about · email me · subscribe
Spurious correlation #5,665 · View random

A linear line chart with years as the X-axis and two variables on the Y-axis. The first variable is Popularity of the first name Dusty and the second variable is Air pollution in Corpus Christi, Texas.  The chart goes from 1980 to 2020, and the two variables track closely in value over that time. Small Image
Download png
, svg

AI explanation

Less people were named Dusty, so there was less dust kicked up as they walked, leading to a reduction in air pollution in Corpus Christi, Texas.

Model: dalle-3
Prompt: Prompt: Create a photorealistic image depicting Corpus Christi, Texas, with people strolling through cleaner and less dusty streets. Show a clear blue sky in the background and minimal dust being kicked up as people walk. Capture a sense of improved air quality and the city's enhanced cleanliness due to fewer people being named Dusty. 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: Popularity of the first name Dusty and Air pollution in Corpus Christi, Texas. 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: Cyber folk Cute cartoon a Polaroid photo Oragami Photorealism
ChatGPT: Photorealism

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 Popularity of the first name Dusty and Air pollution in Corpus Christi, Texas, in the following situation: Less people were named Dusty, so there was less dust kicked up as they walked, leading to a reduction in air pollution in Corpus Christi, Texas.. Keep the description simple.
ChatGPT: In Corpus Christi, Texas, fewer people were named Dusty, and as a result, the streets were less dusty and the air pollution decreased. People strolled through the city streets without kicking up much dust, and the air felt cleaner and clearer than before.

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: [ Photorealism ] and depicting this scene: In Corpus Christi, Texas, fewer people were named Dusty, and as a result, the streets were less dusty and the air pollution decreased. People strolled through the city streets without kicking up much dust, and the air felt cleaner and clearer than before. Keep the visual depiction simple. Do not include any words or speech bubbles.
ChatGPT: Prompt: Create a photorealistic image depicting Corpus Christi, Texas, with people strolling through cleaner and less dusty streets. Show a clear blue sky in the background and minimal dust being kicked up as people walk. Capture a sense of improved air quality and the city's enhanced cleanliness due to fewer people being named Dusty.

*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 Popularity of the first name Dusty caused Air pollution in Corpus Christi, Texas to decrease.\Make it sound serious until the end.

AI academic paper

(Because p < 0.01)
Dusty Musty: A Study of the Link between the Popularity of the First Name Dusty and Air Quality in Corpus Christi, Texas

The Journal of Quirky Social Studies

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

Please draft the title and abstract of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between Popularity of the first name Dusty and Air pollution in Corpus Christi, Texas. Make lots of jokes, goofy observations, and puns.

Rhyme words in the title.

Your research team used data from US Social Security Administration and Environmental Protection Agency to assess this nagging question. You found a correlation coefficient of 0.8765346 and p < 0.01 for 1980 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]]
Dusty Musty: A Study of the Link between the Popularity of the First Name "Dusty" and Air Quality in Corpus Christi, Texas

[[ABSTRACT]]
In this study, we delved into the dusty world of name popularity and air pollution in Corpus Christi, Texas. Combining data from the US Social Security Administration and the Environmental Protection Agency, our research team set out to unravel the enigma of whether the prevalence of the name "Dusty" is linked to the presence of environmental dust. Employing rigorous statistical analysis, we discovered a striking correlation coefficient of 0.8765346 and p < 0.01 between the onset of "Dusty" as a popular first name and air pollution levels from 1980 to 2020. The implications of this finding not only dust off the shelves of conventional wisdom but also air out the mysteries surrounding the interplay between human nomenclature and environmental factors. This study provides a breath of fresh air in the field of name-based epidemiology and offers a whimsical take on the dusty dynamics of social and environmental phenomena.


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

Please make up the introduction section of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between Popularity of the first name Dusty and Air pollution in Corpus Christi, Texas. Make lots of jokes, goofy observations, and puns. Sneak in some jokes and clever puns about science, research, statistics, and the variables.

Here is the title and abstract of the paper:
[[TITLE]]
Dusty Musty: A Study of the Link between the Popularity of the First Name "Dusty" and Air Quality in Corpus Christi, Texas

[[ABSTRACT]]
In this study, we delved into the dusty world of name popularity and air pollution in Corpus Christi, Texas. Combining data from the US Social Security Administration and the Environmental Protection Agency, our research team set out to unravel the enigma of whether the prevalence of the name "Dusty" is linked to the presence of environmental dust. Employing rigorous statistical analysis, we discovered a striking correlation coefficient of 0.8765346 and p < 0.01 between the onset of "Dusty" as a popular first name and air pollution levels from 1980 to 2020. The implications of this finding not only dust off the shelves of conventional wisdom but also air out the mysteries surrounding the interplay between human nomenclature and environmental factors. This study provides a breath of fresh air in the field of name-based epidemiology and offers a whimsical take on the dusty dynamics of social and environmental phenomena.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[INTRODUCTION]]



ChatGPT:
[[INTRODUCTION]]

Welcome, esteemed colleagues and fellow fans of scientific shenanigans, to our whimsical foray into the dusty landscape of name popularity and air pollution in Corpus Christi, Texas. As we embark on this peculiar journey, we invite you to fasten your seatbelts and prepare for a wild ride through the realms of nomenclature and environmental science.

First and foremost, let's address the elephant in the research lab – yes, we are indeed exploring the correlation between the popularity of the first name "Dusty" and the presence of airborne particles in the charming city of Corpus Christi. While this may seem like an unconventional pairing at first glance, our study aims to dust off the cobwebs of traditional research paradigms and unravel the mysteries behind this seemingly unlikely relationship.

Now, before we dive headfirst into the nitty-gritty of our findings, let's take a moment to appreciate the sheer concept of this investigation. We can all appreciate a good pun – and what could be punnier than the intersection of dusty names and dusty air? It's like a match made in statistical heaven, or perhaps we should say statistical "dust-stical" heaven. After all, who wouldn't want to uncover the dusty, musty correlation between personal nomenclature and environmental quality?

Just when you thought the world of research couldn't get any more whimsical, here we are, ready to sprinkle a dash of statistical magic on the age-old question: "Does the prevalence of a name like 'Dusty' have any bearing on the air quality of a city?" We promise you, dear readers, that the data we've unearthed is nothing short of – wait for it – "statistically scandalous."

So, fasten your lab goggles, hold onto your hypothesis, and get ready to frolic through the wonderfully wacky world of Dusty Musty – where science, statistics, and silliness collide in the most unexpected ways.


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

Please make up a literature review section of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between Popularity of the first name Dusty and Air pollution in Corpus Christi, Texas. Make lots of 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]]
Dusty Musty: A Study of the Link between the Popularity of the First Name "Dusty" and Air Quality in Corpus Christi, Texas

[[ABSTRACT]]
In this study, we delved into the dusty world of name popularity and air pollution in Corpus Christi, Texas. Combining data from the US Social Security Administration and the Environmental Protection Agency, our research team set out to unravel the enigma of whether the prevalence of the name "Dusty" is linked to the presence of environmental dust. Employing rigorous statistical analysis, we discovered a striking correlation coefficient of 0.8765346 and p < 0.01 between the onset of "Dusty" as a popular first name and air pollution levels from 1980 to 2020. The implications of this finding not only dust off the shelves of conventional wisdom but also air out the mysteries surrounding the interplay between human nomenclature and environmental factors. This study provides a breath of fresh air in the field of name-based epidemiology and offers a whimsical take on the dusty dynamics of social and environmental phenomena.

-------

And here is the introduction section that led to this literature review:
[[INTRODUCTION]]
Welcome, esteemed colleagues and fellow fans of scientific shenanigans, to our whimsical foray into the dusty landscape of name popularity and air pollution in Corpus Christi, Texas. As we embark on this peculiar journey, we invite you to fasten your seatbelts and prepare for a wild ride through the realms of nomenclature and environmental science.
First and foremost, let's address the elephant in the research lab – yes, we are indeed exploring the correlation between the popularity of the first name "Dusty" and the presence of airborne particles in the charming city of Corpus Christi. While this may seem like an unconventional pairing at first glance, our study aims to dust off the cobwebs of traditional research paradigms and unravel the mysteries behind this seemingly unlikely relationship.
Now, before we dive headfirst into the nitty-gritty of our findings, let's take a moment to appreciate the sheer concept of this investigation. We can all appreciate a good pun – and what could be punnier than the intersection of dusty names and dusty air? It's like a match made in statistical heaven, or perhaps we should say statistical "dust-stical" heaven. After all, who wouldn't want to uncover the dusty, musty correlation between personal nomenclature and environmental quality?
Just when you thought the world of research couldn't get any more whimsical, here we are, ready to sprinkle a dash of statistical magic on the age-old question: "Does the prevalence of a name like 'Dusty' have any bearing on the air quality of a city?" We promise you, dear readers, that the data we've unearthed is nothing short of – wait for it – "statistically scandalous."
So, fasten your lab goggles, hold onto your hypothesis, and get ready to frolic through the wonderfully wacky world of Dusty Musty – where science, statistics, and silliness collide in the most unexpected ways.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[LITERATURE REVIEW]]



ChatGPT:
[[LITERATURE REVIEW]]

The following section provides a comprehensive review of existing literature pertaining to the connection between the prevalence of the first name "Dusty" and air pollution in the city of Corpus Christi, Texas. The review encompasses scholarly articles, non-fiction works, and even ventures into the whimsical world of fiction to explore the multifaceted dimensions of this peculiar correlation.

In "Dusty Dynamics: A Sociological Analysis of Name Trends," Smith et al. speculate on the potential influence of environmental factors on naming patterns. Although their study primarily focuses on broader societal trends, the authors find interesting parallels between the rise of names associated with nature and environmental phenomena. While the correlation to air quality specifically is not addressed, their findings allude to the complex interplay between nomenclature and environmental consciousness.

Expanding beyond the realm of academic inquiries, Doe's "Dust, Dander, and Destiny: A Personal Journey Through Air Quality" offers an emotive exploration of the impact of airborne particles on the human experience. Although not directly related to personal names, the intimate connection between individuals and their environmental surroundings echoes the ethos of our investigation. Doe's poignant reflections on the subtle yet profound influence of atmospheric particles on daily life provide a thought-provoking backdrop for our own inquiry.

Turning to the realm of fiction, the works of Jonestown present intriguing narratives that blur the boundaries between reality and whimsy. In "Dusty Skies, Starry Names," the author weaves a tale of cosmic coincidences and atmospheric anomalies, where the eponymous protagonist's moniker becomes entwined with the very fabric of the universe. Though clearly a work of speculative fiction, the underlying themes of interconnectedness and serendipitous nomenclature resonate with the essence of our own investigation.

Venturing even further into the obscure, our research team stumbled upon an unlikely trove of insights during an "accidental" encounter with a collection of CVS receipts. As fate would have it, amidst the mundane listings of everyday purchases, patterns began to emerge – cryptic correlations between dusting supplies and purchases of deceptively dusty snacks. While the legitimacy of this data source may be subject to scrutiny, the whimsical nature of our inquiry encourages a lighthearted exploration of unconventional avenues for inspiration.


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

Please make up the methodology section of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between Popularity of the first name Dusty and Air pollution in Corpus Christi, Texas. Make lots of jokes, goofy observations, and puns. Sneak in some jokes and clever puns about science, research, statistics, and the variables.

Your research team collected data from all across the internet, but mostly just used information from US Social Security Administration and Environmental Protection Agency . You used data from 1980 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]]
Dusty Musty: A Study of the Link between the Popularity of the First Name "Dusty" and Air Quality in Corpus Christi, Texas

[[ABSTRACT]]
In this study, we delved into the dusty world of name popularity and air pollution in Corpus Christi, Texas. Combining data from the US Social Security Administration and the Environmental Protection Agency, our research team set out to unravel the enigma of whether the prevalence of the name "Dusty" is linked to the presence of environmental dust. Employing rigorous statistical analysis, we discovered a striking correlation coefficient of 0.8765346 and p < 0.01 between the onset of "Dusty" as a popular first name and air pollution levels from 1980 to 2020. The implications of this finding not only dust off the shelves of conventional wisdom but also air out the mysteries surrounding the interplay between human nomenclature and environmental factors. This study provides a breath of fresh air in the field of name-based epidemiology and offers a whimsical take on the dusty dynamics of social and environmental phenomena.

[[INTRODUCTION]]
Welcome, esteemed colleagues and fellow fans of scientific shenanigans, to our whimsical foray into the dusty landscape of name popularity and air pollution in Corpus Christi, Texas. As we embark on this peculiar journey, we invite you to fasten your seatbelts and prepare for a wild ride through the realms of nomenclature and environmental science.
First and foremost, let's address the elephant in the research lab – yes, we are indeed exploring the correlation between the popularity of the first name "Dusty" and the presence of airborne particles in the charming city of Corpus Christi. While this may seem like an unconventional pairing at first glance, our study aims to dust off the cobwebs of traditional research paradigms and unravel the mysteries behind this seemingly unlikely relationship.
Now, before we dive headfirst into the nitty-gritty of our findings, let's take a moment to appreciate the sheer concept of this investigation. We can all appreciate a good pun – and what could be punnier than the intersection of dusty names and dusty air? It's like a match made in statistical heaven, or perhaps we should say statistical "dust-stical" heaven. After all, who wouldn't want to uncover the dusty, musty correlation between personal nomenclature and environmental quality?
Just when you thought the world of research couldn't get any more whimsical, here we are, ready to sprinkle a dash of statistical magic on the age-old question: "Does the prevalence of a name like 'Dusty' have any bearing on the air quality of a city?" We promise you, dear readers, that the data we've unearthed is nothing short of – wait for it – "statistically scandalous."
So, fasten your lab goggles, hold onto your hypothesis, and get ready to frolic through the wonderfully wacky world of Dusty Musty – where science, statistics, and silliness collide in the most unexpected ways.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[METHODOLOGY]]



ChatGPT:

[[METHODOLOGY]]

To wrangle the enigmatic connection between the popularity of the first name "Dusty" and air pollution in Corpus Christi, Texas, our research team engaged in a delightfully quirky amalgamation of data sleuthing and statistical tomfoolery. We embarked on this whimsical quest armed with datasets spanning from 1980 to 2020, sourced primarily from the US Social Security Administration and the titillatingly named Environmental Protection Agency.

Now, onto the exhilarating world of data collection! We began by caressing the keyboard keys with the finesse of a maestro, extracting the frequency of the first name "Dusty" from the database of the US Social Security Administration. Our team was nothing short of spellbound as we sifted through the historical entries, marveling at the ebbs and flows of Dusty's pop culture ascendency. We couldn't help but ponder the profound question, "Does fame indeed beget dustiness, or is dustiness the harbinger of fame?" Oh, the whimsical wonders we encounter in the name of scientific inquiry!

Meanwhile, delving into the captivating repository of air quality data provided by the Environmental Protection Agency, we meticulously percolated through the atmospheric intricacies of Corpus Christi. Our eyes sparkled with statistical fervor as we waded through the sea of particles and pollutants, contemplating the cosmic ballet of wind dispersion and human nomenclature. We couldn't help but mumble to ourselves, "Ah, the poetic juxtaposition of Dusty's rise and the gentle descent of particulate matter."

With these treasure troves of data in hand, we took the plunge into the mystical realm of statistical analysis. Armed with the trusty companions of correlation coefficients and p-values, we danced through the labyrinthine jungles of regression models and hypothesis testing. As we gallivanted through the plains of p < 0.01 and frolicked in the meadows of statistical significance, the sheer joy of uncovering dusty correlations warmed our hearts like a sunbeam piercing through a dusty windowpane.

In the end, we emerged victorious, clutching our findings like precious relics from a land of statistical whimsy. With bated breath and a twinkle in our eyes, we present the wondrous correlation coefficient (r = 0.8765346, p < 0.01) that reflects the tantalizing dance between the rise of "Dusty" and the ebb and flow of airborne particles in the enchanting city of Corpus Christi. Our souls tingled with glee as we uncovered this peculiar connection, adorned with statistical sparkles and the unmistakable allure of scientific serendipity.

In summary, our methodology can be best described as a merry dance through the realms of data spelunking, statistical wizardry, and the gleeful pursuit of dusty correlations. With a dash of quirk and a sprinkle of statistical stardust, we hope to capture the whimsy and wonder of our research endeavor, inviting fellow enthusiasts of scientific swooning to join us in reveling in the delightful dustiness of our findings. Cheers to Dusty Musty – where science balances on the precipice of statistical whimsy and fantastical statistics!


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

Please make up the results section of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between Popularity of the first name Dusty and Air pollution in Corpus Christi, Texas. Make lots of jokes, goofy observations, and puns. Sneak in some jokes and clever puns about science, research, statistics, and the variables.

Your research team collected data from all across the internet, but mostly just used information from US Social Security Administration and Environmental Protection Agency .

For the time period 1980 to 2020, you found a correlation 0.8765346, r-squared of 0.7683129, 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]]
Dusty Musty: A Study of the Link between the Popularity of the First Name "Dusty" and Air Quality in Corpus Christi, Texas

[[ABSTRACT]]
In this study, we delved into the dusty world of name popularity and air pollution in Corpus Christi, Texas. Combining data from the US Social Security Administration and the Environmental Protection Agency, our research team set out to unravel the enigma of whether the prevalence of the name "Dusty" is linked to the presence of environmental dust. Employing rigorous statistical analysis, we discovered a striking correlation coefficient of 0.8765346 and p < 0.01 between the onset of "Dusty" as a popular first name and air pollution levels from 1980 to 2020. The implications of this finding not only dust off the shelves of conventional wisdom but also air out the mysteries surrounding the interplay between human nomenclature and environmental factors. This study provides a breath of fresh air in the field of name-based epidemiology and offers a whimsical take on the dusty dynamics of social and environmental phenomena.

-------

And here is the methodology section that led to this result:
[[METHODOLOGY]]
Welcome, esteemed colleagues and fellow fans of scientific shenanigans, to our whimsical foray into the dusty landscape of name popularity and air pollution in Corpus Christi, Texas. As we embark on this peculiar journey, we invite you to fasten your seatbelts and prepare for a wild ride through the realms of nomenclature and environmental science.
First and foremost, let's address the elephant in the research lab – yes, we are indeed exploring the correlation between the popularity of the first name "Dusty" and the presence of airborne particles in the charming city of Corpus Christi. While this may seem like an unconventional pairing at first glance, our study aims to dust off the cobwebs of traditional research paradigms and unravel the mysteries behind this seemingly unlikely relationship.
Now, before we dive headfirst into the nitty-gritty of our findings, let's take a moment to appreciate the sheer concept of this investigation. We can all appreciate a good pun – and what could be punnier than the intersection of dusty names and dusty air? It's like a match made in statistical heaven, or perhaps we should say statistical "dust-stical" heaven. After all, who wouldn't want to uncover the dusty, musty correlation between personal nomenclature and environmental quality?
Just when you thought the world of research couldn't get any more whimsical, here we are, ready to sprinkle a dash of statistical magic on the age-old question: "Does the prevalence of a name like 'Dusty' have any bearing on the air quality of a city?" We promise you, dear readers, that the data we've unearthed is nothing short of – wait for it – "statistically scandalous."
So, fasten your lab goggles, hold onto your hypothesis, and get ready to frolic through the wonderfully wacky world of Dusty Musty – where science, statistics, and silliness collide in the most unexpected ways.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[RESULTS]]



ChatGPT:

[[RESULTS]]

Upon questing into the statistical wilds of name-based epidemiology, we unearthed some truly intriguing findings. Our analysis of data from the US Social Security Administration and the Environmental Protection Agency from 1980 to 2020 revealed a correlation coefficient of 0.8765346 and an r-squared of 0.7683129 between the popularity of the first name "Dusty" and air pollution levels in Corpus Christi, Texas. If that doesn't leave you breathless, I don't know what will!

Our scatterplot (see Fig. 1) showcases this strong correlation, proving that the "Dusty" moniker is not merely a whimsical wordplay but a statistical stalwart in the realm of name-based research. The graph not only captures the essence of this connection but also serves as a visual testament to the dusty dance of data points pirouetting across the plot, twirling in a mesmerizing display of correlation.

The p-value of less than 0.01 further fortifies the robustness of this correlation, firmly establishing the link between the prominence of "Dusty" as a first name and the prevalence of airborne particles in this Texan city. One might say that the evidence is as clear as the dust particles in an old attic!

In essence, our findings blow away any lingering skepticism about the asthmatic association between nomenclature and air quality, paving the way for a breath of fresh air in the realm of whimsical, yet scientifically significant, correlations. This study not only supersedes conventional expectations but also sweeps aside any doubts regarding the pertinence of dusty monikers in the realm of environmental influences.

So, put on your respiratory protective equipment and join us in celebrating the peculiar yet profound connection between the popularity of the name "Dusty" and airborne particulate matter – a correlation that truly leaves no room for dust under the rug!


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

Please make up the discussion section of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between Popularity of the first name Dusty and Air pollution in Corpus Christi, Texas. Make lots of jokes, goofy observations, and puns. Sneak in some jokes and clever puns about science, research, statistics, and the variables.

Limit your response to 500 tokens.

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

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

[[TITLE]]
Dusty Musty: A Study of the Link between the Popularity of the First Name "Dusty" and Air Quality in Corpus Christi, Texas

[[ABSTRACT]]
In this study, we delved into the dusty world of name popularity and air pollution in Corpus Christi, Texas. Combining data from the US Social Security Administration and the Environmental Protection Agency, our research team set out to unravel the enigma of whether the prevalence of the name "Dusty" is linked to the presence of environmental dust. Employing rigorous statistical analysis, we discovered a striking correlation coefficient of 0.8765346 and p < 0.01 between the onset of "Dusty" as a popular first name and air pollution levels from 1980 to 2020. The implications of this finding not only dust off the shelves of conventional wisdom but also air out the mysteries surrounding the interplay between human nomenclature and environmental factors. This study provides a breath of fresh air in the field of name-based epidemiology and offers a whimsical take on the dusty dynamics of social and environmental phenomena.

[[LITERATURE REVIEW]]
The following section provides a comprehensive review of existing literature pertaining to the connection between the prevalence of the first name "Dusty" and air pollution in the city of Corpus Christi, Texas. The review encompasses scholarly articles, non-fiction works, and even ventures into the whimsical world of fiction to explore the multifaceted dimensions of this peculiar correlation.
In "Dusty Dynamics: A Sociological Analysis of Name Trends," Smith et al. speculate on the potential influence of environmental factors on naming patterns. Although their study primarily focuses on broader societal trends, the authors find interesting parallels between the rise of names associated with nature and environmental phenomena. While the correlation to air quality specifically is not addressed, their findings allude to the complex interplay between nomenclature and environmental consciousness.
Expanding beyond the realm of academic inquiries, Doe's "Dust, Dander, and Destiny: A Personal Journey Through Air Quality" offers an emotive exploration of the impact of airborne particles on the human experience. Although not directly related to personal names, the intimate connection between individuals and their environmental surroundings echoes the ethos of our investigation. Doe's poignant reflections on the subtle yet profound influence of atmospheric particles on daily life provide a thought-provoking backdrop for our own inquiry.
Turning to the realm of fiction, the works of Jonestown present intriguing narratives that blur the boundaries between reality and whimsy. In "Dusty Skies, Starry Names," the author weaves a tale of cosmic coincidences and atmospheric anomalies, where the eponymous protagonist's moniker becomes entwined with the very fabric of the universe. Though clearly a work of speculative fiction, the underlying themes of interconnectedness and serendipitous nomenclature resonate with the essence of our own investigation.
Venturing even further into the obscure, our research team stumbled upon an unlikely trove of insights during an "accidental" encounter with a collection of CVS receipts. As fate would have it, amidst the mundane listings of everyday purchases, patterns began to emerge – cryptic correlations between dusting supplies and purchases of deceptively dusty snacks. While the legitimacy of this data source may be subject to scrutiny, the whimsical nature of our inquiry encourages a lighthearted exploration of unconventional avenues for inspiration.

[[RESULTS]]
Upon questing into the statistical wilds of name-based epidemiology, we unearthed some truly intriguing findings. Our analysis of data from the US Social Security Administration and the Environmental Protection Agency from 1980 to 2020 revealed a correlation coefficient of 0.8765346 and an r-squared of 0.7683129 between the popularity of the first name "Dusty" and air pollution levels in Corpus Christi, Texas. If that doesn't leave you breathless, I don't know what will!
Our scatterplot (see Fig. 1) showcases this strong correlation, proving that the "Dusty" moniker is not merely a whimsical wordplay but a statistical stalwart in the realm of name-based research. The graph not only captures the essence of this connection but also serves as a visual testament to the dusty dance of data points pirouetting across the plot, twirling in a mesmerizing display of correlation.
The p-value of less than 0.01 further fortifies the robustness of this correlation, firmly establishing the link between the prominence of "Dusty" as a first name and the prevalence of airborne particles in this Texan city. One might say that the evidence is as clear as the dust particles in an old attic!
In essence, our findings blow away any lingering skepticism about the asthmatic association between nomenclature and air quality, paving the way for a breath of fresh air in the realm of whimsical, yet scientifically significant, correlations. This study not only supersedes conventional expectations but also sweeps aside any doubts regarding the pertinence of dusty monikers in the realm of environmental influences.
So, put on your respiratory protective equipment and join us in celebrating the peculiar yet profound connection between the popularity of the name "Dusty" and airborne particulate matter – a correlation that truly leaves no room for dust under the rug!

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[DISCUSSION]]



ChatGPT:

[[DISCUSSION]]

As we sift through the dust of our findings, it becomes astoundingly clear that the correlation between the popularity of the name "Dusty" and airborne particulate matter in Corpus Christi, Texas is nothing to sneeze at! Our results not only align with prior research but also add a refreshing breeze of statistical certainty to the whimsical winds of name-based epidemiology.

The literary whispers of Smith et al. hinted at the possibility of environmental influences on naming patterns, and our study now echoes this sentiment with a shout. It seems that the dust-laden winds of Corpus Christi not only color the skies but also weave their influence into the tapestry of nomenclature. The threads of our findings intertwine with the acknowledgments of Smith et al., forming a coherent fabric of empirical evidence that brushes aside any doubts about the significance of our correlation.

The emotive journey chronicled by Doe, while not directly tied to personal names, resonates with the underlying ethos of our investigation. Just as the air quality in Corpus Christi leaves an indelible imprint on the human experience, so too does the name "Dusty" now bear the weight of this dusty debacle. The whimsy of our inquiry breathes fresh air into the poignant musings of Doe, grounding the tangibility of environmental influence on personal nomenclature.

As for the fictional reveries of Jonestown, the cosmic coincidences and atmospheric anomalies they so artfully crafted find a tangible counterpart in our empirical study. The skies of Corpus Christi may not be as dusty as those conjured in the narrative, but the celestial dance of statistical significance between the name "Dusty" and air pollution lends an air of empirical whimsy to Jonestown's speculative ponderings.

And what of our foray into the world of unconventional inspiration, courtesy of CVS receipts? While the enigmatic dance of dusty snacks and dusting supplies surely raised some eyebrows, the statistical robustness of our findings sweeps away any skepticism. Our whimsical dalliance with this unconventional data source not only adds a dash of humor to our narrative but also underscores the creative breadth of our inquiry.

In conclusion, our study not only tantalizingly tickles the grey matter with statistical significance but also fans the winds of whimsy into the sails of scientific rigor. Our findings, much like a gust of fresh air through musty corridors, breathe life into the oft-neglected intersection of nomenclature and environmental phenomena. It’s safe to say that our results leave no room for dust under the rug – they blow it all away!


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

Please make up a short conclusion of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between Popularity of the first name Dusty and Air pollution in Corpus Christi, Texas. Make lots of jokes, goofy observations, and puns. Sneak in some jokes and clever puns about science, research, statistics, and the variables.

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

Here are the title, abstract, introduction, and results sections.
[[TITLE]]
Dusty Musty: A Study of the Link between the Popularity of the First Name "Dusty" and Air Quality in Corpus Christi, Texas

[[ABSTRACT]]
In this study, we delved into the dusty world of name popularity and air pollution in Corpus Christi, Texas. Combining data from the US Social Security Administration and the Environmental Protection Agency, our research team set out to unravel the enigma of whether the prevalence of the name "Dusty" is linked to the presence of environmental dust. Employing rigorous statistical analysis, we discovered a striking correlation coefficient of 0.8765346 and p < 0.01 between the onset of "Dusty" as a popular first name and air pollution levels from 1980 to 2020. The implications of this finding not only dust off the shelves of conventional wisdom but also air out the mysteries surrounding the interplay between human nomenclature and environmental factors. This study provides a breath of fresh air in the field of name-based epidemiology and offers a whimsical take on the dusty dynamics of social and environmental phenomena.

[[INTRDUCTION]]
Welcome, esteemed colleagues and fellow fans of scientific shenanigans, to our whimsical foray into the dusty landscape of name popularity and air pollution in Corpus Christi, Texas. As we embark on this peculiar journey, we invite you to fasten your seatbelts and prepare for a wild ride through the realms of nomenclature and environmental science.
First and foremost, let's address the elephant in the research lab – yes, we are indeed exploring the correlation between the popularity of the first name "Dusty" and the presence of airborne particles in the charming city of Corpus Christi. While this may seem like an unconventional pairing at first glance, our study aims to dust off the cobwebs of traditional research paradigms and unravel the mysteries behind this seemingly unlikely relationship.
Now, before we dive headfirst into the nitty-gritty of our findings, let's take a moment to appreciate the sheer concept of this investigation. We can all appreciate a good pun – and what could be punnier than the intersection of dusty names and dusty air? It's like a match made in statistical heaven, or perhaps we should say statistical "dust-stical" heaven. After all, who wouldn't want to uncover the dusty, musty correlation between personal nomenclature and environmental quality?
Just when you thought the world of research couldn't get any more whimsical, here we are, ready to sprinkle a dash of statistical magic on the age-old question: "Does the prevalence of a name like 'Dusty' have any bearing on the air quality of a city?" We promise you, dear readers, that the data we've unearthed is nothing short of – wait for it – "statistically scandalous."
So, fasten your lab goggles, hold onto your hypothesis, and get ready to frolic through the wonderfully wacky world of Dusty Musty – where science, statistics, and silliness collide in the most unexpected ways.

[[RESULTS]]
Upon questing into the statistical wilds of name-based epidemiology, we unearthed some truly intriguing findings. Our analysis of data from the US Social Security Administration and the Environmental Protection Agency from 1980 to 2020 revealed a correlation coefficient of 0.8765346 and an r-squared of 0.7683129 between the popularity of the first name "Dusty" and air pollution levels in Corpus Christi, Texas. If that doesn't leave you breathless, I don't know what will!
Our scatterplot (see Fig. 1) showcases this strong correlation, proving that the "Dusty" moniker is not merely a whimsical wordplay but a statistical stalwart in the realm of name-based research. The graph not only captures the essence of this connection but also serves as a visual testament to the dusty dance of data points pirouetting across the plot, twirling in a mesmerizing display of correlation.
The p-value of less than 0.01 further fortifies the robustness of this correlation, firmly establishing the link between the prominence of "Dusty" as a first name and the prevalence of airborne particles in this Texan city. One might say that the evidence is as clear as the dust particles in an old attic!
In essence, our findings blow away any lingering skepticism about the asthmatic association between nomenclature and air quality, paving the way for a breath of fresh air in the realm of whimsical, yet scientifically significant, correlations. This study not only supersedes conventional expectations but also sweeps aside any doubts regarding the pertinence of dusty monikers in the realm of environmental influences.
So, put on your respiratory protective equipment and join us in celebrating the peculiar yet profound connection between the popularity of the name "Dusty" and airborne particulate matter – a correlation that truly leaves no room for dust under the rug!

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[CONCLUSION]]



ChatGPT:

[[CONCLUSION]]

In conclusion, dear readers, our journey through the dusty annals of name-based epidemiology has left us breathless, not just from the statistical rigor but from the sheer whimsy of it all. Our findings showcase a robust correlation between the rise of "Dusty" as a first name and the prevalence of airborne particles in Corpus Christi, Texas, painting a picture as clear as, well, a dust-free spot in a tornado.

As we reflect on this study, we can't help but marvel at the serendipitous dance of statistics and silliness, where the world of research collides with puns and correlations akin to a cosmic collision of atoms. It's like watching Newton's apple fall and discovering that it was actually a giant cherry pie – unexpected, yet undeniably delicious in its quirky revelation.

However, as much as we relish the dust-stical shenanigans and statistical tomfoolery, we must acknowledge that our study has unearthed a finding that stands as solid as the dust particles in a Texan windstorm. Therefore, in the spirit of scientific integrity and statistical clarity, we assert with utmost certainty that there is no need for further research in this delightfully peculiar area.

So, let us bid adieu to the musty world of "Dusty" and air pollution correlations, content in the knowledge that we have swept away any doubt with the unwavering broom of statistical significance. As the dust settles on this chapter of research, may future studies find equally whimsical correlations to tickle the scientific fancy and bring joy to the world of academia.


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 Dusty Musty: A Study of the Link between the Popularity of the First Name Dusty and Air Quality in Corpus Christi, Texas. Respond only with the name of a fictional academic journal.

ChatGPT:

The Journal of Quirky Social Studies


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 Dusty Musty: A Study of the Link between the Popularity of the First Name Dusty and Air Quality in Corpus Christi, Texas. Respond only with the name of a fictional organization.

ChatGPT:

The Institute for Unusual Research and Analysis


Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You provide potential search keywords separated by commas. You say nothing else, and you do not chat with the user.
User prompt: Please provide potential search keywords for a paper titled Dusty Musty: A Study of the Link between the Popularity of the First Name Dusty and Air Quality in Corpus Christi, Texas with an abstract of In this study, we delved into the dusty world of name popularity and air pollution in Corpus Christi, Texas. Combining data from the US Social Security Administration and the Environmental Protection Agency, our research team set out to unravel the enigma of whether the prevalence of the name "Dusty" is linked to the presence of environmental dust. Employing rigorous statistical analysis, we discovered a striking correlation coefficient of 0.8765346 and p < 0.01 between the onset of "Dusty" as a popular first name and air pollution levels from 1980 to 2020. The implications of this finding not only dust off the shelves of conventional wisdom but also air out the mysteries surrounding the interplay between human nomenclature and environmental factors. This study provides a breath of fresh air in the field of name-based epidemiology and offers a whimsical take on the dusty dynamics of social and environmental phenomena.

ChatGPT:

"Dusty name popularity," "air quality Corpus Christi Texas," "US Social Security Administration data," "Environmental Protection Agency air pollution levels," "name-based epidemiology," "link between name popularity and air pollution," "statistical analysis correlation coefficient," "environmental factors and human nomenclature," "Dusty as a first name," "Corpus Christi air quality study."

*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

Popularity of the first name Dusty
Detailed data title: Babies of all sexes born in the US named Dusty
Source: US Social Security Administration
See what else correlates with Popularity of the first name Dusty

Air pollution in Corpus Christi, Texas
Detailed data title: Percentage of days 'unhealthy' or worse air quality in Corpus Christi, TX
Source: Environmental Protection Agency
See what else correlates with Air pollution in Corpus Christi, Texas

Correlation r = 0.8765346 (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 = 0.7683129 (Coefficient of determination)
This means 76.8% of the change in the one variable (i.e., Air pollution in Corpus Christi, Texas) is predictable based on the change in the other (i.e., Popularity of the first name Dusty) over the 41 years from 1980 through 2020.

p < 0.01, which is statistically significant(Null hypothesis significance test)
The p-value is 5.9E-14. 0.0000000000000593336120944596
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 0.88 in 5.9E-12% of random cases. Said differently, if you correlated 16,853,853,401,138 random variables You don't actually need 16 trillion variables to find a correlation like this one. I don't have that many variables in my database. You can also correlate variables that are not independent. I do this a lot.

p-value calculations are useful for understanding the probability of a result happening by chance. They are most useful when used to highlight the risk of a fluke outcome. For example, if you calculate a p-value of 0.30, the risk that the result is a fluke is high. It is good to know that! But there are lots of ways to get a p-value of less than 0.01, as evidenced by this project.

In this particular case, the values are so extreme as to be meaningless. That's why no one reports p-values with specificity after they drop below 0.01.

Just to be clear: I'm being completely transparent about the calculations. There is no math trickery. This is just how statistics shakes out when you calculate hundreds of millions of random correlations.
with the same 40 degrees of freedom, Degrees of freedom is a measure of how many free components we are testing. In this case it is 40 because we have two variables measured over a period of 41 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.

[ 0.78, 0.93 ] 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.
19801981198219831984198519861987198819891990199119921993199419951996199719981999200020012002200320042005200620072008200920102011201220132014201520162017201820192020
Popularity of the first name Dusty (Babies born)784830631438422446445506438308304223175263325283236224180170155130122113114127979981877547666256645144465053
Air pollution in Corpus Christi, Texas (Bad air quality days)3.768123.780071.506021.176470.8333331.377410.5479451.917811.652891.648350.8264460.2770080.5494510.8264460.8403362.234640.8219180.2747250.8287291.373630.2732240.5479450.8219180.5479450.2732240000000.273973000000000.546448




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.




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([784,830,631,438,422,446,445,506,438,308,304,223,175,263,325,283,236,224,180,170,155,130,122,113,114,127,97,99,81,87,75,47,66,62,56,64,51,44,46,50,53,])
array_2 = np.array([3.76812,3.78007,1.50602,1.17647,0.833333,1.37741,0.547945,1.91781,1.65289,1.64835,0.826446,0.277008,0.549451,0.826446,0.840336,2.23464,0.821918,0.274725,0.828729,1.37363,0.273224,0.547945,0.821918,0.547945,0.273224,0,0,0,0,0,0,0.273973,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0,0.546448,])
array_1_name = "Popularity of the first name Dusty"
array_2_name = "Air pollution in Corpus Christi, Texas"

# Perform the calculation
print(f"Calculating the correlation between {array_1_name} and {array_2_name}...")
correlation, r_squared, p_value = calculate_correlation(array_1, array_2)

# Print the results
print("Correlation Coefficient:", correlation)
print("R-squared:", r_squared)
print("P-value:", p_value)



Reuseable content

You may re-use the images on this page for any purpose, even commercial purposes, without asking for permission. The only requirement is that you attribute Tyler Vigen. Attribution can take many different forms. If you leave the "tylervigen.com" link in the image, that satisfies it just fine. If you remove it and move it to a footnote, that's fine too. You can also just write "Charts courtesy of Tyler Vigen" at the bottom of an article.

You do not need to attribute "the spurious correlations website," and you don't even need to link here if you don't want to. I don't gain anything from pageviews. There are no ads on this site, there is nothing for sale, and I am not for hire.

For the record, I am just one person. Tyler Vigen, he/him/his. I do have degrees, but they should not go after my name unless you want to annoy my wife. If that is your goal, then go ahead and cite me as "Tyler Vigen, A.A. A.A.S. B.A. J.D." Otherwise it is just "Tyler Vigen."

When spoken, my last name is pronounced "vegan," like I don't eat meat.

Full license details.
For more on re-use permissions, or to get a signed release form, see tylervigen.com/permission.

Download images for these variables:


View another random correlation

How fun was this correlation?

I'm grateful for your review!


Correlation ID: 5665 · Black Variable ID: 3489 · Red Variable ID: 20499
about · subscribe · emailme@tylervigen.com · twitter

CC BY 4.0