about · email me · subscribe
Spurious correlation #4,468 · 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 Minnesota and the second variable is Popularity of the 'distracted boyfriend' meme.  The chart goes from 2006 to 2020, and the two variables track closely in value over that time. Small Image
Download png
, svg

AI explanation

As more Republican senators were voted in, they inadvertently boosted the meme economy. Their conservative policies led to an unexpected rise in meme production as people sought lighthearted distractions from political discourse. It turns out, the secret ingredient for meme success was... bipartisanship!

Create a meme inspired by the distracted boyfriend meme that in some way references Republican votes for Senators in Minnesota. Try to emulate the style of the meme - don’t violate the copyright, just make it look and feel like the original meme.

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 Minnesota caused Popularity of the 'distracted boyfriend' meme to increase.

AI academic paper

(Because p < 0.01)
Votes and Voyeurs: The Distracted Boyfriend Meme and Republican Senators in Minnesota

The International Journal of Memetics and Political Behavior

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 dry but witty academic researcher. You speak in the passive voice, and your writing sounds like it belongs in a medical or economics journal.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 Minnesota and Popularity of the 'distracted boyfriend' meme. Make lots of jokes, goofy observations, and puns.

Include a pun in the title.

Your research team used data from MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse and Google Trends to assess this nagging question. You found a correlation coefficient of 0.9503880 and p < 0.01 for 2006 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]]
"Votes and Voyeurs: The Distracted Boyfriend Meme and Republican Senators in Minnesota"

[[ABSTRACT]]
This paper delves into the captivating world of internet memes and political preferences, seeking to unravel the perplexing link between the popularity of the "distracted boyfriend" meme and Republican votes for Senators in Minnesota. Leveraging data from the MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, and Google Trends, we conducted a comprehensive analysis spanning the years 2006 to 2020. Our findings revealed a positively shocking correlation coefficient of 0.9503880 and a staggeringly significant p-value of less than 0.01. The unexpected alignment of these seemingly disparate phenomena prompts a reevaluation of the interplay between online culture and political leanings, shedding light on the meme-orable impact of digital distractions in the realm of political decision-making.


Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You are a dry but witty academic researcher. You speak in the passive voice, and your writing sounds like it belongs in a medical or economics journal.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 Minnesota and Popularity of the 'distracted boyfriend' meme. Make lots of jokes, goofy observations, and puns. Sneak in some jokes and clever puns about science, research, statistics, and the variables.

Here is the title and abstract of the paper:
[[TITLE]]
"Votes and Voyeurs: The Distracted Boyfriend Meme and Republican Senators in Minnesota"

[[ABSTRACT]]
This paper delves into the captivating world of internet memes and political preferences, seeking to unravel the perplexing link between the popularity of the "distracted boyfriend" meme and Republican votes for Senators in Minnesota. Leveraging data from the MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, and Google Trends, we conducted a comprehensive analysis spanning the years 2006 to 2020. Our findings revealed a positively shocking correlation coefficient of 0.9503880 and a staggeringly significant p-value of less than 0.01. The unexpected alignment of these seemingly disparate phenomena prompts a reevaluation of the interplay between online culture and political leanings, shedding light on the meme-orable impact of digital distractions in the realm of political decision-making.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[INTRODUCTION]]



ChatGPT:
[[INTRODUCTION]]

The age of the internet is awash with a cacophony of memes, from the timeless classics like the "distracted boyfriend" to the trendy and transient creations that ebb and flow with the digital tides. Meanwhile, in the realm of politics, the ebb and flow of votes and political leanings is a dance as old as time – or at least as old as democracy. This study seeks to untangle the enigmatic web that connects these seemingly unrelated domains: the world of memes and the realm of political votes.

The "distracted boyfriend" meme, with its allure of ambiguous glances and pop culture relevance, has captured the attention of internet users across the globe. But what could this captivating image macro possibly have to do with the political landscape of Minnesota and the voting patterns of Republican Senators?

The pursuit of this connection led to the assembly of a vast and varied dataset, ranging from the voting records of Senators in Minnesota to the fluctuations in the popularity of the "distracted boyfriend" meme on the internet. This endeavor involved a veritable smorgasbord of statistical analyses, from correlation coefficients to regression models, offering a cornucopia of cyberspace and political insights.

As we embark on this scholarly adventure, we must exercise caution in navigating the treacherous waters of correlation and causation, akin to sailors charting a course through a sea of memes and political ideologies. However, armed with our trusty statistical compass and an insatiable curiosity, we shall endeavor to unravel the mystery that lies at the intersection of digital ephemera and political predilections. This study aims not only to entertain with its unexpected findings but also to provoke contemplation on the quirky nuances of human behavior in the digital age.


Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You are a dry but witty academic researcher. You speak in the passive voice, and your writing sounds like it belongs in a medical or economics journal.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 Minnesota and Popularity of the 'distracted boyfriend' meme. 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 cartoons and childrens' shows that you watched that are related to the topic.

Here is the title and abstract of the paper:
[[TITLE]]
"Votes and Voyeurs: The Distracted Boyfriend Meme and Republican Senators in Minnesota"

[[ABSTRACT]]
This paper delves into the captivating world of internet memes and political preferences, seeking to unravel the perplexing link between the popularity of the "distracted boyfriend" meme and Republican votes for Senators in Minnesota. Leveraging data from the MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, and Google Trends, we conducted a comprehensive analysis spanning the years 2006 to 2020. Our findings revealed a positively shocking correlation coefficient of 0.9503880 and a staggeringly significant p-value of less than 0.01. The unexpected alignment of these seemingly disparate phenomena prompts a reevaluation of the interplay between online culture and political leanings, shedding light on the meme-orable impact of digital distractions in the realm of political decision-making.

-------

And here is the introduction section that led to this literature review:
[[INTRODUCTION]]
The age of the internet is awash with a cacophony of memes, from the timeless classics like the "distracted boyfriend" to the trendy and transient creations that ebb and flow with the digital tides. Meanwhile, in the realm of politics, the ebb and flow of votes and political leanings is a dance as old as time – or at least as old as democracy. This study seeks to untangle the enigmatic web that connects these seemingly unrelated domains: the world of memes and the realm of political votes.
The "distracted boyfriend" meme, with its allure of ambiguous glances and pop culture relevance, has captured the attention of internet users across the globe. But what could this captivating image macro possibly have to do with the political landscape of Minnesota and the voting patterns of Republican Senators?

The pursuit of this connection led to the assembly of a vast and varied dataset, ranging from the voting records of Senators in Minnesota to the fluctuations in the popularity of the "distracted boyfriend" meme on the internet. This endeavor involved a veritable smorgasbord of statistical analyses, from correlation coefficients to regression models, offering a cornucopia of cyberspace and political insights.
As we embark on this scholarly adventure, we must exercise caution in navigating the treacherous waters of correlation and causation, akin to sailors charting a course through a sea of memes and political ideologies. However, armed with our trusty statistical compass and an insatiable curiosity, we shall endeavor to unravel the mystery that lies at the intersection of digital ephemera and political predilections. This study aims not only to entertain with its unexpected findings but also to provoke contemplation on the quirky nuances of human behavior in the digital age.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[LITERATURE REVIEW]]



ChatGPT:
[[LITERATURE REVIEW]]

In "Smith, et al.," the authors find that internet memes play a significant role in shaping contemporary culture and communication patterns. Similarly, "Doe and Jones" delve into the social impact of digital imagery and its influence on individual perceptions and behaviors. These studies lay the foundation for our exploration of the peculiar intersection between internet memes and political preferences, particularly as manifested in the context of Republican votes for Senators in Minnesota.

Moving beyond the realm of academia, "The Selfish Gene" by Richard Dawkins presents a compelling perspective on human behavior and the transmission of cultural traits, which may offer insight into the diffusion and perpetuation of internet memes like the "distracted boyfriend." Furthermore, "The Tipping Point" by Malcolm Gladwell examines the dissemination of trends and ideas within society, potentially shedding light on the viral nature of internet memes and their impact on public consciousness.

On a more fictional note, the works of Terry Pratchett, particularly "Going Postal," provide a whimsical yet astute commentary on human folly and the influence of media and messaging. In a similarly fantastical vein, Neil Gaiman's "American Gods" offers a contemporary mythological framework through which to contemplate the power of symbols and icons in shaping societal beliefs and actions.

From the realm of childhood nostalgia, the cartoon "Scooby-Doo" comes to mind, with its thematic exploration of mystery, intrigue, and unexpected revelations. Similarly, the educational series "Sesame Street" presents a playful yet didactic approach to human behavior, underscoring the multifaceted influences that shape individual decisions and inclinations. While these cultural touchstones may seem far removed from our academic inquiry, their thematic exploration of curiosity, discovery, and the unexpected mirrors the spirit of our undertaking.

In sum, the exploration of the connection between Republican votes for Senators in Minnesota and the popularity of the "distracted boyfriend" meme invites a playful and diverse array of scholarly and fictional perspectives, promising to unravel a tapestry as colorful and unpredictable as the memes that adorn the digital landscape.


Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You are a dry but witty academic researcher. You speak in the passive voice, and your writing sounds like it belongs in a medical or economics journal.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 Minnesota and Popularity of the 'distracted boyfriend' meme. Make lots of jokes, goofy observations, and puns. Sneak in some jokes and clever puns about science, research, statistics, and the variables.

Your research team collected data from all across the internet, but mostly just used information from MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse and Google Trends . You used data from 2006 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]]
"Votes and Voyeurs: The Distracted Boyfriend Meme and Republican Senators in Minnesota"

[[ABSTRACT]]
This paper delves into the captivating world of internet memes and political preferences, seeking to unravel the perplexing link between the popularity of the "distracted boyfriend" meme and Republican votes for Senators in Minnesota. Leveraging data from the MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, and Google Trends, we conducted a comprehensive analysis spanning the years 2006 to 2020. Our findings revealed a positively shocking correlation coefficient of 0.9503880 and a staggeringly significant p-value of less than 0.01. The unexpected alignment of these seemingly disparate phenomena prompts a reevaluation of the interplay between online culture and political leanings, shedding light on the meme-orable impact of digital distractions in the realm of political decision-making.

[[INTRODUCTION]]
The age of the internet is awash with a cacophony of memes, from the timeless classics like the "distracted boyfriend" to the trendy and transient creations that ebb and flow with the digital tides. Meanwhile, in the realm of politics, the ebb and flow of votes and political leanings is a dance as old as time – or at least as old as democracy. This study seeks to untangle the enigmatic web that connects these seemingly unrelated domains: the world of memes and the realm of political votes.
The "distracted boyfriend" meme, with its allure of ambiguous glances and pop culture relevance, has captured the attention of internet users across the globe. But what could this captivating image macro possibly have to do with the political landscape of Minnesota and the voting patterns of Republican Senators?

The pursuit of this connection led to the assembly of a vast and varied dataset, ranging from the voting records of Senators in Minnesota to the fluctuations in the popularity of the "distracted boyfriend" meme on the internet. This endeavor involved a veritable smorgasbord of statistical analyses, from correlation coefficients to regression models, offering a cornucopia of cyberspace and political insights.
As we embark on this scholarly adventure, we must exercise caution in navigating the treacherous waters of correlation and causation, akin to sailors charting a course through a sea of memes and political ideologies. However, armed with our trusty statistical compass and an insatiable curiosity, we shall endeavor to unravel the mystery that lies at the intersection of digital ephemera and political predilections. This study aims not only to entertain with its unexpected findings but also to provoke contemplation on the quirky nuances of human behavior in the digital age.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[METHODOLOGY]]



ChatGPT:

[[METHODOLOGY]]

A hodgepodge of data sources was scrutinized to reveal the curious nexus of Republican votes for Senators in Minnesota and the zeitgeist of the "distracted boyfriend" meme. Leveraging the troves of information from the MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, and the digital pulse of Google Trends, our research team embarked on an odyssey through the choppy seas of data collection and analysis.

To quantify the popularity of the "distracted boyfriend" meme, the Google Trends data were harvested, as this platform provides a window into the collective consciousness of internet denizens regarding their fervent engagements with memes. This index of meme momentum from 2006 to 2020 served as a barometer of the ebb and flow of the meme's digital dominance.

Meanwhile, the political landscape of Minnesota and the voting behavior of Republican Senators were meticulously tabulated from the archives of the MIT Election Data and Science Lab, granting a panoramic view into the kaleidoscopic realm of political choices and party allegiance.

Subsequently, armed with this amalgam of data, we embarked on a grand voyage through the simulated seas of statistical analysis. Correlation coefficients were summoned forth to assess the apparent interplay between the popularity of the "distracted boyfriend" meme and the Republican support for Senators in Minnesota. A notable rendezvous with regression models was also arranged to discern the potential predictive power of the meme's appeal on the political stage.

Lastly, the statistical significance of our findings was scrutinized with the zeal of a meme aficionado dissecting the nuances of a viral creation. Hypothesis testing, accompanied by the unveiling of p-values and confidence intervals, was deployed to bestow the sheen of statistical significance on the serendipitous correlations that skulked within the datasets.

In the pursuit of this scholarly escapade, we navigated the ebbs and flows of data, charts, and statistical software, ever vigilant against the treacherous siren songs of erroneous conclusions. Through this melange of data deluge and statistical scrutiny, the tides of digital culture and political sway were probed, offering a titillating rendition of the dance between memes and political predilections.


Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You are a dry but witty academic researcher. You speak in the passive voice, and your writing sounds like it belongs in a medical or economics journal.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 Minnesota and Popularity of the 'distracted boyfriend' meme. Make lots of jokes, goofy observations, and puns. Sneak in some jokes and clever puns about science, research, statistics, and the variables.

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

For the time period 2006 to 2020, you found a correlation 0.9503880, r-squared of 0.9032373, 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]]
"Votes and Voyeurs: The Distracted Boyfriend Meme and Republican Senators in Minnesota"

[[ABSTRACT]]
This paper delves into the captivating world of internet memes and political preferences, seeking to unravel the perplexing link between the popularity of the "distracted boyfriend" meme and Republican votes for Senators in Minnesota. Leveraging data from the MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, and Google Trends, we conducted a comprehensive analysis spanning the years 2006 to 2020. Our findings revealed a positively shocking correlation coefficient of 0.9503880 and a staggeringly significant p-value of less than 0.01. The unexpected alignment of these seemingly disparate phenomena prompts a reevaluation of the interplay between online culture and political leanings, shedding light on the meme-orable impact of digital distractions in the realm of political decision-making.

-------

And here is the methodology section that led to this result:
[[METHODOLOGY]]
The age of the internet is awash with a cacophony of memes, from the timeless classics like the "distracted boyfriend" to the trendy and transient creations that ebb and flow with the digital tides. Meanwhile, in the realm of politics, the ebb and flow of votes and political leanings is a dance as old as time – or at least as old as democracy. This study seeks to untangle the enigmatic web that connects these seemingly unrelated domains: the world of memes and the realm of political votes.
The "distracted boyfriend" meme, with its allure of ambiguous glances and pop culture relevance, has captured the attention of internet users across the globe. But what could this captivating image macro possibly have to do with the political landscape of Minnesota and the voting patterns of Republican Senators?

The pursuit of this connection led to the assembly of a vast and varied dataset, ranging from the voting records of Senators in Minnesota to the fluctuations in the popularity of the "distracted boyfriend" meme on the internet. This endeavor involved a veritable smorgasbord of statistical analyses, from correlation coefficients to regression models, offering a cornucopia of cyberspace and political insights.
As we embark on this scholarly adventure, we must exercise caution in navigating the treacherous waters of correlation and causation, akin to sailors charting a course through a sea of memes and political ideologies. However, armed with our trusty statistical compass and an insatiable curiosity, we shall endeavor to unravel the mystery that lies at the intersection of digital ephemera and political predilections. This study aims not only to entertain with its unexpected findings but also to provoke contemplation on the quirky nuances of human behavior in the digital age.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[RESULTS]]



ChatGPT:

[[RESULTS]]

The enthralling interplay between the popularity of the "distracted boyfriend" meme and the electoral decisions of Republican Senators in Minnesota has yielded some truly eye-opening results. Our analysis uncovered a positively staggering correlation coefficient of 0.9503880, indicating a remarkably strong relationship between these seemingly unrelated variables. The R-squared value of 0.9032373 further emphasizes the robustness of this correlation, suggesting that approximately 90.3% of the variation in Republican votes for Senators in Minnesota can be explained by the popularity of the "distracted boyfriend" meme.

The p-value of less than 0.01 provides compelling evidence of the statistical significance of this association, rendering it not just a mere coincidence or a fluke of data but a bona fide phenomenon that demands further inquiry. In other words, the likelihood of obtaining such a strong correlation by random chance is exceedingly low, reinforcing the notion that there is indeed a substantial relationship between these two variables.

In Fig. 1, the scatterplot visually encapsulates the robustness of the correlation, illustrating a tight clustering of data points that follows a clear upward trend. The figure serves as a compelling visual testament to the remarkable connection between Republican votes for Senators in Minnesota and the allure of the "distracted boyfriend" meme.

This unexpected alignment of internet frivolity and political preferences may seem as outlandish as a quantum physicist randomly using puns, but our findings elucidate the intriguing interplay between online culture and political inclinations. As we delve deeper into the labyrinthine recesses of digital culture, it becomes evident that the influence of memes transcends the boundaries of entertainment, seeping into the fabric of political decision-making with a captivating and confounding allure. Indeed, this study serves as a poignant reminder that in the fickle and fantastical realm of cyberspace, even the most seemingly whimsical phenomena can wield a palpable impact on the serious and staid domain of politics.


Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You are a dry but witty academic researcher. You speak in the passive voice, and your writing sounds like it belongs in a medical or economics journal.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 Minnesota and Popularity of the 'distracted boyfriend' meme. Make lots of jokes, goofy observations, and puns. Sneak in some jokes and clever puns about science, research, statistics, and the variables.

Limit your response to 500 tokens.

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

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

[[TITLE]]
"Votes and Voyeurs: The Distracted Boyfriend Meme and Republican Senators in Minnesota"

[[ABSTRACT]]
This paper delves into the captivating world of internet memes and political preferences, seeking to unravel the perplexing link between the popularity of the "distracted boyfriend" meme and Republican votes for Senators in Minnesota. Leveraging data from the MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, and Google Trends, we conducted a comprehensive analysis spanning the years 2006 to 2020. Our findings revealed a positively shocking correlation coefficient of 0.9503880 and a staggeringly significant p-value of less than 0.01. The unexpected alignment of these seemingly disparate phenomena prompts a reevaluation of the interplay between online culture and political leanings, shedding light on the meme-orable impact of digital distractions in the realm of political decision-making.

[[LITERATURE REVIEW]]
In "Smith, et al.," the authors find that internet memes play a significant role in shaping contemporary culture and communication patterns. Similarly, "Doe and Jones" delve into the social impact of digital imagery and its influence on individual perceptions and behaviors. These studies lay the foundation for our exploration of the peculiar intersection between internet memes and political preferences, particularly as manifested in the context of Republican votes for Senators in Minnesota.
Moving beyond the realm of academia, "The Selfish Gene" by Richard Dawkins presents a compelling perspective on human behavior and the transmission of cultural traits, which may offer insight into the diffusion and perpetuation of internet memes like the "distracted boyfriend." Furthermore, "The Tipping Point" by Malcolm Gladwell examines the dissemination of trends and ideas within society, potentially shedding light on the viral nature of internet memes and their impact on public consciousness.
On a more fictional note, the works of Terry Pratchett, particularly "Going Postal," provide a whimsical yet astute commentary on human folly and the influence of media and messaging. In a similarly fantastical vein, Neil Gaiman's "American Gods" offers a contemporary mythological framework through which to contemplate the power of symbols and icons in shaping societal beliefs and actions.
From the realm of childhood nostalgia, the cartoon "Scooby-Doo" comes to mind, with its thematic exploration of mystery, intrigue, and unexpected revelations. Similarly, the educational series "Sesame Street" presents a playful yet didactic approach to human behavior, underscoring the multifaceted influences that shape individual decisions and inclinations. While these cultural touchstones may seem far removed from our academic inquiry, their thematic exploration of curiosity, discovery, and the unexpected mirrors the spirit of our undertaking.
In sum, the exploration of the connection between Republican votes for Senators in Minnesota and the popularity of the "distracted boyfriend" meme invites a playful and diverse array of scholarly and fictional perspectives, promising to unravel a tapestry as colorful and unpredictable as the memes that adorn the digital landscape.

[[RESULTS]]
The enthralling interplay between the popularity of the "distracted boyfriend" meme and the electoral decisions of Republican Senators in Minnesota has yielded some truly eye-opening results. Our analysis uncovered a positively staggering correlation coefficient of 0.9503880, indicating a remarkably strong relationship between these seemingly unrelated variables. The R-squared value of 0.9032373 further emphasizes the robustness of this correlation, suggesting that approximately 90.3% of the variation in Republican votes for Senators in Minnesota can be explained by the popularity of the "distracted boyfriend" meme.
The p-value of less than 0.01 provides compelling evidence of the statistical significance of this association, rendering it not just a mere coincidence or a fluke of data but a bona fide phenomenon that demands further inquiry. In other words, the likelihood of obtaining such a strong correlation by random chance is exceedingly low, reinforcing the notion that there is indeed a substantial relationship between these two variables.
In Fig. 1, the scatterplot visually encapsulates the robustness of the correlation, illustrating a tight clustering of data points that follows a clear upward trend. The figure serves as a compelling visual testament to the remarkable connection between Republican votes for Senators in Minnesota and the allure of the "distracted boyfriend" meme.
This unexpected alignment of internet frivolity and political preferences may seem as outlandish as a quantum physicist randomly using puns, but our findings elucidate the intriguing interplay between online culture and political inclinations. As we delve deeper into the labyrinthine recesses of digital culture, it becomes evident that the influence of memes transcends the boundaries of entertainment, seeping into the fabric of political decision-making with a captivating and confounding allure. Indeed, this study serves as a poignant reminder that in the fickle and fantastical realm of cyberspace, even the most seemingly whimsical phenomena can wield a palpable impact on the serious and staid domain of politics.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[DISCUSSION]]



ChatGPT:

[[DISCUSSION]]
The unearthed correlation between the Republican votes for Senators in Minnesota and the popularity of the "distracted boyfriend" meme has opened a Pandora's box of perplexing yet compelling insights. Our findings not only support the existing literature on the influence of internet memes on sociocultural phenomena but also add a quirky twist to the age-old debate of whether politics and playfulness can coexist.

As we revisit the scholarly and fictional lenses through which we approached this investigation, the gravity of our results juxtaposed with the whimsy of our literature review becomes as striking as a statistical outlier. The works of Richard Dawkins take on an unexpected profundity, akin to a meme with hidden layers of meaning. While "The Selfish Gene" may have initially seemed like a tangential reference, its exploration of cultural transmission resonates deeply with the meme's viral spread and enduring impact.

Moreover, the insights from Malcolm Gladwell's "The Tipping Point" acquire a newfound resonance, much like discovering a meme's hidden symbolism. Just as Gladwell delves into the heretofore uncharted terrain of social epidemics, our findings unveil the contagion of digital distractions in the realm of political decision-making. We have inadvertently stumbled upon a "tipping point" where online frivolity intersects with the gravity of electoral choices, underscoring the nuanced interplay between seemingly incongruous domains.

Returning to the whimsical realm evoked by Terry Pratchett and Neil Gaiman, our findings embody the blend of levity and profundity encapsulated in their works. The seemingly disparate worlds of memes and political preferences converge in a manner reminiscent of Pratchett's astute commentary on human folly, as if digital distractions and electoral decisions were but pawns in a cosmic chess game.

From an empirical standpoint, the robust correlation coefficient and R-squared value substantiate the genuine magnitude of the relationship between these variables. They stand as stark evidence that the allure of the "distracted boyfriend" meme exerts a tangible influence on the electoral landscape in Minnesota, much like a meme holding sway over online discourse. The p-value, like a meticulous investigator, sheds light on the statistical significance of this association, corroborating that the likelihood of this correlation occurring by mere happenstance is as remote as an inconspicuous outlier in a sea of data points.

As we grapple with the implications of our findings, we are faced with a revelation as striking as an unexpected statistical anomaly: the digital expanse, with its seemingly frivolous memes and ephemeral diversions, permeates the very fabric of political decision-making. Our investigation stands as a testament to the capacity of internet culture to leave an indelible imprint on the seemingly disparate domains of politics and civic engagement. Indeed, the "distracted boyfriend" meme, with its seemingly innocuous depiction of distracted infatuation, emerges as an unwitting protagonist in the intricate narrative of electoral preferences, much like a surprising variable exerting unforeseen influence in a statistical model.


Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You are a dry but witty academic researcher. You speak in the passive voice, and your writing sounds like it belongs in a medical or economics journal.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 Minnesota and Popularity of the 'distracted boyfriend' meme. Make lots of jokes, goofy observations, and puns. Sneak in some jokes and clever puns about science, research, statistics, and the variables.

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

Here are the title, abstract, introduction, and results sections.
[[TITLE]]
"Votes and Voyeurs: The Distracted Boyfriend Meme and Republican Senators in Minnesota"

[[ABSTRACT]]
This paper delves into the captivating world of internet memes and political preferences, seeking to unravel the perplexing link between the popularity of the "distracted boyfriend" meme and Republican votes for Senators in Minnesota. Leveraging data from the MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, and Google Trends, we conducted a comprehensive analysis spanning the years 2006 to 2020. Our findings revealed a positively shocking correlation coefficient of 0.9503880 and a staggeringly significant p-value of less than 0.01. The unexpected alignment of these seemingly disparate phenomena prompts a reevaluation of the interplay between online culture and political leanings, shedding light on the meme-orable impact of digital distractions in the realm of political decision-making.

[[INTRDUCTION]]
The age of the internet is awash with a cacophony of memes, from the timeless classics like the "distracted boyfriend" to the trendy and transient creations that ebb and flow with the digital tides. Meanwhile, in the realm of politics, the ebb and flow of votes and political leanings is a dance as old as time – or at least as old as democracy. This study seeks to untangle the enigmatic web that connects these seemingly unrelated domains: the world of memes and the realm of political votes.
The "distracted boyfriend" meme, with its allure of ambiguous glances and pop culture relevance, has captured the attention of internet users across the globe. But what could this captivating image macro possibly have to do with the political landscape of Minnesota and the voting patterns of Republican Senators?

The pursuit of this connection led to the assembly of a vast and varied dataset, ranging from the voting records of Senators in Minnesota to the fluctuations in the popularity of the "distracted boyfriend" meme on the internet. This endeavor involved a veritable smorgasbord of statistical analyses, from correlation coefficients to regression models, offering a cornucopia of cyberspace and political insights.
As we embark on this scholarly adventure, we must exercise caution in navigating the treacherous waters of correlation and causation, akin to sailors charting a course through a sea of memes and political ideologies. However, armed with our trusty statistical compass and an insatiable curiosity, we shall endeavor to unravel the mystery that lies at the intersection of digital ephemera and political predilections. This study aims not only to entertain with its unexpected findings but also to provoke contemplation on the quirky nuances of human behavior in the digital age.

[[RESULTS]]
The enthralling interplay between the popularity of the "distracted boyfriend" meme and the electoral decisions of Republican Senators in Minnesota has yielded some truly eye-opening results. Our analysis uncovered a positively staggering correlation coefficient of 0.9503880, indicating a remarkably strong relationship between these seemingly unrelated variables. The R-squared value of 0.9032373 further emphasizes the robustness of this correlation, suggesting that approximately 90.3% of the variation in Republican votes for Senators in Minnesota can be explained by the popularity of the "distracted boyfriend" meme.
The p-value of less than 0.01 provides compelling evidence of the statistical significance of this association, rendering it not just a mere coincidence or a fluke of data but a bona fide phenomenon that demands further inquiry. In other words, the likelihood of obtaining such a strong correlation by random chance is exceedingly low, reinforcing the notion that there is indeed a substantial relationship between these two variables.
In Fig. 1, the scatterplot visually encapsulates the robustness of the correlation, illustrating a tight clustering of data points that follows a clear upward trend. The figure serves as a compelling visual testament to the remarkable connection between Republican votes for Senators in Minnesota and the allure of the "distracted boyfriend" meme.
This unexpected alignment of internet frivolity and political preferences may seem as outlandish as a quantum physicist randomly using puns, but our findings elucidate the intriguing interplay between online culture and political inclinations. As we delve deeper into the labyrinthine recesses of digital culture, it becomes evident that the influence of memes transcends the boundaries of entertainment, seeping into the fabric of political decision-making with a captivating and confounding allure. Indeed, this study serves as a poignant reminder that in the fickle and fantastical realm of cyberspace, even the most seemingly whimsical phenomena can wield a palpable impact on the serious and staid domain of politics.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[CONCLUSION]]



ChatGPT:

[[CONCLUSION]]

In conclusion, our investigation into the unlikely pairing of the "distracted boyfriend" meme and Republican votes for Senators in Minnesota has yielded astonishing results. The correlation coefficient of 0.9503880 is as strong as a well-brewed cup of coffee, leaving little room for doubt about the uncanny link between these variables. The statistically significant p-value of less than 0.01 is rarer than a unicorn sighting at a statistics conference, reinforcing the robustness of this correlation and dismissing any suspicions of mere happenstance.

While some may jest that this correlation is as dubious as a scientist's attempt at stand-up comedy, our findings underscore the profound impact of internet culture on political behavior. The allure of the "distracted boyfriend" meme, with its tantalizing ambiguity, seems to have beguiled not only netizens but also voters in the Land of 10,000 Lakes.

This unexpected alignment of cyber whimsy and political proclivities urges us to tread carefully in the labyrinthine corridors of digital culture, for the influence of memes knows no bounds. Perhaps it is time to expand the scope of political campaign strategies to incorporate meme marketing, or even establish the "Meme Party" as a formidable political force. After all, in the realm of online engagement, a well-timed meme could be more influential than a well-crafted policy proposal.

In light of these revelatory findings, it is unequivocally clear that further research in this domain is unnecessary. The correlation between the popularity of the "distracted boyfriend" meme and Republican votes for Senators in Minnesota is as firm as a scientist's belief in the laws of physics. Therefore, it is with utmost confidence that we assert: the case is closed.


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 Votes and Voyeurs: The Distracted Boyfriend Meme and Republican Senators in Minnesota. Respond only with the name of a fictional academic journal.

ChatGPT:

The International Journal of Memetics and Political Behavior


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 Votes and Voyeurs: The Distracted Boyfriend Meme and Republican Senators in Minnesota. Respond only with the name of a fictional organization.

ChatGPT:

The Center for Internet Culture 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 Votes and Voyeurs: The Distracted Boyfriend Meme and Republican Senators in Minnesota with an abstract of This paper delves into the captivating world of internet memes and political preferences, seeking to unravel the perplexing link between the popularity of the "distracted boyfriend" meme and Republican votes for Senators in Minnesota. Leveraging data from the MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, and Google Trends, we conducted a comprehensive analysis spanning the years 2006 to 2020. Our findings revealed a positively shocking correlation coefficient of 0.9503880 and a staggeringly significant p-value of less than 0.01. The unexpected alignment of these seemingly disparate phenomena prompts a reevaluation of the interplay between online culture and political leanings, shedding light on the meme-orable impact of digital distractions in the realm of political decision-making.

ChatGPT:

"distracted boyfriend" meme, Republican Senators, Minnesota, internet memes, political preferences, MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, Google Trends, correlation coefficient, p-value, online culture, political decision-making, digital distractions

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

Popularity of the 'distracted boyfriend' meme
Detailed data title: Relative volume of Google searches for 'distracted boyfriend' (without quotes, in the United States)
Source: Google Trends
Additional Info: Relative search volume is a unique Google thing; the shape of the chart is accurate but the actual numbers are meaningless.

See what else correlates with Popularity of the 'distracted boyfriend' meme

Correlation r = 0.9503880 (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 = 0.9032373 (Coefficient of determination)
This means 90.3% of the change in the one variable (i.e., Popularity of the 'distracted boyfriend' meme) is predictable based on the change in the other (i.e., Votes for Republican Senators in Minnesota) over the 6 years from 2006 through 2020.

p < 0.01, which is statistically significant(Null hypothesis significance test)
The p-value is 0.0036. 0.0036309745975972286000000000
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 0.95 in 0.36% of random cases. Said differently, if you correlated 275 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.

[ 0.61, 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.
200620082012201420182020
Votes for Republican Senators in Minnesota (Total votes)835653121232086797485022720362101398140
Popularity of the 'distracted boyfriend' meme (Relative popularity)44.2222221.343.333327




Why this works

  1. Data dredging: I have 25,153 variables in my database. I compare all these variables against each other to find ones that randomly match up. That's 632,673,409 correlation calculations! This is called “data dredging.” Instead of starting with a hypothesis and testing it, I instead abused the data to see what correlations shake out. It’s a dangerous way to go about analysis, because any sufficiently large dataset will yield strong correlations completely at random.
  2. Lack of causal connection: There is probably Because these pages are automatically generated, it's possible that the two variables you are viewing are in fact causually related. I take steps to prevent the obvious ones from showing on the site (I don't let data about the weather in one city correlate with the weather in a neighboring city, for example), but sometimes they still pop up. If they are related, cool! You found a loophole.
    no direct connection between these variables, despite what the AI says above. This is exacerbated by the fact that I used "Years" as the base variable. Lots of things happen in a year that are not related to each other! Most studies would use something like "one person" in stead of "one year" to be the "thing" studied.
  3. Observations not independent: For many variables, sequential years are not independent of each other. If a population of people is continuously doing something every day, there is no reason to think they would suddenly change how they are doing that thing on January 1. A simple Personally I don't find any p-value calculation to be 'simple,' but you know what I mean.
    p-value calculation does not take this into account, so mathematically it appears less probable than it really is.
  4. Very low n: There are not many data points included in this analysis. Even if the p-value is high, we should be suspicious of using so few datapoints in a correlation.
  5. Y-axis doesn't start at zero: I truncated the Y-axes of the graph above. I also used a line graph, which makes the visual connection stand out more than it deserves. Nothing against line graphs. They are great at telling a story when you have linear data! But visually it is deceptive because the only data is at the points on the graph, not the lines on the graph. In between each point, the data could have been doing anything. Like going for a random walk by itself!
    Mathematically what I showed is true, but it is intentionally misleading. Below is the same chart but with both Y-axes starting at zero.




Try it yourself

You can calculate the values on this page on your own! Try running the Python code to see the calculation results. Step 1: Download and install Python on your computer.

Step 2: Open a plaintext editor like Notepad and paste the code below into it.

Step 3: Save the file as "calculate_correlation.py" in a place you will remember, like your desktop. Copy the file location to your clipboard. On Windows, you can right-click the file and click "Properties," and then copy what comes after "Location:" As an example, on my computer the location is "C:\Users\tyler\Desktop"

Step 4: Open a command line window. For example, by pressing start and typing "cmd" and them pressing enter.

Step 5: Install the required modules by typing "pip install numpy", then pressing enter, then typing "pip install scipy", then pressing enter.

Step 6: Navigate to the location where you saved the Python file by using the "cd" command. For example, I would type "cd C:\Users\tyler\Desktop" and push enter.

Step 7: Run the Python script by typing "python calculate_correlation.py"

If you run into any issues, I suggest asking ChatGPT to walk you through installing Python and running the code below on your system. Try this question:

"Walk me through installing Python on my computer to run a script that uses scipy and numpy. Go step-by-step and ask me to confirm before moving on. Start by asking me questions about my operating system so that you know how to proceed. Assume I want the simplest installation with the latest version of Python and that I do not currently have any of the necessary elements installed. Remember to only give me one step per response and confirm I have done it before proceeding."


# These modules make it easier to perform the calculation
import numpy as np
from scipy import stats

# We'll define a function that we can call to return the correlation calculations
def calculate_correlation(array1, array2):

    # Calculate Pearson correlation coefficient and p-value
    correlation, p_value = stats.pearsonr(array1, array2)

    # Calculate R-squared as the square of the correlation coefficient
    r_squared = correlation**2

    return correlation, r_squared, p_value

# These are the arrays for the variables shown on this page, but you can modify them to be any two sets of numbers
array_1 = np.array([835653,1212320,867974,850227,2036210,1398140,])
array_2 = np.array([4,4.22222,2,1.3,43.3333,27,])
array_1_name = "Votes for Republican Senators in Minnesota"
array_2_name = "Popularity of the 'distracted boyfriend' meme"

# 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?

Thanks for being the explorer we needed!


Correlation ID: 4468 · Black Variable ID: 26262 · Red Variable ID: 25128
about · subscribe · emailme@tylervigen.com · twitter

CC BY 4.0