about · email me · subscribe
Spurious correlation #5,645 · 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 Republican Senators in Alabama and the second variable is Google searches for 'where do birds go when it rains'.  The chart goes from 2004 to 2020, and the two variables track closely in value over that time. Small Image
Download png
, svg

AI explanation

The decrease in Republican votes for Senators in Alabama led to a decrease in hot air being generated, which created a localized anti-cyclonic effect, causing fewer rain showers in the area. So, the birds didn't need to Google for 'where do birds go when it rains' as often because they were experiencing drier conditions overall. One-liner: Seems like the birds were ready to flock to a different forecast!

Model: dalle-3
Prompt: ```[ An image that looks like it is a scene from a Disney movie ]``` Generate an image of a quaint Alabama town with a charming polling station displaying a shift in votes, nestled amid a backdrop of vibrant flora. In the foreground, a lively aviary of birds with colorful plumage perches on lush, verdant branches, soaking in the brilliant, cloudless sky. The birds exude contentment as they bask in the leisurely atmosphere, untouched by worries and instead embracing the gentle weather, free from the need to seek shelter. The depiction should include only scenes, people, and objects, it should not include text or speech bubbles.
This image generation prompt was also generated by AI, using the following sequence:

Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You select one of a few potential scene descriptors that seems to go along with the variables described. You respond only with the scene descriptions provided and say nothing else.
User prompt: Here are two variables: Votes for Republican Senators in Alabama and Google searches for 'where do birds go when it rains'. 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: Cute cartoon Psychedelic a meme An image that looks like it is a scene from A Disney Movie Cute cartoon
ChatGPT: An image that looks like it is a scene from a Disney 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 Votes for Republican Senators in Alabama and Google searches for 'where do birds go when it rains', in the following situation: The decrease in Republican votes for Senators in Alabama led to a decrease in hot air being generated, which created a localized anti-cyclonic effect, causing fewer rain showers in the area. So, the birds didn't need to Google for 'where do birds go when it rains' as often because they were experiencing drier conditions overall. One-liner: Seems like the birds were ready to flock to a different forecast!. Keep the description simple.
ChatGPT: In a picturesque Alabama town, the local polling station shows fewer votes for Republican Senators, while nearby, a colorful aviary of birds perches on lush green branches, gazing at the clear, sunny sky. The birds seem content, as they are not frantically Googling "where do birds go when it rains" on their smartphones, indicating that they don't need to seek shelter from the milder, drier weather brought on by the decreased hot air, all while enjoying the carefree atmosphere.

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 Disney movie ] and depicting this scene: In a picturesque Alabama town, the local polling station shows fewer votes for Republican Senators, while nearby, a colorful aviary of birds perches on lush green branches, gazing at the clear, sunny sky. The birds seem content, as they are not frantically Googling "where do birds go when it rains" on their smartphones, indicating that they don't need to seek shelter from the milder, drier weather brought on by the decreased hot air, all while enjoying the carefree atmosphere. 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 Disney movie ]``` Generate an image of a quaint Alabama town with a charming polling station displaying a shift in votes, nestled amid a backdrop of vibrant flora. In the foreground, a lively aviary of birds with colorful plumage perches on lush, verdant branches, soaking in the brilliant, cloudless sky. The birds exude contentment as they bask in the leisurely atmosphere, untouched by worries and instead embracing the gentle weather, free from the need to seek shelter.

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

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

Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106 (fine-tuned)
System prompt: You provide humorous responses in the form of plausible sounding explanations for correlations. You assume the correlation is causative for the purpose of the explanation even if it is ridiculous. You do not chat with the user, you only reply with the causal connection explanation and nothing else.
User prompt: Please make up a funny explanation for how a decrease in Republican votes for Senators in Alabama caused where do birds go when it rains (Google searches for 'where do birds go when it rains') to decrease. Add a funny one-liner at the end.

AI academic paper

(Because p < 0.01)
Flipping the Bird: A Correlative Study of Republican Votes for Senators in Alabama and Google Searches for 'Where Do Birds Go When It Rains'

The Journal of Avian 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 Republican votes for Senators in Alabama and Google searches for 'where do birds go when it rains'. Make it seem dry like academic research paper, but with lots of subtle hidden offhand remarks, jokes, goofy observations, and puns.

Make the title seem clever.

Your research team used data from MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse and Google Trends to assess this nagging question. You found a correlation coefficient of 0.9806734 and p < 0.01 for 2004 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]]
"Flipping the Bird: A Correlative Study of Republican Votes for Senators in Alabama and Google Searches for 'Where Do Birds Go When It Rains'"

[[ABSTRACT]]
In this empirical study, we present the analysis of a peculiar association between Republican votes for Senators in the state of Alabama and Google searches for the inquiry "where do birds go when it rains." Leveraging data from the MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, and Google Trends, we conducted a comprehensive investigation spanning the years 2004 to 2020. Our findings reveal a striking correlation coefficient of 0.9806734 (p < 0.01) between the two seemingly disparate variables. Our study brings to light the unexpected parallels between political preferences and avian weather-seeking behaviors, shedding light on the intricacies of human cognition and online search patterns.


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 Republican votes for Senators in Alabama and Google searches for 'where do birds go when it rains'. Make it seem dry like academic research paper, but with lots of subtle hidden offhand remarks, jokes, goofy observations, and puns. Stay serious and dry most of the time, but then occasionally let your wit shine through.

Here is the title and abstract of the paper:
[[TITLE]]
"Flipping the Bird: A Correlative Study of Republican Votes for Senators in Alabama and Google Searches for 'Where Do Birds Go When It Rains'"

[[ABSTRACT]]
In this empirical study, we present the analysis of a peculiar association between Republican votes for Senators in the state of Alabama and Google searches for the inquiry "where do birds go when it rains." Leveraging data from the MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, and Google Trends, we conducted a comprehensive investigation spanning the years 2004 to 2020. Our findings reveal a striking correlation coefficient of 0.9806734 (p < 0.01) between the two seemingly disparate variables. Our study brings to light the unexpected parallels between political preferences and avian weather-seeking behaviors, shedding light on the intricacies of human cognition and online search patterns.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[INTRODUCTION]]



ChatGPT:
[[INTRODUCTION]]

Avian enthusiasts and political analysts alike have long pondered the mysteries of bird behavior and political inclinations. While the former may concern themselves with the flight patterns of our feathered friends, the latter engage in their own form of navigating the political landscape. However, our study endeavors to blur the boundaries between these seemingly unrelated domains and uncover a connection that flies under the radar, so to speak.

The state of Alabama, known for its rich political history and diverse avian population, offers a unique backdrop for our investigation. In this study, we delve into the unexpected relationship between the votes cast for Republican Senators and the Google searches for the rather specific query of "where do birds go when it rains." While one may initially dismiss the notion of a correlation between these two disparate elements, our analysis paints a picture that is anything but black and white, or should we say, blue jay and cardinal.

The curiosity driving this research stems from a desire to understand the behavioral patterns that link human political choices and the quest for avian rain shelter. If you think about it, both pursuits rely on a degree of searching and seeking - one for reliable political representation, the other for a dry perch during a downpour. As we embark on this avian-political journey, we invite you to spread your wings of inquiry and join us in examining this fascinating intersection of human behavior. After all, who wouldn't want to take a closer look at the intriguing interplay between the voice of the electorate and the curious quest for avian rain retreats?


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 Republican votes for Senators in Alabama and Google searches for 'where do birds go when it rains'. Make it seem dry like academic research paper, but with lots of subtle hidden offhand remarks, jokes, goofy observations, and puns.

Speak in the present tense for this section (the authors find...), as is common in academic research paper literature reviews. Name the sources in a format similar to this: In "Book," the authors find lorem and ipsum.

Make up the lorem and ipsum part, but make it sound related to the topic at hand.

Start by naming serious-sounding studies by authors like Smith, Doe, and Jones - but then quickly devolve. Name some real non-fiction books that would be related to the topic. Then name some real fiction books that sound like they could be related. Then name a few real TV shows that sound like they might be relevant to the topic that you watched as research.

Here is the title and abstract of the paper:
[[TITLE]]
"Flipping the Bird: A Correlative Study of Republican Votes for Senators in Alabama and Google Searches for 'Where Do Birds Go When It Rains'"

[[ABSTRACT]]
In this empirical study, we present the analysis of a peculiar association between Republican votes for Senators in the state of Alabama and Google searches for the inquiry "where do birds go when it rains." Leveraging data from the MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, and Google Trends, we conducted a comprehensive investigation spanning the years 2004 to 2020. Our findings reveal a striking correlation coefficient of 0.9806734 (p < 0.01) between the two seemingly disparate variables. Our study brings to light the unexpected parallels between political preferences and avian weather-seeking behaviors, shedding light on the intricacies of human cognition and online search patterns.

-------

And here is the introduction section that led to this literature review:
[[INTRODUCTION]]
Avian enthusiasts and political analysts alike have long pondered the mysteries of bird behavior and political inclinations. While the former may concern themselves with the flight patterns of our feathered friends, the latter engage in their own form of navigating the political landscape. However, our study endeavors to blur the boundaries between these seemingly unrelated domains and uncover a connection that flies under the radar, so to speak.
The state of Alabama, known for its rich political history and diverse avian population, offers a unique backdrop for our investigation. In this study, we delve into the unexpected relationship between the votes cast for Republican Senators and the Google searches for the rather specific query of "where do birds go when it rains." While one may initially dismiss the notion of a correlation between these two disparate elements, our analysis paints a picture that is anything but black and white, or should we say, blue jay and cardinal.
The curiosity driving this research stems from a desire to understand the behavioral patterns that link human political choices and the quest for avian rain shelter. If you think about it, both pursuits rely on a degree of searching and seeking - one for reliable political representation, the other for a dry perch during a downpour. As we embark on this avian-political journey, we invite you to spread your wings of inquiry and join us in examining this fascinating intersection of human behavior. After all, who wouldn't want to take a closer look at the intriguing interplay between the voice of the electorate and the curious quest for avian rain retreats?

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[LITERATURE REVIEW]]



ChatGPT:
[[LITERATURE REVIEW]]

The exploration of the interplay between avian behavior and political leanings in Alabama is a relatively novel undertaking in the field of socio-political studies. Nevertheless, a comprehensive review of relevant literature reveals some intriguing insights and unexpected connections that set the stage for our own investigation.

Smith et al. (2015) conducted a seminal study on the cognitive processes and decision-making factors underlying political voting behavior, emphasizing the role of emotional responses and environmental influences. While their focus was primarily centered on human-centric stimuli, their findings indirectly prompt consideration of analogous factors that could potentially influence search queries related to avian behavior in response to inclement weather.

Turning to the domain of avian behavior, Doe and Jones (2018) explored the migratory patterns and habitat choices of various bird species in their natural habitats. While their work primarily centers on the physiological and instinctual mechanisms that drive such behaviors, it paves the way for broader contemplation of the potential psychological resonances of these patterns among human observers and, by extension, their influence on seemingly unrelated spheres such as political preferences.

These serious studies provide a contextual backdrop for our investigation, as we endeavor to bridge the gaps between these seemingly distant fields of inquiry. However, it is important to note that our research also draws inspiration from outside the traditional academic realm. The non-fiction works of renowned naturalist John James Audubon and ornithologist David Attenborough offer valuable perspectives on avian behavior, enriching our understanding of the intricacies of bird cognition and instinct.

Further afield, the fictional narratives of authors such as Jonathan Franzen and T.C. Boyle weave captivating tales that, while not grounded in empirical research, provide a vibrant portrayal of human interactions with birds and the natural world. Similarly, the popular television series "Planet Earth" and "The Big Bang Theory" delve into the complexities of natural phenomena and human curiosity, inspiring a broader contemplation of the intersections between political choices and avian inquiries.

By incorporating insights from diverse sources, both scholarly and popular, our literature review sets the stage for a lighthearted yet rigorous exploration of the relationship between Republican votes for Senators in Alabama and the peculiar curiosity about bird behavior during rainfall.


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 Republican votes for Senators in Alabama and Google searches for 'where do birds go when it rains'. Make it seem dry like academic research paper, but with lots of subtle hidden offhand remarks, jokes, goofy observations, and puns. Stay serious and dry most of the time, but then occasionally let your wit shine through.

Your research team collected data from all across the internet, but mostly just used information from MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse and Google Trends . You used data from 2004 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]]
"Flipping the Bird: A Correlative Study of Republican Votes for Senators in Alabama and Google Searches for 'Where Do Birds Go When It Rains'"

[[ABSTRACT]]
In this empirical study, we present the analysis of a peculiar association between Republican votes for Senators in the state of Alabama and Google searches for the inquiry "where do birds go when it rains." Leveraging data from the MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, and Google Trends, we conducted a comprehensive investigation spanning the years 2004 to 2020. Our findings reveal a striking correlation coefficient of 0.9806734 (p < 0.01) between the two seemingly disparate variables. Our study brings to light the unexpected parallels between political preferences and avian weather-seeking behaviors, shedding light on the intricacies of human cognition and online search patterns.

[[INTRODUCTION]]
Avian enthusiasts and political analysts alike have long pondered the mysteries of bird behavior and political inclinations. While the former may concern themselves with the flight patterns of our feathered friends, the latter engage in their own form of navigating the political landscape. However, our study endeavors to blur the boundaries between these seemingly unrelated domains and uncover a connection that flies under the radar, so to speak.
The state of Alabama, known for its rich political history and diverse avian population, offers a unique backdrop for our investigation. In this study, we delve into the unexpected relationship between the votes cast for Republican Senators and the Google searches for the rather specific query of "where do birds go when it rains." While one may initially dismiss the notion of a correlation between these two disparate elements, our analysis paints a picture that is anything but black and white, or should we say, blue jay and cardinal.
The curiosity driving this research stems from a desire to understand the behavioral patterns that link human political choices and the quest for avian rain shelter. If you think about it, both pursuits rely on a degree of searching and seeking - one for reliable political representation, the other for a dry perch during a downpour. As we embark on this avian-political journey, we invite you to spread your wings of inquiry and join us in examining this fascinating intersection of human behavior. After all, who wouldn't want to take a closer look at the intriguing interplay between the voice of the electorate and the curious quest for avian rain retreats?

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[METHODOLOGY]]



ChatGPT:

[[METHODOLOGY]]

To commence our investigation, we hatched a meticulous plan to aggregate and analyze data from diverse sources, much like a bird building its nest with various twigs and grasses. Our avian-themed investigation perched firmly on the branch of statistical rigor as we sought to uncover the hidden roost of correlation between Republican votes for Senators in Alabama and the popular curiosity surrounding the whereabouts of birds during rainfall.

Data Collection
Our pursuit for data akin to a bird's quest for sustenance led us to reputable repositories such as the MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, and Google Trends. We obtained precinct-level voting data for Republican Senators from 2004 to 2020, encompassing both primary and general elections. Subsequently, we turned our gaze to Google Trends, extracting search volume indices for the query "where do birds go when it rains" within the state of Alabama. This unique combination of political and avian data allowed us to meticulously analyze the parallel movements of the twain - both politically and meteorologically.

Data Analysis
The heart of our inquiry, not unlike the rhythmic beating of a bird's wings in flight, lay in the statistical analysis of the collected data. We employed a variety of statistical techniques including correlation analysis, time series analysis, and regression modeling to uncover patterns and associations. Like the intricate blend of feather and air that facilitates avian flight, our statistical methods engendered a holistic view of the connection between political leanings and ornithological inquisitiveness.

Correlation Calculation
In our pursuit to unveil the uncanny connection between Republican votes for Senators and searches for avian precipitation perches, we calculated the Pearson correlation coefficient. The resulting coefficient, much like a colorful plumage, revealed a striking correlation between the two variables. As a reflection of our disciplined analytical endeavors, the correlation coefficient stood at an impressive 0.9806734 with a p-value less than 0.01, signifying a robust and significant relationship.

Temporal Analysis
Furthermore, we conducted a temporal analysis to discern any temporal trends and anomalies in the data. Just as birds' migratory patterns exhibit temporal rhythms, our analysis encompassed the examination of temporal fluctuations in both Republican votes and bird-centric Google searches. This temporal lens added depth to our inquiry, akin to the nuanced understanding of avian behavior across different seasons.

Regression Modeling
To consolidate our findings and disentangle the web of intertwining variables, we employed regression modeling techniques. Through these models, we sought to undrape the mysteries of causation and elucidate the undercurrents shaping both political preferences and avian weather quest. The regression analyses, much like aligning the flight trajectory of a bird, provided valuable insights into the determinants of variation in the search behavior for avian rain retreats.

In light of these methodological underpinnings, our research soared to new heights, revealing the unexpected and intriguing intersections between political choices and the quest for avian rain shelters. As we delve into the intricate statistical underbelly of this correlated curiosity, we invite fellow researchers to preen their proverbial feathers of inquiry and join us in this unique exploration. After all, what could be more intriguing than uncovering the electoral nests of the avian enthusiasts?


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 Republican votes for Senators in Alabama and Google searches for 'where do birds go when it rains'. Make it seem dry like academic research paper, but with lots of subtle hidden offhand remarks, jokes, goofy observations, and puns. Stay serious and dry most of the time, but then occasionally let your wit shine through.

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

For the time period 2004 to 2020, you found a correlation 0.9806734, r-squared of 0.9617204, 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]]
"Flipping the Bird: A Correlative Study of Republican Votes for Senators in Alabama and Google Searches for 'Where Do Birds Go When It Rains'"

[[ABSTRACT]]
In this empirical study, we present the analysis of a peculiar association between Republican votes for Senators in the state of Alabama and Google searches for the inquiry "where do birds go when it rains." Leveraging data from the MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, and Google Trends, we conducted a comprehensive investigation spanning the years 2004 to 2020. Our findings reveal a striking correlation coefficient of 0.9806734 (p < 0.01) between the two seemingly disparate variables. Our study brings to light the unexpected parallels between political preferences and avian weather-seeking behaviors, shedding light on the intricacies of human cognition and online search patterns.

-------

And here is the methodology section that led to this result:
[[METHODOLOGY]]
Avian enthusiasts and political analysts alike have long pondered the mysteries of bird behavior and political inclinations. While the former may concern themselves with the flight patterns of our feathered friends, the latter engage in their own form of navigating the political landscape. However, our study endeavors to blur the boundaries between these seemingly unrelated domains and uncover a connection that flies under the radar, so to speak.
The state of Alabama, known for its rich political history and diverse avian population, offers a unique backdrop for our investigation. In this study, we delve into the unexpected relationship between the votes cast for Republican Senators and the Google searches for the rather specific query of "where do birds go when it rains." While one may initially dismiss the notion of a correlation between these two disparate elements, our analysis paints a picture that is anything but black and white, or should we say, blue jay and cardinal.
The curiosity driving this research stems from a desire to understand the behavioral patterns that link human political choices and the quest for avian rain shelter. If you think about it, both pursuits rely on a degree of searching and seeking - one for reliable political representation, the other for a dry perch during a downpour. As we embark on this avian-political journey, we invite you to spread your wings of inquiry and join us in examining this fascinating intersection of human behavior. After all, who wouldn't want to take a closer look at the intriguing interplay between the voice of the electorate and the curious quest for avian rain retreats?

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[RESULTS]]



ChatGPT:

[[RESULTS]]

The analysis of data collected from the MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, and Google Trends revealed a remarkably high correlation between Republican votes for Senators in Alabama and Google searches for "where do birds go when it rains." The correlation coefficient obtained was 0.9806734, indicating a strong linear relationship between the two variables. Additionally, the coefficient of determination (r-squared) was calculated to be 0.9617204, signifying that approximately 96.17% of the variation in Republican votes for Senators can be explained by the variation in the Google searches for avian rain shelters. The p-value associated with this correlation was found to be less than 0.01, indicating a high level of significance in the relationship between the variables.

The robustness of the correlation is visually depicted in Figure 1, which showcases a scatterplot illustrating the close correspondence between the Republican votes for Senators and the Google searches for "where do birds go when it rains." The data points form a clear linear pattern, affirming the substantial association between these seemingly unrelated phenomena.

This study not only uncovers an unexpected and statistically significant correlation between political allegiances and avian weather-related queries but also sets the stage for further interdisciplinary explorations at the intersection of ornithology and political science. The implications of these findings extend beyond mere statistical intrigue, offering a whimsical glimpse into the whims and fancies that inform human behaviors, whether in the realm of governance or the pursuit of avian knowledge.

Furthermore, the magnitude of the correlation prompts us to reflect on the underlying cognitive processes that underpin the simultaneity of engaging in political decision-making and seeking shelter for our feathered counterparts. The correlation coefficient obtained is a testament to the interconnectedness of human cognition and decision-making, transcending the realms of traditional academic inquiry to embrace the unexpected, the outlandish, and the delightfully quirky.


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 Republican votes for Senators in Alabama and Google searches for 'where do birds go when it rains'. Make it seem dry like academic research paper, but with lots of subtle hidden offhand remarks, jokes, goofy observations, and puns. Stay serious and dry most of the time, but then occasionally let your wit shine through.

Limit your response to 500 tokens.

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

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

[[TITLE]]
"Flipping the Bird: A Correlative Study of Republican Votes for Senators in Alabama and Google Searches for 'Where Do Birds Go When It Rains'"

[[ABSTRACT]]
In this empirical study, we present the analysis of a peculiar association between Republican votes for Senators in the state of Alabama and Google searches for the inquiry "where do birds go when it rains." Leveraging data from the MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, and Google Trends, we conducted a comprehensive investigation spanning the years 2004 to 2020. Our findings reveal a striking correlation coefficient of 0.9806734 (p < 0.01) between the two seemingly disparate variables. Our study brings to light the unexpected parallels between political preferences and avian weather-seeking behaviors, shedding light on the intricacies of human cognition and online search patterns.

[[LITERATURE REVIEW]]
The exploration of the interplay between avian behavior and political leanings in Alabama is a relatively novel undertaking in the field of socio-political studies. Nevertheless, a comprehensive review of relevant literature reveals some intriguing insights and unexpected connections that set the stage for our own investigation.
Smith et al. (2015) conducted a seminal study on the cognitive processes and decision-making factors underlying political voting behavior, emphasizing the role of emotional responses and environmental influences. While their focus was primarily centered on human-centric stimuli, their findings indirectly prompt consideration of analogous factors that could potentially influence search queries related to avian behavior in response to inclement weather.
Turning to the domain of avian behavior, Doe and Jones (2018) explored the migratory patterns and habitat choices of various bird species in their natural habitats. While their work primarily centers on the physiological and instinctual mechanisms that drive such behaviors, it paves the way for broader contemplation of the potential psychological resonances of these patterns among human observers and, by extension, their influence on seemingly unrelated spheres such as political preferences.
These serious studies provide a contextual backdrop for our investigation, as we endeavor to bridge the gaps between these seemingly distant fields of inquiry. However, it is important to note that our research also draws inspiration from outside the traditional academic realm. The non-fiction works of renowned naturalist John James Audubon and ornithologist David Attenborough offer valuable perspectives on avian behavior, enriching our understanding of the intricacies of bird cognition and instinct.
Further afield, the fictional narratives of authors such as Jonathan Franzen and T.C. Boyle weave captivating tales that, while not grounded in empirical research, provide a vibrant portrayal of human interactions with birds and the natural world. Similarly, the popular television series "Planet Earth" and "The Big Bang Theory" delve into the complexities of natural phenomena and human curiosity, inspiring a broader contemplation of the intersections between political choices and avian inquiries.
By incorporating insights from diverse sources, both scholarly and popular, our literature review sets the stage for a lighthearted yet rigorous exploration of the relationship between Republican votes for Senators in Alabama and the peculiar curiosity about bird behavior during rainfall.

[[RESULTS]]
The analysis of data collected from the MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, and Google Trends revealed a remarkably high correlation between Republican votes for Senators in Alabama and Google searches for "where do birds go when it rains." The correlation coefficient obtained was 0.9806734, indicating a strong linear relationship between the two variables. Additionally, the coefficient of determination (r-squared) was calculated to be 0.9617204, signifying that approximately 96.17% of the variation in Republican votes for Senators can be explained by the variation in the Google searches for avian rain shelters. The p-value associated with this correlation was found to be less than 0.01, indicating a high level of significance in the relationship between the variables.
The robustness of the correlation is visually depicted in Figure 1, which showcases a scatterplot illustrating the close correspondence between the Republican votes for Senators and the Google searches for "where do birds go when it rains." The data points form a clear linear pattern, affirming the substantial association between these seemingly unrelated phenomena.
This study not only uncovers an unexpected and statistically significant correlation between political allegiances and avian weather-related queries but also sets the stage for further interdisciplinary explorations at the intersection of ornithology and political science. The implications of these findings extend beyond mere statistical intrigue, offering a whimsical glimpse into the whims and fancies that inform human behaviors, whether in the realm of governance or the pursuit of avian knowledge.
Furthermore, the magnitude of the correlation prompts us to reflect on the underlying cognitive processes that underpin the simultaneity of engaging in political decision-making and seeking shelter for our feathered counterparts. The correlation coefficient obtained is a testament to the interconnectedness of human cognition and decision-making, transcending the realms of traditional academic inquiry to embrace the unexpected, the outlandish, and the delightfully quirky.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[DISCUSSION]]



ChatGPT:

[[DISCUSSION]]

The results of our investigation provide compelling evidence of a strong and robust relationship between Republican votes for Senators in Alabama and Google searches for the query "where do birds go when it rains." The correlation coefficient of 0.9806734 found in our study serves as a resounding affirmation of the unexpected parallels between political preferences and avian weather-seeking behaviors. These findings align with the insights gleaned from the existing literature, lending credence to our inter-disciplinary approach that marries the realms of ornithology and political science.

Building upon the previous work of Smith et al. (2015), our study underscores the influence of environmental cues and emotional responses on decision-making processes. While Smith et al. focused on human-centric stimuli, our findings suggest a broader spectrum of contextual influences, wherein the weather-related concerns of avian populations might subtly imprint themselves on the consciousness of human voters. The correlation observed in our study may thus reflect a nuanced intertwining of human emotions and empathetic considerations for our feathered friends, shaping political inclinations in unforeseen ways.

Moreover, our results echo the sentiments put forth by Doe and Jones (2018), who delved into the migratory patterns and habitats of various bird species. While their work centered on instinctual behaviors, our study extends the scope to contemplate the psychological echoes of these behaviors among human observers. In this light, the high correlation observed in our investigation provides a statistical underpinning for the potential resonance of avian weather-seeking behaviors within the collective consciousness of voters, offering an intriguing reflection of the cognitive cross-currents underlying political decision-making.

It is worth noting that our analysis, while grounded in empirical rigor, draws inspiration from diverse sources, including the imaginative portrayals of human interactions with avian species. As presented in the literature review, the non-fiction works of naturalists such as John James Audubon and David Attenborough offer valuable perspectives on avian behavior, enriching our understanding of their cognitive capacities. This broader contemplation of avian cognition and instinct serves as a vital touchstone for the unexpected correlations uncovered in our study.

In conclusion, the improbable convergence of Republican votes for Senators in Alabama and Google queries about avian behavior during rainfall underscores the intricate tapestry of human cognition and decision-making. While our study may raise a few eyebrows, it also invites a whimsical reflection on the ineffable interplay of human quirks and avian curiosities, challenging conventional boundaries of academic inquiry with a lighthearted yet rigorous exploration of the human experience.


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 Republican votes for Senators in Alabama and Google searches for 'where do birds go when it rains'. Make it seem dry like academic research paper, but with lots of subtle hidden offhand remarks, jokes, goofy observations, and puns. Stay serious and dry most of the time, but then occasionally let your wit shine through.

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

Here are the title, abstract, introduction, and results sections.
[[TITLE]]
"Flipping the Bird: A Correlative Study of Republican Votes for Senators in Alabama and Google Searches for 'Where Do Birds Go When It Rains'"

[[ABSTRACT]]
In this empirical study, we present the analysis of a peculiar association between Republican votes for Senators in the state of Alabama and Google searches for the inquiry "where do birds go when it rains." Leveraging data from the MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, and Google Trends, we conducted a comprehensive investigation spanning the years 2004 to 2020. Our findings reveal a striking correlation coefficient of 0.9806734 (p < 0.01) between the two seemingly disparate variables. Our study brings to light the unexpected parallels between political preferences and avian weather-seeking behaviors, shedding light on the intricacies of human cognition and online search patterns.

[[INTRDUCTION]]
Avian enthusiasts and political analysts alike have long pondered the mysteries of bird behavior and political inclinations. While the former may concern themselves with the flight patterns of our feathered friends, the latter engage in their own form of navigating the political landscape. However, our study endeavors to blur the boundaries between these seemingly unrelated domains and uncover a connection that flies under the radar, so to speak.
The state of Alabama, known for its rich political history and diverse avian population, offers a unique backdrop for our investigation. In this study, we delve into the unexpected relationship between the votes cast for Republican Senators and the Google searches for the rather specific query of "where do birds go when it rains." While one may initially dismiss the notion of a correlation between these two disparate elements, our analysis paints a picture that is anything but black and white, or should we say, blue jay and cardinal.
The curiosity driving this research stems from a desire to understand the behavioral patterns that link human political choices and the quest for avian rain shelter. If you think about it, both pursuits rely on a degree of searching and seeking - one for reliable political representation, the other for a dry perch during a downpour. As we embark on this avian-political journey, we invite you to spread your wings of inquiry and join us in examining this fascinating intersection of human behavior. After all, who wouldn't want to take a closer look at the intriguing interplay between the voice of the electorate and the curious quest for avian rain retreats?

[[RESULTS]]
The analysis of data collected from the MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, and Google Trends revealed a remarkably high correlation between Republican votes for Senators in Alabama and Google searches for "where do birds go when it rains." The correlation coefficient obtained was 0.9806734, indicating a strong linear relationship between the two variables. Additionally, the coefficient of determination (r-squared) was calculated to be 0.9617204, signifying that approximately 96.17% of the variation in Republican votes for Senators can be explained by the variation in the Google searches for avian rain shelters. The p-value associated with this correlation was found to be less than 0.01, indicating a high level of significance in the relationship between the variables.
The robustness of the correlation is visually depicted in Figure 1, which showcases a scatterplot illustrating the close correspondence between the Republican votes for Senators and the Google searches for "where do birds go when it rains." The data points form a clear linear pattern, affirming the substantial association between these seemingly unrelated phenomena.
This study not only uncovers an unexpected and statistically significant correlation between political allegiances and avian weather-related queries but also sets the stage for further interdisciplinary explorations at the intersection of ornithology and political science. The implications of these findings extend beyond mere statistical intrigue, offering a whimsical glimpse into the whims and fancies that inform human behaviors, whether in the realm of governance or the pursuit of avian knowledge.
Furthermore, the magnitude of the correlation prompts us to reflect on the underlying cognitive processes that underpin the simultaneity of engaging in political decision-making and seeking shelter for our feathered counterparts. The correlation coefficient obtained is a testament to the interconnectedness of human cognition and decision-making, transcending the realms of traditional academic inquiry to embrace the unexpected, the outlandish, and the delightfully quirky.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[CONCLUSION]]



ChatGPT:

[[CONCLUSION]]

In conclusion, our study has unveiled a surprisingly robust correlation between Republican votes for Senators in Alabama and Google searches for "where do birds go when it rains." The high correlation coefficient and significance level suggest that the connection between these two seemingly unrelated phenomena is not merely a flight of fancy. Indeed, the magnitude of the association lends credence to the notion that avian weather queries may hold more political weight than previously thought.

As we reflect on these findings, one cannot help but marvel at the intricate dance of human behavior and avian curiosity. It seems that while some seek to weather the political storm, others are simply seeking shelter from the literal storm. This intriguing parallel raises questions about the interconnectedness of human decision-making processes and the whimsical ponderings that occupy our minds – truly a case of birds of a feather flocking to the ballot box together.

While this study may leave some scratching their heads like a perplexed parakeet, it stands as a testament to the delightful quirkiness of the human experience. However, as we spread our wings of inquiry and soar to new academic heights, it is evident that no further research is needed in this area. The results speak for themselves, and it seems we have truly "flipped the bird" on conventional expectations in both political and ornithological realms.


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 Flipping the Bird: A Correlative Study of Republican Votes for Senators in Alabama and Google Searches for 'Where Do Birds Go When It Rains'. Respond only with the name of a fictional academic journal.

ChatGPT:

The Journal of Avian 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 Flipping the Bird: A Correlative Study of Republican Votes for Senators in Alabama and Google Searches for 'Where Do Birds Go When It Rains'. Respond only with the name of a fictional organization.

ChatGPT:

The Center for Avian Inquiry and Political Behavior


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 Flipping the Bird: A Correlative Study of Republican Votes for Senators in Alabama and Google Searches for 'Where Do Birds Go When It Rains' with an abstract of In this empirical study, we present the analysis of a peculiar association between Republican votes for Senators in the state of Alabama and Google searches for the inquiry "where do birds go when it rains." Leveraging data from the MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, and Google Trends, we conducted a comprehensive investigation spanning the years 2004 to 2020. Our findings reveal a striking correlation coefficient of 0.9806734 (p < 0.01) between the two seemingly disparate variables. Our study brings to light the unexpected parallels between political preferences and avian weather-seeking behaviors, shedding light on the intricacies of human cognition and online search patterns.

ChatGPT:

Republican votes, Senators, Alabama, Google searches, birds, rain, correlation study, empirical study, MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, Google Trends, political preferences, avian behavior, weather-seeking behaviors

*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 Republican Senators in Alabama
Detailed data title: Percentage of votes cast for Federal Republican Senate candidates in Alabama
Source: MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse
See what else correlates with Votes for Republican Senators in Alabama

Google searches for 'where do birds go when it rains'
Detailed data title: Relative volume of Google searches for 'where do birds go when it rains' (Worldwide, without quotes)
Source: Google Trends
Additional Info: Relative search volume (not absolute numbers)

See what else correlates with Google searches for 'where do birds go when it rains'

Correlation r = 0.9806734 (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 = 0.9617204 (Coefficient of determination)
This means 96.2% of the change in the one variable (i.e., Google searches for 'where do birds go when it rains') is predictable based on the change in the other (i.e., Votes for Republican Senators in Alabama) over the 6 years from 2004 through 2020.

p < 0.01, which is statistically significant(Null hypothesis significance test)
The p-value is 0.00056. 0.0005566649105995364000000000
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 0.056% of random cases. Said differently, if you correlated 1,796 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.

[ 0.83, 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.
200420082010201420162020
Votes for Republican Senators in Alabama (Percentage of votes)67.545263.362265.175597.251663.958860.0954
Google searches for 'where do birds go when it rains' (Rel. search volume)2.833331.083331.1666710.752.083331.91667




Why this works

  1. Data dredging: I have 25,237 variables in my database. I compare all these variables against each other to find ones that randomly match up. That's 636,906,169 correlation calculations! This is called “data dredging.” Instead of starting with a hypothesis and testing it, I instead abused the data to see what correlations shake out. It’s a dangerous way to go about analysis, because any sufficiently large dataset will yield strong correlations completely at random.
  2. Lack of causal connection: There is probably Because these pages are automatically generated, it's possible that the two variables you are viewing are in fact causually related. I take steps to prevent the obvious ones from showing on the site (I don't let data about the weather in one city correlate with the weather in a neighboring city, for example), but sometimes they still pop up. If they are related, cool! You found a loophole.
    no direct connection between these variables, despite what the AI says above. This is exacerbated by the fact that I used "Years" as the base variable. Lots of things happen in a year that are not related to each other! Most studies would use something like "one person" in stead of "one year" to be the "thing" studied.
  3. Observations not independent: For many variables, sequential years are not independent of each other. If a population of people is continuously doing something every day, there is no reason to think they would suddenly change how they are doing that thing on January 1. A simple Personally I don't find any p-value calculation to be 'simple,' but you know what I mean.
    p-value calculation does not take this into account, so mathematically it appears less probable than it really is.
  4. Very low n: There are not many data points included in this analysis. Even if the p-value is high, we should be suspicious of using so few datapoints in a correlation.
  5. Y-axis doesn't start at zero: I truncated the Y-axes of the graph above. I also used a line graph, which makes the visual connection stand out more than it deserves. Nothing against line graphs. They are great at telling a story when you have linear data! But visually it is deceptive because the only data is at the points on the graph, not the lines on the graph. In between each point, the data could have been doing anything. Like going for a random walk by itself!
    Mathematically what I showed is true, but it is intentionally misleading. Below is the same chart but with both Y-axes starting at zero.




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([67.5452,63.3622,65.1755,97.2516,63.9588,60.0954,])
array_2 = np.array([2.83333,1.08333,1.16667,10.75,2.08333,1.91667,])
array_1_name = "Votes for Republican Senators in Alabama"
array_2_name = "Google searches for 'where do birds go when it rains'"

# 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 correlation rating is out of this world!


Correlation ID: 5645 · Black Variable ID: 26344 · Red Variable ID: 1468
about · subscribe · emailme@tylervigen.com · twitter

CC BY 4.0