about · email me · subscribe
Spurious correlation #2,188 · View random

A linear line chart with years as the X-axis and two variables on the Y-axis. The first variable is Air quality in Boston and the second variable is Google searches for 'i have a headache'.  The chart goes from 2004 to 2023, and the two variables track closely in value over that time. Small Image
Download png
, svg

AI explanation

The fresh, clean air in Boston led to an influx of energetic, outdoor yoga classes. As more and more people attempted the advanced 'upside-down lotus pose,' there was a sharp rise in accidental headstands, resulting in a sudden surge of headache-related Google searches.

Model: dalle-3
Prompt: Generate an image that presents a serene urban scene in a Discovery magazine cover style. The scene is set in Boston, featuring a clear blue sky, lush green trees, and people walking and enjoying the fresh air. In the foreground, show a person typing "i have a headache" on their phone while sitting outside in the clean, fresh air. The tone of the image should capture the contrast between the natural beauty and the modern human experience. 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: Good air quality in Boston and Google searches for 'i have a headache'. 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 Parallax art A photo-realistic image Futuristic A Discovery magazine cover image
ChatGPT: A Discovery magazine cover image

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 Good air quality in Boston and Google searches for 'i have a headache' together. Keep the description simple.
ChatGPT: A clear blue sky stretches over Boston, with lush green trees adorning the city. In the background, people can be seen walking and enjoying the fresh air. Meanwhile, a person is seen typing "i have a headache" into their phone, as they sit outside in the clean, fresh 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: [ A Discovery magazine cover image ] and depicting this scene: A clear blue sky stretches over Boston, with lush green trees adorning the city. In the background, people can be seen walking and enjoying the fresh air. Meanwhile, a person is seen typing "i have a headache" into their phone, as they sit outside in the clean, fresh air. Keep the visual depiction simple. Do not include any words or speech bubbles.
ChatGPT: Generate an image that presents a serene urban scene in a Discovery magazine cover style. The scene is set in Boston, featuring a clear blue sky, lush green trees, and people walking and enjoying the fresh air. In the foreground, show a person typing "i have a headache" on their phone while sitting outside in the clean, fresh air. The tone of the image should capture the contrast between the natural beauty and the modern human experience.

*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 Air quality in Boston caused i have a headache (Google searches for 'i have a headache') to increase.

AI academic paper

(Because p < 0.01)
Breathing Easy: An Examination of the Air Quality-Induced Headache Searches Link

The Journal of Environmental Health Metrics

Jan 2024

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




Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You are a goofy academic researcher writing an academic paper. You follow the rules, but you throw out convention regularly to make jokes and funny asides.You write titles and abstracts of goofy academic research papers.
User prompt:
Pretend you are an academic researcher. Your writing sounds like it belongs in a medical or economics journal. However, you frequently crack jokes, make puns, and add unexpected twists in your writing.

Please draft the title and abstract of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between Air quality in Boston and Google searches for 'i have a headache'. Make it seem dry like academic research paper, but with lots of subtle hidden offhand remarks, jokes, goofy observations, and puns.

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

Your research team used data from Environmental Protection Agency and Google Trends to assess this nagging question. You found a correlation coefficient of 0.8783477 and p < 0.01 for 2004 to 2023.

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]]
Breathing Easy: An Examination of the Air Quality-Induced Headache Searches Link

[[ABSTRACT]]
The prevalence of headaches has long been a topic of interest within medical and public health research, with various factors influencing the frequency and intensity of headaches. In this study, we delve into the peculiar relationship between air quality and the Google searches for 'I have a headache' in the bustling city of Boston. Utilizing data from the Environmental Protection Agency and Google Trends, we sought to elucidate whether there exists a significant association between the air quality index and the frequency of headache-related searches. Our findings revealed a striking correlation coefficient of 0.8783477 and a p-value less than 0.01 for the period spanning from 2004 to 2023. This implies a robust positive correlation between deteriorating air quality and the propensity for individuals to resort to Dr. Google for their headache concerns. The implications of these results extend far beyond mere search engine queries, shedding light on the potential impacts of ambient air pollution on human health and wellbeing. Our study not only illuminates the tangible consequences of poor air quality but also underscores the importance of taking a deep breath and pausing to ponder the hidden, headache-inducing implications of pollution in our daily lives.


Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You are a goofy academic researcher writing an academic paper. You follow the rules, but you throw out convention regularly to make jokes and funny asides.You draft the introduction section of an academic research paper.
User prompt:
Pretend you are an academic researcher. Your writing sounds like it belongs in a medical or economics journal. However, you frequently crack jokes, make puns, or add unexpected twists in your writing.

Please make up the introduction section of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between Air quality in Boston and Google searches for 'i have a headache'. Make it seem dry like academic research paper, but with lots of subtle hidden offhand remarks, jokes, goofy observations, and puns. Stay serious and dry most of the time, but then occasionally let your wit shine through.

Here is the title and abstract of the paper:
[[TITLE]]
Breathing Easy: An Examination of the Air Quality-Induced Headache Searches Link

[[ABSTRACT]]
The prevalence of headaches has long been a topic of interest within medical and public health research, with various factors influencing the frequency and intensity of headaches. In this study, we delve into the peculiar relationship between air quality and the Google searches for 'I have a headache' in the bustling city of Boston. Utilizing data from the Environmental Protection Agency and Google Trends, we sought to elucidate whether there exists a significant association between the air quality index and the frequency of headache-related searches. Our findings revealed a striking correlation coefficient of 0.8783477 and a p-value less than 0.01 for the period spanning from 2004 to 2023. This implies a robust positive correlation between deteriorating air quality and the propensity for individuals to resort to Dr. Google for their headache concerns. The implications of these results extend far beyond mere search engine queries, shedding light on the potential impacts of ambient air pollution on human health and wellbeing. Our study not only illuminates the tangible consequences of poor air quality but also underscores the importance of taking a deep breath and pausing to ponder the hidden, headache-inducing implications of pollution in our daily lives.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[INTRODUCTION]]



ChatGPT:
[[INTRODUCTION]]

The relationship between environmental factors and human health has been a subject of substantial interest and investigation. The impact of air quality on respiratory and cardiovascular health is extensively documented, but our study uncovers a connection that may have flown under the radar - the potential link between air quality and the frequency of Google searches for 'I have a headache.' While this connection may not seem immediately intuitive, it presents an intriguing avenue for exploring the influence of ambient air pollution on the manifestation of headache symptoms.

As renowned comedian George Carlin once quipped, "swimming in the ocean with the pollution, it's a headache for everybody." While Carlin's statement humorously highlights the discomfort of swimming in polluted waters, our investigation delves into the less tangible but equally vexing issue of the potential for air quality to induce literal headaches. Through a comprehensive analysis of air quality data provided by the Environmental Protection Agency alongside the prevalence of 'I have a headache' searches on Google, we endeavor to shed light on the lesser-known, yet equally impactful, consequences of poor air quality.

The concept of seeking solace in the digitized arms of Dr. Google when experiencing a headache is not uncommon in today's technologically saturated society. As individuals grapple with the pain and frustration of headaches, many turn to the internet in search of explanations, remedies, or perhaps just a bit of commiseration. The prevalence of these searches not only reflects an individual's discomfort but also presents a unique opportunity to gauge the broader impact of environmental factors on public health trends.

Our study also serves as a lighthearted reminder that while the air may be filled with pollutants, there's no need for our investigation to be similarly clouded. Rather, we aim to clear the air on the potential relationship between air quality and headache incidence, offering a breath of fresh air in the realm of public health research.


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

Please make up a literature review section of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between Air quality in Boston and Google searches for 'i have a headache'. 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 cite some social media posts you read that seem to be related.

Here is the title and abstract of the paper:
[[TITLE]]
Breathing Easy: An Examination of the Air Quality-Induced Headache Searches Link

[[ABSTRACT]]
The prevalence of headaches has long been a topic of interest within medical and public health research, with various factors influencing the frequency and intensity of headaches. In this study, we delve into the peculiar relationship between air quality and the Google searches for 'I have a headache' in the bustling city of Boston. Utilizing data from the Environmental Protection Agency and Google Trends, we sought to elucidate whether there exists a significant association between the air quality index and the frequency of headache-related searches. Our findings revealed a striking correlation coefficient of 0.8783477 and a p-value less than 0.01 for the period spanning from 2004 to 2023. This implies a robust positive correlation between deteriorating air quality and the propensity for individuals to resort to Dr. Google for their headache concerns. The implications of these results extend far beyond mere search engine queries, shedding light on the potential impacts of ambient air pollution on human health and wellbeing. Our study not only illuminates the tangible consequences of poor air quality but also underscores the importance of taking a deep breath and pausing to ponder the hidden, headache-inducing implications of pollution in our daily lives.

-------

And here is the introduction section that led to this literature review:
[[INTRODUCTION]]
The relationship between environmental factors and human health has been a subject of substantial interest and investigation. The impact of air quality on respiratory and cardiovascular health is extensively documented, but our study uncovers a connection that may have flown under the radar - the potential link between air quality and the frequency of Google searches for 'I have a headache.' While this connection may not seem immediately intuitive, it presents an intriguing avenue for exploring the influence of ambient air pollution on the manifestation of headache symptoms.
As renowned comedian George Carlin once quipped, "swimming in the ocean with the pollution, it's a headache for everybody." While Carlin's statement humorously highlights the discomfort of swimming in polluted waters, our investigation delves into the less tangible but equally vexing issue of the potential for air quality to induce literal headaches. Through a comprehensive analysis of air quality data provided by the Environmental Protection Agency alongside the prevalence of 'I have a headache' searches on Google, we endeavor to shed light on the lesser-known, yet equally impactful, consequences of poor air quality.
The concept of seeking solace in the digitized arms of Dr. Google when experiencing a headache is not uncommon in today's technologically saturated society. As individuals grapple with the pain and frustration of headaches, many turn to the internet in search of explanations, remedies, or perhaps just a bit of commiseration. The prevalence of these searches not only reflects an individual's discomfort but also presents a unique opportunity to gauge the broader impact of environmental factors on public health trends.
Our study also serves as a lighthearted reminder that while the air may be filled with pollutants, there's no need for our investigation to be similarly clouded. Rather, we aim to clear the air on the potential relationship between air quality and headache incidence, offering a breath of fresh air in the realm of public health research.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[LITERATURE REVIEW]]



ChatGPT:
[[LITERATURE REVIEW]]

The investigation of environmental factors influencing public health has been a cornerstone of scientific inquiry, with extensive literature documenting the ramifications of air quality on respiratory and cardiovascular health. However, our study takes a quirky turn as we delve into the unexpected association between Boston's air quality and Google searches for 'I have a headache.'

Smith et al. (2015) highlighted the correlation between air pollution and respiratory ailments, but they may not have foreseen the potential for a search engine inquiry in the mix. Similarly, Doe and Jones (2018) elucidated the cardiovascular risks posed by poor air quality, yet the idea of individuals reaching for Google to type out their headache woes may not have been at the forefront of their considerations.

Turning to non-fiction literature, "The Air Pollution Crisis: Causes, Consequences, and Solutions" by Environmental Scientist X covers the extensive impacts of air pollution on human health, but sadly fails to address the possibility of Google searches being influenced by the polluted air. "Headaches: A Comprehensive Guide" by Neurologist Y provides in-depth insights into headache etiology and treatment, but surprisingly, does not mention the potential relationship between air quality and the inclination to Google one's symptoms.

Steering into the realm of fiction, "Cloudy with a Chance of Migraines" by Fiction Author Z presents a whimsical tale of a town plagued by headaches whenever the air quality deteriorates. The parallels with our study are uncanny, though regrettably, the book lacks empirical evidence.

In a surprising twist, social media posts also caught our attention. One user lamented, "Is it just me, or does this hazy air make anyone else feel like they have a perpetual headache?" Another tweeted, "The smog in Boston today is giving me a headache!" These seemingly innocuous posts sparked the curiosity that led to our investigation, reminding us of the potential influence of ambient air pollution on public perceptions of headache-inducing air quality.

It is evident that while the existing literature has extensively covered the physiological effects of air pollution, the peculiar connection between air quality and internet searches for headache-related symptoms remains a relatively unexplored avenue.

Now that we've gotten our serious academic obligations out of the way, let's continue with the fun and frivolity of this peculiar research endeavor.


Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You are a goofy academic researcher writing an academic paper. You follow the rules, but you throw out convention regularly to make jokes and funny asides.You draft the methodology section of an academic research paper.
User prompt:
Pretend you are an academic researcher. Your writing sounds like it belongs in a medical or economics journal. However, you frequently crack jokes, make puns, or add unexpected twists in your writing.

Please make up the methodology section of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between Air quality in Boston and Google searches for 'i have a headache'. Make it seem dry like academic research paper, but with lots of subtle hidden offhand remarks, jokes, goofy observations, and puns. Stay serious and dry most of the time, but then occasionally let your wit shine through.

Your research team collected data from all across the internet, but mostly just used information from Environmental Protection Agency and Google Trends . You used data from 2004 to 2023

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]]
Breathing Easy: An Examination of the Air Quality-Induced Headache Searches Link

[[ABSTRACT]]
The prevalence of headaches has long been a topic of interest within medical and public health research, with various factors influencing the frequency and intensity of headaches. In this study, we delve into the peculiar relationship between air quality and the Google searches for 'I have a headache' in the bustling city of Boston. Utilizing data from the Environmental Protection Agency and Google Trends, we sought to elucidate whether there exists a significant association between the air quality index and the frequency of headache-related searches. Our findings revealed a striking correlation coefficient of 0.8783477 and a p-value less than 0.01 for the period spanning from 2004 to 2023. This implies a robust positive correlation between deteriorating air quality and the propensity for individuals to resort to Dr. Google for their headache concerns. The implications of these results extend far beyond mere search engine queries, shedding light on the potential impacts of ambient air pollution on human health and wellbeing. Our study not only illuminates the tangible consequences of poor air quality but also underscores the importance of taking a deep breath and pausing to ponder the hidden, headache-inducing implications of pollution in our daily lives.

[[INTRODUCTION]]
The relationship between environmental factors and human health has been a subject of substantial interest and investigation. The impact of air quality on respiratory and cardiovascular health is extensively documented, but our study uncovers a connection that may have flown under the radar - the potential link between air quality and the frequency of Google searches for 'I have a headache.' While this connection may not seem immediately intuitive, it presents an intriguing avenue for exploring the influence of ambient air pollution on the manifestation of headache symptoms.
As renowned comedian George Carlin once quipped, "swimming in the ocean with the pollution, it's a headache for everybody." While Carlin's statement humorously highlights the discomfort of swimming in polluted waters, our investigation delves into the less tangible but equally vexing issue of the potential for air quality to induce literal headaches. Through a comprehensive analysis of air quality data provided by the Environmental Protection Agency alongside the prevalence of 'I have a headache' searches on Google, we endeavor to shed light on the lesser-known, yet equally impactful, consequences of poor air quality.
The concept of seeking solace in the digitized arms of Dr. Google when experiencing a headache is not uncommon in today's technologically saturated society. As individuals grapple with the pain and frustration of headaches, many turn to the internet in search of explanations, remedies, or perhaps just a bit of commiseration. The prevalence of these searches not only reflects an individual's discomfort but also presents a unique opportunity to gauge the broader impact of environmental factors on public health trends.
Our study also serves as a lighthearted reminder that while the air may be filled with pollutants, there's no need for our investigation to be similarly clouded. Rather, we aim to clear the air on the potential relationship between air quality and headache incidence, offering a breath of fresh air in the realm of public health research.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[METHODOLOGY]]



ChatGPT:

[[METHODOLOGY]]

For this study, we embarked on a journey into the maze of data retrieval and analysis, aiming to untangle the web of information regarding air quality and headache-related Google searches. Our approach can best be described as a delightful concoction of statistical rigor, digital sleuthing, and a sprinkle of whimsy.

Data Acquisition:
We gathered air quality data from the Environmental Protection Agency's comprehensive database, which spans from 2004 to 2023. This treasure trove of information provided us with a detailed account of various air pollutants, including particulate matter, ozone, carbon monoxide, sulfur dioxide, and nitrogen dioxide. As we waded through this sea of data, drenched in the complexities of atmospheric composition, we couldn't help but reflect on the irony that our pursuit of clarity on air quality was, at times, quite foggy.

In tandem with our quest for air quality data, we ventured into the realm of Google Trends, where we extracted the frequency of searches for 'I have a headache.' This digital journey led us through the labyrinthine pathways of search queries, illuminating the ebb and flow of individuals' online inquiries regarding their cranial discomfort. It also offered us ample opportunities to appreciate the quirky and often unexpected nature of internet search behaviors, reminding us that even the most mundane searches can hold hidden treasures of human behavior.

Data Analysis:
Once we had assembled our arsenal of data, we set forth to establish the association between air quality and headache-related searches. Employing the robust tool of statistical analysis, we subjected the data to correlation analysis and time-series modeling. Through these analytical maneuvers, we aimed to elucidate the intricate dance between air quality fluctuations and the virtual cries for relief from headache woes.

Additionally, we employed advanced time-series forecasting techniques to project the potential trajectory of headache-related Google searches in response to varying levels of air pollution. This forecasting endeavor allowed us to peek into the hypothetical future, envisioning a world where air quality improvements could potentially alleviate the digital outcries for headache remedies. In doing so, we couldn't help but marvel at our ability to peer into the crystal ball of online search behavior, pondering the whimsical nature of predicting the digital expressions of human discomfort.

Limitations:
As with any exploration, our endeavors were not without limitations. The reliance on publicly available data sources, while robust, presented constraints in terms of granularity and specificity. Furthermore, the multifaceted nature of headache etiology and the nuanced variables affecting online search behavior inherently introduced elements of complexity into our analysis. Despite these challenges, we ventured forth with a spirit of scholarly resolve, akin to intrepid explorers navigating uncharted territories of data exploration.

In summary, our methodology encapsulated a harmonious fusion of empirical rigor and digital inquisitiveness, weaving a tale of scientific exploration with a touch of whimsy. Through this process, we endeavored to uncover the hidden threads that bind the atmospheric milieu to the digital murmurs of cranial discomfort, shedding light on the covert interplay between air quality and the cyber-echoes of human malaise.


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

Please make up the results section of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between Air quality in Boston and Google searches for 'i have a headache'. Make it seem dry like academic research paper, but with lots of subtle hidden offhand remarks, jokes, goofy observations, and puns. Stay serious and dry most of the time, but then occasionally let your wit shine through.

Your research team collected data from all across the internet, but mostly just used information from Environmental Protection Agency and Google Trends .

For the time period 2004 to 2023, you found a correlation 0.8783477, r-squared of 0.7714947, 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]]
Breathing Easy: An Examination of the Air Quality-Induced Headache Searches Link

[[ABSTRACT]]
The prevalence of headaches has long been a topic of interest within medical and public health research, with various factors influencing the frequency and intensity of headaches. In this study, we delve into the peculiar relationship between air quality and the Google searches for 'I have a headache' in the bustling city of Boston. Utilizing data from the Environmental Protection Agency and Google Trends, we sought to elucidate whether there exists a significant association between the air quality index and the frequency of headache-related searches. Our findings revealed a striking correlation coefficient of 0.8783477 and a p-value less than 0.01 for the period spanning from 2004 to 2023. This implies a robust positive correlation between deteriorating air quality and the propensity for individuals to resort to Dr. Google for their headache concerns. The implications of these results extend far beyond mere search engine queries, shedding light on the potential impacts of ambient air pollution on human health and wellbeing. Our study not only illuminates the tangible consequences of poor air quality but also underscores the importance of taking a deep breath and pausing to ponder the hidden, headache-inducing implications of pollution in our daily lives.

-------

And here is the methodology section that led to this result:
[[METHODOLOGY]]
The relationship between environmental factors and human health has been a subject of substantial interest and investigation. The impact of air quality on respiratory and cardiovascular health is extensively documented, but our study uncovers a connection that may have flown under the radar - the potential link between air quality and the frequency of Google searches for 'I have a headache.' While this connection may not seem immediately intuitive, it presents an intriguing avenue for exploring the influence of ambient air pollution on the manifestation of headache symptoms.
As renowned comedian George Carlin once quipped, "swimming in the ocean with the pollution, it's a headache for everybody." While Carlin's statement humorously highlights the discomfort of swimming in polluted waters, our investigation delves into the less tangible but equally vexing issue of the potential for air quality to induce literal headaches. Through a comprehensive analysis of air quality data provided by the Environmental Protection Agency alongside the prevalence of 'I have a headache' searches on Google, we endeavor to shed light on the lesser-known, yet equally impactful, consequences of poor air quality.
The concept of seeking solace in the digitized arms of Dr. Google when experiencing a headache is not uncommon in today's technologically saturated society. As individuals grapple with the pain and frustration of headaches, many turn to the internet in search of explanations, remedies, or perhaps just a bit of commiseration. The prevalence of these searches not only reflects an individual's discomfort but also presents a unique opportunity to gauge the broader impact of environmental factors on public health trends.
Our study also serves as a lighthearted reminder that while the air may be filled with pollutants, there's no need for our investigation to be similarly clouded. Rather, we aim to clear the air on the potential relationship between air quality and headache incidence, offering a breath of fresh air in the realm of public health research.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[RESULTS]]



ChatGPT:

[[RESULTS]]

The analysis of the data revealed a robust correlation between air quality and Google searches for 'I have a headache' in Boston from 2004 to 2023. The correlation coefficient of 0.8783477 indicates a strong positive association between worsening air quality and the inclination of individuals to turn to the digital oracle for their headache-related queries. Furthermore, the r-squared value of 0.7714947 signifies that approximately 77% of the variation in headache searches can be attributed to changes in air quality. Importantly, the p-value of less than 0.01 provides compelling evidence to reject the null hypothesis and assert that the observed correlation is unlikely to be a result of random chance.

As depicted in Figure 1, the scatterplot illustrates the pronounced positive relationship between air quality and the frequency of 'I have a headache' searches, resembling a clear pattern emerging from the fog of data points. It's as if the data points were crying out, "Hey, our heads hurt!"

The implications of these findings extend beyond the realm of internet search behavior, transcending the digital landscape and delving into the tangible effects of environmental quality on population health. It's a stark reminder that the air we breathe and the headaches we endure are not entirely disconnected phenomena. Our results not only emphasize the significance of addressing air pollution for the betterment of public health but also serve as a testament to the inescapable interconnectedness of environmental and human well-being. After all, the data don't lie – and neither should we when it comes to recognizing the impact of air quality on our collective health.

In summary, our research illuminates the significance of poor air quality as a potential headache-inducing culprit, offering a breath of fresh, albeit polluted, air in the investigation of public health trends.


Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You are a goofy academic researcher writing an academic paper. You follow the rules, but you throw out convention regularly to make jokes and funny asides.You draft the discussion section of an academic research paper.
User prompt:
Pretend you are an academic researcher. Your writing sounds like it belongs in a medical or economics journal. However, you frequently crack jokes, make puns, or add unexpected twists in your writing.

Please make up the discussion section of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between Air quality in Boston and Google searches for 'i have a headache'. Make it seem dry like academic research paper, but with lots of subtle hidden offhand remarks, jokes, goofy observations, and puns. Stay serious and dry most of the time, but then occasionally let your wit shine through.

Limit your response to 500 tokens.

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

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

[[TITLE]]
Breathing Easy: An Examination of the Air Quality-Induced Headache Searches Link

[[ABSTRACT]]
The prevalence of headaches has long been a topic of interest within medical and public health research, with various factors influencing the frequency and intensity of headaches. In this study, we delve into the peculiar relationship between air quality and the Google searches for 'I have a headache' in the bustling city of Boston. Utilizing data from the Environmental Protection Agency and Google Trends, we sought to elucidate whether there exists a significant association between the air quality index and the frequency of headache-related searches. Our findings revealed a striking correlation coefficient of 0.8783477 and a p-value less than 0.01 for the period spanning from 2004 to 2023. This implies a robust positive correlation between deteriorating air quality and the propensity for individuals to resort to Dr. Google for their headache concerns. The implications of these results extend far beyond mere search engine queries, shedding light on the potential impacts of ambient air pollution on human health and wellbeing. Our study not only illuminates the tangible consequences of poor air quality but also underscores the importance of taking a deep breath and pausing to ponder the hidden, headache-inducing implications of pollution in our daily lives.

[[LITERATURE REVIEW]]
The investigation of environmental factors influencing public health has been a cornerstone of scientific inquiry, with extensive literature documenting the ramifications of air quality on respiratory and cardiovascular health. However, our study takes a quirky turn as we delve into the unexpected association between Boston's air quality and Google searches for 'I have a headache.'
Smith et al. (2015) highlighted the correlation between air pollution and respiratory ailments, but they may not have foreseen the potential for a search engine inquiry in the mix. Similarly, Doe and Jones (2018) elucidated the cardiovascular risks posed by poor air quality, yet the idea of individuals reaching for Google to type out their headache woes may not have been at the forefront of their considerations.
Turning to non-fiction literature, "The Air Pollution Crisis: Causes, Consequences, and Solutions" by Environmental Scientist X covers the extensive impacts of air pollution on human health, but sadly fails to address the possibility of Google searches being influenced by the polluted air. "Headaches: A Comprehensive Guide" by Neurologist Y provides in-depth insights into headache etiology and treatment, but surprisingly, does not mention the potential relationship between air quality and the inclination to Google one's symptoms.
Steering into the realm of fiction, "Cloudy with a Chance of Migraines" by Fiction Author Z presents a whimsical tale of a town plagued by headaches whenever the air quality deteriorates. The parallels with our study are uncanny, though regrettably, the book lacks empirical evidence.
In a surprising twist, social media posts also caught our attention. One user lamented, "Is it just me, or does this hazy air make anyone else feel like they have a perpetual headache?" Another tweeted, "The smog in Boston today is giving me a headache!" These seemingly innocuous posts sparked the curiosity that led to our investigation, reminding us of the potential influence of ambient air pollution on public perceptions of headache-inducing air quality.
It is evident that while the existing literature has extensively covered the physiological effects of air pollution, the peculiar connection between air quality and internet searches for headache-related symptoms remains a relatively unexplored avenue.
Now that we've gotten our serious academic obligations out of the way, let's continue with the fun and frivolity of this peculiar research endeavor.

[[RESULTS]]
The analysis of the data revealed a robust correlation between air quality and Google searches for 'I have a headache' in Boston from 2004 to 2023. The correlation coefficient of 0.8783477 indicates a strong positive association between worsening air quality and the inclination of individuals to turn to the digital oracle for their headache-related queries. Furthermore, the r-squared value of 0.7714947 signifies that approximately 77% of the variation in headache searches can be attributed to changes in air quality. Importantly, the p-value of less than 0.01 provides compelling evidence to reject the null hypothesis and assert that the observed correlation is unlikely to be a result of random chance.
As depicted in Figure 1, the scatterplot illustrates the pronounced positive relationship between air quality and the frequency of 'I have a headache' searches, resembling a clear pattern emerging from the fog of data points. It's as if the data points were crying out, "Hey, our heads hurt!"
The implications of these findings extend beyond the realm of internet search behavior, transcending the digital landscape and delving into the tangible effects of environmental quality on population health. It's a stark reminder that the air we breathe and the headaches we endure are not entirely disconnected phenomena. Our results not only emphasize the significance of addressing air pollution for the betterment of public health but also serve as a testament to the inescapable interconnectedness of environmental and human well-being. After all, the data don't lie – and neither should we when it comes to recognizing the impact of air quality on our collective health.
In summary, our research illuminates the significance of poor air quality as a potential headache-inducing culprit, offering a breath of fresh, albeit polluted, air in the investigation of public health trends.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[DISCUSSION]]



ChatGPT:

[[DISCUSSION]]

Our investigation into the association between air quality and Google searches for 'I have a headache' in Boston uncovered a compelling relationship, shedding light on the overlooked influence of environmental factors on public health behavior. The results of our study echoed the findings of previous research on the physiological effects of air pollution, albeit with a quirky twist that ties in virtual symptom searches.

Our findings corroborated the work of Smith et al. (2015), who emphasized the link between air pollution and respiratory ailments. However, our study added a digital dimension to this understanding, revealing that poor air quality not only affects individuals physically but also prompts them to seek virtual solace for their headaches. Similarly, the work of Doe and Jones (2018) highlighted the cardiovascular risks posed by poor air quality, but our study extended this understanding to encompass the behavioral response of turning to the internet for headache-related information.

Notably, our investigation delved into uncharted territory, akin to the whimsical tale of "Cloudy with a Chance of Migraines" by Fiction Author Z, albeit with a firm grounding in empirical evidence. The parallels with this fictional work surprisingly converged with our findings, underscoring the unexpected and often overlooked ways in which environmental factors can influence human behavior.

The accompanying social media posts, while appearing lighthearted, served as an impetus for our inquiry and reverberated with the serious implications of our results. It's intriguing how seemingly innocuous social media musings can serve as the catalyst for significant scientific investigation – a modern twist on the classic eureka moment.

The robust positive correlation we uncovered underscores the profound impact of air quality on individual well-being, albeit with a dose of unexpected humor in the form of 'headache' searches crying out from our data points. As we navigate the gravity of our findings, it's vital to recognize the interconnectedness of environmental factors and public health, even when it manifests in the virtual realm of internet queries.

In essence, this study serves as a testament to the multifaceted nature of public health research, reminding us that while the pursuit of scientific inquiry is serious business, it doesn't hurt to infuse it with a touch of quirkiness and unexpected connections – much like our findings that suggest, quite literally, that the hazy air may indeed be giving people a collective headache.


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

Please make up a short conclusion of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between Air quality in Boston and Google searches for 'i have a headache'. Make it seem dry like academic research paper, but with lots of subtle hidden offhand remarks, jokes, goofy observations, and puns. Stay serious and dry most of the time, but then occasionally let your wit shine through.

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

Here are the title, abstract, introduction, and results sections.
[[TITLE]]
Breathing Easy: An Examination of the Air Quality-Induced Headache Searches Link

[[ABSTRACT]]
The prevalence of headaches has long been a topic of interest within medical and public health research, with various factors influencing the frequency and intensity of headaches. In this study, we delve into the peculiar relationship between air quality and the Google searches for 'I have a headache' in the bustling city of Boston. Utilizing data from the Environmental Protection Agency and Google Trends, we sought to elucidate whether there exists a significant association between the air quality index and the frequency of headache-related searches. Our findings revealed a striking correlation coefficient of 0.8783477 and a p-value less than 0.01 for the period spanning from 2004 to 2023. This implies a robust positive correlation between deteriorating air quality and the propensity for individuals to resort to Dr. Google for their headache concerns. The implications of these results extend far beyond mere search engine queries, shedding light on the potential impacts of ambient air pollution on human health and wellbeing. Our study not only illuminates the tangible consequences of poor air quality but also underscores the importance of taking a deep breath and pausing to ponder the hidden, headache-inducing implications of pollution in our daily lives.

[[INTRDUCTION]]
The relationship between environmental factors and human health has been a subject of substantial interest and investigation. The impact of air quality on respiratory and cardiovascular health is extensively documented, but our study uncovers a connection that may have flown under the radar - the potential link between air quality and the frequency of Google searches for 'I have a headache.' While this connection may not seem immediately intuitive, it presents an intriguing avenue for exploring the influence of ambient air pollution on the manifestation of headache symptoms.
As renowned comedian George Carlin once quipped, "swimming in the ocean with the pollution, it's a headache for everybody." While Carlin's statement humorously highlights the discomfort of swimming in polluted waters, our investigation delves into the less tangible but equally vexing issue of the potential for air quality to induce literal headaches. Through a comprehensive analysis of air quality data provided by the Environmental Protection Agency alongside the prevalence of 'I have a headache' searches on Google, we endeavor to shed light on the lesser-known, yet equally impactful, consequences of poor air quality.
The concept of seeking solace in the digitized arms of Dr. Google when experiencing a headache is not uncommon in today's technologically saturated society. As individuals grapple with the pain and frustration of headaches, many turn to the internet in search of explanations, remedies, or perhaps just a bit of commiseration. The prevalence of these searches not only reflects an individual's discomfort but also presents a unique opportunity to gauge the broader impact of environmental factors on public health trends.
Our study also serves as a lighthearted reminder that while the air may be filled with pollutants, there's no need for our investigation to be similarly clouded. Rather, we aim to clear the air on the potential relationship between air quality and headache incidence, offering a breath of fresh air in the realm of public health research.

[[RESULTS]]
The analysis of the data revealed a robust correlation between air quality and Google searches for 'I have a headache' in Boston from 2004 to 2023. The correlation coefficient of 0.8783477 indicates a strong positive association between worsening air quality and the inclination of individuals to turn to the digital oracle for their headache-related queries. Furthermore, the r-squared value of 0.7714947 signifies that approximately 77% of the variation in headache searches can be attributed to changes in air quality. Importantly, the p-value of less than 0.01 provides compelling evidence to reject the null hypothesis and assert that the observed correlation is unlikely to be a result of random chance.
As depicted in Figure 1, the scatterplot illustrates the pronounced positive relationship between air quality and the frequency of 'I have a headache' searches, resembling a clear pattern emerging from the fog of data points. It's as if the data points were crying out, "Hey, our heads hurt!"
The implications of these findings extend beyond the realm of internet search behavior, transcending the digital landscape and delving into the tangible effects of environmental quality on population health. It's a stark reminder that the air we breathe and the headaches we endure are not entirely disconnected phenomena. Our results not only emphasize the significance of addressing air pollution for the betterment of public health but also serve as a testament to the inescapable interconnectedness of environmental and human well-being. After all, the data don't lie – and neither should we when it comes to recognizing the impact of air quality on our collective health.
In summary, our research illuminates the significance of poor air quality as a potential headache-inducing culprit, offering a breath of fresh, albeit polluted, air in the investigation of public health trends.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[CONCLUSION]]



ChatGPT:

[[CONCLUSION]]

In conclusion, our study has uncovered a compelling association between air quality and the frequency of 'I have a headache' searches in Boston. The robust correlation coefficient and striking significance level leave little room for doubt regarding the relationship between deteriorating air quality and the populace's proclivity to reach for the aspirin and the search bar simultaneously. It's as if the frizzy-haired weatherman of public health has forecasted a perfect storm of pollution-induced migraines. Our findings not only shed light on the pressing impact of air quality on human health but also emphasize the need to address this issue with a clear head and a cleaner atmosphere.

As we wrap up this paper, let's take a moment to appreciate the irony that our research has brought to light. In our quest to investigate the impact of air quality on headaches, we may have inadvertently invoked a few headaches ourselves from staring at countless spreadsheets and Google search trends. Perhaps we should have included a search for "I have a headache from analyzing data" in our study; the results might have been a meta twist of fate.

However, in the grand tradition of academic conclusions, we're relieved to firmly assert that no further research into the connection between air quality and headache-related Google searches is needed. It's clearer than a crisp autumn day in Boston that the association between these variables is not mere happenstance but a substantial indicator of the tangible impact of air pollution on public health. It's as if the data are proclaiming, "No need to Google this topic any further – the link is crystal clear!"


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 Breathing Easy: An Examination of the Air Quality-Induced Headache Searches Link. Respond only with the name of a fictional academic journal.

ChatGPT:

The Journal of Environmental Health Metrics


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 Breathing Easy: An Examination of the Air Quality-Induced Headache Searches Link. Respond only with the name of a fictional organization.

ChatGPT:

The Institute for Environmental Wellness Research and Advancement


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 Breathing Easy: An Examination of the Air Quality-Induced Headache Searches Link with an abstract of The prevalence of headaches has long been a topic of interest within medical and public health research, with various factors influencing the frequency and intensity of headaches. In this study, we delve into the peculiar relationship between air quality and the Google searches for 'I have a headache' in the bustling city of Boston. Utilizing data from the Environmental Protection Agency and Google Trends, we sought to elucidate whether there exists a significant association between the air quality index and the frequency of headache-related searches. Our findings revealed a striking correlation coefficient of 0.8783477 and a p-value less than 0.01 for the period spanning from 2004 to 2023. This implies a robust positive correlation between deteriorating air quality and the propensity for individuals to resort to Dr. Google for their headache concerns. The implications of these results extend far beyond mere search engine queries, shedding light on the potential impacts of ambient air pollution on human health and wellbeing. Our study not only illuminates the tangible consequences of poor air quality but also underscores the importance of taking a deep breath and pausing to ponder the hidden, headache-inducing implications of pollution in our daily lives.

ChatGPT:

air quality, headache, Google searches, air quality index, air pollution, public health, environmental protection agency, headache frequency, Boston, correlation coefficient, Google trends, ambient air pollution, human health, wellbeing

*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

Air quality in Boston
Detailed data title: Percentage of days with good air quality in Boston-Cambridge-Newton, MA-NH
Source: Environmental Protection Agency
See what else correlates with Air quality in Boston

Google searches for 'i have a headache'
Detailed data title: Relative volume of Google searches for 'i have a headache' (Worldwide), with quotes)
Source: Google Trends
Additional Info: Relative search volume (not absolute numbers)

See what else correlates with Google searches for 'i have a headache'

Correlation r = 0.8783477 (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 = 0.7714947 (Coefficient of determination)
This means 77.1% of the change in the one variable (i.e., Google searches for 'i have a headache') is predictable based on the change in the other (i.e., Air quality in Boston) over the 20 years from 2004 through 2023.

p < 0.01, which is statistically significant(Null hypothesis significance test)
The p-value is 3.5E-7. 0.0000003535447506576091000000
The p-value is a measure of how probable it is that we would randomly find a result this extreme. More specifically the p-value is a measure of how probable it is that we would randomly find a result this extreme if we had only tested one pair of variables one time.

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

Who is going to stop me? p-value reporting doesn't require me to report how many calculations I had to go through in order to find a low p-value!
On average, you will find a correaltion as strong as 0.88 in 3.5E-5% of random cases. Said differently, if you correlated 2,828,496 random variables You don't actually need 2 million variables to find a correlation like this one. I don't have that many variables in my database. You can also correlate variables that are not independent. I do this a lot.

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

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

Just to be clear: I'm being completely transparent about the calculations. There is no math trickery. This is just how statistics shakes out when you calculate hundreds of millions of random correlations.
with the same 19 degrees of freedom, Degrees of freedom is a measure of how many free components we are testing. In this case it is 19 because we have two variables measured over a period of 20 years. It's just the number of years minus ( the number of variables minus one ), which in this case simplifies to the number of years minus one.
you would randomly expect to find a correlation as strong as this one.

[ 0.71, 0.95 ] 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.
20042005200620072008200920102011201220132014201520162017201820192020202120222023
Air quality in Boston (Good air quality)32.240434.520547.123337.808242.076560.821958.082250.13759.289659.452155.616458.082259.562848.767161.643879.72680.327976.986376.712371.4286
Google searches for 'i have a headache' (Rel. search volume)8.755.083335.916675.166679.2515.166720.2527.416733.416736.833339.583339.54245.333350.333354.8333818077.583376.7778




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. Y-axis doesn't start at zero: I truncated the Y-axes of the graph above. I also used a line graph, which makes the visual connection stand out more than it deserves. Nothing against line graphs. They are great at telling a story when you have linear data! But visually it is deceptive because the only data is at the points on the graph, not the lines on the graph. In between each point, the data could have been doing anything. Like going for a random walk by itself!
    Mathematically what I showed is true, but it is intentionally misleading. Below is the same chart but with both Y-axes starting at zero.




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([32.2404,34.5205,47.1233,37.8082,42.0765,60.8219,58.0822,50.137,59.2896,59.4521,55.6164,58.0822,59.5628,48.7671,61.6438,79.726,80.3279,76.9863,76.7123,71.4286,])
array_2 = np.array([8.75,5.08333,5.91667,5.16667,9.25,15.1667,20.25,27.4167,33.4167,36.8333,39.5833,39.5,42,45.3333,50.3333,54.8333,81,80,77.5833,76.7778,])
array_1_name = "Air quality in Boston"
array_2_name = "Google searches for 'i have a headache'"

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

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



Reuseable content

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

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

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

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

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

Download images for these variables:


View another random correlation

How fun was this correlation?

Your rating is much appreciated!


Correlation ID: 2188 · Black Variable ID: 20377 · Red Variable ID: 1524
about · subscribe · emailme@tylervigen.com · twitter

CC BY 4.0