about · email me · subscribe
Spurious correlation #2,849 · View random

A linear line chart with years as the X-axis and two variables on the Y-axis. The first variable is Air pollution in Washington, D.C. and the second variable is Viewership count for Days of Our Lives.  The chart goes from 1980 to 2021, and the two variables track closely in value over that time. Small Image
Download png
, svg

AI explanation

As the air cleared up in D.C., it took away the "smoggy" drama vibes that viewers craved, leading to a breath of fresh air. With the pollution levels dropping, it seems the Days of Our Lives lost some of its "smoky" allure. As absurd as it sounds, perhaps there's a bizarre connection between clean air and soap opera interest!

Model: dalle-3
Prompt: [ Concept art ] Generate an image depicting a bright, sunny day in Washington, D.C. The city skyline looms in the background, partially obscured by a thick haze of smog, emphasizing the high air pollution levels. Inside living rooms across the city, televisions display a noticeable drop in the number of viewers tuning in to watch Days of Our Lives. Meanwhile, a few individuals, wearing masks, are depicted leaving their homes and walking in a nearby park, opting to enjoy the fresh air and outdoor ambience instead of indoors. 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: Air pollution in Washington, D.C. 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: Minimalism Cute 2D animation Cybernetic art Parallax art Concept art
ChatGPT: Concept art

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 Air pollution in Washington, D.C. and Viewership count for Days of Our Lives, in the following situation: Because with cleaner air, people were less likely to stay indoors and watch TV, opting instead to go outside and enjoy the fresh air. As a result, viewership for Days of Our Lives decreased.. Keep the description simple.
ChatGPT: On a sunny day in Washington, D.C., the city skyline is marred by a thick haze of smog, indicating high air pollution levels. Meanwhile, inside living rooms across the city, TV screens show a noticeable drop in the number of viewers tuning in to watch Days of Our Lives. A few people, wearing masks, are shown leaving their homes and walking in the nearby park, enjoying the fresh air and choosing to be outdoors instead of inside watching TV.

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: [ Concept art ] and depicting this scene: On a sunny day in Washington, D.C., the city skyline is marred by a thick haze of smog, indicating high air pollution levels. Meanwhile, inside living rooms across the city, TV screens show a noticeable drop in the number of viewers tuning in to watch Days of Our Lives. A few people, wearing masks, are shown leaving their homes and walking in the nearby park, enjoying the fresh air and choosing to be outdoors instead of inside watching TV. Keep the visual depiction simple. Do not include any words or speech bubbles.
ChatGPT: [ Concept art ] Generate an image depicting a bright, sunny day in Washington, D.C. The city skyline looms in the background, partially obscured by a thick haze of smog, emphasizing the high air pollution levels. Inside living rooms across the city, televisions display a noticeable drop in the number of viewers tuning in to watch Days of Our Lives. Meanwhile, a few individuals, wearing masks, are depicted leaving their homes and walking in a nearby park, opting to enjoy the fresh air and outdoor ambience instead of indoors.

*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 Air pollution in Washington, D.C. caused Viewership count for Days of Our Lives to decrease. Include one good pun.

AI academic paper

(Because p < 0.01)
Hazy Days and Hazy Viewers: Exploring the Correlation Between Air Pollution and Days of Our Lives Viewership in Washington, D.C.

Journal of Unlikely Correlations

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 dry but witty academic researcher. You speak in the passive voice, and your writing sounds like it belongs in a medical or economics journal.You 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 pollution in Washington, D.C. and Viewership count for Days of Our Lives. You can't resist a good dad joke. Add a relevant dad joke related to the content every couple of sentences.

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

Your research team used data from Environmental Protection Agency and Wikipedia to assess this nagging question. You found a correlation coefficient of 0.8513344 and p < 0.01 for 1980 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]]
Hazy Days and Hazy Viewers: Exploring the Correlation Between Air Pollution and Days of Our Lives Viewership in Washington, D.C.

[[ABSTRACT]]
This paper rigorously investigates the relationship between air pollution and the viewership count for the enduring soap opera Days of Our Lives in the Washington, D.C. area. Drawing upon data from the Environmental Protection Agency and Wikipedia, our research team employed statistical analyses to elucidate the potential linkage between these seemingly disparate phenomena. Surprisingly, we found a remarkably strong correlation coefficient of 0.8513344 and p < 0.01 for the years 1980 to 2021, indicating a robust association between the level of air pollution and the number of viewers tuning in to the melodramatic escapades of the fictional town of Salem.

It seems that the haze in the air is paralleled by a haze in the minds of the audience, as our findings suggest that increases in air pollution are linked to heightened viewership of Days of Our Lives. Perhaps the age-old question of "Who killed Laura Horton?" becomes more pressing amidst environmental adversity. This unexpected correlation raises intriguing questions about the potential influence of external factors on television preferences and emphasizes the need for further interdisciplinary research. In conclusion, our study sheds light on a surprising correlation and prompts a reevaluation of the societal impacts of both air pollution and daytime dramas.


Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You are a dry but witty academic researcher. You speak in the passive voice, and your writing sounds like it belongs in a medical or economics journal.You draft the 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 pollution in Washington, D.C. and Viewership count for Days of Our Lives. You can't resist a good dad joke. Add a relevant dad joke related to the content every couple of sentences. 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]]
Hazy Days and Hazy Viewers: Exploring the Correlation Between Air Pollution and Days of Our Lives Viewership in Washington, D.C.

[[ABSTRACT]]
This paper rigorously investigates the relationship between air pollution and the viewership count for the enduring soap opera Days of Our Lives in the Washington, D.C. area. Drawing upon data from the Environmental Protection Agency and Wikipedia, our research team employed statistical analyses to elucidate the potential linkage between these seemingly disparate phenomena. Surprisingly, we found a remarkably strong correlation coefficient of 0.8513344 and p < 0.01 for the years 1980 to 2021, indicating a robust association between the level of air pollution and the number of viewers tuning in to the melodramatic escapades of the fictional town of Salem.

It seems that the haze in the air is paralleled by a haze in the minds of the audience, as our findings suggest that increases in air pollution are linked to heightened viewership of Days of Our Lives. Perhaps the age-old question of "Who killed Laura Horton?" becomes more pressing amidst environmental adversity. This unexpected correlation raises intriguing questions about the potential influence of external factors on television preferences and emphasizes the need for further interdisciplinary research. In conclusion, our study sheds light on a surprising correlation and prompts a reevaluation of the societal impacts of both air pollution and daytime dramas.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[INTRODUCTION]]



ChatGPT:
[[INTRODUCTION]]

The air we breathe is a vital component of our daily lives, impacting not only our physical health but also our cognitive and perceptual processes. In recent years, there has been growing concern about the detrimental effects of air pollution on human health, with particular attention given to respiratory and cardiovascular diseases. However, the potential influence of air pollution on non-health-related behaviors and activities remains an intriguing area of investigation.

Between the hazy skies and the hazy plotlines, there seems to be a strong correlation between the levels of air pollution and the viewership count for the long-running soap opera Days of Our Lives in the Washington, D.C. area. It's almost as if the citizens of Salem have sought refuge in the hazy daydreams of daytime television to escape the haze in the air.

As the saying goes, "Where there's smog, there's drama." It is in this light that our research aims to explore the unexpected connection between air pollution and the enduring allure of daytime melodramas. This study seeks to uncover whether the atmospheric conditions in Washington, D.C. have a discernible impact on the audience's inclination to tune into the dramatic saga of the Horton and Brady families. It seems the air pollution in the nation's capital may be inadvertently contributing to the "Days" of our lives indeed.

The seemingly disparate nature of these two phenomena sparks curiosity and calls for systematic investigation, as it is important to understand the potential influence of environmental factors on entertainment choices. Consequently, this study introduces an exciting twist to the research landscape, blending air quality measurements and television viewership data to uncover an unexpected correlation with potential far-reaching implications. We look forward to shedding light on this puzzling relationship and perhaps, offering a breath of fresh air to the discourse on environmental and media influences.


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

Please make up a literature review section of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between Air pollution in Washington, D.C. and Viewership count for Days of Our Lives. You can't resist a good dad joke. Add a relevant dad joke related to the content every couple of sentences.

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

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

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

Here is the title and abstract of the paper:
[[TITLE]]
Hazy Days and Hazy Viewers: Exploring the Correlation Between Air Pollution and Days of Our Lives Viewership in Washington, D.C.

[[ABSTRACT]]
This paper rigorously investigates the relationship between air pollution and the viewership count for the enduring soap opera Days of Our Lives in the Washington, D.C. area. Drawing upon data from the Environmental Protection Agency and Wikipedia, our research team employed statistical analyses to elucidate the potential linkage between these seemingly disparate phenomena. Surprisingly, we found a remarkably strong correlation coefficient of 0.8513344 and p < 0.01 for the years 1980 to 2021, indicating a robust association between the level of air pollution and the number of viewers tuning in to the melodramatic escapades of the fictional town of Salem.

It seems that the haze in the air is paralleled by a haze in the minds of the audience, as our findings suggest that increases in air pollution are linked to heightened viewership of Days of Our Lives. Perhaps the age-old question of "Who killed Laura Horton?" becomes more pressing amidst environmental adversity. This unexpected correlation raises intriguing questions about the potential influence of external factors on television preferences and emphasizes the need for further interdisciplinary research. In conclusion, our study sheds light on a surprising correlation and prompts a reevaluation of the societal impacts of both air pollution and daytime dramas.

-------

And here is the introduction section that led to this literature review:
[[INTRODUCTION]]
The air we breathe is a vital component of our daily lives, impacting not only our physical health but also our cognitive and perceptual processes. In recent years, there has been growing concern about the detrimental effects of air pollution on human health, with particular attention given to respiratory and cardiovascular diseases. However, the potential influence of air pollution on non-health-related behaviors and activities remains an intriguing area of investigation.
Between the hazy skies and the hazy plotlines, there seems to be a strong correlation between the levels of air pollution and the viewership count for the long-running soap opera Days of Our Lives in the Washington, D.C. area. It's almost as if the citizens of Salem have sought refuge in the hazy daydreams of daytime television to escape the haze in the air.
As the saying goes, "Where there's smog, there's drama." It is in this light that our research aims to explore the unexpected connection between air pollution and the enduring allure of daytime melodramas. This study seeks to uncover whether the atmospheric conditions in Washington, D.C. have a discernible impact on the audience's inclination to tune into the dramatic saga of the Horton and Brady families. It seems the air pollution in the nation's capital may be inadvertently contributing to the "Days" of our lives indeed.
The seemingly disparate nature of these two phenomena sparks curiosity and calls for systematic investigation, as it is important to understand the potential influence of environmental factors on entertainment choices. Consequently, this study introduces an exciting twist to the research landscape, blending air quality measurements and television viewership data to uncover an unexpected correlation with potential far-reaching implications. We look forward to shedding light on this puzzling relationship and perhaps, offering a breath of fresh air to the discourse on environmental and media influences.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[LITERATURE REVIEW]]



ChatGPT:
[[LITERATURE REVIEW]]

In "Smith and Doe (2015)," the authors find that air pollution has been linked to a range of adverse health effects, including respiratory and cardiovascular diseases. The impact of air pollution on human health has been a focal point of environmental research, with efforts to mitigate its effects encompassing various policy and public health initiatives. However, the potential influence of air pollution on non-health-related behaviors and activities remains an intriguing area of investigation.

Dad Joke #1: How do you know air pollution is a serious issue? It's nothing to sneeze at!

In "Jones (2017)," the author delves into the societal and environmental impacts of air pollution, emphasizing the need for interdisciplinary research to understand its complex ramifications. The atmospheric conditions in urban areas, particularly those with high vehicular and industrial activity, have been identified as significant contributors to air pollution levels.

Dad Joke #2: Did you hear about the air pollution-based comedy? It's so bad, it's laughable!

Moving beyond the traditional scope of air pollution research, the unexpected correlation between air pollution and entertainment preferences has garnered attention in recent literature. The unanticipated link between air quality and viewership count for soap operas presents a unique intersection of environment and media influences, prompting a reevaluation of the societal impacts of both air pollution and daytime dramas.

In "Clean Air, Clear Mind: The Impact of Environmental Conditions on Cognitive Processing," an analysis of environmental factors in relation to cognitive functioning revealed intriguing findings. While the focus of the study was not on television viewership, the research lays a foundation for exploring the potential influence of atmospheric conditions on cognitive processes and decision-making, including entertainment choices.

Dad Joke #3: Why did the TV show break up with the air pollution? It couldn't handle the drama!

Further expanding the purview of environmental influences, the correlation between air pollution and viewership count for soap operas in urban settings points to the need for nuanced investigations into the interplay of environmental conditions and leisure activities. As such, the study at hand seeks to unravel the enigmatic relationship between air pollution levels and the enduring appeal of daytime melodramas in Washington, D.C.

Dad Joke #4: What did the air pollution say to the television? Let's make some smoggy drama!

In "Breathless in Salem: The Atmospheric Allure of Daytime Dramas," the authors examine the cultural and environmental dimensions of televised soap operas, offering insights into the enduring allure of fictional narratives amidst atmospheric adversity. The unforeseen correlation between air pollution and soap opera viewership underscores the complexities of human behavior and the potential impact of external factors on entertainment preferences.

Straying from conventional academic sources, the literature review encompasses diverse sources, including fictional narratives that parallel the themes of drama and environmental intrigue. Works such as "The Smoggy Saga of Salem" and "Airborne Allure: A Love Story in Hazy Heights" present imaginative scenarios that blur the boundaries between air pollution and the allure of melodramatic storytelling.

Dad Joke #5: Did you hear about the romance between the pollution and the soap opera? It was quite a hazy love story!

Finally, with a touch of levity, the literature review extends to unconventional sources, encompassing the whimsical insights from the backs of shampoo bottles and the narratives of talking air particles. While these sources may lack empirical rigor, their playful engagement with the themes of air pollution and televised dramas serves as a lighthearted addition to the multidimensional exploration of the unexpected correlation at hand.

Dad Joke #6: What did the shampoo bottle say to the soap opera? Let's lather up some entertainment!


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

Please make up the methodology section of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between Air pollution in Washington, D.C. and Viewership count for Days of Our Lives. You can't resist a good dad joke. Add a relevant dad joke related to the content every couple of sentences. 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 Wikipedia . You used data from 1980 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]]
Hazy Days and Hazy Viewers: Exploring the Correlation Between Air Pollution and Days of Our Lives Viewership in Washington, D.C.

[[ABSTRACT]]
This paper rigorously investigates the relationship between air pollution and the viewership count for the enduring soap opera Days of Our Lives in the Washington, D.C. area. Drawing upon data from the Environmental Protection Agency and Wikipedia, our research team employed statistical analyses to elucidate the potential linkage between these seemingly disparate phenomena. Surprisingly, we found a remarkably strong correlation coefficient of 0.8513344 and p < 0.01 for the years 1980 to 2021, indicating a robust association between the level of air pollution and the number of viewers tuning in to the melodramatic escapades of the fictional town of Salem.

It seems that the haze in the air is paralleled by a haze in the minds of the audience, as our findings suggest that increases in air pollution are linked to heightened viewership of Days of Our Lives. Perhaps the age-old question of "Who killed Laura Horton?" becomes more pressing amidst environmental adversity. This unexpected correlation raises intriguing questions about the potential influence of external factors on television preferences and emphasizes the need for further interdisciplinary research. In conclusion, our study sheds light on a surprising correlation and prompts a reevaluation of the societal impacts of both air pollution and daytime dramas.

[[INTRODUCTION]]
The air we breathe is a vital component of our daily lives, impacting not only our physical health but also our cognitive and perceptual processes. In recent years, there has been growing concern about the detrimental effects of air pollution on human health, with particular attention given to respiratory and cardiovascular diseases. However, the potential influence of air pollution on non-health-related behaviors and activities remains an intriguing area of investigation.
Between the hazy skies and the hazy plotlines, there seems to be a strong correlation between the levels of air pollution and the viewership count for the long-running soap opera Days of Our Lives in the Washington, D.C. area. It's almost as if the citizens of Salem have sought refuge in the hazy daydreams of daytime television to escape the haze in the air.
As the saying goes, "Where there's smog, there's drama." It is in this light that our research aims to explore the unexpected connection between air pollution and the enduring allure of daytime melodramas. This study seeks to uncover whether the atmospheric conditions in Washington, D.C. have a discernible impact on the audience's inclination to tune into the dramatic saga of the Horton and Brady families. It seems the air pollution in the nation's capital may be inadvertently contributing to the "Days" of our lives indeed.
The seemingly disparate nature of these two phenomena sparks curiosity and calls for systematic investigation, as it is important to understand the potential influence of environmental factors on entertainment choices. Consequently, this study introduces an exciting twist to the research landscape, blending air quality measurements and television viewership data to uncover an unexpected correlation with potential far-reaching implications. We look forward to shedding light on this puzzling relationship and perhaps, offering a breath of fresh air to the discourse on environmental and media influences.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[METHODOLOGY]]



ChatGPT:

[[METHODOLOGY]]

In order to elucidate the potential association between air pollution and viewership of Days of Our Lives in Washington, D.C., our research team employed a combination of data collection, statistical analysis, and a hint of whimsy. Data on air pollution levels, specifically the concentrations of particulate matter (PM2.5 and PM10), carbon monoxide, sulfur dioxide, and nitrogen dioxide, were obtained from the Environmental Protection Agency's Air Quality System. Concurrently, viewership data for Days of Our Lives in the Washington, D.C. area were gathered from publicly available sources, primarily Wikipedia, with consideration given to Nielsen ratings and online streaming figures.

The data sets were subjected to rigorous scrutiny, akin to examining salem's most perplexing mysteries. Statistical analyses, including Pearson correlation coefficients, regression models, and time series analyses, were carried out to explore the potential relationship between air pollution levels and viewership counts for Days of Our Lives. Our research team also conducted various sensitivity analyses to ensure the robustness of the findings.

After carefully crunching the numbers, we detected a positively hazy correlation between air pollution levels and Days of Our Lives viewership counts. The correlation coefficient of 0.8513344, with p < 0.01, suggests a statistically significant correlation, much like uncovering a dramatic plot twist in a soap opera. This surprising finding implies that as the air becomes hazier, the allure of the dramatic escapades in Salem intensifies, much like the increasing suspense in a daytime drama.

Furthermore, considering the temporal aspect of the data, we employed time series analyses to investigate the potential lagged effects of air pollution on viewership. The results indicated a delayed but persistent influence of air pollution on Days of Our Lives viewership, adding a dimension of intrigue akin to uncovering the intricacies of a long-running television series.

Our data collection and analysis process, though unconventional in its combination of environmental and entertainment metrics, provided robust evidence of the unexpected correlation between air pollution and Days of Our Lives viewership in the Washington, D.C. area.

The unexpected correlation we observed is sure to leave a lasting impression, much like the cliffhangers that characterize the world of soap operas. While our findings shed light on this surprising relationship, they also prompt a reevaluation of the societal impacts of both air pollution and daytime dramas. This study emphasizes the need for a more interdisciplinary approach to understanding the influences on entertainment choices, reminding us of the interconnected nature of the world and the unexpected connections that may reside amidst the haze.


Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You are a dry but witty academic researcher. You speak in the passive voice, and your writing sounds like it belongs in a medical or economics journal.You draft the 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 pollution in Washington, D.C. and Viewership count for Days of Our Lives. You can't resist a good dad joke. Add a relevant dad joke related to the content every couple of sentences. 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 Wikipedia .

For the time period 1980 to 2021, you found a correlation 0.8513344, r-squared of 0.7247703, 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]]
Hazy Days and Hazy Viewers: Exploring the Correlation Between Air Pollution and Days of Our Lives Viewership in Washington, D.C.

[[ABSTRACT]]
This paper rigorously investigates the relationship between air pollution and the viewership count for the enduring soap opera Days of Our Lives in the Washington, D.C. area. Drawing upon data from the Environmental Protection Agency and Wikipedia, our research team employed statistical analyses to elucidate the potential linkage between these seemingly disparate phenomena. Surprisingly, we found a remarkably strong correlation coefficient of 0.8513344 and p < 0.01 for the years 1980 to 2021, indicating a robust association between the level of air pollution and the number of viewers tuning in to the melodramatic escapades of the fictional town of Salem.

It seems that the haze in the air is paralleled by a haze in the minds of the audience, as our findings suggest that increases in air pollution are linked to heightened viewership of Days of Our Lives. Perhaps the age-old question of "Who killed Laura Horton?" becomes more pressing amidst environmental adversity. This unexpected correlation raises intriguing questions about the potential influence of external factors on television preferences and emphasizes the need for further interdisciplinary research. In conclusion, our study sheds light on a surprising correlation and prompts a reevaluation of the societal impacts of both air pollution and daytime dramas.

-------

And here is the methodology section that led to this result:
[[METHODOLOGY]]
The air we breathe is a vital component of our daily lives, impacting not only our physical health but also our cognitive and perceptual processes. In recent years, there has been growing concern about the detrimental effects of air pollution on human health, with particular attention given to respiratory and cardiovascular diseases. However, the potential influence of air pollution on non-health-related behaviors and activities remains an intriguing area of investigation.
Between the hazy skies and the hazy plotlines, there seems to be a strong correlation between the levels of air pollution and the viewership count for the long-running soap opera Days of Our Lives in the Washington, D.C. area. It's almost as if the citizens of Salem have sought refuge in the hazy daydreams of daytime television to escape the haze in the air.
As the saying goes, "Where there's smog, there's drama." It is in this light that our research aims to explore the unexpected connection between air pollution and the enduring allure of daytime melodramas. This study seeks to uncover whether the atmospheric conditions in Washington, D.C. have a discernible impact on the audience's inclination to tune into the dramatic saga of the Horton and Brady families. It seems the air pollution in the nation's capital may be inadvertently contributing to the "Days" of our lives indeed.
The seemingly disparate nature of these two phenomena sparks curiosity and calls for systematic investigation, as it is important to understand the potential influence of environmental factors on entertainment choices. Consequently, this study introduces an exciting twist to the research landscape, blending air quality measurements and television viewership data to uncover an unexpected correlation with potential far-reaching implications. We look forward to shedding light on this puzzling relationship and perhaps, offering a breath of fresh air to the discourse on environmental and media influences.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[RESULTS]]



ChatGPT:

[[RESULTS]]

The statistical analysis revealed a significant correlation between air pollution levels and the viewership count for Days of Our Lives in the Washington, D.C. area from 1980 to 2021. The correlation coefficient of 0.8513344 indicates a strong positive association between these two variables. This finding suggests that as air pollution levels increased, so did the number of viewers tuning in to the daytime drama. It appears that the atmospheric haze was accompanied by a surge in small screen voyeurism.

The R-squared value of 0.7247703 further strengthens the evidence for the relationship between air pollution and Days of Our Lives viewership, indicating that approximately 72.5% of the variability in viewership count can be explained by changes in air pollution levels. It seems the plotlines of Salem were not the only things clouded by the environmental haze.

The p-value of less than 0.01 provides strong evidence against the null hypothesis of no correlation, corroborating the robustness of the observed relationship. This statistical significance supports the argument that there is a genuine association between air pollution and viewership of the enduring soap opera in the Washington, D.C. area.

Figure 1 displays the scatterplot illustrating the positive correlation between air pollution levels and Days of Our Lives viewership count. The data points form a clear ascending pattern, emphasizing the concurrent increase in air pollution and viewership over the years. It appears that the melodramatic allure of Days of Our Lives becomes particularly irresistible amidst hazier atmospheric conditions.

One can't help but wonder if the citizens of Washington, D.C. sought solace in the fictional trials and tribulations of Salem's inhabitants as the environmental conditions outside grew ever more tumultuous. The unexpected convergence of these seemingly unrelated variables invites a reevaluation of the societal influences of environmental quality and entertainment choices.

In conclusion, this study has unearthed a surprising correlation between air pollution levels and Days of Our Lives viewership, underscoring the need for further investigation into the interplay of environmental factors and television preferences. The findings prompt a reconsideration of the potential impact of external conditions on audience behavior and serve as a reminder that, as with the plot twists in soap operas, correlations in the real world can also be unexpected and riveting.


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

Please make up the discussion section of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between Air pollution in Washington, D.C. and Viewership count for Days of Our Lives. You can't resist a good dad joke. Add a relevant dad joke related to the content every couple of sentences. 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]]
Hazy Days and Hazy Viewers: Exploring the Correlation Between Air Pollution and Days of Our Lives Viewership in Washington, D.C.

[[ABSTRACT]]
This paper rigorously investigates the relationship between air pollution and the viewership count for the enduring soap opera Days of Our Lives in the Washington, D.C. area. Drawing upon data from the Environmental Protection Agency and Wikipedia, our research team employed statistical analyses to elucidate the potential linkage between these seemingly disparate phenomena. Surprisingly, we found a remarkably strong correlation coefficient of 0.8513344 and p < 0.01 for the years 1980 to 2021, indicating a robust association between the level of air pollution and the number of viewers tuning in to the melodramatic escapades of the fictional town of Salem.

It seems that the haze in the air is paralleled by a haze in the minds of the audience, as our findings suggest that increases in air pollution are linked to heightened viewership of Days of Our Lives. Perhaps the age-old question of "Who killed Laura Horton?" becomes more pressing amidst environmental adversity. This unexpected correlation raises intriguing questions about the potential influence of external factors on television preferences and emphasizes the need for further interdisciplinary research. In conclusion, our study sheds light on a surprising correlation and prompts a reevaluation of the societal impacts of both air pollution and daytime dramas.

[[LITERATURE REVIEW]]
In "Smith and Doe (2015)," the authors find that air pollution has been linked to a range of adverse health effects, including respiratory and cardiovascular diseases. The impact of air pollution on human health has been a focal point of environmental research, with efforts to mitigate its effects encompassing various policy and public health initiatives. However, the potential influence of air pollution on non-health-related behaviors and activities remains an intriguing area of investigation.
Dad Joke #1: How do you know air pollution is a serious issue? It's nothing to sneeze at!
In "Jones (2017)," the author delves into the societal and environmental impacts of air pollution, emphasizing the need for interdisciplinary research to understand its complex ramifications. The atmospheric conditions in urban areas, particularly those with high vehicular and industrial activity, have been identified as significant contributors to air pollution levels.
Dad Joke #2: Did you hear about the air pollution-based comedy? It's so bad, it's laughable!
Moving beyond the traditional scope of air pollution research, the unexpected correlation between air pollution and entertainment preferences has garnered attention in recent literature. The unanticipated link between air quality and viewership count for soap operas presents a unique intersection of environment and media influences, prompting a reevaluation of the societal impacts of both air pollution and daytime dramas.
In "Clean Air, Clear Mind: The Impact of Environmental Conditions on Cognitive Processing," an analysis of environmental factors in relation to cognitive functioning revealed intriguing findings. While the focus of the study was not on television viewership, the research lays a foundation for exploring the potential influence of atmospheric conditions on cognitive processes and decision-making, including entertainment choices.
Dad Joke #3: Why did the TV show break up with the air pollution? It couldn't handle the drama!
Further expanding the purview of environmental influences, the correlation between air pollution and viewership count for soap operas in urban settings points to the need for nuanced investigations into the interplay of environmental conditions and leisure activities. As such, the study at hand seeks to unravel the enigmatic relationship between air pollution levels and the enduring appeal of daytime melodramas in Washington, D.C.
Dad Joke #4: What did the air pollution say to the television? Let's make some smoggy drama!
In "Breathless in Salem: The Atmospheric Allure of Daytime Dramas," the authors examine the cultural and environmental dimensions of televised soap operas, offering insights into the enduring allure of fictional narratives amidst atmospheric adversity. The unforeseen correlation between air pollution and soap opera viewership underscores the complexities of human behavior and the potential impact of external factors on entertainment preferences.
Straying from conventional academic sources, the literature review encompasses diverse sources, including fictional narratives that parallel the themes of drama and environmental intrigue. Works such as "The Smoggy Saga of Salem" and "Airborne Allure: A Love Story in Hazy Heights" present imaginative scenarios that blur the boundaries between air pollution and the allure of melodramatic storytelling.
Dad Joke #5: Did you hear about the romance between the pollution and the soap opera? It was quite a hazy love story!
Finally, with a touch of levity, the literature review extends to unconventional sources, encompassing the whimsical insights from the backs of shampoo bottles and the narratives of talking air particles. While these sources may lack empirical rigor, their playful engagement with the themes of air pollution and televised dramas serves as a lighthearted addition to the multidimensional exploration of the unexpected correlation at hand.
Dad Joke #6: What did the shampoo bottle say to the soap opera? Let's lather up some entertainment!

[[RESULTS]]
The statistical analysis revealed a significant correlation between air pollution levels and the viewership count for Days of Our Lives in the Washington, D.C. area from 1980 to 2021. The correlation coefficient of 0.8513344 indicates a strong positive association between these two variables. This finding suggests that as air pollution levels increased, so did the number of viewers tuning in to the daytime drama. It appears that the atmospheric haze was accompanied by a surge in small screen voyeurism.
The R-squared value of 0.7247703 further strengthens the evidence for the relationship between air pollution and Days of Our Lives viewership, indicating that approximately 72.5% of the variability in viewership count can be explained by changes in air pollution levels. It seems the plotlines of Salem were not the only things clouded by the environmental haze.
The p-value of less than 0.01 provides strong evidence against the null hypothesis of no correlation, corroborating the robustness of the observed relationship. This statistical significance supports the argument that there is a genuine association between air pollution and viewership of the enduring soap opera in the Washington, D.C. area.
Figure 1 displays the scatterplot illustrating the positive correlation between air pollution levels and Days of Our Lives viewership count. The data points form a clear ascending pattern, emphasizing the concurrent increase in air pollution and viewership over the years. It appears that the melodramatic allure of Days of Our Lives becomes particularly irresistible amidst hazier atmospheric conditions.
One can't help but wonder if the citizens of Washington, D.C. sought solace in the fictional trials and tribulations of Salem's inhabitants as the environmental conditions outside grew ever more tumultuous. The unexpected convergence of these seemingly unrelated variables invites a reevaluation of the societal influences of environmental quality and entertainment choices.
In conclusion, this study has unearthed a surprising correlation between air pollution levels and Days of Our Lives viewership, underscoring the need for further investigation into the interplay of environmental factors and television preferences. The findings prompt a reconsideration of the potential impact of external conditions on audience behavior and serve as a reminder that, as with the plot twists in soap operas, correlations in the real world can also be unexpected and riveting.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[DISCUSSION]]



ChatGPT:

[[DISCUSSION]]

The findings of this study provide compelling evidence for a strong and significant correlation between air pollution levels and the viewership count for Days of Our Lives in the Washington, D.C. area. While the initial proposition of investigating such an association may have seemed like an entertaining diversion, the robust correlation coefficient of 0.8513344 and p < 0.01 underscores the legitimacy of this unexpected linkage. This unforeseen correspondence parallels the unpredictable plot twists that captivate the audience of the daytime drama, further emphasizing the need for interdisciplinary exploration into the influences of environmental conditions on leisure activities.

The results of our research align with previous works that have delved into the unanticipated connections between atmospheric conditions and entertainment preferences. The supportive nature of our findings bolsters the credence of prior research that has highlighted the potential influence of external factors on television viewership. As the haze in the air seems to be mirrored by a haze in the minds of the audience, the age-old question of "Who killed Laura Horton?" takes on a new dimension amidst the environmental backdrop. This unexpected correlation raises intriguing questions about the potential impact of air pollution on entertainment choices and serves as a reminder that real-world correlations can be as unpredictable and engaging as the plot twists in soap operas.

In line with Smith and Doe (2015), our findings underscore the need to recognize the multifaceted effects of air pollution on human behavior, extending beyond traditional health-related manifestations. The robust correlation coefficient we observed aligns with the consistent efforts in the field to understand the complex ramifications of air pollution and emphasizes the need for nuanced investigations into the interplay of environmental conditions and leisure activities. The unexpected convergence of these seemingly unrelated variables prompts a reevaluation of the societal influences of environmental quality and entertainment choices, further supporting the call for interdisciplinary research efforts to unravel the enigmatic relationship between environmental conditions and cultural preferences.

Moreover, the substantial R-squared value of 0.7247703 indicates that approximately 72.5% of the variability in Days of Our Lives viewership count can be explained by changes in air pollution levels. This statistical evidence resonates with the observations in "Breathless in Salem: The Atmospheric Allure of Daytime Dramas," emphasizing the potential impact of atmospheric conditions on media consumption patterns. The correlation between air pollution levels and the enduring appeal of daytime melodramas in Washington, D.C. underscores the complexities of human behavior and the potential influence of external factors on entertainment preferences.

Our study not only contributes to the growing body of literature on the interplay between environmental influences and cultural phenomena but also serves as a reminder to approach seemingly unconventional research inquiries with an open mind. As the unexpected convergence of air pollution and soap opera viewership unfolds, it becomes evident that correlations in the real world can be as unexpected and captivating as the plot twists in daytime dramas. This study highlights the pressing need for further interdisciplinary research to disentangle the complex interplay of environmental conditions and leisure activities, reminding us that even in the realm of empirical investigations, there is room for unexpected intrigue and humor.

In the realm of hazy hypotheses, it turns out that the connection between air pollution and Days of Our Lives viewership is as compelling as a cliffhanger ending. As we await the next installment of research, the unforeseen correlations that emerge continue to demonstrate that in both soap operas and scientific inquiry, the most engaging narratives often defy expectations and conventional boundaries.


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

Please make up a short conclusion of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between Air pollution in Washington, D.C. and Viewership count for Days of Our Lives. You can't resist a good dad joke. Add a relevant dad joke related to the content every couple of sentences. 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]]
Hazy Days and Hazy Viewers: Exploring the Correlation Between Air Pollution and Days of Our Lives Viewership in Washington, D.C.

[[ABSTRACT]]
This paper rigorously investigates the relationship between air pollution and the viewership count for the enduring soap opera Days of Our Lives in the Washington, D.C. area. Drawing upon data from the Environmental Protection Agency and Wikipedia, our research team employed statistical analyses to elucidate the potential linkage between these seemingly disparate phenomena. Surprisingly, we found a remarkably strong correlation coefficient of 0.8513344 and p < 0.01 for the years 1980 to 2021, indicating a robust association between the level of air pollution and the number of viewers tuning in to the melodramatic escapades of the fictional town of Salem.

It seems that the haze in the air is paralleled by a haze in the minds of the audience, as our findings suggest that increases in air pollution are linked to heightened viewership of Days of Our Lives. Perhaps the age-old question of "Who killed Laura Horton?" becomes more pressing amidst environmental adversity. This unexpected correlation raises intriguing questions about the potential influence of external factors on television preferences and emphasizes the need for further interdisciplinary research. In conclusion, our study sheds light on a surprising correlation and prompts a reevaluation of the societal impacts of both air pollution and daytime dramas.

[[INTRDUCTION]]
The air we breathe is a vital component of our daily lives, impacting not only our physical health but also our cognitive and perceptual processes. In recent years, there has been growing concern about the detrimental effects of air pollution on human health, with particular attention given to respiratory and cardiovascular diseases. However, the potential influence of air pollution on non-health-related behaviors and activities remains an intriguing area of investigation.
Between the hazy skies and the hazy plotlines, there seems to be a strong correlation between the levels of air pollution and the viewership count for the long-running soap opera Days of Our Lives in the Washington, D.C. area. It's almost as if the citizens of Salem have sought refuge in the hazy daydreams of daytime television to escape the haze in the air.
As the saying goes, "Where there's smog, there's drama." It is in this light that our research aims to explore the unexpected connection between air pollution and the enduring allure of daytime melodramas. This study seeks to uncover whether the atmospheric conditions in Washington, D.C. have a discernible impact on the audience's inclination to tune into the dramatic saga of the Horton and Brady families. It seems the air pollution in the nation's capital may be inadvertently contributing to the "Days" of our lives indeed.
The seemingly disparate nature of these two phenomena sparks curiosity and calls for systematic investigation, as it is important to understand the potential influence of environmental factors on entertainment choices. Consequently, this study introduces an exciting twist to the research landscape, blending air quality measurements and television viewership data to uncover an unexpected correlation with potential far-reaching implications. We look forward to shedding light on this puzzling relationship and perhaps, offering a breath of fresh air to the discourse on environmental and media influences.

[[RESULTS]]
The statistical analysis revealed a significant correlation between air pollution levels and the viewership count for Days of Our Lives in the Washington, D.C. area from 1980 to 2021. The correlation coefficient of 0.8513344 indicates a strong positive association between these two variables. This finding suggests that as air pollution levels increased, so did the number of viewers tuning in to the daytime drama. It appears that the atmospheric haze was accompanied by a surge in small screen voyeurism.
The R-squared value of 0.7247703 further strengthens the evidence for the relationship between air pollution and Days of Our Lives viewership, indicating that approximately 72.5% of the variability in viewership count can be explained by changes in air pollution levels. It seems the plotlines of Salem were not the only things clouded by the environmental haze.
The p-value of less than 0.01 provides strong evidence against the null hypothesis of no correlation, corroborating the robustness of the observed relationship. This statistical significance supports the argument that there is a genuine association between air pollution and viewership of the enduring soap opera in the Washington, D.C. area.
Figure 1 displays the scatterplot illustrating the positive correlation between air pollution levels and Days of Our Lives viewership count. The data points form a clear ascending pattern, emphasizing the concurrent increase in air pollution and viewership over the years. It appears that the melodramatic allure of Days of Our Lives becomes particularly irresistible amidst hazier atmospheric conditions.
One can't help but wonder if the citizens of Washington, D.C. sought solace in the fictional trials and tribulations of Salem's inhabitants as the environmental conditions outside grew ever more tumultuous. The unexpected convergence of these seemingly unrelated variables invites a reevaluation of the societal influences of environmental quality and entertainment choices.
In conclusion, this study has unearthed a surprising correlation between air pollution levels and Days of Our Lives viewership, underscoring the need for further investigation into the interplay of environmental factors and television preferences. The findings prompt a reconsideration of the potential impact of external conditions on audience behavior and serve as a reminder that, as with the plot twists in soap operas, correlations in the real world can also be unexpected and riveting.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[CONCLUSION]]



ChatGPT:

[[CONCLUSION]]

In conclusion, our investigation has successfully uncovered a compelling and unexpected correlation between air pollution levels and the viewership count for Days of Our Lives in the Washington, D.C. area. The robust statistical analysis has demonstrated a strong positive association, suggesting that as the haze in the air increased, so did the captivation with the soap opera's drama. It seems that the citizens of the nation's capital sought refuge in the fictional intrigues of Salem amidst the atmospheric haziness, providing a breath of fresh air to the discourse on environmental and media influences.

One might say that the citizens of Washington, D.C. turned from "hazy days" to "Days of Our Lives" in their pursuit of respite. It appears that when the air is foggy, the allure of daytime melodramas becomes increasingly irresistible, drawing in viewers like moths to a flame. This unexpected intertwining of environmental quality and television preferences raises thought-provoking questions about the nuanced ways in which external factors influence entertainment choices, demonstrating that correlations in the real world can be as suspenseful as soap opera plot twists.

It seems that amidst the haze in the air, there is a haze in the minds of the audience, prompting a reevaluation of the societal impacts of both air pollution and daytime dramas. As the age-old question of "Who killed Laura Horton?" gains renewed poignancy in the context of environmental adversity, our findings emphasize the complex interplay between external conditions and audience behavior, serving as a reminder that correlations can be as unexpected and riveting as soap opera storylines.

As engrossing as this correlation may be, it is clear that no further research in this area is needed. The evidence has been aired, and the connection between air pollution and Days of Our Lives viewership has been firmly established. It seems that when it comes to the intersection of air quality and soap opera fandom, the evidence is as clear as the skies on a windy day.


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 Hazy Days and Hazy Viewers: Exploring the Correlation Between Air Pollution and Days of Our Lives Viewership in Washington, D.C.. Respond only with the name of a fictional academic journal.

ChatGPT:

Journal of Unlikely Correlations


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 Hazy Days and Hazy Viewers: Exploring the Correlation Between Air Pollution and Days of Our Lives Viewership in Washington, D.C.. Respond only with the name of a fictional organization.

ChatGPT:

The Society for the Advancement of Wacky Research (SAWR)


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 Hazy Days and Hazy Viewers: Exploring the Correlation Between Air Pollution and Days of Our Lives Viewership in Washington, D.C. with an abstract of This paper rigorously investigates the relationship between air pollution and the viewership count for the enduring soap opera Days of Our Lives in the Washington, D.C. area. Drawing upon data from the Environmental Protection Agency and Wikipedia, our research team employed statistical analyses to elucidate the potential linkage between these seemingly disparate phenomena. Surprisingly, we found a remarkably strong correlation coefficient of 0.8513344 and p < 0.01 for the years 1980 to 2021, indicating a robust association between the level of air pollution and the number of viewers tuning in to the melodramatic escapades of the fictional town of Salem.
It seems that the haze in the air is paralleled by a haze in the minds of the audience, as our findings suggest that increases in air pollution are linked to heightened viewership of Days of Our Lives. Perhaps the age-old question of "Who killed Laura Horton?" becomes more pressing amidst environmental adversity. This unexpected correlation raises intriguing questions about the potential influence of external factors on television preferences and emphasizes the need for further interdisciplinary research. In conclusion, our study sheds light on a surprising correlation and prompts a reevaluation of the societal impacts of both air pollution and daytime dramas.

ChatGPT:

air pollution, viewership, soap opera, Days of Our Lives, correlation, Washington D.C., Environmental Protection Agency, statistical analysis, television preferences, societal impacts

*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 pollution in Washington, D.C.
Detailed data title: Percentage of days 'unhealthy' or worse air quality in Washington-Arlington-Alexandria, DC-VA-MD-WV
Source: Environmental Protection Agency
See what else correlates with Air pollution in Washington, D.C.

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 = 0.8513344 (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 = 0.7247703 (Coefficient of determination)
This means 72.5% 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., Air pollution in Washington, D.C.) over the 42 years from 1980 through 2021.

p < 0.01, which is statistically significant(Null hypothesis significance test)
The p-value is 9.08E-13. 0.0000000000009081471605196457
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 0.85 in 9.08E-11% of random cases. Said differently, if you correlated 1,101,143,122,473 random variables You don't actually need 1 trillion 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 41 degrees of freedom, Degrees of freedom is a measure of how many free components we are testing. In this case it is 41 because we have two variables measured over a period of 42 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.

[ 0.74, 0.92 ] 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.
198019811982198319841985198619871988198919901991199219931994199519961997199819992000200120022003200420052006200720082009201020112012201320142015201620172018201920202021
Air pollution in Washington, D.C. (Bad air quality days)14.207710.13711.506816.98639.2896211.232910.958913.424714.48095.205486.027413.69863.8251412.60275.753428.767124.644818.2191812.876710.95893.278696.02749.863012.191781.912574.931515.753424.657532.1857903.561642.739732.4590200.2739730.273973000.2739730.2739730.2732240.273973
Viewership count for Days of Our Lives (Nielson share)560000055000005700000710000071000007200000700000071000006500000540000052000005400000490000056000005300000580000058000005100000580000042000003800000360000031000003100000270000026000002300000210000022000002200000200000020000002100000190000020500001800000160000016000001600000140000012000001200000




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([14.2077,10.137,11.5068,16.9863,9.28962,11.2329,10.9589,13.4247,14.4809,5.20548,6.0274,13.6986,3.82514,12.6027,5.75342,8.76712,4.64481,8.21918,12.8767,10.9589,3.27869,6.0274,9.86301,2.19178,1.91257,4.93151,5.75342,4.65753,2.18579,0,3.56164,2.73973,2.45902,0,0.273973,0.273973,0,0,0.273973,0.273973,0.273224,0.273973,])
array_2 = np.array([5600000,5500000,5700000,7100000,7100000,7200000,7000000,7100000,6500000,5400000,5200000,5400000,4900000,5600000,5300000,5800000,5800000,5100000,5800000,4200000,3800000,3600000,3100000,3100000,2700000,2600000,2300000,2100000,2200000,2200000,2000000,2000000,2100000,1900000,2050000,1800000,1600000,1600000,1600000,1400000,1200000,1200000,])
array_1_name = "Air pollution in Washington, D.C."
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 rating is pure awesomeness!


Correlation ID: 2849 · Black Variable ID: 21419 · Red Variable ID: 87
about · subscribe · emailme@tylervigen.com · twitter

CC BY 4.0