about · email me · subscribe
Spurious correlation #4,449 · View random

A linear line chart with years as the X-axis and two variables on the Y-axis. The first variable is Popularity of the first name Joaquin and the second variable is Votes for the Democratic Presidential candidate in Mississippi.  The chart goes from 1976 to 2020, and the two variables track closely in value over that time. Small Image
Download png
, svg

AI explanation

Perhaps every time someone said the name Joaquin, it subliminally whispered 'vote Democrat' to the listener's subconscious. It's as if the name itself was casting a political spell. Maybe we just need more names with built-in political endorsements!

Model: dalle-3
Prompt: Generate an image of a bustling Mississippi town square, captured in the style of a woodblock painting. The large banner displaying the name "Joaquin" hangs prominently above a lively campaign rally for the Democratic presidential candidate. The scene is filled with a curious mix of admiration for the name, and a growing sense of political alignment among the crowd, as if the name itself has a persuasive charm that subtly influences the political mood. Capture the movement and energy of the crowd as they pause to murmur the name and a hushed whisper seems to echo "vote Democrat" in the air around them. The woodblock style should emphasize bold lines and vibrant, earthy tones to convey a sense of history and tradition. 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: Popularity of the first name Joaquin and Votes for the Democrat Presidential candidate 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: Low poly Cute cartoon Woodblock painting Woodblock painting a funny image macro
ChatGPT: Woodblock painting

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 Popularity of the first name Joaquin and Votes for the Democrat Presidential candidate in Mississippi, in the following situation: Perhaps every time someone said the name Joaquin, it subliminally whispered 'vote Democrat' to the listener's subconscious. It's as if the name itself was casting a political spell. Maybe we just need more names with built-in political endorsements!. Keep the description simple.
ChatGPT: In a bustling Mississippi town square, a large banner displaying the name "Joaquin" hangs above a lively campaign rally for the Democratic presidential candidate. As people pass by, they pause to murmur the name, and suddenly, a hushed whisper seems to echo "vote Democrat" in the air around them. The scene is filled with a curious mix of admiration for the name and a growing sense of political alignment, as if the name itself has a persuasive charm that subtly influences the political mood.

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: [ Woodblock painting ] and depicting this scene: In a bustling Mississippi town square, a large banner displaying the name "Joaquin" hangs above a lively campaign rally for the Democratic presidential candidate. As people pass by, they pause to murmur the name, and suddenly, a hushed whisper seems to echo "vote Democrat" in the air around them. The scene is filled with a curious mix of admiration for the name and a growing sense of political alignment, as if the name itself has a persuasive charm that subtly influences the political mood. Keep the visual depiction simple. Do not include any words or speech bubbles.
ChatGPT: Generate an image of a bustling Mississippi town square, captured in the style of a woodblock painting. The large banner displaying the name "Joaquin" hangs prominently above a lively campaign rally for the Democratic presidential candidate. The scene is filled with a curious mix of admiration for the name, and a growing sense of political alignment among the crowd, as if the name itself has a persuasive charm that subtly influences the political mood. Capture the movement and energy of the crowd as they pause to murmur the name and a hushed whisper seems to echo "vote Democrat" in the air around them. The woodblock style should emphasize bold lines and vibrant, earthy tones to convey a sense of history and tradition.

*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 an increase in Popularity of the first name Joaquin caused Votes for the Democrat Presidential candidate in Mississippi to increase. Add a funny one-liner at the end.

AI academic paper

(Because p < 0.01)
Joaquin the Votes: A Quantitative Analysis of the Relationship Between the Popularity of the Name Joaquin and Democratic Presidential Votes in Mississippi

The Journal of Sociopolitical Naming Patterns

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 Popularity of the first name Joaquin and Votes for the Democrat Presidential candidate in Mississippi. You can't resist a good dad joke. Add a relevant dad joke related to the content every couple of sentences.

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

Your research team used data from US Social Security Administration and MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse to assess this nagging question. You found a correlation coefficient of 0.9420739 and p < 0.01 for 1976 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]]
"Joaquin the Votes: A Quantitative Analysis of the Relationship Between the Popularity of the Name Joaquin and Democratic Presidential Votes in Mississippi"

[[ABSTRACT]]
The perennial question of whether there exists a curious connection between the naming trends and political inclinations in American states has long intrigued researchers. In this study, we delve into the fascinating realm of the political and nominative, investigating the potential correlation between the prevalence of the name "Joaquin" and the voting patterns for the Democratic presidential candidate in the state of Mississippi. Using comprehensive datasets sourced from the US Social Security Administration and the MIT Election Data and Science Lab via the Harvard Dataverse, we conducted a rigorous quantitative analysis spanning the period from 1976 to 2020.

Our findings reveal a striking correlation coefficient of 0.9420739 and a significance level of p < 0.01, providing compelling evidence of a strong positive relationship between the frequency of the name "Joaquin" and the votes garnered by the Democratic presidential candidate in Mississippi. It appears that the incorporation of the name "Joaquin" into individuals' monikers may indeed exert an influence on their political preferences in this distinctive Southern state.

Nevertheless, while this correlation may be statistically significant, let us not jump to hasty conclusions or make rash assumptions. As the old saying goes, "Correlation does not imply causation" – unless of course, your name is Joaquin, in which case, you might just be casting your vote in favor of the candidate with the same "name-ocratic" affiliation.


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 Popularity of the first name Joaquin and Votes for the Democrat Presidential candidate in Mississippi. You can't resist a good dad joke. Add a relevant dad joke related to the content every couple of sentences.

Here is the title and abstract of the paper:
[[TITLE]]
"Joaquin the Votes: A Quantitative Analysis of the Relationship Between the Popularity of the Name Joaquin and Democratic Presidential Votes in Mississippi"

[[ABSTRACT]]
The perennial question of whether there exists a curious connection between the naming trends and political inclinations in American states has long intrigued researchers. In this study, we delve into the fascinating realm of the political and nominative, investigating the potential correlation between the prevalence of the name "Joaquin" and the voting patterns for the Democratic presidential candidate in the state of Mississippi. Using comprehensive datasets sourced from the US Social Security Administration and the MIT Election Data and Science Lab via the Harvard Dataverse, we conducted a rigorous quantitative analysis spanning the period from 1976 to 2020.

Our findings reveal a striking correlation coefficient of 0.9420739 and a significance level of p < 0.01, providing compelling evidence of a strong positive relationship between the frequency of the name "Joaquin" and the votes garnered by the Democratic presidential candidate in Mississippi. It appears that the incorporation of the name "Joaquin" into individuals' monikers may indeed exert an influence on their political preferences in this distinctive Southern state.

Nevertheless, while this correlation may be statistically significant, let us not jump to hasty conclusions or make rash assumptions. As the old saying goes, "Correlation does not imply causation" – unless of course, your name is Joaquin, in which case, you might just be casting your vote in favor of the candidate with the same "name-ocratic" affiliation.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[INTRODUCTION]]



ChatGPT:
[[INTRODUCTION]]

As the late great William Shakespeare famously said, "What's in a name?" Well, as it turns out, quite a lot, according to our latest research findings. In this study, we set out to explore the intriguing relationship between the popularity of the first name "Joaquin" and the voting behavior for the Democratic presidential candidate in the state of Mississippi. With puns aplenty and statistical analysis in hand, we unravel the potential link between nomenclature and political preference in the Magnolia State.

It has been a long-standing adage that names carry significant weight, but we are not merely engaging in a game of 'catchy' titles – pun intended. Our study channels the iconic words of the philosopher Aristotle, who once mused, "Give me a data set and a pun, and I shall move the world." We sifted through comprehensive datasets provided by the US Social Security Administration and the MIT Election Data and Science Lab, embracing the quantitative analysis with the fervor of a dad joke enthusiast at a comedy club.

Upon delving into the treasure trove of data spanning from 1976 to 2020, we uncovered a most intriguing correlation between the prevalence of the name "Joaquin" and the votes cast for the Democratic presidential candidate in Mississippi. The correlation coefficient of 0.9420739 shone brightly like the morning sun over the Gulf Coast, bestowing credence to the idea that the name "Joaquin," when it rains, it pours – votes for the blue party.

Now, we must tread lightly and heed the age-old wisdom passed down from generations before us. "Correlation does not imply causation," or so they say, but if the shoe fits – or in this case, if the name Joaquin fits – then, well, perhaps there is some 'name-ocratic' influence at play. After all, in the colorful tapestry of human behavior, stranger things have happened than a name nudging someone toward their preferred political candidate.


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 Popularity of the first name Joaquin and Votes for the Democrat Presidential candidate in Mississippi. You can't resist a good dad joke. Add a relevant dad joke related to the content every couple of sentences.

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 couple popular internet memes that are related to one of the topics.

Here is the title and abstract of the paper:
[[TITLE]]
"Joaquin the Votes: A Quantitative Analysis of the Relationship Between the Popularity of the Name Joaquin and Democratic Presidential Votes in Mississippi"

[[ABSTRACT]]
The perennial question of whether there exists a curious connection between the naming trends and political inclinations in American states has long intrigued researchers. In this study, we delve into the fascinating realm of the political and nominative, investigating the potential correlation between the prevalence of the name "Joaquin" and the voting patterns for the Democratic presidential candidate in the state of Mississippi. Using comprehensive datasets sourced from the US Social Security Administration and the MIT Election Data and Science Lab via the Harvard Dataverse, we conducted a rigorous quantitative analysis spanning the period from 1976 to 2020.

Our findings reveal a striking correlation coefficient of 0.9420739 and a significance level of p < 0.01, providing compelling evidence of a strong positive relationship between the frequency of the name "Joaquin" and the votes garnered by the Democratic presidential candidate in Mississippi. It appears that the incorporation of the name "Joaquin" into individuals' monikers may indeed exert an influence on their political preferences in this distinctive Southern state.

Nevertheless, while this correlation may be statistically significant, let us not jump to hasty conclusions or make rash assumptions. As the old saying goes, "Correlation does not imply causation" – unless of course, your name is Joaquin, in which case, you might just be casting your vote in favor of the candidate with the same "name-ocratic" affiliation.

-------

And here is the introduction section that led to this literature review:
[[INTRODUCTION]]
As the late great William Shakespeare famously said, "What's in a name?" Well, as it turns out, quite a lot, according to our latest research findings. In this study, we set out to explore the intriguing relationship between the popularity of the first name "Joaquin" and the voting behavior for the Democratic presidential candidate in the state of Mississippi. With puns aplenty and statistical analysis in hand, we unravel the potential link between nomenclature and political preference in the Magnolia State.
It has been a long-standing adage that names carry significant weight, but we are not merely engaging in a game of 'catchy' titles – pun intended. Our study channels the iconic words of the philosopher Aristotle, who once mused, "Give me a data set and a pun, and I shall move the world." We sifted through comprehensive datasets provided by the US Social Security Administration and the MIT Election Data and Science Lab, embracing the quantitative analysis with the fervor of a dad joke enthusiast at a comedy club.
Upon delving into the treasure trove of data spanning from 1976 to 2020, we uncovered a most intriguing correlation between the prevalence of the name "Joaquin" and the votes cast for the Democratic presidential candidate in Mississippi. The correlation coefficient of 0.9420739 shone brightly like the morning sun over the Gulf Coast, bestowing credence to the idea that the name "Joaquin," when it rains, it pours – votes for the blue party.
Now, we must tread lightly and heed the age-old wisdom passed down from generations before us. "Correlation does not imply causation," or so they say, but if the shoe fits – or in this case, if the name Joaquin fits – then, well, perhaps there is some 'name-ocratic' influence at play. After all, in the colorful tapestry of human behavior, stranger things have happened than a name nudging someone toward their preferred political candidate.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[LITERATURE REVIEW]]



ChatGPT:
[[LITERATURE REVIEW]]

With a judicious blend of seriousness and lightheartedness, our investigation on the relationship between the popularity of the first name "Joaquin" and voting patterns for the Democratic presidential candidate in Mississippi is buttressed by existing research. In "Smith and Jones's Study on Naming Trends and Political Affiliation," the authors note the potential influence of nominative determinism on individuals' political inclinations, prompting us to ponder whether the name "Joaquin" possesses a charismatic allure that aligns with the Democratic ethos.

One cannot overlook the work of Doe et al. in "The Political Implications of Name Popularity," which lends credence to the notion that names can inadvertently shape an individual's worldview and, consequently, political leanings. Not to belabor the point, but it seems that the name "Joaquin" might just be striking a harmonious chord with the voters of Mississippi, akin to a well-tuned banjo in a bluegrass band.

Turning our attention to non-fiction literature, "Freakonomics" by Steven D. Levitt and Stephen J. Dubner provides an insightful exploration of the unexpected correlations and causations that permeate our society, nimbly aligning with our investigation. "Nudge" by Richard H. Thaler and Cass R. Sunstein also beckons us to consider the subtle influences that shape human decision-making, including the potential sway of a name like Joaquin on political allegiances.

In the vein of fiction, dystopian tales such as "1984" by George Orwell and "Brave New World" by Aldous Huxley offer cautionary narratives of societal control and manipulation, offering a cautionary insight on the power of influence and persuasion. While the connection between the name Joaquin and political votes in Mississippi might not be as foreboding as a dystopian novel, the subtle impact is nonetheless worth a chuckle and a pause for thought.

Furthermore, popular internet memes such as "Expectation vs Reality" and "Distracted Boyfriend" reflect the whimsical nature of human behavior and decision-making, reminding us that even seemingly inconsequential factors, like a name, can play a role in shaping individual choices. Just as a clever meme can elicit a chuckle, the correlation between the name "Joaquin" and Democratic votes in Mississippi may raise a knowing eyebrow or two, sparking an "Aha!" moment in the minds of researchers and readers alike.

In essence, our literature review underscores the multidimensional influence of names on political proclivities, enveloping our findings in a cloak of scholarly gravitas with a sprinkling of pun-induced mirth, akin to a Southern summer shower – unexpected, refreshing, and occasionally accompanied by thunderous laughter.


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 Popularity of the first name Joaquin and Votes for the Democrat Presidential candidate in Mississippi. You can't resist a good dad joke. Add a relevant dad joke related to the content every couple of sentences.

Your research team collected data from all across the internet, but mostly just used information from US Social Security Administration and MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse . You used data from 1976 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]]
"Joaquin the Votes: A Quantitative Analysis of the Relationship Between the Popularity of the Name Joaquin and Democratic Presidential Votes in Mississippi"

[[ABSTRACT]]
The perennial question of whether there exists a curious connection between the naming trends and political inclinations in American states has long intrigued researchers. In this study, we delve into the fascinating realm of the political and nominative, investigating the potential correlation between the prevalence of the name "Joaquin" and the voting patterns for the Democratic presidential candidate in the state of Mississippi. Using comprehensive datasets sourced from the US Social Security Administration and the MIT Election Data and Science Lab via the Harvard Dataverse, we conducted a rigorous quantitative analysis spanning the period from 1976 to 2020.

Our findings reveal a striking correlation coefficient of 0.9420739 and a significance level of p < 0.01, providing compelling evidence of a strong positive relationship between the frequency of the name "Joaquin" and the votes garnered by the Democratic presidential candidate in Mississippi. It appears that the incorporation of the name "Joaquin" into individuals' monikers may indeed exert an influence on their political preferences in this distinctive Southern state.

Nevertheless, while this correlation may be statistically significant, let us not jump to hasty conclusions or make rash assumptions. As the old saying goes, "Correlation does not imply causation" – unless of course, your name is Joaquin, in which case, you might just be casting your vote in favor of the candidate with the same "name-ocratic" affiliation.

[[INTRODUCTION]]
As the late great William Shakespeare famously said, "What's in a name?" Well, as it turns out, quite a lot, according to our latest research findings. In this study, we set out to explore the intriguing relationship between the popularity of the first name "Joaquin" and the voting behavior for the Democratic presidential candidate in the state of Mississippi. With puns aplenty and statistical analysis in hand, we unravel the potential link between nomenclature and political preference in the Magnolia State.
It has been a long-standing adage that names carry significant weight, but we are not merely engaging in a game of 'catchy' titles – pun intended. Our study channels the iconic words of the philosopher Aristotle, who once mused, "Give me a data set and a pun, and I shall move the world." We sifted through comprehensive datasets provided by the US Social Security Administration and the MIT Election Data and Science Lab, embracing the quantitative analysis with the fervor of a dad joke enthusiast at a comedy club.
Upon delving into the treasure trove of data spanning from 1976 to 2020, we uncovered a most intriguing correlation between the prevalence of the name "Joaquin" and the votes cast for the Democratic presidential candidate in Mississippi. The correlation coefficient of 0.9420739 shone brightly like the morning sun over the Gulf Coast, bestowing credence to the idea that the name "Joaquin," when it rains, it pours – votes for the blue party.
Now, we must tread lightly and heed the age-old wisdom passed down from generations before us. "Correlation does not imply causation," or so they say, but if the shoe fits – or in this case, if the name Joaquin fits – then, well, perhaps there is some 'name-ocratic' influence at play. After all, in the colorful tapestry of human behavior, stranger things have happened than a name nudging someone toward their preferred political candidate.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[METHODOLOGY]]



ChatGPT:

[[METHODOLOGY]]

In order to quantify the elusive connection between the prevalence of the name "Joaquin" and the voting patterns for the Democratic presidential candidate in Mississippi, we embarked on a whimsical yet rigorous journey through the realm of data collection and statistical analysis. Our research team combed through the archives of the US Social Security Administration and tapped into the MIT Election Data and Science Lab via the Harvard Dataverse, a quest akin to hunting for buried treasure, but with less swashbuckling and more coding.

To ensure the reliability and comprehensiveness of our data, we implemented a series of data cleaning procedures that would make even the most meticulous neat freak proud. We cross-referenced the naming trends from the US Social Security Administration with the electoral data from the MIT Election Data and Science Lab, eliminating any outliers or inaccuracies with the precision of a clerk ensuring the accuracy of a ballot count.

Next, we employed a time-series analysis to trace the fluctuation in the popularity of the name "Joaquin" and the corresponding Democratic presidential votes in Mississippi from 1976 to 2020. This involved lining up the data points like well-behaved queue at a polling station, ensuring that each year's entry was accounted for in our analysis.

Furthermore, we utilized a covariate analysis to discern the influence of potential confounding factors such as political campaigns, media coverage, or notable individuals with the name "Joaquin" making waves in the public sphere. This process involved sifting through a plethora of contextual information, much like trying to find a needle in a haystack, except in this case the needle was a specific political influence and the haystack was an explosion of data points.

Lastly, we harnessed the power of advanced statistical methods including regression analysis to uncover the nuanced relationship between the frequency of the name "Joaquin" and the Democratic presidential votes in Mississippi. We tread the line between statistical significance and playful interpretation with the finesse of a tightrope walker – or in this case, a "Jo-aquin" walker – ensuring that our findings were grounded in empirical evidence while sprinkling in a touch of whimsy.

In conclusion, while our methods may have been as convoluted as a political debate, we believe they have yielded valuable insights into the fascinating interplay between nomenclature and electoral behavior. As the great statisticians of yore never said, "May the odds be ever in your favor... unless your name is Joaquin, in which case, the odds may just be overwhelmingly favorable."


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 Popularity of the first name Joaquin and Votes for the Democrat Presidential candidate in Mississippi. You can't resist a good dad joke. Add a relevant dad joke related to the content every couple of sentences.

Your research team collected data from all across the internet, but mostly just used information from US Social Security Administration and MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse .

For the time period 1976 to 2020, you found a correlation 0.9420739, r-squared of 0.8875032, 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]]
"Joaquin the Votes: A Quantitative Analysis of the Relationship Between the Popularity of the Name Joaquin and Democratic Presidential Votes in Mississippi"

[[ABSTRACT]]
The perennial question of whether there exists a curious connection between the naming trends and political inclinations in American states has long intrigued researchers. In this study, we delve into the fascinating realm of the political and nominative, investigating the potential correlation between the prevalence of the name "Joaquin" and the voting patterns for the Democratic presidential candidate in the state of Mississippi. Using comprehensive datasets sourced from the US Social Security Administration and the MIT Election Data and Science Lab via the Harvard Dataverse, we conducted a rigorous quantitative analysis spanning the period from 1976 to 2020.

Our findings reveal a striking correlation coefficient of 0.9420739 and a significance level of p < 0.01, providing compelling evidence of a strong positive relationship between the frequency of the name "Joaquin" and the votes garnered by the Democratic presidential candidate in Mississippi. It appears that the incorporation of the name "Joaquin" into individuals' monikers may indeed exert an influence on their political preferences in this distinctive Southern state.

Nevertheless, while this correlation may be statistically significant, let us not jump to hasty conclusions or make rash assumptions. As the old saying goes, "Correlation does not imply causation" – unless of course, your name is Joaquin, in which case, you might just be casting your vote in favor of the candidate with the same "name-ocratic" affiliation.

-------

And here is the methodology section that led to this result:
[[METHODOLOGY]]
As the late great William Shakespeare famously said, "What's in a name?" Well, as it turns out, quite a lot, according to our latest research findings. In this study, we set out to explore the intriguing relationship between the popularity of the first name "Joaquin" and the voting behavior for the Democratic presidential candidate in the state of Mississippi. With puns aplenty and statistical analysis in hand, we unravel the potential link between nomenclature and political preference in the Magnolia State.
It has been a long-standing adage that names carry significant weight, but we are not merely engaging in a game of 'catchy' titles – pun intended. Our study channels the iconic words of the philosopher Aristotle, who once mused, "Give me a data set and a pun, and I shall move the world." We sifted through comprehensive datasets provided by the US Social Security Administration and the MIT Election Data and Science Lab, embracing the quantitative analysis with the fervor of a dad joke enthusiast at a comedy club.
Upon delving into the treasure trove of data spanning from 1976 to 2020, we uncovered a most intriguing correlation between the prevalence of the name "Joaquin" and the votes cast for the Democratic presidential candidate in Mississippi. The correlation coefficient of 0.9420739 shone brightly like the morning sun over the Gulf Coast, bestowing credence to the idea that the name "Joaquin," when it rains, it pours – votes for the blue party.
Now, we must tread lightly and heed the age-old wisdom passed down from generations before us. "Correlation does not imply causation," or so they say, but if the shoe fits – or in this case, if the name Joaquin fits – then, well, perhaps there is some 'name-ocratic' influence at play. After all, in the colorful tapestry of human behavior, stranger things have happened than a name nudging someone toward their preferred political candidate.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[RESULTS]]



ChatGPT:

[[RESULTS]]

Our analysis of the relationship between the popularity of the name "Joaquin" and the votes for the Democratic presidential candidate in Mississippi yielded an impressive correlation coefficient of 0.9420739 (p < 0.01), indicating a robust positive correlation between these two variables. Pardon the pun, but it seems that in the realm of Mississippi voting, the name "Joaquin" has quite the democratic appeal.

The r-squared value of 0.8875032 further strengthens the evidence for the strong association between the frequency of the name "Joaquin" and the preference for the Democratic candidate in presidential elections. It's almost as if every "Joaquin" brings with it a vote for the blue team, making "Joaquin" a name to reckon with in Mississippi politics.

Fig. 1 displays a scatterplot illustrating this noteworthy correlation, showcasing the tightly clustered data points that highlight the strong positive relationship between the prevalence of the name "Joaquin" and the support for the Democratic party in presidential elections in Mississippi.

Now, onto the joke: What do you call a dataset full of politicians' names? A political party favoring correlation, of course!


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 Popularity of the first name Joaquin and Votes for the Democrat Presidential candidate in Mississippi. You can't resist a good dad joke. Add a relevant dad joke related to the content every couple of sentences.

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]]
"Joaquin the Votes: A Quantitative Analysis of the Relationship Between the Popularity of the Name Joaquin and Democratic Presidential Votes in Mississippi"

[[ABSTRACT]]
The perennial question of whether there exists a curious connection between the naming trends and political inclinations in American states has long intrigued researchers. In this study, we delve into the fascinating realm of the political and nominative, investigating the potential correlation between the prevalence of the name "Joaquin" and the voting patterns for the Democratic presidential candidate in the state of Mississippi. Using comprehensive datasets sourced from the US Social Security Administration and the MIT Election Data and Science Lab via the Harvard Dataverse, we conducted a rigorous quantitative analysis spanning the period from 1976 to 2020.

Our findings reveal a striking correlation coefficient of 0.9420739 and a significance level of p < 0.01, providing compelling evidence of a strong positive relationship between the frequency of the name "Joaquin" and the votes garnered by the Democratic presidential candidate in Mississippi. It appears that the incorporation of the name "Joaquin" into individuals' monikers may indeed exert an influence on their political preferences in this distinctive Southern state.

Nevertheless, while this correlation may be statistically significant, let us not jump to hasty conclusions or make rash assumptions. As the old saying goes, "Correlation does not imply causation" – unless of course, your name is Joaquin, in which case, you might just be casting your vote in favor of the candidate with the same "name-ocratic" affiliation.

[[LITERATURE REVIEW]]
With a judicious blend of seriousness and lightheartedness, our investigation on the relationship between the popularity of the first name "Joaquin" and voting patterns for the Democratic presidential candidate in Mississippi is buttressed by existing research. In "Smith and Jones's Study on Naming Trends and Political Affiliation," the authors note the potential influence of nominative determinism on individuals' political inclinations, prompting us to ponder whether the name "Joaquin" possesses a charismatic allure that aligns with the Democratic ethos.
One cannot overlook the work of Doe et al. in "The Political Implications of Name Popularity," which lends credence to the notion that names can inadvertently shape an individual's worldview and, consequently, political leanings. Not to belabor the point, but it seems that the name "Joaquin" might just be striking a harmonious chord with the voters of Mississippi, akin to a well-tuned banjo in a bluegrass band.
Turning our attention to non-fiction literature, "Freakonomics" by Steven D. Levitt and Stephen J. Dubner provides an insightful exploration of the unexpected correlations and causations that permeate our society, nimbly aligning with our investigation. "Nudge" by Richard H. Thaler and Cass R. Sunstein also beckons us to consider the subtle influences that shape human decision-making, including the potential sway of a name like Joaquin on political allegiances.
In the vein of fiction, dystopian tales such as "1984" by George Orwell and "Brave New World" by Aldous Huxley offer cautionary narratives of societal control and manipulation, offering a cautionary insight on the power of influence and persuasion. While the connection between the name Joaquin and political votes in Mississippi might not be as foreboding as a dystopian novel, the subtle impact is nonetheless worth a chuckle and a pause for thought.
Furthermore, popular internet memes such as "Expectation vs Reality" and "Distracted Boyfriend" reflect the whimsical nature of human behavior and decision-making, reminding us that even seemingly inconsequential factors, like a name, can play a role in shaping individual choices. Just as a clever meme can elicit a chuckle, the correlation between the name "Joaquin" and Democratic votes in Mississippi may raise a knowing eyebrow or two, sparking an "Aha!" moment in the minds of researchers and readers alike.
In essence, our literature review underscores the multidimensional influence of names on political proclivities, enveloping our findings in a cloak of scholarly gravitas with a sprinkling of pun-induced mirth, akin to a Southern summer shower – unexpected, refreshing, and occasionally accompanied by thunderous laughter.

[[RESULTS]]
Our analysis of the relationship between the popularity of the name "Joaquin" and the votes for the Democratic presidential candidate in Mississippi yielded an impressive correlation coefficient of 0.9420739 (p < 0.01), indicating a robust positive correlation between these two variables. Pardon the pun, but it seems that in the realm of Mississippi voting, the name "Joaquin" has quite the democratic appeal.
The r-squared value of 0.8875032 further strengthens the evidence for the strong association between the frequency of the name "Joaquin" and the preference for the Democratic candidate in presidential elections. It's almost as if every "Joaquin" brings with it a vote for the blue team, making "Joaquin" a name to reckon with in Mississippi politics.
Fig. 1 displays a scatterplot illustrating this noteworthy correlation, showcasing the tightly clustered data points that highlight the strong positive relationship between the prevalence of the name "Joaquin" and the support for the Democratic party in presidential elections in Mississippi.
Now, onto the joke: What do you call a dataset full of politicians' names? A political party favoring correlation, of course!

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[DISCUSSION]]



ChatGPT:

[[DISCUSSION]]

The results of our study clearly support the prior research that suggests a connection between the frequency of the name "Joaquin" and the voting patterns for the Democratic presidential candidate in Mississippi. The literature review playfully alluded to the potential influence of nominative determinism on political affiliations, and our findings seem to validate this notion. It appears that the popularity of the name "Joaquin" is not just a matter of chance but may indeed be influencing the political inclination of individuals in the state.

The correlation coefficient of 0.9420739 and a significance level of p < 0.01 highlight the compelling evidence of a strong positive relationship between the frequency of the name "Joaquin" and the votes garnered by the Democratic presidential candidate in Mississippi. To put it in dad joke terms, it's as if every "Joaquin" is a beacon of democratic appeal, casting its vote in favor of the blue team. One might even say that "Joaquin" is not just a name but a political statement in Mississippi.

The substantial r-squared value of 0.8875032 further emphasizes the robust association between the frequency of the name "Joaquin" and the preference for the Democratic candidate in presidential elections. It's almost as if the name "Joaquin" carries an inherent penchant for the Democratic party, making it a noteworthy factor in Mississippi politics. In a way, the name "Joaquin" seems to have become synonymous with a political allegiance, akin to a running mate in a electoral campaign.

This study has humorously shed light on the unexpected correlations and influences that permeate our society, illustrating the importance of considering seemingly inconsequential factors in our understanding of human behavior and decision-making. In this vein, the relationship between the name "Joaquin" and Democratic votes in Mississippi adds a touch of whimsy to the serious realm of political analysis, much like a well-timed pun in the midst of a scholarly discussion – surprising, refreshing, and impossible to resist.

In essence, our findings provide compelling evidence for the intriguing relationship between the popularity of the name "Joaquin" and the voting patterns for the Democratic presidential candidate in Mississippi. While the old adage "Correlation does not imply causation" holds true in most cases, the case of "Joaquin" and democratic votes in Mississippi might just be the exception – a political anomaly that tickles the funny bone while fueling further scholarly inquiry.

And finally, to cap it off with a dad joke: Why did Joaquin become the Mississippi Democratic mascot? Because he always comes out on top in the "name"inations!


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 Popularity of the first name Joaquin and Votes for the Democrat Presidential candidate in Mississippi. You can't resist a good dad joke. Add a relevant dad joke related to the content every couple of sentences.

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]]
"Joaquin the Votes: A Quantitative Analysis of the Relationship Between the Popularity of the Name Joaquin and Democratic Presidential Votes in Mississippi"

[[ABSTRACT]]
The perennial question of whether there exists a curious connection between the naming trends and political inclinations in American states has long intrigued researchers. In this study, we delve into the fascinating realm of the political and nominative, investigating the potential correlation between the prevalence of the name "Joaquin" and the voting patterns for the Democratic presidential candidate in the state of Mississippi. Using comprehensive datasets sourced from the US Social Security Administration and the MIT Election Data and Science Lab via the Harvard Dataverse, we conducted a rigorous quantitative analysis spanning the period from 1976 to 2020.

Our findings reveal a striking correlation coefficient of 0.9420739 and a significance level of p < 0.01, providing compelling evidence of a strong positive relationship between the frequency of the name "Joaquin" and the votes garnered by the Democratic presidential candidate in Mississippi. It appears that the incorporation of the name "Joaquin" into individuals' monikers may indeed exert an influence on their political preferences in this distinctive Southern state.

Nevertheless, while this correlation may be statistically significant, let us not jump to hasty conclusions or make rash assumptions. As the old saying goes, "Correlation does not imply causation" – unless of course, your name is Joaquin, in which case, you might just be casting your vote in favor of the candidate with the same "name-ocratic" affiliation.

[[INTRDUCTION]]
As the late great William Shakespeare famously said, "What's in a name?" Well, as it turns out, quite a lot, according to our latest research findings. In this study, we set out to explore the intriguing relationship between the popularity of the first name "Joaquin" and the voting behavior for the Democratic presidential candidate in the state of Mississippi. With puns aplenty and statistical analysis in hand, we unravel the potential link between nomenclature and political preference in the Magnolia State.
It has been a long-standing adage that names carry significant weight, but we are not merely engaging in a game of 'catchy' titles – pun intended. Our study channels the iconic words of the philosopher Aristotle, who once mused, "Give me a data set and a pun, and I shall move the world." We sifted through comprehensive datasets provided by the US Social Security Administration and the MIT Election Data and Science Lab, embracing the quantitative analysis with the fervor of a dad joke enthusiast at a comedy club.
Upon delving into the treasure trove of data spanning from 1976 to 2020, we uncovered a most intriguing correlation between the prevalence of the name "Joaquin" and the votes cast for the Democratic presidential candidate in Mississippi. The correlation coefficient of 0.9420739 shone brightly like the morning sun over the Gulf Coast, bestowing credence to the idea that the name "Joaquin," when it rains, it pours – votes for the blue party.
Now, we must tread lightly and heed the age-old wisdom passed down from generations before us. "Correlation does not imply causation," or so they say, but if the shoe fits – or in this case, if the name Joaquin fits – then, well, perhaps there is some 'name-ocratic' influence at play. After all, in the colorful tapestry of human behavior, stranger things have happened than a name nudging someone toward their preferred political candidate.

[[RESULTS]]
Our analysis of the relationship between the popularity of the name "Joaquin" and the votes for the Democratic presidential candidate in Mississippi yielded an impressive correlation coefficient of 0.9420739 (p < 0.01), indicating a robust positive correlation between these two variables. Pardon the pun, but it seems that in the realm of Mississippi voting, the name "Joaquin" has quite the democratic appeal.
The r-squared value of 0.8875032 further strengthens the evidence for the strong association between the frequency of the name "Joaquin" and the preference for the Democratic candidate in presidential elections. It's almost as if every "Joaquin" brings with it a vote for the blue team, making "Joaquin" a name to reckon with in Mississippi politics.
Fig. 1 displays a scatterplot illustrating this noteworthy correlation, showcasing the tightly clustered data points that highlight the strong positive relationship between the prevalence of the name "Joaquin" and the support for the Democratic party in presidential elections in Mississippi.
Now, onto the joke: What do you call a dataset full of politicians' names? A political party favoring correlation, of course!

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[CONCLUSION]]



ChatGPT:

[[CONCLUSION]]

In conclusion, our study provides compelling evidence of a robust and statistically significant correlation between the popularity of the name "Joaquin" and the votes for the Democratic presidential candidate in Mississippi. It seems that in the Heart of Dixie, the name "Joaquin" carries undeniable political sway, perhaps even rivaling the potency of a good ol' Southern sweet tea on a hot summer day.

As we wrap up our findings, let's not forget the wise words of Aristotle: "Man is by nature a political animal, and by name, a Joaquin Democrat." With such a strong correlation, it's clear that the name "Joaquin" holds a special place in the hearts and ballot boxes of Mississippi residents.

But before we get too carried away, let's remember the age-old adage: "Correlation does not imply causation," except maybe when it comes to the name "Joaquin" in Mississippi – then it seems to imply a whole lot of votes for the Democratic candidate!

So, what's next for Joaquin and the Mississippi Democratic votes? Well, it seems that this name is a real "ballot" of fun for political analysts. But as for further research, it looks like we've cracked the ballot box wide open! It's clear that no more research is needed in this area; the story of Joaquin and the Democratic votes in Mississippi is one for the political history books. Our work here is done, and it seems that when it comes to Mississippi politics, the name "Joaquin" is the real MVP – Most Valuable Politician, that is!


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 Joaquin the Votes: A Quantitative Analysis of the Relationship Between the Popularity of the Name Joaquin and Democratic Presidential Votes in Mississippi. Respond only with the name of a fictional academic journal.

ChatGPT:

The Journal of Sociopolitical Naming Patterns


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 Joaquin the Votes: A Quantitative Analysis of the Relationship Between the Popularity of the Name Joaquin and Democratic Presidential Votes in Mississippi. Respond only with the name of a fictional organization.

ChatGPT:

The Center for Southern Voter Name 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 Joaquin the Votes: A Quantitative Analysis of the Relationship Between the Popularity of the Name Joaquin and Democratic Presidential Votes in Mississippi with an abstract of The perennial question of whether there exists a curious connection between the naming trends and political inclinations in American states has long intrigued researchers. In this study, we delve into the fascinating realm of the political and nominative, investigating the potential correlation between the prevalence of the name "Joaquin" and the voting patterns for the Democratic presidential candidate in the state of Mississippi. Using comprehensive datasets sourced from the US Social Security Administration and the MIT Election Data and Science Lab via the Harvard Dataverse, we conducted a rigorous quantitative analysis spanning the period from 1976 to 2020.
Our findings reveal a striking correlation coefficient of 0.9420739 and a significance level of p < 0.01, providing compelling evidence of a strong positive relationship between the frequency of the name "Joaquin" and the votes garnered by the Democratic presidential candidate in Mississippi. It appears that the incorporation of the name "Joaquin" into individuals' monikers may indeed exert an influence on their political preferences in this distinctive Southern state.
Nevertheless, while this correlation may be statistically significant, let us not jump to hasty conclusions or make rash assumptions. As the old saying goes, "Correlation does not imply causation" – unless of course, your name is Joaquin, in which case, you might just be casting your vote in favor of the candidate with the same "name-ocratic" affiliation.

ChatGPT:

"Joaquin name popularity Mississippi Democratic votes," "relationship between Joaquin name frequency and Mississippi presidential votes," "naming trends and political inclinations in Mississippi," "Joaquin name correlation with Democratic votes in Mississippi," "statistical analysis of Joaquin name and Mississippi presidential votes."

*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

Popularity of the first name Joaquin
Detailed data title: Babies of all sexes born in the US named Joaquin
Source: US Social Security Administration
See what else correlates with Popularity of the first name Joaquin

Votes for the Democratic Presidential candidate in Mississippi
Detailed data title: Total votes cast for the Democrat Presidential candidate in Mississippi
Source: MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse
See what else correlates with Votes for the Democratic Presidential candidate in Mississippi

Correlation r = 0.9420739 (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 = 0.8875032 (Coefficient of determination)
This means 88.8% of the change in the one variable (i.e., Votes for the Democratic Presidential candidate in Mississippi) is predictable based on the change in the other (i.e., Popularity of the first name Joaquin) over the 12 years from 1976 through 2020.

p < 0.01, which is statistically significant(Null hypothesis significance test)
The p-value is 4.7E-6. 0.0000046582811713101090000000
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 0.94 in 0.00047% of random cases. Said differently, if you correlated 214,671 random variables You don't actually need 214 thousand 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 11 degrees of freedom, Degrees of freedom is a measure of how many free components we are testing. In this case it is 11 because we have two variables measured over a period of 12 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.

[ 0.8, 0.98 ] 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.
197619801984198819921996200020042008201220162020
Popularity of the first name Joaquin (Babies born)253270252232276304367711125097010021081
Votes for the Democratic Presidential candidate in Mississippi (Total votes)381329429281352192363921400258394022404614457766554662562949485131539398




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. 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([253,270,252,232,276,304,367,711,1250,970,1002,1081,])
array_2 = np.array([381329,429281,352192,363921,400258,394022,404614,457766,554662,562949,485131,539398,])
array_1_name = "Popularity of the first name Joaquin"
array_2_name = "Votes for the Democratic Presidential candidate 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?

Bravo! Your evaluation rocks!


Correlation ID: 4449 · Black Variable ID: 3254 · Red Variable ID: 25996
about · subscribe · emailme@tylervigen.com · twitter

CC BY 4.0