about · email me · subscribe
Spurious correlation #3,464 · View random

A linear line chart with years as the X-axis and two variables on the Y-axis. The first variable is The number of merchandise displayers and window trimmers in District of Columbia and the second variable is Bankruptcies in California.  The chart goes from 2006 to 2013, and the two variables track closely in value over that time. Small Image
Download png
, svg

AI explanation

The influx of avant-garde window displays in the District of Columbia led to a sudden spike in consumer demand for the latest trendy products. This diverted the flow of disposable income away from traditional industries in California, ultimately leading to an unexpected surge in bankruptcies. It seems the Golden State couldn't glitter and compete with the D.C. window wizardry!

Model: dalle-3
Prompt: [Whimsical illustration] Create an image of a lively scene in the District of Columbia, where a vibrant street is filled with extravagant merchandise displayers and window trimmers setting up eye-catching storefronts. The storefronts are adorned with luxurious and eye-catching props, reflecting the high demand for extravagant display items. Meanwhile, in California, people are depicted gravitating towards less shiny investments, highlighting the shortage of sparkly things. This leads to an increase in bankruptcies as people redirect their spending away from luxury items. 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: The number of merchandise displayers and window trimmers in District of Columbia and Bankruptcies in California. 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: Hyper-realistic a Polaroid photo Whimsical illustration Brutalism 3D Pixar Style
ChatGPT: Whimsical illustration

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 The number of merchandise displayers and window trimmers in District of Columbia and Bankruptcies in California, in the following situation: Because as the number of merchandise displayers and window trimmers in District of Columbia increases, it leads to a surge in demand for extravagant display props, causing a shortage of sparkly things in California, leading people to spend their money on less shiny investments, which eventually results in bankruptcies.. Keep the description simple.
ChatGPT: In District of Columbia, a bustling street is lined with extravagant merchandise displayers and window trimmers setting up eye-catching storefronts. The demand for extravagant display props is high, causing a shortage of sparkly things in California. Meanwhile, in California, people are seen gravitating towards less shiny investments as the supply of sparkly things dwindles. This leads to an increase in bankruptcies as people redirect their spending away from luxury items.

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: [ Whimsical illustration ] and depicting this scene: In District of Columbia, a bustling street is lined with extravagant merchandise displayers and window trimmers setting up eye-catching storefronts. The demand for extravagant display props is high, causing a shortage of sparkly things in California. Meanwhile, in California, people are seen gravitating towards less shiny investments as the supply of sparkly things dwindles. This leads to an increase in bankruptcies as people redirect their spending away from luxury items. Keep the visual depiction simple. Do not include any words or speech bubbles.
ChatGPT: [Whimsical illustration] Create an image of a lively scene in the District of Columbia, where a vibrant street is filled with extravagant merchandise displayers and window trimmers setting up eye-catching storefronts. The storefronts are adorned with luxurious and eye-catching props, reflecting the high demand for extravagant display items. Meanwhile, in California, people are depicted gravitating towards less shiny investments, highlighting the shortage of sparkly things. This leads to an increase in bankruptcies as people redirect their spending away from luxury items.

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

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

Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106 (fine-tuned)
System prompt: You provide humorous responses in the form of plausible sounding explanations for correlations. You assume the correlation is causative for the purpose of the explanation even if it is ridiculous. You do not chat with the user, you only reply with the causal connection explanation and nothing else.
User prompt: Please make up a funny explanation for how an increase in The number of merchandise displayers and window trimmers in District of Columbia caused Bankruptcies in California to increase.

AI academic paper

(Because p < 0.01)
Merchandise Mandates: A Tale of Windows, Bankruptcies, and Statistical Shenanigans

The Journal of Retail Ruin Research

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 goofy academic researcher writing an academic paper. You follow the rules, but you throw out convention regularly to make jokes and funny asides.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 The number of merchandise displayers and window trimmers in District of Columbia and Bankruptcies in California. Make lots of jokes, goofy observations, and puns.

Make the title punny if you can come up with clever pun. If not, just make it sound clever.

Your research team used data from Bureau of Larbor Statistics and Statsamerica to assess this nagging question. You found a correlation coefficient of 0.9418642 and p < 0.01 for 2006 to 2013.

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]]
Merchandise Mandates: A Tale of Windows, Bankruptcies, and Statistical Shenanigans

[[ABSTRACT]]
In this study, we delved into the whimsical world of retail displays, window trimmings, and bankruptcies to uncover the potential connection between the number of merchandise displayers and window trimmers in the District of Columbia and the occurrence of bankruptcies in California. Using data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics and Statsamerica, we embarked on an academic escapade to unravel this mystery.

Our findings yielded a correlation coefficient of 0.9418642 and a p-value less than 0.01 from 2006 to 2013, leaving us flabbergasted by the strength of this correlation. We laughed, we cried (mostly from staring at spreadsheets for too long), and we cracked jokes about the idea of mannequins and window displays somehow exuding financial influence across state lines. While our research may not directly guide retail store owners to alter their window displays to prevent bankruptcies in distant states, it certainly provides an amusing anecdote for cocktail parties. Our study reminds us that sometimes, statistics can be as whimsical and unpredictable as a display window at a theme park gift shop.


Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You are a goofy academic researcher writing an academic paper. You follow the rules, but you throw out convention regularly to make jokes and funny asides.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 The number of merchandise displayers and window trimmers in District of Columbia and Bankruptcies in California. Make lots of jokes, goofy observations, and puns.

Here is the title and abstract of the paper:
[[TITLE]]
Merchandise Mandates: A Tale of Windows, Bankruptcies, and Statistical Shenanigans

[[ABSTRACT]]
In this study, we delved into the whimsical world of retail displays, window trimmings, and bankruptcies to uncover the potential connection between the number of merchandise displayers and window trimmers in the District of Columbia and the occurrence of bankruptcies in California. Using data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics and Statsamerica, we embarked on an academic escapade to unravel this mystery.

Our findings yielded a correlation coefficient of 0.9418642 and a p-value less than 0.01 from 2006 to 2013, leaving us flabbergasted by the strength of this correlation. We laughed, we cried (mostly from staring at spreadsheets for too long), and we cracked jokes about the idea of mannequins and window displays somehow exuding financial influence across state lines. While our research may not directly guide retail store owners to alter their window displays to prevent bankruptcies in distant states, it certainly provides an amusing anecdote for cocktail parties. Our study reminds us that sometimes, statistics can be as whimsical and unpredictable as a display window at a theme park gift shop.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[INTRODUCTION]]



ChatGPT:
Ah, the world of research! Where serious inquiries meet statistical shenanigans and whimsical correlations. In this study, we ventured into the glittering realm of retail displays, window trimmings, and bankruptcies to explore the potential link between the number of merchandise displayers and window trimmers in the District of Columbia and the occurrence of bankruptcies in California. Our academic escapade led us through a maze of data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics and Statsamerica, all in pursuit of unlocking this peculiar mystery.

Much like a detective in a classic whodunit, armed with spreadsheets instead of magnifying glasses, our journey was filled with unexpected twists and turns. Picture a Sherlock Holmes of statistics, pondering the curious connection between mannequins and failing businesses across state lines. Arming ourselves with the power of correlation coefficients and p-values, we set out to shed light on this enigmatic relationship.

Our findings unearthed a staggering correlation coefficient of 0.9418642, accompanied by a p-value that even the most skeptical of statisticians would raise an eyebrow at – less than 0.01. As we gazed upon these results, we couldn’t help but be flabbergasted by the sheer strength of this correlation. We laughed, we cried (mostly from staring at spreadsheets for too long), and we couldn’t help but crack a few jokes about the idea of mannequins and window displays exuding financial influence across state lines.

While our research may not offer practical advice for retail store owners on altering their window displays to prevent bankruptcies in distant states, it certainly provides an amusing anecdote for future cocktail parties. Our findings serve as a whimsical reminder that statistics, much like a display window at a theme park gift shop, can surprise and perplex us with the most unexpected revelations.


Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You are a goofy academic researcher writing an academic paper. You follow the rules, but you throw out convention regularly to make jokes and funny asides.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 The number of merchandise displayers and window trimmers in District of Columbia and Bankruptcies in California. 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 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]]
Merchandise Mandates: A Tale of Windows, Bankruptcies, and Statistical Shenanigans

[[ABSTRACT]]
In this study, we delved into the whimsical world of retail displays, window trimmings, and bankruptcies to uncover the potential connection between the number of merchandise displayers and window trimmers in the District of Columbia and the occurrence of bankruptcies in California. Using data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics and Statsamerica, we embarked on an academic escapade to unravel this mystery.

Our findings yielded a correlation coefficient of 0.9418642 and a p-value less than 0.01 from 2006 to 2013, leaving us flabbergasted by the strength of this correlation. We laughed, we cried (mostly from staring at spreadsheets for too long), and we cracked jokes about the idea of mannequins and window displays somehow exuding financial influence across state lines. While our research may not directly guide retail store owners to alter their window displays to prevent bankruptcies in distant states, it certainly provides an amusing anecdote for cocktail parties. Our study reminds us that sometimes, statistics can be as whimsical and unpredictable as a display window at a theme park gift shop.

-------

And here is the introduction section that led to this literature review:
[[INTRODUCTION]]
Ah, the world of research! Where serious inquiries meet statistical shenanigans and whimsical correlations. In this study, we ventured into the glittering realm of retail displays, window trimmings, and bankruptcies to explore the potential link between the number of merchandise displayers and window trimmers in the District of Columbia and the occurrence of bankruptcies in California. Our academic escapade led us through a maze of data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics and Statsamerica, all in pursuit of unlocking this peculiar mystery.
Much like a detective in a classic whodunit, armed with spreadsheets instead of magnifying glasses, our journey was filled with unexpected twists and turns. Picture a Sherlock Holmes of statistics, pondering the curious connection between mannequins and failing businesses across state lines. Arming ourselves with the power of correlation coefficients and p-values, we set out to shed light on this enigmatic relationship.
Our findings unearthed a staggering correlation coefficient of 0.9418642, accompanied by a p-value that even the most skeptical of statisticians would raise an eyebrow at – less than 0.01. As we gazed upon these results, we couldn’t help but be flabbergasted by the sheer strength of this correlation. We laughed, we cried (mostly from staring at spreadsheets for too long), and we couldn’t help but crack a few jokes about the idea of mannequins and window displays exuding financial influence across state lines.
While our research may not offer practical advice for retail store owners on altering their window displays to prevent bankruptcies in distant states, it certainly provides an amusing anecdote for future cocktail parties. Our findings serve as a whimsical reminder that statistics, much like a display window at a theme park gift shop, can surprise and perplex us with the most unexpected revelations.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[LITERATURE REVIEW]]



ChatGPT:
[[LITERATURE REVIEW]]

In "Window Dressing and Bankruptcy Risk" by Smith et al., the authors find a significant correlation between the frequency of merchandise display changes and the likelihood of bankruptcy filing among retail businesses. The study examines the intricate dance of window trimmings and financial instability, highlighting the potential impact of visual merchandising on the economic landscape. Smith et al. skillfully navigate through the complexities of retail aesthetics and financial woes, offering a compelling narrative of mannequins and money matters.

Doe's "The Art of Retail Displays" further delves into the artistry of window dressing, shedding light on the psychology behind captivating displays and their potential influence on consumer behavior. Although Doe's work primarily focuses on consumer engagement, it inadvertently paves the way for considering the ripple effects of display techniques on broader economic indicators. After all, who can resist the siren call of a well-decorated storefront, beckoning customers like moths to a flame?

Jones et al., in "From Shelves to Shambles: A Retail Odyssey," embark on a journey through the intricate world of retail management. While their exploration centers on inventory strategies and logistical challenges, the subtle undertones of visual merchandising's role in shaping consumer preferences cannot be overlooked. One cannot help but wonder if behind every bankruptcy filing, there lies a neglected mannequin craving attention and a fresh change of clothes.

In the whimsical realm of non-fiction, "Display of Power: How FUBU Changed a World of Fashion, Branding and Lifestyle" by Daymond John offers captivating insights into the power of visual appeal in the realm of fashion and retail. While the narrative primarily chronicles the rise of a fashion empire, its underlying themes of visual storytelling and brand projection resonate with the enchanting allure of merchandise displays.

Turning to the world of fiction, "The Window Dresser's Dream" by Alice M. Leggett presents a captivating tale of a window trimmer who unlocks the secrets of financial prosperity through the art of display. As the protagonist adorns storefronts with unparalleled flair, the lines between aesthetic appeal and economic fortune blur in this enchanting narrative. The power of visual storytelling takes center stage as the characters navigate a world where bankruptcies and embellished displays intertwine in a symphony of peculiar correlations.

Additionally, HBO's critically acclaimed show "Succession" provides a non-traditional lens through which to examine the dynamics of business and financial instability. While not directly related to our research topic, the show's portrayal of corporate power struggles and the unpredictability of financial markets offers a captivating backdrop for contemplating the whimsical interplay between retail displays and economic fates. After all, who's to say that a strategically placed mannequin couldn't sway the tides of fortune in the business world?

And let's not forget the timeless allure of the TV series "Mannequin Makeover Madness." While its premise may seem lighthearted, the show's exploration of the drama and intrigue behind merchandise display competitions offers a whimsical yet thought-provoking glimpse into the mesmerizing world of visual merchandising. Who knew that beneath the surface of ostentatious storefront displays, an undercurrent of financial consequences lurked, waiting to be unraveled?

As we step into the realm of literature and entertainment, it becomes increasingly evident that the whimsical world of retail displays and bankruptcies holds a peculiar allure—a blend of intrigue, psychology, and perhaps a sprinkle of statistical shenanigans. These diverse sources offer a whimsical plunge into the correlation between merchandise displays and economic turmoil, reminding us that sometimes, truth truly is stranger than fiction.


Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You are a goofy academic researcher writing an academic paper. You follow the rules, but you throw out convention regularly to make jokes and funny asides.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 The number of merchandise displayers and window trimmers in District of Columbia and Bankruptcies in California. Make lots of jokes, goofy observations, and puns.

Your research team collected data from all across the internet, but mostly just used information from Bureau of Larbor Statistics and Statsamerica . You used data from 2006 to 2013

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]]
Merchandise Mandates: A Tale of Windows, Bankruptcies, and Statistical Shenanigans

[[ABSTRACT]]
In this study, we delved into the whimsical world of retail displays, window trimmings, and bankruptcies to uncover the potential connection between the number of merchandise displayers and window trimmers in the District of Columbia and the occurrence of bankruptcies in California. Using data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics and Statsamerica, we embarked on an academic escapade to unravel this mystery.

Our findings yielded a correlation coefficient of 0.9418642 and a p-value less than 0.01 from 2006 to 2013, leaving us flabbergasted by the strength of this correlation. We laughed, we cried (mostly from staring at spreadsheets for too long), and we cracked jokes about the idea of mannequins and window displays somehow exuding financial influence across state lines. While our research may not directly guide retail store owners to alter their window displays to prevent bankruptcies in distant states, it certainly provides an amusing anecdote for cocktail parties. Our study reminds us that sometimes, statistics can be as whimsical and unpredictable as a display window at a theme park gift shop.

[[INTRODUCTION]]
Ah, the world of research! Where serious inquiries meet statistical shenanigans and whimsical correlations. In this study, we ventured into the glittering realm of retail displays, window trimmings, and bankruptcies to explore the potential link between the number of merchandise displayers and window trimmers in the District of Columbia and the occurrence of bankruptcies in California. Our academic escapade led us through a maze of data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics and Statsamerica, all in pursuit of unlocking this peculiar mystery.
Much like a detective in a classic whodunit, armed with spreadsheets instead of magnifying glasses, our journey was filled with unexpected twists and turns. Picture a Sherlock Holmes of statistics, pondering the curious connection between mannequins and failing businesses across state lines. Arming ourselves with the power of correlation coefficients and p-values, we set out to shed light on this enigmatic relationship.
Our findings unearthed a staggering correlation coefficient of 0.9418642, accompanied by a p-value that even the most skeptical of statisticians would raise an eyebrow at – less than 0.01. As we gazed upon these results, we couldn’t help but be flabbergasted by the sheer strength of this correlation. We laughed, we cried (mostly from staring at spreadsheets for too long), and we couldn’t help but crack a few jokes about the idea of mannequins and window displays exuding financial influence across state lines.
While our research may not offer practical advice for retail store owners on altering their window displays to prevent bankruptcies in distant states, it certainly provides an amusing anecdote for future cocktail parties. Our findings serve as a whimsical reminder that statistics, much like a display window at a theme park gift shop, can surprise and perplex us with the most unexpected revelations.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[METHODOLOGY]]



ChatGPT:

[[METHODOLOGY]]

To untangle the mysterious web of connections between merchandise displayers, window trimmers, and bankruptcies, our research team embarked on a zany journey through the realms of data collection and statistical analysis.

Data Collection:
We scoured the internet like intrepid treasure hunters, sifting through the digital sands to gather information on the number of merchandise displayers and window trimmers in the District of Columbia. Our search led us to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, where we found a trove of data resembling a statistical pirate's chest, brimming with numbers and figures from 2006 to 2013. We also plundered data from Statsamerica, which, like a trader in a bustling marketplace, provided us with additional insights into the retail landscape.

After donning our virtual Indiana Jones hats and wielding our metaphorical bullwhips of data retrieval, we emerged victorious, armed with a collection of datasets that would make even the most ardent data hoarder envious.

Statistical Analysis:
With our cache of data in hand, we dived headfirst into the whimsical world of statistical analysis. Like mad scientists in a laboratory of numbers, we unleashed the tools of correlation analysis and hypothesis testing upon our datasets.

We employed the venerable Pearson correlation coefficient to unveil the potential relationship between the number of merchandise displayers and window trimmers in the District of Columbia and the incidence of bankruptcies in California. This trusty statistician's compass guided us through the murky seas of correlation, allowing us to quantify the strength and direction of any possible connections between our variables.

Furthermore, we subjected our findings to the formidable p-value test, which served as our statistical trident, piercing through the waves of uncertainty to determine the significance of any observed correlations. With the p-value less than 0.01, we found ourselves gawking at the statistical significance of our results, unable to suppress our amazement at the striking relationship we had unearthed.

Amidst the whirlwind of statistical analysis, we couldn't help but exclaim in astonishment at the delightful surprises our data revealed. Just as a magician pulls a rabbit out of a hat, our statistical methods conjured a correlation coefficient of 0.9418642, leaving us flabbergasted by the sheer strength of this connection.

In summary, our methodology, while steeped in the rigors of statistical analysis, was also infused with the adventurous spirit of intrepid explorers navigating the uncharted territories of whimsical correlations. Much like a bumbling yet endearing protagonist in a comedic quest, we stumbled our way through the statistical underbrush, emerging with findings that not only captivated our research team but also added a dash of whimsy to the often serious domain of academic inquiry.


Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You are a goofy academic researcher writing an academic paper. You follow the rules, but you throw out convention regularly to make jokes and funny asides.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 The number of merchandise displayers and window trimmers in District of Columbia and Bankruptcies in California. Make lots of jokes, goofy observations, and puns.

Your research team collected data from all across the internet, but mostly just used information from Bureau of Larbor Statistics and Statsamerica .

For the time period 2006 to 2013, you found a correlation 0.9418642, r-squared of 0.8871081, 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]]
Merchandise Mandates: A Tale of Windows, Bankruptcies, and Statistical Shenanigans

[[ABSTRACT]]
In this study, we delved into the whimsical world of retail displays, window trimmings, and bankruptcies to uncover the potential connection between the number of merchandise displayers and window trimmers in the District of Columbia and the occurrence of bankruptcies in California. Using data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics and Statsamerica, we embarked on an academic escapade to unravel this mystery.

Our findings yielded a correlation coefficient of 0.9418642 and a p-value less than 0.01 from 2006 to 2013, leaving us flabbergasted by the strength of this correlation. We laughed, we cried (mostly from staring at spreadsheets for too long), and we cracked jokes about the idea of mannequins and window displays somehow exuding financial influence across state lines. While our research may not directly guide retail store owners to alter their window displays to prevent bankruptcies in distant states, it certainly provides an amusing anecdote for cocktail parties. Our study reminds us that sometimes, statistics can be as whimsical and unpredictable as a display window at a theme park gift shop.

-------

And here is the methodology section that led to this result:
[[METHODOLOGY]]
Ah, the world of research! Where serious inquiries meet statistical shenanigans and whimsical correlations. In this study, we ventured into the glittering realm of retail displays, window trimmings, and bankruptcies to explore the potential link between the number of merchandise displayers and window trimmers in the District of Columbia and the occurrence of bankruptcies in California. Our academic escapade led us through a maze of data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics and Statsamerica, all in pursuit of unlocking this peculiar mystery.
Much like a detective in a classic whodunit, armed with spreadsheets instead of magnifying glasses, our journey was filled with unexpected twists and turns. Picture a Sherlock Holmes of statistics, pondering the curious connection between mannequins and failing businesses across state lines. Arming ourselves with the power of correlation coefficients and p-values, we set out to shed light on this enigmatic relationship.
Our findings unearthed a staggering correlation coefficient of 0.9418642, accompanied by a p-value that even the most skeptical of statisticians would raise an eyebrow at – less than 0.01. As we gazed upon these results, we couldn’t help but be flabbergasted by the sheer strength of this correlation. We laughed, we cried (mostly from staring at spreadsheets for too long), and we couldn’t help but crack a few jokes about the idea of mannequins and window displays exuding financial influence across state lines.
While our research may not offer practical advice for retail store owners on altering their window displays to prevent bankruptcies in distant states, it certainly provides an amusing anecdote for future cocktail parties. Our findings serve as a whimsical reminder that statistics, much like a display window at a theme park gift shop, can surprise and perplex us with the most unexpected revelations.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[RESULTS]]



ChatGPT:

[[RESULTS]]

The results of our analytical expedition led us to a significant correlation between the number of merchandise displayers and window trimmers in the District of Columbia and the incidence of bankruptcies in California. From 2006 to 2013, we uncovered a correlation coefficient of 0.9418642, with an r-squared value of 0.8871081, and a p-value lower than 0.01. Our statistical findings left us wide-eyed and contemplating the surreal possibility of mannequins secretly holding the keys to financial stability across state borders.

To visualize this uncannily strong correlation, we present Figure 1, a scatterplot that distinctly portrays the relationship between these two variables. It's as if the data points are holding hands and singing a chorus of "Lean on Me" in perfect unison – a heartwarming sight, indeed!

Through the magic of statistical analysis, we found ourselves in awe of the robust connection between these seemingly disparate elements. The correlation coefficient of nearly 0.94 danced before our eyes like a magician pulling a rabbit out of a hat – except in this case, the rabbit was a staggering association between merchandise displays in one location and bankruptcies in another. The p-value of less than 0.01 winked mischievously at us, as if daring us to explain this statistical sorcery.

While we remain hesitant to suggest that rearranging shop windows in the nation's capital could single-handedly rescue struggling businesses in the Golden State, our findings provide an enchanting narrative for water cooler conversations. After all, who wouldn't be captivated by the notion of mannequins covertly influencing the financial fate of businesses thousands of miles away?

In conclusion, our study not only shines a whimsical spotlight on the unexpected connections that statistics can unveil but also reminds us that under the veneer of scholarly pursuits, lies a realm where mannequins may hold untold powers over financial destinies.


Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You are a goofy academic researcher writing an academic paper. You follow the rules, but you throw out convention regularly to make jokes and funny asides.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 The number of merchandise displayers and window trimmers in District of Columbia and Bankruptcies in California. Make lots of jokes, goofy observations, and puns.

Limit your response to 500 tokens.

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

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

[[TITLE]]
Merchandise Mandates: A Tale of Windows, Bankruptcies, and Statistical Shenanigans

[[ABSTRACT]]
In this study, we delved into the whimsical world of retail displays, window trimmings, and bankruptcies to uncover the potential connection between the number of merchandise displayers and window trimmers in the District of Columbia and the occurrence of bankruptcies in California. Using data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics and Statsamerica, we embarked on an academic escapade to unravel this mystery.

Our findings yielded a correlation coefficient of 0.9418642 and a p-value less than 0.01 from 2006 to 2013, leaving us flabbergasted by the strength of this correlation. We laughed, we cried (mostly from staring at spreadsheets for too long), and we cracked jokes about the idea of mannequins and window displays somehow exuding financial influence across state lines. While our research may not directly guide retail store owners to alter their window displays to prevent bankruptcies in distant states, it certainly provides an amusing anecdote for cocktail parties. Our study reminds us that sometimes, statistics can be as whimsical and unpredictable as a display window at a theme park gift shop.

[[LITERATURE REVIEW]]
In "Window Dressing and Bankruptcy Risk" by Smith et al., the authors find a significant correlation between the frequency of merchandise display changes and the likelihood of bankruptcy filing among retail businesses. The study examines the intricate dance of window trimmings and financial instability, highlighting the potential impact of visual merchandising on the economic landscape. Smith et al. skillfully navigate through the complexities of retail aesthetics and financial woes, offering a compelling narrative of mannequins and money matters.
Doe's "The Art of Retail Displays" further delves into the artistry of window dressing, shedding light on the psychology behind captivating displays and their potential influence on consumer behavior. Although Doe's work primarily focuses on consumer engagement, it inadvertently paves the way for considering the ripple effects of display techniques on broader economic indicators. After all, who can resist the siren call of a well-decorated storefront, beckoning customers like moths to a flame?
Jones et al., in "From Shelves to Shambles: A Retail Odyssey," embark on a journey through the intricate world of retail management. While their exploration centers on inventory strategies and logistical challenges, the subtle undertones of visual merchandising's role in shaping consumer preferences cannot be overlooked. One cannot help but wonder if behind every bankruptcy filing, there lies a neglected mannequin craving attention and a fresh change of clothes.
In the whimsical realm of non-fiction, "Display of Power: How FUBU Changed a World of Fashion, Branding and Lifestyle" by Daymond John offers captivating insights into the power of visual appeal in the realm of fashion and retail. While the narrative primarily chronicles the rise of a fashion empire, its underlying themes of visual storytelling and brand projection resonate with the enchanting allure of merchandise displays.
Turning to the world of fiction, "The Window Dresser's Dream" by Alice M. Leggett presents a captivating tale of a window trimmer who unlocks the secrets of financial prosperity through the art of display. As the protagonist adorns storefronts with unparalleled flair, the lines between aesthetic appeal and economic fortune blur in this enchanting narrative. The power of visual storytelling takes center stage as the characters navigate a world where bankruptcies and embellished displays intertwine in a symphony of peculiar correlations.
Additionally, HBO's critically acclaimed show "Succession" provides a non-traditional lens through which to examine the dynamics of business and financial instability. While not directly related to our research topic, the show's portrayal of corporate power struggles and the unpredictability of financial markets offers a captivating backdrop for contemplating the whimsical interplay between retail displays and economic fates. After all, who's to say that a strategically placed mannequin couldn't sway the tides of fortune in the business world?
And let's not forget the timeless allure of the TV series "Mannequin Makeover Madness." While its premise may seem lighthearted, the show's exploration of the drama and intrigue behind merchandise display competitions offers a whimsical yet thought-provoking glimpse into the mesmerizing world of visual merchandising. Who knew that beneath the surface of ostentatious storefront displays, an undercurrent of financial consequences lurked, waiting to be unraveled?
As we step into the realm of literature and entertainment, it becomes increasingly evident that the whimsical world of retail displays and bankruptcies holds a peculiar allure—a blend of intrigue, psychology, and perhaps a sprinkle of statistical shenanigans. These diverse sources offer a whimsical plunge into the correlation between merchandise displays and economic turmoil, reminding us that sometimes, truth truly is stranger than fiction.

[[RESULTS]]
The results of our analytical expedition led us to a significant correlation between the number of merchandise displayers and window trimmers in the District of Columbia and the incidence of bankruptcies in California. From 2006 to 2013, we uncovered a correlation coefficient of 0.9418642, with an r-squared value of 0.8871081, and a p-value lower than 0.01. Our statistical findings left us wide-eyed and contemplating the surreal possibility of mannequins secretly holding the keys to financial stability across state borders.
To visualize this uncannily strong correlation, we present Figure 1, a scatterplot that distinctly portrays the relationship between these two variables. It's as if the data points are holding hands and singing a chorus of "Lean on Me" in perfect unison – a heartwarming sight, indeed!
Through the magic of statistical analysis, we found ourselves in awe of the robust connection between these seemingly disparate elements. The correlation coefficient of nearly 0.94 danced before our eyes like a magician pulling a rabbit out of a hat – except in this case, the rabbit was a staggering association between merchandise displays in one location and bankruptcies in another. The p-value of less than 0.01 winked mischievously at us, as if daring us to explain this statistical sorcery.
While we remain hesitant to suggest that rearranging shop windows in the nation's capital could single-handedly rescue struggling businesses in the Golden State, our findings provide an enchanting narrative for water cooler conversations. After all, who wouldn't be captivated by the notion of mannequins covertly influencing the financial fate of businesses thousands of miles away?
In conclusion, our study not only shines a whimsical spotlight on the unexpected connections that statistics can unveil but also reminds us that under the veneer of scholarly pursuits, lies a realm where mannequins may hold untold powers over financial destinies.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[DISCUSSION]]



ChatGPT:

[[DISCUSSION]]

Our findings have sparked delightful ripples in the fabric of the retail and economic landscape, revealing a correlation so strong it could almost be mistaken for a magician's sleight of hand. As we reflect on our results, we cannot help but recall the whimsical wisdom of Alice M. Leggett's "The Window Dresser's Dream," where the protagonist's window trimmings influence financial prosperity. While we must acknowledge the fantastical nature of such tales, our research has unwittingly unveiled a similar thread weaving through the statistics.

The correlation coefficient of 0.9418642 that emerged from our analysis not only exceeded our expectations but also danced merrily in tandem with prior research, echoing the sentiments of Smith et al. regarding the link between merchandise display changes and bankruptcy risk. As we pondered the strength of this correlation, the absurd yet captivating premise of mannequins whispering financial forecasts into the wind seemed less far-fetched than one might expect.

In a manner reminiscent of HBO's "Succession," where power struggles and financial unpredictability reign supreme, our results offer a fresh lens through which to view the capricious interplay of retail displays and economic outcomes. While our study does not prescribe altering display techniques as a panacea for financial woes, it does, however, enrich the conversation on the enigmatic influences surrounding business fortunes.

While "Mannequin Makeover Madness" may have primed us for fantastical flights of fancy, we must confront the sobering reality that statistical shenanigans, rather than whimsical tales, underpin our discoveries. Nevertheless, amidst the sea of numbers and spreadsheets, we found ourselves enamored by the unlikely camaraderie between the number of merchandise displayers in the District of Columbia and the bankruptcies in California.

This correlation, akin to a cinematic plot twist, demonstrates the harmonious alignment of two ostensibly unrelated variables, evoking a sentiment akin to the well-coordinated choreography of an intricately crafted storefront display. Our extensive literature review, with its diverse tapestry of literature and entertainment, set the stage for our research, revealing the resounding allure of the whimsical world of retail displays and bankruptcies. As we bid adieu to this whimsical romp through statistics, we are left with a parting thought: perhaps, behind every bankruptcy filing, a neglected mannequin is silently beckoning for attention, its influence stretching across state lines with the enigmatic charm of a retail fairy godmother.


Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You are a goofy academic researcher writing an academic paper. You follow the rules, but you throw out convention regularly to make jokes and funny asides.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 The number of merchandise displayers and window trimmers in District of Columbia and Bankruptcies in California. Make lots of jokes, goofy observations, and puns.

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

Here are the title, abstract, introduction, and results sections.
[[TITLE]]
Merchandise Mandates: A Tale of Windows, Bankruptcies, and Statistical Shenanigans

[[ABSTRACT]]
In this study, we delved into the whimsical world of retail displays, window trimmings, and bankruptcies to uncover the potential connection between the number of merchandise displayers and window trimmers in the District of Columbia and the occurrence of bankruptcies in California. Using data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics and Statsamerica, we embarked on an academic escapade to unravel this mystery.

Our findings yielded a correlation coefficient of 0.9418642 and a p-value less than 0.01 from 2006 to 2013, leaving us flabbergasted by the strength of this correlation. We laughed, we cried (mostly from staring at spreadsheets for too long), and we cracked jokes about the idea of mannequins and window displays somehow exuding financial influence across state lines. While our research may not directly guide retail store owners to alter their window displays to prevent bankruptcies in distant states, it certainly provides an amusing anecdote for cocktail parties. Our study reminds us that sometimes, statistics can be as whimsical and unpredictable as a display window at a theme park gift shop.

[[INTRDUCTION]]
Ah, the world of research! Where serious inquiries meet statistical shenanigans and whimsical correlations. In this study, we ventured into the glittering realm of retail displays, window trimmings, and bankruptcies to explore the potential link between the number of merchandise displayers and window trimmers in the District of Columbia and the occurrence of bankruptcies in California. Our academic escapade led us through a maze of data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics and Statsamerica, all in pursuit of unlocking this peculiar mystery.
Much like a detective in a classic whodunit, armed with spreadsheets instead of magnifying glasses, our journey was filled with unexpected twists and turns. Picture a Sherlock Holmes of statistics, pondering the curious connection between mannequins and failing businesses across state lines. Arming ourselves with the power of correlation coefficients and p-values, we set out to shed light on this enigmatic relationship.
Our findings unearthed a staggering correlation coefficient of 0.9418642, accompanied by a p-value that even the most skeptical of statisticians would raise an eyebrow at – less than 0.01. As we gazed upon these results, we couldn’t help but be flabbergasted by the sheer strength of this correlation. We laughed, we cried (mostly from staring at spreadsheets for too long), and we couldn’t help but crack a few jokes about the idea of mannequins and window displays exuding financial influence across state lines.
While our research may not offer practical advice for retail store owners on altering their window displays to prevent bankruptcies in distant states, it certainly provides an amusing anecdote for future cocktail parties. Our findings serve as a whimsical reminder that statistics, much like a display window at a theme park gift shop, can surprise and perplex us with the most unexpected revelations.

[[RESULTS]]
The results of our analytical expedition led us to a significant correlation between the number of merchandise displayers and window trimmers in the District of Columbia and the incidence of bankruptcies in California. From 2006 to 2013, we uncovered a correlation coefficient of 0.9418642, with an r-squared value of 0.8871081, and a p-value lower than 0.01. Our statistical findings left us wide-eyed and contemplating the surreal possibility of mannequins secretly holding the keys to financial stability across state borders.
To visualize this uncannily strong correlation, we present Figure 1, a scatterplot that distinctly portrays the relationship between these two variables. It's as if the data points are holding hands and singing a chorus of "Lean on Me" in perfect unison – a heartwarming sight, indeed!
Through the magic of statistical analysis, we found ourselves in awe of the robust connection between these seemingly disparate elements. The correlation coefficient of nearly 0.94 danced before our eyes like a magician pulling a rabbit out of a hat – except in this case, the rabbit was a staggering association between merchandise displays in one location and bankruptcies in another. The p-value of less than 0.01 winked mischievously at us, as if daring us to explain this statistical sorcery.
While we remain hesitant to suggest that rearranging shop windows in the nation's capital could single-handedly rescue struggling businesses in the Golden State, our findings provide an enchanting narrative for water cooler conversations. After all, who wouldn't be captivated by the notion of mannequins covertly influencing the financial fate of businesses thousands of miles away?
In conclusion, our study not only shines a whimsical spotlight on the unexpected connections that statistics can unveil but also reminds us that under the veneer of scholarly pursuits, lies a realm where mannequins may hold untold powers over financial destinies.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[CONCLUSION]]



ChatGPT:

[[CONCLUSION]]

In this enigmatic voyage through the realm of statistics and retail curiosities, our findings have left us with more questions than answers. As we close the curtains on this academic escapade, we couldn't help but marvel at the whimsical dance of correlation coefficients and p-values that led us to the unexpected link between merchandise displayers and window trimmers in the District of Columbia and bankruptcies in California.

Our research has shown that the correlation coefficient of 0.9418642 stood before us like a giant jenga tower – precariously perched, yet undeniably captivating. With a p-value less than 0.01, it beckoned us to ponder whether mannequins were secretly whispering financial advice to struggling businesses across state lines.

As we reflect on our statistical expedition, we dare not propose that a rearrangement of display windows in the nation's capital could single-handedly salvage floundering businesses in the Golden State. However, we do assert that our findings leave a lingering sense of wonder, sparking conversations that are more fantastical than the plot of a science fiction novel.

In the whimsical world of statistical shenanigans, our research provides a grand tale to regale at social gatherings, reminding us that even the most unexpected correlations can emerge from the depths of data analysis. And let's face it, who wouldn't be intrigued by the idea of mannequins secretly orchestrating the financial fate of businesses thousands of miles away? It's like a real-life game of Monopoly, but instead of buying properties, mannequins are controlling economic destinies from storefront displays.

While our study may not revolutionize retail practices, it certainly serves as a survey into the capricious and delightful nature of statistical discoveries, where mannequins, window trimmers, and bankruptcies converge in an unexpected waltz of numbers and whimsy.

In closing, we assert that no further inquiry is warranted in this arena. The connection between merchandise displayers in one area and bankruptcies in another is a charming testament to the delightful unpredictability of statistical analysis.

And with that, we rest our case, as we bid adieu to this statistical saga, leaving the stage open for the next whimsical enigma to unravel.


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 Merchandise Mandates: A Tale of Windows, Bankruptcies, and Statistical Shenanigans. Respond only with the name of a fictional academic journal.

ChatGPT:

The Journal of Retail Ruin Research


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 Merchandise Mandates: A Tale of Windows, Bankruptcies, and Statistical Shenanigans. Respond only with the name of a fictional organization.

ChatGPT:

The Institute for Consumer Behavior and Outlandish Economics


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 Merchandise Mandates: A Tale of Windows, Bankruptcies, and Statistical Shenanigans with an abstract of In this study, we delved into the whimsical world of retail displays, window trimmings, and bankruptcies to uncover the potential connection between the number of merchandise displayers and window trimmers in the District of Columbia and the occurrence of bankruptcies in California. Using data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics and Statsamerica, we embarked on an academic escapade to unravel this mystery.
Our findings yielded a correlation coefficient of 0.9418642 and a p-value less than 0.01 from 2006 to 2013, leaving us flabbergasted by the strength of this correlation. We laughed, we cried (mostly from staring at spreadsheets for too long), and we cracked jokes about the idea of mannequins and window displays somehow exuding financial influence across state lines. While our research may not directly guide retail store owners to alter their window displays to prevent bankruptcies in distant states, it certainly provides an amusing anecdote for cocktail parties. Our study reminds us that sometimes, statistics can be as whimsical and unpredictable as a display window at a theme park gift shop.

ChatGPT:

"merchandise displayers, window trimmings, bankruptcies, correlation coefficient, p-value, Bureau of Labor Statistics, Statsamerica, retail displays, statistical analysis, retail bankruptcies, financial influence, state lines, academic research, data analysis"

*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

The number of merchandise displayers and window trimmers in District of Columbia
Detailed data title: BLS estimate of merchandise displayers and window trimmers in District of Columbia
Source: Bureau of Larbor Statistics
See what else correlates with The number of merchandise displayers and window trimmers in District of Columbia

Bankruptcies in California
Source: Statsamerica
See what else correlates with Bankruptcies in California

Correlation r = 0.9418642 (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 = 0.8871081 (Coefficient of determination)
This means 88.7% of the change in the one variable (i.e., Bankruptcies in California) is predictable based on the change in the other (i.e., The number of merchandise displayers and window trimmers in District of Columbia) over the 8 years from 2006 through 2013.

p < 0.01, which is statistically significant(Null hypothesis significance test)
The p-value is 0.00047. 0.0004700462690190073000000000
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 0.94 in 0.047% of random cases. Said differently, if you correlated 2,127 random variables Which I absolutely did.
with the same 7 degrees of freedom, Degrees of freedom is a measure of how many free components we are testing. In this case it is 7 because we have two variables measured over a period of 8 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.

[ 0.71, 0.99 ] 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.
20062007200820092010201120122013
The number of merchandise displayers and window trimmers in District of Columbia (Laborers)40506011019018013090
Bankruptcies in California (Bankruptcies)3920572615133223209818260210240151187322136485




Why this works

  1. Data dredging: I have 25,153 variables in my database. I compare all these variables against each other to find ones that randomly match up. That's 632,673,409 correlation calculations! This is called “data dredging.” Instead of starting with a hypothesis and testing it, I instead abused the data to see what correlations shake out. It’s a dangerous way to go about analysis, because any sufficiently large dataset will yield strong correlations completely at random.
  2. Lack of causal connection: There is probably Because these pages are automatically generated, it's possible that the two variables you are viewing are in fact causually related. I take steps to prevent the obvious ones from showing on the site (I don't let data about the weather in one city correlate with the weather in a neighboring city, for example), but sometimes they still pop up. If they are related, cool! You found a loophole.
    no direct connection between these variables, despite what the AI says above. This is exacerbated by the fact that I used "Years" as the base variable. Lots of things happen in a year that are not related to each other! Most studies would use something like "one person" in stead of "one year" to be the "thing" studied.
  3. Observations not independent: For many variables, sequential years are not independent of each other. If a population of people is continuously doing something every day, there is no reason to think they would suddenly change how they are doing that thing on January 1. A simple Personally I don't find any p-value calculation to be 'simple,' but you know what I mean.
    p-value calculation does not take this into account, so mathematically it appears less probable than it really is.
  4. Very low n: There are not many data points included in this analysis. Even if the p-value is high, we should be suspicious of using so few datapoints in a correlation.




Try it yourself

You can calculate the values on this page on your own! Try running the Python code to see the calculation results. Step 1: Download and install Python on your computer.

Step 2: Open a plaintext editor like Notepad and paste the code below into it.

Step 3: Save the file as "calculate_correlation.py" in a place you will remember, like your desktop. Copy the file location to your clipboard. On Windows, you can right-click the file and click "Properties," and then copy what comes after "Location:" As an example, on my computer the location is "C:\Users\tyler\Desktop"

Step 4: Open a command line window. For example, by pressing start and typing "cmd" and them pressing enter.

Step 5: Install the required modules by typing "pip install numpy", then pressing enter, then typing "pip install scipy", then pressing enter.

Step 6: Navigate to the location where you saved the Python file by using the "cd" command. For example, I would type "cd C:\Users\tyler\Desktop" and push enter.

Step 7: Run the Python script by typing "python calculate_correlation.py"

If you run into any issues, I suggest asking ChatGPT to walk you through installing Python and running the code below on your system. Try this question:

"Walk me through installing Python on my computer to run a script that uses scipy and numpy. Go step-by-step and ask me to confirm before moving on. Start by asking me questions about my operating system so that you know how to proceed. Assume I want the simplest installation with the latest version of Python and that I do not currently have any of the necessary elements installed. Remember to only give me one step per response and confirm I have done it before proceeding."


# These modules make it easier to perform the calculation
import numpy as np
from scipy import stats

# We'll define a function that we can call to return the correlation calculations
def calculate_correlation(array1, array2):

    # Calculate Pearson correlation coefficient and p-value
    correlation, p_value = stats.pearsonr(array1, array2)

    # Calculate R-squared as the square of the correlation coefficient
    r_squared = correlation**2

    return correlation, r_squared, p_value

# These are the arrays for the variables shown on this page, but you can modify them to be any two sets of numbers
array_1 = np.array([40,50,60,110,190,180,130,90,])
array_2 = np.array([39205,72615,133223,209818,260210,240151,187322,136485,])
array_1_name = "The number of merchandise displayers and window trimmers in District of Columbia"
array_2_name = "Bankruptcies in California"

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

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



Reuseable content

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

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

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

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

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

Download images for these variables:


View another random correlation

How fun was this correlation?

Your rating is much appreciated!


Correlation ID: 3464 · Black Variable ID: 17662 · Red Variable ID: 375
about · subscribe · emailme@tylervigen.com · twitter

CC BY 4.0