about · email me · subscribe
Spurious correlation #3,403 · View random

A linear line chart with years as the X-axis and two variables on the Y-axis. The first variable is The number of survey researchers in Michigan and the second variable is Wins for the Detroit Tigers.  The chart goes from 2003 to 2022, and the two variables track closely in value over that time. Small Image
Download png
, svg

AI explanation

The abundance of survey researchers helped the team to 'field' more accurate data on their opponents, giving them a better 'pitch' on how to win! The Tigers were never 'survey'ed defeat while the researchers were around. They really 'researched' their way to victory!

Model: dalle-3
Prompt: Generate an image of a photorealistic scene capturing a group of survey researchers in Michigan focused and engaged in their work. In the background, the Detroit Tigers are playing a game at the stadium. The researchers eagerly share their findings with the Tigers' coaching staff, who are seen observing intently. The Tigers then implement new batting techniques and strategic plays based on the survey results. As they achieve victories, the researchers smile with pride, witnessing their work translating into success on the baseball field. 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: The number of survey researchers in Michigan and Wins for the Detroit Tigers. 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: Parallax art a Polaroid photo Scalar art Photorealism An image that looks like it is a scene from 'Star Wars'
ChatGPT: Photorealism

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 The number of survey researchers in Michigan and Wins for the Detroit Tigers, in the following situation: As the number of survey researchers in Michigan increased, so did the Detroit Tigers' wins. The researchers surveyed fans, leading to "pole" position strategies and "data-driven" batting techniques. This caused a "survey-surge" in the team's performance, proving that in baseball, numbers really do "count"!. Keep the description simple.
ChatGPT: In the scene, we see a group of survey researchers in Michigan working diligently, while in the background, the Detroit Tigers are playing a game. As the researchers gather data, they eagerly share their findings with the Tigers' coaching staff. We then witness the Tigers employing new batting techniques and strategic plays based on the survey results. With each win, the researchers smile, proud to see their work translating into success on the baseball field.

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: [ Photorealism ] and depicting this scene: In the scene, we see a group of survey researchers in Michigan working diligently, while in the background, the Detroit Tigers are playing a game. As the researchers gather data, they eagerly share their findings with the Tigers' coaching staff. We then witness the Tigers employing new batting techniques and strategic plays based on the survey results. With each win, the researchers smile, proud to see their work translating into success on the baseball field. Keep the visual depiction simple. Do not include any words or speech bubbles.
ChatGPT: Generate an image of a photorealistic scene capturing a group of survey researchers in Michigan focused and engaged in their work. In the background, the Detroit Tigers are playing a game at the stadium. The researchers eagerly share their findings with the Tigers' coaching staff, who are seen observing intently. The Tigers then implement new batting techniques and strategic plays based on the survey results. As they achieve victories, the researchers smile with pride, witnessing their work translating into success on the baseball field.

*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 The number of survey researchers in Michigan positively influenced Wins for the Detroit Tigers. Include one good pun.

AI academic paper

(Because p < 0.01)
The Surveying the Field and the Diamond: Investigating the Relationship Between Survey Researchers in Michigan and Wins for the Detroit Tigers Study

The Journal of Survey Research and Sports Analytics

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 The number of survey researchers in Michigan and Wins for the Detroit Tigers. Make it seem dry like academic research paper, but with lots of subtle hidden offhand remarks, jokes, goofy observations, and puns.

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

Your research team used data from Bureau of Larbor Statistics and Baseball-Reference.com to assess this nagging question. You found a correlation coefficient of 0.7272417 and p < 0.01 for 2003 to 2022.

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 "Surveying the Field and the Diamond: Investigating the Relationship Between Survey Researchers in Michigan and Wins for the Detroit Tigers" Study

[[ABSTRACT]]
In this paper, we investigate the peculiar connection between the number of survey researchers in Michigan and the performance of the Detroit Tigers. Employing data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics and Baseball-Reference.com, we examine the correlation between these seemingly unrelated variables from 2003 to 2022. Surprisingly, our analysis reveals a remarkably high correlation coefficient of 0.7272417 and a statistically significant p-value of less than 0.01. Our findings suggest that there might be something more than meets the eye in the world of survey research and baseball. This study not only sheds light on the synergies between these two domains but also adds a dash of whimsy to the rather serious field of statistical analysis.


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 The number of survey researchers in Michigan and Wins for the Detroit Tigers. Make it seem dry like academic research paper, but with lots of subtle hidden offhand remarks, jokes, goofy observations, and puns. Sneak in some jokes and clever puns about science, research, statistics, and the variables.

Here is the title and abstract of the paper:
[[TITLE]]
The "Surveying the Field and the Diamond: Investigating the Relationship Between Survey Researchers in Michigan and Wins for the Detroit Tigers" Study

[[ABSTRACT]]
In this paper, we investigate the peculiar connection between the number of survey researchers in Michigan and the performance of the Detroit Tigers. Employing data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics and Baseball-Reference.com, we examine the correlation between these seemingly unrelated variables from 2003 to 2022. Surprisingly, our analysis reveals a remarkably high correlation coefficient of 0.7272417 and a statistically significant p-value of less than 0.01. Our findings suggest that there might be something more than meets the eye in the world of survey research and baseball. This study not only sheds light on the synergies between these two domains but also adds a dash of whimsy to the rather serious field of statistical analysis.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[INTRODUCTION]]



ChatGPT:
Introduction

The world of research is a curious one, filled with data, analysis, and the occasional statistical curveball. In this study, we embark on a journey to uncover the mysterious relationship between the employment of survey researchers in Michigan and the wins accumulated by the Detroit Tigers. It's a peculiar pairing, akin to mixing oil and water, or in more contemporary terms, like trying to merge cats and dogs in a statistical experiment.

Like alchemists searching for the philosopher's stone, we seek to unravel the enigmatic connection between these disparate variables. On one hand, we have the diligent survey researchers meticulously collecting and analyzing data, and on the other, we have the Detroit Tigers, swinging their bats and chasing victory on the baseball diamond. Never before has there been such an odd couple in the world of statistical analysis, and the findings may leave you scratching your head, much like a perplexed batter facing a knuckleball.

While it may seem as though we are venturing into the realm of whimsy, our study is firmly rooted in rigorous statistical analysis. We have combed through data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics and Baseball-Reference.com, leaving no data point unturned in our quest for understanding. As we delve into the peculiar relationship between the number of survey researchers and the performance of the Tigers, we are reminded of the saying, "In the world of statistics, correlation does not imply causation, but it sure does waggle its eyebrows suggestively and gesture furtively while mouthing, 'Look over there.'"

Throughout the course of this investigation, we aim to bring levity to the rather serious business of statistical analysis. After all, who said that statistical research can't have a sense of humor? So buckle up, dear reader, as we delve into this intriguing study that promises to offer both statistical insights and a pinch of amusement. Just as a curveball catches a batter off guard, so too shall our findings surprise and intrigue those delving into the depths of empirical inquiry.


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 The number of survey researchers in Michigan and Wins for the Detroit Tigers. Make it seem dry like academic research paper, but with lots of subtle hidden offhand remarks, jokes, goofy observations, and puns.

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

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

Start by naming serious-sounding studies by authors like Smith, Doe, and Jones - but then quickly devolve. Name some real non-fiction books that would be related to the topic. Then name some real fiction books that sound like they could be related. Then 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]]
The "Surveying the Field and the Diamond: Investigating the Relationship Between Survey Researchers in Michigan and Wins for the Detroit Tigers" Study

[[ABSTRACT]]
In this paper, we investigate the peculiar connection between the number of survey researchers in Michigan and the performance of the Detroit Tigers. Employing data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics and Baseball-Reference.com, we examine the correlation between these seemingly unrelated variables from 2003 to 2022. Surprisingly, our analysis reveals a remarkably high correlation coefficient of 0.7272417 and a statistically significant p-value of less than 0.01. Our findings suggest that there might be something more than meets the eye in the world of survey research and baseball. This study not only sheds light on the synergies between these two domains but also adds a dash of whimsy to the rather serious field of statistical analysis.

-------

And here is the introduction section that led to this literature review:
[[INTRODUCTION]]
Introduction
The world of research is a curious one, filled with data, analysis, and the occasional statistical curveball. In this study, we embark on a journey to uncover the mysterious relationship between the employment of survey researchers in Michigan and the wins accumulated by the Detroit Tigers. It's a peculiar pairing, akin to mixing oil and water, or in more contemporary terms, like trying to merge cats and dogs in a statistical experiment.
Like alchemists searching for the philosopher's stone, we seek to unravel the enigmatic connection between these disparate variables. On one hand, we have the diligent survey researchers meticulously collecting and analyzing data, and on the other, we have the Detroit Tigers, swinging their bats and chasing victory on the baseball diamond. Never before has there been such an odd couple in the world of statistical analysis, and the findings may leave you scratching your head, much like a perplexed batter facing a knuckleball.
While it may seem as though we are venturing into the realm of whimsy, our study is firmly rooted in rigorous statistical analysis. We have combed through data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics and Baseball-Reference.com, leaving no data point unturned in our quest for understanding. As we delve into the peculiar relationship between the number of survey researchers and the performance of the Tigers, we are reminded of the saying, "In the world of statistics, correlation does not imply causation, but it sure does waggle its eyebrows suggestively and gesture furtively while mouthing, 'Look over there.'"
Throughout the course of this investigation, we aim to bring levity to the rather serious business of statistical analysis. After all, who said that statistical research can't have a sense of humor? So buckle up, dear reader, as we delve into this intriguing study that promises to offer both statistical insights and a pinch of amusement. Just as a curveball catches a batter off guard, so too shall our findings surprise and intrigue those delving into the depths of empirical inquiry.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[LITERATURE REVIEW]]



ChatGPT:
[[LITERATURE REVIEW]]

In "Smith et al.," the authors find that the employment of survey researchers in Michigan has steadily increased over the past decade, reflecting the growing demand for data collection and analysis in various industries. Similarly, "Doe and Johnson" highlight the importance of statistical analysis in understanding complex relationships, emphasizing the need for thorough investigation into seemingly unrelated variables. Building upon this foundation, "Jones and Brown" delve into the realm of sports statistics, examining the myriad factors that contribute to a team's performance on the field.

Turning to non-fiction resources, "Statistics for Dummies" provides a comprehensive overview of statistical concepts, offering insights into the intricacies of correlation and regression analysis. This resource serves as a valuable reference in grappling with the statistical nuances of our investigation. Additionally, "Moneyball: The Art of Winning an Unfair Game" explores the innovative use of data in baseball, shedding light on the unconventional strategies employed by the Oakland Athletics to achieve success on the diamond.

Venturing into the world of fiction, "The Curious Incident of the Dog in the Night-Time" presents a compelling narrative that intertwines mystery and logic, mirroring the enigmatic connection we seek to unravel in our study. Furthermore, "The Art of Fielding" captures the essence of baseball as a metaphor for life's unpredictability, drawing parallels to the unexpected twists and turns inherent in statistical analysis.

In a departure from conventional sources, our examination has also extended to unorthodox literature, including the backs of shampoo bottles, where we encountered an unexpected revelation regarding the correlation between lather and the likelihood of a team clinching a decisive victory. Though unconventional, such sources have yielded unexpected insights, prompting us to adopt a holistic approach to our investigation.

As we navigate through the troves of literature, both traditional and unconventional, we remain mindful of the whimsical nature of our study, embracing the unexpected and finding amusement in the pursuit of statistical enlightenment. After all, who would have thought that the world of survey research and the realm of baseball could converge in such an intriguing manner?


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 The number of survey researchers in Michigan and Wins for the Detroit Tigers. Make it seem dry like academic research paper, but with lots of subtle hidden offhand remarks, jokes, goofy observations, and puns. Sneak in some jokes and clever puns about science, research, statistics, and the variables.

Your research team collected data from all across the internet, but mostly just used information from Bureau of Larbor Statistics and Baseball-Reference.com . You used data from 2003 to 2022

Make up the research methods you don't know. Make them a bit goofy and convoluted.

Here is the title, abstract, and introduction of the paper:
[[TITLE]]
The "Surveying the Field and the Diamond: Investigating the Relationship Between Survey Researchers in Michigan and Wins for the Detroit Tigers" Study

[[ABSTRACT]]
In this paper, we investigate the peculiar connection between the number of survey researchers in Michigan and the performance of the Detroit Tigers. Employing data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics and Baseball-Reference.com, we examine the correlation between these seemingly unrelated variables from 2003 to 2022. Surprisingly, our analysis reveals a remarkably high correlation coefficient of 0.7272417 and a statistically significant p-value of less than 0.01. Our findings suggest that there might be something more than meets the eye in the world of survey research and baseball. This study not only sheds light on the synergies between these two domains but also adds a dash of whimsy to the rather serious field of statistical analysis.

[[INTRODUCTION]]
Introduction
The world of research is a curious one, filled with data, analysis, and the occasional statistical curveball. In this study, we embark on a journey to uncover the mysterious relationship between the employment of survey researchers in Michigan and the wins accumulated by the Detroit Tigers. It's a peculiar pairing, akin to mixing oil and water, or in more contemporary terms, like trying to merge cats and dogs in a statistical experiment.
Like alchemists searching for the philosopher's stone, we seek to unravel the enigmatic connection between these disparate variables. On one hand, we have the diligent survey researchers meticulously collecting and analyzing data, and on the other, we have the Detroit Tigers, swinging their bats and chasing victory on the baseball diamond. Never before has there been such an odd couple in the world of statistical analysis, and the findings may leave you scratching your head, much like a perplexed batter facing a knuckleball.
While it may seem as though we are venturing into the realm of whimsy, our study is firmly rooted in rigorous statistical analysis. We have combed through data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics and Baseball-Reference.com, leaving no data point unturned in our quest for understanding. As we delve into the peculiar relationship between the number of survey researchers and the performance of the Tigers, we are reminded of the saying, "In the world of statistics, correlation does not imply causation, but it sure does waggle its eyebrows suggestively and gesture furtively while mouthing, 'Look over there.'"
Throughout the course of this investigation, we aim to bring levity to the rather serious business of statistical analysis. After all, who said that statistical research can't have a sense of humor? So buckle up, dear reader, as we delve into this intriguing study that promises to offer both statistical insights and a pinch of amusement. Just as a curveball catches a batter off guard, so too shall our findings surprise and intrigue those delving into the depths of empirical inquiry.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[METHODOLOGY]]



ChatGPT:

**[[METHODOLOGY]]**

**Data Collection**

Our research team embarked on a quest for data that would rival the exploits of Indiana Jones in search of ancient artifacts. We scoured the vast expanse of the internet, navigating through the digital jungle with the agility of a statistical Tarzan. Our primary sources of data were the Bureau of Labor Statistics and Baseball-Reference.com, akin to a pair of trusty sidekicks helping us unravel the mysteries of survey researchers and the Detroit Tigers.

The data spanned from 2003 to 2022, encompassing a wide spectrum of triumphs and tribulations for both survey researchers and the Tigers. We diligently extracted information on the employment numbers of survey researchers in Michigan and the corresponding tally of wins for the Detroit Tigers. The process was akin to crafting an intricate mosaic, where each data point formed a piece in the grand puzzle we sought to solve.

**Statistical Analysis**

With our treasure trove of data in hand, we ventured into the labyrinth of statistical analysis. Armed with an array of sophisticated methods, we set out to illuminate the enigmatic relationship between the number of survey researchers and the performance of the Tigers. Our statistical arsenal included correlation analysis, regression models, and a sprinkle of magic (just kidding – the real magic is in the methods themselves).

We calculated the Pearson correlation coefficient to discern the strength and direction of the relationship between the variables. The process echoed the delicate dance of celestial bodies in the cosmos, as we sought to unveil the gravitational forces at play in the realm of survey researchers and baseball victories.

In conjunction with the correlation analysis, we employed regression models to unravel the quantitative intricacies of the association. Our models were as meticulously crafted as a watchmaker's masterpiece, each cog and gear meticulously aligned to reveal the inner workings of the relationship between survey researchers and Tigers' wins.

**Ethical Considerations**

In our scientific fervor, we remained steadfast in upholding the ethical principles governing research. The sanctity of data integrity and confidentiality was paramount, much like the unwavering code of honor upheld by the knights of yore. We handled the data with the utmost care, ensuring that each statistical maneuver was executed with precision and respect for the information at hand.

**Limitations**

As with any scientific endeavor, our study was not devoid of limitations. The reliance on secondary data sources posed inherent constraints, akin to performing a cosmic exploration with telescopes that could only peek through a haze of cosmic dust. Additionally, the nature of observational data precluded causal inferences, leaving us to ponder the age-old conundrum of correlation versus causation, much like discerning whether the chicken or the egg came first.

Despite these limitations, our research endeavor was a testament to the inquisitive spirit of statistical inquiry and the whimsical nature of uncovering hidden relationships. We proceeded with an unwavering commitment to unraveling the mysteries that lie at the nexus of survey researchers and Tigers' triumphs, infusing our scientific pursuit with a dash of levity and wonder.

Now, onward to the results, where the unveiling of our findings promises to tickle the intellect and perhaps even elicit a wry smile from the statistical connoisseur!


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 The number of survey researchers in Michigan and Wins for the Detroit Tigers. Make it seem dry like academic research paper, but with lots of subtle hidden offhand remarks, jokes, goofy observations, and puns. Sneak in some jokes and clever puns about science, research, statistics, and the variables.

Your research team collected data from all across the internet, but mostly just used information from Bureau of Larbor Statistics and Baseball-Reference.com .

For the time period 2003 to 2022, you found a correlation 0.7272417, r-squared of 0.5288805, 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 "Surveying the Field and the Diamond: Investigating the Relationship Between Survey Researchers in Michigan and Wins for the Detroit Tigers" Study

[[ABSTRACT]]
In this paper, we investigate the peculiar connection between the number of survey researchers in Michigan and the performance of the Detroit Tigers. Employing data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics and Baseball-Reference.com, we examine the correlation between these seemingly unrelated variables from 2003 to 2022. Surprisingly, our analysis reveals a remarkably high correlation coefficient of 0.7272417 and a statistically significant p-value of less than 0.01. Our findings suggest that there might be something more than meets the eye in the world of survey research and baseball. This study not only sheds light on the synergies between these two domains but also adds a dash of whimsy to the rather serious field of statistical analysis.

-------

And here is the methodology section that led to this result:
[[METHODOLOGY]]
Introduction
The world of research is a curious one, filled with data, analysis, and the occasional statistical curveball. In this study, we embark on a journey to uncover the mysterious relationship between the employment of survey researchers in Michigan and the wins accumulated by the Detroit Tigers. It's a peculiar pairing, akin to mixing oil and water, or in more contemporary terms, like trying to merge cats and dogs in a statistical experiment.
Like alchemists searching for the philosopher's stone, we seek to unravel the enigmatic connection between these disparate variables. On one hand, we have the diligent survey researchers meticulously collecting and analyzing data, and on the other, we have the Detroit Tigers, swinging their bats and chasing victory on the baseball diamond. Never before has there been such an odd couple in the world of statistical analysis, and the findings may leave you scratching your head, much like a perplexed batter facing a knuckleball.
While it may seem as though we are venturing into the realm of whimsy, our study is firmly rooted in rigorous statistical analysis. We have combed through data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics and Baseball-Reference.com, leaving no data point unturned in our quest for understanding. As we delve into the peculiar relationship between the number of survey researchers and the performance of the Tigers, we are reminded of the saying, "In the world of statistics, correlation does not imply causation, but it sure does waggle its eyebrows suggestively and gesture furtively while mouthing, 'Look over there.'"
Throughout the course of this investigation, we aim to bring levity to the rather serious business of statistical analysis. After all, who said that statistical research can't have a sense of humor? So buckle up, dear reader, as we delve into this intriguing study that promises to offer both statistical insights and a pinch of amusement. Just as a curveball catches a batter off guard, so too shall our findings surprise and intrigue those delving into the depths of empirical inquiry.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[RESULTS]]



ChatGPT:

[[RESULTS]]

The analysis of the data revealed a surprising correlation between the number of survey researchers in Michigan and the performance of the Detroit Tigers. The correlation coefficient obtained was 0.7272417, indicating a strong positive relationship between the two variables. This finding suggests that as the number of survey researchers in Michigan increased, the wins for the Detroit Tigers also experienced a notable uptick. It's as though the survey researchers were secretly batting for the Tigers, or perhaps providing them with some statistical mojo to up their game.

Furthermore, the r-squared value of 0.5288805 indicates that approximately 52.88% of the variability in the Detroit Tigers' wins can be explained by the number of survey researchers in Michigan. This solid r-squared value highlights the substantial influence that survey researchers seem to have on the performance of the Tigers. It's as if the survey researchers were like the statistical equivalent of a lucky charm for the baseball team, sprinkling their data-driven magic to propel the Tigers toward victory.

The p-value of less than 0.01 further solidifies the statistical significance of this correlation, providing compelling evidence that the relationship between the two variables is not just a fluke occurrence. It's as if the statistical gods themselves were waving their significance wands, endorsing the unlikely connection between survey researchers and baseball wins.

Finally, the scatterplot (Fig. 1) visually illustrates the strong positive correlation between the number of survey researchers in Michigan and the wins for the Detroit Tigers. The data points seem to dance in alignment, almost as if the survey researchers were orchestrating a statistical symphony, with the Tigers pirouetting to their melodic analysis.

In conclusion, the results of this study not only uncover a remarkable association between survey researchers in Michigan and wins for the Detroit Tigers but also add an element of surprise and amusement to the realm of statistical analysis. It's as if statistical research decided to do a little dance, make a little love, and get down tonight, revealing the quirky and unexpected connections that can emerge when delving into the depths of empirical inquiry.


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 The number of survey researchers in Michigan and Wins for the Detroit Tigers. Make it seem dry like academic research paper, but with lots of subtle hidden offhand remarks, jokes, goofy observations, and puns. Sneak in some jokes and clever puns about science, research, statistics, and the variables.

Limit your response to 500 tokens.

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

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

[[TITLE]]
The "Surveying the Field and the Diamond: Investigating the Relationship Between Survey Researchers in Michigan and Wins for the Detroit Tigers" Study

[[ABSTRACT]]
In this paper, we investigate the peculiar connection between the number of survey researchers in Michigan and the performance of the Detroit Tigers. Employing data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics and Baseball-Reference.com, we examine the correlation between these seemingly unrelated variables from 2003 to 2022. Surprisingly, our analysis reveals a remarkably high correlation coefficient of 0.7272417 and a statistically significant p-value of less than 0.01. Our findings suggest that there might be something more than meets the eye in the world of survey research and baseball. This study not only sheds light on the synergies between these two domains but also adds a dash of whimsy to the rather serious field of statistical analysis.

[[LITERATURE REVIEW]]
In "Smith et al.," the authors find that the employment of survey researchers in Michigan has steadily increased over the past decade, reflecting the growing demand for data collection and analysis in various industries. Similarly, "Doe and Johnson" highlight the importance of statistical analysis in understanding complex relationships, emphasizing the need for thorough investigation into seemingly unrelated variables. Building upon this foundation, "Jones and Brown" delve into the realm of sports statistics, examining the myriad factors that contribute to a team's performance on the field.
Turning to non-fiction resources, "Statistics for Dummies" provides a comprehensive overview of statistical concepts, offering insights into the intricacies of correlation and regression analysis. This resource serves as a valuable reference in grappling with the statistical nuances of our investigation. Additionally, "Moneyball: The Art of Winning an Unfair Game" explores the innovative use of data in baseball, shedding light on the unconventional strategies employed by the Oakland Athletics to achieve success on the diamond.
Venturing into the world of fiction, "The Curious Incident of the Dog in the Night-Time" presents a compelling narrative that intertwines mystery and logic, mirroring the enigmatic connection we seek to unravel in our study. Furthermore, "The Art of Fielding" captures the essence of baseball as a metaphor for life's unpredictability, drawing parallels to the unexpected twists and turns inherent in statistical analysis.
In a departure from conventional sources, our examination has also extended to unorthodox literature, including the backs of shampoo bottles, where we encountered an unexpected revelation regarding the correlation between lather and the likelihood of a team clinching a decisive victory. Though unconventional, such sources have yielded unexpected insights, prompting us to adopt a holistic approach to our investigation.
As we navigate through the troves of literature, both traditional and unconventional, we remain mindful of the whimsical nature of our study, embracing the unexpected and finding amusement in the pursuit of statistical enlightenment. After all, who would have thought that the world of survey research and the realm of baseball could converge in such an intriguing manner?

[[RESULTS]]
The analysis of the data revealed a surprising correlation between the number of survey researchers in Michigan and the performance of the Detroit Tigers. The correlation coefficient obtained was 0.7272417, indicating a strong positive relationship between the two variables. This finding suggests that as the number of survey researchers in Michigan increased, the wins for the Detroit Tigers also experienced a notable uptick. It's as though the survey researchers were secretly batting for the Tigers, or perhaps providing them with some statistical mojo to up their game.
Furthermore, the r-squared value of 0.5288805 indicates that approximately 52.88% of the variability in the Detroit Tigers' wins can be explained by the number of survey researchers in Michigan. This solid r-squared value highlights the substantial influence that survey researchers seem to have on the performance of the Tigers. It's as if the survey researchers were like the statistical equivalent of a lucky charm for the baseball team, sprinkling their data-driven magic to propel the Tigers toward victory.
The p-value of less than 0.01 further solidifies the statistical significance of this correlation, providing compelling evidence that the relationship between the two variables is not just a fluke occurrence. It's as if the statistical gods themselves were waving their significance wands, endorsing the unlikely connection between survey researchers and baseball wins.
Finally, the scatterplot (Fig. 1) visually illustrates the strong positive correlation between the number of survey researchers in Michigan and the wins for the Detroit Tigers. The data points seem to dance in alignment, almost as if the survey researchers were orchestrating a statistical symphony, with the Tigers pirouetting to their melodic analysis.
In conclusion, the results of this study not only uncover a remarkable association between survey researchers in Michigan and wins for the Detroit Tigers but also add an element of surprise and amusement to the realm of statistical analysis. It's as if statistical research decided to do a little dance, make a little love, and get down tonight, revealing the quirky and unexpected connections that can emerge when delving into the depths of empirical inquiry.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[DISCUSSION]]



ChatGPT:

[[DISCUSSION]]

The results of our investigation have divulged a fascinating correlation between the number of survey researchers in Michigan and the performance of the Detroit Tigers. Our findings not only align with prior research, but they also add layers of whimsy and wonder to the esoteric world of statistical analysis.

First and foremost, our study corroborates the findings of "Smith et al.," who observed a steady increase in the employment of survey researchers in Michigan. This trend parallels the surge in demand for thorough data collection and analysis, suggesting that the statistical prowess of these researchers may have seeped into the realm of baseball, much like a pitcher's curveball sneaking past an unsuspecting batter. If we consider statistical analysis as the pitching arm of the research world, then the survey researchers in Michigan might just be throwing a mean statistical fastball that the Tigers can't help but hit out of the park.

In a similar vein, "Doe and Johnson" emphasized the need for meticulous investigation into seemingly unrelated variables, a notion that resonates with our study's unearthing of the unexpected connection between survey researchers and baseball wins. It's as though the statistics gods whispered a secret to the survey researchers, who in turn imbued the Tigers with an uncanny statistical edge, much like the hidden underdog strategy unveiled in "Moneyball: The Art of Winning an Unfair Game." Who knew that beneath the surface of America's favorite pastime, a statistical saga was unfolding, with survey researchers playing the unlikely role of statistical sorcerers reshaping the game.

Moreover, the presence of a strong positive correlation, as reflected in our remarkably high correlation coefficient, echoes the sentiment espoused by "Jones and Brown" in their exploration of sports statistics. Their work laid the groundwork for delving into the multitude of factors affecting a team's performance, and our study has unearthed an unforeseen variable in the form of survey researchers. It's almost as if the Tigers had a secret statistical playbook penned by the survey researchers, unlocking the mysteries of performance and victory.

As we navigate through the labyrinth of literature, both orthodox and unconventional, we are reminded of the serendipity that underpins scientific inquiry. Sometimes, the most unexpected sources, whether inspirational or satirical, can illuminate the unlikeliest of connections, breathing new life into the otherwise solemn landscape of empirical scholarship. Our discovery of the statistical symphony orchestrated by the survey researchers and the Tigers stands as a testament to the capricious nature of the scientific endeavor, where the unexpected and the inexplicable converge to fashion a tapestry of curiosity and amusement.

In essence, our peculiar findings not only align with prior research but also infuse a sense of levity and charm into the often somber world of statistical analysis. It's as if statistical research decided to take a detour through the land of whimsy, unearthing hidden connections while savoring the statistical dance of serendipity. After all, who knew that the world of survey research and the realm of baseball could intertwine in such a fascinating and unexpected manner?


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 The number of survey researchers in Michigan and Wins for the Detroit Tigers. Make it seem dry like academic research paper, but with lots of subtle hidden offhand remarks, jokes, goofy observations, and puns. Sneak in some jokes and clever puns about science, research, statistics, and the variables.

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

Here are the title, abstract, introduction, and results sections.
[[TITLE]]
The "Surveying the Field and the Diamond: Investigating the Relationship Between Survey Researchers in Michigan and Wins for the Detroit Tigers" Study

[[ABSTRACT]]
In this paper, we investigate the peculiar connection between the number of survey researchers in Michigan and the performance of the Detroit Tigers. Employing data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics and Baseball-Reference.com, we examine the correlation between these seemingly unrelated variables from 2003 to 2022. Surprisingly, our analysis reveals a remarkably high correlation coefficient of 0.7272417 and a statistically significant p-value of less than 0.01. Our findings suggest that there might be something more than meets the eye in the world of survey research and baseball. This study not only sheds light on the synergies between these two domains but also adds a dash of whimsy to the rather serious field of statistical analysis.

[[INTRDUCTION]]
Introduction
The world of research is a curious one, filled with data, analysis, and the occasional statistical curveball. In this study, we embark on a journey to uncover the mysterious relationship between the employment of survey researchers in Michigan and the wins accumulated by the Detroit Tigers. It's a peculiar pairing, akin to mixing oil and water, or in more contemporary terms, like trying to merge cats and dogs in a statistical experiment.
Like alchemists searching for the philosopher's stone, we seek to unravel the enigmatic connection between these disparate variables. On one hand, we have the diligent survey researchers meticulously collecting and analyzing data, and on the other, we have the Detroit Tigers, swinging their bats and chasing victory on the baseball diamond. Never before has there been such an odd couple in the world of statistical analysis, and the findings may leave you scratching your head, much like a perplexed batter facing a knuckleball.
While it may seem as though we are venturing into the realm of whimsy, our study is firmly rooted in rigorous statistical analysis. We have combed through data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics and Baseball-Reference.com, leaving no data point unturned in our quest for understanding. As we delve into the peculiar relationship between the number of survey researchers and the performance of the Tigers, we are reminded of the saying, "In the world of statistics, correlation does not imply causation, but it sure does waggle its eyebrows suggestively and gesture furtively while mouthing, 'Look over there.'"
Throughout the course of this investigation, we aim to bring levity to the rather serious business of statistical analysis. After all, who said that statistical research can't have a sense of humor? So buckle up, dear reader, as we delve into this intriguing study that promises to offer both statistical insights and a pinch of amusement. Just as a curveball catches a batter off guard, so too shall our findings surprise and intrigue those delving into the depths of empirical inquiry.

[[RESULTS]]
The analysis of the data revealed a surprising correlation between the number of survey researchers in Michigan and the performance of the Detroit Tigers. The correlation coefficient obtained was 0.7272417, indicating a strong positive relationship between the two variables. This finding suggests that as the number of survey researchers in Michigan increased, the wins for the Detroit Tigers also experienced a notable uptick. It's as though the survey researchers were secretly batting for the Tigers, or perhaps providing them with some statistical mojo to up their game.
Furthermore, the r-squared value of 0.5288805 indicates that approximately 52.88% of the variability in the Detroit Tigers' wins can be explained by the number of survey researchers in Michigan. This solid r-squared value highlights the substantial influence that survey researchers seem to have on the performance of the Tigers. It's as if the survey researchers were like the statistical equivalent of a lucky charm for the baseball team, sprinkling their data-driven magic to propel the Tigers toward victory.
The p-value of less than 0.01 further solidifies the statistical significance of this correlation, providing compelling evidence that the relationship between the two variables is not just a fluke occurrence. It's as if the statistical gods themselves were waving their significance wands, endorsing the unlikely connection between survey researchers and baseball wins.
Finally, the scatterplot (Fig. 1) visually illustrates the strong positive correlation between the number of survey researchers in Michigan and the wins for the Detroit Tigers. The data points seem to dance in alignment, almost as if the survey researchers were orchestrating a statistical symphony, with the Tigers pirouetting to their melodic analysis.
In conclusion, the results of this study not only uncover a remarkable association between survey researchers in Michigan and wins for the Detroit Tigers but also add an element of surprise and amusement to the realm of statistical analysis. It's as if statistical research decided to do a little dance, make a little love, and get down tonight, revealing the quirky and unexpected connections that can emerge when delving into the depths of empirical inquiry.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[CONCLUSION]]



ChatGPT:

[[CONCLUSION]]

In conclusion, the findings of this study remarkably unveil the curious relationship between the number of survey researchers in Michigan and the performance of the Detroit Tigers, adding a delightful twist to the otherwise buttoned-up world of statistical analysis. It's as if the survey researchers were summoning some statistical legerdemain to rally the Tigers toward victory, or perhaps employing some sort of data-driven voodoo to influence the outcome of baseball games. The results, with a correlation coefficient reminiscent of two kindred statistical spirits dancing in synchrony, point to a substantial association between these seemingly unrelated variables. It's almost as if the survey researchers were secretly moonlighting as baseball whisperers, using their empirical acumen to nudge the Tigers in the right statistical direction.

With an r-squared value that could rival the most charming of statistical charms, and a p-value signaling significance as clear as a sunny day at the ballpark, it's evident that there's more to this correlation than meets the eye. The scatterplot paints a vivid picture of this unlikely statistical tango, as if the survey researchers were choreographing a statistical ballet that the Tigers simply couldn't resist.

However, as much as we'd love to delve deeper into this whimsical world of statistical serendipity, it's clear that further investigation in this area is about as necessary as a third arm for a pitcher. It seems that in the realm of statistical oddities, this rare gem of a correlation might just be one of a kind, leaving us with a quirky anecdote and a statistical eyebrow raised in delightful surprise. And so, we bid adieu to this unlikely statistical romance, content in the knowledge that sometimes, even in the world of statistical analysis, the unexpected can be the most enticing discovery of all.

No further research required.


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 Surveying the Field and the Diamond: Investigating the Relationship Between Survey Researchers in Michigan and Wins for the Detroit Tigers Study. Respond only with the name of a fictional academic journal.

ChatGPT:

The Journal of Survey Research and Sports Analytics


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 Surveying the Field and the Diamond: Investigating the Relationship Between Survey Researchers in Michigan and Wins for the Detroit Tigers Study. Respond only with the name of a fictional organization.

ChatGPT:

The Institute for Midwestern Sports and Social Science Studies


Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You provide potential search keywords separated by commas. You say nothing else, and you do not chat with the user.
User prompt: Please provide potential search keywords for a paper titled The Surveying the Field and the Diamond: Investigating the Relationship Between Survey Researchers in Michigan and Wins for the Detroit Tigers Study with an abstract of In this paper, we investigate the peculiar connection between the number of survey researchers in Michigan and the performance of the Detroit Tigers. Employing data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics and Baseball-Reference.com, we examine the correlation between these seemingly unrelated variables from 2003 to 2022. Surprisingly, our analysis reveals a remarkably high correlation coefficient of 0.7272417 and a statistically significant p-value of less than 0.01. Our findings suggest that there might be something more than meets the eye in the world of survey research and baseball. This study not only sheds light on the synergies between these two domains but also adds a dash of whimsy to the rather serious field of statistical analysis.

ChatGPT:

survey researchers, Michigan, Detroit Tigers, survey research, performance, correlation, Bureau of Labor Statistics, Baseball-Reference.com, statistical analysis, data analysis, correlation coefficient, p-value, relationship, synergies, whimsy

*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

The number of survey researchers in Michigan
Detailed data title: BLS estimate of survey researchers in Michigan
Source: Bureau of Larbor Statistics
See what else correlates with The number of survey researchers in Michigan

Wins for the Detroit Tigers
Detailed data title: The total number of season wins for the Detroit Tigers
Source: Baseball-Reference.com
See what else correlates with Wins for the Detroit Tigers

Correlation r = 0.7272417 (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 = 0.5288805 (Coefficient of determination)
This means 52.9% of the change in the one variable (i.e., Wins for the Detroit Tigers) is predictable based on the change in the other (i.e., The number of survey researchers in Michigan) over the 20 years from 2003 through 2022.

p < 0.01, which is statistically significant(Null hypothesis significance test)
The p-value is 0.00028. 0.0002799448482068147000000000
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 0.73 in 0.028% of random cases. Said differently, if you correlated 3,572 random variables Which I absolutely did.
with the same 19 degrees of freedom, Degrees of freedom is a measure of how many free components we are testing. In this case it is 19 because we have two variables measured over a period of 20 years. It's just the number of years minus ( the number of variables minus one ), which in this case simplifies to the number of years minus one.
you would randomly expect to find a correlation as strong as this one.

[ 0.42, 0.88 ] 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.
20032004200520062007200820092010201120122013201420152016201720182019202020212022
The number of survey researchers in Michigan (Survey Researchers)1603007501050970820840840880720810530610400290240200190210130
Wins for the Detroit Tigers (Game wins)4372719588748681958893907486646447237766




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([160,300,750,1050,970,820,840,840,880,720,810,530,610,400,290,240,200,190,210,130,])
array_2 = np.array([43,72,71,95,88,74,86,81,95,88,93,90,74,86,64,64,47,23,77,66,])
array_1_name = "The number of survey researchers in Michigan"
array_2_name = "Wins for the Detroit Tigers"

# 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?

Bravo! Your evaluation rocks!


Correlation ID: 3403 · Black Variable ID: 9625 · Red Variable ID: 4307
about · subscribe · emailme@tylervigen.com · twitter

CC BY 4.0