Spurious correlation #1,505 · View random
A linear line chart with years as the X-axis and two variables on the Y-axis. The first variable is Age of the director who won the Best Picture award and the second variable is Google searches for 'how to treat a snake bite'. The chart goes from 2004 to 2022, and the two variables track closely in value over that time.

A linear line chart with years as the X-axis and two variables on the Y-axis. The first variable is Age of the director who won the Best Picture award and the second variable is Google searches for 'how to treat a snake bite'. The chart goes from 2004 to 2022, and the two variables track closely in value over that time.

Download png, svg

AI explanation

As directors get older, they become more skilled at storytelling. This newfound expertise in captivating audiences translates to creating more engaging educational content about snake bites. Their advanced age also means they have accumulated wisdom and experience, leading to more thorough and effective snake bite treatment methods being depicted in their films. The connection between aging filmmakers and snake bite knowledge may be serpentine, but it’s definitely not a plot twist!

^{Show image generation prompt} Model: dalle-3
Prompt: Generate an image of a cute art illustration where a gray-haired director in his 60s stands on stage holding a sparkly, oversized Best Picture award. The director is smiling proudly, while in the background, a person with a worried expression frantically types "how to treat a snake bite" into a Google search bar on their smartphone. The stage is dimly lit, creating a dramatic contrast between the director's spotlight and the urgency of the person performing the online search. 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: Age of the director who won the Best Picture award and Google searches for 'how to treat a snake bite'. 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: a Polaroid photo Charcoal Cute 2D animation Cutsy art illustration Vaporwave
ChatGPT: Cutsy art illustration

Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You describe simple visual scenes that depict the two variables stated. You combine both variables into one scene.
User prompt: Please describe a visual scene that prominently depicts both Age of the director who won the Best Picture award and Google searches for 'how to treat a snake bite' together. Keep the description simple.
ChatGPT: A gray-haired director, in his 60s, stands on stage holding the Best Picture award, while in the background, a person frantically types "how to treat a snake bite" into a Google search bar on their smartphone.

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: [ Cutsy art illustration ] and depicting this scene: A gray-haired director, in his 60s, stands on stage holding the Best Picture award, while in the background, a person frantically types "how to treat a snake bite" into a Google search bar on their smartphone. Keep the visual depiction simple. Do not include any words or speech bubbles.
ChatGPT: Generate an image of a cute art illustration where a gray-haired director in his 60s stands on stage holding a sparkly, oversized Best Picture award. The director is smiling proudly, while in the background, a person with a worried expression frantically types "how to treat a snake bite" into a Google search bar on their smartphone. The stage is dimly lit, creating a dramatic contrast between the director's spotlight and the urgency of the person performing the online search.

*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.
^{Show prompt for explanation} 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 increases in Age of the director who won the Best Picture award positively influenced how to treat a snake bite (Google searches for 'how to treat a snake bite'). Make it feel plausible.

AI academic paper

(Because p < 0.01)

Director's Age: A Snake Bite or a Bait? A Correlational Analysis of Best Picture Winners and Google Searches for Snake Bite Treatment

The Journal of Cinematic Epidemiology

Jan 2024

Reminder: This paper is AI-generated. Not real!

^{Show prompt used to generate this paper} 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 dry but witty academic researcher. You speak in the passive voice, and your writing sounds like it belongs in a medical or economics 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 Age of the director who won the Best Picture award and Google searches for 'how to treat a snake bite'. Make lots of jokes, goofy observations, and puns.

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

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

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

Here is the title and abstract of the paper:
[[TITLE]]
Director's Age: A Snake Bite or a Bait? A Correlational Analysis of Best Picture Winners and Google Searches for Snake Bite Treatment

[[ABSTRACT]]
This study explored the potentially serpentine relationship between the age of directors who snagged the Academy Award for Best Picture and the public's interest in snake bite treatment, as measured by Google search data. Our findings, drawn from an analysis of data from 2004 to 2022, revealed a surprising correlation coefficient of 0.6911000 and p < 0.01, indicating a robust statistical association between these seemingly unrelated phenomena. While the causal connection remains as elusive as a slithering reptile in the underbrush, our research suggests that there may be more to the age of directors and public concerns about snake bites than meets the eye. This peculiar association warrants further investigation to untangle whether this correlation is merely a snake charmer's elusive illusion or a genuine cinematic enigma waiting to be uncoiled.

-------

And here is the introduction section that led to this literature review:
[[INTRODUCTION]]
Navigating the treacherous terrain of academia often feels like tiptoeing through a snake pit. Just when you think you have a firm grasp on data analysis and statistical methods, a wild and unexpected correlation slithers its way into your research, leaving you bewildered and befuddled. Such was the case with the curious correlation we intend to dissect in this study, where we embark on a cryptic journey to unravel the connection between the age of directors who clinched the coveted Best Picture award and the public’s inquisitiveness about treating snake bites.
One might assume that these two variables are about as related as apples and orangutans, or perhaps more fittingly, as reptiles and red carpets. Yet, as any seasoned researcher knows, the world of statistics is filled with as many twists and turns as a Hollywood blockbuster. It is precisely this enigmatic intersection between Tinseltown triumphs and reptilian remedy-seeking that has piqued our scholarly interest.
As our research delves into this bewildering correlation, we aim to elucidate whether there is a genuine cause-and-effect relationship lurking beneath the surface, or if this statistical correlation is merely a trick of the light, much like the illusion of a cleverly concealed snake charmer. Could it be that the age of directors serves as a sly bait, luring the public’s attention toward seeking snake bite remedies, or is there a more serpentine surprise waiting to be unraveled?
In the pages that follow, we will unravel the curious tale of age, accolades, and antidotes, using robust statistical analysis to determine whether this unlikely association is a mere cinematic mirage or a hidden truth waiting to be uncoiled. So, buckle up and prepare for a wild ride through the jungle of correlation and causation, as we dare to shed light on this unexpected connection between the world of film and the realm of reptilian remedies.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[LITERATURE REVIEW]]

ChatGPT:
[[LITERATURE REVIEW]]

The curious relationship between the age of film directors who triumph at the Academy Awards and the public's interest in treating snake bites has perplexed scholars and cinephiles alike. The unexpected intersection of these distinct domains has beckoned researchers to explore the potential connection, despite its seemingly serpentine nature. In "Smith et al.," the authors find a noteworthy correlation between the age of Best Picture-winning directors and Google searches for snake bite treatment. The statistical association, though surprising, prompts further investigation into the underlying factors contributing to this unlikely bond.

Concurrent literature points to the influence of directorial experience and expertise on the success of film productions, as illustrated in "Doe and Jones." These authors demonstrate the impact of age on directorial style and storytelling, shedding light on how the maturation of filmmakers can captivate audiences and garner critical acclaim. However, the leap from cinematic prowess to public interest in snake bite treatment remains a dramatic twist in the plot of correlation research.

Drawing from non-fiction sources related to venomous creatures and medical emergencies, "Venomous Vipers and Emergency Medicine" provides insight into the public's fascination with snake bite treatment and the psychological underpinnings of such inquiries. Furthermore, works of fiction featuring serpent-centric narratives, such as "The Serpent's Secret" and "Snake Charmer's Delight," offer a whimsical exploration of serpentine themes that may resonate with individuals conducting internet searches related to snake bites.

Expanding the scope of inquiry, our review incorporates an unorthodox source of literature, as we diligently examine the back labels of various household products. Despite their mundane appearance, the descriptions of shampoo bottles and cleaning agents reveal an unexpected trove of information, offering a lighthearted diversion from the scholarly pursuit of understanding the age of directors and public curiosity about snake bite treatment.

Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You are a dry but witty academic researcher. You speak in the passive voice, and your writing sounds like it belongs in a medical or economics 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 Age of the director who won the Best Picture award and Google searches for 'how to treat a snake bite'. Make lots of jokes, goofy observations, and puns. Sneak in some jokes and clever puns about science, research, statistics, and the variables.

Your research team collected data from all across the internet, but mostly just used information from Film Affinity and Google Trends . You used data from 2004 to 2022

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]]
Director's Age: A Snake Bite or a Bait? A Correlational Analysis of Best Picture Winners and Google Searches for Snake Bite Treatment

[[ABSTRACT]]
This study explored the potentially serpentine relationship between the age of directors who snagged the Academy Award for Best Picture and the public's interest in snake bite treatment, as measured by Google search data. Our findings, drawn from an analysis of data from 2004 to 2022, revealed a surprising correlation coefficient of 0.6911000 and p < 0.01, indicating a robust statistical association between these seemingly unrelated phenomena. While the causal connection remains as elusive as a slithering reptile in the underbrush, our research suggests that there may be more to the age of directors and public concerns about snake bites than meets the eye. This peculiar association warrants further investigation to untangle whether this correlation is merely a snake charmer's elusive illusion or a genuine cinematic enigma waiting to be uncoiled.

[[INTRODUCTION]]
Navigating the treacherous terrain of academia often feels like tiptoeing through a snake pit. Just when you think you have a firm grasp on data analysis and statistical methods, a wild and unexpected correlation slithers its way into your research, leaving you bewildered and befuddled. Such was the case with the curious correlation we intend to dissect in this study, where we embark on a cryptic journey to unravel the connection between the age of directors who clinched the coveted Best Picture award and the public’s inquisitiveness about treating snake bites.
One might assume that these two variables are about as related as apples and orangutans, or perhaps more fittingly, as reptiles and red carpets. Yet, as any seasoned researcher knows, the world of statistics is filled with as many twists and turns as a Hollywood blockbuster. It is precisely this enigmatic intersection between Tinseltown triumphs and reptilian remedy-seeking that has piqued our scholarly interest.
As our research delves into this bewildering correlation, we aim to elucidate whether there is a genuine cause-and-effect relationship lurking beneath the surface, or if this statistical correlation is merely a trick of the light, much like the illusion of a cleverly concealed snake charmer. Could it be that the age of directors serves as a sly bait, luring the public’s attention toward seeking snake bite remedies, or is there a more serpentine surprise waiting to be unraveled?
In the pages that follow, we will unravel the curious tale of age, accolades, and antidotes, using robust statistical analysis to determine whether this unlikely association is a mere cinematic mirage or a hidden truth waiting to be uncoiled. So, buckle up and prepare for a wild ride through the jungle of correlation and causation, as we dare to shed light on this unexpected connection between the world of film and the realm of reptilian remedies.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[METHODOLOGY]]

ChatGPT:

[[METHODOLOGY]]

To decipher the cryptic connection between the age of Best Picture-winning directors and the public's fascination with snake bite treatment, our research team embarked on a quest that would make Indiana Jones proud. We scoured a multitude of sources, but primarily relied on data from Film Affinity, which cataloged the birthdates of esteemed directors, and Google Trends, which provided us with the search interest in "how to treat a snake bite" from 2004 to 2022. This gathered data became the canvas upon which we painted our statistical masterpiece, aiming to capture the elusive correlation between these seemingly disparate variables.

Our first step involved verifying the age of each director at the time of their Best Picture victory, employing every metaphorical magnifying glass and compass in our methodological toolkit to ensure accurate data collection. Likewise, we meticulously documented the frequency of Google searches for snake bite treatment, mindful of the potential geographical variances in search patterns. We then navigated the perilous waters of statistical analysis, employing a combination of Pearson's correlation coefficient and regression analysis to illuminate the obscure relationship between these variables.

Furthermore, in an effort to palpate the pulse of our correlation, we conducted robustness checks and sensitivity analyses, guarding against spurious associations and lurking confounding variables that could ambush our findings like a deceptively camouflaged viper in the underbrush. Every step of our research journey was infused with the determination to uncover the truth behind this unexpected convergence, leaving no stone unturned in our quest for statistical significance.

Our statistical models were carefully crafted to wrangle the enigmatic relationship between directorial age and public snake bite curiosity, harnessing the power of auxiliary variables to tease out the nuances of this correlation. We also navigated the choppy waters of time-series analysis to discern any temporal patterns in the data, scrutinizing fluctuations in search interest and directorial ages over the years with the keen eye of a seasoned seafarer scanning the horizon for land.

In conclusion, our approach to disentangling the interplay between directorial age and snake bite interest was akin to taming a wild python – meticulous, methodical, and at times, filled with unexpected twists and turns. Our commitment to unwinding this statistical enigma serves as a testament to the relentless pursuit of truth in the world of research, as we endeavor to shed light on the curious connection between the glamor of Hollywood's finest and the primal instinct to seek remedies for serpentine afflictions.

Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You are a dry but witty academic researcher. You speak in the passive voice, and your writing sounds like it belongs in a medical or economics 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 Age of the director who won the Best Picture award and Google searches for 'how to treat a snake bite'. Make lots of jokes, goofy observations, and puns. Sneak in some jokes and clever puns about science, research, statistics, and the variables.

Limit your response to 500 tokens.

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

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

[[TITLE]]
Director's Age: A Snake Bite or a Bait? A Correlational Analysis of Best Picture Winners and Google Searches for Snake Bite Treatment

[[ABSTRACT]]
This study explored the potentially serpentine relationship between the age of directors who snagged the Academy Award for Best Picture and the public's interest in snake bite treatment, as measured by Google search data. Our findings, drawn from an analysis of data from 2004 to 2022, revealed a surprising correlation coefficient of 0.6911000 and p < 0.01, indicating a robust statistical association between these seemingly unrelated phenomena. While the causal connection remains as elusive as a slithering reptile in the underbrush, our research suggests that there may be more to the age of directors and public concerns about snake bites than meets the eye. This peculiar association warrants further investigation to untangle whether this correlation is merely a snake charmer's elusive illusion or a genuine cinematic enigma waiting to be uncoiled.

[[LITERATURE REVIEW]]
The curious relationship between the age of film directors who triumph at the Academy Awards and the public's interest in treating snake bites has perplexed scholars and cinephiles alike. The unexpected intersection of these distinct domains has beckoned researchers to explore the potential connection, despite its seemingly serpentine nature. In "Smith et al.," the authors find a noteworthy correlation between the age of Best Picture-winning directors and Google searches for snake bite treatment. The statistical association, though surprising, prompts further investigation into the underlying factors contributing to this unlikely bond.
Concurrent literature points to the influence of directorial experience and expertise on the success of film productions, as illustrated in "Doe and Jones." These authors demonstrate the impact of age on directorial style and storytelling, shedding light on how the maturation of filmmakers can captivate audiences and garner critical acclaim. However, the leap from cinematic prowess to public interest in snake bite treatment remains a dramatic twist in the plot of correlation research.
Drawing from non-fiction sources related to venomous creatures and medical emergencies, "Venomous Vipers and Emergency Medicine" provides insight into the public's fascination with snake bite treatment and the psychological underpinnings of such inquiries. Furthermore, works of fiction featuring serpent-centric narratives, such as "The Serpent's Secret" and "Snake Charmer's Delight," offer a whimsical exploration of serpentine themes that may resonate with individuals conducting internet searches related to snake bites.
Expanding the scope of inquiry, our review incorporates an unorthodox source of literature, as we diligently examine the back labels of various household products. Despite their mundane appearance, the descriptions of shampoo bottles and cleaning agents reveal an unexpected trove of information, offering a lighthearted diversion from the scholarly pursuit of understanding the age of directors and public curiosity about snake bite treatment.

[[RESULTS]]
A striking correlation of 0.6911000, an r-squared of 0.4776192, and a p-value of less than 0.01 emerged from our rigorous analysis of the relationship between the age of Best Picture-winning directors and Google searches for snake bite treatment. These statistical indicators point to a remarkably robust association, as strong as a Burmese python's constriction.
Fig. 1 illustrates the scatterplot displaying this unlikely partnership between the age of directors and the public's concern for snake bite remedies. Just as a snake sheds its skin, our findings shed new light on the intricate web of connections within the world of cinema and the realm of reptilian remedies.
It is noteworthy that the correlation coefficient value, akin to a serpent's mesmerizing dance, suggests a substantial link between these seemingly unrelated variables. The r-squared value, like a serpent coiled and ready to strike, accounts for about 47.76% of the variance in Google searches for snake bite treatment, leaving behind an aura of mystery for the remaining unexplained variance to slither through.
The significant p-value, as rare as a diamondback rattlesnake in Maine, indicates that the observed correlation is not due to random chance, further emphasizing the robustness of our findings. This unexpected correlation has set the stage for a lively debate on whether there is a genuine link between the age of directors and the public's interest in snake bite treatment or if this association is no more real than a Hollywood special effect.
The unexpected link we uncovered has rattled the foundations of traditional research, prompting a reevaluation of seemingly unrelated phenomena. This peculiar relationship warrants further investigation to determine whether it is a genuine cinematic enigma waiting to be uncoiled or simply a statistical illusion conjured by the unpredictable dance of data.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[DISCUSSION]]

ChatGPT:

[[DISCUSSION]]

The uncanny correlation unearthed in our analysis of the age of Best Picture-winning directors and Google searches for snake bite treatment has slithered its way into the annals of statistical intrigue. Our results, echoing the previous research by Smith et al., reinforced the surprising finding of a robust association between these seemingly disparate variables. Much like the plot twist in a suspenseful thriller, our findings unveiled a compelling connection where none was expected, sparking curiosity and prompting further inquiry.

The statistical indicators, resembling the coiling patterns of a reticulated python, illustrated a substantial relationship between the age of directors and public interest in snake bite treatment. The correlation coefficient, akin to a snake charmer's hypnotic melody, demonstrated the strength of this association, suggesting that as directors age, the public's curiosity about snake bite remedies intensifies. This finding aligns with existing literature on the influence of directorial expertise and artistic maturity in captivating audiences, albeit with an unexpected reptilian twist.

Moreover, the r-squared value, akin to a snake's sinuous movements, accounted for a substantial portion of the variance in Google searches for snake bite treatment, highlighting the influence of directorial age on this peculiar public interest. This remarkable explanatory power reflects the nuanced interplay between cinematic success and the enigmatic allure of serpent-related anxieties.

The significant p-value, as elusive as a viper camouflaged in the underbrush, attested to the robustness of the observed correlation, lending further weight to the notion that the connection between the age of directors and public intrigue in snake bite treatment is no mere statistical charade. Our results, thus, lend credence to the notion that there may be a genuine, albeit unanticipated, link waiting to be unraveled between the world of cinema and the realm of reptilian remedies.

In light of these intriguing findings, our study, much like a cinematic sequel, serves as a catalyst for future investigations into the underlying mechanisms driving this unexpected correlation. The peculiar intersection of the age of directors and public curiosity about snake bite treatment beckons scholars to delve deeper into the psychological, cultural, and cinematic factors that may underpin this unlikely connection. As researchers embark on this uncharted exploration, they are advised to tread with caution, much like a herpetologist approaching an unknown species, and remain open to the possibility of serendipitous discoveries lurking beneath the surface.

The results of our study, like a cliffhanger ending, leave us on the edge of our seats, eager to witness how this peculiar correlation unfolds in the realm of future research. Ultimately, our findings reinforce the notion that the world of statistics, much like the world of cinema, is replete with unexpected twists and turns, inviting researchers to embrace the unanticipated and embark on scientific endeavors akin to a thrilling adventure, where the mysteries of correlation abound and await the discerning eye of the scholarly detective.

Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You are a dry but witty academic researcher. You speak in the passive voice, and your writing sounds like it belongs in a medical or economics 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 Age of the director who won the Best Picture award and Google searches for 'how to treat a snake bite'. Make lots of jokes, goofy observations, and puns. Sneak in some jokes and clever puns about science, research, statistics, and the variables.

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

Here are the title, abstract, introduction, and results sections.
[[TITLE]]
Director's Age: A Snake Bite or a Bait? A Correlational Analysis of Best Picture Winners and Google Searches for Snake Bite Treatment

[[ABSTRACT]]
This study explored the potentially serpentine relationship between the age of directors who snagged the Academy Award for Best Picture and the public's interest in snake bite treatment, as measured by Google search data. Our findings, drawn from an analysis of data from 2004 to 2022, revealed a surprising correlation coefficient of 0.6911000 and p < 0.01, indicating a robust statistical association between these seemingly unrelated phenomena. While the causal connection remains as elusive as a slithering reptile in the underbrush, our research suggests that there may be more to the age of directors and public concerns about snake bites than meets the eye. This peculiar association warrants further investigation to untangle whether this correlation is merely a snake charmer's elusive illusion or a genuine cinematic enigma waiting to be uncoiled.

[[INTRDUCTION]]
Navigating the treacherous terrain of academia often feels like tiptoeing through a snake pit. Just when you think you have a firm grasp on data analysis and statistical methods, a wild and unexpected correlation slithers its way into your research, leaving you bewildered and befuddled. Such was the case with the curious correlation we intend to dissect in this study, where we embark on a cryptic journey to unravel the connection between the age of directors who clinched the coveted Best Picture award and the public’s inquisitiveness about treating snake bites.
One might assume that these two variables are about as related as apples and orangutans, or perhaps more fittingly, as reptiles and red carpets. Yet, as any seasoned researcher knows, the world of statistics is filled with as many twists and turns as a Hollywood blockbuster. It is precisely this enigmatic intersection between Tinseltown triumphs and reptilian remedy-seeking that has piqued our scholarly interest.
As our research delves into this bewildering correlation, we aim to elucidate whether there is a genuine cause-and-effect relationship lurking beneath the surface, or if this statistical correlation is merely a trick of the light, much like the illusion of a cleverly concealed snake charmer. Could it be that the age of directors serves as a sly bait, luring the public’s attention toward seeking snake bite remedies, or is there a more serpentine surprise waiting to be unraveled?
In the pages that follow, we will unravel the curious tale of age, accolades, and antidotes, using robust statistical analysis to determine whether this unlikely association is a mere cinematic mirage or a hidden truth waiting to be uncoiled. So, buckle up and prepare for a wild ride through the jungle of correlation and causation, as we dare to shed light on this unexpected connection between the world of film and the realm of reptilian remedies.

[[RESULTS]]
A striking correlation of 0.6911000, an r-squared of 0.4776192, and a p-value of less than 0.01 emerged from our rigorous analysis of the relationship between the age of Best Picture-winning directors and Google searches for snake bite treatment. These statistical indicators point to a remarkably robust association, as strong as a Burmese python's constriction.
Fig. 1 illustrates the scatterplot displaying this unlikely partnership between the age of directors and the public's concern for snake bite remedies. Just as a snake sheds its skin, our findings shed new light on the intricate web of connections within the world of cinema and the realm of reptilian remedies.
It is noteworthy that the correlation coefficient value, akin to a serpent's mesmerizing dance, suggests a substantial link between these seemingly unrelated variables. The r-squared value, like a serpent coiled and ready to strike, accounts for about 47.76% of the variance in Google searches for snake bite treatment, leaving behind an aura of mystery for the remaining unexplained variance to slither through.
The significant p-value, as rare as a diamondback rattlesnake in Maine, indicates that the observed correlation is not due to random chance, further emphasizing the robustness of our findings. This unexpected correlation has set the stage for a lively debate on whether there is a genuine link between the age of directors and the public's interest in snake bite treatment or if this association is no more real than a Hollywood special effect.
The unexpected link we uncovered has rattled the foundations of traditional research, prompting a reevaluation of seemingly unrelated phenomena. This peculiar relationship warrants further investigation to determine whether it is a genuine cinematic enigma waiting to be uncoiled or simply a statistical illusion conjured by the unpredictable dance of data.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[CONCLUSION]]

ChatGPT:

[[CONCLUSION]]

In conclusion, our study has shed a spotlight on the unexpected tango between the age of directors who clinched the illustrious Best Picture award and the public's inquisitiveness about snake bite treatment. Much like a classic whodunit, our findings have unraveled a plot twist that even the savviest of statistical sleuths didn't see coming.

The robust correlation coefficient and minuscule p-value reveal a connection as tightly woven as a ball python in its cozy terrarium. It appears that the age of directors may indeed play a role in enticing the populace to ponder over the art of snake bite treatment. Our results suggest that as directors mature like a fine wine, so does the public's fascination with serpent-related first aid.

While some may argue that correlation does not imply causation, our study tantalizingly hints at the possibility of a cause-and-effect relationship lurking within this peculiar pairing. Is it possible that the age of directors casts a hypnotic spell, drawing the masses into the mesmerizing world of snake bite remedies? Or perhaps it's simply a case of statistical happenstance—an enigmatic correlation that defies conventional explanation, much like a snake's cryptic camouflage.

As we wrap up this enthralling chapter of cinematic serendipity and reptilian intrigue, it is evident that no more research is needed in this area. Our findings stand as a testament to the unpredictable whims of statistical fate, leaving us with a curious correlation that is as perplexing as it is amusing. As we bid adieu to this unusual correlation, we can't help but marvel at the unexpected connections that lurk beneath the surface of seemingly unrelated phenomena, much like a snake coiled under a rock.

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 Director's Age: A Snake Bite or a Bait? A Correlational Analysis of Best Picture Winners and Google Searches for Snake Bite Treatment. Respond only with the name of a fictional academic journal.

ChatGPT:

The Journal of Cinematic Epidemiology

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 Director's Age: A Snake Bite or a Bait? A Correlational Analysis of Best Picture Winners and Google Searches for Snake Bite Treatment. Respond only with the name of a fictional organization.

ChatGPT:

The Society for Cinematic and Zoological Research

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 Director's Age: A Snake Bite or a Bait? A Correlational Analysis of Best Picture Winners and Google Searches for Snake Bite Treatment with an abstract of This study explored the potentially serpentine relationship between the age of directors who snagged the Academy Award for Best Picture and the public's interest in snake bite treatment, as measured by Google search data. Our findings, drawn from an analysis of data from 2004 to 2022, revealed a surprising correlation coefficient of 0.6911000 and p < 0.01, indicating a robust statistical association between these seemingly unrelated phenomena. While the causal connection remains as elusive as a slithering reptile in the underbrush, our research suggests that there may be more to the age of directors and public concerns about snake bites than meets the eye. This peculiar association warrants further investigation to untangle whether this correlation is merely a snake charmer's elusive illusion or a genuine cinematic enigma waiting to be uncoiled.

ChatGPT:

Director's Age, Best Picture Winners, Google Searches, Snake Bite Treatment, Correlational Analysis, Age of Directors, Public Interest, Statistical Association, Causal Connection, Research Investigation, Cinematic Enigma

*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

Age of the director who won the Best Picture award
Source: Film Affinity
See what else correlates with Age of the director who won the Best Picture award

Google searches for 'how to treat a snake bite'
Detailed data title: Relative volume of Google searches for 'how to treat a snake bite' (Worldwide, without quotes)
Source: Google Trends
Additional Info: ^{See full details} Relative search volume (not absolute numbers)

See what else correlates with Google searches for 'how to treat a snake bite'

Correlation r = 0.6911000 (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 = 0.4776192 (Coefficient of determination)
This means 47.8% of the change in the one variable (i.e., Google searches for 'how to treat a snake bite') is predictable based on the change in the other (i.e., Age of the director who won the Best Picture award) over the 19 years from 2004 through 2022.

p < 0.01, which is statistically significant(Null hypothesis significance test)
The p-value is 0.00105.^Show 0.0010502783839222822000000000
The p-value is a measure of how probable it is that we would randomly find a result this extreme.^Note 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 0.69 in 0.105% of random cases. Said differently, if you correlated 952 random variables^Note Which I absolutely did.
with the same 18 degrees of freedom, ^Note Degrees of freedom is a measure of how many free components we are testing. In this case it is 18 because we have two variables measured over a period of 19 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.

[ 0.35, 0.87 ] 95% correlation confidence interval (using the Fisher z-transformation)
^{Read more about the confidence interval} 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: ^Note 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.

	2004	2005	2006	2007	2008	2009	2010	2011	2012	2013	2014	2015	2016	2017	2018	2019	2020	2021	2022
Age of the director who won the Best Picture award (Age Years)	42	74	51	64	50	52	58	38	44	40	44	51	49	37	53	62	50	39	44
Google searches for 'how to treat a snake bite' (Rel. search volume)	14.25	23.75	14	19.75	12	17.1667	15.6667	14	14.9167	13	12.9167	11.9167	10.25	13.1667	17.1667	16.0833	15.5833	14.4167	17.5

Why this works

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.
Lack of causal connection: There is probably^Note 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.
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^Note Personally I don't find any p-value calculation to be 'simple,' but you know what I mean.
p-value calculation does not take this into account, so mathematically it appears less probable than it really is.

Try it yourself

You can calculate the values on this page on your own! Try running the Python code to see the calculation results. ^{Show the steps to do this.} 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([42,74,51,64,50,52,58,38,44,40,44,51,49,37,53,62,50,39,44,])
array_2 = np.array([14.25,23.75,14,19.75,12,17.1667,15.6667,14,14.9167,13,12.9167,11.9167,10.25,13.1667,17.1667,16.0833,15.5833,14.4167,17.5,])
array_1_name = "Age of the director who won the Best Picture award"
array_2_name = "Google searches for 'how to treat a snake bite'"

# 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. ^Note 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:

High resolution line chart ^Note The image linked here is a Scalable Vector Graphic (SVG). It is the highest resolution that is possible to achieve. It scales up beyond the size of the observable universe without pixelating. You do not need to email me asking if I have a higher resolution image. I do not. The physical limitations of our universe prevent me from providing you with an image that is any higher resolution than this one.

If you insert it into a PowerPoint presentation (a tool well-known for managing things that are the scale of the universe), you can right-click > "Ungroup" or "Create Shape" and then edit the lines and text directly. You can also change the colors this way.

Alternatively you can use a tool like Inkscape.
High resolution line chart, optimized for mobile
Alternative high resolution line chart
Scatterplot
Portable line chart (png)
Portable line chart (png), optimized for mobile
Line chart for only Age of the director who won the Best Picture award
Line chart for only Google searches for 'how to treat a snake bite'
AI-generated correlation image
The spurious research paper: Director's Age: A Snake Bite or a Bait? A Correlational Analysis of Best Picture Winners and Google Searches for Snake Bite Treatment

View another random correlation

How fun was this correlation?

Thanks for being the explorer we needed!

Correlation ID: 1505 · Black Variable ID: 102 · Red Variable ID: 1378


Problem variable:
Issue:
Additional details: Optional
Confirm you are a human: