about · email me · subscribe
Spurious correlation #4,367 · View random

A linear line chart with years as the X-axis and two variables on the Y-axis. The first variable is US household spending on entertainment and the second variable is Votes for Republican Senators in Mississippi.  The chart goes from 2000 to 2020, and the two variables track closely in value over that time. Small Image
Download png
, svg

AI explanation

As household spending on entertainment in the US increased, more families in Mississippi were able to afford TV and internet subscriptions. This led to a rise in exposure to Republican political advertising and messaging, ultimately swaying their votes towards Republican Senators.

Model: dalle-3
Prompt: Generate an image that combines the style of "a scene from Skyrim" with the scene of "A cozy living room in Mississippi, families gathered around a big screen TV, streaming entertainment subscriptions. The room is softly lit by the glow of the screen as they watch their favorite shows. Meanwhile, on the TV, political ads from Republican candidates play, influencing their decision to vote for Republican Senators." 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: US household spending on entertainment and Republican votes for Senators in Mississippi. 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: A scene from Skyrim Cyberpunk a Polaroid photo a Polaroid photo Cyberpunk
ChatGPT: a scene from Skyrim

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 US household spending on entertainment and Republican votes for Senators in Mississippi, in the following situation: As household spending on entertainment in the US increased, more families in Mississippi were able to afford TV and internet subscriptions. This led to a rise in exposure to Republican political advertising and messaging, ultimately swaying their votes towards Republican Senators.. Keep the description simple.
ChatGPT: A cozy living room in Mississippi, families gathered around a big screen TV, streaming entertainment subscriptions. The room is softly lit by the glow of the screen as they watch their favorite shows. Meanwhile, on the TV, political ads from Republican candidates play, influencing their decision to vote for Republican Senators.

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 scene from Skyrim ] and depicting this scene: A cozy living room in Mississippi, families gathered around a big screen TV, streaming entertainment subscriptions. The room is softly lit by the glow of the screen as they watch their favorite shows. Meanwhile, on the TV, political ads from Republican candidates play, influencing their decision to vote for Republican Senators. Keep the visual depiction simple. Do not include any words or speech bubbles.
ChatGPT: Generate an image that combines the style of "a scene from Skyrim" with the scene of "A cozy living room in Mississippi, families gathered around a big screen TV, streaming entertainment subscriptions. The room is softly lit by the glow of the screen as they watch their favorite shows. Meanwhile, on the TV, political ads from Republican candidates play, influencing their decision to vote for Republican Senators."

*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 US household spending on entertainment positively influenced Republican votes for Senators in Mississippi. Make it feel plausible.

AI academic paper

(Because p < 0.01)
EntertainMint to Win It: The Correlation between US Household Spending on Entertainment and Republican Votes for Senators in Mississippi

The Journal of Political Pop Culture Analysis

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 silly 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 US household spending on entertainment and Republican votes for Senators in Mississippi. Make lots of jokes, goofy observations, and puns.

Include a pun in the title.

Your research team used data from Bureau of Labor Statistics and MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse to assess this nagging question. You found a correlation coefficient of 0.8582342 and p < 0.01 for 2000 to 2020.

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]]
EntertainMint to Win It: The Correlation between US Household Spending on Entertainment and Republican Votes for Senators in Mississippi

[[ABSTRACT]]
In this paper, we endeavor to shed light on the surprising relationship between US household spending on entertainment and Republican votes for Senators in Mississippi. While one might think that politics and entertainment are as unrelated as a chicken and a tutu, our findings suggest otherwise. By delving into data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics and the MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, we uncovered a correlation coefficient of 0.8582342 and a p-value of less than 0.01 for the period spanning 2000 to 2020. It seems that the more Mississippians spend on entertainment, the more likely they are to cast their votes in favor of Republican candidates. It's a correlation that's so statistically significant, even statisticians are dancing in disbelief. So, next time you're watching a movie or attending a concert, just remember, your entertainment choices might be shaping the political landscape more than you think!


Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You are a silly 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 US household spending on entertainment and Republican votes for Senators in Mississippi. Make lots of jokes, goofy observations, and puns.

Here is the title and abstract of the paper:
[[TITLE]]
EntertainMint to Win It: The Correlation between US Household Spending on Entertainment and Republican Votes for Senators in Mississippi

[[ABSTRACT]]
In this paper, we endeavor to shed light on the surprising relationship between US household spending on entertainment and Republican votes for Senators in Mississippi. While one might think that politics and entertainment are as unrelated as a chicken and a tutu, our findings suggest otherwise. By delving into data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics and the MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, we uncovered a correlation coefficient of 0.8582342 and a p-value of less than 0.01 for the period spanning 2000 to 2020. It seems that the more Mississippians spend on entertainment, the more likely they are to cast their votes in favor of Republican candidates. It's a correlation that's so statistically significant, even statisticians are dancing in disbelief. So, next time you're watching a movie or attending a concert, just remember, your entertainment choices might be shaping the political landscape more than you think!

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[INTRODUCTION]]



ChatGPT:
[[INTRODUCTION]]

Ah, the intriguing world of politics and entertainment - two realms that seem as different as night and well, another night. In this paper, we embark on a journey to unravel the mysterious bond between US household expenditure on entertainment and the Republican support for Senators in the great state of Mississippi. Who would have thought that the popcorn you munch on during movie nights or the latest bestselling novel you purchase could potentially sway a voter's political allegiance? It's as if the ballot box has transformed into a stage, and the voters are the audience eagerly waiting for a stimulating performance.

As we delve into this unique relationship, our study aims to bring some levity (pun intended) to the realm of political analyses. While it may seem like a stretch to connect household spending on entertainment with political affiliations, the numbers don't lie, and they certainly don't care about your preferred genre of music or film. Our findings unveil a correlation coefficient that's stronger than the grip of an eager spectator on a front-row concert ticket. Get ready to kick back, relax, and join us as we journey through the curious confluence of leisure activities and political preferences in the heart of Mississippi. After all, what's the harm in adding a little razzle-dazzle to the usual research jargon? Let's sprinkle some confetti on these statistical relationships!


Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You are a silly 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 US household spending on entertainment and Republican votes for Senators in Mississippi. 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 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]]
EntertainMint to Win It: The Correlation between US Household Spending on Entertainment and Republican Votes for Senators in Mississippi

[[ABSTRACT]]
In this paper, we endeavor to shed light on the surprising relationship between US household spending on entertainment and Republican votes for Senators in Mississippi. While one might think that politics and entertainment are as unrelated as a chicken and a tutu, our findings suggest otherwise. By delving into data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics and the MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, we uncovered a correlation coefficient of 0.8582342 and a p-value of less than 0.01 for the period spanning 2000 to 2020. It seems that the more Mississippians spend on entertainment, the more likely they are to cast their votes in favor of Republican candidates. It's a correlation that's so statistically significant, even statisticians are dancing in disbelief. So, next time you're watching a movie or attending a concert, just remember, your entertainment choices might be shaping the political landscape more than you think!

-------

And here is the introduction section that led to this literature review:
[[INTRODUCTION]]
Ah, the intriguing world of politics and entertainment - two realms that seem as different as night and well, another night. In this paper, we embark on a journey to unravel the mysterious bond between US household expenditure on entertainment and the Republican support for Senators in the great state of Mississippi. Who would have thought that the popcorn you munch on during movie nights or the latest bestselling novel you purchase could potentially sway a voter's political allegiance? It's as if the ballot box has transformed into a stage, and the voters are the audience eagerly waiting for a stimulating performance.
As we delve into this unique relationship, our study aims to bring some levity (pun intended) to the realm of political analyses. While it may seem like a stretch to connect household spending on entertainment with political affiliations, the numbers don't lie, and they certainly don't care about your preferred genre of music or film. Our findings unveil a correlation coefficient that's stronger than the grip of an eager spectator on a front-row concert ticket. Get ready to kick back, relax, and join us as we journey through the curious confluence of leisure activities and political preferences in the heart of Mississippi. After all, what's the harm in adding a little razzle-dazzle to the usual research jargon? Let's sprinkle some confetti on these statistical relationships!

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[LITERATURE REVIEW]]



ChatGPT:
[[LITERATURE REVIEW]]

Smith and Doe (2015) conducted a comprehensive analysis of US household spending patterns and their potential impact on political attitudes. Their study "Trends in Entertainment Expenditure and Political Leanings" revealed intriguing trends in entertainment spending, with a notable emphasis on the correlation between music purchases and voting tendencies. Similarly, Jones et al. (2017) delved into the economic and sociopolitical implications of leisure activities in their seminal work, "Leisure, Entertainment, and Political Preferences: An Integrated Analysis." These studies laid a solid foundation for understanding the intersection of entertainment and political behavior.

In "The Entertainment Economy: How Mega-Media Shapes Public Opinion" by Brown (2018), the author highlighted the influential role of media consumption in shaping individuals' worldviews, including their political inclinations. Additionally, Thompson's "News Jacking: How to Inject Your Ideas into a Breaking News Story and Generate Tons of Media Coverage" (2016) provided insights into the power of entertainment-driven narratives in influencing public discourse and political ideologies.

Taking a more whimsical approach, Orwell's "Animal Farm" (1945) and Huxley's "Brave New World" (1932) offer fictional yet thought-provoking portrayals of societal control and political manipulation, albeit in a more dystopian setting. The escapades chronicled in Pratchett's "The Truth" (2000) provide a satirical take on the influence of media and entertainment on public opinion, albeit in a fantastical realm.

As part of this research, the authors indulged in a thorough consumption of entertainment media, including the binge-watching of "Parks and Recreation" and "The West Wing," in the name of scholarly inquiry. Although not directly linked to the topic at hand, these experiences provided invaluable insights into the tangential connections between entertainment and politics - not to mention a few laughs and a newfound appreciation for mockumentary-style sitcoms.

In summary, the literature pertaining to the intersection of entertainment and political inclinations provides a rich tapestry of perspectives, ranging from scholarly analyses to fictional explorations. While the initial studies laid the groundwork for understanding the potential correlations, the whimsical additions contributed to a more holistic view of the subject matter. As we proceed with our own investigation, we seek to infuse this serious topic with a dash of humor and a sprinkling of unexpected correlations. After all, as the saying goes, "All's fair in love, war, and statistical analysis."


Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You are a silly 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 US household spending on entertainment and Republican votes for Senators in Mississippi. Make lots of jokes, goofy observations, and puns.

Your research team collected data from all across the internet, but mostly just used information from Bureau of Labor Statistics and MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse . You used data from 2000 to 2020

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]]
EntertainMint to Win It: The Correlation between US Household Spending on Entertainment and Republican Votes for Senators in Mississippi

[[ABSTRACT]]
In this paper, we endeavor to shed light on the surprising relationship between US household spending on entertainment and Republican votes for Senators in Mississippi. While one might think that politics and entertainment are as unrelated as a chicken and a tutu, our findings suggest otherwise. By delving into data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics and the MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, we uncovered a correlation coefficient of 0.8582342 and a p-value of less than 0.01 for the period spanning 2000 to 2020. It seems that the more Mississippians spend on entertainment, the more likely they are to cast their votes in favor of Republican candidates. It's a correlation that's so statistically significant, even statisticians are dancing in disbelief. So, next time you're watching a movie or attending a concert, just remember, your entertainment choices might be shaping the political landscape more than you think!

[[INTRODUCTION]]
Ah, the intriguing world of politics and entertainment - two realms that seem as different as night and well, another night. In this paper, we embark on a journey to unravel the mysterious bond between US household expenditure on entertainment and the Republican support for Senators in the great state of Mississippi. Who would have thought that the popcorn you munch on during movie nights or the latest bestselling novel you purchase could potentially sway a voter's political allegiance? It's as if the ballot box has transformed into a stage, and the voters are the audience eagerly waiting for a stimulating performance.
As we delve into this unique relationship, our study aims to bring some levity (pun intended) to the realm of political analyses. While it may seem like a stretch to connect household spending on entertainment with political affiliations, the numbers don't lie, and they certainly don't care about your preferred genre of music or film. Our findings unveil a correlation coefficient that's stronger than the grip of an eager spectator on a front-row concert ticket. Get ready to kick back, relax, and join us as we journey through the curious confluence of leisure activities and political preferences in the heart of Mississippi. After all, what's the harm in adding a little razzle-dazzle to the usual research jargon? Let's sprinkle some confetti on these statistical relationships!

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[METHODOLOGY]]



ChatGPT:

[[METHODOLOGY]]

To kick off this captivating analysis, our research team dove headfirst into the vast sea of data, navigating through the treacherous waves of spreadsheets and statistical algorithms. We gathered household spending data on entertainment from the Bureau of Labor Statistics, where we treaded through a myriad of figures on concert tickets, movie rentals, and perhaps even the occasional clown for a child's birthday party. The MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse also provided us with a treasure trove of information on Republican votes for Senators in Mississippi, allowing us to chart the political tides amidst the waves of entertainment expenditures.

To ensure that our data was as reliable as a seasoned stand-up comedian's punchline, we meticulously selected the time frame from 2000 to 2020, taking into account the ever-changing dynamics of entertainment trends and political sentiments. This timeframe allowed us to capture the evolution of both leisure spending habits and political leanings, akin to observing the metamorphosis of a caterpillar into a politically savvy butterfly.

To measure the strength of the relationship between US household spending on entertainment and Republican votes for Senators in Mississippi, we employed the almighty Pearson correlation coefficient, brandishing it like a statistical Excalibur. This valiant coefficient allowed us to quantify the degree of association between our variables, providing a numerical testament to the intertwined nature of leisurely activities and political preferences. Additionally, we wielded the p-value, the defender of statistical significance, to scrutinize the validity of our discoveries, ensuring that our findings were not merely a stroke of luck in a game of political roulette.

With the fusion of data from diverse sources and the employment of robust statistical tools, our research sought to unravel the enigmatic connection between entertainment spending and political affiliations with all the precision of a magician pulling a rabbit out of a hat. Armed with wit, wisdom, and a touch of whimsy, we embarked upon this scientific journey to illuminate the unexpected symphony of entertainment expenditures and political predilections in the bustling heart of Mississippi.


Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You are a silly 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 US household spending on entertainment and Republican votes for Senators in Mississippi. Make lots of jokes, goofy observations, and puns.

Your research team collected data from all across the internet, but mostly just used information from Bureau of Labor Statistics and MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse .

For the time period 2000 to 2020, you found a correlation 0.8582342, r-squared of 0.7365659, 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]]
EntertainMint to Win It: The Correlation between US Household Spending on Entertainment and Republican Votes for Senators in Mississippi

[[ABSTRACT]]
In this paper, we endeavor to shed light on the surprising relationship between US household spending on entertainment and Republican votes for Senators in Mississippi. While one might think that politics and entertainment are as unrelated as a chicken and a tutu, our findings suggest otherwise. By delving into data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics and the MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, we uncovered a correlation coefficient of 0.8582342 and a p-value of less than 0.01 for the period spanning 2000 to 2020. It seems that the more Mississippians spend on entertainment, the more likely they are to cast their votes in favor of Republican candidates. It's a correlation that's so statistically significant, even statisticians are dancing in disbelief. So, next time you're watching a movie or attending a concert, just remember, your entertainment choices might be shaping the political landscape more than you think!

-------

And here is the methodology section that led to this result:
[[METHODOLOGY]]
Ah, the intriguing world of politics and entertainment - two realms that seem as different as night and well, another night. In this paper, we embark on a journey to unravel the mysterious bond between US household expenditure on entertainment and the Republican support for Senators in the great state of Mississippi. Who would have thought that the popcorn you munch on during movie nights or the latest bestselling novel you purchase could potentially sway a voter's political allegiance? It's as if the ballot box has transformed into a stage, and the voters are the audience eagerly waiting for a stimulating performance.
As we delve into this unique relationship, our study aims to bring some levity (pun intended) to the realm of political analyses. While it may seem like a stretch to connect household spending on entertainment with political affiliations, the numbers don't lie, and they certainly don't care about your preferred genre of music or film. Our findings unveil a correlation coefficient that's stronger than the grip of an eager spectator on a front-row concert ticket. Get ready to kick back, relax, and join us as we journey through the curious confluence of leisure activities and political preferences in the heart of Mississippi. After all, what's the harm in adding a little razzle-dazzle to the usual research jargon? Let's sprinkle some confetti on these statistical relationships!

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[RESULTS]]



ChatGPT:

[[RESULTS]]

Our analysis revealed a rather surprising but robust connection between US household spending on entertainment and Republican votes for Senators in Mississippi. The correlation coefficient of 0.8582342 slapped us in the face like a plot twist in a popcorn movie, leaving us stunned at the strength of this peculiar relationship. With an r-squared of 0.7365659, it's as if the entertainment spending is belting out a catchy tune that just won't leave our heads. And with a p-value of less than 0.01, the significance of this correlation is as clear as a high-definition picture on a brand-new television screen.

The correlation can be adequately visualized in Figure 1, which presents a scatterplot showcasing the undeniable bond between US household spending on entertainment and Republican votes for Senators in Mississippi. It's as if the data itself is asking, "Are you not entertained?!"

These findings imply that as Mississippians open their wallets for entertainment, they might just be casting their ballots for Republican candidates. It's like they're saying, "Pass the popcorn and a ballot, please!" The relationship is so puzzling, it's as if political rallies have taken on the vibe of a rock concert or a Broadway show.

It seems that in the great state of Mississippi, entertainment spending and political affiliations are dancing hand in hand like a pair of enthusiastic partners on a reality TV dance competition. So, the next time you're at a concert or catching a movie, remember - your entertainment choices might be influencing the political scene more than you'd ever imagine. It's as if the stage lights have expanded to encompass the ballot box, and voters are tapping their feet to the rhythm of their entertainment spending.


Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You are a silly 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 US household spending on entertainment and Republican votes for Senators in Mississippi. 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]]
EntertainMint to Win It: The Correlation between US Household Spending on Entertainment and Republican Votes for Senators in Mississippi

[[ABSTRACT]]
In this paper, we endeavor to shed light on the surprising relationship between US household spending on entertainment and Republican votes for Senators in Mississippi. While one might think that politics and entertainment are as unrelated as a chicken and a tutu, our findings suggest otherwise. By delving into data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics and the MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, we uncovered a correlation coefficient of 0.8582342 and a p-value of less than 0.01 for the period spanning 2000 to 2020. It seems that the more Mississippians spend on entertainment, the more likely they are to cast their votes in favor of Republican candidates. It's a correlation that's so statistically significant, even statisticians are dancing in disbelief. So, next time you're watching a movie or attending a concert, just remember, your entertainment choices might be shaping the political landscape more than you think!

[[LITERATURE REVIEW]]
Smith and Doe (2015) conducted a comprehensive analysis of US household spending patterns and their potential impact on political attitudes. Their study "Trends in Entertainment Expenditure and Political Leanings" revealed intriguing trends in entertainment spending, with a notable emphasis on the correlation between music purchases and voting tendencies. Similarly, Jones et al. (2017) delved into the economic and sociopolitical implications of leisure activities in their seminal work, "Leisure, Entertainment, and Political Preferences: An Integrated Analysis." These studies laid a solid foundation for understanding the intersection of entertainment and political behavior.
In "The Entertainment Economy: How Mega-Media Shapes Public Opinion" by Brown (2018), the author highlighted the influential role of media consumption in shaping individuals' worldviews, including their political inclinations. Additionally, Thompson's "News Jacking: How to Inject Your Ideas into a Breaking News Story and Generate Tons of Media Coverage" (2016) provided insights into the power of entertainment-driven narratives in influencing public discourse and political ideologies.
Taking a more whimsical approach, Orwell's "Animal Farm" (1945) and Huxley's "Brave New World" (1932) offer fictional yet thought-provoking portrayals of societal control and political manipulation, albeit in a more dystopian setting. The escapades chronicled in Pratchett's "The Truth" (2000) provide a satirical take on the influence of media and entertainment on public opinion, albeit in a fantastical realm.
As part of this research, the authors indulged in a thorough consumption of entertainment media, including the binge-watching of "Parks and Recreation" and "The West Wing," in the name of scholarly inquiry. Although not directly linked to the topic at hand, these experiences provided invaluable insights into the tangential connections between entertainment and politics - not to mention a few laughs and a newfound appreciation for mockumentary-style sitcoms.
In summary, the literature pertaining to the intersection of entertainment and political inclinations provides a rich tapestry of perspectives, ranging from scholarly analyses to fictional explorations. While the initial studies laid the groundwork for understanding the potential correlations, the whimsical additions contributed to a more holistic view of the subject matter. As we proceed with our own investigation, we seek to infuse this serious topic with a dash of humor and a sprinkling of unexpected correlations. After all, as the saying goes, "All's fair in love, war, and statistical analysis."

[[RESULTS]]
Our analysis revealed a rather surprising but robust connection between US household spending on entertainment and Republican votes for Senators in Mississippi. The correlation coefficient of 0.8582342 slapped us in the face like a plot twist in a popcorn movie, leaving us stunned at the strength of this peculiar relationship. With an r-squared of 0.7365659, it's as if the entertainment spending is belting out a catchy tune that just won't leave our heads. And with a p-value of less than 0.01, the significance of this correlation is as clear as a high-definition picture on a brand-new television screen.
The correlation can be adequately visualized in Figure 1, which presents a scatterplot showcasing the undeniable bond between US household spending on entertainment and Republican votes for Senators in Mississippi. It's as if the data itself is asking, "Are you not entertained?!"
These findings imply that as Mississippians open their wallets for entertainment, they might just be casting their ballots for Republican candidates. It's like they're saying, "Pass the popcorn and a ballot, please!" The relationship is so puzzling, it's as if political rallies have taken on the vibe of a rock concert or a Broadway show.
It seems that in the great state of Mississippi, entertainment spending and political affiliations are dancing hand in hand like a pair of enthusiastic partners on a reality TV dance competition. So, the next time you're at a concert or catching a movie, remember - your entertainment choices might be influencing the political scene more than you'd ever imagine. It's as if the stage lights have expanded to encompass the ballot box, and voters are tapping their feet to the rhythm of their entertainment spending.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[DISCUSSION]]



ChatGPT:

[[DISCUSSION]]

Our results confirm and even amplify the earlier research by Smith and Doe (2015) and Jones et al. (2017) into the interconnection between entertainment spending and political leanings. This correlation is so sturdy; it's like an elephant sitting on a seesaw – definitely not something to be taken lightly. Just as Jones et al. (2017) pointed out, leisure activities seem to have a more profound impact on political preferences than we previously thought. It's as if Mississippians are saying, "Vote Republican and chill? Yes, please!"

Brown (2018) also highlighted the influential role of media consumption in shaping political inclinations, but our findings add a new dimension: personal entertainment expenditures. It's like Mississippians are not just picking up on media narratives; they're literally investing in them with their hard-earned cash. The narrative could very well be: "Buy tickets to the political drama, starring your favorite Republican candidates!"

Even with a touch of whimsy, Orwell's "Animal Farm" (1945) and Huxley's "Brave New World" (1932) offer fictional yet thought-provoking portrayals of societal control and political manipulation. Our research, much like these literary works, suggests that the boundaries between entertainment and politics are as blurred as a Monet painting – best enjoyed with a Republican-themed soundtrack.

As we embraced a more light-hearted approach to our study, immersing ourselves in entertainment media akin to the binge-watching of "Parks and Recreation," we couldn't help but notice a nuanced, albeit unexpected, relationship between entertainment and Mississippi's political landscape. It's as if the state is staging a political rom-com, with voters swaying to the beat of their favorite entertainment choices and casting their ballots accordingly.

This research suggests that the link between entertainment spending and political affiliations is stronger than a double shot of espresso in the morning. It's like Mississippians are tapping into a whole new source of political engagement, where their entertainment choices are not just personal preferences, but potentially influential factors in the voting booth. It's as if the state's motto has evolved into "Votertainment: where democracy meets the dance floor!"

In conclusion, our findings serve as a levity-laden reminder of the vital – if unconventional – connection between entertainment spending and political affiliations. It's apparent that entertainment and politics in Mississippi are not just parallel tracks but appear to be dancing cheek to cheek, influencing each other in ways that may shape the state's future political dynamics. So, next time you're at a Mississippi movie theater or a Republican rally, remember – behind every political backdrop, there might just be a popcorn-scented soundtrack playing.


Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You are a silly 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 US household spending on entertainment and Republican votes for Senators in Mississippi. 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]]
EntertainMint to Win It: The Correlation between US Household Spending on Entertainment and Republican Votes for Senators in Mississippi

[[ABSTRACT]]
In this paper, we endeavor to shed light on the surprising relationship between US household spending on entertainment and Republican votes for Senators in Mississippi. While one might think that politics and entertainment are as unrelated as a chicken and a tutu, our findings suggest otherwise. By delving into data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics and the MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, we uncovered a correlation coefficient of 0.8582342 and a p-value of less than 0.01 for the period spanning 2000 to 2020. It seems that the more Mississippians spend on entertainment, the more likely they are to cast their votes in favor of Republican candidates. It's a correlation that's so statistically significant, even statisticians are dancing in disbelief. So, next time you're watching a movie or attending a concert, just remember, your entertainment choices might be shaping the political landscape more than you think!

[[INTRDUCTION]]
Ah, the intriguing world of politics and entertainment - two realms that seem as different as night and well, another night. In this paper, we embark on a journey to unravel the mysterious bond between US household expenditure on entertainment and the Republican support for Senators in the great state of Mississippi. Who would have thought that the popcorn you munch on during movie nights or the latest bestselling novel you purchase could potentially sway a voter's political allegiance? It's as if the ballot box has transformed into a stage, and the voters are the audience eagerly waiting for a stimulating performance.
As we delve into this unique relationship, our study aims to bring some levity (pun intended) to the realm of political analyses. While it may seem like a stretch to connect household spending on entertainment with political affiliations, the numbers don't lie, and they certainly don't care about your preferred genre of music or film. Our findings unveil a correlation coefficient that's stronger than the grip of an eager spectator on a front-row concert ticket. Get ready to kick back, relax, and join us as we journey through the curious confluence of leisure activities and political preferences in the heart of Mississippi. After all, what's the harm in adding a little razzle-dazzle to the usual research jargon? Let's sprinkle some confetti on these statistical relationships!

[[RESULTS]]
Our analysis revealed a rather surprising but robust connection between US household spending on entertainment and Republican votes for Senators in Mississippi. The correlation coefficient of 0.8582342 slapped us in the face like a plot twist in a popcorn movie, leaving us stunned at the strength of this peculiar relationship. With an r-squared of 0.7365659, it's as if the entertainment spending is belting out a catchy tune that just won't leave our heads. And with a p-value of less than 0.01, the significance of this correlation is as clear as a high-definition picture on a brand-new television screen.
The correlation can be adequately visualized in Figure 1, which presents a scatterplot showcasing the undeniable bond between US household spending on entertainment and Republican votes for Senators in Mississippi. It's as if the data itself is asking, "Are you not entertained?!"
These findings imply that as Mississippians open their wallets for entertainment, they might just be casting their ballots for Republican candidates. It's like they're saying, "Pass the popcorn and a ballot, please!" The relationship is so puzzling, it's as if political rallies have taken on the vibe of a rock concert or a Broadway show.
It seems that in the great state of Mississippi, entertainment spending and political affiliations are dancing hand in hand like a pair of enthusiastic partners on a reality TV dance competition. So, the next time you're at a concert or catching a movie, remember - your entertainment choices might be influencing the political scene more than you'd ever imagine. It's as if the stage lights have expanded to encompass the ballot box, and voters are tapping their feet to the rhythm of their entertainment spending.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[CONCLUSION]]



ChatGPT:

[[CONCLUSION]]

In conclusion, our study has revealed an unexpectedly harmonious relationship between US household spending on entertainment and Republican votes for Senators in Mississippi. It appears that the political stage is not as far removed from the entertainment arena as one might assume. As the old saying goes, "All the world's a stage," and it seems that in Mississippi, the showbiz factor extends even to the voting booth!

Our findings highlight a noteworthy correlation that's stronger than the bass in a hip-hop concert, and as undeniable as the allure of a big-budget blockbuster. It's as if voters are singing, "I'm with the bandwagon" as they sway their way to the polls.

With such compelling statistical evidence, it's tempting to break out in a chorus of "Entertainment, Ho! Let's go, vote!" Indeed, the data practically screams, "Lights, camera, action - and Republican votes!" Who knew that the ticket to political favor could be hidden in a theater stub or a gaming console receipt?

As the curtains draw to a close on this research, we are confident in asserting that no further investigations are warranted in this area. The correlation between entertainment spending and Republican votes in Mississippi is a phenomenon as clear as a high-definition TV, and it's time to give this topic a standing ovation and a well-deserved encore. After all, why continue to probe when the answer is as crystal clear as an IMAX screen?

In the grand production of political analysis, it seems that entertainment spending has earned itself a lead role, and it's time to sit back, relax, and enjoy the show.


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 EntertainMint to Win It: The Correlation between US Household Spending on Entertainment and Republican Votes for Senators in Mississippi. Respond only with the name of a fictional academic journal.

ChatGPT:

The Journal of Political Pop Culture Analysis


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 EntertainMint to Win It: The Correlation between US Household Spending on Entertainment and Republican Votes for Senators in Mississippi. Respond only with the name of a fictional organization.

ChatGPT:

The Center for Amusing Political Analysis


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 EntertainMint to Win It: The Correlation between US Household Spending on Entertainment and Republican Votes for Senators in Mississippi with an abstract of In this paper, we endeavor to shed light on the surprising relationship between US household spending on entertainment and Republican votes for Senators in Mississippi. While one might think that politics and entertainment are as unrelated as a chicken and a tutu, our findings suggest otherwise. By delving into data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics and the MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, we uncovered a correlation coefficient of 0.8582342 and a p-value of less than 0.01 for the period spanning 2000 to 2020. It seems that the more Mississippians spend on entertainment, the more likely they are to cast their votes in favor of Republican candidates. It's a correlation that's so statistically significant, even statisticians are dancing in disbelief. So, next time you're watching a movie or attending a concert, just remember, your entertainment choices might be shaping the political landscape more than you think!

ChatGPT:

US household spending on entertainment, Republican votes in Mississippi, correlation, Bureau of Labor Statistics, MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, correlation coefficient, p-value, Mississippi entertainment spending, political landscape, entertainment choices, entertainment spending and political affiliation

*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

US household spending on entertainment
Detailed data title: Annual US household spend on entertainment, as a percentage of total household spend
Source: Bureau of Labor Statistics
See what else correlates with US household spending on entertainment

Votes for Republican Senators in Mississippi
Detailed data title: Percentage of votes cast for Federal Republican Senate candidates in Mississippi
Source: MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse
See what else correlates with Votes for Republican Senators in Mississippi

Correlation r = 0.8582342 (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 = 0.7365659 (Coefficient of determination)
This means 73.7% of the change in the one variable (i.e., Votes for Republican Senators in Mississippi) is predictable based on the change in the other (i.e., US household spending on entertainment) over the 8 years from 2000 through 2020.

p < 0.01, which is statistically significant(Null hypothesis significance test)
The p-value is 0.0064. 0.0063870034220379100000000000
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 0.86 in 0.64% of random cases. Said differently, if you correlated 157 random variables Which I absolutely did.
with the same 7 degrees of freedom, Degrees of freedom is a measure of how many free components we are testing. In this case it is 7 because we have two variables measured over a period of 8 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.

[ 0.39, 0.97 ] 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.
20002002200620082012201420182020
US household spending on entertainment (Household spend)4.896835.1114.911165.615425.063965.099545.269184.74777
Votes for Republican Senators in Mississippi (Percentage of votes)65.879984.579463.576116.39557.155659.8997112.12654.1052




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. Very low n: There are not many data points included in this analysis. Even if the p-value is high, we should be suspicious of using so few datapoints in a correlation.
  5. Y-axis doesn't start at zero: I truncated the Y-axes of the graph above. I also used a line graph, which makes the visual connection stand out more than it deserves. Nothing against line graphs. They are great at telling a story when you have linear data! But visually it is deceptive because the only data is at the points on the graph, not the lines on the graph. In between each point, the data could have been doing anything. Like going for a random walk by itself!
    Mathematically what I showed is true, but it is intentionally misleading. Below is the same chart but with both Y-axes starting 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([4.89683,5.111,4.91116,5.61542,5.06396,5.09954,5.26918,4.74777,])
array_2 = np.array([65.8799,84.5794,63.576,116.395,57.1556,59.8997,112.126,54.1052,])
array_1_name = "US household spending on entertainment"
array_2_name = "Votes for Republican Senators in Mississippi"

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

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



Reuseable content

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

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

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

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

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

Download images for these variables:


View another random correlation

How fun was this correlation?

Your rating skills are top-notch!


Correlation ID: 4367 · Black Variable ID: 19997 · Red Variable ID: 26412
about · subscribe · emailme@tylervigen.com · twitter

CC BY 4.0