about · email me · subscribe
Spurious correlation #4,000 · View random

A linear line chart with years as the X-axis and two variables on the Y-axis. The first variable is Air pollution in Effingham, Illinois and the second variable is Viewership count for Days of Our Lives.  The chart goes from 1982 to 2021, and the two variables track closely in value over that time. Small Image
Download png
, svg

AI explanation

The smog created a hazy, dream-like atmosphere, making the dramatic plotlines seem even more gripping and surreal.

Model: dalle-3
Prompt: Create an image of a Polaroid photo capturing the essence of Effingham, Illinois. The sky is tinged with a hazy pollution that filters the sunlight as families gather in their living rooms for solace. The focus of the image is on a family cozily huddled together, engrossed in watching "Days of Our Lives" on television, portraying the shared experience and comfort found in these familiar surroundings. The depiction should include only scenes, people, and objects, it should not include text or speech bubbles.
This image generation prompt was also generated by AI, using the following sequence:

Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You select one of a few potential scene descriptors that seems to go along with the variables described. You respond only with the scene descriptions provided and say nothing else.
User prompt: Here are two variables: Air pollution in Effingham, Illinois and Viewership count for Days of Our Lives. Given these, which of the following image style descriptions seems most appropriate? Pick the one that seems to be related to one of the variables at hand. Please respond with only one of the following potential descriptions: 3D Pixar Style Symbolism Cyberpunk a meme a Polaroid photo
ChatGPT: a Polaroid photo

Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You describe simple visual scenes that depict the two variables stated. You combine both variables into one scene.
User prompt: Please describe a visual scene that prominently depicts both Air pollution in Effingham, Illinois and Viewership count for Days of Our Lives, in the following situation: Because the increased air pollution in Effingham, Illinois caused everyone to stay indoors and watch Days of Our Lives instead of going outside, thus boosting the viewership count.. Keep the description simple.
ChatGPT: In Effingham, Illinois, the sky is hazy with pollution, and people are seen staying indoors. The camera pans to living rooms where families are gathered around the television, watching Days of Our Lives together.

Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You write and improve image generation prompts for DALLE-3. You maintain the same subjects, but enhance the visuals.
User prompt: Please respond with an image generation prompt that would be likely to create an interesting visual using DALLE-3, using the following style: [ a Polaroid photo ] and depicting this scene: In Effingham, Illinois, the sky is hazy with pollution, and people are seen staying indoors. The camera pans to living rooms where families are gathered around the television, watching Days of Our Lives together. Keep the visual depiction simple. Do not include any words or speech bubbles.
ChatGPT: Create an image of a Polaroid photo capturing the essence of Effingham, Illinois. The sky is tinged with a hazy pollution that filters the sunlight as families gather in their living rooms for solace. The focus of the image is on a family cozily huddled together, engrossed in watching "Days of Our Lives" on television, portraying the shared experience and comfort found in these familiar surroundings.

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

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

Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106 (fine-tuned)
System prompt: You provide humorous responses in the form of plausible sounding explanations for correlations. You assume the correlation is causative for the purpose of the explanation even if it is ridiculous. You do not chat with the user, you only reply with the causal connection explanation and nothing else.
User prompt: Please make up a funny explanation for how increases in Air pollution in Effingham, Illinois positively influenced Viewership count for Days of Our Lives.

AI academic paper

(Because p < 0.01)
The Air Affair: A Correlation Between Effingham Air Quality and Days of Our Lives Viewership

The Journal of Environmental Esoterica

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

Please draft the title and abstract of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between Air pollution in Effingham, Illinois and Viewership count for Days of Our Lives. Make it seem dry like academic research paper, but with lots of subtle hidden offhand remarks, jokes, goofy observations, and puns.

Rhyme words in the title.

Your research team used data from Environmental Protection Agency and Wikipedia to assess this nagging question. You found a correlation coefficient of 0.7182011 and p < 0.01 for 1982 to 2021.

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

[[TITLE]]
Lorem ipsum dolor sit

[[ABSTRACT]]
Lorem ipsum dolor sit



ChatGPT:
[[TITLE]]
The Air Affair: A Correlation Between Effingham Air Quality and Days of Our Lives Viewership

[[ABSTRACT]]
This study endeavors to examine the ostensibly incongruent relationship between air pollution in Effingham, Illinois and the viewership count for the long-running soap opera "Days of Our Lives." By analyzing data procured from the Environmental Protection Agency and the fount of knowledge that is Wikipedia, a correlation coefficient of 0.7182011 (p < 0.01) was ascertained for the period encompassing 1982 to 2021. Despite the seemingly disparate nature of the variables under scrutiny, our findings suggest a potentially profound association. This intriguing correlation prompts us to contemplate the tantalizing possibility of an atmospheric influence on melodramatic preferences. Alas, the air we breathe may indeed possess the subtle power to sway our television choices. Our study thus illuminates the curious interplay between environmental quality and soap opera viewership, transcending mere statistical inquiry to beckon a whimsical exploration of serendipitous associations.


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

Please make up the introduction section of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between Air pollution in Effingham, Illinois and Viewership count for Days of Our Lives. 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 Air Affair: A Correlation Between Effingham Air Quality and Days of Our Lives Viewership

[[ABSTRACT]]
This study endeavors to examine the ostensibly incongruent relationship between air pollution in Effingham, Illinois and the viewership count for the long-running soap opera "Days of Our Lives." By analyzing data procured from the Environmental Protection Agency and the fount of knowledge that is Wikipedia, a correlation coefficient of 0.7182011 (p < 0.01) was ascertained for the period encompassing 1982 to 2021. Despite the seemingly disparate nature of the variables under scrutiny, our findings suggest a potentially profound association. This intriguing correlation prompts us to contemplate the tantalizing possibility of an atmospheric influence on melodramatic preferences. Alas, the air we breathe may indeed possess the subtle power to sway our television choices. Our study thus illuminates the curious interplay between environmental quality and soap opera viewership, transcending mere statistical inquiry to beckon a whimsical exploration of serendipitous associations.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[INTRODUCTION]]



ChatGPT:
[[INTRODUCTION]]

The pursuit of knowledge often leads us down unexpected and curious paths, and this study is no exception. As researchers, we are often exhorted to seek out relationships where none may seem to exist, to unearth connections that may be as elusive as a soap opera character's long-lost twin. However, through diligent analysis of data and rigorous statistical scrutiny, we have set out to explore the unlikely liaison between air quality in Effingham, Illinois, and the enduring saga of love, betrayal, and dramatic plot twists that is "Days of Our Lives."

It is no secret that Effingham, Illinois, with its picturesque landscapes and charming communities, has been grappling with air pollution issues. Yet, it may come as a surprise that amidst concerns about particulate matter and ozone levels, there may exist a silent protagonist, influencing not the air we breathe, but the shows we choose to watch as we unwind after a long day.

As we delve into the labyrinth of statistical analysis, let us not forget that sometimes, science itself can be a bit of a soap opera, full of unexpected twists, dramatic tension, and the occasional cliffhanger. Our quest to uncover the enigmatic relationship between air quality and soap opera viewership tested not only our research acumen but also our ability to grasp the peculiarities of human behavior in response to environmental stimuli.

In the words of the great scientist-philosopher, Lorem Ipsum, "In the cacophony of data and analysis, it is the unexpected connections that often whisper the most profound truths." With this sage advice in mind, let us embark on a journey that promises to unveil an unsuspected entanglement between the atmospheric milieu of Effingham and the captivating allure of "Days of Our Lives."


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

Please make up a literature review section of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between Air pollution in Effingham, Illinois and Viewership count for Days of Our Lives. 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 name a few real TV shows that sound like they might be relevant to the topic that you watched as research.

Here is the title and abstract of the paper:
[[TITLE]]
The Air Affair: A Correlation Between Effingham Air Quality and Days of Our Lives Viewership

[[ABSTRACT]]
This study endeavors to examine the ostensibly incongruent relationship between air pollution in Effingham, Illinois and the viewership count for the long-running soap opera "Days of Our Lives." By analyzing data procured from the Environmental Protection Agency and the fount of knowledge that is Wikipedia, a correlation coefficient of 0.7182011 (p < 0.01) was ascertained for the period encompassing 1982 to 2021. Despite the seemingly disparate nature of the variables under scrutiny, our findings suggest a potentially profound association. This intriguing correlation prompts us to contemplate the tantalizing possibility of an atmospheric influence on melodramatic preferences. Alas, the air we breathe may indeed possess the subtle power to sway our television choices. Our study thus illuminates the curious interplay between environmental quality and soap opera viewership, transcending mere statistical inquiry to beckon a whimsical exploration of serendipitous associations.

-------

And here is the introduction section that led to this literature review:
[[INTRODUCTION]]
The pursuit of knowledge often leads us down unexpected and curious paths, and this study is no exception. As researchers, we are often exhorted to seek out relationships where none may seem to exist, to unearth connections that may be as elusive as a soap opera character's long-lost twin. However, through diligent analysis of data and rigorous statistical scrutiny, we have set out to explore the unlikely liaison between air quality in Effingham, Illinois, and the enduring saga of love, betrayal, and dramatic plot twists that is "Days of Our Lives."
It is no secret that Effingham, Illinois, with its picturesque landscapes and charming communities, has been grappling with air pollution issues. Yet, it may come as a surprise that amidst concerns about particulate matter and ozone levels, there may exist a silent protagonist, influencing not the air we breathe, but the shows we choose to watch as we unwind after a long day.
As we delve into the labyrinth of statistical analysis, let us not forget that sometimes, science itself can be a bit of a soap opera, full of unexpected twists, dramatic tension, and the occasional cliffhanger. Our quest to uncover the enigmatic relationship between air quality and soap opera viewership tested not only our research acumen but also our ability to grasp the peculiarities of human behavior in response to environmental stimuli.
In the words of the great scientist-philosopher, Lorem Ipsum, "In the cacophony of data and analysis, it is the unexpected connections that often whisper the most profound truths." With this sage advice in mind, let us embark on a journey that promises to unveil an unsuspected entanglement between the atmospheric milieu of Effingham and the captivating allure of "Days of Our Lives."

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[LITERATURE REVIEW]]



ChatGPT:
[[LITERATURE REVIEW]]

The correlation between atmospheric conditions and human behavior has been a subject of scholarly interest for decades. Smith and Doe (2005) examined the impact of air quality on cognitive function, providing a compelling basis for investigating the potential influence of air pollution on entertainment preferences. In a similar vein, Jones et al. (2010) explored the psychological effects of environmental stressors, shedding light on the intricate interplay between external stimuli and individual inclinations. However, as we delve deeper into the world of unlikely connections, it becomes apparent that the literature on atmospheric influence in the realm of soap opera viewership is, shall we say, less than robust.

Turning to more tangentially related sources, "The Air We Breathe: A Comprehensive Study of Environmental Impact" by Green and White (2016) offers a comprehensive overview of air quality research, laying the groundwork for our exploration of its potential effects on television consumption habits. Additionally, "The Power of Narratives: Understanding Fiction and its Influence" by Brown (2018) provides valuable insights into the captivating nature of storytelling, hinting at a possible link between atmospheric conditions and the allure of televised dramas.

In a surprisingly serendipitous turn of events, the gripping tales of love, betrayal, and supernatural occurrences in "Days of Our Lives" bear a striking resemblance to the convoluted plotlines of "Game of Thrones" and "Stranger Things," two fictional works renowned for their ability to captivate audiences. The authors find themselves compelled to admit having indulged in research activities involving substantial viewership of these shows, under the auspices of germane comparative analyses, of course.

Furthermore, the authors confess to exploring the mysterious world of daytime television, with "The Young and the Restless" and "General Hospital" serving as indispensable points of reference. These televised dramatic chronicles, replete with familial conflicts, romantic entanglements, and the occasional bout of amnesia, add an air of academic rigor to our investigation, albeit with a generous sprinkle of soap suds.

In this exuberant pursuit of knowledge, one cannot disregard the profound guidance offered by the enigmatic Lorem Ipsum. Their unconventional wisdom, couched in layers of arcane language, resonates with the spirit of our inquiry, urging us to embrace the delightfully unexpected and navigate the turbulent currents of scholarly pursuit, much like a character navigating the tumultuous seas of soap opera drama. As we transition from the solemnity of academic literature to the stirring melodrama of televised narratives, we invite our esteemed readers to embark on this scholarly journey emboldened by an open mind, a discerning eye, and perhaps, a dash of theatrical flair.


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

Please make up the methodology section of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between Air pollution in Effingham, Illinois and Viewership count for Days of Our Lives. 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 Environmental Protection Agency and Wikipedia . You used data from 1982 to 2021

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

Here is the title, abstract, and introduction of the paper:
[[TITLE]]
The Air Affair: A Correlation Between Effingham Air Quality and Days of Our Lives Viewership

[[ABSTRACT]]
This study endeavors to examine the ostensibly incongruent relationship between air pollution in Effingham, Illinois and the viewership count for the long-running soap opera "Days of Our Lives." By analyzing data procured from the Environmental Protection Agency and the fount of knowledge that is Wikipedia, a correlation coefficient of 0.7182011 (p < 0.01) was ascertained for the period encompassing 1982 to 2021. Despite the seemingly disparate nature of the variables under scrutiny, our findings suggest a potentially profound association. This intriguing correlation prompts us to contemplate the tantalizing possibility of an atmospheric influence on melodramatic preferences. Alas, the air we breathe may indeed possess the subtle power to sway our television choices. Our study thus illuminates the curious interplay between environmental quality and soap opera viewership, transcending mere statistical inquiry to beckon a whimsical exploration of serendipitous associations.

[[INTRODUCTION]]
The pursuit of knowledge often leads us down unexpected and curious paths, and this study is no exception. As researchers, we are often exhorted to seek out relationships where none may seem to exist, to unearth connections that may be as elusive as a soap opera character's long-lost twin. However, through diligent analysis of data and rigorous statistical scrutiny, we have set out to explore the unlikely liaison between air quality in Effingham, Illinois, and the enduring saga of love, betrayal, and dramatic plot twists that is "Days of Our Lives."
It is no secret that Effingham, Illinois, with its picturesque landscapes and charming communities, has been grappling with air pollution issues. Yet, it may come as a surprise that amidst concerns about particulate matter and ozone levels, there may exist a silent protagonist, influencing not the air we breathe, but the shows we choose to watch as we unwind after a long day.
As we delve into the labyrinth of statistical analysis, let us not forget that sometimes, science itself can be a bit of a soap opera, full of unexpected twists, dramatic tension, and the occasional cliffhanger. Our quest to uncover the enigmatic relationship between air quality and soap opera viewership tested not only our research acumen but also our ability to grasp the peculiarities of human behavior in response to environmental stimuli.
In the words of the great scientist-philosopher, Lorem Ipsum, "In the cacophony of data and analysis, it is the unexpected connections that often whisper the most profound truths." With this sage advice in mind, let us embark on a journey that promises to unveil an unsuspected entanglement between the atmospheric milieu of Effingham and the captivating allure of "Days of Our Lives."

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[METHODOLOGY]]



ChatGPT:

The methodology employed in this investigation navigates the labyrinthine terrain of data collection, statistical analysis, and interpretive scrutiny with the dexterity and finesse of a seasoned detective sifting through clues to unravel a gripping mystery. Our approach involved the amalgamation of unconventional variables and the application of analytical techniques that transcend the mundane, akin to conducting a scientific séance to conjure elusive correlations.

Data Collection:
The data encompassing air quality indicators in Effingham, Illinois was meticulously procured from the Environmental Protection Agency – an esteemed bastion of environmental enlightenment. This repository of atmospheric insights served as the oracle from which we extracted readings on particulate matter, ozone levels, and other atmospheric constituents resembling the cast of characters in a sprawling soap opera, each vying for attention and influence.

On the other hand, the viewership count for "Days of Our Lives" was mined from a variety of sources, predictably and somewhat unpredictably, predominantly including the comprehensive tome of knowledge that is Wikipedia. Much like perusing the annals of a soap opera's plot twists, our gaze fell upon the tumultuous ebb and flow of viewership statistics, capturing the vicissitudes of audience engagement with the melodramatic tapestry of Salem's denizens.

Quantitative Analysis:
To disentangle the intricate tapestry of our data, we employed a veritable arsenal of statistical tools, transforming our raw data into the hallowed chi-square tests and the venerable Pearson correlation coefficient. Through the application of these analytical arts, we sought to elucidate the enigmatic interplay between air quality in Effingham and the ebb and flow of viewership for "Days of Our Lives."

The temporospatial scope of our analysis ventured across the epochs from 1982 to 2021, embracing the vicissitudes of time much like a soap opera script navigating the tumultuous waves of plot development. We spared no statistical incantations in discerning the nature of the relationships, conducting the equivalent of a statistical tango to ascertain the degree of confluence between air quality and soap opera viewership.

Qualitative Interpretation:
Beyond the confines of numerical analysis lay the subtler nuances of subjective interpretation, akin to the dramatic undertones and character motivations in a soap opera plot. We ventured to imbue these seemingly disparate variables with a measure of interpretive insight, discerning the underlying narrative threads that wove together the atmospheric milieu of Effingham and the soap opera preferences of its denizens.

In acknowledging the unconventional nature of our variables, we remained sensitive to the nuances of unforeseen confounders and the capriciousness of correlation, navigating these treacherous waters much like a soap opera character tiptoeing through the minefield of interpersonal drama. In doing so, we sought not mere statistical confirmation, but a richer understanding of the nuanced interplay between environmental quality and popular culture proclivities.

The analytic tableau that arose from this research confluence harkened to an unexpected performance, juxtaposing the ostensible disharmony of air quality and soap opera viewership with an intriguing symmetry that beckoned further contemplation. This methodological voyage, whilst anchored in the rigors of empirical inquiry, served as a reminder that beneath the veneer of statistical analysis lies the serendipitous whimsy of unexpected connections – a sentiment akin to discovering a previously unseen subplot in a long-running soap opera.


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

Please make up the results section of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between Air pollution in Effingham, Illinois and Viewership count for Days of Our Lives. 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 Environmental Protection Agency and Wikipedia .

For the time period 1982 to 2021, you found a correlation 0.7182011, r-squared of 0.5158128, and p < 0.01.

One figure will be included. The figure (Fig. 1) is a scatterplot showing the strong correlation between the two variables. You don't need to specify where; I will add the figure.

Here is the title and abstract of the paper:
[[TITLE]]
The Air Affair: A Correlation Between Effingham Air Quality and Days of Our Lives Viewership

[[ABSTRACT]]
This study endeavors to examine the ostensibly incongruent relationship between air pollution in Effingham, Illinois and the viewership count for the long-running soap opera "Days of Our Lives." By analyzing data procured from the Environmental Protection Agency and the fount of knowledge that is Wikipedia, a correlation coefficient of 0.7182011 (p < 0.01) was ascertained for the period encompassing 1982 to 2021. Despite the seemingly disparate nature of the variables under scrutiny, our findings suggest a potentially profound association. This intriguing correlation prompts us to contemplate the tantalizing possibility of an atmospheric influence on melodramatic preferences. Alas, the air we breathe may indeed possess the subtle power to sway our television choices. Our study thus illuminates the curious interplay between environmental quality and soap opera viewership, transcending mere statistical inquiry to beckon a whimsical exploration of serendipitous associations.

-------

And here is the methodology section that led to this result:
[[METHODOLOGY]]
The pursuit of knowledge often leads us down unexpected and curious paths, and this study is no exception. As researchers, we are often exhorted to seek out relationships where none may seem to exist, to unearth connections that may be as elusive as a soap opera character's long-lost twin. However, through diligent analysis of data and rigorous statistical scrutiny, we have set out to explore the unlikely liaison between air quality in Effingham, Illinois, and the enduring saga of love, betrayal, and dramatic plot twists that is "Days of Our Lives."
It is no secret that Effingham, Illinois, with its picturesque landscapes and charming communities, has been grappling with air pollution issues. Yet, it may come as a surprise that amidst concerns about particulate matter and ozone levels, there may exist a silent protagonist, influencing not the air we breathe, but the shows we choose to watch as we unwind after a long day.
As we delve into the labyrinth of statistical analysis, let us not forget that sometimes, science itself can be a bit of a soap opera, full of unexpected twists, dramatic tension, and the occasional cliffhanger. Our quest to uncover the enigmatic relationship between air quality and soap opera viewership tested not only our research acumen but also our ability to grasp the peculiarities of human behavior in response to environmental stimuli.
In the words of the great scientist-philosopher, Lorem Ipsum, "In the cacophony of data and analysis, it is the unexpected connections that often whisper the most profound truths." With this sage advice in mind, let us embark on a journey that promises to unveil an unsuspected entanglement between the atmospheric milieu of Effingham and the captivating allure of "Days of Our Lives."

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[RESULTS]]



ChatGPT:

[[RESULTS]]

Upon conducting our analysis, we uncovered a statistically significant correlation between air pollution in Effingham, Illinois and the viewership count for "Days of Our Lives" spanning the years 1982 to 2021. The correlation coefficient of 0.7182011, with an r-squared of 0.5158128 and p < 0.01, suggests a remarkably robust relationship between these seemingly disparate variables.

Fig. 1 illustrates the scatterplot that visually encapsulates the strong correlation we observed, serving as a testament to the intriguing synchronicity between air quality and soap opera viewership. One might say that our findings breathe new life into the very notion of environmental influence on television preferences.

In this data-driven journey, we have stumbled upon an unexpected coalescence of air pollution and soap opera fandom, perhaps suggesting that the air quality in Effingham has been whispering melodramatic cues and plot twists through the wind, subtly influencing viewers to tune into the trials and tribulations of Salem's finest. As remarkable as it may seem, our results support the notion that the air we inhale may indeed have a hand in shaping our entertainment choices, orchestrating a symphony of atmospheric influence on our appetites for daytime drama.

These findings not only shed light on the intersection of environmental factors and cultural preferences but also invite us to marvel at the whimsical dance of statistical probabilities and hidden relationships, reminding us that beneath the surface of data and analysis lies the potential for surprising and comedic connections, much like the delightful unpredictability of a soap opera's plot twists.


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

Please make up the discussion section of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between Air pollution in Effingham, Illinois and Viewership count for Days of Our Lives. 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 Air Affair: A Correlation Between Effingham Air Quality and Days of Our Lives Viewership

[[ABSTRACT]]
This study endeavors to examine the ostensibly incongruent relationship between air pollution in Effingham, Illinois and the viewership count for the long-running soap opera "Days of Our Lives." By analyzing data procured from the Environmental Protection Agency and the fount of knowledge that is Wikipedia, a correlation coefficient of 0.7182011 (p < 0.01) was ascertained for the period encompassing 1982 to 2021. Despite the seemingly disparate nature of the variables under scrutiny, our findings suggest a potentially profound association. This intriguing correlation prompts us to contemplate the tantalizing possibility of an atmospheric influence on melodramatic preferences. Alas, the air we breathe may indeed possess the subtle power to sway our television choices. Our study thus illuminates the curious interplay between environmental quality and soap opera viewership, transcending mere statistical inquiry to beckon a whimsical exploration of serendipitous associations.

[[LITERATURE REVIEW]]
The correlation between atmospheric conditions and human behavior has been a subject of scholarly interest for decades. Smith and Doe (2005) examined the impact of air quality on cognitive function, providing a compelling basis for investigating the potential influence of air pollution on entertainment preferences. In a similar vein, Jones et al. (2010) explored the psychological effects of environmental stressors, shedding light on the intricate interplay between external stimuli and individual inclinations. However, as we delve deeper into the world of unlikely connections, it becomes apparent that the literature on atmospheric influence in the realm of soap opera viewership is, shall we say, less than robust.
Turning to more tangentially related sources, "The Air We Breathe: A Comprehensive Study of Environmental Impact" by Green and White (2016) offers a comprehensive overview of air quality research, laying the groundwork for our exploration of its potential effects on television consumption habits. Additionally, "The Power of Narratives: Understanding Fiction and its Influence" by Brown (2018) provides valuable insights into the captivating nature of storytelling, hinting at a possible link between atmospheric conditions and the allure of televised dramas.
In a surprisingly serendipitous turn of events, the gripping tales of love, betrayal, and supernatural occurrences in "Days of Our Lives" bear a striking resemblance to the convoluted plotlines of "Game of Thrones" and "Stranger Things," two fictional works renowned for their ability to captivate audiences. The authors find themselves compelled to admit having indulged in research activities involving substantial viewership of these shows, under the auspices of germane comparative analyses, of course.
Furthermore, the authors confess to exploring the mysterious world of daytime television, with "The Young and the Restless" and "General Hospital" serving as indispensable points of reference. These televised dramatic chronicles, replete with familial conflicts, romantic entanglements, and the occasional bout of amnesia, add an air of academic rigor to our investigation, albeit with a generous sprinkle of soap suds.
In this exuberant pursuit of knowledge, one cannot disregard the profound guidance offered by the enigmatic Lorem Ipsum. Their unconventional wisdom, couched in layers of arcane language, resonates with the spirit of our inquiry, urging us to embrace the delightfully unexpected and navigate the turbulent currents of scholarly pursuit, much like a character navigating the tumultuous seas of soap opera drama. As we transition from the solemnity of academic literature to the stirring melodrama of televised narratives, we invite our esteemed readers to embark on this scholarly journey emboldened by an open mind, a discerning eye, and perhaps, a dash of theatrical flair.

[[RESULTS]]
Upon conducting our analysis, we uncovered a statistically significant correlation between air pollution in Effingham, Illinois and the viewership count for "Days of Our Lives" spanning the years 1982 to 2021. The correlation coefficient of 0.7182011, with an r-squared of 0.5158128 and p < 0.01, suggests a remarkably robust relationship between these seemingly disparate variables.
Fig. 1 illustrates the scatterplot that visually encapsulates the strong correlation we observed, serving as a testament to the intriguing synchronicity between air quality and soap opera viewership. One might say that our findings breathe new life into the very notion of environmental influence on television preferences.
In this data-driven journey, we have stumbled upon an unexpected coalescence of air pollution and soap opera fandom, perhaps suggesting that the air quality in Effingham has been whispering melodramatic cues and plot twists through the wind, subtly influencing viewers to tune into the trials and tribulations of Salem's finest. As remarkable as it may seem, our results support the notion that the air we inhale may indeed have a hand in shaping our entertainment choices, orchestrating a symphony of atmospheric influence on our appetites for daytime drama.
These findings not only shed light on the intersection of environmental factors and cultural preferences but also invite us to marvel at the whimsical dance of statistical probabilities and hidden relationships, reminding us that beneath the surface of data and analysis lies the potential for surprising and comedic connections, much like the delightful unpredictability of a soap opera's plot twists.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[DISCUSSION]]



ChatGPT:

[[DISCUSSION]]

The intriguing correlation coefficient of 0.7182011 (p < 0.01) discovered through our rigorous examination of Effinghamian air pollution and "Days of Our Lives" viewership count is nothing short of a statistical soap opera, replete with unexpected twists and tantalizing drama. Our findings not only align with previous research into the influence of atmospheric conditions on human behavior but also cast a whimsical spotlight on the delightful unpredictability of statistical relationships.

Harnessing the profound insight of Smith and Doe (2005) into the impact of air quality on cognitive function, our study elegantly underscores the potential for air pollution to orchestrate a symphony of atmospheric influence on our melodramatic appetites. The air quality in Effingham, Illinois may very well have been emitting subtle cues and scandalous whispers, compelling viewers to lose themselves in the trials and tribulations of Salem's finest. It seems improbable, but we cannot discount the possibility that the wind in Effingham has been choreographing dramatic plot twists and emotional fervor with the finesse of a maestro.

Similarly, the lavish intrigues of "Game of Thrones" and "Stranger Things" have not only provided ample entertainment but also served as indispensable sources for comparative analysis. The gripping tales of love, betrayal, and the occasional bout of amnesia found in "Days of Our Lives" share an uncanny kinship with these televised epics, further deepening our appreciation for the captivating allure of meticulously crafted narratives. As we navigate the convoluted plotlines of the scientific world, we are reminded that, much like a soap opera's twists and turns, statistical correlations can astound with their unexpected flair and fastidious craftsmanship.

In this odyssey of scientific inquiry, we are confronted with the realization that beneath the façade of data lies a world of hidden relationships and comic interplays, leaving us to marvel at the vaudevillian dance of statistical probabilities and serendipitous connections. Our study beseeches us to embrace the whimsical and the unexpected, much like the fervent flights of fancy that transpire on the television screen. After all, who could have predicted that the air we breathe holds the potential to sway our television choices?

As our research journey carries us through the perplexing labyrinths of atmospheric influence and melodramatic inclinations, we are reminded that the scientific landscape is not without its fair share of plot twists and cliffhangers. It is with this spirit of spirited inquiry and resolute curiosity that we invite our ever-diligent readers to embark on the inimitable quest for knowledge, armed with nothing less than an ardent enthusiasm for the delightfully unexpected and perhaps, a comically inclined appreciation for the theatrical flair of scientific discovery.


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

Please make up a short conclusion of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between Air pollution in Effingham, Illinois and Viewership count for Days of Our Lives. 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 Air Affair: A Correlation Between Effingham Air Quality and Days of Our Lives Viewership

[[ABSTRACT]]
This study endeavors to examine the ostensibly incongruent relationship between air pollution in Effingham, Illinois and the viewership count for the long-running soap opera "Days of Our Lives." By analyzing data procured from the Environmental Protection Agency and the fount of knowledge that is Wikipedia, a correlation coefficient of 0.7182011 (p < 0.01) was ascertained for the period encompassing 1982 to 2021. Despite the seemingly disparate nature of the variables under scrutiny, our findings suggest a potentially profound association. This intriguing correlation prompts us to contemplate the tantalizing possibility of an atmospheric influence on melodramatic preferences. Alas, the air we breathe may indeed possess the subtle power to sway our television choices. Our study thus illuminates the curious interplay between environmental quality and soap opera viewership, transcending mere statistical inquiry to beckon a whimsical exploration of serendipitous associations.

[[INTRDUCTION]]
The pursuit of knowledge often leads us down unexpected and curious paths, and this study is no exception. As researchers, we are often exhorted to seek out relationships where none may seem to exist, to unearth connections that may be as elusive as a soap opera character's long-lost twin. However, through diligent analysis of data and rigorous statistical scrutiny, we have set out to explore the unlikely liaison between air quality in Effingham, Illinois, and the enduring saga of love, betrayal, and dramatic plot twists that is "Days of Our Lives."
It is no secret that Effingham, Illinois, with its picturesque landscapes and charming communities, has been grappling with air pollution issues. Yet, it may come as a surprise that amidst concerns about particulate matter and ozone levels, there may exist a silent protagonist, influencing not the air we breathe, but the shows we choose to watch as we unwind after a long day.
As we delve into the labyrinth of statistical analysis, let us not forget that sometimes, science itself can be a bit of a soap opera, full of unexpected twists, dramatic tension, and the occasional cliffhanger. Our quest to uncover the enigmatic relationship between air quality and soap opera viewership tested not only our research acumen but also our ability to grasp the peculiarities of human behavior in response to environmental stimuli.
In the words of the great scientist-philosopher, Lorem Ipsum, "In the cacophony of data and analysis, it is the unexpected connections that often whisper the most profound truths." With this sage advice in mind, let us embark on a journey that promises to unveil an unsuspected entanglement between the atmospheric milieu of Effingham and the captivating allure of "Days of Our Lives."

[[RESULTS]]
Upon conducting our analysis, we uncovered a statistically significant correlation between air pollution in Effingham, Illinois and the viewership count for "Days of Our Lives" spanning the years 1982 to 2021. The correlation coefficient of 0.7182011, with an r-squared of 0.5158128 and p < 0.01, suggests a remarkably robust relationship between these seemingly disparate variables.
Fig. 1 illustrates the scatterplot that visually encapsulates the strong correlation we observed, serving as a testament to the intriguing synchronicity between air quality and soap opera viewership. One might say that our findings breathe new life into the very notion of environmental influence on television preferences.
In this data-driven journey, we have stumbled upon an unexpected coalescence of air pollution and soap opera fandom, perhaps suggesting that the air quality in Effingham has been whispering melodramatic cues and plot twists through the wind, subtly influencing viewers to tune into the trials and tribulations of Salem's finest. As remarkable as it may seem, our results support the notion that the air we inhale may indeed have a hand in shaping our entertainment choices, orchestrating a symphony of atmospheric influence on our appetites for daytime drama.
These findings not only shed light on the intersection of environmental factors and cultural preferences but also invite us to marvel at the whimsical dance of statistical probabilities and hidden relationships, reminding us that beneath the surface of data and analysis lies the potential for surprising and comedic connections, much like the delightful unpredictability of a soap opera's plot twists.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[CONCLUSION]]



ChatGPT:

[[CONCLUSION]]

In concluding our investigation, it is apparent that the web of connections between air quality in Effingham, Illinois and the viewership count for "Days of Our Lives" is as intricate and intriguing as the plotlines of the soap opera itself. The strong correlation coefficient we uncovered serves as a reminder that in the realm of research, even the most unassuming variables can foster a delightful drama of their own. As we bid adieu to this study, it is clear that the atmospheric milieu of Effingham may indeed be playing a supporting role in shaping the entertainment preferences of its residents.

This study, with its revelatory findings, urges us to reevaluate the air of unpredictability that pervades the scientific and statistical domain. It also stands as a testament to the exceptional potential for unearthing unsuspected relationships, like an unexpected plot twist in a well-crafted script. Our explorations have teased out an unprecedented correlation that should not be sniffed at, underscoring the profound influence of the air we breathe on our choices in daytime television.

While our research has certainly piqued the curiosity of those inclined toward the whimsical and serendipitous, it is our humble contention that we have plumbed the depths of this particular enigma. With the evidence laid bare before us, we can confidently assert that no further forays into this peculiar juncture of air pollution and soap opera viewership are warranted. This study has provided a glimpse into the capricious tapestry of human behavior and environmental influences, leaving no stone unturned in its pursuit of mirth and merriment in the realm of empirical inquiry.


Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You provide fictional names of academic journals. You say nothing else, and you do not chat with the user.
User prompt: Please provide the name of a funny but plausible sounding research, scientific, or academic journal that would publish a paper entited The Air Affair: A Correlation Between Effingham Air Quality and Days of Our Lives Viewership. Respond only with the name of a fictional academic journal.

ChatGPT:

The Journal of Environmental Esoterica


Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You provide fictional names of nonprofit research organizations and associations. You say nothing else, and you do not chat with the user.
User prompt: Please provide the name of a funny but plausible sounding nonprofit, academic, or scientific association or organization that would sponsor research that resulted in a paper entited The Air Affair: A Correlation Between Effingham Air Quality and Days of Our Lives Viewership. Respond only with the name of a fictional organization.

ChatGPT:

The Society for Quirky Quandaries Research Institute


Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You provide potential search keywords separated by commas. You say nothing else, and you do not chat with the user.
User prompt: Please provide potential search keywords for a paper titled The Air Affair: A Correlation Between Effingham Air Quality and Days of Our Lives Viewership with an abstract of This study endeavors to examine the ostensibly incongruent relationship between air pollution in Effingham, Illinois and the viewership count for the long-running soap opera "Days of Our Lives." By analyzing data procured from the Environmental Protection Agency and the fount of knowledge that is Wikipedia, a correlation coefficient of 0.7182011 (p < 0.01) was ascertained for the period encompassing 1982 to 2021. Despite the seemingly disparate nature of the variables under scrutiny, our findings suggest a potentially profound association. This intriguing correlation prompts us to contemplate the tantalizing possibility of an atmospheric influence on melodramatic preferences. Alas, the air we breathe may indeed possess the subtle power to sway our television choices. Our study thus illuminates the curious interplay between environmental quality and soap opera viewership, transcending mere statistical inquiry to beckon a whimsical exploration of serendipitous associations.

ChatGPT:

Effingham Air Quality, Days of Our Lives Viewership, air pollution Effingham Illinois, soap opera viewership, correlation coefficient air quality viewership, environmental quality television choices, melodramatic preferences atmospheric influence, statistical inquiry soap opera viewership, environmental influence television preferences

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



Random correlation

Discover a new correlation

View all correlations

View all research papers

Report an error


Data details

Air pollution in Effingham, Illinois
Detailed data title: Percentage of days with air quality at 'unhealthy for sensitive groups' or worse in Effingham, IL
Source: Environmental Protection Agency
See what else correlates with Air pollution in Effingham, Illinois

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

Correlation r = 0.7182011 (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 = 0.5158128 (Coefficient of determination)
This means 51.6% of the change in the one variable (i.e., Viewership count for Days of Our Lives) is predictable based on the change in the other (i.e., Air pollution in Effingham, Illinois) over the 40 years from 1982 through 2021.

p < 0.01, which is statistically significant(Null hypothesis significance test)
The p-value is 1.8E-7. 0.0000001813505434452853800000
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 0.72 in 1.8E-5% of random cases. Said differently, if you correlated 5,514,183 random variables You don't actually need 5 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 39 degrees of freedom, Degrees of freedom is a measure of how many free components we are testing. In this case it is 39 because we have two variables measured over a period of 40 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.

[ 0.52, 0.84 ] 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.
1982198319841985198619871988198919901991199219931994199519961997199819992000200120022003200420052006200720082009201020112012201320142015201620172018201920202021
Air pollution in Effingham, Illinois (Bad air quality days)0.03886930.09821430.1128050.05027930.07636360.1272730.2522520.1037740.08910890.09661840.04926110.02155170.1288890.1022220.06666670.05485230.05128210.1063830.03056770.03286390.1032860.009345790.009661840.03255810.009259260.053811700.004166670.03076920.004739340.04687500000.01229510.00408163000
Viewership count for Days of Our Lives (Nielson share)5700000710000071000007200000700000071000006500000540000052000005400000490000056000005300000580000058000005100000580000042000003800000360000031000003100000270000026000002300000210000022000002200000200000020000002100000190000020500001800000160000016000001600000140000012000001200000




Why this works

  1. Data dredging: I have 25,213 variables in my database. I compare all these variables against each other to find ones that randomly match up. That's 635,695,369 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([0.0388693,0.0982143,0.112805,0.0502793,0.0763636,0.127273,0.252252,0.103774,0.0891089,0.0966184,0.0492611,0.0215517,0.128889,0.102222,0.0666667,0.0548523,0.0512821,0.106383,0.0305677,0.0328639,0.103286,0.00934579,0.00966184,0.0325581,0.00925926,0.0538117,0,0.00416667,0.0307692,0.00473934,0.046875,0,0,0,0,0.0122951,0.00408163,0,0,0,])
array_2 = np.array([5700000,7100000,7100000,7200000,7000000,7100000,6500000,5400000,5200000,5400000,4900000,5600000,5300000,5800000,5800000,5100000,5800000,4200000,3800000,3600000,3100000,3100000,2700000,2600000,2300000,2100000,2200000,2200000,2000000,2000000,2100000,1900000,2050000,1800000,1600000,1600000,1600000,1400000,1200000,1200000,])
array_1_name = "Air pollution in Effingham, Illinois"
array_2_name = "Viewership count for Days of Our Lives"

# Perform the calculation
print(f"Calculating the correlation between {array_1_name} and {array_2_name}...")
correlation, r_squared, p_value = calculate_correlation(array_1, array_2)

# Print the results
print("Correlation Coefficient:", correlation)
print("R-squared:", r_squared)
print("P-value:", p_value)



Reuseable content

You may re-use the images on this page for any purpose, even commercial purposes, without asking for permission. The only requirement is that you attribute Tyler Vigen. Attribution can take many different forms. If you leave the "tylervigen.com" link in the image, that satisfies it just fine. If you remove it and move it to a footnote, that's fine too. You can also just write "Charts courtesy of Tyler Vigen" at the bottom of an article.

You do not need to attribute "the spurious correlations website," and you don't even need to link here if you don't want to. I don't gain anything from pageviews. There are no ads on this site, there is nothing for sale, and I am not for hire.

For the record, I am just one person. Tyler Vigen, he/him/his. I do have degrees, but they should not go after my name unless you want to annoy my wife. If that is your goal, then go ahead and cite me as "Tyler Vigen, A.A. A.A.S. B.A. J.D." Otherwise it is just "Tyler Vigen."

When spoken, my last name is pronounced "vegan," like I don't eat meat.

Full license details.
For more on re-use permissions, or to get a signed release form, see tylervigen.com/permission.

Download images for these variables:


View another random correlation

How fun was this correlation?

Your correlation rating is out of this world!


Correlation ID: 4000 · Black Variable ID: 21606 · Red Variable ID: 87
about · subscribe · emailme@tylervigen.com · twitter

CC BY 4.0