about · email me · subscribe
Spurious correlation #4,456 · 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 Louisiana and the second variable is Customer satisfaction with Sprint.  The chart goes from 2004 to 2020, and the two variables track closely in value over that time. Small Image
Download png
, svg

AI explanation

The Republican Senators in Louisiana must have boosted the signals for Sprint, leading to a stronger reception of customer satisfaction! It looks like their political power was just the boost Sprint needed to win over more voters!

Model: dalle-3
Prompt: Generate an image of a bustling town square in Louisiana where a group of Republican Senators proudly hold up signal booster antennas, surrounded by smiling people happily using their Sprint phones with improved signals. The scene should be captured on a Discovery magazine cover, showcasing the vibrant energy of the crowd and the senators' efforts to improve reception. The composition should highlight the interaction between the Senators and the satisfied customers, creating a visually captivating narrative that emphasizes the impact of their actions on the community. 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 Louisiana and Customer satisfaction with Sprint. 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: Woodblock painting Glitch art Scalar art A Discovery magazine cover image Pop art
ChatGPT: A Discovery magazine cover 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 Louisiana and Customer satisfaction with Sprint, in the following situation: The Republican Senators in Louisiana must have boosted the signals for Sprint, leading to a stronger reception of customer satisfaction! It looks like their political power was just the boost Sprint needed to win over more voters!. Keep the description simple.
ChatGPT: In a bustling town square in Louisiana, a group of Republican Senators stands proudly, holding up signal booster antennas. Meanwhile, a crowd of people are gathered around, smiling and happily using their Sprint phones with strong signals. The Senators' efforts seem to have helped improve the reception, as the customers are expressing satisfaction with improved service.

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 Discovery magazine cover image ] and depicting this scene: In a bustling town square in Louisiana, a group of Republican Senators stands proudly, holding up signal booster antennas. Meanwhile, a crowd of people are gathered around, smiling and happily using their Sprint phones with strong signals. The Senators' efforts seem to have helped improve the reception, as the customers are expressing satisfaction with improved service. Keep the visual depiction simple. Do not include any words or speech bubbles.
ChatGPT: Generate an image of a bustling town square in Louisiana where a group of Republican Senators proudly hold up signal booster antennas, surrounded by smiling people happily using their Sprint phones with improved signals. The scene should be captured on a Discovery magazine cover, showcasing the vibrant energy of the crowd and the senators' efforts to improve reception. The composition should highlight the interaction between the Senators and the satisfied customers, creating a visually captivating narrative that emphasizes the impact of their actions on the community.

*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 Republican votes for Senators in Louisiana caused Customer satisfaction with Sprint to increase. Include one good pun.

AI academic paper

(Because p < 0.01)
Calling Senators and Sprinting to Votes: A Correlative Examination of Republican Voting Patterns in Louisiana and Sprint Customer Satisfaction

The Journal of Political Velocity and Consumer Sentiment

Jan 2024

Reminder: This paper is AI-generated. Not real!
Quick note: This sequence is long and repetitive. That's how the prompt engineering works for this one. I manage the output in Python to format it into this PDF.




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

Please draft the title and abstract of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between Republican votes for Senators in Louisiana and Customer satisfaction with Sprint. Make it seem dry like academic research paper, but with lots of subtle hidden offhand remarks, jokes, goofy observations, and puns.

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

Your research team used data from MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse and American Customer Satisfaction Index to assess this nagging question. You found a correlation coefficient of 0.9191135 and p < 0.01 for 2004 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]]
Calling Senators and Sprinting to Votes: A Correlative Examination of Republican Voting Patterns in Louisiana and Sprint Customer Satisfaction

[[ABSTRACT]]
The channels of influence in American politics and consumer behavior can often meander into unexpected territories. In this study, we delve into the peculiar relationship between the voting patterns of Republican Senators in Louisiana and the customer satisfaction levels with Sprint, a prominent telecommunications provider. Harnessing datasets from the MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, and the American Customer Satisfaction Index, we conducted a comprehensive analysis covering the years 2004 to 2020. Our findings revealed a remarkably high correlation coefficient of 0.9191135, with a p-value less than 0.01, showcasing a robust statistical link between the two seemingly disparate domains. While our results do not necessarily imply causation, they do stir up tantalizing speculations and perhaps hint at the latent telecommunication-phonic sentiments of the voting populace. This correlation may raise brows and mobile phone signals alike, unveiling an intersection where political leanings and network preferences converge. Our study paves the way for further investigations that bridge the realms of policy preferences and wireless connectivity, birthing a fertile ground for humorously unexpected alliances and connections.


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

Please make up the introduction section of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between Republican votes for Senators in Louisiana and Customer satisfaction with Sprint. Make it seem dry like academic research paper, but with lots of subtle hidden offhand remarks, jokes, goofy observations, and puns.

Here is the title and abstract of the paper:
[[TITLE]]
Calling Senators and Sprinting to Votes: A Correlative Examination of Republican Voting Patterns in Louisiana and Sprint Customer Satisfaction

[[ABSTRACT]]
The channels of influence in American politics and consumer behavior can often meander into unexpected territories. In this study, we delve into the peculiar relationship between the voting patterns of Republican Senators in Louisiana and the customer satisfaction levels with Sprint, a prominent telecommunications provider. Harnessing datasets from the MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, and the American Customer Satisfaction Index, we conducted a comprehensive analysis covering the years 2004 to 2020. Our findings revealed a remarkably high correlation coefficient of 0.9191135, with a p-value less than 0.01, showcasing a robust statistical link between the two seemingly disparate domains. While our results do not necessarily imply causation, they do stir up tantalizing speculations and perhaps hint at the latent telecommunication-phonic sentiments of the voting populace. This correlation may raise brows and mobile phone signals alike, unveiling an intersection where political leanings and network preferences converge. Our study paves the way for further investigations that bridge the realms of policy preferences and wireless connectivity, birthing a fertile ground for humorously unexpected alliances and connections.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[INTRODUCTION]]



ChatGPT:
[[INTRODUCTION]]

The intricate web of human behavior and decision-making has always been a petri dish for the curious minds of researchers. In this age of big data, where information flows like water from a leaking faucet, we find ourselves wading through vast datasets, sifting for correlations that could yield insight into our convoluted world. Our paper embarks on a peculiar journey, aiming to unravel the intriguing relationship between the voting behaviors of Republican Senators in Louisiana and the customer satisfaction levels with Sprint, a wireless carrier known for its spirited rivalry in the telecommunications market.

While some may question the rationale behind this unconventional pairing, it is precisely these unforeseen connections that spark our scientific curiosity. The allure of uncovering unexpected associations is akin to stumbling upon a misplaced earring in a vacuum cleaner – puzzling, yet undeniably captivating. As we venture into the depths of this correlation, we aim to shed light on the uncharted territories where political ideologies intersect with mobile phone reception bars, forming an interdimensional bridge between the Senate floor and the cellular airwaves.

Our analysis, spanning the years 2004 to 2020, traverses through the tumultuous waves of political change and the evolution of cellular technology, seeking to unearth patterns that may elude the untrained eye. The statistical behemoth we wield, with a correlation coefficient of 0.9191135 and a p-value resembling the odds of finding a four-leaf clover on the grassy knoll, beckons us to delve further into the mysterious undercurrents that tie together the realm of political affiliation and the siren call of 4G connectivity.

In the grand symphony of the social sciences, our study aspires to strike a chord that resonates far beyond the confines of political science and consumer behavior, orchestrating a comical serenade to the rhythm of voter sentiment and mobile network allegiance. As we peel back the layers of this curious connection, we invite our readers to partake in the whimsical dance of unexpected alliances, where the tango of data analysis meets the foxtrot of serendipitous discoveries.

Together, let us now embark on this riveting expedition, as we endeavor to unravel the enigmatic links between the voting booth and the cellular tower, for at the crux of this correlation lies a tale as intriguing as finding a misplaced mobile phone in the most unexpected of places.


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

Please make up a literature review section of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between Republican votes for Senators in Louisiana and Customer satisfaction with Sprint. Make it seem dry like academic research paper, but with lots of subtle hidden offhand remarks, jokes, goofy observations, and puns.

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

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

Start by naming serious-sounding studies by authors like Smith, Doe, and Jones - but then quickly devolve. Name some real non-fiction books that would be related to the topic. Then name some real fiction books that sound like they could be related. Then you might move on to cartoons and children's shows that you watched for research.

Here is the title and abstract of the paper:
[[TITLE]]
Calling Senators and Sprinting to Votes: A Correlative Examination of Republican Voting Patterns in Louisiana and Sprint Customer Satisfaction

[[ABSTRACT]]
The channels of influence in American politics and consumer behavior can often meander into unexpected territories. In this study, we delve into the peculiar relationship between the voting patterns of Republican Senators in Louisiana and the customer satisfaction levels with Sprint, a prominent telecommunications provider. Harnessing datasets from the MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, and the American Customer Satisfaction Index, we conducted a comprehensive analysis covering the years 2004 to 2020. Our findings revealed a remarkably high correlation coefficient of 0.9191135, with a p-value less than 0.01, showcasing a robust statistical link between the two seemingly disparate domains. While our results do not necessarily imply causation, they do stir up tantalizing speculations and perhaps hint at the latent telecommunication-phonic sentiments of the voting populace. This correlation may raise brows and mobile phone signals alike, unveiling an intersection where political leanings and network preferences converge. Our study paves the way for further investigations that bridge the realms of policy preferences and wireless connectivity, birthing a fertile ground for humorously unexpected alliances and connections.

-------

And here is the introduction section that led to this literature review:
[[INTRODUCTION]]
The intricate web of human behavior and decision-making has always been a petri dish for the curious minds of researchers. In this age of big data, where information flows like water from a leaking faucet, we find ourselves wading through vast datasets, sifting for correlations that could yield insight into our convoluted world. Our paper embarks on a peculiar journey, aiming to unravel the intriguing relationship between the voting behaviors of Republican Senators in Louisiana and the customer satisfaction levels with Sprint, a wireless carrier known for its spirited rivalry in the telecommunications market.
While some may question the rationale behind this unconventional pairing, it is precisely these unforeseen connections that spark our scientific curiosity. The allure of uncovering unexpected associations is akin to stumbling upon a misplaced earring in a vacuum cleaner – puzzling, yet undeniably captivating. As we venture into the depths of this correlation, we aim to shed light on the uncharted territories where political ideologies intersect with mobile phone reception bars, forming an interdimensional bridge between the Senate floor and the cellular airwaves.
Our analysis, spanning the years 2004 to 2020, traverses through the tumultuous waves of political change and the evolution of cellular technology, seeking to unearth patterns that may elude the untrained eye. The statistical behemoth we wield, with a correlation coefficient of 0.9191135 and a p-value resembling the odds of finding a four-leaf clover on the grassy knoll, beckons us to delve further into the mysterious undercurrents that tie together the realm of political affiliation and the siren call of 4G connectivity.
In the grand symphony of the social sciences, our study aspires to strike a chord that resonates far beyond the confines of political science and consumer behavior, orchestrating a comical serenade to the rhythm of voter sentiment and mobile network allegiance. As we peel back the layers of this curious connection, we invite our readers to partake in the whimsical dance of unexpected alliances, where the tango of data analysis meets the foxtrot of serendipitous discoveries.
Together, let us now embark on this riveting expedition, as we endeavor to unravel the enigmatic links between the voting booth and the cellular tower, for at the crux of this correlation lies a tale as intriguing as finding a misplaced mobile phone in the most unexpected of places.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[LITERATURE REVIEW]]



ChatGPT:
[[LITERATURE REVIEW]]

In their study, Smith and colleagues (2015) delve into the intricate web of political voting patterns, unraveling the threads that bind constituents' preferences with their elected officials’ affiliations. This probing analysis sets the stage for our examination into the Republican votes for Senators in Louisiana and its curious correlation with customer satisfaction with Sprint. Building on this foundation, Doe et al. (2018) cast a wide net over consumer behavior, expounding on the myriad factors that influence individuals' choices and preferences in the telecommunications market, providing a launchpad for our investigation into the esoteric realms where political ideologies intersect with cell phone reception quality.

Further adding to this burgeoning field, Jones (2012) elucidates the challenges of econometric analysis in correlating seemingly unrelated domains, paving the way for our own endeavor into the statistical minefield of political leanings and wireless connectivity. These serious and thought-provoking studies form the bedrock of our research, leading us down the rabbit hole of unexpected correlations that leave us pondering the whims of fate and data alike.

Venturing beyond the confines of the academic domain, works of non-fiction such as "The Power of Habit" by Charles Duhigg and "Predictably Irrational" by Dan Ariely draw attention to the idiosyncrasies of human decision-making and the underlying forces that shape consumer behavior. While ostensibly unrelated to our study, the complexities of human cognition and behavior, as expounded in these scholarly works, may offer subtle insights into the multifaceted nature of our research topic.

Plunging even further into uncharted territory, fictional literature presents its own unique contributions. "The Art of Racing in the Rain" by Garth Stein may seem an unlikely addition to the discourse, yet it subtly weaves a tale of unexpected connections and serendipitous twists, much like the correlations we seek to unravel in this study. Similarly, the machinations of power and influence, as depicted in George Orwell's "Animal Farm," elicit contemplation on the intricate dynamics observed in human decision-making, albeit in a vastly different context.

Turning to unconventional sources, one might find immense value in cartoons and children's shows as surprisingly illuminating reservoirs of insight. For instance, "SpongeBob SquarePants" slyly explores themes of community dynamics and the influence of leadership, providing a whimsical parallel to the intricacies of political allegiances. While seemingly lighthearted, the astute observations in these animated programs can cast unexpected light on the social undercurrents that may parallel the themes of our investigation.


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

Please make up the methodology section of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between Republican votes for Senators in Louisiana and Customer satisfaction with Sprint. Make it seem dry like academic research paper, but with lots of subtle hidden offhand remarks, jokes, goofy observations, and puns.

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 American Customer Satisfaction Index . You used data from 2004 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]]
Calling Senators and Sprinting to Votes: A Correlative Examination of Republican Voting Patterns in Louisiana and Sprint Customer Satisfaction

[[ABSTRACT]]
The channels of influence in American politics and consumer behavior can often meander into unexpected territories. In this study, we delve into the peculiar relationship between the voting patterns of Republican Senators in Louisiana and the customer satisfaction levels with Sprint, a prominent telecommunications provider. Harnessing datasets from the MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, and the American Customer Satisfaction Index, we conducted a comprehensive analysis covering the years 2004 to 2020. Our findings revealed a remarkably high correlation coefficient of 0.9191135, with a p-value less than 0.01, showcasing a robust statistical link between the two seemingly disparate domains. While our results do not necessarily imply causation, they do stir up tantalizing speculations and perhaps hint at the latent telecommunication-phonic sentiments of the voting populace. This correlation may raise brows and mobile phone signals alike, unveiling an intersection where political leanings and network preferences converge. Our study paves the way for further investigations that bridge the realms of policy preferences and wireless connectivity, birthing a fertile ground for humorously unexpected alliances and connections.

[[INTRODUCTION]]
The intricate web of human behavior and decision-making has always been a petri dish for the curious minds of researchers. In this age of big data, where information flows like water from a leaking faucet, we find ourselves wading through vast datasets, sifting for correlations that could yield insight into our convoluted world. Our paper embarks on a peculiar journey, aiming to unravel the intriguing relationship between the voting behaviors of Republican Senators in Louisiana and the customer satisfaction levels with Sprint, a wireless carrier known for its spirited rivalry in the telecommunications market.
While some may question the rationale behind this unconventional pairing, it is precisely these unforeseen connections that spark our scientific curiosity. The allure of uncovering unexpected associations is akin to stumbling upon a misplaced earring in a vacuum cleaner – puzzling, yet undeniably captivating. As we venture into the depths of this correlation, we aim to shed light on the uncharted territories where political ideologies intersect with mobile phone reception bars, forming an interdimensional bridge between the Senate floor and the cellular airwaves.
Our analysis, spanning the years 2004 to 2020, traverses through the tumultuous waves of political change and the evolution of cellular technology, seeking to unearth patterns that may elude the untrained eye. The statistical behemoth we wield, with a correlation coefficient of 0.9191135 and a p-value resembling the odds of finding a four-leaf clover on the grassy knoll, beckons us to delve further into the mysterious undercurrents that tie together the realm of political affiliation and the siren call of 4G connectivity.
In the grand symphony of the social sciences, our study aspires to strike a chord that resonates far beyond the confines of political science and consumer behavior, orchestrating a comical serenade to the rhythm of voter sentiment and mobile network allegiance. As we peel back the layers of this curious connection, we invite our readers to partake in the whimsical dance of unexpected alliances, where the tango of data analysis meets the foxtrot of serendipitous discoveries.
Together, let us now embark on this riveting expedition, as we endeavor to unravel the enigmatic links between the voting booth and the cellular tower, for at the crux of this correlation lies a tale as intriguing as finding a misplaced mobile phone in the most unexpected of places.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[METHODOLOGY]]



ChatGPT:

[[METHODOLOGY]]

Data Collection:
The foundation of our study rests upon the sturdy shoulders of data collection. We diligently combed through the vast expanse of the internet, navigating the virtual rabbit hole, and emerged, somewhat bleary-eyed, with datasets from esteemed repositories such as the MIT Election Data and Science Lab, the Harvard Dataverse, and the American Customer Satisfaction Index. This myriad of sources offered a diverse tapestry of information, weaving together the intricacies of political sagas and cellular ardor.

Variables and Measures:
Like surgeons navigating a field of tangled nerves, we meticulously delineated the variables central to our investigation. The voting patterns of Republican Senators in Louisiana, spanning the years 2004 to 2020, formed the bedrock of our political substrate. Meanwhile, to capture the undulating tides of customer satisfaction with Sprint, we tapped into the warm currents of the American Customer Satisfaction Index, immersing ourselves in the swells of data from the same temporal span.

Correlation Analysis:
To unearth the semblance of a clandestine alliance between the Republican votes and Sprint patronage, we turned to the venerable art of correlation analysis. Armed with statistical tools reminiscent of a mathematician’s Swiss army knife, we calculated the correlation coefficient with a precision akin to a sommelier discerning the nuances of a vintage wine. Subsequently, we performed hypothesis testing, scouring the landscape of p-values with the fervor of a treasure-hunting pirate searching for elusive loot.

Discussion of Limitations:
While we endeavored to harness every possible source of data, our findings are not without the occasional pothole in the road. We must acknowledge the limitations inherent in our methodology, including the constraints of retrospective data analysis and the multifaceted nature of human decision-making. Furthermore, the realm of telecommunications and political dynamics is as mercurial as a chameleon in a kaleidoscope, making it imperative to approach our findings with prudent caution.

Ethical Considerations:
In our quest for insight, we acknowledged the ethical compass that guided our research. Our utilization of publicly available data was paired with the utmost respect for data privacy and intellectual propriety, ensuring that our expedition through the corridors of information adhered to the ethical canons governing scholarly inquiry.

In summary, our methodology steered us through a cornucopia of data sources, guiding us toward a deeper understanding of the web that conjures correlations between political predispositions and cellular affinities. With our statistical sails set high and our compass point true, we set out to navigate these uncharted waters, braving eddies of complexity in pursuit of the hidden interplay between the halls of governance and the invisible data streams that weave through the fabric of modern society.


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

Please make up the results section of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between Republican votes for Senators in Louisiana and Customer satisfaction with Sprint. Make it seem dry like academic research paper, but with lots of subtle hidden offhand remarks, jokes, goofy observations, and puns.

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 American Customer Satisfaction Index .

For the time period 2004 to 2020, you found a correlation 0.9191135, r-squared of 0.8447697, 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]]
Calling Senators and Sprinting to Votes: A Correlative Examination of Republican Voting Patterns in Louisiana and Sprint Customer Satisfaction

[[ABSTRACT]]
The channels of influence in American politics and consumer behavior can often meander into unexpected territories. In this study, we delve into the peculiar relationship between the voting patterns of Republican Senators in Louisiana and the customer satisfaction levels with Sprint, a prominent telecommunications provider. Harnessing datasets from the MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, and the American Customer Satisfaction Index, we conducted a comprehensive analysis covering the years 2004 to 2020. Our findings revealed a remarkably high correlation coefficient of 0.9191135, with a p-value less than 0.01, showcasing a robust statistical link between the two seemingly disparate domains. While our results do not necessarily imply causation, they do stir up tantalizing speculations and perhaps hint at the latent telecommunication-phonic sentiments of the voting populace. This correlation may raise brows and mobile phone signals alike, unveiling an intersection where political leanings and network preferences converge. Our study paves the way for further investigations that bridge the realms of policy preferences and wireless connectivity, birthing a fertile ground for humorously unexpected alliances and connections.

-------

And here is the methodology section that led to this result:
[[METHODOLOGY]]
The intricate web of human behavior and decision-making has always been a petri dish for the curious minds of researchers. In this age of big data, where information flows like water from a leaking faucet, we find ourselves wading through vast datasets, sifting for correlations that could yield insight into our convoluted world. Our paper embarks on a peculiar journey, aiming to unravel the intriguing relationship between the voting behaviors of Republican Senators in Louisiana and the customer satisfaction levels with Sprint, a wireless carrier known for its spirited rivalry in the telecommunications market.
While some may question the rationale behind this unconventional pairing, it is precisely these unforeseen connections that spark our scientific curiosity. The allure of uncovering unexpected associations is akin to stumbling upon a misplaced earring in a vacuum cleaner – puzzling, yet undeniably captivating. As we venture into the depths of this correlation, we aim to shed light on the uncharted territories where political ideologies intersect with mobile phone reception bars, forming an interdimensional bridge between the Senate floor and the cellular airwaves.
Our analysis, spanning the years 2004 to 2020, traverses through the tumultuous waves of political change and the evolution of cellular technology, seeking to unearth patterns that may elude the untrained eye. The statistical behemoth we wield, with a correlation coefficient of 0.9191135 and a p-value resembling the odds of finding a four-leaf clover on the grassy knoll, beckons us to delve further into the mysterious undercurrents that tie together the realm of political affiliation and the siren call of 4G connectivity.
In the grand symphony of the social sciences, our study aspires to strike a chord that resonates far beyond the confines of political science and consumer behavior, orchestrating a comical serenade to the rhythm of voter sentiment and mobile network allegiance. As we peel back the layers of this curious connection, we invite our readers to partake in the whimsical dance of unexpected alliances, where the tango of data analysis meets the foxtrot of serendipitous discoveries.
Together, let us now embark on this riveting expedition, as we endeavor to unravel the enigmatic links between the voting booth and the cellular tower, for at the crux of this correlation lies a tale as intriguing as finding a misplaced mobile phone in the most unexpected of places.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[RESULTS]]



ChatGPT:

[[RESULTS]]

The results of our analysis unveiled a striking correlation between the voting patterns of Republican Senators in Louisiana and customer satisfaction levels with Sprint. Our statistical analysis revealed a correlation coefficient of 0.9191135, indicating a remarkably strong positive relationship between these seemingly unrelated variables. The robustness of this association is further underscored by the high r-squared value of 0.8447697, suggesting that a substantial proportion of the variability in Sprint customer satisfaction can be explained by the voting preferences of Republican Senators in Louisiana. Additionally, the p-value falling below 0.01 provides strong evidence against the null hypothesis, reinforcing the credibility of this correlation.

While these findings do not establish a causal relationship between the two variables, they do raise intriguing questions and feed into the voracious appetite of the inquisitive mind for unforeseen connections. One might jest that the mobile network prowess of a certain carrier might indeed sway the hearts of the electorate, or that perhaps political sentiments can be gauged by the strength of one's signal bars. These correlations can prompt quite the lively debate, akin to determining the most effective location to place a political campaign billboard – intriguing yet ultimately inconclusive.

To visually encapsulate this compelling correlation, we present Figure 1, a scatterplot depicting the unmistakably strong relationship between Republican votes for Senators in Louisiana and customer satisfaction with Sprint. As the saying goes, a picture is worth a thousand words, and in this instance, it certainly holds true that a graph can speak volumes about the intriguing connections in the web of human preferences and behaviors.

Overall, our findings provocatively hint at the potential convergence of political inclinations and telecommunication predilections, inviting further exploration into this intersection that may uncover hidden facets of consumer behavior and political sentiment. This correlation, like a well-timed punchline at a political gathering, may bring a spark of humor and unexpected intrigue to the often-stoic realm of statistical analysis and social sciences.

And speaking of unexpected intrigues, it seems that the data has uncovered a tale as curious and enigmatic as the elusive sightings of a Cheshire cat in a realm that bridges the Senate chambers and the wireless airwaves.


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

Please make up the discussion section of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between Republican votes for Senators in Louisiana and Customer satisfaction with Sprint. Make it seem dry like academic research paper, but with lots of subtle hidden offhand remarks, jokes, goofy observations, and puns.

Limit your response to 500 tokens.

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

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

[[TITLE]]
Calling Senators and Sprinting to Votes: A Correlative Examination of Republican Voting Patterns in Louisiana and Sprint Customer Satisfaction

[[ABSTRACT]]
The channels of influence in American politics and consumer behavior can often meander into unexpected territories. In this study, we delve into the peculiar relationship between the voting patterns of Republican Senators in Louisiana and the customer satisfaction levels with Sprint, a prominent telecommunications provider. Harnessing datasets from the MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, and the American Customer Satisfaction Index, we conducted a comprehensive analysis covering the years 2004 to 2020. Our findings revealed a remarkably high correlation coefficient of 0.9191135, with a p-value less than 0.01, showcasing a robust statistical link between the two seemingly disparate domains. While our results do not necessarily imply causation, they do stir up tantalizing speculations and perhaps hint at the latent telecommunication-phonic sentiments of the voting populace. This correlation may raise brows and mobile phone signals alike, unveiling an intersection where political leanings and network preferences converge. Our study paves the way for further investigations that bridge the realms of policy preferences and wireless connectivity, birthing a fertile ground for humorously unexpected alliances and connections.

[[LITERATURE REVIEW]]
In their study, Smith and colleagues (2015) delve into the intricate web of political voting patterns, unraveling the threads that bind constituents' preferences with their elected officials’ affiliations. This probing analysis sets the stage for our examination into the Republican votes for Senators in Louisiana and its curious correlation with customer satisfaction with Sprint. Building on this foundation, Doe et al. (2018) cast a wide net over consumer behavior, expounding on the myriad factors that influence individuals' choices and preferences in the telecommunications market, providing a launchpad for our investigation into the esoteric realms where political ideologies intersect with cell phone reception quality.
Further adding to this burgeoning field, Jones (2012) elucidates the challenges of econometric analysis in correlating seemingly unrelated domains, paving the way for our own endeavor into the statistical minefield of political leanings and wireless connectivity. These serious and thought-provoking studies form the bedrock of our research, leading us down the rabbit hole of unexpected correlations that leave us pondering the whims of fate and data alike.
Venturing beyond the confines of the academic domain, works of non-fiction such as "The Power of Habit" by Charles Duhigg and "Predictably Irrational" by Dan Ariely draw attention to the idiosyncrasies of human decision-making and the underlying forces that shape consumer behavior. While ostensibly unrelated to our study, the complexities of human cognition and behavior, as expounded in these scholarly works, may offer subtle insights into the multifaceted nature of our research topic.
Plunging even further into uncharted territory, fictional literature presents its own unique contributions. "The Art of Racing in the Rain" by Garth Stein may seem an unlikely addition to the discourse, yet it subtly weaves a tale of unexpected connections and serendipitous twists, much like the correlations we seek to unravel in this study. Similarly, the machinations of power and influence, as depicted in George Orwell's "Animal Farm," elicit contemplation on the intricate dynamics observed in human decision-making, albeit in a vastly different context.
Turning to unconventional sources, one might find immense value in cartoons and children's shows as surprisingly illuminating reservoirs of insight. For instance, "SpongeBob SquarePants" slyly explores themes of community dynamics and the influence of leadership, providing a whimsical parallel to the intricacies of political allegiances. While seemingly lighthearted, the astute observations in these animated programs can cast unexpected light on the social undercurrents that may parallel the themes of our investigation.

[[RESULTS]]
The results of our analysis unveiled a striking correlation between the voting patterns of Republican Senators in Louisiana and customer satisfaction levels with Sprint. Our statistical analysis revealed a correlation coefficient of 0.9191135, indicating a remarkably strong positive relationship between these seemingly unrelated variables. The robustness of this association is further underscored by the high r-squared value of 0.8447697, suggesting that a substantial proportion of the variability in Sprint customer satisfaction can be explained by the voting preferences of Republican Senators in Louisiana. Additionally, the p-value falling below 0.01 provides strong evidence against the null hypothesis, reinforcing the credibility of this correlation.
While these findings do not establish a causal relationship between the two variables, they do raise intriguing questions and feed into the voracious appetite of the inquisitive mind for unforeseen connections. One might jest that the mobile network prowess of a certain carrier might indeed sway the hearts of the electorate, or that perhaps political sentiments can be gauged by the strength of one's signal bars. These correlations can prompt quite the lively debate, akin to determining the most effective location to place a political campaign billboard – intriguing yet ultimately inconclusive.
To visually encapsulate this compelling correlation, we present Figure 1, a scatterplot depicting the unmistakably strong relationship between Republican votes for Senators in Louisiana and customer satisfaction with Sprint. As the saying goes, a picture is worth a thousand words, and in this instance, it certainly holds true that a graph can speak volumes about the intriguing connections in the web of human preferences and behaviors.
Overall, our findings provocatively hint at the potential convergence of political inclinations and telecommunication predilections, inviting further exploration into this intersection that may uncover hidden facets of consumer behavior and political sentiment. This correlation, like a well-timed punchline at a political gathering, may bring a spark of humor and unexpected intrigue to the often-stoic realm of statistical analysis and social sciences.
And speaking of unexpected intrigues, it seems that the data has uncovered a tale as curious and enigmatic as the elusive sightings of a Cheshire cat in a realm that bridges the Senate chambers and the wireless airwaves.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[DISCUSSION]]



ChatGPT:

[[DISCUSSION]]

The results of our study have unearthed an uncanny correlation that, much like an unexpected plot twist in a political drama, has piqued our curiosity and raised a few eyebrows. Contrary to any skepticism that may have floated about, our findings stand as a testament to the fortuitous alignment of seemingly unrelated realms. The correlation between Republican votes for Senators in Louisiana and customer satisfaction with Sprint has left us shaking our heads in wry amusement, reminiscent of a well-crafted punchline that catches us off guard.

In our literature review, we took the liberty of entwining serious academic works with ventures into the whimsical and unusual, drawing inspiration from an array of sources that range from econometric analysis to the exploits of SpongeBob SquarePants. As we reflect on our results, we find ourselves circling back to these curious literary influences. From Jones' insightful discourse on the challenges of correlating disparate domains to the idiosyncrasies of human decision-making depicted in "The Power of Habit" and "Predictably Irrational," our findings neatly assimilate with the nuances and complexities that we gleaned from these varied literary tapestries.

The high correlation coefficient of 0.9191135 showcases a remarkably strong positive relationship between the voting patterns of Republican Senators in Louisiana and the customer satisfaction levels with Sprint. This compelling statistical link echoes the unforeseen connections and hidden threads that permeate the intricate web of human preferences and behaviors, much like the astute observations we found in cartoons and children's shows – a testament to the often-unexpected inspirations that academia can draw from.

From a statistical standpoint, the robustness of this association, as highlighted by the high r-squared value of 0.8447697, reinforces the notion that a substantial proportion of the variability in Sprint customer satisfaction can be illuminated by the preferences of Republican Senators in Louisiana. While this correlation does not imply causation, the evidence against the null hypothesis, as detailed by the p-value falling below 0.01, fuels the fires of curiosity and inquiry, much like the lingering ponderings inspired by "The Art of Racing in the Rain."

Figure 1, our vivid scatterplot, encapsulates the striking relationship between the variables, illustrating the unfolding drama of political inclinations and wireless predilections. This visual representation serves as a poignant reminder that, much like a well-deployed political cartoon, a graph can distill complex connections into an accessible and engaging format.

In conclusion, our study has opened a veritable Pandora's box of connections, blurring the boundaries between the Senate chambers and the wireless airwaves. Our findings, akin to an unexpected jest at an otherwise staid political gathering, infuse the often-serious realm of statistical analysis and social sciences with a dash of humor and intrigue. With this, we leave the stage open for further exploration and discovery, ready to embrace the chaotic dance of politics and communications with all the quirk and wonder it entails.


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

Please make up a short conclusion of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between Republican votes for Senators in Louisiana and Customer satisfaction with Sprint. Make it seem dry like academic research paper, but with lots of subtle hidden offhand remarks, jokes, goofy observations, and puns.

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

Here are the title, abstract, introduction, and results sections.
[[TITLE]]
Calling Senators and Sprinting to Votes: A Correlative Examination of Republican Voting Patterns in Louisiana and Sprint Customer Satisfaction

[[ABSTRACT]]
The channels of influence in American politics and consumer behavior can often meander into unexpected territories. In this study, we delve into the peculiar relationship between the voting patterns of Republican Senators in Louisiana and the customer satisfaction levels with Sprint, a prominent telecommunications provider. Harnessing datasets from the MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, and the American Customer Satisfaction Index, we conducted a comprehensive analysis covering the years 2004 to 2020. Our findings revealed a remarkably high correlation coefficient of 0.9191135, with a p-value less than 0.01, showcasing a robust statistical link between the two seemingly disparate domains. While our results do not necessarily imply causation, they do stir up tantalizing speculations and perhaps hint at the latent telecommunication-phonic sentiments of the voting populace. This correlation may raise brows and mobile phone signals alike, unveiling an intersection where political leanings and network preferences converge. Our study paves the way for further investigations that bridge the realms of policy preferences and wireless connectivity, birthing a fertile ground for humorously unexpected alliances and connections.

[[INTRDUCTION]]
The intricate web of human behavior and decision-making has always been a petri dish for the curious minds of researchers. In this age of big data, where information flows like water from a leaking faucet, we find ourselves wading through vast datasets, sifting for correlations that could yield insight into our convoluted world. Our paper embarks on a peculiar journey, aiming to unravel the intriguing relationship between the voting behaviors of Republican Senators in Louisiana and the customer satisfaction levels with Sprint, a wireless carrier known for its spirited rivalry in the telecommunications market.
While some may question the rationale behind this unconventional pairing, it is precisely these unforeseen connections that spark our scientific curiosity. The allure of uncovering unexpected associations is akin to stumbling upon a misplaced earring in a vacuum cleaner – puzzling, yet undeniably captivating. As we venture into the depths of this correlation, we aim to shed light on the uncharted territories where political ideologies intersect with mobile phone reception bars, forming an interdimensional bridge between the Senate floor and the cellular airwaves.
Our analysis, spanning the years 2004 to 2020, traverses through the tumultuous waves of political change and the evolution of cellular technology, seeking to unearth patterns that may elude the untrained eye. The statistical behemoth we wield, with a correlation coefficient of 0.9191135 and a p-value resembling the odds of finding a four-leaf clover on the grassy knoll, beckons us to delve further into the mysterious undercurrents that tie together the realm of political affiliation and the siren call of 4G connectivity.
In the grand symphony of the social sciences, our study aspires to strike a chord that resonates far beyond the confines of political science and consumer behavior, orchestrating a comical serenade to the rhythm of voter sentiment and mobile network allegiance. As we peel back the layers of this curious connection, we invite our readers to partake in the whimsical dance of unexpected alliances, where the tango of data analysis meets the foxtrot of serendipitous discoveries.
Together, let us now embark on this riveting expedition, as we endeavor to unravel the enigmatic links between the voting booth and the cellular tower, for at the crux of this correlation lies a tale as intriguing as finding a misplaced mobile phone in the most unexpected of places.

[[RESULTS]]
The results of our analysis unveiled a striking correlation between the voting patterns of Republican Senators in Louisiana and customer satisfaction levels with Sprint. Our statistical analysis revealed a correlation coefficient of 0.9191135, indicating a remarkably strong positive relationship between these seemingly unrelated variables. The robustness of this association is further underscored by the high r-squared value of 0.8447697, suggesting that a substantial proportion of the variability in Sprint customer satisfaction can be explained by the voting preferences of Republican Senators in Louisiana. Additionally, the p-value falling below 0.01 provides strong evidence against the null hypothesis, reinforcing the credibility of this correlation.
While these findings do not establish a causal relationship between the two variables, they do raise intriguing questions and feed into the voracious appetite of the inquisitive mind for unforeseen connections. One might jest that the mobile network prowess of a certain carrier might indeed sway the hearts of the electorate, or that perhaps political sentiments can be gauged by the strength of one's signal bars. These correlations can prompt quite the lively debate, akin to determining the most effective location to place a political campaign billboard – intriguing yet ultimately inconclusive.
To visually encapsulate this compelling correlation, we present Figure 1, a scatterplot depicting the unmistakably strong relationship between Republican votes for Senators in Louisiana and customer satisfaction with Sprint. As the saying goes, a picture is worth a thousand words, and in this instance, it certainly holds true that a graph can speak volumes about the intriguing connections in the web of human preferences and behaviors.
Overall, our findings provocatively hint at the potential convergence of political inclinations and telecommunication predilections, inviting further exploration into this intersection that may uncover hidden facets of consumer behavior and political sentiment. This correlation, like a well-timed punchline at a political gathering, may bring a spark of humor and unexpected intrigue to the often-stoic realm of statistical analysis and social sciences.
And speaking of unexpected intrigues, it seems that the data has uncovered a tale as curious and enigmatic as the elusive sightings of a Cheshire cat in a realm that bridges the Senate chambers and the wireless airwaves.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[CONCLUSION]]



ChatGPT:

[[CONCLUSION]]

In conclusion, our study has illuminated a compelling correlation between the voting behaviors of Republican Senators in Louisiana and the customer satisfaction levels with Sprint. The robust statistical analysis revealed a remarkably high correlation coefficient and a p-value that could make even the most impassive statistician raise an eyebrow. While this correlation does not imply a causal relationship, it does peek beneath the surface of societal quirks and prompts amusing contemplations. It seems that the political landscape and the realm of mobile networks may share a peculiar kinship, akin to discovering a hidden treasure trove within the labyrinth of data analysis. In a world where unexpected associations surface like unplanned punchlines, our findings add a whimsical note to the scholarly dialogue, infusing a dash of levity into the staid research arena.

As we bring this colorful chase of statistical discovery to a close, we assert with a twinkle of sardonic humor that delving further into the link between Republican votes for Senators in Louisiana and customer satisfaction with Sprint may yield diminishing returns. It appears that this academic tango between wireless connectivity and political leanings has twirled its way into the limelight, leaving little room for additional pirouettes in this particular arena. With a curtain call, we declare that the stage is now set for other areas of inquiry, as there is certainly a treasure trove of other unexpected correlations awaiting the eager gaze of inquisitive researchers. The enigmatic dance between political affiliations and mobile network satisfaction has been briefly illuminated, revealing a whimsical partnership that may continue to amuse and bemuse future scholars.

Therefore, we assert, with resounding affirmation, that the tale of Republican votes and Sprint satisfaction has been told, and it is on this spirited note that we bid adieu to this particular expedition into the serendipitous realms of interdisciplinary correlation.


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 Calling Senators and Sprinting to Votes: A Correlative Examination of Republican Voting Patterns in Louisiana and Sprint Customer Satisfaction. Respond only with the name of a fictional academic journal.

ChatGPT:

The Journal of Political Velocity and Consumer Sentiment


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 Calling Senators and Sprinting to Votes: A Correlative Examination of Republican Voting Patterns in Louisiana and Sprint Customer Satisfaction. Respond only with the name of a fictional organization.

ChatGPT:

The Association for Political Teleportation 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 Calling Senators and Sprinting to Votes: A Correlative Examination of Republican Voting Patterns in Louisiana and Sprint Customer Satisfaction with an abstract of The channels of influence in American politics and consumer behavior can often meander into unexpected territories. In this study, we delve into the peculiar relationship between the voting patterns of Republican Senators in Louisiana and the customer satisfaction levels with Sprint, a prominent telecommunications provider. Harnessing datasets from the MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, and the American Customer Satisfaction Index, we conducted a comprehensive analysis covering the years 2004 to 2020. Our findings revealed a remarkably high correlation coefficient of 0.9191135, with a p-value less than 0.01, showcasing a robust statistical link between the two seemingly disparate domains. While our results do not necessarily imply causation, they do stir up tantalizing speculations and perhaps hint at the latent telecommunication-phonic sentiments of the voting populace. This correlation may raise brows and mobile phone signals alike, unveiling an intersection where political leanings and network preferences converge. Our study paves the way for further investigations that bridge the realms of policy preferences and wireless connectivity, birthing a fertile ground for humorously unexpected alliances and connections.

ChatGPT:

Republican Senators Louisiana voting patterns, Sprint customer satisfaction, telecommunications provider, consumer behavior, American politics influence, correlation coefficient analysis, MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, American Customer Satisfaction Index, political leanings, wireless connectivity, policy preferences, telecommunication-phonic sentiments, Sprint network preferences

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



Random correlation

Discover a new correlation

View all correlations

View all research papers

Report an error


Data details

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

Customer satisfaction with Sprint
Source: American Customer Satisfaction Index
See what else correlates with Customer satisfaction with Sprint

Correlation r = 0.9191135 (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 = 0.8447697 (Coefficient of determination)
This means 84.5% of the change in the one variable (i.e., Customer satisfaction with Sprint) is predictable based on the change in the other (i.e., Votes for Republican Senators in Louisiana) over the 6 years from 2004 through 2020.

p < 0.01, which is statistically significant(Null hypothesis significance test)
The p-value is 0.0095. 0.0095493299082138540000000000
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 0.95% of random cases. Said differently, if you correlated 105 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.

[ 0.42, 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.
200420082010201420162020
Votes for Republican Senators in Louisiana (Percentage of votes)51.027445.723356.554854.754762.060861.1762
Customer satisfaction with Sprint (Consumer Satisfaction)595670687070




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([51.0274,45.7233,56.5548,54.7547,62.0608,61.1762,])
array_2 = np.array([59,56,70,68,70,70,])
array_1_name = "Votes for Republican Senators in Louisiana"
array_2_name = "Customer satisfaction with Sprint"

# 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?

Big thanks for reviewing!


Correlation ID: 4456 · Black Variable ID: 26395 · Red Variable ID: 19884
about · subscribe · emailme@tylervigen.com · twitter

CC BY 4.0