about · email me · subscribe
Spurious correlation #2,227 · View random

A linear line chart with years as the X-axis and two variables on the Y-axis. The first variable is Arson in California and the second variable is Viewership count for Days of Our Lives.  The chart goes from 1985 to 2021, and the two variables track closely in value over that time. Small Image
Download png
, svg

AI explanation

The heat was turned down on both the flames and the drama.

Model: dalle-3
Prompt: [ A black-and-white newspaper illustration ] Scene description: In California, a wildfire rages in the distance, sending plumes of smoke into the sky. In the foreground, a group of friends huddles around a television, engrossed in an episode of Days of Our Lives, their faces lit up by the glow of the screen. Image generation prompt: Generate an image in the style of a classic black-and-white newspaper illustration. Depict a landscape with a raging wildfire in the distance, sending plumes of smoke into the sky. In the foreground, feature a group of friends huddling around a television, engrossed in an episode of Days of Our Lives, their faces illuminated by the glow of the screen. Keep the visual depiction simple, and focus on capturing the contrast between the natural disaster and the mundane entertainment. 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: Arson in California and Viewership count for Days of Our Lives. 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 black-and-white newspaper illustration Macabre Oragami Cutsy art illustration 3D Pixar Style
ChatGPT: A black-and-white newspaper 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 Arson in California and Viewership count for Days of Our Lives together. Keep the description simple.
ChatGPT: In California, a wildfire rages in the distance, sending plumes of smoke into the sky. In the foreground, a group of friends huddles around a television, engrossed in an episode of Days of Our Lives, their faces lit up by the glow of the screen.

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 black-and-white newspaper illustration ] and depicting this scene: In California, a wildfire rages in the distance, sending plumes of smoke into the sky. In the foreground, a group of friends huddles around a television, engrossed in an episode of Days of Our Lives, their faces lit up by the glow of the screen. Keep the visual depiction simple. Do not include any words or speech bubbles.
ChatGPT: [ A black-and-white newspaper illustration ] Scene description: In California, a wildfire rages in the distance, sending plumes of smoke into the sky. In the foreground, a group of friends huddles around a television, engrossed in an episode of Days of Our Lives, their faces lit up by the glow of the screen. Image generation prompt: Generate an image in the style of a classic black-and-white newspaper illustration. Depict a landscape with a raging wildfire in the distance, sending plumes of smoke into the sky. In the foreground, feature a group of friends huddling around a television, engrossed in an episode of Days of Our Lives, their faces illuminated by the glow of the screen. Keep the visual depiction simple, and focus on capturing the contrast between the natural disaster and the mundane entertainment.

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

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

Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106 (fine-tuned)
System prompt: You provide humorous responses in the form of plausible sounding explanations for correlations. You assume the correlation is causative for the purpose of the explanation even if it is ridiculous. You do not chat with the user, you only reply with the causal connection explanation and nothing else.
User prompt: Please make up a funny explanation for how a decrease in Arson in California caused Viewership count for Days of Our Lives to decrease. Include one good pun.

AI academic paper

(Because p < 0.01)
Burning Up the Ratings: Investigating the Fiery Connection Between Arson in California and Viewership Count for Days of Our Lives

The Journal of Soap Opera Arson Studies

Jan 2024

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




Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You are a 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 Arson in California and Viewership count for Days of Our Lives. Make lots of jokes, goofy observations, and puns.

Include a pun in the title.

Your research team used data from FBI Criminal Justice Information Services and Wikipedia to assess this nagging question. You found a correlation coefficient of 0.9372332 and p < 0.01 for 1985 to 2021.

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]]
Burning Up the Ratings: Investigating the Fiery Connection Between Arson in California and Viewership Count for Days of Our Lives

[[ABSTRACT]]
In this study, we set out to explore the unexpected link between arson in California and the viewership count for the long-running soap opera "Days of Our Lives." Utilizing data from the FBI Criminal Justice Information Services and Wikipedia, we set out to determine if there was any statistical association between these two seemingly disparate phenomena. To our surprise (and amusement), we discovered a significant correlation coefficient of 0.9372332 and p < 0.01 for the period from 1985 to 2021.

This finding challenges conventional wisdom and invites a fresh perspective on the potential influence of real-world events on television viewership. We delve into potential explanations for this correlation, from coincidental timing to the allure of dramatic storylines mirroring real-life events. Additionally, we playfully speculate on whether the flame-inspired plotlines of "Days of Our Lives" stoke the fiery passion of arsonists or capture the fascination of fire enthusiasts.

The results of this study not only provide a lighthearted twist on academic research but also spark intriguing questions about the interplay between popular culture and societal events.


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 Arson in California and Viewership count for Days of Our Lives. Make lots of jokes, goofy observations, and puns. Sneak in some jokes and clever puns about science, research, statistics, and the variables.

Here is the title and abstract of the paper:
[[TITLE]]
Burning Up the Ratings: Investigating the Fiery Connection Between Arson in California and Viewership Count for Days of Our Lives

[[ABSTRACT]]
In this study, we set out to explore the unexpected link between arson in California and the viewership count for the long-running soap opera "Days of Our Lives." Utilizing data from the FBI Criminal Justice Information Services and Wikipedia, we set out to determine if there was any statistical association between these two seemingly disparate phenomena. To our surprise (and amusement), we discovered a significant correlation coefficient of 0.9372332 and p < 0.01 for the period from 1985 to 2021.

This finding challenges conventional wisdom and invites a fresh perspective on the potential influence of real-world events on television viewership. We delve into potential explanations for this correlation, from coincidental timing to the allure of dramatic storylines mirroring real-life events. Additionally, we playfully speculate on whether the flame-inspired plotlines of "Days of Our Lives" stoke the fiery passion of arsonists or capture the fascination of fire enthusiasts.

The results of this study not only provide a lighthearted twist on academic research but also spark intriguing questions about the interplay between popular culture and societal events.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[INTRODUCTION]]



ChatGPT:
INTRODUCTION

The world of research is often a serious and solemn place, where scholars meticulously dissect data and uncover profound connections. However, every so often, a study comes along that ignites curiosity and leaves researchers puzzled, amused, and perhaps a little bit singed. Our investigation into the relationship between arson in California and the viewership count for the beloved soap opera "Days of Our Lives" is one such study.

As scholars, we are used to observing correlations between variables that are, in the words of Spock, "logical." However, the link between deliberate fire-setting and daytime television drama is as unexpected as finding a marshmallow in a bowl of spaghetti – perplexing yet undeniably intriguing.

In this investigation, we set out to determine if there exists a statistical relationship between these two seemingly unrelated phenomena. Armed with data from the FBI Criminal Justice Information Services and the hallowed annals of Wikipedia, we aimed to shine a light on this curious correlation that might just illuminate the intersection of popular entertainment and real-world events.

To our astonishment (and perhaps a smidgen of delight), our analysis revealed a correlation coefficient of 0.9372332 and a p-value less than 0.01 for the period from 1985 to 2021. This is a statistical bond stronger than that of any soap opera couple, and it has left us with more eyebrow-raising questions than a dramatic reveal in a telenovela.

One might ask, "What are the odds of such a connection? And more importantly, have arsonists been setting the wrong kind of fires?" These are just the tip of the iceberg – or perhaps, in this case, the tip of the flame.

The time has come to flip the script on traditional research and set our sights on the outrageous, the unexpected, and the downright fiery. Join us in this sizzling escapade as we unravel the curious dance between flames in California and the fervent viewership of "Days of Our Lives." Let's stoke the embers of inquiry and kindle the spirit of playful speculation in the vast, unpredictable landscape of academic investigation. After all, in the words of the esteemed Sherlock Holmes, "The game is afoot!"

Hold on to your lab coats, folks – we're about to embark on a journey where science meets soap operas, where statistics collide with storylines, and where every correlation, no matter how absurd, deserves its moment in the spotlight.


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 Arson in California and Viewership count for Days of Our Lives. Make lots of jokes, goofy observations, and puns.

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

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

Start by naming serious-sounding studies by authors like Smith, Doe, and Jones - but then quickly devolve. Name some real non-fiction books that would be related to the topic. Then name some real fiction books that sound like they could be related. Then name a few real TV shows that sound like they might be relevant to the topic that you watched as research.

Here is the title and abstract of the paper:
[[TITLE]]
Burning Up the Ratings: Investigating the Fiery Connection Between Arson in California and Viewership Count for Days of Our Lives

[[ABSTRACT]]
In this study, we set out to explore the unexpected link between arson in California and the viewership count for the long-running soap opera "Days of Our Lives." Utilizing data from the FBI Criminal Justice Information Services and Wikipedia, we set out to determine if there was any statistical association between these two seemingly disparate phenomena. To our surprise (and amusement), we discovered a significant correlation coefficient of 0.9372332 and p < 0.01 for the period from 1985 to 2021.

This finding challenges conventional wisdom and invites a fresh perspective on the potential influence of real-world events on television viewership. We delve into potential explanations for this correlation, from coincidental timing to the allure of dramatic storylines mirroring real-life events. Additionally, we playfully speculate on whether the flame-inspired plotlines of "Days of Our Lives" stoke the fiery passion of arsonists or capture the fascination of fire enthusiasts.

The results of this study not only provide a lighthearted twist on academic research but also spark intriguing questions about the interplay between popular culture and societal events.

-------

And here is the introduction section that led to this literature review:
[[INTRODUCTION]]
INTRODUCTION
The world of research is often a serious and solemn place, where scholars meticulously dissect data and uncover profound connections. However, every so often, a study comes along that ignites curiosity and leaves researchers puzzled, amused, and perhaps a little bit singed. Our investigation into the relationship between arson in California and the viewership count for the beloved soap opera "Days of Our Lives" is one such study.
As scholars, we are used to observing correlations between variables that are, in the words of Spock, "logical." However, the link between deliberate fire-setting and daytime television drama is as unexpected as finding a marshmallow in a bowl of spaghetti – perplexing yet undeniably intriguing.
In this investigation, we set out to determine if there exists a statistical relationship between these two seemingly unrelated phenomena. Armed with data from the FBI Criminal Justice Information Services and the hallowed annals of Wikipedia, we aimed to shine a light on this curious correlation that might just illuminate the intersection of popular entertainment and real-world events.
To our astonishment (and perhaps a smidgen of delight), our analysis revealed a correlation coefficient of 0.9372332 and a p-value less than 0.01 for the period from 1985 to 2021. This is a statistical bond stronger than that of any soap opera couple, and it has left us with more eyebrow-raising questions than a dramatic reveal in a telenovela.
One might ask, "What are the odds of such a connection? And more importantly, have arsonists been setting the wrong kind of fires?" These are just the tip of the iceberg – or perhaps, in this case, the tip of the flame.
The time has come to flip the script on traditional research and set our sights on the outrageous, the unexpected, and the downright fiery. Join us in this sizzling escapade as we unravel the curious dance between flames in California and the fervent viewership of "Days of Our Lives." Let's stoke the embers of inquiry and kindle the spirit of playful speculation in the vast, unpredictable landscape of academic investigation. After all, in the words of the esteemed Sherlock Holmes, "The game is afoot!"
Hold on to your lab coats, folks – we're about to embark on a journey where science meets soap operas, where statistics collide with storylines, and where every correlation, no matter how absurd, deserves its moment in the spotlight.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[LITERATURE REVIEW]]



ChatGPT:
LITERATURE REVIEW

In "Smith et al. (2020)," the authors find that arson in California is a serious societal issue with implications for public safety, property damage, and environmental impact. The study delves into the various motivations behind arson, ranging from financial gain to psychological disorders. Similarly, "Doe and Johnson (2018)" highlight the devastating consequences of arson, emphasizing the need for comprehensive prevention and intervention strategies.

While the literature is abundant in discussing the dire consequences of arson, there is a dearth of scholarly work exploring its connection to the viewership count of daytime soap operas. This gap in knowledge prompts us to turn to a wider array of sources, both serious and whimsical, to unearth any potential relationship.

In "Fires and Their Aftermath" by Emma White, the author recounts harrowing tales of communities grappling with the aftermath of arson, shedding light on the human toll of such criminal acts. Similarly, "The Pyromaniac's Predicament" by John Blaze explores the complex psychology of fire-setting, drawing attention to the intriguing yet concerning motivations behind arson.

However, it is also important to consider fictional works that could conceivably shed light on the unexpected linkage we are exploring. Could J.K. Rowling's "Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire" offer a metaphorical perspective on the fiery allure of compelling storytelling? How about Ray Bradbury's "Fahrenheit 451," which delves into the dangers of censorship and the power of literature – albeit in a somewhat different context?

Turning to the world of television, popular daytime dramas such as "The Young and the Restless," "General Hospital," and "All My Children" have long captured the hearts of viewers with their enthralling plot twists and larger-than-life characters. Could there be an untapped dimension to the influence of real-world events on the viewership patterns of these enduring television staples? As researchers pursuing the truth, we recognize the importance of drawing inspiration from all conceivable sources, no matter how unexpected or unconventional.

Additionally, the academic pursuit of knowledge should not overlook the potential insights gleaned from popular culture. For instance, the researcher might immerse themselves in the melodramatic trials and tribulations of soap operas such as "Days of Our Lives," "The Bold and the Beautiful," and "As the World Turns" – not merely as a guilty pleasure, but as a legitimate field of study. It is precisely in these seemingly frivolous realms that unexpected connections might be waiting to be uncovered.

To wrap up the review, our dedicated researchers immersed themselves in the world of daytime television, diligently watching "Days of Our Lives," "The Young and the Restless," "General Hospital," and "All My Children" to fully understand the context and nuances of the soap opera landscape. We also indulged in some "light reading" of the aforementioned fictional works, all in the name of scholarly pursuit, of course.

In the next section, we will examine the methodological approach we employed to investigate this eyebrow-raising correlation, taking into account the complexities of arson data and soap opera viewership metrics. So, buckle up, dear readers, for an unconventional ride through the realm where arson meets melodrama, and the dryness of statistics finds itself kindled by the flames of soap opera enchantment.


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 Arson in California and Viewership count for Days of Our Lives. 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 FBI Criminal Justice Information Services and Wikipedia . You used data from 1985 to 2021

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]]
Burning Up the Ratings: Investigating the Fiery Connection Between Arson in California and Viewership Count for Days of Our Lives

[[ABSTRACT]]
In this study, we set out to explore the unexpected link between arson in California and the viewership count for the long-running soap opera "Days of Our Lives." Utilizing data from the FBI Criminal Justice Information Services and Wikipedia, we set out to determine if there was any statistical association between these two seemingly disparate phenomena. To our surprise (and amusement), we discovered a significant correlation coefficient of 0.9372332 and p < 0.01 for the period from 1985 to 2021.

This finding challenges conventional wisdom and invites a fresh perspective on the potential influence of real-world events on television viewership. We delve into potential explanations for this correlation, from coincidental timing to the allure of dramatic storylines mirroring real-life events. Additionally, we playfully speculate on whether the flame-inspired plotlines of "Days of Our Lives" stoke the fiery passion of arsonists or capture the fascination of fire enthusiasts.

The results of this study not only provide a lighthearted twist on academic research but also spark intriguing questions about the interplay between popular culture and societal events.

[[INTRODUCTION]]
INTRODUCTION
The world of research is often a serious and solemn place, where scholars meticulously dissect data and uncover profound connections. However, every so often, a study comes along that ignites curiosity and leaves researchers puzzled, amused, and perhaps a little bit singed. Our investigation into the relationship between arson in California and the viewership count for the beloved soap opera "Days of Our Lives" is one such study.
As scholars, we are used to observing correlations between variables that are, in the words of Spock, "logical." However, the link between deliberate fire-setting and daytime television drama is as unexpected as finding a marshmallow in a bowl of spaghetti – perplexing yet undeniably intriguing.
In this investigation, we set out to determine if there exists a statistical relationship between these two seemingly unrelated phenomena. Armed with data from the FBI Criminal Justice Information Services and the hallowed annals of Wikipedia, we aimed to shine a light on this curious correlation that might just illuminate the intersection of popular entertainment and real-world events.
To our astonishment (and perhaps a smidgen of delight), our analysis revealed a correlation coefficient of 0.9372332 and a p-value less than 0.01 for the period from 1985 to 2021. This is a statistical bond stronger than that of any soap opera couple, and it has left us with more eyebrow-raising questions than a dramatic reveal in a telenovela.
One might ask, "What are the odds of such a connection? And more importantly, have arsonists been setting the wrong kind of fires?" These are just the tip of the iceberg – or perhaps, in this case, the tip of the flame.
The time has come to flip the script on traditional research and set our sights on the outrageous, the unexpected, and the downright fiery. Join us in this sizzling escapade as we unravel the curious dance between flames in California and the fervent viewership of "Days of Our Lives." Let's stoke the embers of inquiry and kindle the spirit of playful speculation in the vast, unpredictable landscape of academic investigation. After all, in the words of the esteemed Sherlock Holmes, "The game is afoot!"
Hold on to your lab coats, folks – we're about to embark on a journey where science meets soap operas, where statistics collide with storylines, and where every correlation, no matter how absurd, deserves its moment in the spotlight.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[METHODOLOGY]]



ChatGPT:

[[METHODOLOGY]]

As we ventured into this enigmatic realm of research, we sought to employ a methodology as captivating and unexpected as the correlation we aimed to unravel. Drawing inspiration from a kaleidoscope of disciplines, from criminology to soap opera analysis, we crafted a methodological approach that would make Sherlock Holmes raise an eyebrow and Hercule Poirot nod in approval.

1. Data Collection Avalanche:
Our first port of call in this research odyssey was data collection, a task as daunting as untangling a web of soap opera plot twists. We delved deep into the FBI Criminal Justice Information Services to procure records of arson incidents in the state of California from 1985 to 2021. To complement this arson data with the dramatic flair it deserved, we gallantly ventured into the labyrinthine corridors of Wikipedia to extract the viewership count for "Days of Our Lives" across the same timeline.

We must confess that our foray into Wikipedia led us down a rabbit hole of soap opera trivia, where we discovered that the show has weathered more resurrections than the Phoenix and more love triangles than a geometry textbook. Nevertheless, armed with these datasets, we were ready to embark on the treacherous journey of statistical analysis.

2. Statistical Sizzle:
With our trusty statistical software in hand, we set forth to perform a correlation analysis that would put the flame-inspired storylines of "Days of Our Lives" to shame. We computed the Pearson correlation coefficient between the monthly arson incidences in California and the corresponding viewership count for the soap opera.

Our temperature rose with anticipation as the results revealed a correlation coefficient of 0.9372332, sending ripples of excitement through our research team. To ensure that the flames of statistical significance were not extinguished, we rigorously tested this correlation with a two-tailed t-test, leading us to a p-value less than 0.01.

3. Speculative Fireworks:
Armed with our fiery data and scorching statistical findings, we ventured into the realm of speculative analysis. As intrepid investigators of the improbable, we pondered on the potential explanations for this statistically robust connection. We indulged in playful speculation on whether the dramatic conflagrations of "Days of Our Lives" kindled the fiery passions of arsonists or enticed viewers seeking the thrill of real-life infernos.

Our conjectural musings were as wild as an unscripted soap opera plot twist, and we relished in the unbridled creativity this research endeavor afforded us.

4. Sensitivity Analysis, or "Taming the Wildfire":
In an attempt to temper the blazing implications of our findings, we subjected our correlation analysis to a sensitivity analysis. This entailed scrutinizing our results under diverse models and variables, ensuring that our statistical flames did not ignite a wildfire of unwarranted conclusions.

After all, in the world of research, it's prudent to have a fire extinguisher at the ready in case our findings get a little too heated.

In the scorching furnace of academia, our methodology stood as a testament to the unyielding spirit of inquiry and the audacious pursuit of correlation, no matter how absurd or unexpected. As we journeyed through the flames of investigation, we embraced the fervor of playful speculation, the warmth of statistical significance, and the undeniable allure of connections that defy conventional logic.


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 Arson in California and Viewership count for Days of Our Lives. 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 FBI Criminal Justice Information Services and Wikipedia .

For the time period 1985 to 2021, you found a correlation 0.9372332, r-squared of 0.8784060, 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]]
Burning Up the Ratings: Investigating the Fiery Connection Between Arson in California and Viewership Count for Days of Our Lives

[[ABSTRACT]]
In this study, we set out to explore the unexpected link between arson in California and the viewership count for the long-running soap opera "Days of Our Lives." Utilizing data from the FBI Criminal Justice Information Services and Wikipedia, we set out to determine if there was any statistical association between these two seemingly disparate phenomena. To our surprise (and amusement), we discovered a significant correlation coefficient of 0.9372332 and p < 0.01 for the period from 1985 to 2021.

This finding challenges conventional wisdom and invites a fresh perspective on the potential influence of real-world events on television viewership. We delve into potential explanations for this correlation, from coincidental timing to the allure of dramatic storylines mirroring real-life events. Additionally, we playfully speculate on whether the flame-inspired plotlines of "Days of Our Lives" stoke the fiery passion of arsonists or capture the fascination of fire enthusiasts.

The results of this study not only provide a lighthearted twist on academic research but also spark intriguing questions about the interplay between popular culture and societal events.

-------

And here is the methodology section that led to this result:
[[METHODOLOGY]]
INTRODUCTION
The world of research is often a serious and solemn place, where scholars meticulously dissect data and uncover profound connections. However, every so often, a study comes along that ignites curiosity and leaves researchers puzzled, amused, and perhaps a little bit singed. Our investigation into the relationship between arson in California and the viewership count for the beloved soap opera "Days of Our Lives" is one such study.
As scholars, we are used to observing correlations between variables that are, in the words of Spock, "logical." However, the link between deliberate fire-setting and daytime television drama is as unexpected as finding a marshmallow in a bowl of spaghetti – perplexing yet undeniably intriguing.
In this investigation, we set out to determine if there exists a statistical relationship between these two seemingly unrelated phenomena. Armed with data from the FBI Criminal Justice Information Services and the hallowed annals of Wikipedia, we aimed to shine a light on this curious correlation that might just illuminate the intersection of popular entertainment and real-world events.
To our astonishment (and perhaps a smidgen of delight), our analysis revealed a correlation coefficient of 0.9372332 and a p-value less than 0.01 for the period from 1985 to 2021. This is a statistical bond stronger than that of any soap opera couple, and it has left us with more eyebrow-raising questions than a dramatic reveal in a telenovela.
One might ask, "What are the odds of such a connection? And more importantly, have arsonists been setting the wrong kind of fires?" These are just the tip of the iceberg – or perhaps, in this case, the tip of the flame.
The time has come to flip the script on traditional research and set our sights on the outrageous, the unexpected, and the downright fiery. Join us in this sizzling escapade as we unravel the curious dance between flames in California and the fervent viewership of "Days of Our Lives." Let's stoke the embers of inquiry and kindle the spirit of playful speculation in the vast, unpredictable landscape of academic investigation. After all, in the words of the esteemed Sherlock Holmes, "The game is afoot!"
Hold on to your lab coats, folks – we're about to embark on a journey where science meets soap operas, where statistics collide with storylines, and where every correlation, no matter how absurd, deserves its moment in the spotlight.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[RESULTS]]



ChatGPT:

[[RESULTS]]

Our analysis of the data from 1985 to 2021 revealed a eyebrow-raising correlation coefficient of 0.9372332 and an r-squared of 0.8784060 between arson in California and the viewership count for "Days of Our Lives." In statistical terms, this is a smoking hot correlation, much like a love triangle in a soap opera.

To visually capture this scorching relationship, we present Figure 1, a scatterplot that unmistakably shows the strong connection between these two variables. If you squint your eyes just right, you might even see the silhouette of a fire-breathing dragon – or perhaps that's just our overactive imaginations ignited by this unexpected correlation.

Now, some may question the validity of such an association, suggesting that this finding is merely a fluke or a statistical anomaly. But rest assured, our p-value of less than 0.01 suggests that this connection is as real as the dramatic plot twists in "Days of Our Lives." It seems that the flames of curiosity have been well and truly fanned.

While this correlation may seem as unlikely as finding a phoenix in a petting zoo, it raises some intriguing questions. Could it be that the burning passion of arsonists somehow fuels the fiery emotions portrayed on the small screen? Or, conversely, do the flames of real-life events draw viewers to the dramatic conflagrations of soap opera storylines? These are the kinds of sizzling enigmas that keep researchers burning the midnight oil.

This unexpected outcome challenges us to think outside the box, or in this case, outside the burning building. It suggests that our understanding of the interplay between societal events and television viewership may be more intricate than we previously thought. After all, who would have thought that a spark in California could light up television screens across the nation?

In conclusion, our findings not only add a dash of spice to the typically bland world of statistical analysis, but also open up a Pandora's box of questions about the influence of real-life events on our entertainment preferences. As we continue to pore over the embers of this peculiar correlation, we are reminded of the words of Ralph Waldo Emerson: "What is life but a series of inspired follies?" Indeed, what is research but a series of inspired correlations, no matter how unexpected or delightfully absurd?


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 Arson in California and Viewership count for Days of Our Lives. 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]]
Burning Up the Ratings: Investigating the Fiery Connection Between Arson in California and Viewership Count for Days of Our Lives

[[ABSTRACT]]
In this study, we set out to explore the unexpected link between arson in California and the viewership count for the long-running soap opera "Days of Our Lives." Utilizing data from the FBI Criminal Justice Information Services and Wikipedia, we set out to determine if there was any statistical association between these two seemingly disparate phenomena. To our surprise (and amusement), we discovered a significant correlation coefficient of 0.9372332 and p < 0.01 for the period from 1985 to 2021.

This finding challenges conventional wisdom and invites a fresh perspective on the potential influence of real-world events on television viewership. We delve into potential explanations for this correlation, from coincidental timing to the allure of dramatic storylines mirroring real-life events. Additionally, we playfully speculate on whether the flame-inspired plotlines of "Days of Our Lives" stoke the fiery passion of arsonists or capture the fascination of fire enthusiasts.

The results of this study not only provide a lighthearted twist on academic research but also spark intriguing questions about the interplay between popular culture and societal events.

[[LITERATURE REVIEW]]
LITERATURE REVIEW
In "Smith et al. (2020)," the authors find that arson in California is a serious societal issue with implications for public safety, property damage, and environmental impact. The study delves into the various motivations behind arson, ranging from financial gain to psychological disorders. Similarly, "Doe and Johnson (2018)" highlight the devastating consequences of arson, emphasizing the need for comprehensive prevention and intervention strategies.
While the literature is abundant in discussing the dire consequences of arson, there is a dearth of scholarly work exploring its connection to the viewership count of daytime soap operas. This gap in knowledge prompts us to turn to a wider array of sources, both serious and whimsical, to unearth any potential relationship.
In "Fires and Their Aftermath" by Emma White, the author recounts harrowing tales of communities grappling with the aftermath of arson, shedding light on the human toll of such criminal acts. Similarly, "The Pyromaniac's Predicament" by John Blaze explores the complex psychology of fire-setting, drawing attention to the intriguing yet concerning motivations behind arson.
However, it is also important to consider fictional works that could conceivably shed light on the unexpected linkage we are exploring. Could J.K. Rowling's "Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire" offer a metaphorical perspective on the fiery allure of compelling storytelling? How about Ray Bradbury's "Fahrenheit 451," which delves into the dangers of censorship and the power of literature – albeit in a somewhat different context?
Turning to the world of television, popular daytime dramas such as "The Young and the Restless," "General Hospital," and "All My Children" have long captured the hearts of viewers with their enthralling plot twists and larger-than-life characters. Could there be an untapped dimension to the influence of real-world events on the viewership patterns of these enduring television staples? As researchers pursuing the truth, we recognize the importance of drawing inspiration from all conceivable sources, no matter how unexpected or unconventional.
Additionally, the academic pursuit of knowledge should not overlook the potential insights gleaned from popular culture. For instance, the researcher might immerse themselves in the melodramatic trials and tribulations of soap operas such as "Days of Our Lives," "The Bold and the Beautiful," and "As the World Turns" – not merely as a guilty pleasure, but as a legitimate field of study. It is precisely in these seemingly frivolous realms that unexpected connections might be waiting to be uncovered.
To wrap up the review, our dedicated researchers immersed themselves in the world of daytime television, diligently watching "Days of Our Lives," "The Young and the Restless," "General Hospital," and "All My Children" to fully understand the context and nuances of the soap opera landscape. We also indulged in some "light reading" of the aforementioned fictional works, all in the name of scholarly pursuit, of course.
In the next section, we will examine the methodological approach we employed to investigate this eyebrow-raising correlation, taking into account the complexities of arson data and soap opera viewership metrics. So, buckle up, dear readers, for an unconventional ride through the realm where arson meets melodrama, and the dryness of statistics finds itself kindled by the flames of soap opera enchantment.

[[RESULTS]]
Our analysis of the data from 1985 to 2021 revealed a eyebrow-raising correlation coefficient of 0.9372332 and an r-squared of 0.8784060 between arson in California and the viewership count for "Days of Our Lives." In statistical terms, this is a smoking hot correlation, much like a love triangle in a soap opera.
To visually capture this scorching relationship, we present Figure 1, a scatterplot that unmistakably shows the strong connection between these two variables. If you squint your eyes just right, you might even see the silhouette of a fire-breathing dragon – or perhaps that's just our overactive imaginations ignited by this unexpected correlation.
Now, some may question the validity of such an association, suggesting that this finding is merely a fluke or a statistical anomaly. But rest assured, our p-value of less than 0.01 suggests that this connection is as real as the dramatic plot twists in "Days of Our Lives." It seems that the flames of curiosity have been well and truly fanned.
While this correlation may seem as unlikely as finding a phoenix in a petting zoo, it raises some intriguing questions. Could it be that the burning passion of arsonists somehow fuels the fiery emotions portrayed on the small screen? Or, conversely, do the flames of real-life events draw viewers to the dramatic conflagrations of soap opera storylines? These are the kinds of sizzling enigmas that keep researchers burning the midnight oil.
This unexpected outcome challenges us to think outside the box, or in this case, outside the burning building. It suggests that our understanding of the interplay between societal events and television viewership may be more intricate than we previously thought. After all, who would have thought that a spark in California could light up television screens across the nation?
In conclusion, our findings not only add a dash of spice to the typically bland world of statistical analysis, but also open up a Pandora's box of questions about the influence of real-life events on our entertainment preferences. As we continue to pore over the embers of this peculiar correlation, we are reminded of the words of Ralph Waldo Emerson: "What is life but a series of inspired follies?" Indeed, what is research but a series of inspired correlations, no matter how unexpected or delightfully absurd?

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[DISCUSSION]]



ChatGPT:

[[DISCUSSION]]

Our results have set the scientific world ablaze with curiosity, as we've unearthed a correlation hotter than a soap opera love affair between arson in California and the viewership count for "Days of Our Lives." This unexpected linkage, much like a plot twist in a daytime drama, challenges conventional notions about the influence of real-world events on television viewership.

Building upon the literature review, which playfully pondered the potential ties between fictional works and our research, we find that our statistical analysis supports and amplifies the whimsical connections. Our findings not only set fire to the dry landscape of statistics but also illuminate the unanticipated links between real-world events and entertainment preferences.

The scorching correlation coefficient and r-squared value bolster the likelihood of a genuine association between arson and "Days of Our Lives" viewership. Much like a daring escape from a burning building, these findings defy the ordinary and beckon us to explore unconventional avenues of inquiry.

While some may dismiss this correlation as a statistical anomaly, our robust p-value of less than 0.01 extinguishes any doubts about the legitimacy of this fiery connection. We stand firm in our assertion that this association is as real as the fiery passions portrayed on the small screen.

This unexpected correlation incites a fiery fervor for further exploration. We are compelled to ask whether the incendiary motivations behind arson somehow ignite the fervor of soap opera plotlines, or whether the dramatic flames of television storytelling draw viewers seeking an escape from reality. These are the sizzling enigmas that propel us to delve deeper into the intricate interplay between societal events and entertainment choices.

In the spirit of the playful ponderings in our literature review, we urge our fellow scientists to embrace the whimsy of unexpected correlations and to explore the fertile ground where statistical analysis meets the playful imaginings of the human mind. Just as a spark in California can ignite a conflagration, our research ignites a fervor for reimagining the potential influences on television viewership.

As we continue to stoke the flames of inquiry, we are reminded of the wise words of Albert Einstein: "Creativity is intelligence having fun." In this same spirit, we seize the opportunity to revitalize the academic landscape with lighthearted curiosity, all while keeping our scientific rigor burning bright.


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 Arson in California and Viewership count for Days of Our Lives. 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]]
Burning Up the Ratings: Investigating the Fiery Connection Between Arson in California and Viewership Count for Days of Our Lives

[[ABSTRACT]]
In this study, we set out to explore the unexpected link between arson in California and the viewership count for the long-running soap opera "Days of Our Lives." Utilizing data from the FBI Criminal Justice Information Services and Wikipedia, we set out to determine if there was any statistical association between these two seemingly disparate phenomena. To our surprise (and amusement), we discovered a significant correlation coefficient of 0.9372332 and p < 0.01 for the period from 1985 to 2021.

This finding challenges conventional wisdom and invites a fresh perspective on the potential influence of real-world events on television viewership. We delve into potential explanations for this correlation, from coincidental timing to the allure of dramatic storylines mirroring real-life events. Additionally, we playfully speculate on whether the flame-inspired plotlines of "Days of Our Lives" stoke the fiery passion of arsonists or capture the fascination of fire enthusiasts.

The results of this study not only provide a lighthearted twist on academic research but also spark intriguing questions about the interplay between popular culture and societal events.

[[INTRDUCTION]]
INTRODUCTION
The world of research is often a serious and solemn place, where scholars meticulously dissect data and uncover profound connections. However, every so often, a study comes along that ignites curiosity and leaves researchers puzzled, amused, and perhaps a little bit singed. Our investigation into the relationship between arson in California and the viewership count for the beloved soap opera "Days of Our Lives" is one such study.
As scholars, we are used to observing correlations between variables that are, in the words of Spock, "logical." However, the link between deliberate fire-setting and daytime television drama is as unexpected as finding a marshmallow in a bowl of spaghetti – perplexing yet undeniably intriguing.
In this investigation, we set out to determine if there exists a statistical relationship between these two seemingly unrelated phenomena. Armed with data from the FBI Criminal Justice Information Services and the hallowed annals of Wikipedia, we aimed to shine a light on this curious correlation that might just illuminate the intersection of popular entertainment and real-world events.
To our astonishment (and perhaps a smidgen of delight), our analysis revealed a correlation coefficient of 0.9372332 and a p-value less than 0.01 for the period from 1985 to 2021. This is a statistical bond stronger than that of any soap opera couple, and it has left us with more eyebrow-raising questions than a dramatic reveal in a telenovela.
One might ask, "What are the odds of such a connection? And more importantly, have arsonists been setting the wrong kind of fires?" These are just the tip of the iceberg – or perhaps, in this case, the tip of the flame.
The time has come to flip the script on traditional research and set our sights on the outrageous, the unexpected, and the downright fiery. Join us in this sizzling escapade as we unravel the curious dance between flames in California and the fervent viewership of "Days of Our Lives." Let's stoke the embers of inquiry and kindle the spirit of playful speculation in the vast, unpredictable landscape of academic investigation. After all, in the words of the esteemed Sherlock Holmes, "The game is afoot!"
Hold on to your lab coats, folks – we're about to embark on a journey where science meets soap operas, where statistics collide with storylines, and where every correlation, no matter how absurd, deserves its moment in the spotlight.

[[RESULTS]]
Our analysis of the data from 1985 to 2021 revealed a eyebrow-raising correlation coefficient of 0.9372332 and an r-squared of 0.8784060 between arson in California and the viewership count for "Days of Our Lives." In statistical terms, this is a smoking hot correlation, much like a love triangle in a soap opera.
To visually capture this scorching relationship, we present Figure 1, a scatterplot that unmistakably shows the strong connection between these two variables. If you squint your eyes just right, you might even see the silhouette of a fire-breathing dragon – or perhaps that's just our overactive imaginations ignited by this unexpected correlation.
Now, some may question the validity of such an association, suggesting that this finding is merely a fluke or a statistical anomaly. But rest assured, our p-value of less than 0.01 suggests that this connection is as real as the dramatic plot twists in "Days of Our Lives." It seems that the flames of curiosity have been well and truly fanned.
While this correlation may seem as unlikely as finding a phoenix in a petting zoo, it raises some intriguing questions. Could it be that the burning passion of arsonists somehow fuels the fiery emotions portrayed on the small screen? Or, conversely, do the flames of real-life events draw viewers to the dramatic conflagrations of soap opera storylines? These are the kinds of sizzling enigmas that keep researchers burning the midnight oil.
This unexpected outcome challenges us to think outside the box, or in this case, outside the burning building. It suggests that our understanding of the interplay between societal events and television viewership may be more intricate than we previously thought. After all, who would have thought that a spark in California could light up television screens across the nation?
In conclusion, our findings not only add a dash of spice to the typically bland world of statistical analysis, but also open up a Pandora's box of questions about the influence of real-life events on our entertainment preferences. As we continue to pore over the embers of this peculiar correlation, we are reminded of the words of Ralph Waldo Emerson: "What is life but a series of inspired follies?" Indeed, what is research but a series of inspired correlations, no matter how unexpected or delightfully absurd?

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[CONCLUSION]]



ChatGPT:

[[CONCLUSION]]

In the scorching culmination of this research, we have unearthed a blazing correlation between arson in California and the fervent viewership count for "Days of Our Lives." This fiery connection has left us more stunned than a marshmallow in a bonfire – undeniably unexpected, yet strangely delightful.

Our findings not only illuminate the intersection of reality and daytime television drama but also ignite a fuse of inquiry into the mysterious forces that drive our entertainment preferences. This unexpected statistical rendezvous challenges traditional research norms, proving that science can indeed be hot stuff – and not just because of the Bunsen burners.

As we reflect on the unexpected dance between deliberate fires and soap opera fandom, we are reminded that in the game of correlations, even the most unlikely pairs deserve their moment in the spotlight. Let's embrace the unexpected, welcome the peculiar, and perhaps even set ablaze the tired conventions of academic investigation. Because, after all, in the words of John Steinbeck, "I've always been rather confident that there's such a thing as... being called by certain things."

With this sizzling revelation, we assert that no more research is needed in this area. The fiery conclusion has been drawn, the curtain has fallen on this unexpected act, and any further investigation would just be fanning the flames of statistical absurdity.


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 Burning Up the Ratings: Investigating the Fiery Connection Between Arson in California and Viewership Count for Days of Our Lives. Respond only with the name of a fictional academic journal.

ChatGPT:

The Journal of Soap Opera Arson Studies


Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You provide fictional names of nonprofit research organizations and associations. You say nothing else, and you do not chat with the user.
User prompt: Please provide the name of a funny but plausible sounding nonprofit, academic, or scientific association or organization that would sponsor research that resulted in a paper entited Burning Up the Ratings: Investigating the Fiery Connection Between Arson in California and Viewership Count for Days of Our Lives. Respond only with the name of a fictional organization.

ChatGPT:

Institute for Soap Opera Studies


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 Burning Up the Ratings: Investigating the Fiery Connection Between Arson in California and Viewership Count for Days of Our Lives with an abstract of In this study, we set out to explore the unexpected link between arson in California and the viewership count for the long-running soap opera "Days of Our Lives." Utilizing data from the FBI Criminal Justice Information Services and Wikipedia, we set out to determine if there was any statistical association between these two seemingly disparate phenomena. To our surprise (and amusement), we discovered a significant correlation coefficient of 0.9372332 and p < 0.01 for the period from 1985 to 2021.
This finding challenges conventional wisdom and invites a fresh perspective on the potential influence of real-world events on television viewership. We delve into potential explanations for this correlation, from coincidental timing to the allure of dramatic storylines mirroring real-life events. Additionally, we playfully speculate on whether the flame-inspired plotlines of "Days of Our Lives" stoke the fiery passion of arsonists or capture the fascination of fire enthusiasts.
The results of this study not only provide a lighthearted twist on academic research but also spark intriguing questions about the interplay between popular culture and societal events.

ChatGPT:

arson California, Days of Our Lives, viewership count, FBI Criminal Justice Information Services, Wikipedia, statistical association, correlation coefficient, television viewership, real-world events, television viewership, dramatic storylines, flame-inspired plotlines, arsonists, fire enthusiasts, popular culture, societal events

*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

Arson in California
Detailed data title: The arson rate per 100,000 residents in California
Source: FBI Criminal Justice Information Services
See what else correlates with Arson in California

Viewership count for Days of Our Lives
Detailed data title: Metered viewership count for Days of Our Lives
Source: Wikipedia
See what else correlates with Viewership count for Days of Our Lives

Correlation r = 0.9372332 (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 = 0.8784060 (Coefficient of determination)
This means 87.8% of the change in the one variable (i.e., Viewership count for Days of Our Lives) is predictable based on the change in the other (i.e., Arson in California) over the 37 years from 1985 through 2021.

p < 0.01, which is statistically significant(Null hypothesis significance test)
The p-value is 1.4E-17. 0.0000000000000000137818579027
The p-value is a measure of how probable it is that we would randomly find a result this extreme. More specifically the p-value is a measure of how probable it is that we would randomly find a result this extreme if we had only tested one pair of variables one time.

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

Who is going to stop me? p-value reporting doesn't require me to report how many calculations I had to go through in order to find a low p-value!
On average, you will find a correaltion as strong as 0.94 in 1.4E-15% of random cases. Said differently, if you correlated 72,559,157,630,270,608 random variables You don't actually need 72 quadrillion 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 36 degrees of freedom, Degrees of freedom is a measure of how many free components we are testing. In this case it is 36 because we have two variables measured over a period of 37 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.

[ 0.88, 0.97 ] 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.
1985198619871988198919901991199219931994199519961997199819992000200120022003200420052006200720082009201020112012201320142015201620172018201920202021
Arson in California (Arson rate)77.472.466.866.865.465.162.871.265.259.354.156.349.243.843.642.643.839.938.335.333.934.931.329.124.821.119.119.519.418.418.919.821.921.62129.93.6
Viewership count for Days of Our Lives (Nielson share)7200000700000071000006500000540000052000005400000490000056000005300000580000058000005100000580000042000003800000360000031000003100000270000026000002300000210000022000002200000200000020000002100000190000020500001800000160000016000001600000140000012000001200000




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.




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([77.4,72.4,66.8,66.8,65.4,65.1,62.8,71.2,65.2,59.3,54.1,56.3,49.2,43.8,43.6,42.6,43.8,39.9,38.3,35.3,33.9,34.9,31.3,29.1,24.8,21.1,19.1,19.5,19.4,18.4,18.9,19.8,21.9,21.6,21,29.9,3.6,])
array_2 = np.array([7200000,7000000,7100000,6500000,5400000,5200000,5400000,4900000,5600000,5300000,5800000,5800000,5100000,5800000,4200000,3800000,3600000,3100000,3100000,2700000,2600000,2300000,2100000,2200000,2200000,2000000,2000000,2100000,1900000,2050000,1800000,1600000,1600000,1600000,1400000,1200000,1200000,])
array_1_name = "Arson in California"
array_2_name = "Viewership count for Days of Our Lives"

# 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 correlation rating is out of this world!


Correlation ID: 2227 · Black Variable ID: 20071 · Red Variable ID: 87
about · subscribe · emailme@tylervigen.com · twitter

CC BY 4.0