about · email me · subscribe
Spurious correlation #5,097 · View random

A linear line chart with years as the X-axis and two variables on the Y-axis. The first variable is Votes for Democratic Senators in Tennessee and the second variable is Krispy Kreme Doughnuts store count in the US.  The chart goes from 2001 to 2020, and the two variables track closely in value over that time. Small Image
Download png
, svg

AI explanation

As more Democrat votes for Senators in Tennessee rolled in, it created a ripple effect by attracting a higher concentration of donut enthusiasts to the state. This sudden surge in demand for delicious fried dough led Krispy Kreme to expand their operations across the nation in a bid to keep up with the anticipated cravings. After all, when it comes to politics and pastries, it's all about the power of glazetical influence!

Model: dalle-3
Prompt: Prompt: Create an image depicting the scene in Tennessee, where growing Democrat votes for Senators coincide with increasing lines at Krispy Kreme Doughnut stores. Show people eagerly queuing up outside the stores, with a sense of anticipation and excitement. Additionally, illustrate the expansion of Krispy Kreme stores across the US to accommodate the surge in demand, with a focus on the iconic architecture and branding of the chain. 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: Democrat votes for Senators in Tennessee and Krispy Kreme Doughnuts store count in the US. 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: Sci-fi fantacy Symbolism Cute 2D animation Celtic art Cybernetic art
ChatGPT: Symbolism

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 Democrat votes for Senators in Tennessee and Krispy Kreme Doughnuts store count in the US, in the following situation: As more Democrat votes for Senators in Tennessee rolled in, it created a ripple effect by attracting a higher concentration of donut enthusiasts to the state. This sudden surge in demand for delicious fried dough led Krispy Kreme to expand their operations across the nation in a bid to keep up with the anticipated cravings. After all, when it comes to politics and pastries, it's all about the power of glazetical influence!. Keep the description simple.
ChatGPT: In Tennessee, as Democrat votes for Senators increased, lines at Krispy Kreme Doughnut stores grew longer, with more and more people eagerly waiting to satisfy their sweet cravings. This surge in demand prompted Krispy Kreme to expand their stores across the US, ensuring that everyone could have a taste of their delicious doughnuts.

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: [ Symbolism ] and depicting this scene: In Tennessee, as Democrat votes for Senators increased, lines at Krispy Kreme Doughnut stores grew longer, with more and more people eagerly waiting to satisfy their sweet cravings. This surge in demand prompted Krispy Kreme to expand their stores across the US, ensuring that everyone could have a taste of their delicious doughnuts. Keep the visual depiction simple. Do not include any words or speech bubbles.
ChatGPT: Prompt: Create an image depicting the scene in Tennessee, where growing Democrat votes for Senators coincide with increasing lines at Krispy Kreme Doughnut stores. Show people eagerly queuing up outside the stores, with a sense of anticipation and excitement. Additionally, illustrate the expansion of Krispy Kreme stores across the US to accommodate the surge in demand, with a focus on the iconic architecture and branding of the chain.

*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 Democrat votes for Senators in Tennessee caused Krispy Kreme Doughnuts store count in the US to increase.

AI academic paper

(Because p < 0.01)
Do(nut) Democrats: A Statistical Analysis of the Relationship Between Senatorial Votes in Tennessee and Krispy Kreme Doughnut Store Density

The Journal of Culinary Quantitative Analysis

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 Democrat votes for Senators in Tennessee and Krispy Kreme Doughnuts store count in the US. Make it seem dry like academic research paper, but with lots of subtle hidden offhand remarks, jokes, goofy observations, and puns.

Make the title a clever pun.

Your research team used data from MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse and Statista to assess this nagging question. You found a correlation coefficient of 0.9563499 and p < 0.01 for 2001 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]]
Do(nut) Democrats: A Statistical Analysis of the Relationship Between Senatorial Votes in Tennessee and Krispy Kreme Doughnut Store Density

[[ABSTRACT]]
In this study, we delved into the correlation between the Democratic votes for Senators in Tennessee and the proliferation of Krispy Kreme doughnut stores across the United States. Our research team utilized data from the MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, and Statista to uncover valuable insights into this peculiarly delectable relationship. With a correlation coefficient of 0.9563499 and p < 0.01 during the period from 2001 to 2020, our findings provide compelling evidence that there is a strong and intriguing link between the political preferences of Tennessee constituents and the availability of glazed, powdered, and sprinkled temptations nationwide. This study not only contributes to the burgeoning field of doughnut-based political science but also underscores the potential influence of fried confectioneries on electoral behaviors.


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 Democrat votes for Senators in Tennessee and Krispy Kreme Doughnuts store count in the US. Make it seem dry like academic research paper, but with lots of subtle hidden offhand remarks, jokes, goofy observations, and puns.

Here is the title and abstract of the paper:
[[TITLE]]
Do(nut) Democrats: A Statistical Analysis of the Relationship Between Senatorial Votes in Tennessee and Krispy Kreme Doughnut Store Density

[[ABSTRACT]]
In this study, we delved into the correlation between the Democratic votes for Senators in Tennessee and the proliferation of Krispy Kreme doughnut stores across the United States. Our research team utilized data from the MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, and Statista to uncover valuable insights into this peculiarly delectable relationship. With a correlation coefficient of 0.9563499 and p < 0.01 during the period from 2001 to 2020, our findings provide compelling evidence that there is a strong and intriguing link between the political preferences of Tennessee constituents and the availability of glazed, powdered, and sprinkled temptations nationwide. This study not only contributes to the burgeoning field of doughnut-based political science but also underscores the potential influence of fried confectioneries on electoral behaviors.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[INTRODUCTION]]



ChatGPT:
[[INTRODUCTION]]

The quest for understanding political behavior has taken researchers down numerous surprising and unconventional paths. From examining the impact of weather on voter turnout to unraveling the influence of fast-food restaurants on political ideology, academics have continuously sought to shed light on the often enigmatic forces that shape voting preferences. In this paper, we turn our attention to the unexpected and perhaps slightly sweet connection between Democrat votes for Senators in Tennessee and the number of Krispy Kreme doughnut stores scattered across the United States.

While the study of electoral patterns has traditionally revolved around factors such as demographics, policy preferences, and incumbent popularity, the potential influence of sugary treats on voter behavior presents a tantalizingly unexplored realm. Our investigation aims to untangle the seemingly paradoxical relationship between political allegiance and the irresistible allure of sugar-coated delicacies. By employing rigorous statistical methods and drawing on a comprehensive dataset spanning the past two decades, we endeavor to demonstrate the noteworthy association between Democratic support in Tennessee and the abundance of doughnut emporiums nationwide.

As we wade into this uncharted territory, it becomes increasingly apparent that the realm of electoral dynamics is not without its whimsical surprises. With a raised eyebrow and a sprinkle of curiosity, we embark on this scholarly odyssey, cognizant of the peculiar yet potentially profound implications of our inquiries. Join us as we knead through the dough of data and attempt to piece together the tantalizing puzzle of partisan preferences and doughnut density.


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 Democrat votes for Senators in Tennessee and Krispy Kreme Doughnuts store count in the US. 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 devolve ever further, and mention something completely ridiculous, like you conducted literature review by reading CVS receipts.

Here is the title and abstract of the paper:
[[TITLE]]
Do(nut) Democrats: A Statistical Analysis of the Relationship Between Senatorial Votes in Tennessee and Krispy Kreme Doughnut Store Density

[[ABSTRACT]]
In this study, we delved into the correlation between the Democratic votes for Senators in Tennessee and the proliferation of Krispy Kreme doughnut stores across the United States. Our research team utilized data from the MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, and Statista to uncover valuable insights into this peculiarly delectable relationship. With a correlation coefficient of 0.9563499 and p < 0.01 during the period from 2001 to 2020, our findings provide compelling evidence that there is a strong and intriguing link between the political preferences of Tennessee constituents and the availability of glazed, powdered, and sprinkled temptations nationwide. This study not only contributes to the burgeoning field of doughnut-based political science but also underscores the potential influence of fried confectioneries on electoral behaviors.

-------

And here is the introduction section that led to this literature review:
[[INTRODUCTION]]
The quest for understanding political behavior has taken researchers down numerous surprising and unconventional paths. From examining the impact of weather on voter turnout to unraveling the influence of fast-food restaurants on political ideology, academics have continuously sought to shed light on the often enigmatic forces that shape voting preferences. In this paper, we turn our attention to the unexpected and perhaps slightly sweet connection between Democrat votes for Senators in Tennessee and the number of Krispy Kreme doughnut stores scattered across the United States.
While the study of electoral patterns has traditionally revolved around factors such as demographics, policy preferences, and incumbent popularity, the potential influence of sugary treats on voter behavior presents a tantalizingly unexplored realm. Our investigation aims to untangle the seemingly paradoxical relationship between political allegiance and the irresistible allure of sugar-coated delicacies. By employing rigorous statistical methods and drawing on a comprehensive dataset spanning the past two decades, we endeavor to demonstrate the noteworthy association between Democratic support in Tennessee and the abundance of doughnut emporiums nationwide.
As we wade into this uncharted territory, it becomes increasingly apparent that the realm of electoral dynamics is not without its whimsical surprises. With a raised eyebrow and a sprinkle of curiosity, we embark on this scholarly odyssey, cognizant of the peculiar yet potentially profound implications of our inquiries. Join us as we knead through the dough of data and attempt to piece together the tantalizing puzzle of partisan preferences and doughnut density.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[LITERATURE REVIEW]]



ChatGPT:
[[LITERATURE REVIEW]]

Studies on voter behavior have long focused on conventional factors such as socio-economic status, education level, and ideological orientation (Smith, 2015; Doe, 2018; Jones, 2020). However, in recent years, researchers have increasingly delved into the more peculiar and delectable influences that may shape political preferences. In "The Role of Fast Food in American Politics," the authors delve into the impact of fast-food restaurants on political ideology, providing a tantalizing precursor to our investigation into the connection between Democrat votes for Senators in Tennessee and the proliferation of Krispy Kreme doughnut stores across the United States.

As we venture deeper into the literature, we encounter "The Political Influence of Sugar: A Sweet Affair," a captivating exploration of the potential role of sugary treats in electoral dynamics. Furthermore, "Doughnuts at the Ballot Box: An Unconventional Analysis of Voter Behavior" presents a quirky yet intriguing glimpse into the connection between pastry preferences and political inclinations. While these real non-fiction books provide a serious foundation for our research, it's worth noting that academia isn't the only place we can turn for insights into the doughnut-politics nexus.

The fictional realm also offers intriguing possibilities. Books such as "The Doughnut Paradox: Sweet Democracy" and "Glazed and Confused: A Novel Approach to Political Cravings" flirt with the idea of doughnuts as a potential determinant of voter allegiance, blending fiction with a hint of social commentary. The escapades of characters grappling with dilemmas involving glazed, jelly-filled, and chocolate-coated confections raise eyebrow-raising questions about the interplay between doughnut store density and political predispositions.

In our earnest pursuit of understanding this unexpected correlation, we cast a wide net for information, turning to unconventional sources for inspiration. While some may question our methods, we are reminded of the wisdom found in the unlikeliest of places. It is with this ethos in mind that we declare, with utter sincerity and a hint of mischief, that our literature review extends to include the most obscure of resources, such as perusing the backs of CVS receipts and eavesdropping on the whispered conversations of doughnut shop patrons. For in the pursuit of knowledge, no stone, nor crumb, shall be left unturned.


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 Democrat votes for Senators in Tennessee and Krispy Kreme Doughnuts store count in the US. Make it seem dry like academic research paper, but with lots of subtle hidden offhand remarks, jokes, goofy observations, and puns.

Your research team collected data from all across the internet, but mostly just used information from MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse and Statista . You used data from 2001 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]]
Do(nut) Democrats: A Statistical Analysis of the Relationship Between Senatorial Votes in Tennessee and Krispy Kreme Doughnut Store Density

[[ABSTRACT]]
In this study, we delved into the correlation between the Democratic votes for Senators in Tennessee and the proliferation of Krispy Kreme doughnut stores across the United States. Our research team utilized data from the MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, and Statista to uncover valuable insights into this peculiarly delectable relationship. With a correlation coefficient of 0.9563499 and p < 0.01 during the period from 2001 to 2020, our findings provide compelling evidence that there is a strong and intriguing link between the political preferences of Tennessee constituents and the availability of glazed, powdered, and sprinkled temptations nationwide. This study not only contributes to the burgeoning field of doughnut-based political science but also underscores the potential influence of fried confectioneries on electoral behaviors.

[[INTRODUCTION]]
The quest for understanding political behavior has taken researchers down numerous surprising and unconventional paths. From examining the impact of weather on voter turnout to unraveling the influence of fast-food restaurants on political ideology, academics have continuously sought to shed light on the often enigmatic forces that shape voting preferences. In this paper, we turn our attention to the unexpected and perhaps slightly sweet connection between Democrat votes for Senators in Tennessee and the number of Krispy Kreme doughnut stores scattered across the United States.
While the study of electoral patterns has traditionally revolved around factors such as demographics, policy preferences, and incumbent popularity, the potential influence of sugary treats on voter behavior presents a tantalizingly unexplored realm. Our investigation aims to untangle the seemingly paradoxical relationship between political allegiance and the irresistible allure of sugar-coated delicacies. By employing rigorous statistical methods and drawing on a comprehensive dataset spanning the past two decades, we endeavor to demonstrate the noteworthy association between Democratic support in Tennessee and the abundance of doughnut emporiums nationwide.
As we wade into this uncharted territory, it becomes increasingly apparent that the realm of electoral dynamics is not without its whimsical surprises. With a raised eyebrow and a sprinkle of curiosity, we embark on this scholarly odyssey, cognizant of the peculiar yet potentially profound implications of our inquiries. Join us as we knead through the dough of data and attempt to piece together the tantalizing puzzle of partisan preferences and doughnut density.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[METHODOLOGY]]



ChatGPT:

[[METHODOLOGY]]

To explore the intriguing interplay between Democrat votes for Senators in Tennessee and the proliferation of Krispy Kreme doughnut stores across the United States, our research team embarked on a methodological journey as flavorful as a glazed doughnut itself. We utilized data from the MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, and Statista, as these sources provided the dough, so to speak, for our statistical recipe. Our dataset spanned the period from 2001 to 2020, allowing us to examine electoral behavior and doughnut darling dominance over an extensive timeframe.

First, to gauge Democrat votes for Senators in Tennessee, we embraced the electoral data with the enthusiasm of a doughnut enthusiast sighting a "Hot Now" sign at a Krispy Kreme outlet. The voting numbers were carefully curated and scrutinized, ensuring that our analysis reflected the political preferences of Tennesseans with a rigor akin to the precision required in doughnut hole cutting.

Simultaneously, we ventured into the labyrinth of Krispy Kreme doughnut store data across the United States, employing geospatial analysis to map out the tantalizing spread of these sugary sanctuaries. The quest for this information was akin to a treasure hunt, only with doughnut franchises as the cherished bounty.

Once armed with the delectable dataset, we invoked the powers of statistical analysis with the finesse of a maître pâtissier crafting the perfect cruller. We computed correlation coefficients to discern the strength and direction of the relationship between Democrat votes for Senators in Tennessee and the count of Krispy Kreme stores, recognizing that the statistical dough ought to rise just right to demonstrate a meaningful association.

Additionally, we conducted regression analyses to delve deeper into the causal implications of our findings, treating the data with the tenderness of a warm, freshly baked batch of glazed rings. Robustness checks were performed with the meticulousness of a baker testing and retesting the consistency of the dough, ensuring the authenticity and reliability of our results.

Lastly, to account for potential confounding variables that might sprinkle unexpected flavor into our findings, we employed multivariate analyses, carefully considering factors such as socioeconomic indicators, culinary preferences, and perhaps even the proximity of coffee shops for a nuanced understanding of the doughnut democracy dynamic.

Our methodology embraces the confluence of political and palatable, offering a savory blend of precision and whimsy to unravel this pertinently sweeter side of electoral dynamics. Through these methodological maneuvers, we aimed to churn out insights as delectable as a fresh batch of original glazed doughnuts, tantalizing the scholarly taste buds with the unexpected and illuminating characteristics of partisan preferences and doughnut density.


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 Democrat votes for Senators in Tennessee and Krispy Kreme Doughnuts store count in the US. Make it seem dry like academic research paper, but with lots of subtle hidden offhand remarks, jokes, goofy observations, and puns.

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

For the time period 2001 to 2020, you found a correlation 0.9563499, r-squared of 0.9146051, 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]]
Do(nut) Democrats: A Statistical Analysis of the Relationship Between Senatorial Votes in Tennessee and Krispy Kreme Doughnut Store Density

[[ABSTRACT]]
In this study, we delved into the correlation between the Democratic votes for Senators in Tennessee and the proliferation of Krispy Kreme doughnut stores across the United States. Our research team utilized data from the MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, and Statista to uncover valuable insights into this peculiarly delectable relationship. With a correlation coefficient of 0.9563499 and p < 0.01 during the period from 2001 to 2020, our findings provide compelling evidence that there is a strong and intriguing link between the political preferences of Tennessee constituents and the availability of glazed, powdered, and sprinkled temptations nationwide. This study not only contributes to the burgeoning field of doughnut-based political science but also underscores the potential influence of fried confectioneries on electoral behaviors.

-------

And here is the methodology section that led to this result:
[[METHODOLOGY]]
The quest for understanding political behavior has taken researchers down numerous surprising and unconventional paths. From examining the impact of weather on voter turnout to unraveling the influence of fast-food restaurants on political ideology, academics have continuously sought to shed light on the often enigmatic forces that shape voting preferences. In this paper, we turn our attention to the unexpected and perhaps slightly sweet connection between Democrat votes for Senators in Tennessee and the number of Krispy Kreme doughnut stores scattered across the United States.
While the study of electoral patterns has traditionally revolved around factors such as demographics, policy preferences, and incumbent popularity, the potential influence of sugary treats on voter behavior presents a tantalizingly unexplored realm. Our investigation aims to untangle the seemingly paradoxical relationship between political allegiance and the irresistible allure of sugar-coated delicacies. By employing rigorous statistical methods and drawing on a comprehensive dataset spanning the past two decades, we endeavor to demonstrate the noteworthy association between Democratic support in Tennessee and the abundance of doughnut emporiums nationwide.
As we wade into this uncharted territory, it becomes increasingly apparent that the realm of electoral dynamics is not without its whimsical surprises. With a raised eyebrow and a sprinkle of curiosity, we embark on this scholarly odyssey, cognizant of the peculiar yet potentially profound implications of our inquiries. Join us as we knead through the dough of data and attempt to piece together the tantalizing puzzle of partisan preferences and doughnut density.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[RESULTS]]



ChatGPT:

[[RESULTS]]

The statistical analysis revealed a remarkably high correlation between Democrat votes for Senators in Tennessee and the number of Krispy Kreme doughnut outlets in the United States from 2001 to 2020. The correlation coefficient of 0.9563499 indicates a strong positive relationship, suggesting that as the number of Krispy Kreme stores increased, so did the support for Democratic candidates in the state of Tennessee. The coefficient of determination (r-squared) of 0.9146051 further emphasizes the substantial proportion of variability in Democrat votes that can be explained by the variation in Krispy Kreme store count.

The p-value of less than 0.01 indicates that the observed correlation is statistically significant, lending further credibility to the robustness of our findings. In simpler terms, the likelihood of this relationship occurring purely by chance is less than 1%, affirming the legitimacy of the observed association.

The scatterplot depicted in Fig. 1 visually illustrates the striking correlation between Democrat votes for Senators in Tennessee and the proliferation of Krispy Kreme doughnut stores across the United States. Each data point on the plot represents a specific year within the 2001-2020 timeframe, making evident the consistent alignment between the two variables.

These results not only shed light on a rather unexpected and whimsical correlation but also underscore the potential influence of delectable sugary treats on voting behaviors. The implications of this study transcend the realms of traditional political science, delving into the quirky yet fascinating intersection of culinary indulgence and electoral inclinations.


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 Democrat votes for Senators in Tennessee and Krispy Kreme Doughnuts store count in the US. Make it seem dry like academic research paper, but with lots of subtle hidden offhand remarks, jokes, goofy observations, and puns.

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]]
Do(nut) Democrats: A Statistical Analysis of the Relationship Between Senatorial Votes in Tennessee and Krispy Kreme Doughnut Store Density

[[ABSTRACT]]
In this study, we delved into the correlation between the Democratic votes for Senators in Tennessee and the proliferation of Krispy Kreme doughnut stores across the United States. Our research team utilized data from the MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, and Statista to uncover valuable insights into this peculiarly delectable relationship. With a correlation coefficient of 0.9563499 and p < 0.01 during the period from 2001 to 2020, our findings provide compelling evidence that there is a strong and intriguing link between the political preferences of Tennessee constituents and the availability of glazed, powdered, and sprinkled temptations nationwide. This study not only contributes to the burgeoning field of doughnut-based political science but also underscores the potential influence of fried confectioneries on electoral behaviors.

[[LITERATURE REVIEW]]
Studies on voter behavior have long focused on conventional factors such as socio-economic status, education level, and ideological orientation (Smith, 2015; Doe, 2018; Jones, 2020). However, in recent years, researchers have increasingly delved into the more peculiar and delectable influences that may shape political preferences. In "The Role of Fast Food in American Politics," the authors delve into the impact of fast-food restaurants on political ideology, providing a tantalizing precursor to our investigation into the connection between Democrat votes for Senators in Tennessee and the proliferation of Krispy Kreme doughnut stores across the United States.
As we venture deeper into the literature, we encounter "The Political Influence of Sugar: A Sweet Affair," a captivating exploration of the potential role of sugary treats in electoral dynamics. Furthermore, "Doughnuts at the Ballot Box: An Unconventional Analysis of Voter Behavior" presents a quirky yet intriguing glimpse into the connection between pastry preferences and political inclinations. While these real non-fiction books provide a serious foundation for our research, it's worth noting that academia isn't the only place we can turn for insights into the doughnut-politics nexus.
The fictional realm also offers intriguing possibilities. Books such as "The Doughnut Paradox: Sweet Democracy" and "Glazed and Confused: A Novel Approach to Political Cravings" flirt with the idea of doughnuts as a potential determinant of voter allegiance, blending fiction with a hint of social commentary. The escapades of characters grappling with dilemmas involving glazed, jelly-filled, and chocolate-coated confections raise eyebrow-raising questions about the interplay between doughnut store density and political predispositions.
In our earnest pursuit of understanding this unexpected correlation, we cast a wide net for information, turning to unconventional sources for inspiration. While some may question our methods, we are reminded of the wisdom found in the unlikeliest of places. It is with this ethos in mind that we declare, with utter sincerity and a hint of mischief, that our literature review extends to include the most obscure of resources, such as perusing the backs of CVS receipts and eavesdropping on the whispered conversations of doughnut shop patrons. For in the pursuit of knowledge, no stone, nor crumb, shall be left unturned.

[[RESULTS]]
The statistical analysis revealed a remarkably high correlation between Democrat votes for Senators in Tennessee and the number of Krispy Kreme doughnut outlets in the United States from 2001 to 2020. The correlation coefficient of 0.9563499 indicates a strong positive relationship, suggesting that as the number of Krispy Kreme stores increased, so did the support for Democratic candidates in the state of Tennessee. The coefficient of determination (r-squared) of 0.9146051 further emphasizes the substantial proportion of variability in Democrat votes that can be explained by the variation in Krispy Kreme store count.
The p-value of less than 0.01 indicates that the observed correlation is statistically significant, lending further credibility to the robustness of our findings. In simpler terms, the likelihood of this relationship occurring purely by chance is less than 1%, affirming the legitimacy of the observed association.
The scatterplot depicted in Fig. 1 visually illustrates the striking correlation between Democrat votes for Senators in Tennessee and the proliferation of Krispy Kreme doughnut stores across the United States. Each data point on the plot represents a specific year within the 2001-2020 timeframe, making evident the consistent alignment between the two variables.
These results not only shed light on a rather unexpected and whimsical correlation but also underscore the potential influence of delectable sugary treats on voting behaviors. The implications of this study transcend the realms of traditional political science, delving into the quirky yet fascinating intersection of culinary indulgence and electoral inclinations.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[DISCUSSION]]



ChatGPT:

[[DISCUSSION]]

Our findings have, quite literally, brought a new flavor to the discourse on voter behavior. The notable correlation between Democrat votes for Senators in Tennessee and the prevalence of Krispy Kreme doughnut establishments across the United States underscores the potential impact of sweet delicacies on political predispositions. While some may find it hard to swallow, the statistically significant relationship we've uncovered aligns with the emerging body of research that suggests unconventional influences on electoral dynamics.

The burgeoning interest in the intersection of food culture and political ideology has led to an array of intriguing studies that examine the unorthodox factors that may shape voting behaviors. Indeed, our results support the prior research that delved into the unconventional influences on voter preferences, including the tantalizing precursor study that explored the impact of fast-food restaurants on political ideology.

In addition, our findings substantiate the insights presented in "The Role of Fast Food in American Politics" and "The Political Influence of Sugar: A Sweet Affair," hinting at the potential role of sugary treats in shaping electoral dynamics. We have essentially provided empirical evidence that extends beyond conjecture, reaffirming the suppositions put forth in the exploration of doughnut-driven political inclinations.

It's important to recognize that our research deviates from the traditional norm and harkens back to the unconventional literature that blurs the line between fact and fiction. The inclusion of unusual sources and unconventional methods has enriched our understanding of the doughnut-politics nexus, corroborating the wisdom found in the unlikeliest of places.

In essence, our study has added substance to the whimsical musings of authors who have flirted with the idea of doughnuts as a determinant of voter allegiance. Through rigorous statistical analysis, we have breathed life into the lighthearted and improbable notions encapsulated in works such as "The Doughnut Paradox: Sweet Democracy" and "Glazed and Confused: A Novel Approach to Political Cravings." Our findings provide empirical weight to the playful speculations and fictionalized scenarios that spark curiosity about the interplay between doughnut store density and political predilections.

In conclusion, our study has introduced a delectable twist to the conventional understanding of voter behavior, echoing the sentiment that in the pursuit of knowledge, no stone, nor crumb, shall be left unturned. While some may jest at the peculiar nature of our inquiry, our serious commitment to uncovering the unexpected links between doughnut availability and political preferences has added a sprinkle of curiosity to the field of political science.


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 Democrat votes for Senators in Tennessee and Krispy Kreme Doughnuts store count in the US. Make it seem dry like academic research paper, but with lots of subtle hidden offhand remarks, jokes, goofy observations, and puns.

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]]
Do(nut) Democrats: A Statistical Analysis of the Relationship Between Senatorial Votes in Tennessee and Krispy Kreme Doughnut Store Density

[[ABSTRACT]]
In this study, we delved into the correlation between the Democratic votes for Senators in Tennessee and the proliferation of Krispy Kreme doughnut stores across the United States. Our research team utilized data from the MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, and Statista to uncover valuable insights into this peculiarly delectable relationship. With a correlation coefficient of 0.9563499 and p < 0.01 during the period from 2001 to 2020, our findings provide compelling evidence that there is a strong and intriguing link between the political preferences of Tennessee constituents and the availability of glazed, powdered, and sprinkled temptations nationwide. This study not only contributes to the burgeoning field of doughnut-based political science but also underscores the potential influence of fried confectioneries on electoral behaviors.

[[INTRDUCTION]]
The quest for understanding political behavior has taken researchers down numerous surprising and unconventional paths. From examining the impact of weather on voter turnout to unraveling the influence of fast-food restaurants on political ideology, academics have continuously sought to shed light on the often enigmatic forces that shape voting preferences. In this paper, we turn our attention to the unexpected and perhaps slightly sweet connection between Democrat votes for Senators in Tennessee and the number of Krispy Kreme doughnut stores scattered across the United States.
While the study of electoral patterns has traditionally revolved around factors such as demographics, policy preferences, and incumbent popularity, the potential influence of sugary treats on voter behavior presents a tantalizingly unexplored realm. Our investigation aims to untangle the seemingly paradoxical relationship between political allegiance and the irresistible allure of sugar-coated delicacies. By employing rigorous statistical methods and drawing on a comprehensive dataset spanning the past two decades, we endeavor to demonstrate the noteworthy association between Democratic support in Tennessee and the abundance of doughnut emporiums nationwide.
As we wade into this uncharted territory, it becomes increasingly apparent that the realm of electoral dynamics is not without its whimsical surprises. With a raised eyebrow and a sprinkle of curiosity, we embark on this scholarly odyssey, cognizant of the peculiar yet potentially profound implications of our inquiries. Join us as we knead through the dough of data and attempt to piece together the tantalizing puzzle of partisan preferences and doughnut density.

[[RESULTS]]
The statistical analysis revealed a remarkably high correlation between Democrat votes for Senators in Tennessee and the number of Krispy Kreme doughnut outlets in the United States from 2001 to 2020. The correlation coefficient of 0.9563499 indicates a strong positive relationship, suggesting that as the number of Krispy Kreme stores increased, so did the support for Democratic candidates in the state of Tennessee. The coefficient of determination (r-squared) of 0.9146051 further emphasizes the substantial proportion of variability in Democrat votes that can be explained by the variation in Krispy Kreme store count.
The p-value of less than 0.01 indicates that the observed correlation is statistically significant, lending further credibility to the robustness of our findings. In simpler terms, the likelihood of this relationship occurring purely by chance is less than 1%, affirming the legitimacy of the observed association.
The scatterplot depicted in Fig. 1 visually illustrates the striking correlation between Democrat votes for Senators in Tennessee and the proliferation of Krispy Kreme doughnut stores across the United States. Each data point on the plot represents a specific year within the 2001-2020 timeframe, making evident the consistent alignment between the two variables.
These results not only shed light on a rather unexpected and whimsical correlation but also underscore the potential influence of delectable sugary treats on voting behaviors. The implications of this study transcend the realms of traditional political science, delving into the quirky yet fascinating intersection of culinary indulgence and electoral inclinations.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[CONCLUSION]]



ChatGPT:

[[CONCLUSION]]

In conclusion, our research has unraveled a compelling correlation between Democrat votes for Senators in Tennessee and the proliferation of Krispy Kreme doughnut stores across the United States. The statistically significant relationship, as indicated by the high correlation coefficient and the minuscule p-value, suggests a sweet symmetry between partisan proclivities and delectable doughnut density. This study not only extends the boundaries of electoral analysis into uncharted culinary territories but also underscores the potential impact of confectionery cravings on political predilections.

The implications of our findings reach far beyond the hallowed halls of academia. They delve into the realm of public consciousness, elevating the role of glazed, powdered, and sprinkled temptations in the complex tapestry of democratic decision-making. One might whimsically ponder if an increase in doughnut consumption leads to a decrease in political tension, effectively filling the holes in partisan divides.

While our investigation has beautifully glazed over this peculiar relationship, it is crucial to acknowledge the limitations of our study. The potential influence of other factors such as socio-economic demographics, cultural proclivities, and perhaps even the irresistible aroma of freshly baked confections cannot be disregarded. Furthermore, the underlying mechanisms through which doughnut densities sway political allegiance warrant further exploration - a doughnut-shaped hole in our current understanding.

However, in the spirit of cautious optimism, we assert that no further research is needed in this area. Instead, let us savor the tantalizing confluence of politics and pastries, sprinkling our academic discourse with a dash of sweetness and a pinch of whimsy. As we bid adieu to this scholarly odyssey, let us not lament the unanswered questions but rather relish in the serendipitous joy of discovering a delightfully unexpected correlation. After all, in the words of Homer Simpson, "Donuts. Is there anything they can't do?"


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 Do(nut) Democrats: A Statistical Analysis of the Relationship Between Senatorial Votes in Tennessee and Krispy Kreme Doughnut Store Density. Respond only with the name of a fictional academic journal.

ChatGPT:

The Journal of Culinary Quantitative Analysis


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 Do(nut) Democrats: A Statistical Analysis of the Relationship Between Senatorial Votes in Tennessee and Krispy Kreme Doughnut Store Density. Respond only with the name of a fictional organization.

ChatGPT:

The Center for Policy and Pastry 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 Do(nut) Democrats: A Statistical Analysis of the Relationship Between Senatorial Votes in Tennessee and Krispy Kreme Doughnut Store Density with an abstract of In this study, we delved into the correlation between the Democratic votes for Senators in Tennessee and the proliferation of Krispy Kreme doughnut stores across the United States. Our research team utilized data from the MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, and Statista to uncover valuable insights into this peculiarly delectable relationship. With a correlation coefficient of 0.9563499 and p < 0.01 during the period from 2001 to 2020, our findings provide compelling evidence that there is a strong and intriguing link between the political preferences of Tennessee constituents and the availability of glazed, powdered, and sprinkled temptations nationwide. This study not only contributes to the burgeoning field of doughnut-based political science but also underscores the potential influence of fried confectioneries on electoral behaviors.

ChatGPT:

Tennessee, Senatorial Votes, Krispy Kreme, Doughnut Store Density, Democratic Votes, Statistical Analysis, Correlation, MIT Election Data, Harvard Dataverse, Statista, Tennessee Constituents, Political Preferences, Glazed Doughnuts, Powdered Doughnuts, Sprinkled Doughnuts, Electoral Behaviors, Fried Confectioneries

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



Random correlation

Discover a new correlation

View all correlations

View all research papers

Report an error


Data details

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

Krispy Kreme Doughnuts store count in the US
Source: Statista
See what else correlates with Krispy Kreme Doughnuts store count in the US

Correlation r = 0.9563499 (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 = 0.9146051 (Coefficient of determination)
This means 91.5% of the change in the one variable (i.e., Krispy Kreme Doughnuts store count in the US) is predictable based on the change in the other (i.e., Votes for Democratic Senators in Tennessee) over the 6 years from 2001 through 2020.

p < 0.01, which is statistically significant(Null hypothesis significance test)
The p-value is 0.0028. 0.0028164139860532780000000000
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 0.96 in 0.28% of random cases. Said differently, if you correlated 355 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.

[ 0.65, 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.
200220062008201220182020
Votes for Democratic Senators in Tennessee (Total votes)7282328799767672367058829854501040690
Krispy Kreme Doughnuts store count in the US (Number of Stores)239272225239355365




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([728232,879976,767236,705882,985450,1040690,])
array_2 = np.array([239,272,225,239,355,365,])
array_1_name = "Votes for Democratic Senators in Tennessee"
array_2_name = "Krispy Kreme Doughnuts store count in the US"

# 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?

Big thanks for reviewing!


Correlation ID: 5097 · Black Variable ID: 26316 · Red Variable ID: 416
about · subscribe · emailme@tylervigen.com · twitter

CC BY 4.0