about · email me · subscribe
Spurious correlation #3,032 · View random

A linear line chart with years as the X-axis and two variables on the Y-axis. The first variable is Air quality in Hartford, Connecticut and the second variable is Instructor salaries in the US.  The chart goes from 2009 to 2021, and the two variables track closely in value over that time. Small Image
Download png
, svg

AI explanation

As air quality improved in Hartford, Connecticut, a new wave of highly motivated and energized yoga instructors emerged. This led to a nationwide demand for their services, prompting yoga studios to increase instructor salaries in order to attract and retain the newly enlightened and oxygenated talent.

Model: dalle-3
Prompt: An image that looks like it is a scene from a Pixar movie: In the heart of Hartford, Connecticut, the air is noticeably cleaner as tall trees sway gently in the breeze. Fewer caped figures soar through the sky, as the need for their superheroic interventions diminishes. A self-defense class instructor in the US sits with fewer students in a sparsely populated training room, reflecting the decrease in demand. The instructor's salary falls, mirroring the tranquility of the city's air. Improved version: Create an image of a whimsical, colorful cityscape of Hartford, Connecticut, with vibrant greenery and clear blue skies. A few superheroes are seen gracefully flying overhead, alongside tall trees gently swaying in the breeze. In a serene training room, a friendly self-defense instructor engages with a small group of diverse students, portraying a sense of community and peace. The instructor's smile reflects a sense of purpose, despite the decrease in demand, while outside the window, the city continues to thrive with harmony and lighthearted charm. 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 quality in Hartford, Connecticut and Instructor salaries in the US. 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: Hyper-realistic A scene from Skyrim Cubism An image that looks like it is a scene from a Pixar movie Concept art
ChatGPT: An image that looks like it is a scene from a Pixar movie

Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You describe simple visual scenes that depict the two variables stated. You combine both variables into one scene.
User prompt: Please describe a visual scene that prominently depicts both Air quality in Hartford, Connecticut and Instructor salaries in the US, in the following situation: Because as air quality improves in Hartford, Connecticut, fewer superhero sightings occur, causing a drop in demand for self-defense classes. With fewer students, instructor salaries across the US decrease.. Keep the description simple.
ChatGPT: In the heart of Hartford, Connecticut, the air is noticeably cleaner as tall trees sway gently in the breeze. Along the streets, fewer caped figures soar through the sky, as the need for their superheroic interventions diminishes. As a result, a self-defense class instructor in the US sits with fewer students in a sparsely populated training room, reflecting the decrease in demand. The instructor's salary falls, mirroring the tranquility of the city's air.

Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You write and improve image generation prompts for DALLE-3. You maintain the same subjects, but enhance the visuals.
User prompt: Please respond with an image generation prompt that would be likely to create an interesting visual using DALLE-3, using the following style: [ An image that looks like it is a scene from a Pixar movie ] and depicting this scene: In the heart of Hartford, Connecticut, the air is noticeably cleaner as tall trees sway gently in the breeze. Along the streets, fewer caped figures soar through the sky, as the need for their superheroic interventions diminishes. As a result, a self-defense class instructor in the US sits with fewer students in a sparsely populated training room, reflecting the decrease in demand. The instructor's salary falls, mirroring the tranquility of the city's air. Keep the visual depiction simple. Do not include any words or speech bubbles.
ChatGPT: An image that looks like it is a scene from a Pixar movie: In the heart of Hartford, Connecticut, the air is noticeably cleaner as tall trees sway gently in the breeze. Fewer caped figures soar through the sky, as the need for their superheroic interventions diminishes. A self-defense class instructor in the US sits with fewer students in a sparsely populated training room, reflecting the decrease in demand. The instructor's salary falls, mirroring the tranquility of the city's air. Improved version: Create an image of a whimsical, colorful cityscape of Hartford, Connecticut, with vibrant greenery and clear blue skies. A few superheroes are seen gracefully flying overhead, alongside tall trees gently swaying in the breeze. In a serene training room, a friendly self-defense instructor engages with a small group of diverse students, portraying a sense of community and peace. The instructor's smile reflects a sense of purpose, despite the decrease in demand, while outside the window, the city continues to thrive with harmony and lighthearted charm.

*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 increases in Air quality in Hartford, Connecticut positively influenced Instructor salaries in the US.

AI academic paper

(Because p < 0.01)
The Air-ly Connection: Exploring the Correlation Between Air Quality in Hartford, Connecticut, and Instructor Salaries in the US

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

Please draft the title and abstract of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between Air quality in Hartford, Connecticut and Instructor salaries in the US. Make lots of jokes, goofy observations, and puns.

Make the title a clever pun.

Your research team used data from Environmental Protection Agency and National Center for Education Statistics to assess this nagging question. You found a correlation coefficient of 0.8740167 and p < 0.01 for 2009 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]]
The Air-ly Connection: Exploring the Correlation Between Air Quality in Hartford, Connecticut, and Instructor Salaries in the US

[[ABSTRACT]]
In this research paper, we dive into the intriguing relationship between air quality in Hartford, Connecticut, and instructor salaries in the US. While one might wonder what a city known for its insurance industry and Mark Twain's residence has to do with educator pay, our findings bring a breath of fresh air to the discussion. Leveraging data from the Environmental Protection Agency and the National Center for Education Statistics, we discovered a correlation coefficient of 0.8740167 between air quality in Hartford and instructor salaries, with p < 0.01 from 2009 to 2021. This suggests that there may be something in the air affecting the pockets of educators across the nation. Our research brings to light the importance of considering environmental factors in discussions about labor economics and highlights the need for further investigation into the air-ly connection between air quality and educator compensation. So, while cardiopulmonary health and income may seem to be as different as apples and oranges, it appears that in this case, cleaner air might also mean cleaner paychecks for instructors.


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

Please make up the introduction section of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between Air quality in Hartford, Connecticut and Instructor salaries in the US. Make lots of jokes, goofy observations, and puns.

Here is the title and abstract of the paper:
[[TITLE]]
The Air-ly Connection: Exploring the Correlation Between Air Quality in Hartford, Connecticut, and Instructor Salaries in the US

[[ABSTRACT]]
In this research paper, we dive into the intriguing relationship between air quality in Hartford, Connecticut, and instructor salaries in the US. While one might wonder what a city known for its insurance industry and Mark Twain's residence has to do with educator pay, our findings bring a breath of fresh air to the discussion. Leveraging data from the Environmental Protection Agency and the National Center for Education Statistics, we discovered a correlation coefficient of 0.8740167 between air quality in Hartford and instructor salaries, with p < 0.01 from 2009 to 2021. This suggests that there may be something in the air affecting the pockets of educators across the nation. Our research brings to light the importance of considering environmental factors in discussions about labor economics and highlights the need for further investigation into the air-ly connection between air quality and educator compensation. So, while cardiopulmonary health and income may seem to be as different as apples and oranges, it appears that in this case, cleaner air might also mean cleaner paychecks for instructors.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[INTRODUCTION]]



ChatGPT:
INTRODUCTION

As the old adage goes, "There's something in the air," and in the case of our research, that "something" appears to be closely linked to instructor salaries across the United States. The tantalizing connection between the air quality in Hartford, Connecticut, and the compensation of educators has piqued our interest, leading us down a path that's equal parts academic inquiry and environmental detective work.

While the mention of Hartford might prompt thoughts of insurance giants and literary legends, our focus lies not with policy premiums or classic literature, but rather with the quality of the very air that surrounds the city. Hartford, nestled in the heart of New England, holds the distinction of being one of the oldest cities in the United States, but it's not just its historical significance that's caught our attention. The city's air quality, or lack thereof, has raised eyebrows and triggered a whiff of curiosity, leading us to investigate its potential impact on the nation's educators.

On the other side of the equation, we have the unsung heroes of the education system—our dedicated instructors. From kindergarten classrooms to university lecture halls, these educators are the driving force behind shaping young minds and preparing the future workforce. However, as many are all too aware, the financial compensation for these vital roles often leaves much to be desired. Thus, we set out to explore whether there exists a surprising connection between the air quality in Hartford and the salaries of educators across the entire United States.

In this academic quest, we delve into a seemingly unlikely pairing, akin to peanut butter and pickle sandwiches or socks with sandals. By leveraging data from the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the National Center for Education Statistics, we aim to uncover whether there's more than meets the eye when it comes to the correlation between air quality in Hartford and instructor salaries. While the concept may seem as incongruous as a musical about astrophysics, our initial findings indicate a significant relationship between these seemingly unrelated variables.

Join us on this intellectual journey as we navigate through the murky air of statistical analysis, the breezy plains of labor economics, and the unexpected crossroads where environmental factors and educator compensation intersect. While the connection may initially sound as puzzling as a mystery novel set in a bubble wrap factory, our findings promise to shed light on a phenomenon that deserves closer examination. So, buckle up and breathe in the fresh intellectual air, for we are about to embark on a journey into the "air-ly" connection that leaves no room for stuffy academic conventions and is sure to leave you gasping for more insights. Let's clear the air and soar into the heart of our research findings!


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

Please make up a literature review section of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between Air quality in Hartford, Connecticut and Instructor salaries in the US. 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 some movies that you watched that are tangentially related to the topic.

Here is the title and abstract of the paper:
[[TITLE]]
The Air-ly Connection: Exploring the Correlation Between Air Quality in Hartford, Connecticut, and Instructor Salaries in the US

[[ABSTRACT]]
In this research paper, we dive into the intriguing relationship between air quality in Hartford, Connecticut, and instructor salaries in the US. While one might wonder what a city known for its insurance industry and Mark Twain's residence has to do with educator pay, our findings bring a breath of fresh air to the discussion. Leveraging data from the Environmental Protection Agency and the National Center for Education Statistics, we discovered a correlation coefficient of 0.8740167 between air quality in Hartford and instructor salaries, with p < 0.01 from 2009 to 2021. This suggests that there may be something in the air affecting the pockets of educators across the nation. Our research brings to light the importance of considering environmental factors in discussions about labor economics and highlights the need for further investigation into the air-ly connection between air quality and educator compensation. So, while cardiopulmonary health and income may seem to be as different as apples and oranges, it appears that in this case, cleaner air might also mean cleaner paychecks for instructors.

-------

And here is the introduction section that led to this literature review:
[[INTRODUCTION]]
INTRODUCTION
As the old adage goes, "There's something in the air," and in the case of our research, that "something" appears to be closely linked to instructor salaries across the United States. The tantalizing connection between the air quality in Hartford, Connecticut, and the compensation of educators has piqued our interest, leading us down a path that's equal parts academic inquiry and environmental detective work.
While the mention of Hartford might prompt thoughts of insurance giants and literary legends, our focus lies not with policy premiums or classic literature, but rather with the quality of the very air that surrounds the city. Hartford, nestled in the heart of New England, holds the distinction of being one of the oldest cities in the United States, but it's not just its historical significance that's caught our attention. The city's air quality, or lack thereof, has raised eyebrows and triggered a whiff of curiosity, leading us to investigate its potential impact on the nation's educators.
On the other side of the equation, we have the unsung heroes of the education system—our dedicated instructors. From kindergarten classrooms to university lecture halls, these educators are the driving force behind shaping young minds and preparing the future workforce. However, as many are all too aware, the financial compensation for these vital roles often leaves much to be desired. Thus, we set out to explore whether there exists a surprising connection between the air quality in Hartford and the salaries of educators across the entire United States.
In this academic quest, we delve into a seemingly unlikely pairing, akin to peanut butter and pickle sandwiches or socks with sandals. By leveraging data from the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the National Center for Education Statistics, we aim to uncover whether there's more than meets the eye when it comes to the correlation between air quality in Hartford and instructor salaries. While the concept may seem as incongruous as a musical about astrophysics, our initial findings indicate a significant relationship between these seemingly unrelated variables.
Join us on this intellectual journey as we navigate through the murky air of statistical analysis, the breezy plains of labor economics, and the unexpected crossroads where environmental factors and educator compensation intersect. While the connection may initially sound as puzzling as a mystery novel set in a bubble wrap factory, our findings promise to shed light on a phenomenon that deserves closer examination. So, buckle up and breathe in the fresh intellectual air, for we are about to embark on a journey into the "air-ly" connection that leaves no room for stuffy academic conventions and is sure to leave you gasping for more insights. Let's clear the air and soar into the heart of our research findings!

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[LITERATURE REVIEW]]



ChatGPT:
[[LITERATURE REVIEW]]

The existing literature on the correlation between air quality and labor economics provides a solid foundation for our investigation. Smith et al. (2015) explore the impact of environmental factors on economic outcomes, shedding light on the potential influence of air quality on labor market dynamics. Similarly, Doe and Jones (2017) delve into the intricate relationship between environmental conditions and wage disparities, offering valuable insights that prompt us to further examine the specific case of instructor salaries in the US in connection to the air quality in Hartford, Connecticut.

In "Air Pollution and Its Impacts" by Environmental Scientist A. Clean, the authors find compelling evidence linking air pollution to adverse health effects and economic burdens, inviting us to consider how such environmental factors might permeate into the realm of labor economics. Moreover, "The Economics of Fresh Air" by E. Breezy challenges conventional notions of environmental externalities by examining the potential implications of air quality on income distribution. These works serve as a launching point for our exploratory journey into the air-ly connection between Hartford's air quality and instructor salaries.

Turning to non-fiction literature, works such as "Environmental Justice and the Fate of Hartford's Air" by J. Breathe and "Teaching for a Breathe-ter Tomorrow" by C. Oxyjen offer contextual insights into the environmental challenges faced by Hartford and the broader implications for educational professionals. Meanwhile, fiction literature provides an unexpected yet delightful twist to our investigation, with titles like "The Airborne Educator" and "Gone with the Wind: A Tale of Educator Salaries" adding an element of whimsy to the scholarly discourse.

In the realm of film, movies such as "The Fresh Prince of Paychecks" and "Airplane! Teacher's Edition" deliver tangentially related narratives that inject a breath of levity into our serious inquiry. While the cinematic depictions may not directly align with our scholarly pursuit, they serve as a reminder of the multifaceted nature of the air-ly connection we seek to unravel.

As we wade through these diverse sources, it becomes abundantly clear that the intersection of air quality in Hartford and instructor salaries in the US is a topic ripe for exploration. Our scholarly journey continues with an amalgamation of rigorous inquiry and a sprinkle of whimsy, as we endeavor to untangle the web of factors shaping the financial landscape of educators in relation to the air they breathe. So, fasten your metaphorical seatbelts and get ready for a turbulent yet exhilarating ride through the scholarly stratosphere of the air-ly connection!


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

Please make up the methodology section of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between Air quality in Hartford, Connecticut and Instructor salaries in the US. Make lots of jokes, goofy observations, and puns.

Your research team collected data from all across the internet, but mostly just used information from Environmental Protection Agency and National Center for Education Statistics . You used data from 2009 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]]
The Air-ly Connection: Exploring the Correlation Between Air Quality in Hartford, Connecticut, and Instructor Salaries in the US

[[ABSTRACT]]
In this research paper, we dive into the intriguing relationship between air quality in Hartford, Connecticut, and instructor salaries in the US. While one might wonder what a city known for its insurance industry and Mark Twain's residence has to do with educator pay, our findings bring a breath of fresh air to the discussion. Leveraging data from the Environmental Protection Agency and the National Center for Education Statistics, we discovered a correlation coefficient of 0.8740167 between air quality in Hartford and instructor salaries, with p < 0.01 from 2009 to 2021. This suggests that there may be something in the air affecting the pockets of educators across the nation. Our research brings to light the importance of considering environmental factors in discussions about labor economics and highlights the need for further investigation into the air-ly connection between air quality and educator compensation. So, while cardiopulmonary health and income may seem to be as different as apples and oranges, it appears that in this case, cleaner air might also mean cleaner paychecks for instructors.

[[INTRODUCTION]]
INTRODUCTION
As the old adage goes, "There's something in the air," and in the case of our research, that "something" appears to be closely linked to instructor salaries across the United States. The tantalizing connection between the air quality in Hartford, Connecticut, and the compensation of educators has piqued our interest, leading us down a path that's equal parts academic inquiry and environmental detective work.
While the mention of Hartford might prompt thoughts of insurance giants and literary legends, our focus lies not with policy premiums or classic literature, but rather with the quality of the very air that surrounds the city. Hartford, nestled in the heart of New England, holds the distinction of being one of the oldest cities in the United States, but it's not just its historical significance that's caught our attention. The city's air quality, or lack thereof, has raised eyebrows and triggered a whiff of curiosity, leading us to investigate its potential impact on the nation's educators.
On the other side of the equation, we have the unsung heroes of the education system—our dedicated instructors. From kindergarten classrooms to university lecture halls, these educators are the driving force behind shaping young minds and preparing the future workforce. However, as many are all too aware, the financial compensation for these vital roles often leaves much to be desired. Thus, we set out to explore whether there exists a surprising connection between the air quality in Hartford and the salaries of educators across the entire United States.
In this academic quest, we delve into a seemingly unlikely pairing, akin to peanut butter and pickle sandwiches or socks with sandals. By leveraging data from the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the National Center for Education Statistics, we aim to uncover whether there's more than meets the eye when it comes to the correlation between air quality in Hartford and instructor salaries. While the concept may seem as incongruous as a musical about astrophysics, our initial findings indicate a significant relationship between these seemingly unrelated variables.
Join us on this intellectual journey as we navigate through the murky air of statistical analysis, the breezy plains of labor economics, and the unexpected crossroads where environmental factors and educator compensation intersect. While the connection may initially sound as puzzling as a mystery novel set in a bubble wrap factory, our findings promise to shed light on a phenomenon that deserves closer examination. So, buckle up and breathe in the fresh intellectual air, for we are about to embark on a journey into the "air-ly" connection that leaves no room for stuffy academic conventions and is sure to leave you gasping for more insights. Let's clear the air and soar into the heart of our research findings!

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[METHODOLOGY]]



ChatGPT:


[[METHODOLOGY]]

To untangle the enigmatic relationship between air quality in Hartford, Connecticut, and instructor salaries in the US, our research team embarked on an odyssey of data collection and analysis. We sought to employ rigorous methodologies while injecting a breath of fresh comedic air into the typically solemn realm of academic research.

Data Collection:
Our foray into the world of data collection involved a thorough scavenger hunt across the vast landscape of the internet. With our trusty magnifying glass and a dash of whimsy, we scoured databases and websites to gather information spanning the period from 2009 to 2021. Our primary sources included the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the National Center for Education Statistics. We examined air quality indices, pollutant levels, and meteorological data for Hartford, Connecticut, while also delving into the labyrinthine corridors of educator salaries and employment statistics nationwide.

Statistical Analysis:
Armed with an arsenal of statistical tools and a sprinkle of statistical fairy dust, we set out to unravel the complexities of the data at hand. Employing correlation analysis, regression modeling, and other statistical wizardry, we sought to identify any discernible patterns or connections between the air quality in Hartford and instructor salaries across the United States. Additionally, we performed time-series analysis to understand the temporal dynamics of these variables, ensuring that our findings captured the ebb and flow of both air quality and educator compensation over the years.

Interdisciplinary Synthesis:
In true interdisciplinary fashion, our research team melded the worlds of environmental science and labor economics, creating a harmonious blend that would make even the most discerning connoisseur of knowledge raise an eyebrow in approval. By synergizing concepts from atmospheric physics, economic theories of labor markets, and a touch of culinary artistry (because who doesn't love a good metaphorical stew?), we aimed to address the intersection of air quality and instructor salaries from multiple vantage points.

Quality Control:
In our pursuit of academic excellence, we maintained a keen eye for quality control, ensuring that our data were as pure as the driven snow – or at least as pristine as a freshly laundered lab coat. We meticulously scrutinized our methodologies, cross-referenced our findings, and engaged in peer review discussions to eliminate any lurking statistical gremlins and confirm the robustness of our conclusions.

Ethical Considerations:
In adherence to the solemn oath of academic integrity, we upheld the highest ethical standards throughout our research endeavor. We safeguarded the confidentiality of sensitive data, treated each variable with the respect and dignity it deserved, and refrained from engaging in any illicit data manipulation – unless, of course, you count the occasional spontaneous dance party to celebrate a particularly intriguing data point.

In summary, our research methodology embraced a fusion of academic rigor and lighthearted curiosity, blending data-driven precision with the occasional whimsical flourish. The culmination of our efforts promises to shed light on the "air-ly" connection between air quality in Hartford and educator compensation, leaving no room for stodgy research practices and infusing the academic discourse with a breath of fresh, pun-laden air.


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

Please make up the results section of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between Air quality in Hartford, Connecticut and Instructor salaries in the US. Make lots of jokes, goofy observations, and puns.

Your research team collected data from all across the internet, but mostly just used information from Environmental Protection Agency and National Center for Education Statistics .

For the time period 2009 to 2021, you found a correlation 0.8740167, r-squared of 0.7639052, 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]]
The Air-ly Connection: Exploring the Correlation Between Air Quality in Hartford, Connecticut, and Instructor Salaries in the US

[[ABSTRACT]]
In this research paper, we dive into the intriguing relationship between air quality in Hartford, Connecticut, and instructor salaries in the US. While one might wonder what a city known for its insurance industry and Mark Twain's residence has to do with educator pay, our findings bring a breath of fresh air to the discussion. Leveraging data from the Environmental Protection Agency and the National Center for Education Statistics, we discovered a correlation coefficient of 0.8740167 between air quality in Hartford and instructor salaries, with p < 0.01 from 2009 to 2021. This suggests that there may be something in the air affecting the pockets of educators across the nation. Our research brings to light the importance of considering environmental factors in discussions about labor economics and highlights the need for further investigation into the air-ly connection between air quality and educator compensation. So, while cardiopulmonary health and income may seem to be as different as apples and oranges, it appears that in this case, cleaner air might also mean cleaner paychecks for instructors.

-------

And here is the methodology section that led to this result:
[[METHODOLOGY]]
INTRODUCTION
As the old adage goes, "There's something in the air," and in the case of our research, that "something" appears to be closely linked to instructor salaries across the United States. The tantalizing connection between the air quality in Hartford, Connecticut, and the compensation of educators has piqued our interest, leading us down a path that's equal parts academic inquiry and environmental detective work.
While the mention of Hartford might prompt thoughts of insurance giants and literary legends, our focus lies not with policy premiums or classic literature, but rather with the quality of the very air that surrounds the city. Hartford, nestled in the heart of New England, holds the distinction of being one of the oldest cities in the United States, but it's not just its historical significance that's caught our attention. The city's air quality, or lack thereof, has raised eyebrows and triggered a whiff of curiosity, leading us to investigate its potential impact on the nation's educators.
On the other side of the equation, we have the unsung heroes of the education system—our dedicated instructors. From kindergarten classrooms to university lecture halls, these educators are the driving force behind shaping young minds and preparing the future workforce. However, as many are all too aware, the financial compensation for these vital roles often leaves much to be desired. Thus, we set out to explore whether there exists a surprising connection between the air quality in Hartford and the salaries of educators across the entire United States.
In this academic quest, we delve into a seemingly unlikely pairing, akin to peanut butter and pickle sandwiches or socks with sandals. By leveraging data from the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the National Center for Education Statistics, we aim to uncover whether there's more than meets the eye when it comes to the correlation between air quality in Hartford and instructor salaries. While the concept may seem as incongruous as a musical about astrophysics, our initial findings indicate a significant relationship between these seemingly unrelated variables.
Join us on this intellectual journey as we navigate through the murky air of statistical analysis, the breezy plains of labor economics, and the unexpected crossroads where environmental factors and educator compensation intersect. While the connection may initially sound as puzzling as a mystery novel set in a bubble wrap factory, our findings promise to shed light on a phenomenon that deserves closer examination. So, buckle up and breathe in the fresh intellectual air, for we are about to embark on a journey into the "air-ly" connection that leaves no room for stuffy academic conventions and is sure to leave you gasping for more insights. Let's clear the air and soar into the heart of our research findings!

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[RESULTS]]



ChatGPT:

[[RESULTS]]

For our analysis, we set out to uncover the potentially surprising relationship between air quality in Hartford, Connecticut, and instructor salaries across the United States. Armed with data from the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the National Center for Education Statistics, we embarked on a statistical voyage that would put any seafaring adventurer to shame. Our findings revealed a tantalizing correlation coefficient of 0.8740167, with an r-squared value of 0.7639052 and a p-value less than 0.01, indicating a robust and significant association between these seemingly disparate variables.

The fortuitous alignment of our data uncovered a "breath-taking" revelation, as the air quality in Hartford exhibited a strong and positive correlation with instructor salaries nationwide. It seems that the air in Hartford may be more than just a lungful; it may also be a pocketful for educators across the United States.

To visually illustrate this intriguing relationship, we present Figure 1, a scatterplot demonstrating the conspicuous correlation between air quality in Hartford and instructor salaries. Take a gander at that, and you'll see the clear trend that emerges, akin to finding a pearl in an oyster or a good cheese in a wheel of fortune.

Our results suggest that there may indeed be something in the air, and it's not just a catchy tune. The correlation we've uncovered invites further inquiry into the connection between local environmental factors and broader economic trends. While this relationship might at first seem as unlikely as finding a needle in a haystack or a vegetarian at a barbecue, our findings stand as a testament to the potential impact of air quality on the financial well-being of educators.

In essence, our research highlights the importance of considering not only traditional economic indicators but also the atmospheric conditions that surround them. After all, when it comes to understanding the complexities of labor markets, it seems that the sky's the limit, especially when there's a high-quality breeze coming from Hartford.


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

Please make up the discussion section of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between Air quality in Hartford, Connecticut and Instructor salaries in the US. Make lots of jokes, goofy observations, and puns.

Limit your response to 500 tokens.

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

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

[[TITLE]]
The Air-ly Connection: Exploring the Correlation Between Air Quality in Hartford, Connecticut, and Instructor Salaries in the US

[[ABSTRACT]]
In this research paper, we dive into the intriguing relationship between air quality in Hartford, Connecticut, and instructor salaries in the US. While one might wonder what a city known for its insurance industry and Mark Twain's residence has to do with educator pay, our findings bring a breath of fresh air to the discussion. Leveraging data from the Environmental Protection Agency and the National Center for Education Statistics, we discovered a correlation coefficient of 0.8740167 between air quality in Hartford and instructor salaries, with p < 0.01 from 2009 to 2021. This suggests that there may be something in the air affecting the pockets of educators across the nation. Our research brings to light the importance of considering environmental factors in discussions about labor economics and highlights the need for further investigation into the air-ly connection between air quality and educator compensation. So, while cardiopulmonary health and income may seem to be as different as apples and oranges, it appears that in this case, cleaner air might also mean cleaner paychecks for instructors.

[[LITERATURE REVIEW]]
The existing literature on the correlation between air quality and labor economics provides a solid foundation for our investigation. Smith et al. (2015) explore the impact of environmental factors on economic outcomes, shedding light on the potential influence of air quality on labor market dynamics. Similarly, Doe and Jones (2017) delve into the intricate relationship between environmental conditions and wage disparities, offering valuable insights that prompt us to further examine the specific case of instructor salaries in the US in connection to the air quality in Hartford, Connecticut.
In "Air Pollution and Its Impacts" by Environmental Scientist A. Clean, the authors find compelling evidence linking air pollution to adverse health effects and economic burdens, inviting us to consider how such environmental factors might permeate into the realm of labor economics. Moreover, "The Economics of Fresh Air" by E. Breezy challenges conventional notions of environmental externalities by examining the potential implications of air quality on income distribution. These works serve as a launching point for our exploratory journey into the air-ly connection between Hartford's air quality and instructor salaries.
Turning to non-fiction literature, works such as "Environmental Justice and the Fate of Hartford's Air" by J. Breathe and "Teaching for a Breathe-ter Tomorrow" by C. Oxyjen offer contextual insights into the environmental challenges faced by Hartford and the broader implications for educational professionals. Meanwhile, fiction literature provides an unexpected yet delightful twist to our investigation, with titles like "The Airborne Educator" and "Gone with the Wind: A Tale of Educator Salaries" adding an element of whimsy to the scholarly discourse.
In the realm of film, movies such as "The Fresh Prince of Paychecks" and "Airplane! Teacher's Edition" deliver tangentially related narratives that inject a breath of levity into our serious inquiry. While the cinematic depictions may not directly align with our scholarly pursuit, they serve as a reminder of the multifaceted nature of the air-ly connection we seek to unravel.
As we wade through these diverse sources, it becomes abundantly clear that the intersection of air quality in Hartford and instructor salaries in the US is a topic ripe for exploration. Our scholarly journey continues with an amalgamation of rigorous inquiry and a sprinkle of whimsy, as we endeavor to untangle the web of factors shaping the financial landscape of educators in relation to the air they breathe. So, fasten your metaphorical seatbelts and get ready for a turbulent yet exhilarating ride through the scholarly stratosphere of the air-ly connection!

[[RESULTS]]
For our analysis, we set out to uncover the potentially surprising relationship between air quality in Hartford, Connecticut, and instructor salaries across the United States. Armed with data from the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the National Center for Education Statistics, we embarked on a statistical voyage that would put any seafaring adventurer to shame. Our findings revealed a tantalizing correlation coefficient of 0.8740167, with an r-squared value of 0.7639052 and a p-value less than 0.01, indicating a robust and significant association between these seemingly disparate variables.
The fortuitous alignment of our data uncovered a "breath-taking" revelation, as the air quality in Hartford exhibited a strong and positive correlation with instructor salaries nationwide. It seems that the air in Hartford may be more than just a lungful; it may also be a pocketful for educators across the United States.
To visually illustrate this intriguing relationship, we present Figure 1, a scatterplot demonstrating the conspicuous correlation between air quality in Hartford and instructor salaries. Take a gander at that, and you'll see the clear trend that emerges, akin to finding a pearl in an oyster or a good cheese in a wheel of fortune.
Our results suggest that there may indeed be something in the air, and it's not just a catchy tune. The correlation we've uncovered invites further inquiry into the connection between local environmental factors and broader economic trends. While this relationship might at first seem as unlikely as finding a needle in a haystack or a vegetarian at a barbecue, our findings stand as a testament to the potential impact of air quality on the financial well-being of educators.
In essence, our research highlights the importance of considering not only traditional economic indicators but also the atmospheric conditions that surround them. After all, when it comes to understanding the complexities of labor markets, it seems that the sky's the limit, especially when there's a high-quality breeze coming from Hartford.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[DISCUSSION]]



ChatGPT:

[[DISCUSSION]]

Ah, the air-ly connection between air quality in Hartford and instructor salaries in the US - a topic that has surely left many scholars scratching their heads like a cat with an itch. Our findings have certainly blown some fresh air into the debate, shedding light on the unexpected relationship between these two seemingly unrelated entities.

Our results harmonize with prior research (Smith et al., 2015; Doe and Jones, 2017) that hinted at the influence of environmental factors on labor economics. It turns out that the air in Hartford, besides being a source of oxygen, may also be a source of financial oxygen for educators nationwide. Environmental Scientist A. Clean's insightful work on air pollution and its impacts resonates with our findings, as we observed a robust correlation between air quality in Hartford and instructor salaries. E. Breezy's "The Economics of Fresh Air" was no breeze to read, but its implications echo our own observations, emphasizing the potential implications of air quality on income distribution. Who knew that studying air quality could lead to such uplifting conclusions?

Even our literary and cinematic detours into the topic, at first glance as offbeat as a penguin in a desert, turned out to add a quirky dimension to our scholarly pursuit. "The Fresh Prince of Paychecks" indeed dispensed tangentially related narratives that, much like a gust of wind on a warm day, gently nudged us towards thinking about the multifaceted nature of our research.

Surprisingly, our results align with these diverse sources, affirming the prevailing theories and works that have contributed to unraveling the complexities of the air-ly connection. It seems that the significant relationship we've uncovered is not just a statistical whim, but rather a real and tangible link worthy of further inquiry.

In essence, our findings underscore the importance of considering the air we breathe, not just for its potential health effects but also for its financial reverberations in labor markets. While the connection between air quality in Hartford and educator salaries may seem as unlikely as finding a four-leaf clover in a field of three-leaf clovers, our research unveils the potential impact of local environmental conditions on broader economic trends. Just as the wind blows unpredictably, so too does the impact of clean air on educator paychecks, leaving us with a tantalizing enigma to unravel – and a lot of fresh puns to boot!


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

Please make up a short conclusion of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between Air quality in Hartford, Connecticut and Instructor salaries in the US. Make lots of jokes, goofy observations, and puns.

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

Here are the title, abstract, introduction, and results sections.
[[TITLE]]
The Air-ly Connection: Exploring the Correlation Between Air Quality in Hartford, Connecticut, and Instructor Salaries in the US

[[ABSTRACT]]
In this research paper, we dive into the intriguing relationship between air quality in Hartford, Connecticut, and instructor salaries in the US. While one might wonder what a city known for its insurance industry and Mark Twain's residence has to do with educator pay, our findings bring a breath of fresh air to the discussion. Leveraging data from the Environmental Protection Agency and the National Center for Education Statistics, we discovered a correlation coefficient of 0.8740167 between air quality in Hartford and instructor salaries, with p < 0.01 from 2009 to 2021. This suggests that there may be something in the air affecting the pockets of educators across the nation. Our research brings to light the importance of considering environmental factors in discussions about labor economics and highlights the need for further investigation into the air-ly connection between air quality and educator compensation. So, while cardiopulmonary health and income may seem to be as different as apples and oranges, it appears that in this case, cleaner air might also mean cleaner paychecks for instructors.

[[INTRDUCTION]]
INTRODUCTION
As the old adage goes, "There's something in the air," and in the case of our research, that "something" appears to be closely linked to instructor salaries across the United States. The tantalizing connection between the air quality in Hartford, Connecticut, and the compensation of educators has piqued our interest, leading us down a path that's equal parts academic inquiry and environmental detective work.
While the mention of Hartford might prompt thoughts of insurance giants and literary legends, our focus lies not with policy premiums or classic literature, but rather with the quality of the very air that surrounds the city. Hartford, nestled in the heart of New England, holds the distinction of being one of the oldest cities in the United States, but it's not just its historical significance that's caught our attention. The city's air quality, or lack thereof, has raised eyebrows and triggered a whiff of curiosity, leading us to investigate its potential impact on the nation's educators.
On the other side of the equation, we have the unsung heroes of the education system—our dedicated instructors. From kindergarten classrooms to university lecture halls, these educators are the driving force behind shaping young minds and preparing the future workforce. However, as many are all too aware, the financial compensation for these vital roles often leaves much to be desired. Thus, we set out to explore whether there exists a surprising connection between the air quality in Hartford and the salaries of educators across the entire United States.
In this academic quest, we delve into a seemingly unlikely pairing, akin to peanut butter and pickle sandwiches or socks with sandals. By leveraging data from the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the National Center for Education Statistics, we aim to uncover whether there's more than meets the eye when it comes to the correlation between air quality in Hartford and instructor salaries. While the concept may seem as incongruous as a musical about astrophysics, our initial findings indicate a significant relationship between these seemingly unrelated variables.
Join us on this intellectual journey as we navigate through the murky air of statistical analysis, the breezy plains of labor economics, and the unexpected crossroads where environmental factors and educator compensation intersect. While the connection may initially sound as puzzling as a mystery novel set in a bubble wrap factory, our findings promise to shed light on a phenomenon that deserves closer examination. So, buckle up and breathe in the fresh intellectual air, for we are about to embark on a journey into the "air-ly" connection that leaves no room for stuffy academic conventions and is sure to leave you gasping for more insights. Let's clear the air and soar into the heart of our research findings!

[[RESULTS]]
For our analysis, we set out to uncover the potentially surprising relationship between air quality in Hartford, Connecticut, and instructor salaries across the United States. Armed with data from the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the National Center for Education Statistics, we embarked on a statistical voyage that would put any seafaring adventurer to shame. Our findings revealed a tantalizing correlation coefficient of 0.8740167, with an r-squared value of 0.7639052 and a p-value less than 0.01, indicating a robust and significant association between these seemingly disparate variables.
The fortuitous alignment of our data uncovered a "breath-taking" revelation, as the air quality in Hartford exhibited a strong and positive correlation with instructor salaries nationwide. It seems that the air in Hartford may be more than just a lungful; it may also be a pocketful for educators across the United States.
To visually illustrate this intriguing relationship, we present Figure 1, a scatterplot demonstrating the conspicuous correlation between air quality in Hartford and instructor salaries. Take a gander at that, and you'll see the clear trend that emerges, akin to finding a pearl in an oyster or a good cheese in a wheel of fortune.
Our results suggest that there may indeed be something in the air, and it's not just a catchy tune. The correlation we've uncovered invites further inquiry into the connection between local environmental factors and broader economic trends. While this relationship might at first seem as unlikely as finding a needle in a haystack or a vegetarian at a barbecue, our findings stand as a testament to the potential impact of air quality on the financial well-being of educators.
In essence, our research highlights the importance of considering not only traditional economic indicators but also the atmospheric conditions that surround them. After all, when it comes to understanding the complexities of labor markets, it seems that the sky's the limit, especially when there's a high-quality breeze coming from Hartford.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[CONCLUSION]]



ChatGPT:

CONCLUSION

As we wrap up our findings, it's clear that we've uncovered a breath of fresh air in the realm of labor economics. The correlation we've unearthed between the air quality in Hartford, Connecticut, and instructor salaries across the US is as surprising as finding an avocado in a fruit salad. Our results suggest that maybe, just maybe, there's more to "hot air" than meets the eye, as the quality of the air in Hartford appears to have a "pocketful" impact on educator pay nationwide.

Our statistical analysis has left us feeling like we've stumbled upon a hidden treasure in the form of a correlation coefficient of 0.8740167, a true gem that's as rare as a unicorn sighting at a carnival. And with a p-value of less than 0.01, this relationship is as significant as finding a four-leaf clover on St. Patrick's Day.

In the grand tradition of "stranger things," our research invites further exploration into the "air-ly" connection between environmental factors and educator compensation. But let's be real, if oxygen was a commodity, educators would be rolling in it. It's time to clear the air and acknowledge the potential impact of local atmospheres on national paychecks.

As we take our leave, it's clear that no further research is needed in this area. The connection we've uncovered between air quality and instructor salaries is as solid as a rock in a quarry. So, let's close this chapter and allow our findings to float away like a dandelion in a gentle breeze. After all, with these results in hand, we can confidently say that the "air-ly" connection has been definitively teased out, and it's as clear as the blue sky on a perfect day. It's time to exhale and celebrate the fresh insights—not to mention, the puns—that our research has brought to the table. And with that, let's bid adieu to the "air-ly" mysteries, leaving no room for doubt that our work has blown away any lingering questions.


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 The Air-ly Connection: Exploring the Correlation Between Air Quality in Hartford, Connecticut, and Instructor Salaries in the US. Respond only with the name of a fictional academic journal.

ChatGPT:

The Journal of Nebulous 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 The Air-ly Connection: Exploring the Correlation Between Air Quality in Hartford, Connecticut, and Instructor Salaries in the US. Respond only with the name of a fictional organization.

ChatGPT:

The Society for Urban Air Quality Research and Economic Development


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 The Air-ly Connection: Exploring the Correlation Between Air Quality in Hartford, Connecticut, and Instructor Salaries in the US with an abstract of In this research paper, we dive into the intriguing relationship between air quality in Hartford, Connecticut, and instructor salaries in the US. While one might wonder what a city known for its insurance industry and Mark Twain's residence has to do with educator pay, our findings bring a breath of fresh air to the discussion. Leveraging data from the Environmental Protection Agency and the National Center for Education Statistics, we discovered a correlation coefficient of 0.8740167 between air quality in Hartford and instructor salaries, with p < 0.01 from 2009 to 2021. This suggests that there may be something in the air affecting the pockets of educators across the nation. Our research brings to light the importance of considering environmental factors in discussions about labor economics and highlights the need for further investigation into the air-ly connection between air quality and educator compensation. So, while cardiopulmonary health and income may seem to be as different as apples and oranges, it appears that in this case, cleaner air might also mean cleaner paychecks for instructors.

ChatGPT:

Hartford air quality, Connecticut air quality, instructor salaries, correlation between air quality and educator compensation, environmental factors in labor economics, air quality effect on educator pay, air pollution and teacher salaries, relationship between air quality and wages, correlation coefficient air quality and instructor salaries

*There is a bunch of Python happening behind the scenes to turn this prompt sequence into a PDF.



Random correlation

Discover a new correlation

View all correlations

View all research papers

Report an error


Data details

Air quality in Hartford, Connecticut
Detailed data title: Percentage of days with good air quality in Hartford-West Hartford-East Hartford, CT
Source: Environmental Protection Agency
See what else correlates with Air quality in Hartford, Connecticut

Instructor salaries in the US
Detailed data title: Average salary of full-time instructional faculty on 9-month contracts in degree-granting postsecondary institutions, by academic rank of of Instructor
Source: National Center for Education Statistics
See what else correlates with Instructor salaries in the US

Correlation r = 0.8740167 (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 = 0.7639052 (Coefficient of determination)
This means 76.4% of the change in the one variable (i.e., Instructor salaries in the US) is predictable based on the change in the other (i.e., Air quality in Hartford, Connecticut) over the 13 years from 2009 through 2021.

p < 0.01, which is statistically significant(Null hypothesis significance test)
The p-value is 9.4E-5. 0.0000937545296652117500000000
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 0.87 in 0.0094% of random cases. Said differently, if you correlated 10,666 random variables Which I absolutely did.
with the same 12 degrees of freedom, Degrees of freedom is a measure of how many free components we are testing. In this case it is 12 because we have two variables measured over a period of 13 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.

[ 0.62, 0.96 ] 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.
2009201020112012201320142015201620172018201920202021
Air quality in Hartford, Connecticut (Good air quality)79.178174.520572.876760.382556.986364.383659.72670.218673.972678.356279.72681.147578.3562
Instructor salaries in the US (Salary)75200739907231470306699057055272096739347408075449753717551272503




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([79.1781,74.5205,72.8767,60.3825,56.9863,64.3836,59.726,70.2186,73.9726,78.3562,79.726,81.1475,78.3562,])
array_2 = np.array([75200,73990,72314,70306,69905,70552,72096,73934,74080,75449,75371,75512,72503,])
array_1_name = "Air quality in Hartford, Connecticut"
array_2_name = "Instructor salaries in the US"

# 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?

Kudos for rating!


Correlation ID: 3032 · Black Variable ID: 20717 · Red Variable ID: 1204
about · subscribe · emailme@tylervigen.com · twitter

CC BY 4.0