about · email me · subscribe
Spurious correlation #4,768 · View random

A linear line chart with years as the X-axis and two variables on the Y-axis. The first variable is Annual US household spending on alcoholic beverages and the second variable is Votes for the Republican Presidential candidate in Rhode Island.  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 household spending on alcoholic beverages increased, more people turned to the Republican candidate for a clearer understanding of the party platform. After all, with a few drinks in them, the conservative policies may have seemed like a great idea – like a sobering revelation, but in reverse! It's as if the candidate's speeches were aged like fine wine, gaining the approval of voters who were probably just a little bit tipsy on trickle-down economics.

Model: dalle-3
Prompt: [An image that looks like it is a scene from a Pixar movie] In a cozy living room, the warm glow of the fire creates a comforting atmosphere as a group of friends gather around. On the TV screen, a chart displaying the rise in Annual US household spending on alcoholic beverages is being projected. Meanwhile, the friends cheer and raise their glasses, adding to the joyful ambiance. In the background, a beer-stained wall poster with the Republican Presidential candidate's twinkling eyes creates a whimsical touch. The faint smell of aged scotch fills the air, enhancing the cozy and inviting setting. 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: Annual US household spending on alcoholic beverages and Votes for the Republican Presidential candidate in Rhode Island. 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: Whimsical illustration Data cyber art Glitch art An image that looks like it is a scene from a Pixar movie A comic-book-style illustration with muted colors and a dotted halftone pattern from the 1960s
ChatGPT: An image that looks like it is a scene from a Pixar movie

Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You describe simple visual scenes that depict the two variables stated. You combine both variables into one scene.
User prompt: Please describe a visual scene that prominently depicts both Annual US household spending on alcoholic beverages and Votes for the Republican Presidential candidate in Rhode Island, in the following situation: As household spending on alcoholic beverages increased, more people turned to the Republican candidate for a clearer understanding of the party platform. After all, with a few drinks in them, the conservative policies may have seemed like a great idea – like a sobering revelation, but in reverse! It's as if the candidate's speeches were aged like fine wine, gaining the approval of voters who were probably just a little bit tipsy on trickle-down economics.. Keep the description simple.
ChatGPT: In a cozy living room, a chart showing the rise in Annual US household spending on alcoholic beverages is displayed on a TV screen. In the background, a group of friends cheer and raise their glasses while listening to a speech by the Republican Presidential candidate, who is portrayed on the beer-stained wall poster with a twinkle in his eye. The room has a warm, inviting glow, and the faint smell of aged scotch fills the air.

Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You write and improve image generation prompts for DALLE-3. You maintain the same subjects, but enhance the visuals.
User prompt: Please respond with an image generation prompt that would be likely to create an interesting visual using DALLE-3, using the following style: [ An image that looks like it is a scene from a Pixar movie ] and depicting this scene: In a cozy living room, a chart showing the rise in Annual US household spending on alcoholic beverages is displayed on a TV screen. In the background, a group of friends cheer and raise their glasses while listening to a speech by the Republican Presidential candidate, who is portrayed on the beer-stained wall poster with a twinkle in his eye. The room has a warm, inviting glow, and the faint smell of aged scotch fills the air. Keep the visual depiction simple. Do not include any words or speech bubbles.
ChatGPT: [An image that looks like it is a scene from a Pixar movie] In a cozy living room, the warm glow of the fire creates a comforting atmosphere as a group of friends gather around. On the TV screen, a chart displaying the rise in Annual US household spending on alcoholic beverages is being projected. Meanwhile, the friends cheer and raise their glasses, adding to the joyful ambiance. In the background, a beer-stained wall poster with the Republican Presidential candidate's twinkling eyes creates a whimsical touch. The faint smell of aged scotch fills the air, enhancing the cozy and inviting setting.

*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 Annual US household spending on alcoholic beverages caused Votes for the Republican Presidential candidate in Rhode Island to increase.

AI academic paper

(Because p < 0.01)
Tipsy Trends: Tracing the Ties between Household Hooch Habit and Right-leaning Rhode Islanders

The Journal of Quirky Socio-Cultural Studies

Jan 2024

Reminder: This paper is AI-generated. Not real!
Quick note: This sequence is long and repetitive. That's how the prompt engineering works for this one. I manage the output in Python to format it into this PDF.




Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You are a witty academic researcher. Your writing sounds like it belongs in a statistics journal.You write titles and abstracts of goofy academic research papers.
User prompt:
Pretend you are an academic researcher. Your writing sounds like it belongs in a medical or economics journal. However, you frequently crack jokes, make puns, and add unexpected twists in your writing.

Please draft the title and abstract of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between Annual US household spending on alcoholic beverages and Votes for the Republican Presidential candidate in Rhode Island. Make it seem dry like academic research paper, but with lots of subtle hidden offhand remarks, jokes, goofy observations, and puns.

Make the title an alliteration.

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 0.9250118 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]]
Tipsy Trends: Tracing the Ties between Household Hooch Habit and Right-leaning Rhode Islanders

[[ABSTRACT]]
This paper conducts a diligent examination of the relationship between annual household spending on alcoholic beverages and votes for the Republican presidential candidate in the tiny but mighty state of Rhode Island. Leveraging data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics and the MIT Election Data and Science Lab, we embarked on a rollicking journey to uncover any hidden elixirs of association between these seemingly disparate variables. Our findings astound and amuse in equal measure as we unveil a correlation coefficient of 0.9250118 and p < 0.01 for the time span from 2000 to 2020, prompting us to raise a glass to this fortuitous discovery. This research contributes a quirky yet relevant perspective to the broader discussions surrounding booze, ballots, and alliteration. Cheers to statistical serendipity!


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

Please make up the introduction section of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between Annual US household spending on alcoholic beverages and Votes for the Republican Presidential candidate in Rhode Island. Make it seem dry like academic research paper, but with lots of subtle hidden offhand remarks, jokes, goofy observations, and puns.

Here is the title and abstract of the paper:
[[TITLE]]
Tipsy Trends: Tracing the Ties between Household Hooch Habit and Right-leaning Rhode Islanders

[[ABSTRACT]]
This paper conducts a diligent examination of the relationship between annual household spending on alcoholic beverages and votes for the Republican presidential candidate in the tiny but mighty state of Rhode Island. Leveraging data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics and the MIT Election Data and Science Lab, we embarked on a rollicking journey to uncover any hidden elixirs of association between these seemingly disparate variables. Our findings astound and amuse in equal measure as we unveil a correlation coefficient of 0.9250118 and p < 0.01 for the time span from 2000 to 2020, prompting us to raise a glass to this fortuitous discovery. This research contributes a quirky yet relevant perspective to the broader discussions surrounding booze, ballots, and alliteration. Cheers to statistical serendipity!

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[INTRODUCTION]]



ChatGPT:
[[INTRODUCTION]]

The electoral landscape of the United States is a complex tapestry woven from a multitude of variables, including but not limited to socio-economic indicators, geopolitical factors, and the all-important candidate charisma quotient. Amidst this tumultuous tableau, the state of Rhode Island stands as a intriguing microcosm, where the confluence of tradition, demographics, and possibly even imbibing habits may exert subtle influences on voting behaviors. In this work, we set out to uncover any potential kinship between household expenditure on alcoholic beverages and political alignment with the Republican party in the Ocean State.

The backdrop for our inquiry lies in the time-honored adage that bipartisanship often goes hand in hand with a finely mixed cocktail – or perhaps even an (electoral) "shot in the dark." By delving into the Bureau of Labor Statistics’ invaluable trove of data on annual household spending, we endeavor to illuminate any trends that may bolster this whimsical hypothesis. In tandem, we tap into the MIT Election Data and Science Lab's repository to unravel the electoral predilections of Rhode Islanders, particularly with regard to their choice of presidential candidate.

With tongue planted firmly in cheek, we embarked on this statistical escapade propelled by an unquenchable thirst for uncovering quirky correlations and forging pathbreaking pathways through the labyrinth of socio-political phenomena. While our intent is rooted in scholarly rigor, we approach our investigation with a dash of levity, acknowledging that the search for statistical significance can, at times, be akin to a enigmatic brew of alchemical proportions: both engaging and mystifying in its twists and turns.

We aim to dispel any notion that our pursuit is mere ale-fueled whimsy, as we wield the power of regression analysis to disentangle the enigmatic dance between household libations and political allegiances. In doing so, we seek not just to entertain, but also to inform, shedding light on a juncture where the seemingly mundane world of consumer spending converges with the high stakes realm of electoral outcomes. This unconventional blend of statistical inquiry and political nuance promises to serve as an intoxicating elixir for the inquisitive mind, in the grand tradition of scholarly quirkiness and revelatory revelry. So raise a glass, whether it be of campaign spirits or distilled statistics, as we embark on our intoxicating voyage!


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

Please make up a literature review section of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between Annual US household spending on alcoholic beverages and Votes for the Republican Presidential candidate in Rhode Island. Make it seem dry like academic research paper, but with lots of subtle hidden offhand remarks, jokes, goofy observations, and puns.

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

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

Start by naming serious-sounding studies by authors like Smith, Doe, and Jones - but then quickly devolve. Name some real non-fiction books that would be related to the topic. Then name some real fiction books that sound like they could be related. Then devolve ever further, and mention something completely ridiculous, like you conducted literature review by reading the backs of shampoo bottles.

Here is the title and abstract of the paper:
[[TITLE]]
Tipsy Trends: Tracing the Ties between Household Hooch Habit and Right-leaning Rhode Islanders

[[ABSTRACT]]
This paper conducts a diligent examination of the relationship between annual household spending on alcoholic beverages and votes for the Republican presidential candidate in the tiny but mighty state of Rhode Island. Leveraging data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics and the MIT Election Data and Science Lab, we embarked on a rollicking journey to uncover any hidden elixirs of association between these seemingly disparate variables. Our findings astound and amuse in equal measure as we unveil a correlation coefficient of 0.9250118 and p < 0.01 for the time span from 2000 to 2020, prompting us to raise a glass to this fortuitous discovery. This research contributes a quirky yet relevant perspective to the broader discussions surrounding booze, ballots, and alliteration. Cheers to statistical serendipity!

-------

And here is the introduction section that led to this literature review:
[[INTRODUCTION]]
The electoral landscape of the United States is a complex tapestry woven from a multitude of variables, including but not limited to socio-economic indicators, geopolitical factors, and the all-important candidate charisma quotient. Amidst this tumultuous tableau, the state of Rhode Island stands as a intriguing microcosm, where the confluence of tradition, demographics, and possibly even imbibing habits may exert subtle influences on voting behaviors. In this work, we set out to uncover any potential kinship between household expenditure on alcoholic beverages and political alignment with the Republican party in the Ocean State.
The backdrop for our inquiry lies in the time-honored adage that bipartisanship often goes hand in hand with a finely mixed cocktail – or perhaps even an (electoral) "shot in the dark." By delving into the Bureau of Labor Statistics’ invaluable trove of data on annual household spending, we endeavor to illuminate any trends that may bolster this whimsical hypothesis. In tandem, we tap into the MIT Election Data and Science Lab's repository to unravel the electoral predilections of Rhode Islanders, particularly with regard to their choice of presidential candidate.
With tongue planted firmly in cheek, we embarked on this statistical escapade propelled by an unquenchable thirst for uncovering quirky correlations and forging pathbreaking pathways through the labyrinth of socio-political phenomena. While our intent is rooted in scholarly rigor, we approach our investigation with a dash of levity, acknowledging that the search for statistical significance can, at times, be akin to a enigmatic brew of alchemical proportions: both engaging and mystifying in its twists and turns.
We aim to dispel any notion that our pursuit is mere ale-fueled whimsy, as we wield the power of regression analysis to disentangle the enigmatic dance between household libations and political allegiances. In doing so, we seek not just to entertain, but also to inform, shedding light on a juncture where the seemingly mundane world of consumer spending converges with the high stakes realm of electoral outcomes. This unconventional blend of statistical inquiry and political nuance promises to serve as an intoxicating elixir for the inquisitive mind, in the grand tradition of scholarly quirkiness and revelatory revelry. So raise a glass, whether it be of campaign spirits or distilled statistics, as we embark on our intoxicating voyage!

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[LITERATURE REVIEW]]



ChatGPT:
[[LITERATURE REVIEW]]

The authors find that the connection between annual household spending on alcoholic beverages and political affiliations has been an area of interest in scholarly pursuits. In "Booze and Ballots: A Statistical Odyssey" by Smith et al., the authors delve into the potential linkages between alcohol consumption and voting behaviors, shedding light on the nuanced interplay of libations and electoral inclinations. Similarly, Doe's "Thirsty for Votes: The Political Pint" provides a comprehensive examination of the intersection between consumer spending on alcohol and party preferences, offering insights that titillate the scholarly palate.
Expanding beyond the academic realm, non-fiction works such as "The Economics of Spirits" by Johnson and "Cheers to Capitalism" by Thompson showcase the interdisciplinary nature of this unconventional research pairing. Moreover, fiction literature has not been immune to the allure of alcoholic undertones in political narratives, as evidenced by George R.R. Martin's "A Game of Goblets" and Gabriel García Márquez's "One Hundred Years of Lagers" – emblematic titles that tantalize the imagination with their thematic resonances.
Moving beyond conventional sources, the researchers have taken a more unorthodox approach to supplement their inquiry. In a daring departure from scholarly convention, the authors have embarked on a thorough review of unconventional texts, including but not limited to the backs of shampoo bottles, seeking to distill any wisdom that might bubble to the surface from these unlikely reservoirs of knowledge. It is with equal parts mirth and method that the researchers have navigated this eclectic array of sources, poised to uncork any unexpected insights that may effervesce from this unconventional odyssey.


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

Please make up the methodology section of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between Annual US household spending on alcoholic beverages and Votes for the Republican Presidential candidate in Rhode Island. Make it seem dry like academic research paper, but with lots of subtle hidden offhand remarks, jokes, goofy observations, and puns.

Your research team collected data from all across the internet, but mostly just used information from 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]]
Tipsy Trends: Tracing the Ties between Household Hooch Habit and Right-leaning Rhode Islanders

[[ABSTRACT]]
This paper conducts a diligent examination of the relationship between annual household spending on alcoholic beverages and votes for the Republican presidential candidate in the tiny but mighty state of Rhode Island. Leveraging data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics and the MIT Election Data and Science Lab, we embarked on a rollicking journey to uncover any hidden elixirs of association between these seemingly disparate variables. Our findings astound and amuse in equal measure as we unveil a correlation coefficient of 0.9250118 and p < 0.01 for the time span from 2000 to 2020, prompting us to raise a glass to this fortuitous discovery. This research contributes a quirky yet relevant perspective to the broader discussions surrounding booze, ballots, and alliteration. Cheers to statistical serendipity!

[[INTRODUCTION]]
The electoral landscape of the United States is a complex tapestry woven from a multitude of variables, including but not limited to socio-economic indicators, geopolitical factors, and the all-important candidate charisma quotient. Amidst this tumultuous tableau, the state of Rhode Island stands as a intriguing microcosm, where the confluence of tradition, demographics, and possibly even imbibing habits may exert subtle influences on voting behaviors. In this work, we set out to uncover any potential kinship between household expenditure on alcoholic beverages and political alignment with the Republican party in the Ocean State.
The backdrop for our inquiry lies in the time-honored adage that bipartisanship often goes hand in hand with a finely mixed cocktail – or perhaps even an (electoral) "shot in the dark." By delving into the Bureau of Labor Statistics’ invaluable trove of data on annual household spending, we endeavor to illuminate any trends that may bolster this whimsical hypothesis. In tandem, we tap into the MIT Election Data and Science Lab's repository to unravel the electoral predilections of Rhode Islanders, particularly with regard to their choice of presidential candidate.
With tongue planted firmly in cheek, we embarked on this statistical escapade propelled by an unquenchable thirst for uncovering quirky correlations and forging pathbreaking pathways through the labyrinth of socio-political phenomena. While our intent is rooted in scholarly rigor, we approach our investigation with a dash of levity, acknowledging that the search for statistical significance can, at times, be akin to a enigmatic brew of alchemical proportions: both engaging and mystifying in its twists and turns.
We aim to dispel any notion that our pursuit is mere ale-fueled whimsy, as we wield the power of regression analysis to disentangle the enigmatic dance between household libations and political allegiances. In doing so, we seek not just to entertain, but also to inform, shedding light on a juncture where the seemingly mundane world of consumer spending converges with the high stakes realm of electoral outcomes. This unconventional blend of statistical inquiry and political nuance promises to serve as an intoxicating elixir for the inquisitive mind, in the grand tradition of scholarly quirkiness and revelatory revelry. So raise a glass, whether it be of campaign spirits or distilled statistics, as we embark on our intoxicating voyage!

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[METHODOLOGY]]



ChatGPT:

[[METHODOLOGY]]

In this study, we employed a robust and eclectic methodological approach to untangle the enigmatic dance between annual US household spending on alcoholic beverages and votes for the Republican presidential candidate in Rhode Island. Our methodology sought to ensure the utmost rigor while simultaneously infusing a splash of whimsy and verve, akin to the effervescent bubbles in a finely crafted cocktail.

Data Collection:
We diligently scoured the digital expanse, utilizing a combination of web scraping, data mining, and a touch of internet archaeology to procure pertinent information. Much like intrepid explorers of statistical treasure, we traversed the Bureau of Labor Statistics and the MIT Election Data and Science Lab, as well as the Harvard Dataverse, uncovering datasets spanning the years 2000 to 2020. This venture into the digital wilderness allowed us to harness a wide-ranging array of data encompassing household spending habits and electoral preferences, forming the bedrock of our analysis.

Tipple Transformation and Aggregation:
To distill meaningful insights from the copious data garnered, we harnessed the transformative powers of statistical alchemy. Through a series of meticulously calibrated transformations and aggregations, we coaxed the raw data into a format amenable to our analytical quests. This process involved cleansing, harmonizing, and amalgamating disparate datasets, ensuring that our statistical elixirs were brewed to perfection, free of the impurities that may taint the veracity of our findings.

Tippler Targeting:
Having extracted and refined the data, we set our sights on identifying the key parameters underpinning our research inquiry. Specifically, we isolated the annual household expenditure on alcoholic beverages as the focal variable of interest, alongside the percentage of votes garnered by the Republican presidential candidate in Rhode Island. This precise targeting enabled us to aim our statistical arrows with pinpoint accuracy, zeroing in on the relationship between libations and leanings.

Statistical Libations and Libido-Regression Analysis:
Harnessing the formidable power of regression analysis, we endeavored to uncork the hidden associations and correlations lurking within the data. Through the deft application of statistical tools, we scrutinized the interplay between household spending on alcoholic beverages and Republican voting patterns, seeking to disentangle the convoluted strands of electoral libations and political predilections.

Quirky and Quotidian Quandaries:
Furthermore, we recognized the idiosyncratic nature of our research subject matter, acknowledging the potential interplay of quirky socio-political dynamics. Thus, we adopted a qualitative lens, interlacing our quantitative analysis with exploratory forays into the whimsical nuances of consumer behavior and electoral sentiments. This multi-faceted approach allowed us to harmonize the quirky with the quotidian, captivating a rich tapestry of statistical flavors.

In conclusion, our methodology mirrors the eclectic and vibrant spirit of our research endeavor, blending scholarly rigor with a dash of mirthful inquisitiveness. The confluence of statistical sleuthing and irrepressible curiosity has paved the way for a rollicking journey through the hallowed halls of correlation and causation, unraveling the interplay between imbibing habits and political proclivities with erudition and gusto. Cheers to statistical revelry!


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

Please make up the results section of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between Annual US household spending on alcoholic beverages and Votes for the Republican Presidential candidate in Rhode Island. Make it seem dry like academic research paper, but with lots of subtle hidden offhand remarks, jokes, goofy observations, and puns.

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

For the time period 2000 to 2020, you found a correlation 0.9250118, r-squared of 0.8556468, 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]]
Tipsy Trends: Tracing the Ties between Household Hooch Habit and Right-leaning Rhode Islanders

[[ABSTRACT]]
This paper conducts a diligent examination of the relationship between annual household spending on alcoholic beverages and votes for the Republican presidential candidate in the tiny but mighty state of Rhode Island. Leveraging data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics and the MIT Election Data and Science Lab, we embarked on a rollicking journey to uncover any hidden elixirs of association between these seemingly disparate variables. Our findings astound and amuse in equal measure as we unveil a correlation coefficient of 0.9250118 and p < 0.01 for the time span from 2000 to 2020, prompting us to raise a glass to this fortuitous discovery. This research contributes a quirky yet relevant perspective to the broader discussions surrounding booze, ballots, and alliteration. Cheers to statistical serendipity!

-------

And here is the methodology section that led to this result:
[[METHODOLOGY]]
The electoral landscape of the United States is a complex tapestry woven from a multitude of variables, including but not limited to socio-economic indicators, geopolitical factors, and the all-important candidate charisma quotient. Amidst this tumultuous tableau, the state of Rhode Island stands as a intriguing microcosm, where the confluence of tradition, demographics, and possibly even imbibing habits may exert subtle influences on voting behaviors. In this work, we set out to uncover any potential kinship between household expenditure on alcoholic beverages and political alignment with the Republican party in the Ocean State.
The backdrop for our inquiry lies in the time-honored adage that bipartisanship often goes hand in hand with a finely mixed cocktail – or perhaps even an (electoral) "shot in the dark." By delving into the Bureau of Labor Statistics’ invaluable trove of data on annual household spending, we endeavor to illuminate any trends that may bolster this whimsical hypothesis. In tandem, we tap into the MIT Election Data and Science Lab's repository to unravel the electoral predilections of Rhode Islanders, particularly with regard to their choice of presidential candidate.
With tongue planted firmly in cheek, we embarked on this statistical escapade propelled by an unquenchable thirst for uncovering quirky correlations and forging pathbreaking pathways through the labyrinth of socio-political phenomena. While our intent is rooted in scholarly rigor, we approach our investigation with a dash of levity, acknowledging that the search for statistical significance can, at times, be akin to a enigmatic brew of alchemical proportions: both engaging and mystifying in its twists and turns.
We aim to dispel any notion that our pursuit is mere ale-fueled whimsy, as we wield the power of regression analysis to disentangle the enigmatic dance between household libations and political allegiances. In doing so, we seek not just to entertain, but also to inform, shedding light on a juncture where the seemingly mundane world of consumer spending converges with the high stakes realm of electoral outcomes. This unconventional blend of statistical inquiry and political nuance promises to serve as an intoxicating elixir for the inquisitive mind, in the grand tradition of scholarly quirkiness and revelatory revelry. So raise a glass, whether it be of campaign spirits or distilled statistics, as we embark on our intoxicating voyage!

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[RESULTS]]



ChatGPT:

[[RESULTS]]

The spirited exploration into the relationship between annual household spending on alcoholic beverages and votes for the Republican presidential candidate in Rhode Island yielded intriguing findings that set our scholarly spirits alight. Upon conducting a rigorous analysis of the data spanning from 2000 to 2020, we uncorked a remarkably high correlation coefficient of 0.9250118 (p < 0.01) between these merry variables. This robust correlation was accompanied by an r-squared of 0.8556468, indicating that approximately 85.57% of the variation in the Republican presidential votes can be explained by the annual household spending on alcoholic beverages.

The visual portrayal of this revelatory association is encapsulated in Figure 1, a scatterplot that showcases the unmistakable convergence of household hooch habit and right-leaning electoral proclivities. The figure vividly illustrates the strong positive relationship between these seemingly incongruous elements, offering a glimpse into the whimsical world of statistical serendipity.

It is evident from these findings that the ties between tippling tendencies and political preferences in the captivating corridors of Rhode Island merit further scholarly sips and statistical musings. These results tantalizingly allude to a quirk of electoral dynamics that raises both eyebrows and, perhaps, a well-deserved toast to the unexpected interplay of booze and ballots in this intricate political tableau. This research not only adds a dash of statistical whimsy to the academic discourse but also reinforces the adage that in statistical inquiry, as in life, when it rains, it pourtraits fascinating and unexpected revelations. Cheers to the statistical and scholarly spirit of inquiry!


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

Please make up the discussion section of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between Annual US household spending on alcoholic beverages and Votes for the Republican Presidential candidate in Rhode Island. Make it seem dry like academic research paper, but with lots of subtle hidden offhand remarks, jokes, goofy observations, and puns.

Limit your response to 500 tokens.

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

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

[[TITLE]]
Tipsy Trends: Tracing the Ties between Household Hooch Habit and Right-leaning Rhode Islanders

[[ABSTRACT]]
This paper conducts a diligent examination of the relationship between annual household spending on alcoholic beverages and votes for the Republican presidential candidate in the tiny but mighty state of Rhode Island. Leveraging data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics and the MIT Election Data and Science Lab, we embarked on a rollicking journey to uncover any hidden elixirs of association between these seemingly disparate variables. Our findings astound and amuse in equal measure as we unveil a correlation coefficient of 0.9250118 and p < 0.01 for the time span from 2000 to 2020, prompting us to raise a glass to this fortuitous discovery. This research contributes a quirky yet relevant perspective to the broader discussions surrounding booze, ballots, and alliteration. Cheers to statistical serendipity!

[[LITERATURE REVIEW]]
The authors find that the connection between annual household spending on alcoholic beverages and political affiliations has been an area of interest in scholarly pursuits. In "Booze and Ballots: A Statistical Odyssey" by Smith et al., the authors delve into the potential linkages between alcohol consumption and voting behaviors, shedding light on the nuanced interplay of libations and electoral inclinations. Similarly, Doe's "Thirsty for Votes: The Political Pint" provides a comprehensive examination of the intersection between consumer spending on alcohol and party preferences, offering insights that titillate the scholarly palate.
Expanding beyond the academic realm, non-fiction works such as "The Economics of Spirits" by Johnson and "Cheers to Capitalism" by Thompson showcase the interdisciplinary nature of this unconventional research pairing. Moreover, fiction literature has not been immune to the allure of alcoholic undertones in political narratives, as evidenced by George R.R. Martin's "A Game of Goblets" and Gabriel García Márquez's "One Hundred Years of Lagers" – emblematic titles that tantalize the imagination with their thematic resonances.
Moving beyond conventional sources, the researchers have taken a more unorthodox approach to supplement their inquiry. In a daring departure from scholarly convention, the authors have embarked on a thorough review of unconventional texts, including but not limited to the backs of shampoo bottles, seeking to distill any wisdom that might bubble to the surface from these unlikely reservoirs of knowledge. It is with equal parts mirth and method that the researchers have navigated this eclectic array of sources, poised to uncork any unexpected insights that may effervesce from this unconventional odyssey.

[[RESULTS]]
The spirited exploration into the relationship between annual household spending on alcoholic beverages and votes for the Republican presidential candidate in Rhode Island yielded intriguing findings that set our scholarly spirits alight. Upon conducting a rigorous analysis of the data spanning from 2000 to 2020, we uncorked a remarkably high correlation coefficient of 0.9250118 (p < 0.01) between these merry variables. This robust correlation was accompanied by an r-squared of 0.8556468, indicating that approximately 85.57% of the variation in the Republican presidential votes can be explained by the annual household spending on alcoholic beverages.
The visual portrayal of this revelatory association is encapsulated in Figure 1, a scatterplot that showcases the unmistakable convergence of household hooch habit and right-leaning electoral proclivities. The figure vividly illustrates the strong positive relationship between these seemingly incongruous elements, offering a glimpse into the whimsical world of statistical serendipity.
It is evident from these findings that the ties between tippling tendencies and political preferences in the captivating corridors of Rhode Island merit further scholarly sips and statistical musings. These results tantalizingly allude to a quirk of electoral dynamics that raises both eyebrows and, perhaps, a well-deserved toast to the unexpected interplay of booze and ballots in this intricate political tableau. This research not only adds a dash of statistical whimsy to the academic discourse but also reinforces the adage that in statistical inquiry, as in life, when it rains, it pourtraits fascinating and unexpected revelations. Cheers to the statistical and scholarly spirit of inquiry!

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[DISCUSSION]]



ChatGPT:

[[DISCUSSION]]

Our findings uncork a compelling connection between household spending on alcoholic beverages and voting behaviors in Rhode Island, shedding light on the captivating confluence of libations and politics. The robust correlation coefficient of 0.9250118 (p < 0.01) we uncovered mirrors the prior research, confirming the resounding resonance of inebriated inclinations with right-leaning electoral proclivities. We find ourselves buzzing with excitement as our results align with the scholarly fermentations of Smith et al. and Doe, offering a caffeinated confirmation of the intoxicating interplay between booze and ballots.

The quirky yet relevant perspective that our research brings to the broader discussions surrounding household hooch habit and right-leaning Rhode Islanders is a refreshing departure from the traditional statistical libations. Our findings offer a sobering reinforcement of the unconventional pairing of these seemingly disparate variables, underscoring the potent influence of political pint preferences on the beverage budgets of Rhode Island households. Cheers to the statistical and scholarly spirit of inquiry, as we uncover the unexpected interplay of booze and ballots and raise a metaphorical glass to the serendipitous revelations unearthed in this quirky statistical odyssey.

The visual portrayal of our revelatory association in Figure 1 captures the undeniable convergence of household hooch habit and right-leaning electoral proclivities, offering a whimsical window into the quirky world of statistical serendipity. This irrefutable visual evidence further solidifies the spirited synchrony between tippling tendencies and political preferences, providing a playful yet profound insight into the intricate nexus of alcohol and electoral dynamics.

Our findings tantalizingly allude to a quirk of electoral dynamics that raises both eyebrows and, perhaps, a well-deserved toast to the unexpected interplay of booze and ballots in this intricate political tableau. It is evident from these findings that the ties between tippling tendencies and political preferences in the captivating corridors of Rhode Island merit further scholarly sips and statistical musings. As we take a statistical swig of this intriguing association, we toast to the fortuitous discovery that adds a subtle hint of statistical whimsy to the academic discourse, reinforcing the adage that in statistical inquiry, as in life, when it rains, it pourtraits fascinating and unexpected revelations. Cheers to the statistical and scholarly spirit of inquiry, as we uncork the intoxicating dynamics of household hooch habit and right-leaning electoral proclivities in the vibrant state of Rhode Island.


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

Please make up a short conclusion of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between Annual US household spending on alcoholic beverages and Votes for the Republican Presidential candidate in Rhode Island. Make it seem dry like academic research paper, but with lots of subtle hidden offhand remarks, jokes, goofy observations, and puns.

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

Here are the title, abstract, introduction, and results sections.
[[TITLE]]
Tipsy Trends: Tracing the Ties between Household Hooch Habit and Right-leaning Rhode Islanders

[[ABSTRACT]]
This paper conducts a diligent examination of the relationship between annual household spending on alcoholic beverages and votes for the Republican presidential candidate in the tiny but mighty state of Rhode Island. Leveraging data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics and the MIT Election Data and Science Lab, we embarked on a rollicking journey to uncover any hidden elixirs of association between these seemingly disparate variables. Our findings astound and amuse in equal measure as we unveil a correlation coefficient of 0.9250118 and p < 0.01 for the time span from 2000 to 2020, prompting us to raise a glass to this fortuitous discovery. This research contributes a quirky yet relevant perspective to the broader discussions surrounding booze, ballots, and alliteration. Cheers to statistical serendipity!

[[INTRDUCTION]]
The electoral landscape of the United States is a complex tapestry woven from a multitude of variables, including but not limited to socio-economic indicators, geopolitical factors, and the all-important candidate charisma quotient. Amidst this tumultuous tableau, the state of Rhode Island stands as a intriguing microcosm, where the confluence of tradition, demographics, and possibly even imbibing habits may exert subtle influences on voting behaviors. In this work, we set out to uncover any potential kinship between household expenditure on alcoholic beverages and political alignment with the Republican party in the Ocean State.
The backdrop for our inquiry lies in the time-honored adage that bipartisanship often goes hand in hand with a finely mixed cocktail – or perhaps even an (electoral) "shot in the dark." By delving into the Bureau of Labor Statistics’ invaluable trove of data on annual household spending, we endeavor to illuminate any trends that may bolster this whimsical hypothesis. In tandem, we tap into the MIT Election Data and Science Lab's repository to unravel the electoral predilections of Rhode Islanders, particularly with regard to their choice of presidential candidate.
With tongue planted firmly in cheek, we embarked on this statistical escapade propelled by an unquenchable thirst for uncovering quirky correlations and forging pathbreaking pathways through the labyrinth of socio-political phenomena. While our intent is rooted in scholarly rigor, we approach our investigation with a dash of levity, acknowledging that the search for statistical significance can, at times, be akin to a enigmatic brew of alchemical proportions: both engaging and mystifying in its twists and turns.
We aim to dispel any notion that our pursuit is mere ale-fueled whimsy, as we wield the power of regression analysis to disentangle the enigmatic dance between household libations and political allegiances. In doing so, we seek not just to entertain, but also to inform, shedding light on a juncture where the seemingly mundane world of consumer spending converges with the high stakes realm of electoral outcomes. This unconventional blend of statistical inquiry and political nuance promises to serve as an intoxicating elixir for the inquisitive mind, in the grand tradition of scholarly quirkiness and revelatory revelry. So raise a glass, whether it be of campaign spirits or distilled statistics, as we embark on our intoxicating voyage!

[[RESULTS]]
The spirited exploration into the relationship between annual household spending on alcoholic beverages and votes for the Republican presidential candidate in Rhode Island yielded intriguing findings that set our scholarly spirits alight. Upon conducting a rigorous analysis of the data spanning from 2000 to 2020, we uncorked a remarkably high correlation coefficient of 0.9250118 (p < 0.01) between these merry variables. This robust correlation was accompanied by an r-squared of 0.8556468, indicating that approximately 85.57% of the variation in the Republican presidential votes can be explained by the annual household spending on alcoholic beverages.
The visual portrayal of this revelatory association is encapsulated in Figure 1, a scatterplot that showcases the unmistakable convergence of household hooch habit and right-leaning electoral proclivities. The figure vividly illustrates the strong positive relationship between these seemingly incongruous elements, offering a glimpse into the whimsical world of statistical serendipity.
It is evident from these findings that the ties between tippling tendencies and political preferences in the captivating corridors of Rhode Island merit further scholarly sips and statistical musings. These results tantalizingly allude to a quirk of electoral dynamics that raises both eyebrows and, perhaps, a well-deserved toast to the unexpected interplay of booze and ballots in this intricate political tableau. This research not only adds a dash of statistical whimsy to the academic discourse but also reinforces the adage that in statistical inquiry, as in life, when it rains, it pourtraits fascinating and unexpected revelations. Cheers to the statistical and scholarly spirit of inquiry!

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[CONCLUSION]]



ChatGPT:

[[CONCLUSION]]
The findings of this study provide compelling evidence of a snug fit between annual household spending on alcoholic beverages and votes for the Republican presidential candidate in Rhode Island, underscoring the intriguing interplay of tippling tendencies and political proclivities. The robust correlation coefficient and high explanatory power denote a remarkably merry dance between these seemingly incongruous variables, paving the way for a whimsical reimagining of electoral dynamics.

The visual depiction of this correlation in Figure 1 serves as a spirited reminder that statistical exploration, much like a well-crafted cocktail, can yield unexpected and delightful revelations. As we raise a metaphorical toast to these findings, it becomes evident that the intersection of booze and ballots in the Ocean State offers a veritable cornucopia of scholarly and sipping opportunities.

With a nod to the spirited nature of our inquiry, we must acknowledge the potential for confounding variables to lurk in the hazy depths of our analysis. Factors such as local traditions, the climate's impact on imbibing habits, or even the occasional spirited election night party could exert subtle influences that warrant further contemplation.

However, the uncorking of this zealous correlation presents a tantalizing prospect for future research endeavors and provides ample fodder for both statistical curiosity and convivial contemplation. Nevertheless, in the spirit of statistical conclusiveness, it is our firm assertion that no further research is needed in this area, unless, of course, it involves fieldwork at Rhode Island's famed "spirited" locales. Cheers to statistical serendipity, and may the mirth of inebriated inquiry guide future scholarly libations.


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 Tipsy Trends: Tracing the Ties between Household Hooch Habit and Right-leaning Rhode Islanders. Respond only with the name of a fictional academic journal.

ChatGPT:

The Journal of Quirky Socio-Cultural Studies


Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You provide fictional names of nonprofit research organizations and associations. You say nothing else, and you do not chat with the user.
User prompt: Please provide the name of a funny but plausible sounding nonprofit, academic, or scientific association or organization that would sponsor research that resulted in a paper entited Tipsy Trends: Tracing the Ties between Household Hooch Habit and Right-leaning Rhode Islanders. Respond only with the name of a fictional organization.

ChatGPT:

The Society for Quirky Quotidian Quirks (SQ3)


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 Tipsy Trends: Tracing the Ties between Household Hooch Habit and Right-leaning Rhode Islanders with an abstract of This paper conducts a diligent examination of the relationship between annual household spending on alcoholic beverages and votes for the Republican presidential candidate in the tiny but mighty state of Rhode Island. Leveraging data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics and the MIT Election Data and Science Lab, we embarked on a rollicking journey to uncover any hidden elixirs of association between these seemingly disparate variables. Our findings astound and amuse in equal measure as we unveil a correlation coefficient of 0.9250118 and p < 0.01 for the time span from 2000 to 2020, prompting us to raise a glass to this fortuitous discovery. This research contributes a quirky yet relevant perspective to the broader discussions surrounding booze, ballots, and alliteration. Cheers to statistical serendipity!

ChatGPT:

household alcohol spending, Republican presidential votes, Rhode Island, correlation between alcohol spending and political affiliation, Bureau of Labor Statistics, MIT Election Data and Science Lab, alcohol consumption and political preferences, booze and ballots, correlation coefficient, statistical analysis of alcohol spending and voting patterns

*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

Annual US household spending on alcoholic beverages
Detailed data title: Average annual household spend on alcoholic beverages
Source: Bureau of Labor Statistics
See what else correlates with Annual US household spending on alcoholic beverages

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

Correlation r = 0.9250118 (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 = 0.8556468 (Coefficient of determination)
This means 85.6% of the change in the one variable (i.e., Votes for the Republican Presidential candidate in Rhode Island) is predictable based on the change in the other (i.e., Annual US household spending on alcoholic beverages) over the 6 years from 2000 through 2020.

p < 0.01, which is statistically significant(Null hypothesis significance test)
The p-value is 0.0082. 0.0082240095217995540000000000
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 0.93 in 0.82% of random cases. Said differently, if you correlated 122 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.

[ 0.46, 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.
200020042008201220162020
Annual US household spending on alcoholic beverages (Household spend)372459444451484478
Votes for the Republican Presidential candidate in Rhode Island (Percentage of votes)31.911838.671435.057835.243738.898138.6704




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([372,459,444,451,484,478,])
array_2 = np.array([31.9118,38.6714,35.0578,35.2437,38.8981,38.6704,])
array_1_name = "Annual US household spending on alcoholic beverages"
array_2_name = "Votes for the Republican Presidential candidate in Rhode Island"

# 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?

You're a rater extraordinaire!


Correlation ID: 4768 · Black Variable ID: 19902 · Red Variable ID: 26163
about · subscribe · emailme@tylervigen.com · twitter

CC BY 4.0