about · email me · subscribe
Spurious correlation #4,324 · View random

A linear line chart with years as the X-axis and two variables on the Y-axis. The first variable is US household spending on processed fruits and the second variable is Votes for the Democratic Presidential candidate in Tennessee.  The chart goes from 2000 to 2020, and the two variables track closely in value over that time. Small Image
Download png
, svg

AI explanation

As households cut back on processed fruits, their cognitive functions declined, leading to a decreased ability to engage in political discussions. This ultimately resulted in lower voter turnout for the Democrat candidate in Tennessee as people were too busy arguing about the importance of fruit in their diets instead of heading to the polls. Remember, a democracy runs on smoothie discussions and fruit-filled debates!

Model: dalle-3
Prompt: [ a Polaroid photo ] of a busy Tennessee street, with quaint houses and bustling activity. In the forefront, a neglected fruit cart stands abandoned, its empty bowls a stark contrast to the animated residents engaged in passionate debates about the importance of fruit in their diets. Among the fervent discussions, the absence of a line at the voting booth for the Democrat Presidential candidate is noticeable, symbolizing the lack of cognitive focus due to the fruit-related arguments and its impact on voter turnout. The image captures the chaotic and divided nature of the neighborhood, emphasizing the influence of the ongoing debate on the community. The depiction should include only scenes, people, and objects, it should not include text or speech bubbles.
This image generation prompt was also generated by AI, using the following sequence:

Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You select one of a few potential scene descriptors that seems to go along with the variables described. You respond only with the scene descriptions provided and say nothing else.
User prompt: Here are two variables: US household spending on processed fruits and Votes for the Democrat Presidential candidate in Tennessee. 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: Art nouveau Cyber folk a Polaroid photo A scene from Skyrim a Polaroid photo
ChatGPT: a Polaroid photo

Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You describe simple visual scenes that depict the two variables stated. You combine both variables into one scene.
User prompt: Please describe a visual scene that prominently depicts both US household spending on processed fruits and Votes for the Democrat Presidential candidate in Tennessee, in the following situation: As households cut back on processed fruits, their cognitive functions declined, leading to a decreased ability to engage in political discussions. This ultimately resulted in lower voter turnout for the Democrat candidate in Tennessee as people were too busy arguing about the importance of fruit in their diets instead of heading to the polls. Remember, a democracy runs on smoothie discussions and fruit-filled debates!. Keep the description simple.
ChatGPT: In a bustling Tennessee neighborhood, households are seen cutting back on processed fruits, with empty fruit bowls and neglected fruit carts becoming a common sight. Meanwhile, residents are engaged in heated debates on the importance of fruit in their diets, gesturing passionately as they argue back and forth. Amidst the fervent discussions, a line of people eager to vote for the Democrat Presidential candidate is noticeably absent, as the lack of cognitive focus due to fruit-related arguments has caused a decrease in voter turnout.

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: [ a Polaroid photo ] and depicting this scene: In a bustling Tennessee neighborhood, households are seen cutting back on processed fruits, with empty fruit bowls and neglected fruit carts becoming a common sight. Meanwhile, residents are engaged in heated debates on the importance of fruit in their diets, gesturing passionately as they argue back and forth. Amidst the fervent discussions, a line of people eager to vote for the Democrat Presidential candidate is noticeably absent, as the lack of cognitive focus due to fruit-related arguments has caused a decrease in voter turnout. Keep the visual depiction simple. Do not include any words or speech bubbles.
ChatGPT: [ a Polaroid photo ] of a busy Tennessee street, with quaint houses and bustling activity. In the forefront, a neglected fruit cart stands abandoned, its empty bowls a stark contrast to the animated residents engaged in passionate debates about the importance of fruit in their diets. Among the fervent discussions, the absence of a line at the voting booth for the Democrat Presidential candidate is noticeable, symbolizing the lack of cognitive focus due to the fruit-related arguments and its impact on voter turnout. The image captures the chaotic and divided nature of the neighborhood, emphasizing the influence of the ongoing debate on the community.

*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 US household spending on processed fruits caused Votes for the Democrat Presidential candidate in Tennessee to decrease.\Make it sound serious until the end.

AI academic paper

(Because p < 0.01)
Peeling Back the Layers: A Fruitful Investigation into Household Spending on Processed Fruits and Votes for the Democrat Presidential Candidate in Tennessee

Journal of Fruitful Economics

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 US household spending on processed fruits and Votes for the Democrat Presidential candidate in Tennessee. Make lots of jokes, goofy observations, and puns.

Make the title seem clever.

Your research team used data from Bureau of Labor Statistics and MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse to assess this nagging question. You found a correlation coefficient of 0.9754617 and p < 0.01 for 2000 to 2020.

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

[[TITLE]]
Lorem ipsum dolor sit

[[ABSTRACT]]
Lorem ipsum dolor sit



ChatGPT:
[[TITLE]]
Peeling Back the Layers: A Fruitful Investigation into Household Spending on Processed Fruits and Votes for the Democrat Presidential Candidate in Tennessee

[[ABSTRACT]]
As researchers, we often find ourselves in a bit of a jam, but this time, we’ve put our investigative skills to good use by delving into the curious world of processed fruits and political inclinations. In this study, we unearth the juicy relationship between household spending on processed fruits in the vibrant state of Tennessee and the voting preferences for the Democrat presidential candidate. Our data, sourced from the Bureau of Labor Statistics and the MIT Election Data and Science Lab, has given us a rare opportunity to peel away the layers of this quirky correlation. Through rigorous statistical analysis, we discovered a positively ripe correlation coefficient of 0.9754617 with a p-value less than 0.01 over the period from 2000 to 2020. Our findings not only shed light on the curious link between fruity choices and political hues but also highlight the importance of considering fruity factors in the broader context of political decision-making. It seems that in Tennessee, when it comes to processed fruits and political preferences, the stakes are truly bananas!


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 US household spending on processed fruits and Votes for the Democrat Presidential candidate in Tennessee. Make lots of jokes, goofy observations, and puns. Stay serious and dry most of the time, but then occasionally let your wit shine through.

Here is the title and abstract of the paper:
[[TITLE]]
Peeling Back the Layers: A Fruitful Investigation into Household Spending on Processed Fruits and Votes for the Democrat Presidential Candidate in Tennessee

[[ABSTRACT]]
As researchers, we often find ourselves in a bit of a jam, but this time, we’ve put our investigative skills to good use by delving into the curious world of processed fruits and political inclinations. In this study, we unearth the juicy relationship between household spending on processed fruits in the vibrant state of Tennessee and the voting preferences for the Democrat presidential candidate. Our data, sourced from the Bureau of Labor Statistics and the MIT Election Data and Science Lab, has given us a rare opportunity to peel away the layers of this quirky correlation. Through rigorous statistical analysis, we discovered a positively ripe correlation coefficient of 0.9754617 with a p-value less than 0.01 over the period from 2000 to 2020. Our findings not only shed light on the curious link between fruity choices and political hues but also highlight the importance of considering fruity factors in the broader context of political decision-making. It seems that in Tennessee, when it comes to processed fruits and political preferences, the stakes are truly bananas!

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[INTRODUCTION]]



ChatGPT:

INTRODUCTION

The intersection of consumer behavior and political preferences has long fascinated researchers across various disciplines. In this study, we set out to peel back the layers of the intriguing relationship between household spending on processed fruits and votes for the Democrat presidential candidate in the state of Tennessee. While this connection may seem as outlandish as a pineapple on a pizza, our investigation aims to shed light on the potential influence of fruity choices on voters' political leanings.

As researchers, we often find ourselves in a bit of a jam, but this time, we’ve put our investigative skills to good use by delving into the curious world of processed fruits and political inclinations. In this study, we unearth the juicy relationship between household spending on processed fruits in the vibrant state of Tennessee and the voting preferences for the Democrat presidential candidate. Our data, sourced from the Bureau of Labor Statistics and the MIT Election Data and Science Lab, has given us a rare opportunity to peel away the layers of this quirky correlation. Through rigorous statistical analysis, we discovered a positively ripe correlation coefficient of 0.9754617 with a p-value less than 0.01 over the period from 2000 to 2020. Our findings not only shed light on the curious link between fruity choices and political hues but also highlight the importance of considering fruity factors in the broader context of political decision-making. It seems that in Tennessee, when it comes to processed fruits and political preferences, the stakes are truly bananas!

The state of Tennessee, with its unique blend of urban and rural areas, provides an ideal setting to examine this fruity phenomenon. As the home of both the Great Smoky Mountains and the vibrant city of Nashville, Tennessee offers a rich tapestry of political perspectives and fruity preferences. This study expands on previous research that has explored the influence of various consumer behaviors on political outcomes, from the correlation between coffee consumption and civic engagement to the connection between snack food preferences and partisan affiliations. Our investigation focuses specifically on processed fruits, a category that encompasses a wide range of fruit-based products, including canned fruit, fruit juices, and fruit snacks. By honing in on this specific consumer expenditure, we aim to bring a fresh perspective to the study of political sociology and the intricate web of factors that shape electoral choices.

Our exploration of the relationship between household spending on processed fruits and votes for the Democrat presidential candidate in Tennessee is not only an exercise in data analysis but also a pursuit of insight into the quirks of human behavior. Through this research, we hope to encourage further examination of the unexpected connections that shape our political landscape. As we embark on this unconventional journey, we invite readers to join us in peeling back the layers of this curious correlation and savoring the unexpected flavors of political 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 a literature review section of an academic research paper, that starts out dry for the first few sentences but then becomes hilarious and goofy.
User prompt:
Pretend you are an academic researcher. Your writing sounds like it belongs in a medical or economics journal. However, you frequently crack jokes, make puns, or add unexpected twists in your writing.

Please make up a literature review section of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between US household spending on processed fruits and Votes for the Democrat Presidential candidate in Tennessee. 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 some cartoons and childrens' shows that you watched that are related to the topic.

Here is the title and abstract of the paper:
[[TITLE]]
Peeling Back the Layers: A Fruitful Investigation into Household Spending on Processed Fruits and Votes for the Democrat Presidential Candidate in Tennessee

[[ABSTRACT]]
As researchers, we often find ourselves in a bit of a jam, but this time, we’ve put our investigative skills to good use by delving into the curious world of processed fruits and political inclinations. In this study, we unearth the juicy relationship between household spending on processed fruits in the vibrant state of Tennessee and the voting preferences for the Democrat presidential candidate. Our data, sourced from the Bureau of Labor Statistics and the MIT Election Data and Science Lab, has given us a rare opportunity to peel away the layers of this quirky correlation. Through rigorous statistical analysis, we discovered a positively ripe correlation coefficient of 0.9754617 with a p-value less than 0.01 over the period from 2000 to 2020. Our findings not only shed light on the curious link between fruity choices and political hues but also highlight the importance of considering fruity factors in the broader context of political decision-making. It seems that in Tennessee, when it comes to processed fruits and political preferences, the stakes are truly bananas!

-------

And here is the introduction section that led to this literature review:
[[INTRODUCTION]]
INTRODUCTION
The intersection of consumer behavior and political preferences has long fascinated researchers across various disciplines. In this study, we set out to peel back the layers of the intriguing relationship between household spending on processed fruits and votes for the Democrat presidential candidate in the state of Tennessee. While this connection may seem as outlandish as a pineapple on a pizza, our investigation aims to shed light on the potential influence of fruity choices on voters' political leanings.
As researchers, we often find ourselves in a bit of a jam, but this time, we’ve put our investigative skills to good use by delving into the curious world of processed fruits and political inclinations. In this study, we unearth the juicy relationship between household spending on processed fruits in the vibrant state of Tennessee and the voting preferences for the Democrat presidential candidate. Our data, sourced from the Bureau of Labor Statistics and the MIT Election Data and Science Lab, has given us a rare opportunity to peel away the layers of this quirky correlation. Through rigorous statistical analysis, we discovered a positively ripe correlation coefficient of 0.9754617 with a p-value less than 0.01 over the period from 2000 to 2020. Our findings not only shed light on the curious link between fruity choices and political hues but also highlight the importance of considering fruity factors in the broader context of political decision-making. It seems that in Tennessee, when it comes to processed fruits and political preferences, the stakes are truly bananas!
The state of Tennessee, with its unique blend of urban and rural areas, provides an ideal setting to examine this fruity phenomenon. As the home of both the Great Smoky Mountains and the vibrant city of Nashville, Tennessee offers a rich tapestry of political perspectives and fruity preferences. This study expands on previous research that has explored the influence of various consumer behaviors on political outcomes, from the correlation between coffee consumption and civic engagement to the connection between snack food preferences and partisan affiliations. Our investigation focuses specifically on processed fruits, a category that encompasses a wide range of fruit-based products, including canned fruit, fruit juices, and fruit snacks. By honing in on this specific consumer expenditure, we aim to bring a fresh perspective to the study of political sociology and the intricate web of factors that shape electoral choices.
Our exploration of the relationship between household spending on processed fruits and votes for the Democrat presidential candidate in Tennessee is not only an exercise in data analysis but also a pursuit of insight into the quirks of human behavior. Through this research, we hope to encourage further examination of the unexpected connections that shape our political landscape. As we embark on this unconventional journey, we invite readers to join us in peeling back the layers of this curious correlation and savoring the unexpected flavors of political inquiry.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[LITERATURE REVIEW]]



ChatGPT:
[[LITERATURE REVIEW]]

In "Smith et al.," the authors find a positive association between household spending on processed fruits and political leanings, although their study lacks the zest for humor we aim to inject into this lively topic. Moving on to "Doe and Johnson," their research delves into the intricate web of consumer choices and voting behavior, but unfortunately fails to peel back the layers of fruit-related puns and quirky connections that we find truly a-peeling.

Transitioning to more unconventional sources, "The Fruitful Vote: An Analysis of Electoral Trends and Fruity Fancies" by Fruity McFruiterston takes a more light-hearted approach to the subject matter, illustrating the whimsical and juicy nature of the correlation we seek to explore. Similarly, "The Orange Revolution: How Citrus Consumption Shapes Political Persuasion" by Peel E. Zest offers a tangy perspective that aligns with our flavorful investigation.

Delving even further into the realm of creative inspiration, we turn to fictional works that, while unrelated to academic literature, provide a lighthearted take on the potential connection between processed fruits and political attitudes. For instance, "The Grapes of Democracy" by John Stainbeck and "Fruitopia: A Political Odyssey" by Arthur Pomegranate present imaginative scenarios where fruits and politics entwine in unexpected ways.

Looking back on childhood influences, one cannot discount the potential impact of cartoons and children's shows that might have subliminally shaped our perception of processed fruits and political inclinations. Classic cartoons such as "The Powerpuff Girls" and "SpongeBob SquarePants," while seemingly unrelated, have the potential to sneakily influence our fruit choices and, by extension, our political leanings. After all, who wouldn't want to vote for the candidate with the most fruit-packed lunchbox?

Overall, while traditional sources offer valuable insights into the intersection of consumer behavior and political preferences, our exploration of the connection between household spending on processed fruits and votes for the Democrat presidential candidate in Tennessee calls for a dash of playful innovation. By incorporating whimsical perspectives from unconventional sources and embracing the quirks of fruity fiction and childhood nostalgia, we strive to infuse our study with a refreshing twist that will not only inform but also entertain and tickle the fruity fancies of our readers.


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 US household spending on processed fruits and Votes for the Democrat Presidential candidate in Tennessee. Make lots of jokes, goofy observations, and puns. Stay serious and dry most of the time, but then occasionally let your wit shine through.

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

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

Here is the title, abstract, and introduction of the paper:
[[TITLE]]
Peeling Back the Layers: A Fruitful Investigation into Household Spending on Processed Fruits and Votes for the Democrat Presidential Candidate in Tennessee

[[ABSTRACT]]
As researchers, we often find ourselves in a bit of a jam, but this time, we’ve put our investigative skills to good use by delving into the curious world of processed fruits and political inclinations. In this study, we unearth the juicy relationship between household spending on processed fruits in the vibrant state of Tennessee and the voting preferences for the Democrat presidential candidate. Our data, sourced from the Bureau of Labor Statistics and the MIT Election Data and Science Lab, has given us a rare opportunity to peel away the layers of this quirky correlation. Through rigorous statistical analysis, we discovered a positively ripe correlation coefficient of 0.9754617 with a p-value less than 0.01 over the period from 2000 to 2020. Our findings not only shed light on the curious link between fruity choices and political hues but also highlight the importance of considering fruity factors in the broader context of political decision-making. It seems that in Tennessee, when it comes to processed fruits and political preferences, the stakes are truly bananas!

[[INTRODUCTION]]
INTRODUCTION
The intersection of consumer behavior and political preferences has long fascinated researchers across various disciplines. In this study, we set out to peel back the layers of the intriguing relationship between household spending on processed fruits and votes for the Democrat presidential candidate in the state of Tennessee. While this connection may seem as outlandish as a pineapple on a pizza, our investigation aims to shed light on the potential influence of fruity choices on voters' political leanings.
As researchers, we often find ourselves in a bit of a jam, but this time, we’ve put our investigative skills to good use by delving into the curious world of processed fruits and political inclinations. In this study, we unearth the juicy relationship between household spending on processed fruits in the vibrant state of Tennessee and the voting preferences for the Democrat presidential candidate. Our data, sourced from the Bureau of Labor Statistics and the MIT Election Data and Science Lab, has given us a rare opportunity to peel away the layers of this quirky correlation. Through rigorous statistical analysis, we discovered a positively ripe correlation coefficient of 0.9754617 with a p-value less than 0.01 over the period from 2000 to 2020. Our findings not only shed light on the curious link between fruity choices and political hues but also highlight the importance of considering fruity factors in the broader context of political decision-making. It seems that in Tennessee, when it comes to processed fruits and political preferences, the stakes are truly bananas!
The state of Tennessee, with its unique blend of urban and rural areas, provides an ideal setting to examine this fruity phenomenon. As the home of both the Great Smoky Mountains and the vibrant city of Nashville, Tennessee offers a rich tapestry of political perspectives and fruity preferences. This study expands on previous research that has explored the influence of various consumer behaviors on political outcomes, from the correlation between coffee consumption and civic engagement to the connection between snack food preferences and partisan affiliations. Our investigation focuses specifically on processed fruits, a category that encompasses a wide range of fruit-based products, including canned fruit, fruit juices, and fruit snacks. By honing in on this specific consumer expenditure, we aim to bring a fresh perspective to the study of political sociology and the intricate web of factors that shape electoral choices.
Our exploration of the relationship between household spending on processed fruits and votes for the Democrat presidential candidate in Tennessee is not only an exercise in data analysis but also a pursuit of insight into the quirks of human behavior. Through this research, we hope to encourage further examination of the unexpected connections that shape our political landscape. As we embark on this unconventional journey, we invite readers to join us in peeling back the layers of this curious correlation and savoring the unexpected flavors of political inquiry.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[METHODOLOGY]]



ChatGPT:

[[METHODOLOGY]]

Data Collection:
Ah, the thrill of data collection – akin to scouring the aisles of a grocery store in search of the perfect avocado. Our research team embarked on a digital quest, navigating the virtual jungles of the Bureau of Labor Statistics and the MIT Election Data and Science Lab, as well as the Harvard Dataverse, to gather a bountiful harvest of information spanning the years from 2000 to 2020. With the precision of a fruit ninja, we meticulously extracted data on household spending on processed fruits and the corresponding votes for the Democrat presidential candidate in the state of Tennessee. All data were carefully handpicked, maintaining the freshest quality for our analysis.

Statistical Analysis:
Armed with an arsenal of statistical tools, we sliced and diced the data with the finesse of a master chef preparing a fruit salad. Utilizing correlation analysis, we sought to unveil the hidden connections between household spending on processed fruits and voting trends for the Democrat presidential candidate. Our statistical flourishes extended to the calculation of a ripe correlation coefficient, which emerged as a tangible testament to the fruitfulness of our inquiry. With the gravity of a zealous fruit auctioneer, we determined a correlation coefficient of 0.9754617, firmly establishing the robust link between these seemingly unrelated variables. Additionally, our analysis bore witness to the emergence of a p-value less than 0.01, signifying the statistical significance of our findings in a manner that would make any banana proud.

Ethical Considerations:
In navigating the orchards of data acquisition, we upheld the highest ethical standards, ensuring that our research adhered to the principles of honesty and transparency. No deceptive claims were sown within our analysis, and the fruits of our labor were presented with sincerity and integrity. Furthermore, we meticulously safeguarded the anonymity of individual household spending and voting preferences, recognizing the importance of privacy amidst the foliage of our study.

Limitations:
Despite the fruitful yield of our investigation, we acknowledge the presence of certain constraints within our methodology. The retrospective nature of our data limited our ability to establish causality, much like attempting to determine whether the chicken or the egg came first. Additionally, the exclusive focus on Tennessee poses a barrier to generalizing our findings to broader geographical contexts, emphasizing the need for future studies to expand the scope of this fruity inquiry.

In summary, our methodology embraces the intrepid spirit of a botanist exploring uncharted terrain, while also upholding the rigorous principles of scientific inquiry. With a dash of statistical flair and a commitment to ethical practice, our research has blossomed into a vibrant investigation into the esoteric relationship between household spending on processed fruits and political proclivities in Tennessee.


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 US household spending on processed fruits and Votes for the Democrat Presidential candidate in Tennessee. Make lots of jokes, goofy observations, and puns. Stay serious and dry most of the time, but then occasionally let your wit shine through.

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

For the time period 2000 to 2020, you found a correlation 0.9754617, r-squared of 0.9515255, 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]]
Peeling Back the Layers: A Fruitful Investigation into Household Spending on Processed Fruits and Votes for the Democrat Presidential Candidate in Tennessee

[[ABSTRACT]]
As researchers, we often find ourselves in a bit of a jam, but this time, we’ve put our investigative skills to good use by delving into the curious world of processed fruits and political inclinations. In this study, we unearth the juicy relationship between household spending on processed fruits in the vibrant state of Tennessee and the voting preferences for the Democrat presidential candidate. Our data, sourced from the Bureau of Labor Statistics and the MIT Election Data and Science Lab, has given us a rare opportunity to peel away the layers of this quirky correlation. Through rigorous statistical analysis, we discovered a positively ripe correlation coefficient of 0.9754617 with a p-value less than 0.01 over the period from 2000 to 2020. Our findings not only shed light on the curious link between fruity choices and political hues but also highlight the importance of considering fruity factors in the broader context of political decision-making. It seems that in Tennessee, when it comes to processed fruits and political preferences, the stakes are truly bananas!

-------

And here is the methodology section that led to this result:
[[METHODOLOGY]]
INTRODUCTION
The intersection of consumer behavior and political preferences has long fascinated researchers across various disciplines. In this study, we set out to peel back the layers of the intriguing relationship between household spending on processed fruits and votes for the Democrat presidential candidate in the state of Tennessee. While this connection may seem as outlandish as a pineapple on a pizza, our investigation aims to shed light on the potential influence of fruity choices on voters' political leanings.
As researchers, we often find ourselves in a bit of a jam, but this time, we’ve put our investigative skills to good use by delving into the curious world of processed fruits and political inclinations. In this study, we unearth the juicy relationship between household spending on processed fruits in the vibrant state of Tennessee and the voting preferences for the Democrat presidential candidate. Our data, sourced from the Bureau of Labor Statistics and the MIT Election Data and Science Lab, has given us a rare opportunity to peel away the layers of this quirky correlation. Through rigorous statistical analysis, we discovered a positively ripe correlation coefficient of 0.9754617 with a p-value less than 0.01 over the period from 2000 to 2020. Our findings not only shed light on the curious link between fruity choices and political hues but also highlight the importance of considering fruity factors in the broader context of political decision-making. It seems that in Tennessee, when it comes to processed fruits and political preferences, the stakes are truly bananas!
The state of Tennessee, with its unique blend of urban and rural areas, provides an ideal setting to examine this fruity phenomenon. As the home of both the Great Smoky Mountains and the vibrant city of Nashville, Tennessee offers a rich tapestry of political perspectives and fruity preferences. This study expands on previous research that has explored the influence of various consumer behaviors on political outcomes, from the correlation between coffee consumption and civic engagement to the connection between snack food preferences and partisan affiliations. Our investigation focuses specifically on processed fruits, a category that encompasses a wide range of fruit-based products, including canned fruit, fruit juices, and fruit snacks. By honing in on this specific consumer expenditure, we aim to bring a fresh perspective to the study of political sociology and the intricate web of factors that shape electoral choices.
Our exploration of the relationship between household spending on processed fruits and votes for the Democrat presidential candidate in Tennessee is not only an exercise in data analysis but also a pursuit of insight into the quirks of human behavior. Through this research, we hope to encourage further examination of the unexpected connections that shape our political landscape. As we embark on this unconventional journey, we invite readers to join us in peeling back the layers of this curious correlation and savoring the unexpected flavors of political inquiry.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[RESULTS]]



ChatGPT:

[[RESULTS]]

To our delight and possibly to the bemusement of many, the results of our analysis revealed a remarkably strong correlation between household spending on processed fruits and votes for the Democrat presidential candidate in Tennessee. The correlation coefficient of 0.9754617 indicates a nearly perfect positive relationship, suggesting that as spending on processed fruits increased, so did the support for the Democrat candidate. It's as if the residents of Tennessee were saying, "Yes, we can-died fruits!" Please forgive the pun; I couldn't resist.

The r-squared value of 0.9515255 further corroborates the robustness of this relationship, indicating that a whopping 95% of the variation in Democrat votes can be explained by variations in spending on processed fruits. It's quite astonishing to think that nearly all the fluctuations in political preferences in Tennessee can be linked back to boxes of fruit snacks and cans of fruit cocktail. Who would've thought that the path to political insight would wind its way through the grocery store aisles?

Additionally, the p-value less than 0.01 provides strong evidence against the null hypothesis that there is no relationship between these variables. In other words, the likelihood of this correlation occurring by mere chance is about as slim as a dried apricot slice. That's statistical lingo for "this connection is the real deal."

Now, let's not keep you in suspense any longer. Behold, Fig. 1, the scatterplot that graphically captures the undeniable association between household spending on processed fruits and votes for the Democrat presidential candidate in Tennessee. As you can see (or will see once the figure is inserted), the data points form a tight cluster, resembling a bunch of grapes neatly arranged on the vine of correlation. It's a sight to behold, though not quite as visually appealing as a bowl of fresh fruit.

In conclusion, these results underscore the intriguing interplay between seemingly unrelated aspects of everyday life and political decision-making. The ripe correlation we've uncovered between processed fruit expenditures and Democrat votes in Tennessee offers a unique glimpse into the whimsical world of human behavior and its intersection with politics. As we digest these findings, both figuratively and literally, let us not overlook the complex and multi-layered nature of societal dynamics. After all, sometimes the most unexpected pairings produce the most fruitful insights.


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 US household spending on processed fruits and Votes for the Democrat Presidential candidate in Tennessee. Make lots of jokes, goofy observations, and puns. Stay serious and dry most of the time, but then occasionally let your wit shine through.

Limit your response to 500 tokens.

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

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

[[TITLE]]
Peeling Back the Layers: A Fruitful Investigation into Household Spending on Processed Fruits and Votes for the Democrat Presidential Candidate in Tennessee

[[ABSTRACT]]
As researchers, we often find ourselves in a bit of a jam, but this time, we’ve put our investigative skills to good use by delving into the curious world of processed fruits and political inclinations. In this study, we unearth the juicy relationship between household spending on processed fruits in the vibrant state of Tennessee and the voting preferences for the Democrat presidential candidate. Our data, sourced from the Bureau of Labor Statistics and the MIT Election Data and Science Lab, has given us a rare opportunity to peel away the layers of this quirky correlation. Through rigorous statistical analysis, we discovered a positively ripe correlation coefficient of 0.9754617 with a p-value less than 0.01 over the period from 2000 to 2020. Our findings not only shed light on the curious link between fruity choices and political hues but also highlight the importance of considering fruity factors in the broader context of political decision-making. It seems that in Tennessee, when it comes to processed fruits and political preferences, the stakes are truly bananas!

[[LITERATURE REVIEW]]
In "Smith et al.," the authors find a positive association between household spending on processed fruits and political leanings, although their study lacks the zest for humor we aim to inject into this lively topic. Moving on to "Doe and Johnson," their research delves into the intricate web of consumer choices and voting behavior, but unfortunately fails to peel back the layers of fruit-related puns and quirky connections that we find truly a-peeling.
Transitioning to more unconventional sources, "The Fruitful Vote: An Analysis of Electoral Trends and Fruity Fancies" by Fruity McFruiterston takes a more light-hearted approach to the subject matter, illustrating the whimsical and juicy nature of the correlation we seek to explore. Similarly, "The Orange Revolution: How Citrus Consumption Shapes Political Persuasion" by Peel E. Zest offers a tangy perspective that aligns with our flavorful investigation.
Delving even further into the realm of creative inspiration, we turn to fictional works that, while unrelated to academic literature, provide a lighthearted take on the potential connection between processed fruits and political attitudes. For instance, "The Grapes of Democracy" by John Stainbeck and "Fruitopia: A Political Odyssey" by Arthur Pomegranate present imaginative scenarios where fruits and politics entwine in unexpected ways.
Looking back on childhood influences, one cannot discount the potential impact of cartoons and children's shows that might have subliminally shaped our perception of processed fruits and political inclinations. Classic cartoons such as "The Powerpuff Girls" and "SpongeBob SquarePants," while seemingly unrelated, have the potential to sneakily influence our fruit choices and, by extension, our political leanings. After all, who wouldn't want to vote for the candidate with the most fruit-packed lunchbox?
Overall, while traditional sources offer valuable insights into the intersection of consumer behavior and political preferences, our exploration of the connection between household spending on processed fruits and votes for the Democrat presidential candidate in Tennessee calls for a dash of playful innovation. By incorporating whimsical perspectives from unconventional sources and embracing the quirks of fruity fiction and childhood nostalgia, we strive to infuse our study with a refreshing twist that will not only inform but also entertain and tickle the fruity fancies of our readers.

[[RESULTS]]
To our delight and possibly to the bemusement of many, the results of our analysis revealed a remarkably strong correlation between household spending on processed fruits and votes for the Democrat presidential candidate in Tennessee. The correlation coefficient of 0.9754617 indicates a nearly perfect positive relationship, suggesting that as spending on processed fruits increased, so did the support for the Democrat candidate. It's as if the residents of Tennessee were saying, "Yes, we can-died fruits!" Please forgive the pun; I couldn't resist.
The r-squared value of 0.9515255 further corroborates the robustness of this relationship, indicating that a whopping 95% of the variation in Democrat votes can be explained by variations in spending on processed fruits. It's quite astonishing to think that nearly all the fluctuations in political preferences in Tennessee can be linked back to boxes of fruit snacks and cans of fruit cocktail. Who would've thought that the path to political insight would wind its way through the grocery store aisles?
Additionally, the p-value less than 0.01 provides strong evidence against the null hypothesis that there is no relationship between these variables. In other words, the likelihood of this correlation occurring by mere chance is about as slim as a dried apricot slice. That's statistical lingo for "this connection is the real deal."
Now, let's not keep you in suspense any longer. Behold, Fig. 1, the scatterplot that graphically captures the undeniable association between household spending on processed fruits and votes for the Democrat presidential candidate in Tennessee. As you can see (or will see once the figure is inserted), the data points form a tight cluster, resembling a bunch of grapes neatly arranged on the vine of correlation. It's a sight to behold, though not quite as visually appealing as a bowl of fresh fruit.
In conclusion, these results underscore the intriguing interplay between seemingly unrelated aspects of everyday life and political decision-making. The ripe correlation we've uncovered between processed fruit expenditures and Democrat votes in Tennessee offers a unique glimpse into the whimsical world of human behavior and its intersection with politics. As we digest these findings, both figuratively and literally, let us not overlook the complex and multi-layered nature of societal dynamics. After all, sometimes the most unexpected pairings produce the most fruitful insights.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[DISCUSSION]]



ChatGPT:

[[DISCUSSION]]

Our study has, pardon the pun, borne fruit in shedding light on the curious and surprisingly robust relationship between household spending on processed fruits and votes for the Democrat presidential candidate in Tennessee. Our findings echo the prior research by Smith et al. and Doe and Johnson, demonstrating a positive association between fruity choices and political inclinations. It seems that the more processed fruits households in Tennessee indulge in, the more they lean towards the Democrat camp, painting a picture that's as clear as a freshly wiped peach.

While the literature review may have sown seeds of doubt regarding the relevance of fruity correlations, our results provide a juicy vindication of the prior research. The positively ripe correlation coefficient we uncovered aligns with the findings of "The Fruitful Vote" by Fruity McFruiterston and "The Orange Revolution" by Peel E. Zest, validating the zesty hunches of these authors. It’s almost as if our findings are the culmination of a lighthearted fruit-based odyssey through academic literature and whimsical musings - a journey our results have now brought to a fruitful fruition.

The near-perfect correlation coefficient of 0.9754617 we observed underscores the strength of the connection, trumpeting a resounding victory for the linkage between fruity habits and political persuasions. The statistical significance, exemplified by a p-value less than 0.01, speaks to the rigor and reliability of our findings, leaving little room for skepticism – just like how a well-peeled orange leaves little room for the bitter white pith.

As we reckon with the implications of our findings, perhaps the vibrant world of processed fruits offers more than just an array of convenient snacks. It seems that the choice between an apple and an orange at the grocery store may bear unforeseen weight on the political landscape of Tennessee. Our study serves as a gentle reminder that even in the most unexpected places, fruitful insights await those willing to peel back the layers of conventional thinking.


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 US household spending on processed fruits and Votes for the Democrat Presidential candidate in Tennessee. Make lots of jokes, goofy observations, and puns. Stay serious and dry most of the time, but then occasionally let your wit shine through.

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

Here are the title, abstract, introduction, and results sections.
[[TITLE]]
Peeling Back the Layers: A Fruitful Investigation into Household Spending on Processed Fruits and Votes for the Democrat Presidential Candidate in Tennessee

[[ABSTRACT]]
As researchers, we often find ourselves in a bit of a jam, but this time, we’ve put our investigative skills to good use by delving into the curious world of processed fruits and political inclinations. In this study, we unearth the juicy relationship between household spending on processed fruits in the vibrant state of Tennessee and the voting preferences for the Democrat presidential candidate. Our data, sourced from the Bureau of Labor Statistics and the MIT Election Data and Science Lab, has given us a rare opportunity to peel away the layers of this quirky correlation. Through rigorous statistical analysis, we discovered a positively ripe correlation coefficient of 0.9754617 with a p-value less than 0.01 over the period from 2000 to 2020. Our findings not only shed light on the curious link between fruity choices and political hues but also highlight the importance of considering fruity factors in the broader context of political decision-making. It seems that in Tennessee, when it comes to processed fruits and political preferences, the stakes are truly bananas!

[[INTRDUCTION]]
INTRODUCTION
The intersection of consumer behavior and political preferences has long fascinated researchers across various disciplines. In this study, we set out to peel back the layers of the intriguing relationship between household spending on processed fruits and votes for the Democrat presidential candidate in the state of Tennessee. While this connection may seem as outlandish as a pineapple on a pizza, our investigation aims to shed light on the potential influence of fruity choices on voters' political leanings.
As researchers, we often find ourselves in a bit of a jam, but this time, we’ve put our investigative skills to good use by delving into the curious world of processed fruits and political inclinations. In this study, we unearth the juicy relationship between household spending on processed fruits in the vibrant state of Tennessee and the voting preferences for the Democrat presidential candidate. Our data, sourced from the Bureau of Labor Statistics and the MIT Election Data and Science Lab, has given us a rare opportunity to peel away the layers of this quirky correlation. Through rigorous statistical analysis, we discovered a positively ripe correlation coefficient of 0.9754617 with a p-value less than 0.01 over the period from 2000 to 2020. Our findings not only shed light on the curious link between fruity choices and political hues but also highlight the importance of considering fruity factors in the broader context of political decision-making. It seems that in Tennessee, when it comes to processed fruits and political preferences, the stakes are truly bananas!
The state of Tennessee, with its unique blend of urban and rural areas, provides an ideal setting to examine this fruity phenomenon. As the home of both the Great Smoky Mountains and the vibrant city of Nashville, Tennessee offers a rich tapestry of political perspectives and fruity preferences. This study expands on previous research that has explored the influence of various consumer behaviors on political outcomes, from the correlation between coffee consumption and civic engagement to the connection between snack food preferences and partisan affiliations. Our investigation focuses specifically on processed fruits, a category that encompasses a wide range of fruit-based products, including canned fruit, fruit juices, and fruit snacks. By honing in on this specific consumer expenditure, we aim to bring a fresh perspective to the study of political sociology and the intricate web of factors that shape electoral choices.
Our exploration of the relationship between household spending on processed fruits and votes for the Democrat presidential candidate in Tennessee is not only an exercise in data analysis but also a pursuit of insight into the quirks of human behavior. Through this research, we hope to encourage further examination of the unexpected connections that shape our political landscape. As we embark on this unconventional journey, we invite readers to join us in peeling back the layers of this curious correlation and savoring the unexpected flavors of political inquiry.

[[RESULTS]]
To our delight and possibly to the bemusement of many, the results of our analysis revealed a remarkably strong correlation between household spending on processed fruits and votes for the Democrat presidential candidate in Tennessee. The correlation coefficient of 0.9754617 indicates a nearly perfect positive relationship, suggesting that as spending on processed fruits increased, so did the support for the Democrat candidate. It's as if the residents of Tennessee were saying, "Yes, we can-died fruits!" Please forgive the pun; I couldn't resist.
The r-squared value of 0.9515255 further corroborates the robustness of this relationship, indicating that a whopping 95% of the variation in Democrat votes can be explained by variations in spending on processed fruits. It's quite astonishing to think that nearly all the fluctuations in political preferences in Tennessee can be linked back to boxes of fruit snacks and cans of fruit cocktail. Who would've thought that the path to political insight would wind its way through the grocery store aisles?
Additionally, the p-value less than 0.01 provides strong evidence against the null hypothesis that there is no relationship between these variables. In other words, the likelihood of this correlation occurring by mere chance is about as slim as a dried apricot slice. That's statistical lingo for "this connection is the real deal."
Now, let's not keep you in suspense any longer. Behold, Fig. 1, the scatterplot that graphically captures the undeniable association between household spending on processed fruits and votes for the Democrat presidential candidate in Tennessee. As you can see (or will see once the figure is inserted), the data points form a tight cluster, resembling a bunch of grapes neatly arranged on the vine of correlation. It's a sight to behold, though not quite as visually appealing as a bowl of fresh fruit.
In conclusion, these results underscore the intriguing interplay between seemingly unrelated aspects of everyday life and political decision-making. The ripe correlation we've uncovered between processed fruit expenditures and Democrat votes in Tennessee offers a unique glimpse into the whimsical world of human behavior and its intersection with politics. As we digest these findings, both figuratively and literally, let us not overlook the complex and multi-layered nature of societal dynamics. After all, sometimes the most unexpected pairings produce the most fruitful insights.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[CONCLUSION]]



ChatGPT:

[[CONCLUSION]]

In delving into the depths of fruity expenditures and political predilections, our research has borne fruit - quite literally! The positively ripe correlation coefficient and robust statistical evidence have left us in awe of the unexpected synergy between household spending on processed fruits and votes for the Democrat presidential candidate in Tennessee. It seems that alongside the ballot box, there may be a "fruit box" exerting its influence on electoral choices.

As we peel back the layers of this quirky correlation, we cannot help but marvel at the curious dance of consumer behavior and political allegiances. Who would have thought that a can of fruit cocktail could hold such sway in the electoral arena? It's enough to make one seriously consider running for office under the banner of the Fruit Party - campaigning slogan: "Embracing the juiciest policies for a fruitful future!"

In light of these findings, it's clear that there's no need for further research in this area. We've plumbed the depths of processed fruit spending and political affiliations, and the results speak for themselves. It's time for us to bid adieu to this fruity foray and move on to other equally bizarre but undoubtedly captivating investigations. After all, the world of research is a cornucopia of curious connections, just waiting to be explored.

And remember, when it comes to understanding political behaviors, sometimes the most fruitful insights come in the most unexpected packages.


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 Peeling Back the Layers: A Fruitful Investigation into Household Spending on Processed Fruits and Votes for the Democrat Presidential Candidate in Tennessee. Respond only with the name of a fictional academic journal.

ChatGPT:

Journal of Fruitful Economics


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 Peeling Back the Layers: A Fruitful Investigation into Household Spending on Processed Fruits and Votes for the Democrat Presidential Candidate in Tennessee. Respond only with the name of a fictional organization.

ChatGPT:

The Institute for Sociological Studies on Fruit Consumption and Political Preferences


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 Peeling Back the Layers: A Fruitful Investigation into Household Spending on Processed Fruits and Votes for the Democrat Presidential Candidate in Tennessee with an abstract of As researchers, we often find ourselves in a bit of a jam, but this time, we’ve put our investigative skills to good use by delving into the curious world of processed fruits and political inclinations. In this study, we unearth the juicy relationship between household spending on processed fruits in the vibrant state of Tennessee and the voting preferences for the Democrat presidential candidate. Our data, sourced from the Bureau of Labor Statistics and the MIT Election Data and Science Lab, has given us a rare opportunity to peel away the layers of this quirky correlation. Through rigorous statistical analysis, we discovered a positively ripe correlation coefficient of 0.9754617 with a p-value less than 0.01 over the period from 2000 to 2020. Our findings not only shed light on the curious link between fruity choices and political hues but also highlight the importance of considering fruity factors in the broader context of political decision-making. It seems that in Tennessee, when it comes to processed fruits and political preferences, the stakes are truly bananas!

ChatGPT:

Household spending, Processed fruits, Democrat presidential candidate, Tennessee, Voting preferences, Bureau of Labor Statistics, MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Correlation coefficient, Statistical analysis, Political decision-making, Fruity factors, Tennessee politics

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



Random correlation

Discover a new correlation

View all correlations

View all research papers

Report an error


Data details

US household spending on processed fruits
Detailed data title: Annual US household spend on processed fruits, as a percentage of total household spend
Source: Bureau of Labor Statistics
See what else correlates with US household spending on processed fruits

Votes for the Democratic Presidential candidate in Tennessee
Detailed data title: Percentage of all votes cast for the Democrat Presidential candidate in Tennessee
Source: MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse
See what else correlates with Votes for the Democratic Presidential candidate in Tennessee

Correlation r = 0.9754617 (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 = 0.9515255 (Coefficient of determination)
This means 95.2% of the change in the one variable (i.e., Votes for the Democratic Presidential candidate in Tennessee) is predictable based on the change in the other (i.e., US household spending on processed fruits) over the 6 years from 2000 through 2020.

p < 0.01, which is statistically significant(Null hypothesis significance test)
The p-value is 0.0009. 0.0008958048795454577000000000
The p-value is a measure of how probable it is that we would randomly find a result this extreme. More specifically the p-value is a measure of how probable it is that we would randomly find a result this extreme if we had only tested one pair of variables one time.

But I am a p-villain. I absolutely did not test only one pair of variables one time. I correlated hundreds of millions of pairs of variables. I threw boatloads of data into an industrial-sized blender to find this correlation.

Who is going to stop me? p-value reporting doesn't require me to report how many calculations I had to go through in order to find a low p-value!
On average, you will find a correaltion as strong as 0.98 in 0.09% of random cases. Said differently, if you correlated 1,116 random variables Which I absolutely did.
with the same 5 degrees of freedom, Degrees of freedom is a measure of how many free components we are testing. In this case it is 5 because we have two variables measured over a period of 6 years. It's just the number of years minus ( the number of variables minus one ), which in this case simplifies to the number of years minus one.
you would randomly expect to find a correlation as strong as this one.

[ 0.79, 1 ] 95% correlation confidence interval (using the Fisher z-transformation)
The confidence interval is an estimate the range of the value of the correlation coefficient, using the correlation itself as an input. The values are meant to be the low and high end of the correlation coefficient with 95% confidence.

This one is a bit more complciated than the other calculations, but I include it because many people have been pushing for confidence intervals instead of p-value calculations (for example: NEJM. However, if you are dredging data, you can reliably find yourself in the 5%. That's my goal!


All values for the years included above: If I were being very sneaky, I could trim years from the beginning or end of the datasets to increase the correlation on some pairs of variables. I don't do that because there are already plenty of correlations in my database without monkeying with the years.

Still, sometimes one of the variables has more years of data available than the other. This page only shows the overlapping years. To see all the years, click on "See what else correlates with..." link above.
200020042008201220162020
US household spending on processed fruits (Household spend)0.3022740.2534850.2297670.2216090.190190.203802
Votes for the Democratic Presidential candidate in Tennessee (Percentage of votes)47.284942.525341.828539.075834.716337.4514




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([0.302274,0.253485,0.229767,0.221609,0.19019,0.203802,])
array_2 = np.array([47.2849,42.5253,41.8285,39.0758,34.7163,37.4514,])
array_1_name = "US household spending on processed fruits"
array_2_name = "Votes for the Democratic Presidential candidate in Tennessee"

# 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 stellar!


Correlation ID: 4324 · Black Variable ID: 19958 · Red Variable ID: 26170
about · subscribe · emailme@tylervigen.com · twitter

CC BY 4.0