate is making a speech, promising a "butter" future, and people are cheering and nodding in agreement, swayed by the laughter and camaraderie fostered by the tree nuts.

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: [ An image that looks like it is a scene from a Pixar movie ] and depicting this scene: Picture a barbeque in West Virginia where people are gathered around a picnic table. On one side, there is a bowl of mixed tree nuts – almonds, cashews, and walnuts. As the tree nut consumption per person increases, more and more people are laughing and chuckling at political jokes. Meanwhile, in the background, a large red banner with the Republican party symbol is visible. The Republican presidential candidate is making a speech, promising a "butter" future, and people are cheering and nodding in agreement, swayed by the laughter and camaraderie fostered by the tree nuts. Keep the visual depiction simple. Do not include any words or speech bubbles.
ChatGPT: [An image that looks like it is a scene from a Pixar movie] A colorful, sun-dappled view of a West Virginia backyard. A picnic table is the centerpiece, with a group of anthropomorphic animals gathered around it. Squirrels, raccoons, and chipmunks sit together, sharing a bowl of mixed tree nuts – almonds, cashews, and walnuts. As they munch on the nuts, their eyes light up with joy and laughter, and the atmosphere is filled with a sense of conviviality. In the background, a large red banner with the Republican party symbol flutters in the breeze. A charismatic red squirrel, representing the Republican presidential candidate, stands atop a small platform, making a passionate speech about a "butter" future, accompanied by resolute gestures and nods. The audience of animals cheers and nods in agreement, their faces reflecting the sense of unity and hope fostered by the gathering. The scene is infused with warm, golden light and a sense of nostalgia, reminiscent of a heartfelt Pixar movie.

*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 an increase in US Tree Nut Consumption per Person caused Votes for the Republican Presidential candidate in West Virginia to increase. Add a funny one-liner at the end.

AI academic paper

(Because p < 0.01)
Nut Consumption and Republican Presidential Vote: The West Virginia Connection

The Journal of Nutty Political Science

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

Please draft the title and abstract of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between US Tree Nut Consumption per Person and Votes for the Republican Presidential candidate in West Virginia. You can't resist a good dad joke. Add a relevant dad joke related to the content every couple of sentences.

Rhyme words in the title.

Your research team used data from Statista and MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse to assess this nagging question. You found a correlation coefficient of 0.9766254 and p < 0.01 for 2000 to 2020.

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

[[TITLE]]
Lorem ipsum dolor sit

[[ABSTRACT]]
Lorem ipsum dolor sit



ChatGPT:
[[TITLE]]
Nut Consumption and Republican Presidential Vote: The West Virginia Connection

[[ABSTRACT]]
This study prYSidentiaLly investigates the surprising correlation between per capita tree nut consumption and votes for the Republican presidential candidate in the state of West Virginia. Using data from Statista and the MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, we scrutinized this nutty relationship from the year 2000 to 2020. Our findings reveal a striking correlation coefficient of 0.9766254 and a p-value of less than 0.01, suggesting that nut consumption may be unshelled remarkable influence on political choices. It seems the GOP really does have a "cashew" in the hearts of nut-loving West Virginians!


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

Please make up the introduction section of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between US Tree Nut Consumption per Person and Votes for the Republican Presidential candidate in West Virginia. You can't resist a good dad joke. Add a relevant dad joke related to the content every couple of sentences. Sneak in some jokes and clever puns about science, research, statistics, and the variables.

Here is the title and abstract of the paper:
[[TITLE]]
Nut Consumption and Republican Presidential Vote: The West Virginia Connection

[[ABSTRACT]]
This study prYSidentiaLly investigates the surprising correlation between per capita tree nut consumption and votes for the Republican presidential candidate in the state of West Virginia. Using data from Statista and the MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, we scrutinized this nutty relationship from the year 2000 to 2020. Our findings reveal a striking correlation coefficient of 0.9766254 and a p-value of less than 0.01, suggesting that nut consumption may be unshelled remarkable influence on political choices. It seems the GOP really does have a "cashew" in the hearts of nut-loving West Virginians!

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[INTRODUCTION]]



ChatGPT:
[[INTRODUCTION]]

In recent years, there has been an increasing interest in understanding the various factors that influence political behavior and voting patterns. While numerous studies have examined the impact of demographic, socioeconomic, and cultural variables on electoral outcomes, the association between dietary habits and political preferences has garnered surprisingly little attention. It's time to crack open the shell of this untapped area of research and see what tasty nuggets we can find!

The aim of the current study is to explore the peculiar relationship between tree nut consumption per capita and votes for the Republican presidential candidate in the mountainous state of West Virginia. This unlikely coupling has become the subject of curiosity and speculation, leaving researchers wondering whether there's really something nutty going on behind the scenes. It's a matter of "politic-almonds," you might say!

As electoral politics and food consumption are areas typically regarded as disparate fields of study, one might be forgiven for the initial skepticism towards this line of inquiry. However, as the saying goes, "the proof of the pudding is in the eating," and statistical analysis has the potential to reveal surprising connections where one might least expect them. It's time to shell out the details and crack the nut of this enigmatic relationship!

It is important to note that, while this study does not attempt to establish a definitive causative link between nut consumption and political voting behavior, it aims to shed light on the unequivocal association between these variables. After all, correlation does not imply causation – but it certainly does raise an eyebrow when you see it in the polling data! This research will seek to provide valuable insight into the factors that may influence political preferences, expanding our understanding of voters' choices and perhaps leaving us all a little "chestnut"-founded.


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

Please make up a literature review section of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between US Tree Nut Consumption per Person and Votes for the Republican Presidential candidate in West Virginia. 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 the backs of shampoo bottles.

Here is the title and abstract of the paper:
[[TITLE]]
Nut Consumption and Republican Presidential Vote: The West Virginia Connection

[[ABSTRACT]]
This study prYSidentiaLly investigates the surprising correlation between per capita tree nut consumption and votes for the Republican presidential candidate in the state of West Virginia. Using data from Statista and the MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, we scrutinized this nutty relationship from the year 2000 to 2020. Our findings reveal a striking correlation coefficient of 0.9766254 and a p-value of less than 0.01, suggesting that nut consumption may be unshelled remarkable influence on political choices. It seems the GOP really does have a "cashew" in the hearts of nut-loving West Virginians!

-------

And here is the introduction section that led to this literature review:
[[INTRODUCTION]]
In recent years, there has been an increasing interest in understanding the various factors that influence political behavior and voting patterns. While numerous studies have examined the impact of demographic, socioeconomic, and cultural variables on electoral outcomes, the association between dietary habits and political preferences has garnered surprisingly little attention. It's time to crack open the shell of this untapped area of research and see what tasty nuggets we can find!
The aim of the current study is to explore the peculiar relationship between tree nut consumption per capita and votes for the Republican presidential candidate in the mountainous state of West Virginia. This unlikely coupling has become the subject of curiosity and speculation, leaving researchers wondering whether there's really something nutty going on behind the scenes. It's a matter of "politic-almonds," you might say!
As electoral politics and food consumption are areas typically regarded as disparate fields of study, one might be forgiven for the initial skepticism towards this line of inquiry. However, as the saying goes, "the proof of the pudding is in the eating," and statistical analysis has the potential to reveal surprising connections where one might least expect them. It's time to shell out the details and crack the nut of this enigmatic relationship!
It is important to note that, while this study does not attempt to establish a definitive causative link between nut consumption and political voting behavior, it aims to shed light on the unequivocal association between these variables. After all, correlation does not imply causation – but it certainly does raise an eyebrow when you see it in the polling data! This research will seek to provide valuable insight into the factors that may influence political preferences, expanding our understanding of voters' choices and perhaps leaving us all a little "chestnut"-founded.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[LITERATURE REVIEW]]



ChatGPT:
[[LITERATURE REVIEW]]

The connection between dietary habits and political behavior has long been a subject of interest among researchers. In "Nutrition and Political Ideologies," Smith et al. found that individuals with differing political inclinations tend to display distinct dietary preferences, with conservatives favoring protein-rich, hearty meals, while liberals lean towards organic, plant-based options. When it comes to nut consumption, the authors reported a marginal yet statistically significant association with conservative political affiliations, suggesting that nuts may hold a kernel of influence over partisan leanings. Speaking of kernels, did you hear about the walnut who ran for office? He didn't win, but he cracked up the voters!

Moving on, Doe and Jones delved into the intersection of food consumption and voting patterns in their work "The Political Influence of Legumes and Nuts." Their comprehensive analysis revealed a noticeable correlation between legume consumption and liberal voting tendencies, but it surprisingly failed to find a similar pattern for tree nuts. Though their findings cast doubt on a universal relationship between nut consumption and political affiliations, it's worth noting that the study did not account for state-specific variations. This omission may have overlooked the potential for a "West Virginia walnut effect." It's like they say, "to understand the whole truth, you've got to go out on a limb!"

An in-depth investigation of the intersection between nut consumption and political preferences reveals a scarcity of research specifically focusing on West Virginia. However, in "Nuts about Politics: An Electoral Analysis," Brown et al. observed a strong positive correlation between pecan pie consumption and enthusiasm for traditional southern values, a factor that could be relevant in the context of West Virginia's political landscape. Not to mention, the classic pecan pie dad joke – "Why did the pecan pie go to school? To become a little breader!"

Turning to related non-fiction literature, Grains and Gains: The Economic and Nutritional Impact of Tree Nuts by White offers an illuminating look at the economic and dietary significance of tree nut production and consumption in the United States. Meanwhile, Nutritional Politics: A Nutshell History of Food and Government by Black provides a historical perspective on the intertwining of food policies and political ideologies, although it regrettably overlooks the specific role of nut consumption in shaping voting preferences. And who could forget about George R.R. Martin's A Song of Almonds and Fire, where the battle for the Iron Throne is fueled by nothing but almonds? It's a "Game of Scones" out there!

Further investigation into sources beyond academic literature led the researchers to explore unsuspecting realms of information. In a surprising twist, the authors stumbled upon the backs of random shampoo bottles, which, remarkably, seemed to contain cryptic messages about the correlation between nut consumption and political allegiance. While it may be a sudsy source of information, it raises the intriguing prospect that even the most unexpected places may harbor kernels of truth. After all, who could have predicted that a bottle of nut-scented shampoo could hold the key to understanding West Virginia's voting patterns? It seems like the voters are really lathering up in Republican support!


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

Please make up the methodology section of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between US Tree Nut Consumption per Person and Votes for the Republican Presidential candidate in West Virginia. You can't resist a good dad joke. Add a relevant dad joke related to the content every couple of sentences. Sneak in some jokes and clever puns about science, research, statistics, and the variables.

Your research team collected data from all across the internet, but mostly just used information from Statista and MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse . You used data from 2000 to 2020

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

Here is the title, abstract, and introduction of the paper:
[[TITLE]]
Nut Consumption and Republican Presidential Vote: The West Virginia Connection

[[ABSTRACT]]
This study prYSidentiaLly investigates the surprising correlation between per capita tree nut consumption and votes for the Republican presidential candidate in the state of West Virginia. Using data from Statista and the MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, we scrutinized this nutty relationship from the year 2000 to 2020. Our findings reveal a striking correlation coefficient of 0.9766254 and a p-value of less than 0.01, suggesting that nut consumption may be unshelled remarkable influence on political choices. It seems the GOP really does have a "cashew" in the hearts of nut-loving West Virginians!

[[INTRODUCTION]]
In recent years, there has been an increasing interest in understanding the various factors that influence political behavior and voting patterns. While numerous studies have examined the impact of demographic, socioeconomic, and cultural variables on electoral outcomes, the association between dietary habits and political preferences has garnered surprisingly little attention. It's time to crack open the shell of this untapped area of research and see what tasty nuggets we can find!
The aim of the current study is to explore the peculiar relationship between tree nut consumption per capita and votes for the Republican presidential candidate in the mountainous state of West Virginia. This unlikely coupling has become the subject of curiosity and speculation, leaving researchers wondering whether there's really something nutty going on behind the scenes. It's a matter of "politic-almonds," you might say!
As electoral politics and food consumption are areas typically regarded as disparate fields of study, one might be forgiven for the initial skepticism towards this line of inquiry. However, as the saying goes, "the proof of the pudding is in the eating," and statistical analysis has the potential to reveal surprising connections where one might least expect them. It's time to shell out the details and crack the nut of this enigmatic relationship!
It is important to note that, while this study does not attempt to establish a definitive causative link between nut consumption and political voting behavior, it aims to shed light on the unequivocal association between these variables. After all, correlation does not imply causation – but it certainly does raise an eyebrow when you see it in the polling data! This research will seek to provide valuable insight into the factors that may influence political preferences, expanding our understanding of voters' choices and perhaps leaving us all a little "chestnut"-founded.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[METHODOLOGY]]



ChatGPT:

[[METHODOLOGY]]

To con-"duct" our research, we gathered data from Statista and the MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, spanning the years 2000 to 2020. Our research team took a "pecan"-t interest in examining the per capita consumption of tree nuts in West Virginia and juxtaposing it with votes for the Republican presidential candidate. We've certainly gone "nuts" in our endeavor to crack this intriguing nutty relationship.

In order to ensure comprehensive coverage of the data, we utilized various sources, scrutinizing consumption patterns of almonds, walnuts, cashews, and other tree nuts. This thorough investigation allowed us to gain a well-rounded understanding of the "kernel" of the matter. Our efforts were certainly not "half-hazelnut"!

Following the acquisition of data, we employed a rigorous statistical analysis to identify any patterns or correlations between nut consumption and Republican votes. We utilized regression models, hypothesis testing, and correlation analyses to peel back the layers of this unexpected association. Rest assured, we didn't "shell" out on the statistical methods.

We examined the data with a "sharp" focus on identifying any outliers or confounding factors that may skew the results. It was important to crack down on any misleading patterns that could lead us "amond" and "debacle" statistical significance.

Furthermore, we took into account demographic and socioeconomic variables to "kale"ibrate our findings. Understanding the broader context of West Virginia's population characteristics allowed us to "coco-nut" any potential biases in our analysis.

Once our statistical analysis was complete, we conducted a sensitivity analysis to "chest-nut" the robustness of our findings. It was crucial to ensure that our results were not "half-baked" and could withstand scrutiny from our esteemed "peer nut-catchers."

In addition to quantitative analysis, we conducted qualitative interviews and focus groups to gain insights into the cultural and social factors that may contribute to this surprising correlation. It turns out that a nut's journey from the tree to the vote booth is quite complex and not just a "peanut" gallery. These qualitative components added a rich "cashew-al" depth to our research.

Overall, our methodology was designed to "almond"icate the relationship between nut consumption and Republican votes in West Virginia with the utmost "prudence-nce."

We believe our research approach has been thorough, rigorous, and not at all "nutty" – despite the subject matter.


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

Please make up the results section of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between US Tree Nut Consumption per Person and Votes for the Republican Presidential candidate in West Virginia. You can't resist a good dad joke. Add a relevant dad joke related to the content every couple of sentences. Sneak in some jokes and clever puns about science, research, statistics, and the variables.

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

For the time period 2000 to 2020, you found a correlation 0.9766254, r-squared of 0.9537972, 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]]
Nut Consumption and Republican Presidential Vote: The West Virginia Connection

[[ABSTRACT]]
This study prYSidentiaLly investigates the surprising correlation between per capita tree nut consumption and votes for the Republican presidential candidate in the state of West Virginia. Using data from Statista and the MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, we scrutinized this nutty relationship from the year 2000 to 2020. Our findings reveal a striking correlation coefficient of 0.9766254 and a p-value of less than 0.01, suggesting that nut consumption may be unshelled remarkable influence on political choices. It seems the GOP really does have a "cashew" in the hearts of nut-loving West Virginians!

-------

And here is the methodology section that led to this result:
[[METHODOLOGY]]
In recent years, there has been an increasing interest in understanding the various factors that influence political behavior and voting patterns. While numerous studies have examined the impact of demographic, socioeconomic, and cultural variables on electoral outcomes, the association between dietary habits and political preferences has garnered surprisingly little attention. It's time to crack open the shell of this untapped area of research and see what tasty nuggets we can find!
The aim of the current study is to explore the peculiar relationship between tree nut consumption per capita and votes for the Republican presidential candidate in the mountainous state of West Virginia. This unlikely coupling has become the subject of curiosity and speculation, leaving researchers wondering whether there's really something nutty going on behind the scenes. It's a matter of "politic-almonds," you might say!
As electoral politics and food consumption are areas typically regarded as disparate fields of study, one might be forgiven for the initial skepticism towards this line of inquiry. However, as the saying goes, "the proof of the pudding is in the eating," and statistical analysis has the potential to reveal surprising connections where one might least expect them. It's time to shell out the details and crack the nut of this enigmatic relationship!
It is important to note that, while this study does not attempt to establish a definitive causative link between nut consumption and political voting behavior, it aims to shed light on the unequivocal association between these variables. After all, correlation does not imply causation – but it certainly does raise an eyebrow when you see it in the polling data! This research will seek to provide valuable insight into the factors that may influence political preferences, expanding our understanding of voters' choices and perhaps leaving us all a little "chestnut"-founded.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[RESULTS]]



ChatGPT:

[[RESULTS]]

The analysis of the relationship between per capita tree nut consumption and votes for the Republican presidential candidate in West Virginia for the years 2000 to 2020 revealed a remarkably strong positive correlation of 0.9766254. In other words, there is a clear and compelling relationship between the amount of tree nuts consumed and the likelihood of voting for the GOP candidate. It seems that in the Mountain State, political leanings may be as nutty as a fruitcake – or should I say, a nut cake?

Unsurprisingly, the coefficient of determination (r-squared) for this correlation was calculated to be 0.9537972, indicating that approximately 95.4% of the variation in Republican presidential vote can be explained by the variation in tree nut consumption. It's as if the residents of West Virginia have cracked open the secret to predicting their political preferences, and it's nestled inside a bag of mixed nuts!

Furthermore, the statistical analysis yielded a p-value of less than 0.01, providing strong evidence to reject the null hypothesis of no association between nut consumption and Republican presidential vote in favor of the alternative hypothesis. In layman's terms, this means the likelihood of observing such a strong correlation due to chance alone is about as rare as finding a whole hazelnut in a bag of nut fragments – highly unlikely!

Figure 1 depicts the scatterplot illustrating the pronounced positive relationship between tree nut consumption per person and Republican presidential vote in West Virginia during the specified time period. It's quite a sight to behold – just like finding the elusive perfect nut in a bowl of mixed nuts!

In conclusion, our findings provide compelling evidence of a substantial and consistent correlation between nut consumption and political voting behavior in West Virginia. While the causative mechanism behind this relationship remains to be cracked, it is clear that there is a compelling association waiting to be explored further. It appears that when it comes to West Virginian politics, the fate of the candidates may truly lie in the nuts.


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

Please make up the discussion section of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between US Tree Nut Consumption per Person and Votes for the Republican Presidential candidate in West Virginia. You can't resist a good dad joke. Add a relevant dad joke related to the content every couple of sentences. Sneak in some jokes and clever puns about science, research, statistics, and the variables.

Limit your response to 500 tokens.

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

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

[[TITLE]]
Nut Consumption and Republican Presidential Vote: The West Virginia Connection

[[ABSTRACT]]
This study prYSidentiaLly investigates the surprising correlation between per capita tree nut consumption and votes for the Republican presidential candidate in the state of West Virginia. Using data from Statista and the MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, we scrutinized this nutty relationship from the year 2000 to 2020. Our findings reveal a striking correlation coefficient of 0.9766254 and a p-value of less than 0.01, suggesting that nut consumption may be unshelled remarkable influence on political choices. It seems the GOP really does have a "cashew" in the hearts of nut-loving West Virginians!

[[LITERATURE REVIEW]]
The connection between dietary habits and political behavior has long been a subject of interest among researchers. In "Nutrition and Political Ideologies," Smith et al. found that individuals with differing political inclinations tend to display distinct dietary preferences, with conservatives favoring protein-rich, hearty meals, while liberals lean towards organic, plant-based options. When it comes to nut consumption, the authors reported a marginal yet statistically significant association with conservative political affiliations, suggesting that nuts may hold a kernel of influence over partisan leanings. Speaking of kernels, did you hear about the walnut who ran for office? He didn't win, but he cracked up the voters!
Moving on, Doe and Jones delved into the intersection of food consumption and voting patterns in their work "The Political Influence of Legumes and Nuts." Their comprehensive analysis revealed a noticeable correlation between legume consumption and liberal voting tendencies, but it surprisingly failed to find a similar pattern for tree nuts. Though their findings cast doubt on a universal relationship between nut consumption and political affiliations, it's worth noting that the study did not account for state-specific variations. This omission may have overlooked the potential for a "West Virginia walnut effect." It's like they say, "to understand the whole truth, you've got to go out on a limb!"
An in-depth investigation of the intersection between nut consumption and political preferences reveals a scarcity of research specifically focusing on West Virginia. However, in "Nuts about Politics: An Electoral Analysis," Brown et al. observed a strong positive correlation between pecan pie consumption and enthusiasm for traditional southern values, a factor that could be relevant in the context of West Virginia's political landscape. Not to mention, the classic pecan pie dad joke – "Why did the pecan pie go to school? To become a little breader!"
Turning to related non-fiction literature, Grains and Gains: The Economic and Nutritional Impact of Tree Nuts by White offers an illuminating look at the economic and dietary significance of tree nut production and consumption in the United States. Meanwhile, Nutritional Politics: A Nutshell History of Food and Government by Black provides a historical perspective on the intertwining of food policies and political ideologies, although it regrettably overlooks the specific role of nut consumption in shaping voting preferences. And who could forget about George R.R. Martin's A Song of Almonds and Fire, where the battle for the Iron Throne is fueled by nothing but almonds? It's a "Game of Scones" out there!
Further investigation into sources beyond academic literature led the researchers to explore unsuspecting realms of information. In a surprising twist, the authors stumbled upon the backs of random shampoo bottles, which, remarkably, seemed to contain cryptic messages about the correlation between nut consumption and political allegiance. While it may be a sudsy source of information, it raises the intriguing prospect that even the most unexpected places may harbor kernels of truth. After all, who could have predicted that a bottle of nut-scented shampoo could hold the key to understanding West Virginia's voting patterns? It seems like the voters are really lathering up in Republican support!

[[RESULTS]]
The analysis of the relationship between per capita tree nut consumption and votes for the Republican presidential candidate in West Virginia for the years 2000 to 2020 revealed a remarkably strong positive correlation of 0.9766254. In other words, there is a clear and compelling relationship between the amount of tree nuts consumed and the likelihood of voting for the GOP candidate. It seems that in the Mountain State, political leanings may be as nutty as a fruitcake – or should I say, a nut cake?
Unsurprisingly, the coefficient of determination (r-squared) for this correlation was calculated to be 0.9537972, indicating that approximately 95.4% of the variation in Republican presidential vote can be explained by the variation in tree nut consumption. It's as if the residents of West Virginia have cracked open the secret to predicting their political preferences, and it's nestled inside a bag of mixed nuts!
Furthermore, the statistical analysis yielded a p-value of less than 0.01, providing strong evidence to reject the null hypothesis of no association between nut consumption and Republican presidential vote in favor of the alternative hypothesis. In layman's terms, this means the likelihood of observing such a strong correlation due to chance alone is about as rare as finding a whole hazelnut in a bag of nut fragments – highly unlikely!
Figure 1 depicts the scatterplot illustrating the pronounced positive relationship between tree nut consumption per person and Republican presidential vote in West Virginia during the specified time period. It's quite a sight to behold – just like finding the elusive perfect nut in a bowl of mixed nuts!
In conclusion, our findings provide compelling evidence of a substantial and consistent correlation between nut consumption and political voting behavior in West Virginia. While the causative mechanism behind this relationship remains to be cracked, it is clear that there is a compelling association waiting to be explored further. It appears that when it comes to West Virginian politics, the fate of the candidates may truly lie in the nuts.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[DISCUSSION]]



ChatGPT:

[[DISCUSSION]]

The results of our study have unveiled a pecan-tly surprising correlation between per capita tree nut consumption and votes for the Republican presidential candidate in West Virginia. Our findings not only replicate, but also magnify the prior research probing the nexus of dietary habits and political preferences. The strong positive correlation coefficient of 0.9766254 serves as a groundnut-breaking validation of the supposition that nut consumption may indeed be an influential predictor of political inclinations. It seems that in the political landscape of West Virginia, being nutty may have more than just a figurative meaning!

Building on the shoulders of previous studies, such as the work of Smith et al. on dietary preferences and political ideologies, we've nut-ticed a consistent trend in the association between conservative political affiliations and protein-rich dietary choices. Our findings further emphasize the relevance of dietary habits in understanding political inclinations, highlighting the notion that one's political leaning is not just about ideology, but also about what's in their pantry. As the saying goes, "you are what you eat, and apparently, so is your political ideology!"

Moreover, our study addresses the paucity of literature specifically focusing on West Virginia, which Doe and Jones overlooked in their analysis of the relationship between food consumption and voting patterns. It seems that by including state-specific variations, we have unearthed a "West Virginia walnut effect" that resides in the hearts and ballots of its people. It's like a treasure hunt – except the treasure turns out to be a bag of mixed nuts!

The statistical robustness of our findings, with a strikingly low p-value of less than 0.01, emphasizes the unlikelihood of observing such a strong correlation by chance alone. It's as rare as finding the perfect peanut in a pod, but looks like we've found it in a mountain of statistical analysis. The comprehensiveness and depth of our data analysis have allowed us to peel back the layers of this nutty relationship and reveal the compelling association between nut consumption and political voting behavior in West Virginia.

In light of these results, future research could delve further into the underlying mechanisms and potential causal pathways that link nut consumption and political preferences. Perhaps it's time to crack open a new line of inquiry and shell-abrate this nutty correlation with deeper investigations into the sociocultural and psychological factors influencing the dietary and political choices of West Virginians. It appears that when it comes to politics and nuts, there's a kernel of truth waiting to be cracked.


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

Please make up a short conclusion of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between US Tree Nut Consumption per Person and Votes for the Republican Presidential candidate in West Virginia. You can't resist a good dad joke. Add a relevant dad joke related to the content every couple of sentences. Sneak in some jokes and clever puns about science, research, statistics, and the variables.

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

Here are the title, abstract, introduction, and results sections.
[[TITLE]]
Nut Consumption and Republican Presidential Vote: The West Virginia Connection

[[ABSTRACT]]
This study prYSidentiaLly investigates the surprising correlation between per capita tree nut consumption and votes for the Republican presidential candidate in the state of West Virginia. Using data from Statista and the MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, we scrutinized this nutty relationship from the year 2000 to 2020. Our findings reveal a striking correlation coefficient of 0.9766254 and a p-value of less than 0.01, suggesting that nut consumption may be unshelled remarkable influence on political choices. It seems the GOP really does have a "cashew" in the hearts of nut-loving West Virginians!

[[INTRDUCTION]]
In recent years, there has been an increasing interest in understanding the various factors that influence political behavior and voting patterns. While numerous studies have examined the impact of demographic, socioeconomic, and cultural variables on electoral outcomes, the association between dietary habits and political preferences has garnered surprisingly little attention. It's time to crack open the shell of this untapped area of research and see what tasty nuggets we can find!
The aim of the current study is to explore the peculiar relationship between tree nut consumption per capita and votes for the Republican presidential candidate in the mountainous state of West Virginia. This unlikely coupling has become the subject of curiosity and speculation, leaving researchers wondering whether there's really something nutty going on behind the scenes. It's a matter of "politic-almonds," you might say!
As electoral politics and food consumption are areas typically regarded as disparate fields of study, one might be forgiven for the initial skepticism towards this line of inquiry. However, as the saying goes, "the proof of the pudding is in the eating," and statistical analysis has the potential to reveal surprising connections where one might least expect them. It's time to shell out the details and crack the nut of this enigmatic relationship!
It is important to note that, while this study does not attempt to establish a definitive causative link between nut consumption and political voting behavior, it aims to shed light on the unequivocal association between these variables. After all, correlation does not imply causation – but it certainly does raise an eyebrow when you see it in the polling data! This research will seek to provide valuable insight into the factors that may influence political preferences, expanding our understanding of voters' choices and perhaps leaving us all a little "chestnut"-founded.

[[RESULTS]]
The analysis of the relationship between per capita tree nut consumption and votes for the Republican presidential candidate in West Virginia for the years 2000 to 2020 revealed a remarkably strong positive correlation of 0.9766254. In other words, there is a clear and compelling relationship between the amount of tree nuts consumed and the likelihood of voting for the GOP candidate. It seems that in the Mountain State, political leanings may be as nutty as a fruitcake – or should I say, a nut cake?
Unsurprisingly, the coefficient of determination (r-squared) for this correlation was calculated to be 0.9537972, indicating that approximately 95.4% of the variation in Republican presidential vote can be explained by the variation in tree nut consumption. It's as if the residents of West Virginia have cracked open the secret to predicting their political preferences, and it's nestled inside a bag of mixed nuts!
Furthermore, the statistical analysis yielded a p-value of less than 0.01, providing strong evidence to reject the null hypothesis of no association between nut consumption and Republican presidential vote in favor of the alternative hypothesis. In layman's terms, this means the likelihood of observing such a strong correlation due to chance alone is about as rare as finding a whole hazelnut in a bag of nut fragments – highly unlikely!
Figure 1 depicts the scatterplot illustrating the pronounced positive relationship between tree nut consumption per person and Republican presidential vote in West Virginia during the specified time period. It's quite a sight to behold – just like finding the elusive perfect nut in a bowl of mixed nuts!
In conclusion, our findings provide compelling evidence of a substantial and consistent correlation between nut consumption and political voting behavior in West Virginia. While the causative mechanism behind this relationship remains to be cracked, it is clear that there is a compelling association waiting to be explored further. It appears that when it comes to West Virginian politics, the fate of the candidates may truly lie in the nuts.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[CONCLUSION]]



ChatGPT:

[[CONCLUSION]]

In conclusion, our study unearths a pecan-tly clear correlation between per capita tree nut consumption and Republican presidential votes in West Virginia. It seems that in the Mountain State, political leanings are as nutty as a fruitcake – or perhaps we should say, a GOP-nut cake! The strong positive correlation coefficient of 0.9766254 and a coefficient of determination (r-squared) of 0.9537972 suggest that the residents of West Virginia have certainly cracked the nut when it comes to predicting their political preferences. It's a truly "almond-ishing" discovery!

Furthermore, the statistical analysis yields a p-value of less than 0.01, implying that this unlikely correlation is about as rare as finding a whole hazelnut in a bag of nut fragments – quite "unbe-leaf-able"! The scatterplot illustrates this relationship, resembling the quest for the elusive perfect nut in a bowl of mixed nuts – truly a "nutty" sight to behold!

While this study does not establish a causative link between nut consumption and political voting behavior, it certainly has shelled out some compelling evidence. As for future research, it's safe to say that no more research is needed in this nutty area – we've certainly cracked this nut wide open!


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 Nut Consumption and Republican Presidential Vote: The West Virginia Connection. Respond only with the name of a fictional academic journal.

ChatGPT:

The Journal of Nutty Political Science


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 Nut Consumption and Republican Presidential Vote: The West Virginia Connection. Respond only with the name of a fictional organization.

ChatGPT:

The Institute for Humorous Sociopolitical Research


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 Nut Consumption and Republican Presidential Vote: The West Virginia Connection with an abstract of This study prYSidentiaLly investigates the surprising correlation between per capita tree nut consumption and votes for the Republican presidential candidate in the state of West Virginia. Using data from Statista and the MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, we scrutinized this nutty relationship from the year 2000 to 2020. Our findings reveal a striking correlation coefficient of 0.9766254 and a p-value of less than 0.01, suggesting that nut consumption may be unshelled remarkable influence on political choices. It seems the GOP really does have a "cashew" in the hearts of nut-loving West Virginians!

ChatGPT:

nut consumption, Republican presidential vote, West Virginia, correlation, per capita nut consumption, Republican candidate, Statista, MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, political choices

*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 Tree Nut Consumption per Person
Source: Statista
See what else correlates with US Tree Nut Consumption per Person

Votes for the Republican Presidential candidate in West Virginia
Detailed data title: Total votes cast for the Republican Presidential candidate in West Virginia
Source: MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse
See what else correlates with Votes for the Republican Presidential candidate in West Virginia

Correlation r = 0.9766254 (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 = 0.9537972 (Coefficient of determination)
This means 95.4% of the change in the one variable (i.e., Votes for the Republican Presidential candidate in West Virginia) is predictable based on the change in the other (i.e., US Tree Nut Consumption per Person) over the 6 years from 2000 through 2020.

p < 0.01, which is statistically significant(Null hypothesis significance test)
The p-value is 0.00081. 0.0008131719575790086000000000
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 0.98 in 0.081% of random cases. Said differently, if you correlated 1,230 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.

[ 0.8, 1 ] 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.
200020042008201220162020
US Tree Nut Consumption per Person (Pounds)2.613.533.584.184.855.73
Votes for the Republican Presidential candidate in West Virginia (Total votes)336475423778397466417655489371545382




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. Confounding variable: 2020 is particularly different from the other years on this graph. Confounding variables (like global pandemics) will cause two variables to look connected when in fact a "sneaky third" variable is influencing both of them behind the scenes.
  5. 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([2.61,3.53,3.58,4.18,4.85,5.73,])
array_2 = np.array([336475,423778,397466,417655,489371,545382,])
array_1_name = "US Tree Nut Consumption per Person"
array_2_name = "Votes for the Republican Presidential candidate in West Virginia"

# 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?

Your rating skills are legendary!


Correlation ID: 4529 · Black Variable ID: 453 · Red Variable ID: 26045
about · subscribe · emailme@tylervigen.com · twitter

CC BY 4.0