about · email me · subscribe
Spurious correlation #4,451 · View random

A linear line chart with years as the X-axis and two variables on the Y-axis. The first variable is Votes for Republican Senators in Vermont and the second variable is The number of psychiatrists in Vermont.  The chart goes from 2003 to 2018, and the two variables track closely in value over that time. Small Image
Download png
, svg

AI explanation

As Republican votes for Senators in Vermont increase, their opposing viewpoints create more intense political debates. This leads to a surge in demand for psychiatrists as Vermonters struggle to cope with the heightened political tensions. Plus, all the head-scratching and eye-rolling during political discussions is inadvertently creating a booming market for therapy sessions.

Model: dalle-3
Prompt: [A photo-realistic image] In a bustling town hall in Vermont, a heated political debate is underway as Republican votes for Senators in Vermont steadily increase. People are engaged in passionate discussions, gesturing emphatically, and engaging in intense debates. Meanwhile, a line of people waits outside the office of the local psychiatrists, seeking help to navigate the escalating political tensions. The colorful signs advertising therapy services are being put out as the demand for mental health support surges due to the fervent political discussions happening inside the town hall. Enhanced Visual Prompt: Generate an image with a focus on the crowded town hall in Vermont, capturing the building's vibrant exterior. Show people engaged in intense debates through their expressive gestures and stern facial expressions as they rally for Republican votes. At the same time, depict the line of individuals waiting for mental health support outside the psychiatrist's office, emphasizing the increasing demand for therapy services amid the fervent political discussions. Ensure that the scene encapsulates the energy and tension of the conflicting viewpoints while also conveying the need for emotional support. 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: Republican votes for Senators in Vermont and The number of psychiatrists in Vermont. 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: An image that looks like it is a scene from a Pixar movie A photo-realistic image Futuristic Symbolism Parallax art
ChatGPT: A photo-realistic image

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 Republican votes for Senators in Vermont and The number of psychiatrists in Vermont, in the following situation: As Republican votes for Senators in Vermont increase, their opposing viewpoints create more intense political debates. This leads to a surge in demand for psychiatrists as Vermonters struggle to cope with the heightened political tensions. Plus, all the head-scratching and eye-rolling during political discussions is inadvertently creating a booming market for therapy sessions.. Keep the description simple.
ChatGPT: In a bustling town hall in Vermont, a heated political debate is underway as Republican votes for Senators in Vermont steadily increase. People are engaged in passionate discussions, gesturing emphatically and engaging in intense debates. Meanwhile, a line of people waits outside the office of the local psychiatrists, seeking help to navigate the escalating political tensions. The colorful signs advertising therapy services are being put out as the demand for mental health support surges due to the fervent political discussions happening inside the town hall.

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 photo-realistic image ] and depicting this scene: In a bustling town hall in Vermont, a heated political debate is underway as Republican votes for Senators in Vermont steadily increase. People are engaged in passionate discussions, gesturing emphatically and engaging in intense debates. Meanwhile, a line of people waits outside the office of the local psychiatrists, seeking help to navigate the escalating political tensions. The colorful signs advertising therapy services are being put out as the demand for mental health support surges due to the fervent political discussions happening inside the town hall. Keep the visual depiction simple. Do not include any words or speech bubbles.
ChatGPT: [A photo-realistic image] In a bustling town hall in Vermont, a heated political debate is underway as Republican votes for Senators in Vermont steadily increase. People are engaged in passionate discussions, gesturing emphatically, and engaging in intense debates. Meanwhile, a line of people waits outside the office of the local psychiatrists, seeking help to navigate the escalating political tensions. The colorful signs advertising therapy services are being put out as the demand for mental health support surges due to the fervent political discussions happening inside the town hall. Enhanced Visual Prompt: Generate an image with a focus on the crowded town hall in Vermont, capturing the building's vibrant exterior. Show people engaged in intense debates through their expressive gestures and stern facial expressions as they rally for Republican votes. At the same time, depict the line of individuals waiting for mental health support outside the psychiatrist's office, emphasizing the increasing demand for therapy services amid the fervent political discussions. Ensure that the scene encapsulates the energy and tension of the conflicting viewpoints while also conveying the need for emotional support.

*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 Republican votes for Senators in Vermont positively influenced The number of psychiatrists in Vermont.

AI academic paper

(Because p < 0.05)
The Elephant in the Therapy Room: An Analysis of the Correlation between Republican Votes for Senators and the Number of Psychiatrists in Vermont

The Journal of Political Psychiatry

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 Republican votes for Senators in Vermont and The number of psychiatrists in Vermont. Make lots of jokes, goofy observations, and puns.

Make the title a clever pun.

Your research team used data from MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse and Bureau of Larbor Statistics to assess this nagging question. You found a correlation coefficient of 0.9154638 and p < 0.05 for 2003 to 2018.

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

[[TITLE]]
Lorem ipsum dolor sit

[[ABSTRACT]]
Lorem ipsum dolor sit



ChatGPT:
[[TITLE]]
The Elephant in the Therapy Room: An Analysis of the Correlation between Republican Votes for Senators and the Number of Psychiatrists in Vermont

[[ABSTRACT]]
This paper delves into the curious relationship between political leanings and psychological well-being in the picturesque state of Vermont. Through meticulous data analysis spanning from 2003 to 2018, we've unveiled a surprising connection between the number of psychiatrists practicing in Vermont and the inclination of voters to support Republican senators. With a correlation coefficient of 0.9154638 and a p-value of less than 0.05, the evidence suggests that there might be more than just maple syrup brewing in the Green Mountain State.

By scrutinizing data from the MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, and Bureau of Labor Statistics, our research team has illuminated the statistical interplay that challenges conventional wisdom. Challenging the stereotype that Vermonters are all about peace, love, and Bernie Sanders, our findings add a fascinating layer to the state's political landscape. So, next time you're in Vermont, keep an eye out for those elephants in the therapy room and consider the political psychiatry of this intriguing correlation.


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 Republican votes for Senators in Vermont and The number of psychiatrists in Vermont. Make lots of jokes, goofy observations, and puns. Stay serious and dry most of the time, but then occasionally let your wit shine through.

Here is the title and abstract of the paper:
[[TITLE]]
The Elephant in the Therapy Room: An Analysis of the Correlation between Republican Votes for Senators and the Number of Psychiatrists in Vermont

[[ABSTRACT]]
This paper delves into the curious relationship between political leanings and psychological well-being in the picturesque state of Vermont. Through meticulous data analysis spanning from 2003 to 2018, we've unveiled a surprising connection between the number of psychiatrists practicing in Vermont and the inclination of voters to support Republican senators. With a correlation coefficient of 0.9154638 and a p-value of less than 0.05, the evidence suggests that there might be more than just maple syrup brewing in the Green Mountain State.

By scrutinizing data from the MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, and Bureau of Labor Statistics, our research team has illuminated the statistical interplay that challenges conventional wisdom. Challenging the stereotype that Vermonters are all about peace, love, and Bernie Sanders, our findings add a fascinating layer to the state's political landscape. So, next time you're in Vermont, keep an eye out for those elephants in the therapy room and consider the political psychiatry of this intriguing correlation.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[INTRODUCTION]]



ChatGPT:
[[INTRODUCTION]]

As the saying goes, "As Vermont goes, so goes the nation," but could this extend to the therapy room? The quaint and scenic state of Vermont, known for its rolling green hills, fluffy cows, and Ben & Jerry’s ice cream, is also home to some rather intriguing political and psychological dynamics. In particular, the relationship between the number of psychiatrists practicing in Vermont and the voting patterns for Republican senators has raised eyebrows and piqued the interest of researchers and political pundits alike.

While Vermont is renowned for its liberal leanings and its status as the first state to abolish slavery, it also boasts a growing number of psychiatric practitioners. This begs the question: is there a correlation between the political landscape and the demand for mental healthcare in the state? To uncover the mysteries behind this unlikely pairing, our research team took a deep dive into a sea of electoral and psychiatric data, armed with statistical tools and a healthy dose of skepticism.

It’s no secret that Vermonters take their politics seriously, but our analysis suggests that there may be more than just maple syrup stirring the pot. This study introduces a fresh perspective on the state's political landscape and delves into the psychological implications of electoral choices. As we embark on this academic journey, we invite you to join us in uncovering the unexpected relationship between the elephants in the therapy room and the ballot boxes of Vermont. So, buckle up and prepare for a ride through the charmingly quirky world of political psychiatry in the Green Mountain State.


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 Republican votes for Senators in Vermont and The number of psychiatrists in Vermont. Make lots of jokes, goofy observations, and puns.

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

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

Start by naming serious-sounding studies by authors like Smith, Doe, and Jones - but then quickly devolve. Name some real non-fiction books that would be related to the topic. Then name some real fiction books that sound like they could be related. Then name some movies that you watched that are tangentially related to the topic.

Here is the title and abstract of the paper:
[[TITLE]]
The Elephant in the Therapy Room: An Analysis of the Correlation between Republican Votes for Senators and the Number of Psychiatrists in Vermont

[[ABSTRACT]]
This paper delves into the curious relationship between political leanings and psychological well-being in the picturesque state of Vermont. Through meticulous data analysis spanning from 2003 to 2018, we've unveiled a surprising connection between the number of psychiatrists practicing in Vermont and the inclination of voters to support Republican senators. With a correlation coefficient of 0.9154638 and a p-value of less than 0.05, the evidence suggests that there might be more than just maple syrup brewing in the Green Mountain State.

By scrutinizing data from the MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, and Bureau of Labor Statistics, our research team has illuminated the statistical interplay that challenges conventional wisdom. Challenging the stereotype that Vermonters are all about peace, love, and Bernie Sanders, our findings add a fascinating layer to the state's political landscape. So, next time you're in Vermont, keep an eye out for those elephants in the therapy room and consider the political psychiatry of this intriguing correlation.

-------

And here is the introduction section that led to this literature review:
[[INTRODUCTION]]
As the saying goes, "As Vermont goes, so goes the nation," but could this extend to the therapy room? The quaint and scenic state of Vermont, known for its rolling green hills, fluffy cows, and Ben & Jerry’s ice cream, is also home to some rather intriguing political and psychological dynamics. In particular, the relationship between the number of psychiatrists practicing in Vermont and the voting patterns for Republican senators has raised eyebrows and piqued the interest of researchers and political pundits alike.
While Vermont is renowned for its liberal leanings and its status as the first state to abolish slavery, it also boasts a growing number of psychiatric practitioners. This begs the question: is there a correlation between the political landscape and the demand for mental healthcare in the state? To uncover the mysteries behind this unlikely pairing, our research team took a deep dive into a sea of electoral and psychiatric data, armed with statistical tools and a healthy dose of skepticism.
It’s no secret that Vermonters take their politics seriously, but our analysis suggests that there may be more than just maple syrup stirring the pot. This study introduces a fresh perspective on the state's political landscape and delves into the psychological implications of electoral choices. As we embark on this academic journey, we invite you to join us in uncovering the unexpected relationship between the elephants in the therapy room and the ballot boxes of Vermont. So, buckle up and prepare for a ride through the charmingly quirky world of political psychiatry in the Green Mountain State.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[LITERATURE REVIEW]]



ChatGPT:
[[LITERATURE REVIEW]]

The correlation between political affiliations and mental health has long been an area of interest for researchers, with studies by Smith et al. and Doe et al. shedding light on the complex interplay between ideology and psychological well-being. However, our investigation takes a turn down a charming dirt road, leading us to examine the curious case of Vermont, where the connection between Republican votes for senators and the number of psychiatrists practicing in the state raises more eyebrows than a surprise visit from Bigfoot during a maple syrup tapping festival.

In "Mind Matters: The Intersection of Politics and Psychology," the authors expound on the psychological underpinnings of political beliefs, but little did they suspect the quirkiness awaiting them in the tranquil hills of Vermont. Closely related to our inquiry is the work by Jones, who in "The Political Brain: A Hidden Marvel or a Dysfunction Junction?" delves into the intricacies of political decision-making and its psychological roots, unknowingly paving the way for our troupe of psychological sleuths to uncover the unexpected GOP-psychiatry nexus in the land of Bernie Sanders and farm-to-table marmalade.

Turning to non-fiction books that might be tangentially related, we find "The Republican Brain: The Science of Why They Deny Science – and Reality" by Chris Mooney and "Crazy Like Us: The Globalization of the American Psyche" by Ethan Watters, both offering intriguing insights into the intersection of politics and mental health, albeit without the specific quirkiness of Vermont thrown into the mix.

On a more whimsical note, the fictional universe provides us with "The Curious Incident of the Elephant in the Republican Meeting" by Mark Haddon and "One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest of Elephants" by Ken Kesey, offering a light-hearted glimpse into the potential hijinks and shenanigans that might occur in the therapy rooms of politically-charged Vermont.

Additionally, in the realm of cinema, movies such as "Election" and "Silver Linings Playbook" provide nuanced explorations of political fervor and mental well-being, providing valuable context for the peculiar dance between psychiatrists and Republican senatorial votes in the tranquil hills of Vermont.

So, as we journey through academic enclosures and popular marvels, we find ourselves teetering on the precipice of peculiarity, ready to unravel the enigma of elephants in the therapy room and the political memes that lurk behind the lush green veneer of Vermont.


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 Republican votes for Senators in Vermont and The number of psychiatrists in Vermont. Make lots of jokes, goofy observations, and puns. Stay serious and dry most of the time, but then occasionally let your wit shine through.

Your research team collected data from all across the internet, but mostly just used information from MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse and Bureau of Larbor Statistics . You used data from 2003 to 2018

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

Here is the title, abstract, and introduction of the paper:
[[TITLE]]
The Elephant in the Therapy Room: An Analysis of the Correlation between Republican Votes for Senators and the Number of Psychiatrists in Vermont

[[ABSTRACT]]
This paper delves into the curious relationship between political leanings and psychological well-being in the picturesque state of Vermont. Through meticulous data analysis spanning from 2003 to 2018, we've unveiled a surprising connection between the number of psychiatrists practicing in Vermont and the inclination of voters to support Republican senators. With a correlation coefficient of 0.9154638 and a p-value of less than 0.05, the evidence suggests that there might be more than just maple syrup brewing in the Green Mountain State.

By scrutinizing data from the MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, and Bureau of Labor Statistics, our research team has illuminated the statistical interplay that challenges conventional wisdom. Challenging the stereotype that Vermonters are all about peace, love, and Bernie Sanders, our findings add a fascinating layer to the state's political landscape. So, next time you're in Vermont, keep an eye out for those elephants in the therapy room and consider the political psychiatry of this intriguing correlation.

[[INTRODUCTION]]
As the saying goes, "As Vermont goes, so goes the nation," but could this extend to the therapy room? The quaint and scenic state of Vermont, known for its rolling green hills, fluffy cows, and Ben & Jerry’s ice cream, is also home to some rather intriguing political and psychological dynamics. In particular, the relationship between the number of psychiatrists practicing in Vermont and the voting patterns for Republican senators has raised eyebrows and piqued the interest of researchers and political pundits alike.
While Vermont is renowned for its liberal leanings and its status as the first state to abolish slavery, it also boasts a growing number of psychiatric practitioners. This begs the question: is there a correlation between the political landscape and the demand for mental healthcare in the state? To uncover the mysteries behind this unlikely pairing, our research team took a deep dive into a sea of electoral and psychiatric data, armed with statistical tools and a healthy dose of skepticism.
It’s no secret that Vermonters take their politics seriously, but our analysis suggests that there may be more than just maple syrup stirring the pot. This study introduces a fresh perspective on the state's political landscape and delves into the psychological implications of electoral choices. As we embark on this academic journey, we invite you to join us in uncovering the unexpected relationship between the elephants in the therapy room and the ballot boxes of Vermont. So, buckle up and prepare for a ride through the charmingly quirky world of political psychiatry in the Green Mountain State.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[METHODOLOGY]]



ChatGPT:

[[METHODOLOGY]]

Our research employed a blend of quantitative analysis, statistical modeling, and a hint of whimsy to untangle the intriguing correlation between Republican votes for senators and the number of psychiatrists in Vermont. We gathered data from various reputable sources, including the MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, and the Bureau of Labor Statistics, covering the time span from 2003 to 2018. Additionally, we utilized data purification techniques, which involved the careful selection of data points and the removal of any statistical outliers that may have been sneaking around like pesky raccoons in a garbage can.

To determine the number of psychiatrists in Vermont, we utilized information from the Bureau of Labor Statistics, cross-referenced with state licensing boards and professional societies to ensure the accuracy of our data. We then compared this data to the election results for Republican senators, examining precinct-level voting data to capture the nuanced political landscape of Vermont. It was quite the statistical tango, similar to attempting to pair a perfect wine with a particularly complex cheese.

Our analysis involved the use of robust statistical techniques, including least squares regression and correlation analysis, to scrutinize the relationship between these seemingly disparate variables. We also performed a time series analysis to ensure the temporal dynamics were not lost amidst the statistical dance. Furthermore, we conducted sensitivity analyses to test the robustness of our findings, akin to ensuring a solid foundation before constructing a particularly whimsical house of cards.

To verify the robustness of our results, we employed bootstrapping techniques, which involved repeatedly sampling the data to assess the stability of the correlation coefficient and its associated confidence intervals. Think of it as shaking a magic 8-ball to confirm our suspicions but with much more sophisticated mathematics involved.

Finally, we employed geographic information system (GIS) mapping to visualize the spatial distribution of both psychiatric practitioners and Republican voter support, painting a vivid picture of this unlikely union. It was like creating a colorful and whimsical mosaic from seemingly unconnected puzzle pieces, revealing unexpected patterns in the process.

In essence, our methodology stands as a testament to the meticulous and, at times, unorthodox approach we took to unravel the mysterious relationship between political inclinations and the need for therapeutic interventions in the lovely state of Vermont.

-------
I hope this is to your liking!


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 Republican votes for Senators in Vermont and The number of psychiatrists in Vermont. Make lots of jokes, goofy observations, and puns. Stay serious and dry most of the time, but then occasionally let your wit shine through.

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

For the time period 2003 to 2018, you found a correlation 0.9154638, r-squared of 0.8380739, and p < 0.05.

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

Here is the title and abstract of the paper:
[[TITLE]]
The Elephant in the Therapy Room: An Analysis of the Correlation between Republican Votes for Senators and the Number of Psychiatrists in Vermont

[[ABSTRACT]]
This paper delves into the curious relationship between political leanings and psychological well-being in the picturesque state of Vermont. Through meticulous data analysis spanning from 2003 to 2018, we've unveiled a surprising connection between the number of psychiatrists practicing in Vermont and the inclination of voters to support Republican senators. With a correlation coefficient of 0.9154638 and a p-value of less than 0.05, the evidence suggests that there might be more than just maple syrup brewing in the Green Mountain State.

By scrutinizing data from the MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, and Bureau of Labor Statistics, our research team has illuminated the statistical interplay that challenges conventional wisdom. Challenging the stereotype that Vermonters are all about peace, love, and Bernie Sanders, our findings add a fascinating layer to the state's political landscape. So, next time you're in Vermont, keep an eye out for those elephants in the therapy room and consider the political psychiatry of this intriguing correlation.

-------

And here is the methodology section that led to this result:
[[METHODOLOGY]]
As the saying goes, "As Vermont goes, so goes the nation," but could this extend to the therapy room? The quaint and scenic state of Vermont, known for its rolling green hills, fluffy cows, and Ben & Jerry’s ice cream, is also home to some rather intriguing political and psychological dynamics. In particular, the relationship between the number of psychiatrists practicing in Vermont and the voting patterns for Republican senators has raised eyebrows and piqued the interest of researchers and political pundits alike.
While Vermont is renowned for its liberal leanings and its status as the first state to abolish slavery, it also boasts a growing number of psychiatric practitioners. This begs the question: is there a correlation between the political landscape and the demand for mental healthcare in the state? To uncover the mysteries behind this unlikely pairing, our research team took a deep dive into a sea of electoral and psychiatric data, armed with statistical tools and a healthy dose of skepticism.
It’s no secret that Vermonters take their politics seriously, but our analysis suggests that there may be more than just maple syrup stirring the pot. This study introduces a fresh perspective on the state's political landscape and delves into the psychological implications of electoral choices. As we embark on this academic journey, we invite you to join us in uncovering the unexpected relationship between the elephants in the therapy room and the ballot boxes of Vermont. So, buckle up and prepare for a ride through the charmingly quirky world of political psychiatry in the Green Mountain State.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[RESULTS]]



ChatGPT:

[[RESULTS]]

Our findings reveal a striking correlation between the number of psychiatrists in Vermont and Republican support for senators. The correlation coefficient of 0.9154638 suggests a remarkably strong relationship between these seemingly disparate variables. In other words, as the number of psychiatrists increases, so does the tendency for Vermonters to cast their votes in favor of Republican senators.

The scatterplot in Fig. 1 vividly illustrates this association, leaving no room for doubt. It’s fascinating to see how the political landscape and the demand for mental healthcare seem to be dancing a tango in the Green Mountain State.

The r-squared value of 0.8380739 further confirms the robustness of this correlation. This indicates that approximately 83.8% of the variation in the support for Republican senators can be explained by the number of psychiatrists practicing in Vermont. It seems the elephants in the therapy room are raising their trunks and making their presence known in the political arena.

With a p-value of less than 0.05, our results are statistically significant and suggest that this relationship is not a mere coincidental occurrence. This begs the question: does political affiliation play a role in mental healthcare preferences, or are Vermont’s psychiatrists simply drawn to Republican voters like moths to a flame?

While our study cannot establish causation, the strength of the correlation brings forth intriguing possibilities. It’s no longer simply about red versus blue; there seems to be a shade of psychological nuance in the political hues of Vermont.

As we unravel this unprecedented connection between elephants and the political circus, it’s clear that Vermont holds more surprises than just breathtaking foliage and delicious maple syrup. The therapy room may be the new stage for political analysis, and the results of this study provide a compelling invitation for further exploration into the complex interplay of politics and mental healthcare in Vermont. So, next time you're in Vermont, keep an eye out for those elephants in the therapy room and consider the political psychiatry of this intriguing correlation.


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 Republican votes for Senators in Vermont and The number of psychiatrists in Vermont. Make lots of jokes, goofy observations, and puns. Stay serious and dry most of the time, but then occasionally let your wit shine through.

Limit your response to 500 tokens.

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

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

[[TITLE]]
The Elephant in the Therapy Room: An Analysis of the Correlation between Republican Votes for Senators and the Number of Psychiatrists in Vermont

[[ABSTRACT]]
This paper delves into the curious relationship between political leanings and psychological well-being in the picturesque state of Vermont. Through meticulous data analysis spanning from 2003 to 2018, we've unveiled a surprising connection between the number of psychiatrists practicing in Vermont and the inclination of voters to support Republican senators. With a correlation coefficient of 0.9154638 and a p-value of less than 0.05, the evidence suggests that there might be more than just maple syrup brewing in the Green Mountain State.

By scrutinizing data from the MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, and Bureau of Labor Statistics, our research team has illuminated the statistical interplay that challenges conventional wisdom. Challenging the stereotype that Vermonters are all about peace, love, and Bernie Sanders, our findings add a fascinating layer to the state's political landscape. So, next time you're in Vermont, keep an eye out for those elephants in the therapy room and consider the political psychiatry of this intriguing correlation.

[[LITERATURE REVIEW]]
The correlation between political affiliations and mental health has long been an area of interest for researchers, with studies by Smith et al. and Doe et al. shedding light on the complex interplay between ideology and psychological well-being. However, our investigation takes a turn down a charming dirt road, leading us to examine the curious case of Vermont, where the connection between Republican votes for senators and the number of psychiatrists practicing in the state raises more eyebrows than a surprise visit from Bigfoot during a maple syrup tapping festival.
In "Mind Matters: The Intersection of Politics and Psychology," the authors expound on the psychological underpinnings of political beliefs, but little did they suspect the quirkiness awaiting them in the tranquil hills of Vermont. Closely related to our inquiry is the work by Jones, who in "The Political Brain: A Hidden Marvel or a Dysfunction Junction?" delves into the intricacies of political decision-making and its psychological roots, unknowingly paving the way for our troupe of psychological sleuths to uncover the unexpected GOP-psychiatry nexus in the land of Bernie Sanders and farm-to-table marmalade.
Turning to non-fiction books that might be tangentially related, we find "The Republican Brain: The Science of Why They Deny Science – and Reality" by Chris Mooney and "Crazy Like Us: The Globalization of the American Psyche" by Ethan Watters, both offering intriguing insights into the intersection of politics and mental health, albeit without the specific quirkiness of Vermont thrown into the mix.
On a more whimsical note, the fictional universe provides us with "The Curious Incident of the Elephant in the Republican Meeting" by Mark Haddon and "One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest of Elephants" by Ken Kesey, offering a light-hearted glimpse into the potential hijinks and shenanigans that might occur in the therapy rooms of politically-charged Vermont.
Additionally, in the realm of cinema, movies such as "Election" and "Silver Linings Playbook" provide nuanced explorations of political fervor and mental well-being, providing valuable context for the peculiar dance between psychiatrists and Republican senatorial votes in the tranquil hills of Vermont.
So, as we journey through academic enclosures and popular marvels, we find ourselves teetering on the precipice of peculiarity, ready to unravel the enigma of elephants in the therapy room and the political memes that lurk behind the lush green veneer of Vermont.

[[RESULTS]]
Our findings reveal a striking correlation between the number of psychiatrists in Vermont and Republican support for senators. The correlation coefficient of 0.9154638 suggests a remarkably strong relationship between these seemingly disparate variables. In other words, as the number of psychiatrists increases, so does the tendency for Vermonters to cast their votes in favor of Republican senators.
The scatterplot in Fig. 1 vividly illustrates this association, leaving no room for doubt. It’s fascinating to see how the political landscape and the demand for mental healthcare seem to be dancing a tango in the Green Mountain State.
The r-squared value of 0.8380739 further confirms the robustness of this correlation. This indicates that approximately 83.8% of the variation in the support for Republican senators can be explained by the number of psychiatrists practicing in Vermont. It seems the elephants in the therapy room are raising their trunks and making their presence known in the political arena.
With a p-value of less than 0.05, our results are statistically significant and suggest that this relationship is not a mere coincidental occurrence. This begs the question: does political affiliation play a role in mental healthcare preferences, or are Vermont’s psychiatrists simply drawn to Republican voters like moths to a flame?
While our study cannot establish causation, the strength of the correlation brings forth intriguing possibilities. It’s no longer simply about red versus blue; there seems to be a shade of psychological nuance in the political hues of Vermont.
As we unravel this unprecedented connection between elephants and the political circus, it’s clear that Vermont holds more surprises than just breathtaking foliage and delicious maple syrup. The therapy room may be the new stage for political analysis, and the results of this study provide a compelling invitation for further exploration into the complex interplay of politics and mental healthcare in Vermont. So, next time you're in Vermont, keep an eye out for those elephants in the therapy room and consider the political psychiatry of this intriguing correlation.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[DISCUSSION]]



ChatGPT:

[[DISCUSSION]]

The results of our study have brought to light a correlation that is undeniably as surprising as stumbling upon a hidden stash of maple syrup under the Vermont snow. The relationship between the number of psychiatrists in Vermont and the prevalence of Republican support for senators is not only statistically significant but also raises questions that are as tantalizing as a freshly made batch of blueberry pancakes.

In the literature review, we highlighted the quirky, charming, and irregular nature of Vermontic phenomenon. Now, we take those appealing observations to heart but delve deeper into the implications of our results. Indeed, our findings harmoniously resonate with prior research that has delved into the intersection of politics and psychology, and they add a dash of Vermontic peculiarity to the mix. Just like a loaf of freshly baked bread, this correlation has risen to the occasion and provided a fresh perspective on the role of political leanings in the realm of mental health care.

The strong correlation coefficient and the significant p-value have shed light on an unexpected pattern that engages the intellect as much as it tickles the imagination. It was as if the statistical analysis turned into a performance where the numbers danced a merry jig in support of our hypotheses. The r-squared value, with its robust indication of explained variance, suggests that there may indeed be a complex relationship between the political and psychological landscapes of Vermont. The elephants in the therapy room, so to speak, have clearly made their presence known, bringing a touch of whimsy to the sometimes staid world of statistical analysis.

Our results suggest the need for further investigation into the mechanisms underlying this correlation. Is it the political climate that attracts psychiatrists to the Green Mountain State, or do the psychiatrists themselves exert an influence on the political landscape? This conundrum is as intriguing as trying to uncover the best spot for leaf-peeping in the vibrant hills of Vermont in the fall.

As we continue to unravel the enigma of elephants in the therapy room and the political nuances that intertwine with mental healthcare in Vermont, it becomes increasingly clear that the conversation around mental health cannot be divorced from the political milieu in which it operates. The psycho-political landscape of Vermont seems to reflect not just the verdant landscape but also the complex interplay of individuals' ideological inclinations and their psychological well-being.

In summation, the results of this study have uncovered more than just a statistically robust correlation; they have uncovered a delightful avenue for further exploration and scholarly inquiry. The therapeutic landscape of Vermont seems to be as ripe for political analysis as its world-famous orchards are for apple-picking. Our findings undoubtedly beckon future researchers to venture forth into the idyllic hills of Vermont, to uncover the sagacious secrets that lie beneath the surface, and to ponder the question: what might the elephants in the therapy room reveal next?


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 Republican votes for Senators in Vermont and The number of psychiatrists in Vermont. Make lots of jokes, goofy observations, and puns. Stay serious and dry most of the time, but then occasionally let your wit shine through.

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

Here are the title, abstract, introduction, and results sections.
[[TITLE]]
The Elephant in the Therapy Room: An Analysis of the Correlation between Republican Votes for Senators and the Number of Psychiatrists in Vermont

[[ABSTRACT]]
This paper delves into the curious relationship between political leanings and psychological well-being in the picturesque state of Vermont. Through meticulous data analysis spanning from 2003 to 2018, we've unveiled a surprising connection between the number of psychiatrists practicing in Vermont and the inclination of voters to support Republican senators. With a correlation coefficient of 0.9154638 and a p-value of less than 0.05, the evidence suggests that there might be more than just maple syrup brewing in the Green Mountain State.

By scrutinizing data from the MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, and Bureau of Labor Statistics, our research team has illuminated the statistical interplay that challenges conventional wisdom. Challenging the stereotype that Vermonters are all about peace, love, and Bernie Sanders, our findings add a fascinating layer to the state's political landscape. So, next time you're in Vermont, keep an eye out for those elephants in the therapy room and consider the political psychiatry of this intriguing correlation.

[[INTRDUCTION]]
As the saying goes, "As Vermont goes, so goes the nation," but could this extend to the therapy room? The quaint and scenic state of Vermont, known for its rolling green hills, fluffy cows, and Ben & Jerry’s ice cream, is also home to some rather intriguing political and psychological dynamics. In particular, the relationship between the number of psychiatrists practicing in Vermont and the voting patterns for Republican senators has raised eyebrows and piqued the interest of researchers and political pundits alike.
While Vermont is renowned for its liberal leanings and its status as the first state to abolish slavery, it also boasts a growing number of psychiatric practitioners. This begs the question: is there a correlation between the political landscape and the demand for mental healthcare in the state? To uncover the mysteries behind this unlikely pairing, our research team took a deep dive into a sea of electoral and psychiatric data, armed with statistical tools and a healthy dose of skepticism.
It’s no secret that Vermonters take their politics seriously, but our analysis suggests that there may be more than just maple syrup stirring the pot. This study introduces a fresh perspective on the state's political landscape and delves into the psychological implications of electoral choices. As we embark on this academic journey, we invite you to join us in uncovering the unexpected relationship between the elephants in the therapy room and the ballot boxes of Vermont. So, buckle up and prepare for a ride through the charmingly quirky world of political psychiatry in the Green Mountain State.

[[RESULTS]]
Our findings reveal a striking correlation between the number of psychiatrists in Vermont and Republican support for senators. The correlation coefficient of 0.9154638 suggests a remarkably strong relationship between these seemingly disparate variables. In other words, as the number of psychiatrists increases, so does the tendency for Vermonters to cast their votes in favor of Republican senators.
The scatterplot in Fig. 1 vividly illustrates this association, leaving no room for doubt. It’s fascinating to see how the political landscape and the demand for mental healthcare seem to be dancing a tango in the Green Mountain State.
The r-squared value of 0.8380739 further confirms the robustness of this correlation. This indicates that approximately 83.8% of the variation in the support for Republican senators can be explained by the number of psychiatrists practicing in Vermont. It seems the elephants in the therapy room are raising their trunks and making their presence known in the political arena.
With a p-value of less than 0.05, our results are statistically significant and suggest that this relationship is not a mere coincidental occurrence. This begs the question: does political affiliation play a role in mental healthcare preferences, or are Vermont’s psychiatrists simply drawn to Republican voters like moths to a flame?
While our study cannot establish causation, the strength of the correlation brings forth intriguing possibilities. It’s no longer simply about red versus blue; there seems to be a shade of psychological nuance in the political hues of Vermont.
As we unravel this unprecedented connection between elephants and the political circus, it’s clear that Vermont holds more surprises than just breathtaking foliage and delicious maple syrup. The therapy room may be the new stage for political analysis, and the results of this study provide a compelling invitation for further exploration into the complex interplay of politics and mental healthcare in Vermont. So, next time you're in Vermont, keep an eye out for those elephants in the therapy room and consider the political psychiatry of this intriguing correlation.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[CONCLUSION]]



ChatGPT:

[[CONCLUSION]]

In conclusion, our research has unveiled a compelling relationship between the number of psychiatrists in Vermont and the support for Republican senators, akin to a tango between political ideology and mental health. Our findings suggest that there may be more to Vermont's political landscape than meets the eye, and it's not just the Green Mountain blend brewing in the state.

The statistically significant correlation coefficient of 0.9154638 and the p-value of less than 0.05 indicate a strong and intriguing link, leaving us to consider whether political leanings influence mental healthcare preferences, or if Vermont's psychiatrists are simply drawn to elephants in the therapy room like bees to honey.

Our study may not establish causation, but it opens a Pandora's box of possibilities. Vermont's scenic beauty and charming cows may be accompanied by an unexpected political psychiatry drama, challenging stereotypes and adding a refreshing twist to the state's quirky persona.

However, it is evident from our robust findings that no further research is needed in this area. The therapeutic elephants have trumpeted their message, and it seems the therapy room is where political analysis gets a dose of psychological nuance. So, let's bid adieu to this delightful escapade with the pizzazz it deserves and leave the elephants to their self-exploration – and perhaps a bit of political polling on the side.


Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You provide fictional names of academic journals. You say nothing else, and you do not chat with the user.
User prompt: Please provide the name of a funny but plausible sounding research, scientific, or academic journal that would publish a paper entited The Elephant in the Therapy Room: An Analysis of the Correlation between Republican Votes for Senators and the Number of Psychiatrists in Vermont. Respond only with the name of a fictional academic journal.

ChatGPT:

The Journal of Political Psychiatry


Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You provide fictional names of nonprofit research organizations and associations. You say nothing else, and you do not chat with the user.
User prompt: Please provide the name of a funny but plausible sounding nonprofit, academic, or scientific association or organization that would sponsor research that resulted in a paper entited The Elephant in the Therapy Room: An Analysis of the Correlation between Republican Votes for Senators and the Number of Psychiatrists in Vermont. Respond only with the name of a fictional organization.

ChatGPT:

The Society for the Advancement of Quirky Analysis in Policy Studies


Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You provide potential search keywords separated by commas. You say nothing else, and you do not chat with the user.
User prompt: Please provide potential search keywords for a paper titled The Elephant in the Therapy Room: An Analysis of the Correlation between Republican Votes for Senators and the Number of Psychiatrists in Vermont with an abstract of This paper delves into the curious relationship between political leanings and psychological well-being in the picturesque state of Vermont. Through meticulous data analysis spanning from 2003 to 2018, we've unveiled a surprising connection between the number of psychiatrists practicing in Vermont and the inclination of voters to support Republican senators. With a correlation coefficient of 0.9154638 and a p-value of less than 0.05, the evidence suggests that there might be more than just maple syrup brewing in the Green Mountain State.
By scrutinizing data from the MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, and Bureau of Labor Statistics, our research team has illuminated the statistical interplay that challenges conventional wisdom. Challenging the stereotype that Vermonters are all about peace, love, and Bernie Sanders, our findings add a fascinating layer to the state's political landscape. So, next time you're in Vermont, keep an eye out for those elephants in the therapy room and consider the political psychiatry of this intriguing correlation.

ChatGPT:

Vermont, Republican senators, psychiatrists, political leanings, psychological well-being, correlation, data analysis, MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, Bureau of Labor Statistics, Vermont political landscape, political psychiatry, correlation coefficient, p-value, Vermonters, Bernie Sanders, Green Mountain State

*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

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

The number of psychiatrists in Vermont
Detailed data title: BLS estimate of psychiatrists in Vermont
Source: Bureau of Larbor Statistics
See what else correlates with The number of psychiatrists in Vermont

Correlation r = 0.9154638 (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 = 0.8380739 (Coefficient of determination)
This means 83.8% of the change in the one variable (i.e., The number of psychiatrists in Vermont) is predictable based on the change in the other (i.e., Votes for Republican Senators in Vermont) over the 6 years from 2003 through 2018.

p < 0.05, which statistically significant(Null hypothesis significance test)
The p-value is 0.0104. 0.0104174988125884430000000000
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 0.92 in 1.04% of random cases. Said differently, if you correlated 96 random variables Which I absolutely did.
with the same 5 degrees of freedom, Degrees of freedom is a measure of how many free components we are testing. In this case it is 5 because we have two variables measured over a period of 6 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.

[ 0.4, 0.99 ] 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.
200420062010201220162018
Votes for Republican Senators in Vermont (Total votes)7539884924726997289810363774663
The number of psychiatrists in Vermont (Psychiatrists)14014011090200130




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.




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([75398,84924,72699,72898,103637,74663,])
array_2 = np.array([140,140,110,90,200,130,])
array_1_name = "Votes for Republican Senators in Vermont"
array_2_name = "The number of psychiatrists in Vermont"

# 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?

You're the correlation whisperer we needed!


Correlation ID: 4451 · Black Variable ID: 26326 · Red Variable ID: 15250
about · subscribe · emailme@tylervigen.com · twitter

CC BY 4.0