about · email me · subscribe
Spurious correlation #3,573 · View random

A linear line chart with years as the X-axis and two variables on the Y-axis. The first variable is Google searches for 'how to cut own hair' and the second variable is Runs scored by the Baltimore Orioles.  The chart goes from 2004 to 2023, and the two variables track closely in value over that time. Small Image

AI explanation

As more people attempted DIY haircuts, they inadvertently created distracting hairstyles that resembled tiny bird's nests, throwing off the Orioles' focus and coordination on the field. The team was really having a hair-raising experience trying to score!

Model: dalle-3
Prompt: An image that looks like it is a scene from a Disney movie, featuring a group of people huddled around their phones, searching "how to cut own hair." In the background, the Baltimore Orioles are playing a baseball game with players donning wild, wacky hairstyles that hinder their vision while batting. The opposing team's pitcher is visibly distracted by the Orioles' crazy hair, leading to more runs scored for the team. 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: Google searches for 'how to cut own hair' and Runs scored by the Baltimore Orioles. 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: Cutsy art illustration An image that looks like it is a scene from A Disney Movie Charcoal A comic-book-style illustration with muted colors and a dotted halftone pattern from the 1960s An image that looks like it is a scene from A Disney Movie
ChatGPT: An image that looks like it is a scene from A Disney 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 Google searches for 'how to cut own hair' and Runs scored by the Baltimore Orioles, in the following situation: The correlation between "how to cut own hair" searches and Baltimore Orioles runs scored is clear: as more people attempt home haircuts, their hair gets in their eyes, affecting their vision like the Orioles' batters. The resulting wacky hairstyles distract opposing pitchers, leading to more runs for the team!. Keep the description simple.
ChatGPT: In the scene, a group of people are huddled around their phones, searching "how to cut own hair" while in the background, the Baltimore Orioles are playing a baseball game. The players on the team all have wild, wacky hairstyles that are clearly getting in their eyes as they bat, making it difficult for them to see the ball. However, the opposing team's pitcher is clearly distracted by the Orioles' crazy hair, leading to more runs scored for the team.

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 Disney Movie ] and depicting this scene: In the scene, a group of people are huddled around their phones, searching "how to cut own hair" while in the background, the Baltimore Orioles are playing a baseball game. The players on the team all have wild, wacky hairstyles that are clearly getting in their eyes as they bat, making it difficult for them to see the ball. However, the opposing team's pitcher is clearly distracted by the Orioles' crazy hair, leading to more runs scored for the team. 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 Disney movie, featuring a group of people huddled around their phones, searching "how to cut own hair." In the background, the Baltimore Orioles are playing a baseball game with players donning wild, wacky hairstyles that hinder their vision while batting. The opposing team's pitcher is visibly distracted by the Orioles' crazy hair, leading to more runs scored for the team.

*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 how to cut own hair (Google searches for 'how to cut own hair') negatively influenced Runs scored by the Baltimore Orioles. Add a funny one-liner at the end.

AI academic paper

(Because p < 0.01)
Trimming Trends: The Tress Connection Between How to Cut Own Hair Google Searches and Baltimore Orioles' Runs

The Journal of Quirky Correlations

Jan 2024
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 witty academic researcher. Your writing sounds like it belongs in a statistics journal.You write titles and abstracts of goofy academic research papers.
User prompt:
Pretend you are an academic researcher. Your writing sounds like it belongs in a medical or economics journal. However, you frequently crack jokes, make puns, and add unexpected twists in your writing.

Please draft the title and abstract of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between Google searches for 'how to cut own hair' and Runs scored by the Baltimore Orioles. Make lots of jokes, goofy observations, and puns.

Make the title an alliteration.

Your research team used data from Google Trends and Baseball-Reference.com to assess this nagging question. You found a correlation coefficient of -0.8934715 and p < 0.01 for 2004 to 2023.

Please respond in this format (replace "Lorem ipsum dolor sit" with your title and abstract)

[[TITLE]]
Lorem ipsum dolor sit

[[ABSTRACT]]
Lorem ipsum dolor sit



ChatGPT:
[[TITLE]]
Trimming Trends: The Tress Connection Between "How to Cut Own Hair" Google Searches and Baltimore Orioles' Runs

[[ABSTRACT]]
This research delves into the intriguing connection between the frequency of Google searches for "how to cut own hair" and the runs scored by the Baltimore Orioles in Major League Baseball games. By analyzing data from Google Trends and Baseball-Reference.com spanning the period from 2004 to 2023, our research team uncovered a surprising correlation coefficient of -0.8934715 and a statistically significant p-value of less than 0.01. The negative correlation suggests that as Google searches related to self-haircuts rise, the runs scored by the Baltimore Orioles tend to decline, sparking hair-raising questions about the psychological impact of grooming anxieties on athletic performance. Our findings open up a new avenue for understanding the interplay between personal grooming dilemmas and on-field endeavors, shedding light on the windswept wonders of statistical correlations in unexpected domains.


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

Please make up the introduction section of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between Google searches for 'how to cut own hair' and Runs scored by the Baltimore Orioles. Make lots of jokes, goofy observations, and puns.

Here is the title and abstract of the paper:
[[TITLE]]
Trimming Trends: The Tress Connection Between "How to Cut Own Hair" Google Searches and Baltimore Orioles' Runs

[[ABSTRACT]]
This research delves into the intriguing connection between the frequency of Google searches for "how to cut own hair" and the runs scored by the Baltimore Orioles in Major League Baseball games. By analyzing data from Google Trends and Baseball-Reference.com spanning the period from 2004 to 2023, our research team uncovered a surprising correlation coefficient of -0.8934715 and a statistically significant p-value of less than 0.01. The negative correlation suggests that as Google searches related to self-haircuts rise, the runs scored by the Baltimore Orioles tend to decline, sparking hair-raising questions about the psychological impact of grooming anxieties on athletic performance. Our findings open up a new avenue for understanding the interplay between personal grooming dilemmas and on-field endeavors, shedding light on the windswept wonders of statistical correlations in unexpected domains.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[INTRODUCTION]]



ChatGPT:
[[INTRODUCTION]]

As early as the ancient civilizations, hair has played a significant role in human culture. From beehives to bowl cuts, our locks have been a cornerstone of self-expression and social identity. But what happens when the desire for a fresh new look clashes with the intense pressure of professional sports performance? This paper sets out to explore the tangled tale of "Trimming Trends" by investigating the curious relationship between Google searches for "how to cut own hair" and the runs scored by the Baltimore Orioles in Major League Baseball games. As we embark on this journey, we invite you to comb through the hair-raising discoveries and uncurl the mystery of how a simple search query can tease out unsuspecting connections in the realm of sports analytics.

It's a well-established fact that baseball is a game of numbers, from batting averages to earned run averages. And in the age of information, our digital footprints unveil a treasure trove of insights. With Google reigning as the titan of search engines, its Trends tool offers a luscious landscape for mining data on the collective interests and concerns of the masses. Meanwhile, the Baltimore Orioles, with their storied history and rollercoaster performances, provide a compelling backdrop for our hair-raising investigation into the coif-fensive strategy of Grooming Gambits versus Runs Realized.

While it's tempting to brush aside the notion of any meaningful connection between personal grooming and professional athletics, our statistical analysis has uncovered a "follicular" fascination. The negative correlation coefficient of -0.8934715 between Google searches for self-haircut tutorials and runs scored by the Orioles sends a shiver down the spine, prompting us to confront the possibility that behind every home run, there might be a head in need of a trim.

As we venture into uncharted territory, it's imperative to recognize the gravity-defying implications of our findings. The statistically significant p-value of less than 0.01 demands that we untangle the hair-raising questions and scrutinize the implications with a keen eye. Could it be that as individuals seek sartorial independence through DIY haircuts, the Baltimore Orioles' bats lose some of their swing? Or is there a more intricate web of causality at play, entwining the tresses of personal grooming dilemmas with the fibers of performance anxieties?

This paper is more than just an exercise in statistical hair-splitting. It unravels the curious ways in which the digital rumblings of personal grooming ripple through the diamond-studied worlds of professional sports. As we proceed, we urge readers to keep an open mind and a well-coiffed sense of humor, for in the tangled tale of "Trimming Trends," there are sure to be twists, knots, and perhaps a few split ends of disbelief. So, without further ado, let's brush aside the skepticism and embark on a follicle-filled journey through the unexpected coif-fines of correlation.


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

Please make up a literature review section of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between Google searches for 'how to cut own hair' and Runs scored by the Baltimore Orioles. 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 cartoons and childrens' shows that you watched that are related to the topic.

Here is the title and abstract of the paper:
[[TITLE]]
Trimming Trends: The Tress Connection Between "How to Cut Own Hair" Google Searches and Baltimore Orioles' Runs

[[ABSTRACT]]
This research delves into the intriguing connection between the frequency of Google searches for "how to cut own hair" and the runs scored by the Baltimore Orioles in Major League Baseball games. By analyzing data from Google Trends and Baseball-Reference.com spanning the period from 2004 to 2023, our research team uncovered a surprising correlation coefficient of -0.8934715 and a statistically significant p-value of less than 0.01. The negative correlation suggests that as Google searches related to self-haircuts rise, the runs scored by the Baltimore Orioles tend to decline, sparking hair-raising questions about the psychological impact of grooming anxieties on athletic performance. Our findings open up a new avenue for understanding the interplay between personal grooming dilemmas and on-field endeavors, shedding light on the windswept wonders of statistical correlations in unexpected domains.

-------

And here is the introduction section that led to this literature review:
[[INTRODUCTION]]
As early as the ancient civilizations, hair has played a significant role in human culture. From beehives to bowl cuts, our locks have been a cornerstone of self-expression and social identity. But what happens when the desire for a fresh new look clashes with the intense pressure of professional sports performance? This paper sets out to explore the tangled tale of "Trimming Trends" by investigating the curious relationship between Google searches for "how to cut own hair" and the runs scored by the Baltimore Orioles in Major League Baseball games. As we embark on this journey, we invite you to comb through the hair-raising discoveries and uncurl the mystery of how a simple search query can tease out unsuspecting connections in the realm of sports analytics.
It's a well-established fact that baseball is a game of numbers, from batting averages to earned run averages. And in the age of information, our digital footprints unveil a treasure trove of insights. With Google reigning as the titan of search engines, its Trends tool offers a luscious landscape for mining data on the collective interests and concerns of the masses. Meanwhile, the Baltimore Orioles, with their storied history and rollercoaster performances, provide a compelling backdrop for our hair-raising investigation into the coif-fensive strategy of Grooming Gambits versus Runs Realized.
While it's tempting to brush aside the notion of any meaningful connection between personal grooming and professional athletics, our statistical analysis has uncovered a "follicular" fascination. The negative correlation coefficient of -0.8934715 between Google searches for self-haircut tutorials and runs scored by the Orioles sends a shiver down the spine, prompting us to confront the possibility that behind every home run, there might be a head in need of a trim.
As we venture into uncharted territory, it's imperative to recognize the gravity-defying implications of our findings. The statistically significant p-value of less than 0.01 demands that we untangle the hair-raising questions and scrutinize the implications with a keen eye. Could it be that as individuals seek sartorial independence through DIY haircuts, the Baltimore Orioles' bats lose some of their swing? Or is there a more intricate web of causality at play, entwining the tresses of personal grooming dilemmas with the fibers of performance anxieties?
This paper is more than just an exercise in statistical hair-splitting. It unravels the curious ways in which the digital rumblings of personal grooming ripple through the diamond-studied worlds of professional sports. As we proceed, we urge readers to keep an open mind and a well-coiffed sense of humor, for in the tangled tale of "Trimming Trends," there are sure to be twists, knots, and perhaps a few split ends of disbelief. So, without further ado, let's brush aside the skepticism and embark on a follicle-filled journey through the unexpected coif-fines of correlation.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[LITERATURE REVIEW]]



ChatGPT:
[[LITERATURE REVIEW]]

The tangled tale of "Trimming Trends" has spurred a flurry of scholarly inquiry, attempting to unravel the enigmatic link between Google searches for "how to cut own hair" and the runs scored by the Baltimore Orioles. While initial forays into this uncharted terrain hewed closely to conventional statistical methodologies, researchers such as Smith (2017) and Doe (2020) deftly navigated the follicular landscape, examining hair-related queries as potential predictors of athletic outcomes. However, the findings of these pioneering endeavors merely scratched the surface, leaving ample room for further exploration.

In "Hair Today, Gone Tomorrow," Smith (2017) delves into the psychology of self-styling endeavors and the unforeseen repercussions on individuals' emotional well-being. With a keen focus on the DIY hair-cutting community, Smith (2017) uncovers a myriad of motivations behind internet searches for hair-trimming tutorials, ranging from a desire for frugality to a quest for personal reinvention. Yet, while shedding light on the psychological underpinnings of self-grooming dilemmas, this study falls short of extending its gaze to the realm of professional sports.

Similarly, Doe (2020) extends the inquiry into the impact of personal grooming on performance, drawing parallels between athletes' pre-competition rituals and the quest for sartorial self-sufficiency. In "The Coif-fensive Strategy: How Grooming Influences Performance," Doe (2020) presents a comprehensive analysis of the ritualistic significance of grooming practices in the athletic sphere. However, the study stops short of linking these insights to tangible outcomes on the baseball diamond, leaving a follicular gap in our understanding of the tension between tress-tling personal grooming dilemmas and athletic performance.

Turning to works beyond the realm of scholarly research, the literature related to personal grooming and its potential impact on sports performance takes an unexpected turn. In "The Art of Shaving," the authors explore the rituals and intricacies of grooming practices from a historical and cultural perspective, offering a nuanced portrayal of the deeply rooted significance of personal appearance. While not directly tied to our peculiar focus on Google searches and baseball runs, this work serves as a reminder of the intricate interplay between grooming habits and individual pursuits.

On a more whimsical note, the realm of fiction offers unsuspecting treasures that bear uncanny relevance to our investigation. Works such as "The Hair-Raising Adventures of Lemony Snicket" and "Cut and Run: A Stylistic Tale" take readers on a follicle-fueled journey, weaving narratives of unexpected hair-related predicaments and their impact on the characters' fates. While not grounded in empirical research, these literary escapades provide a lighthearted perspective on the curious intersections of personal grooming and unforeseen consequences.

In the vein of childhood nostalgia, the animated landscape of cartoons and children's shows also presents snippets of relevance to our pursuit. From "SpongeBob SquarePants" to "The Simpsons," these beloved series often depict characters navigating hair-related challenges with comedic fervor, giving rise to reflections on the underlying implications of self-styling dilemmas. While seemingly light-hearted, these portrayals offer a poignant reminder of the universal nature of grooming quandaries and their potential reverberations in unexpected domains.

As we comb through the various strands of literature, it becomes evident that the link between Google searches for "how to cut own hair" and the runs scored by the Baltimore Orioles transcends disciplinary boundaries, yielding insights from the scholarly, fictional, and popular cultural realms. This imbues our investigation with a multi-faceted perspective, laying the foundation for a thorough exploration of the follicular forces at play in the realm of sports analytics.


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

Please make up the methodology section of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between Google searches for 'how to cut own hair' and Runs scored by the Baltimore Orioles. Make lots of jokes, goofy observations, and puns.

Your research team collected data from all across the internet, but mostly just used information from Google Trends and Baseball-Reference.com . You used data from 2004 to 2023

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

Here is the title, abstract, and introduction of the paper:
[[TITLE]]
Trimming Trends: The Tress Connection Between "How to Cut Own Hair" Google Searches and Baltimore Orioles' Runs

[[ABSTRACT]]
This research delves into the intriguing connection between the frequency of Google searches for "how to cut own hair" and the runs scored by the Baltimore Orioles in Major League Baseball games. By analyzing data from Google Trends and Baseball-Reference.com spanning the period from 2004 to 2023, our research team uncovered a surprising correlation coefficient of -0.8934715 and a statistically significant p-value of less than 0.01. The negative correlation suggests that as Google searches related to self-haircuts rise, the runs scored by the Baltimore Orioles tend to decline, sparking hair-raising questions about the psychological impact of grooming anxieties on athletic performance. Our findings open up a new avenue for understanding the interplay between personal grooming dilemmas and on-field endeavors, shedding light on the windswept wonders of statistical correlations in unexpected domains.

[[INTRODUCTION]]
As early as the ancient civilizations, hair has played a significant role in human culture. From beehives to bowl cuts, our locks have been a cornerstone of self-expression and social identity. But what happens when the desire for a fresh new look clashes with the intense pressure of professional sports performance? This paper sets out to explore the tangled tale of "Trimming Trends" by investigating the curious relationship between Google searches for "how to cut own hair" and the runs scored by the Baltimore Orioles in Major League Baseball games. As we embark on this journey, we invite you to comb through the hair-raising discoveries and uncurl the mystery of how a simple search query can tease out unsuspecting connections in the realm of sports analytics.
It's a well-established fact that baseball is a game of numbers, from batting averages to earned run averages. And in the age of information, our digital footprints unveil a treasure trove of insights. With Google reigning as the titan of search engines, its Trends tool offers a luscious landscape for mining data on the collective interests and concerns of the masses. Meanwhile, the Baltimore Orioles, with their storied history and rollercoaster performances, provide a compelling backdrop for our hair-raising investigation into the coif-fensive strategy of Grooming Gambits versus Runs Realized.
While it's tempting to brush aside the notion of any meaningful connection between personal grooming and professional athletics, our statistical analysis has uncovered a "follicular" fascination. The negative correlation coefficient of -0.8934715 between Google searches for self-haircut tutorials and runs scored by the Orioles sends a shiver down the spine, prompting us to confront the possibility that behind every home run, there might be a head in need of a trim.
As we venture into uncharted territory, it's imperative to recognize the gravity-defying implications of our findings. The statistically significant p-value of less than 0.01 demands that we untangle the hair-raising questions and scrutinize the implications with a keen eye. Could it be that as individuals seek sartorial independence through DIY haircuts, the Baltimore Orioles' bats lose some of their swing? Or is there a more intricate web of causality at play, entwining the tresses of personal grooming dilemmas with the fibers of performance anxieties?
This paper is more than just an exercise in statistical hair-splitting. It unravels the curious ways in which the digital rumblings of personal grooming ripple through the diamond-studied worlds of professional sports. As we proceed, we urge readers to keep an open mind and a well-coiffed sense of humor, for in the tangled tale of "Trimming Trends," there are sure to be twists, knots, and perhaps a few split ends of disbelief. So, without further ado, let's brush aside the skepticism and embark on a follicle-filled journey through the unexpected coif-fines of correlation.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[METHODOLOGY]]



ChatGPT:

[[METHODOLOGY]]

To unravel the knotty relationship between Google searches for "how to cut own hair" and the runs scored by the Baltimore Orioles, we conducted a comprehensive data collection and analysis. Our research team harnessed the power of internet data, leveraging sources such as Google Trends and Baseball-Reference.com to extract the follicular and athletic flourishes of interest. The dataset spanned the years 2004 to 2023, encompassing a plethora of hair-raising trends and Orioles' on-field exploits.

Data Collection

Our investigation commenced with the acquisition of Google search trends for the query "how to cut own hair," capturing the ebb and flow of follicular fervor across the digital landscape. We carefully monitored the shifts in search volume, exploring the peaks and valleys of coif-curiosity with the precision of a stylist crafting a layered bob. To complement this, we ventured into the annals of baseball statistics, fetching the runs scored by the Baltimore Orioles in each game from Baseball-Reference.com. We combed through the run tallies with meticulous attention, mindful of the intricacies that lie beneath the surface of each numerical denotation.

Data Preprocessing

Before diving into the statistical grooming grounds, our dataset underwent a rigorous grooming session of its own. We cleansed the data, ensuring that any outliers or anomalies were snipped away, much like split ends succumbing to the shears of data hygiene. Additionally, we checked for missing values, plucking out any gaps in the data fabric to present a smooth and lustrous dataset for analysis. The processed dataset resembled a well-styled mane, primed for the grand reveal of patterns and correlations.

Statistical Analysis

To untangle the follicular and sporting threads woven within our dataset, we employed a series of statistical tools and tests. The heartbeat of our analysis was the calculation of the correlation coefficient between Google search trends for self-haircut tutorials and the runs scored by the Baltimore Orioles. With the precision of a skilled barber wielding his shears, we uncovered a strikingly negative correlation coefficient of -0.8934715. This discovery sent a wave of excitement through the research team, akin to the thrill of unearthing a hidden hair accessory.

In addition to the correlation coefficient, we subjected our findings to a battery of statistical tests, including hypothesis testing with a focus on the p-value. The p-value, akin to the follicular fortitude of a well-executed hairstyle, exhibited a statistically significant value of less than 0.01. This result put wind in our statistical sails, propelling our investigation into the realm of significance and relevance.

Limitations and Assumptions

While our methodology strived for thoroughness, it is important to acknowledge the strands of limitations that frame our study. The reliance on Google search trends and baseball statistics necessitates an awareness of the underlying assumptions and potential biases within these sources. Additionally, our analysis operates within the bounds of correlation, delineating associations rather than causations. As with any intricate hairstyle, there are intricacies and nuances that warrant cautious interpretation of our findings.

In conclusion, the methodology underpinning our investigation incorporates a blend of data dexterity and statistical finesse, grooming the raw information into a cohesive narrative of correlation. With the strands of analysis firmly in place, our study advances to the realm of results, where the synergies of self-care quests and sporting conquests unfurl in a follicularly fascinating display.


Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You are a witty academic researcher. Your writing sounds like it belongs in a statistics journal.You draft the results section of an academic research paper. You speak in the past tense (you found...).
User prompt:
Pretend you are an academic researcher. Your writing sounds like it belongs in a medical or economics journal. However, you frequently crack jokes, make puns, or add unexpected twists in your writing.

Please make up the results section of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between Google searches for 'how to cut own hair' and Runs scored by the Baltimore Orioles. Make lots of jokes, goofy observations, and puns.

Your research team collected data from all across the internet, but mostly just used information from Google Trends and Baseball-Reference.com .

For the time period 2004 to 2023, you found a correlation -0.8934715, r-squared of 0.7982913, 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]]
Trimming Trends: The Tress Connection Between "How to Cut Own Hair" Google Searches and Baltimore Orioles' Runs

[[ABSTRACT]]
This research delves into the intriguing connection between the frequency of Google searches for "how to cut own hair" and the runs scored by the Baltimore Orioles in Major League Baseball games. By analyzing data from Google Trends and Baseball-Reference.com spanning the period from 2004 to 2023, our research team uncovered a surprising correlation coefficient of -0.8934715 and a statistically significant p-value of less than 0.01. The negative correlation suggests that as Google searches related to self-haircuts rise, the runs scored by the Baltimore Orioles tend to decline, sparking hair-raising questions about the psychological impact of grooming anxieties on athletic performance. Our findings open up a new avenue for understanding the interplay between personal grooming dilemmas and on-field endeavors, shedding light on the windswept wonders of statistical correlations in unexpected domains.

-------

And here is the methodology section that led to this result:
[[METHODOLOGY]]
As early as the ancient civilizations, hair has played a significant role in human culture. From beehives to bowl cuts, our locks have been a cornerstone of self-expression and social identity. But what happens when the desire for a fresh new look clashes with the intense pressure of professional sports performance? This paper sets out to explore the tangled tale of "Trimming Trends" by investigating the curious relationship between Google searches for "how to cut own hair" and the runs scored by the Baltimore Orioles in Major League Baseball games. As we embark on this journey, we invite you to comb through the hair-raising discoveries and uncurl the mystery of how a simple search query can tease out unsuspecting connections in the realm of sports analytics.
It's a well-established fact that baseball is a game of numbers, from batting averages to earned run averages. And in the age of information, our digital footprints unveil a treasure trove of insights. With Google reigning as the titan of search engines, its Trends tool offers a luscious landscape for mining data on the collective interests and concerns of the masses. Meanwhile, the Baltimore Orioles, with their storied history and rollercoaster performances, provide a compelling backdrop for our hair-raising investigation into the coif-fensive strategy of Grooming Gambits versus Runs Realized.
While it's tempting to brush aside the notion of any meaningful connection between personal grooming and professional athletics, our statistical analysis has uncovered a "follicular" fascination. The negative correlation coefficient of -0.8934715 between Google searches for self-haircut tutorials and runs scored by the Orioles sends a shiver down the spine, prompting us to confront the possibility that behind every home run, there might be a head in need of a trim.
As we venture into uncharted territory, it's imperative to recognize the gravity-defying implications of our findings. The statistically significant p-value of less than 0.01 demands that we untangle the hair-raising questions and scrutinize the implications with a keen eye. Could it be that as individuals seek sartorial independence through DIY haircuts, the Baltimore Orioles' bats lose some of their swing? Or is there a more intricate web of causality at play, entwining the tresses of personal grooming dilemmas with the fibers of performance anxieties?
This paper is more than just an exercise in statistical hair-splitting. It unravels the curious ways in which the digital rumblings of personal grooming ripple through the diamond-studied worlds of professional sports. As we proceed, we urge readers to keep an open mind and a well-coiffed sense of humor, for in the tangled tale of "Trimming Trends," there are sure to be twists, knots, and perhaps a few split ends of disbelief. So, without further ado, let's brush aside the skepticism and embark on a follicle-filled journey through the unexpected coif-fines of correlation.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[RESULTS]]



ChatGPT:

[[RESULTS]]

Our investigation into the link between Google searches for "how to cut own hair" and the Baltimore Orioles' runs has unearthed some truly hair-raising findings. Analyzing the data from 2004 to 2023, we uncovered a remarkably strong negative correlation coefficient of -0.8934715, with an r-squared value of 0.7982913 and a p-value of less than 0.01. These results sent shockwaves through the research team, prompting both bewilderment and a flurry of follicle-related puns.

The negative correlation coefficient indicates an intriguing trend: as Google searches for DIY haircut tutorials increased, the runs scored by the Baltimore Orioles tended to decline. In other words, it seems that as individuals turned to the internet for guidance on trimming their tresses, the Orioles struggled to trim the bases. This unlikely association between personal grooming inquiries and professional sports performance left our team in a tangle of speculation, prompting debates about whether a bad hair day could extend its unruly influence to the baseball diamond.

To visually capture the striking relationship we observed, we present the scatterplot in Fig. 1. This graphic depiction highlights the unmistakable downward trend, illustrating how the frequency of "how to cut own hair" searches aligns with a decrease in the Baltimore Orioles' runs. The plot serves as a vivid testament to the unexpected intertwining of hairstyling queries and athletic achievement, reminding us that statistical correlations can sometimes sprout from the most unlikely sources.

These results invite further contemplation of the intricate connections between personal habits and professional pursuits. While our findings may appear to be a whimsical foray into unusual statistical territories, they compel us to rethink the influence of everyday behaviors on performance outcomes. Could a surge in self-haircut queries sow seeds of distraction in the minds of the Orioles' batters? Or does this correlation hint at a deeper psychological interplay between grooming and athletic prowess, tempting us to ponder the follicular fortunes of the baseball field?

In unraveling the tangled web of "Trimming Trends," our study illuminates the unpredictable nuances of statistical relationships. It encourages a playful reevaluation of the coiffure-conscious world we inhabit, emphasizing that statistical exploration can be as much a rollercoaster ride as a disciplined pursuit of knowledge. As we lift the curtain on this unexpected association, we urge readers to approach our findings with an open mind and a twirl of whimsy, for in the realm of statistical discoveries, there's always the chance of an unexpected twist – or a curl, as it were.


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

Please make up the discussion section of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between Google searches for 'how to cut own hair' and Runs scored by the Baltimore Orioles. 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]]
Trimming Trends: The Tress Connection Between "How to Cut Own Hair" Google Searches and Baltimore Orioles' Runs

[[ABSTRACT]]
This research delves into the intriguing connection between the frequency of Google searches for "how to cut own hair" and the runs scored by the Baltimore Orioles in Major League Baseball games. By analyzing data from Google Trends and Baseball-Reference.com spanning the period from 2004 to 2023, our research team uncovered a surprising correlation coefficient of -0.8934715 and a statistically significant p-value of less than 0.01. The negative correlation suggests that as Google searches related to self-haircuts rise, the runs scored by the Baltimore Orioles tend to decline, sparking hair-raising questions about the psychological impact of grooming anxieties on athletic performance. Our findings open up a new avenue for understanding the interplay between personal grooming dilemmas and on-field endeavors, shedding light on the windswept wonders of statistical correlations in unexpected domains.

[[LITERATURE REVIEW]]
The tangled tale of "Trimming Trends" has spurred a flurry of scholarly inquiry, attempting to unravel the enigmatic link between Google searches for "how to cut own hair" and the runs scored by the Baltimore Orioles. While initial forays into this uncharted terrain hewed closely to conventional statistical methodologies, researchers such as Smith (2017) and Doe (2020) deftly navigated the follicular landscape, examining hair-related queries as potential predictors of athletic outcomes. However, the findings of these pioneering endeavors merely scratched the surface, leaving ample room for further exploration.
In "Hair Today, Gone Tomorrow," Smith (2017) delves into the psychology of self-styling endeavors and the unforeseen repercussions on individuals' emotional well-being. With a keen focus on the DIY hair-cutting community, Smith (2017) uncovers a myriad of motivations behind internet searches for hair-trimming tutorials, ranging from a desire for frugality to a quest for personal reinvention. Yet, while shedding light on the psychological underpinnings of self-grooming dilemmas, this study falls short of extending its gaze to the realm of professional sports.
Similarly, Doe (2020) extends the inquiry into the impact of personal grooming on performance, drawing parallels between athletes' pre-competition rituals and the quest for sartorial self-sufficiency. In "The Coif-fensive Strategy: How Grooming Influences Performance," Doe (2020) presents a comprehensive analysis of the ritualistic significance of grooming practices in the athletic sphere. However, the study stops short of linking these insights to tangible outcomes on the baseball diamond, leaving a follicular gap in our understanding of the tension between tress-tling personal grooming dilemmas and athletic performance.
Turning to works beyond the realm of scholarly research, the literature related to personal grooming and its potential impact on sports performance takes an unexpected turn. In "The Art of Shaving," the authors explore the rituals and intricacies of grooming practices from a historical and cultural perspective, offering a nuanced portrayal of the deeply rooted significance of personal appearance. While not directly tied to our peculiar focus on Google searches and baseball runs, this work serves as a reminder of the intricate interplay between grooming habits and individual pursuits.
On a more whimsical note, the realm of fiction offers unsuspecting treasures that bear uncanny relevance to our investigation. Works such as "The Hair-Raising Adventures of Lemony Snicket" and "Cut and Run: A Stylistic Tale" take readers on a follicle-fueled journey, weaving narratives of unexpected hair-related predicaments and their impact on the characters' fates. While not grounded in empirical research, these literary escapades provide a lighthearted perspective on the curious intersections of personal grooming and unforeseen consequences.
In the vein of childhood nostalgia, the animated landscape of cartoons and children's shows also presents snippets of relevance to our pursuit. From "SpongeBob SquarePants" to "The Simpsons," these beloved series often depict characters navigating hair-related challenges with comedic fervor, giving rise to reflections on the underlying implications of self-styling dilemmas. While seemingly light-hearted, these portrayals offer a poignant reminder of the universal nature of grooming quandaries and their potential reverberations in unexpected domains.
As we comb through the various strands of literature, it becomes evident that the link between Google searches for "how to cut own hair" and the runs scored by the Baltimore Orioles transcends disciplinary boundaries, yielding insights from the scholarly, fictional, and popular cultural realms. This imbues our investigation with a multi-faceted perspective, laying the foundation for a thorough exploration of the follicular forces at play in the realm of sports analytics.

[[RESULTS]]
Our investigation into the link between Google searches for "how to cut own hair" and the Baltimore Orioles' runs has unearthed some truly hair-raising findings. Analyzing the data from 2004 to 2023, we uncovered a remarkably strong negative correlation coefficient of -0.8934715, with an r-squared value of 0.7982913 and a p-value of less than 0.01. These results sent shockwaves through the research team, prompting both bewilderment and a flurry of follicle-related puns.
The negative correlation coefficient indicates an intriguing trend: as Google searches for DIY haircut tutorials increased, the runs scored by the Baltimore Orioles tended to decline. In other words, it seems that as individuals turned to the internet for guidance on trimming their tresses, the Orioles struggled to trim the bases. This unlikely association between personal grooming inquiries and professional sports performance left our team in a tangle of speculation, prompting debates about whether a bad hair day could extend its unruly influence to the baseball diamond.
To visually capture the striking relationship we observed, we present the scatterplot in Fig. 1. This graphic depiction highlights the unmistakable downward trend, illustrating how the frequency of "how to cut own hair" searches aligns with a decrease in the Baltimore Orioles' runs. The plot serves as a vivid testament to the unexpected intertwining of hairstyling queries and athletic achievement, reminding us that statistical correlations can sometimes sprout from the most unlikely sources.
These results invite further contemplation of the intricate connections between personal habits and professional pursuits. While our findings may appear to be a whimsical foray into unusual statistical territories, they compel us to rethink the influence of everyday behaviors on performance outcomes. Could a surge in self-haircut queries sow seeds of distraction in the minds of the Orioles' batters? Or does this correlation hint at a deeper psychological interplay between grooming and athletic prowess, tempting us to ponder the follicular fortunes of the baseball field?
In unraveling the tangled web of "Trimming Trends," our study illuminates the unpredictable nuances of statistical relationships. It encourages a playful reevaluation of the coiffure-conscious world we inhabit, emphasizing that statistical exploration can be as much a rollercoaster ride as a disciplined pursuit of knowledge. As we lift the curtain on this unexpected association, we urge readers to approach our findings with an open mind and a twirl of whimsy, for in the realm of statistical discoveries, there's always the chance of an unexpected twist – or a curl, as it were.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[DISCUSSION]]



ChatGPT:

[[DISCUSSION]]

Our study has shed light on the quirkily intertwined domains of personal grooming inquiries and professional baseball performance. The remarkable negative correlation we observed between Google searches for "how to cut own hair" and the runs scored by the Baltimore Orioles echoes the findings of prior research that delved into the unexpected repercussions of grooming dilemmas.

As we harken back to the literature review, we find that Smith's (2017) exploration of the psychological underpinnings of self-styling endeavors resonates with our own investigation. Smith's examination of the motivations fuelling internet searches for hair-trimming tutorials mirrors the potential impact of grooming anxieties on athletic performance. Our findings hint at the possibility that personal grooming concerns, as reflected in the surge of DIY haircut queries, may indeed extend their windswept influence to the baseball diamond, unsettling the Orioles' batting performances.

Similarly, Doe's (2020) analysis of the ritualistic significance of grooming practices in the athletic sphere aligns with our own pursuit. The parallels drawn between athletes' pre-competition rituals and the quest for sartorial self-sufficiency mirror the unforeseen connection we uncovered between personal grooming inquiries and the Baltimore Orioles' runs. Just as Doe highlights the potential influence of grooming habits on performance, our study adds a twist by revealing a tangible statistical relationship between internet searches for hair-cutting guidance and professional sports outcomes.

Infusing our discussion with the spirit of joyous whimsy, our findings whimsically underscore the intricate interplay between personal habits and athletic achievements. Much like the unexpected twists in works of fiction and cartoons that we encountered in our literature review, our study unfurls a tale of statistical discovery with a spritz of cheer. By unearthing an improbable correlation between hairstyling pursuits and on-field endeavors, we remind ourselves that statistical exploration, much like a whimsical journey, can unfurl unexpected curls of insight and amusement.

In essence, our findings bolster the growing body of evidence that personal grooming dilemmas may hold sway over unexpected domains, transcending disciplinary divisions with their follicular reverberations. As we gaze upon the unexpected correlation we unveiled, we stand poised at the cusp of a follicle-fueled odyssey, enticing us to ponder the whimsical dimensions of statistical exploration and the unforeseen connections that underpin our everyday pursuits.


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

Please make up a short conclusion of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between Google searches for 'how to cut own hair' and Runs scored by the Baltimore Orioles. 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]]
Trimming Trends: The Tress Connection Between "How to Cut Own Hair" Google Searches and Baltimore Orioles' Runs

[[ABSTRACT]]
This research delves into the intriguing connection between the frequency of Google searches for "how to cut own hair" and the runs scored by the Baltimore Orioles in Major League Baseball games. By analyzing data from Google Trends and Baseball-Reference.com spanning the period from 2004 to 2023, our research team uncovered a surprising correlation coefficient of -0.8934715 and a statistically significant p-value of less than 0.01. The negative correlation suggests that as Google searches related to self-haircuts rise, the runs scored by the Baltimore Orioles tend to decline, sparking hair-raising questions about the psychological impact of grooming anxieties on athletic performance. Our findings open up a new avenue for understanding the interplay between personal grooming dilemmas and on-field endeavors, shedding light on the windswept wonders of statistical correlations in unexpected domains.

[[INTRDUCTION]]
As early as the ancient civilizations, hair has played a significant role in human culture. From beehives to bowl cuts, our locks have been a cornerstone of self-expression and social identity. But what happens when the desire for a fresh new look clashes with the intense pressure of professional sports performance? This paper sets out to explore the tangled tale of "Trimming Trends" by investigating the curious relationship between Google searches for "how to cut own hair" and the runs scored by the Baltimore Orioles in Major League Baseball games. As we embark on this journey, we invite you to comb through the hair-raising discoveries and uncurl the mystery of how a simple search query can tease out unsuspecting connections in the realm of sports analytics.
It's a well-established fact that baseball is a game of numbers, from batting averages to earned run averages. And in the age of information, our digital footprints unveil a treasure trove of insights. With Google reigning as the titan of search engines, its Trends tool offers a luscious landscape for mining data on the collective interests and concerns of the masses. Meanwhile, the Baltimore Orioles, with their storied history and rollercoaster performances, provide a compelling backdrop for our hair-raising investigation into the coif-fensive strategy of Grooming Gambits versus Runs Realized.
While it's tempting to brush aside the notion of any meaningful connection between personal grooming and professional athletics, our statistical analysis has uncovered a "follicular" fascination. The negative correlation coefficient of -0.8934715 between Google searches for self-haircut tutorials and runs scored by the Orioles sends a shiver down the spine, prompting us to confront the possibility that behind every home run, there might be a head in need of a trim.
As we venture into uncharted territory, it's imperative to recognize the gravity-defying implications of our findings. The statistically significant p-value of less than 0.01 demands that we untangle the hair-raising questions and scrutinize the implications with a keen eye. Could it be that as individuals seek sartorial independence through DIY haircuts, the Baltimore Orioles' bats lose some of their swing? Or is there a more intricate web of causality at play, entwining the tresses of personal grooming dilemmas with the fibers of performance anxieties?
This paper is more than just an exercise in statistical hair-splitting. It unravels the curious ways in which the digital rumblings of personal grooming ripple through the diamond-studied worlds of professional sports. As we proceed, we urge readers to keep an open mind and a well-coiffed sense of humor, for in the tangled tale of "Trimming Trends," there are sure to be twists, knots, and perhaps a few split ends of disbelief. So, without further ado, let's brush aside the skepticism and embark on a follicle-filled journey through the unexpected coif-fines of correlation.

[[RESULTS]]
Our investigation into the link between Google searches for "how to cut own hair" and the Baltimore Orioles' runs has unearthed some truly hair-raising findings. Analyzing the data from 2004 to 2023, we uncovered a remarkably strong negative correlation coefficient of -0.8934715, with an r-squared value of 0.7982913 and a p-value of less than 0.01. These results sent shockwaves through the research team, prompting both bewilderment and a flurry of follicle-related puns.
The negative correlation coefficient indicates an intriguing trend: as Google searches for DIY haircut tutorials increased, the runs scored by the Baltimore Orioles tended to decline. In other words, it seems that as individuals turned to the internet for guidance on trimming their tresses, the Orioles struggled to trim the bases. This unlikely association between personal grooming inquiries and professional sports performance left our team in a tangle of speculation, prompting debates about whether a bad hair day could extend its unruly influence to the baseball diamond.
To visually capture the striking relationship we observed, we present the scatterplot in Fig. 1. This graphic depiction highlights the unmistakable downward trend, illustrating how the frequency of "how to cut own hair" searches aligns with a decrease in the Baltimore Orioles' runs. The plot serves as a vivid testament to the unexpected intertwining of hairstyling queries and athletic achievement, reminding us that statistical correlations can sometimes sprout from the most unlikely sources.
These results invite further contemplation of the intricate connections between personal habits and professional pursuits. While our findings may appear to be a whimsical foray into unusual statistical territories, they compel us to rethink the influence of everyday behaviors on performance outcomes. Could a surge in self-haircut queries sow seeds of distraction in the minds of the Orioles' batters? Or does this correlation hint at a deeper psychological interplay between grooming and athletic prowess, tempting us to ponder the follicular fortunes of the baseball field?
In unraveling the tangled web of "Trimming Trends," our study illuminates the unpredictable nuances of statistical relationships. It encourages a playful reevaluation of the coiffure-conscious world we inhabit, emphasizing that statistical exploration can be as much a rollercoaster ride as a disciplined pursuit of knowledge. As we lift the curtain on this unexpected association, we urge readers to approach our findings with an open mind and a twirl of whimsy, for in the realm of statistical discoveries, there's always the chance of an unexpected twist – or a curl, as it were.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[CONCLUSION]]



ChatGPT:

[[CONCLUSION]]

In conclusion, our research has teased out a follicle-filled connection between the frequency of "how to cut own hair" Google searches and the runs scored by the Baltimore Orioles, revealing a -0.8934715 correlation coefficient that has left us hair-pressed for words. The striking statistical significance of our findings beckons us to reflect on the unforeseen influences that can tousle the winds of athletic performance.

As we untangle the threads of this unlikely association, it's evident that our findings have combed through the hair-raising and uncharted territories of statistical correlations, reminding us that beneath the surface of seemingly unrelated variables, there may lie a follicular force to be reckoned with. The compelling narrative woven by Google search trends and baseball scores encourages us to approach statistical analysis with a keen eye for the unexpected, for in the landscape of data, a curl in one variable may lead to an unruly whorl in another.

Yet, while the allure of these findings may tempt us to embark on a mane-datory follow-up investigation, we confidently assert that no further research is needed in this area. With our paper, we have laid bare the unexpected interplay between personal grooming inquiries and professional sports performance, spinning a tale of correlation that is as surprisingly tangled as a messy bedhead on a Monday morning. Weaving statistics into the realm of self-care has led to a frizz-onal revelation, but it's time to part ways with this topic and shift our focus to less hairy pursuits.


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 Trimming Trends: The Tress Connection Between How to Cut Own Hair Google Searches and Baltimore Orioles' Runs. Respond only with the name of a fictional academic journal.

ChatGPT:

The Journal of Quirky 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 Trimming Trends: The Tress Connection Between How to Cut Own Hair Google Searches and Baltimore Orioles' Runs. Respond only with the name of a fictional organization.

ChatGPT:

The Association for Synchronized Statistical Analysis and Aesthetic Appreciation


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 Trimming Trends: The Tress Connection Between How to Cut Own Hair Google Searches and Baltimore Orioles' Runs with an abstract of This research delves into the intriguing connection between the frequency of Google searches for "how to cut own hair" and the runs scored by the Baltimore Orioles in Major League Baseball games. By analyzing data from Google Trends and Baseball-Reference.com spanning the period from 2004 to 2023, our research team uncovered a surprising correlation coefficient of -0.8934715 and a statistically significant p-value of less than 0.01. The negative correlation suggests that as Google searches related to self-haircuts rise, the runs scored by the Baltimore Orioles tend to decline, sparking hair-raising questions about the psychological impact of grooming anxieties on athletic performance. Our findings open up a new avenue for understanding the interplay between personal grooming dilemmas and on-field endeavors, shedding light on the windswept wonders of statistical correlations in unexpected domains.

ChatGPT:

"How to cut own hair Google searches, Baltimore Orioles runs, correlation coefficient, Google Trends, Baseball-Reference.com, psychological impact of grooming anxieties, athletic performance, statistical correlations."

*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

Google searches for 'how to cut own hair'
Detailed data title: Relative volume of Google searches for 'how to cut own hair' (Worldwide, without quotes)
Source: Google Trends
Additional Info: Relative search volume (not absolute numbers)

See what else correlates with Google searches for 'how to cut own hair'

Runs scored by the Baltimore Orioles
Detailed data title: The total number of runs scored during the year by the Baltimore Orioles
Source: Baseball-Reference.com
See what else correlates with Runs scored by the Baltimore Orioles

Correlation r = -0.8934715 (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 = 0.7982913 (Coefficient of determination)
This means 79.8% of the change in the one variable (i.e., Runs scored by the Baltimore Orioles) is predictable based on the change in the other (i.e., Google searches for 'how to cut own hair') over the 20 years from 2004 through 2023.

p < 0.01, which is statistically significant(Null hypothesis significance test)
The p-value is 1.1E-7. 0.0000001133381335502146700000
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 -0.89 in 1.1E-5% of random cases. Said differently, if you correlated 8,823,156 random variables You don't actually need 8 million variables to find a correlation like this one. I don't have that many variables in my database. You can also correlate variables that are not independent. I do this a lot.

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

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

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

[ -0.96, -0.75 ] 95% correlation confidence interval (using the Fisher z-transformation)
The confidence interval is an estimate the range of the value of the correlation coefficient, using the correlation itself as an input. The values are meant to be the low and high end of the correlation coefficient with 95% confidence.

This one is a bit more complciated than the other calculations, but I include it because many people have been pushing for confidence intervals instead of p-value calculations (for example: NEJM. However, if you are dredging data, you can reliably find yourself in the 5%. That's my goal!


All values for the years included above: If I were being very sneaky, I could trim years from the beginning or end of the datasets to increase the correlation on some pairs of variables. I don't do that because there are already plenty of correlations in my database without monkeying with the years.

Still, sometimes one of the variables has more years of data available than the other. This page only shows the overlapping years. To see all the years, click on "See what else correlates with..." link above.
20042005200620072008200920102011201220132014201520162017201820192020202120222023
Google searches for 'how to cut own hair' (Rel. search volume)55.755.416676.257.916679.9166712.66671413.166711.833311.666712.416710.833310.7510.333310.083329.2511.41678.083337.1
Runs scored by the Baltimore Orioles (Runs scored)842729768756782741613708712745705713744743622729274659674807




Why this works

  1. Data dredging: I have 25,153 variables in my database. I compare all these variables against each other to find ones that randomly match up. That's 632,673,409 correlation calculations! This is called “data dredging.” Instead of starting with a hypothesis and testing it, I instead abused the data to see what correlations shake out. It’s a dangerous way to go about analysis, because any sufficiently large dataset will yield strong correlations completely at random.
  2. Lack of causal connection: There is probably Because these pages are automatically generated, it's possible that the two variables you are viewing are in fact causually related. I take steps to prevent the obvious ones from showing on the site (I don't let data about the weather in one city correlate with the weather in a neighboring city, for example), but sometimes they still pop up. If they are related, cool! You found a loophole.
    no direct connection between these variables, despite what the AI says above. This is exacerbated by the fact that I used "Years" as the base variable. Lots of things happen in a year that are not related to each other! Most studies would use something like "one person" in stead of "one year" to be the "thing" studied.
  3. Observations not independent: For many variables, sequential years are not independent of each other. If a population of people is continuously doing something every day, there is no reason to think they would suddenly change how they are doing that thing on January 1. A simple Personally I don't find any p-value calculation to be 'simple,' but you know what I mean.
    p-value calculation does not take this into account, so mathematically it appears less probable than it really is.
  4. Confounding variable: 2020 is particularly different from the other years on this graph. Confounding variables (like global pandemics) will cause two variables to look connected when in fact a "sneaky third" variable is influencing both of them behind the scenes.
  5. Inverted Y-axis: I inverted the Y-axis on the chart above so that the lines would move together. This is visually pleasing, but not at all intuitive. Below is a line graph that does not invert the Y-axis and starts at zero.




Try it yourself

You can calculate the values on this page on your own! Try running the Python code to see the calculation results. Step 1: Download and install Python on your computer.

Step 2: Open a plaintext editor like Notepad and paste the code below into it.

Step 3: Save the file as "calculate_correlation.py" in a place you will remember, like your desktop. Copy the file location to your clipboard. On Windows, you can right-click the file and click "Properties," and then copy what comes after "Location:" As an example, on my computer the location is "C:\Users\tyler\Desktop"

Step 4: Open a command line window. For example, by pressing start and typing "cmd" and them pressing enter.

Step 5: Install the required modules by typing "pip install numpy", then pressing enter, then typing "pip install scipy", then pressing enter.

Step 6: Navigate to the location where you saved the Python file by using the "cd" command. For example, I would type "cd C:\Users\tyler\Desktop" and push enter.

Step 7: Run the Python script by typing "python calculate_correlation.py"

If you run into any issues, I suggest asking ChatGPT to walk you through installing Python and running the code below on your system. Try this question:

"Walk me through installing Python on my computer to run a script that uses scipy and numpy. Go step-by-step and ask me to confirm before moving on. Start by asking me questions about my operating system so that you know how to proceed. Assume I want the simplest installation with the latest version of Python and that I do not currently have any of the necessary elements installed. Remember to only give me one step per response and confirm I have done it before proceeding."


# These modules make it easier to perform the calculation
import numpy as np
from scipy import stats

# We'll define a function that we can call to return the correlation calculations
def calculate_correlation(array1, array2):

    # Calculate Pearson correlation coefficient and p-value
    correlation, p_value = stats.pearsonr(array1, array2)

    # Calculate R-squared as the square of the correlation coefficient
    r_squared = correlation**2

    return correlation, r_squared, p_value

# These are the arrays for the variables shown on this page, but you can modify them to be any two sets of numbers
array_1 = np.array([5,5.75,5.41667,6.25,7.91667,9.91667,12.6667,14,13.1667,11.8333,11.6667,12.4167,10.8333,10.75,10.3333,10.0833,29.25,11.4167,8.08333,7.1,])
array_2 = np.array([842,729,768,756,782,741,613,708,712,745,705,713,744,743,622,729,274,659,674,807,])
array_1_name = "Google searches for 'how to cut own hair'"
array_2_name = "Runs scored by the Baltimore Orioles"

# 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?

Cheers to you for rating this correlation!


Correlation ID: 3573 · Black Variable ID: 1389 · Red Variable ID: 4350
about · subscribe · emailme@tylervigen.com · twitter

CC BY 4.0