about · email me · subscribe
Spurious correlation #4,472 · 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 Libertarian Senators in Kansas and the second variable is Total runs scored in the World Series.  The chart goes from 1984 to 2013, and the two variables track closely in value over that time. Small Image
Download png
, svg

AI explanation

As Libertarian votes for Senators in Kansas increase, so does the total runs scored in the World Series. This is because the more libertarian leanings in the state lead to a greater emphasis on individual freedom, including the freedom to hit more home runs and steal more bases. It's a real 'baseball-pursuit of happiness' situation!

Model: dalle-3
Prompt: Generate an image showing a sun-drenched Kansas baseball field with a realistic depiction. The scene should feature a scoreboard proudly displaying "Senatorial Liberty" on one side and "World Series Runners" on the other. The Libertarian votes for Senators in Kansas rise, and the numbers on both sides of the scoreboard gleefully climb in unison, showcasing a shared spirit of freedom and progress. A few players are on the field, with the sound of the crack of bats and cheers from fans echoing through the air, reflecting the state's dedication to individual liberty and the thrilling pursuit of home runs. The setting should capture the feeling of a picturesque, sun-soaked afternoon at a baseball game in Kansas, with a strong emphasis on the pride and excitement of the players and fans. 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: Libertarian votes for Senators in Kansas and Total runs scored in the World Series. 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: Hyper-realistic Realistic a meme Concept art Magic realism
ChatGPT: Realistic

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 Libertarian votes for Senators in Kansas and Total runs scored in the World Series, in the following situation: As Libertarian votes for Senators in Kansas increase, so does the total runs scored in the World Series. This is because the more libertarian leanings in the state lead to a greater emphasis on individual freedom, including the freedom to hit more home runs and steal more bases. It's a real 'baseball-pursuit of happiness' situation!. Keep the description simple.
ChatGPT: In a picturesque, sun-drenched Kansas baseball field, the scoreboard proudly displays "Senatorial Liberty" on one side and "World Series Runners" on the other. As the Libertarian votes for Senators in Kansas rise, the numbers on both sides of the scoreboard gleefully climb in unison, showcasing a shared spirit of freedom and progress. The crack of bats and cheers from fans echo through the air, reflecting the state's dedication to individual liberty and the thrilling pursuit of home runs.

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: [ Realistic ] and depicting this scene: In a picturesque, sun-drenched Kansas baseball field, the scoreboard proudly displays "Senatorial Liberty" on one side and "World Series Runners" on the other. As the Libertarian votes for Senators in Kansas rise, the numbers on both sides of the scoreboard gleefully climb in unison, showcasing a shared spirit of freedom and progress. The crack of bats and cheers from fans echo through the air, reflecting the state's dedication to individual liberty and the thrilling pursuit of home runs. Keep the visual depiction simple. Do not include any words or speech bubbles.
ChatGPT: Generate an image showing a sun-drenched Kansas baseball field with a realistic depiction. The scene should feature a scoreboard proudly displaying "Senatorial Liberty" on one side and "World Series Runners" on the other. The Libertarian votes for Senators in Kansas rise, and the numbers on both sides of the scoreboard gleefully climb in unison, showcasing a shared spirit of freedom and progress. A few players are on the field, with the sound of the crack of bats and cheers from fans echoing through the air, reflecting the state's dedication to individual liberty and the thrilling pursuit of home runs. The setting should capture the feeling of a picturesque, sun-soaked afternoon at a baseball game in Kansas, with a strong emphasis on the pride and excitement of the players and fans.

*Variations in the User Prompts from chart to chart are just the result of random number generation in Python. I wrote a few arrays of various styles and methods to ask questions to change up the results. Every time this site writes an explanation or generates an image, the script picks from each at random.

I sequence the requests into multiple prompts because I find GPT 3.5 to perform much better with short, well-managed contexts. Thus, I track the context directly in Python and only ask ChatGPT targeted questions.

Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106 (fine-tuned)
System prompt: You provide humorous responses in the form of plausible sounding explanations for correlations. You assume the correlation is causative for the purpose of the explanation even if it is ridiculous. You do not chat with the user, you only reply with the causal connection explanation and nothing else.
User prompt: Please make up a funny explanation for how increases in Libertarian votes for Senators in Kansas positively influenced Total runs scored in the World Series. Include one good pun.

AI academic paper

(Because p < 0.01)
LIBERTARIAN SENATE VOTES AND WORLD SERIES RUNS: A CORRELATION THAT PUNS ABOVE THE REST?

The Journal of Satirical Scientific Studies

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 witty academic researcher. Your writing sounds like it belongs in a statistics 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 Libertarian votes for Senators in Kansas and Total runs scored in the World Series. Make lots of jokes, goofy observations, and puns.

Rhyme words in the title.

Your research team used data from MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse and Wikipedia to assess this nagging question. You found a correlation coefficient of 0.9139686 and p < 0.01 for 1984 to 2013.

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]]
LIBERTARIAN SENATE VOTES AND WORLD SERIES RUNS: A CORRELATION THAT PUNS ABOVE THE REST?

[[ABSTRACT]]
This paper applies statistical analysis to investigate the curious relationship between the number of Libertarian votes for Senators in Kansas and the total runs scored in the World Series. Leveraging data from MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, and Wikipedia, our research explores this perplexing nexus with a lighthearted twist.

Our findings yield a remarkable correlation coefficient of 0.9139686 and p < 0.01 for the years 1984 to 2013. The link between political choices and sporting events has long fascinated researchers and laypersons alike, and our study aims to add a humorous, yet academically diligent, angle to this ongoing discourse.

In our analysis, we uncovered fascinating patterns that suggest a potential association between the two seemingly unrelated domains. This unexpected discovery adds a new dimension to the debate on the intricate interplay between politics and leisure.

By infusing statistical rigor with whimsy, this research advances the understanding of societal dynamics and highlights the enduring allure of finding connections in the most unexpected places.


Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You are a witty academic researcher. Your writing sounds like it belongs in a statistics 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 Libertarian votes for Senators in Kansas and Total runs scored in the World Series. Make lots of jokes, goofy observations, and puns. Stay serious and dry most of the time, but then occasionally let your wit shine through.

Here is the title and abstract of the paper:
[[TITLE]]
LIBERTARIAN SENATE VOTES AND WORLD SERIES RUNS: A CORRELATION THAT PUNS ABOVE THE REST?

[[ABSTRACT]]
This paper applies statistical analysis to investigate the curious relationship between the number of Libertarian votes for Senators in Kansas and the total runs scored in the World Series. Leveraging data from MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, and Wikipedia, our research explores this perplexing nexus with a lighthearted twist.

Our findings yield a remarkable correlation coefficient of 0.9139686 and p < 0.01 for the years 1984 to 2013. The link between political choices and sporting events has long fascinated researchers and laypersons alike, and our study aims to add a humorous, yet academically diligent, angle to this ongoing discourse.

In our analysis, we uncovered fascinating patterns that suggest a potential association between the two seemingly unrelated domains. This unexpected discovery adds a new dimension to the debate on the intricate interplay between politics and leisure.

By infusing statistical rigor with whimsy, this research advances the understanding of societal dynamics and highlights the enduring allure of finding connections in the most unexpected places.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[INTRODUCTION]]



ChatGPT:
[[INTRODUCTION]]

The relationship between politics and sports has often been a source of both perplexity and delight. It is the stuff of countless water cooler conversations, op-ed pieces, and now, academic research. In this paper, we embark on a wacky journey to unravel the improbable intersection of Libertarian Senate votes in Kansas and the total runs scored in the World Series.

As researchers, we are accustomed to seeking meaningful correlations within datasets, but the notion of finding a connection between political choices and baseball runs scored seemed as likely as finding a diamond among a pile of cubic zirconia. However, much to our surprise, the numbers told a different story, one that was peculiarly convincing.

The association between a political preference typically categorized as alternative and a quintessentially American sport like baseball is unexpected, to say the least. No one could have predicted that the statistical relationship between the number of votes cast for Libertarian senators and the total runs scored in the World Series would be strong enough to pique the interest of even the most die-hard political pundit or baseball aficionado.

Our study sets out to delve into this quirky correlation with both scholarly rigor and a lighthearted touch. It is a combination of data crunching and tongue-in-cheek humor, aiming to infuse the often-dry world of statistical analysis with a dash of whimsy. After all, where else can you find complex statistical modeling mingling with baseball puns and political satire?

Through our investigation, we hope to add a spirited, albeit rigorous, perspective to the ongoing dialogue about the interconnectedness of seemingly disparate social phenomena. The tantalizing prospect of uncovering unexpected connections in the labyrinth of socio-political dynamics is not just intellectually stimulating but also opens the door to a plethora of quirky water cooler moments.

Join us, dear reader, on this merry jaunt through the improbable realms of data, politics, and baseball. As we walk through this statistical wonderland, we promise to keep one eye on the numbers and the other on finding puns that hit a home run.


Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You are a witty academic researcher. Your writing sounds like it belongs in a statistics 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 Libertarian votes for Senators in Kansas and Total runs scored in the World Series. Make lots of jokes, goofy observations, and puns.

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

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

Start by naming serious-sounding studies by authors like Smith, Doe, and Jones - but then quickly devolve. Name some real non-fiction books that would be related to the topic. Then name some real fiction books that sound like they could be related. Then name a couple popular internet memes that are related to one of the topics.

Here is the title and abstract of the paper:
[[TITLE]]
LIBERTARIAN SENATE VOTES AND WORLD SERIES RUNS: A CORRELATION THAT PUNS ABOVE THE REST?

[[ABSTRACT]]
This paper applies statistical analysis to investigate the curious relationship between the number of Libertarian votes for Senators in Kansas and the total runs scored in the World Series. Leveraging data from MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, and Wikipedia, our research explores this perplexing nexus with a lighthearted twist.

Our findings yield a remarkable correlation coefficient of 0.9139686 and p < 0.01 for the years 1984 to 2013. The link between political choices and sporting events has long fascinated researchers and laypersons alike, and our study aims to add a humorous, yet academically diligent, angle to this ongoing discourse.

In our analysis, we uncovered fascinating patterns that suggest a potential association between the two seemingly unrelated domains. This unexpected discovery adds a new dimension to the debate on the intricate interplay between politics and leisure.

By infusing statistical rigor with whimsy, this research advances the understanding of societal dynamics and highlights the enduring allure of finding connections in the most unexpected places.

-------

And here is the introduction section that led to this literature review:
[[INTRODUCTION]]
The relationship between politics and sports has often been a source of both perplexity and delight. It is the stuff of countless water cooler conversations, op-ed pieces, and now, academic research. In this paper, we embark on a wacky journey to unravel the improbable intersection of Libertarian Senate votes in Kansas and the total runs scored in the World Series.
As researchers, we are accustomed to seeking meaningful correlations within datasets, but the notion of finding a connection between political choices and baseball runs scored seemed as likely as finding a diamond among a pile of cubic zirconia. However, much to our surprise, the numbers told a different story, one that was peculiarly convincing.
The association between a political preference typically categorized as alternative and a quintessentially American sport like baseball is unexpected, to say the least. No one could have predicted that the statistical relationship between the number of votes cast for Libertarian senators and the total runs scored in the World Series would be strong enough to pique the interest of even the most die-hard political pundit or baseball aficionado.
Our study sets out to delve into this quirky correlation with both scholarly rigor and a lighthearted touch. It is a combination of data crunching and tongue-in-cheek humor, aiming to infuse the often-dry world of statistical analysis with a dash of whimsy. After all, where else can you find complex statistical modeling mingling with baseball puns and political satire?
Through our investigation, we hope to add a spirited, albeit rigorous, perspective to the ongoing dialogue about the interconnectedness of seemingly disparate social phenomena. The tantalizing prospect of uncovering unexpected connections in the labyrinth of socio-political dynamics is not just intellectually stimulating but also opens the door to a plethora of quirky water cooler moments.
Join us, dear reader, on this merry jaunt through the improbable realms of data, politics, and baseball. As we walk through this statistical wonderland, we promise to keep one eye on the numbers and the other on finding puns that hit a home run.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[LITERATURE REVIEW]]



ChatGPT:
[[LITERATURE REVIEW]]

Smith, Doe, and Jones (2020) examined the historical voting patterns in Kansas and found a strong relationship between Libertarian candidates and Senate votes. In a parallel vein, scholars such as Johnson and Brown (2015) have extensively dissected the nuanced dynamics of runs scored in the World Series, uncovering intricate patterns between team performance and the total runs garnered throughout this prestigious tournament.

Moving beyond the realm of esoteric scholarly studies, works such as "Moneyball: The Art of Winning an Unfair Game" by Michael Lewis (2003) and "Freakonomics: A Rogue Economist Explores the Hidden Side of Everything" by Steven D. Levitt and Stephen J. Dubner (2005) have explored the intersection of sports and quantitative analysis in a compelling manner. These critically acclaimed works have captivated readers with their illuminating insights and pun-laden prose, setting the stage for a whimsical approach to staid statistical analysis.

Unconventional as it may seem, fictional narratives such as Chad Harbach's "The Art of Fielding" and W.P. Kinsella's "Shoeless Joe" offer whimsical yet poignant reflections on the ineffable charm of baseball, infusing the sports genre with wit and wisdom. These literary tomes, while not academic in nature, provide a colorful backdrop against which we can appreciate the rich tapestry of sporting feats and political paradoxes.

Furthermore, the internet culture has not been immune to the allure of amalgamating political satire and baseball banter. Memes such as the "Libertarian Larry" and "Scoreboard Stan" have garnered online acclaim for their humorous juxtaposition of political ideologies and sporting events, further stoking the flames of curiosity about the interplay between these seemingly unrelated spheres.

In light of these multi-faceted influences, our study seeks to bridge the gap between the oft-dour realm of political analysis and the ebullient arena of sports statistics, aiming to tickle the funny bone while upholding the tenets of sound scholarly inquiry. With a firm grounding in quantitative methodologies and a penchant for puns that soar like home runs, our research endeavors to shed light on the enigmatic correlation between Libertarian Senate votes in Kansas and the total runs scored in the World Series.


Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You are a witty academic researcher. Your writing sounds like it belongs in a statistics 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 Libertarian votes for Senators in Kansas and Total runs scored in the World Series. Make lots of jokes, goofy observations, and puns. Stay serious and dry most of the time, but then occasionally let your wit shine through.

Your research team collected data from all across the internet, but mostly just used information from MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse and Wikipedia . You used data from 1984 to 2013

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]]
LIBERTARIAN SENATE VOTES AND WORLD SERIES RUNS: A CORRELATION THAT PUNS ABOVE THE REST?

[[ABSTRACT]]
This paper applies statistical analysis to investigate the curious relationship between the number of Libertarian votes for Senators in Kansas and the total runs scored in the World Series. Leveraging data from MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, and Wikipedia, our research explores this perplexing nexus with a lighthearted twist.

Our findings yield a remarkable correlation coefficient of 0.9139686 and p < 0.01 for the years 1984 to 2013. The link between political choices and sporting events has long fascinated researchers and laypersons alike, and our study aims to add a humorous, yet academically diligent, angle to this ongoing discourse.

In our analysis, we uncovered fascinating patterns that suggest a potential association between the two seemingly unrelated domains. This unexpected discovery adds a new dimension to the debate on the intricate interplay between politics and leisure.

By infusing statistical rigor with whimsy, this research advances the understanding of societal dynamics and highlights the enduring allure of finding connections in the most unexpected places.

[[INTRODUCTION]]
The relationship between politics and sports has often been a source of both perplexity and delight. It is the stuff of countless water cooler conversations, op-ed pieces, and now, academic research. In this paper, we embark on a wacky journey to unravel the improbable intersection of Libertarian Senate votes in Kansas and the total runs scored in the World Series.
As researchers, we are accustomed to seeking meaningful correlations within datasets, but the notion of finding a connection between political choices and baseball runs scored seemed as likely as finding a diamond among a pile of cubic zirconia. However, much to our surprise, the numbers told a different story, one that was peculiarly convincing.
The association between a political preference typically categorized as alternative and a quintessentially American sport like baseball is unexpected, to say the least. No one could have predicted that the statistical relationship between the number of votes cast for Libertarian senators and the total runs scored in the World Series would be strong enough to pique the interest of even the most die-hard political pundit or baseball aficionado.
Our study sets out to delve into this quirky correlation with both scholarly rigor and a lighthearted touch. It is a combination of data crunching and tongue-in-cheek humor, aiming to infuse the often-dry world of statistical analysis with a dash of whimsy. After all, where else can you find complex statistical modeling mingling with baseball puns and political satire?
Through our investigation, we hope to add a spirited, albeit rigorous, perspective to the ongoing dialogue about the interconnectedness of seemingly disparate social phenomena. The tantalizing prospect of uncovering unexpected connections in the labyrinth of socio-political dynamics is not just intellectually stimulating but also opens the door to a plethora of quirky water cooler moments.
Join us, dear reader, on this merry jaunt through the improbable realms of data, politics, and baseball. As we walk through this statistical wonderland, we promise to keep one eye on the numbers and the other on finding puns that hit a home run.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[METHODOLOGY]]



ChatGPT:

[[METHODOLOGY]]

To investigate the unlikely, yet intriguing, relationship between Libertarian Senate votes in Kansas and the total runs scored in the World Series, we employed a methodological approach that blended meticulous data collection with a whimsical spirit. Our research team scoured various scholarly repositories and data archives, including the MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, and the ever-reliable Wikipedia, to source information spanning the years 1984 to 2013.

The initial step of our analysis involved the collection of historical voting data for Libertarian candidates running for Senate in Kansas. This comprehensive dataset allowed us to meticulously track the ebb and flow of Libertarian support over the selected time period. The inclusion of Kansas specifically was due to its idiosyncratic political landscape and the team’s collective fascination with its electoral dynamics.

Simultaneously, we gathered data on the total runs scored in each World Series matchup between 1984 and 2013. This endeavor required a meticulous review of game statistics, series outcomes, and a persistent eye for any peculiar trends across the decades. It was during this process that our team’s appreciation for the statistical intricacies of baseball reached its zenith, resulting in an unanticipated surge of office banter about unearthing the hidden saga of numbers behind America’s favorite pastime.

With the datasets firmly in hand and an arsenal of statistical software at our disposal, we embarked on a journey of correlation analysis and regression modeling, liberally sprinkled with puns and pop culture references. We explored the relationship between Libertarian votes and World Series runs, employing robust statistical techniques to uncover patterns that defied convention and elicited an occasional chuckle from the research team.

The calculation of a correlation coefficient was central to our methodology, providing a quantitative measure of the strength and direction of the relationship under scrutiny. Moreover, we complemented this analysis with multivariate regression models that factored in additional covariates to ensure the robustness of our findings.

The application of a lighthearted approach to rigorous statistical procedures formed the bedrock of this investigation, ensuring that the seriousness of the research endeavor was periodically lightened by humor-laden discussions about the potential causative role of political ideology in the realm of sports. This approach, while unconventional, encapsulated the spirit of our study as we sought to balance academic rigor with mirthful curiosity.

In summary, our methodology ingeniously combined data wrangling, statistical analysis, and a pinch of whimsy to illuminate the hitherto unexplored adventure where Libertarian Senate votes and World Series runs intersect. This fusion of statistical scholarship and a playfully mischievous demeanor not only enlivened the research process but also underscored the uncommon delights that await those who navigate the amusing corridors of data analysis. After all, who says statistics can’t bring a smile to your face?


Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You are a witty academic researcher. Your writing sounds like it belongs in a statistics 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 Libertarian votes for Senators in Kansas and Total runs scored in the World Series. Make lots of jokes, goofy observations, and puns. Stay serious and dry most of the time, but then occasionally let your wit shine through.

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

For the time period 1984 to 2013, you found a correlation 0.9139686, r-squared of 0.8353386, 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]]
LIBERTARIAN SENATE VOTES AND WORLD SERIES RUNS: A CORRELATION THAT PUNS ABOVE THE REST?

[[ABSTRACT]]
This paper applies statistical analysis to investigate the curious relationship between the number of Libertarian votes for Senators in Kansas and the total runs scored in the World Series. Leveraging data from MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, and Wikipedia, our research explores this perplexing nexus with a lighthearted twist.

Our findings yield a remarkable correlation coefficient of 0.9139686 and p < 0.01 for the years 1984 to 2013. The link between political choices and sporting events has long fascinated researchers and laypersons alike, and our study aims to add a humorous, yet academically diligent, angle to this ongoing discourse.

In our analysis, we uncovered fascinating patterns that suggest a potential association between the two seemingly unrelated domains. This unexpected discovery adds a new dimension to the debate on the intricate interplay between politics and leisure.

By infusing statistical rigor with whimsy, this research advances the understanding of societal dynamics and highlights the enduring allure of finding connections in the most unexpected places.

-------

And here is the methodology section that led to this result:
[[METHODOLOGY]]
The relationship between politics and sports has often been a source of both perplexity and delight. It is the stuff of countless water cooler conversations, op-ed pieces, and now, academic research. In this paper, we embark on a wacky journey to unravel the improbable intersection of Libertarian Senate votes in Kansas and the total runs scored in the World Series.
As researchers, we are accustomed to seeking meaningful correlations within datasets, but the notion of finding a connection between political choices and baseball runs scored seemed as likely as finding a diamond among a pile of cubic zirconia. However, much to our surprise, the numbers told a different story, one that was peculiarly convincing.
The association between a political preference typically categorized as alternative and a quintessentially American sport like baseball is unexpected, to say the least. No one could have predicted that the statistical relationship between the number of votes cast for Libertarian senators and the total runs scored in the World Series would be strong enough to pique the interest of even the most die-hard political pundit or baseball aficionado.
Our study sets out to delve into this quirky correlation with both scholarly rigor and a lighthearted touch. It is a combination of data crunching and tongue-in-cheek humor, aiming to infuse the often-dry world of statistical analysis with a dash of whimsy. After all, where else can you find complex statistical modeling mingling with baseball puns and political satire?
Through our investigation, we hope to add a spirited, albeit rigorous, perspective to the ongoing dialogue about the interconnectedness of seemingly disparate social phenomena. The tantalizing prospect of uncovering unexpected connections in the labyrinth of socio-political dynamics is not just intellectually stimulating but also opens the door to a plethora of quirky water cooler moments.
Join us, dear reader, on this merry jaunt through the improbable realms of data, politics, and baseball. As we walk through this statistical wonderland, we promise to keep one eye on the numbers and the other on finding puns that hit a home run.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[RESULTS]]



ChatGPT:

[[RESULTS]]

The relationship between Libertarian Senate votes in Kansas and the total runs scored in the World Series was a delightful surprise to uncover. Our thorough analysis for the years 1984 to 2013 revealed a substantial and noteworthy correlation coefficient of 0.9139686, with an r-squared of 0.8353386, and a p-value less than 0.01. Yes, you read that right - a p-value that had us tipping our academic hats in amazement!

This revelatory correlation, almost as surprising as a knuckleball pitch, suggests a strong relationship between these seemingly unrelated variables. The scatterplot in Fig. 1 vividly illustrates this striking positive correlation, with every point on the plot practically screaming, "Hey batter batter, swing!" It's as if Senatorial votes and World Series runs were engaged in a synchrony akin to a well-executed relay play.

To put it simply, the data don't lie - there's a statistical connection that's as clear as a perfect strike across the plate. The Libertarian leaning in Kansas appears to be dancing an intricate tango with the number of runs being batted in on the World Series stage. Who would have thought that the pace of political finger-pointing might have a rhythm so in tune with the crack of the bat and the roar of the crowd?

In the world of statistics, uncovering such a robust relationship is akin to hitting a statistical home run. Our findings not only add a light-hearted twist to the otherwise serious realm of statistical analysis, but they also serve as a poignant reminder that the world of data can often surprise us with unexpected, and in this case, downright comical connections.

This unanticipated correlation naturally prompts further inquiry and speculation. Could it be that the cheers echoing through a packed ballpark hold sway over the polling stations in the wheat-laden plains of Kansas? It's enough to make a researcher turn to their colleague and exclaim, "You're batting a thousand with your hypothesis!"

In sum, our study not only expands the frontiers of statistical insight but also brings a smile to the faces of those who see linkage between politics and sports as a merry dance rather than a stern, straight-laced affair. As with a game-deciding home run, our findings bat the door wide open for future research to explore the whimsical world of improbable statistical relations.


Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You are a witty academic researcher. Your writing sounds like it belongs in a statistics 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 Libertarian votes for Senators in Kansas and Total runs scored in the World Series. Make lots of jokes, goofy observations, and puns. Stay serious and dry most of the time, but then occasionally let your wit shine through.

Limit your response to 500 tokens.

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

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

[[TITLE]]
LIBERTARIAN SENATE VOTES AND WORLD SERIES RUNS: A CORRELATION THAT PUNS ABOVE THE REST?

[[ABSTRACT]]
This paper applies statistical analysis to investigate the curious relationship between the number of Libertarian votes for Senators in Kansas and the total runs scored in the World Series. Leveraging data from MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, and Wikipedia, our research explores this perplexing nexus with a lighthearted twist.

Our findings yield a remarkable correlation coefficient of 0.9139686 and p < 0.01 for the years 1984 to 2013. The link between political choices and sporting events has long fascinated researchers and laypersons alike, and our study aims to add a humorous, yet academically diligent, angle to this ongoing discourse.

In our analysis, we uncovered fascinating patterns that suggest a potential association between the two seemingly unrelated domains. This unexpected discovery adds a new dimension to the debate on the intricate interplay between politics and leisure.

By infusing statistical rigor with whimsy, this research advances the understanding of societal dynamics and highlights the enduring allure of finding connections in the most unexpected places.

[[LITERATURE REVIEW]]
Smith, Doe, and Jones (2020) examined the historical voting patterns in Kansas and found a strong relationship between Libertarian candidates and Senate votes. In a parallel vein, scholars such as Johnson and Brown (2015) have extensively dissected the nuanced dynamics of runs scored in the World Series, uncovering intricate patterns between team performance and the total runs garnered throughout this prestigious tournament.
Moving beyond the realm of esoteric scholarly studies, works such as "Moneyball: The Art of Winning an Unfair Game" by Michael Lewis (2003) and "Freakonomics: A Rogue Economist Explores the Hidden Side of Everything" by Steven D. Levitt and Stephen J. Dubner (2005) have explored the intersection of sports and quantitative analysis in a compelling manner. These critically acclaimed works have captivated readers with their illuminating insights and pun-laden prose, setting the stage for a whimsical approach to staid statistical analysis.
Unconventional as it may seem, fictional narratives such as Chad Harbach's "The Art of Fielding" and W.P. Kinsella's "Shoeless Joe" offer whimsical yet poignant reflections on the ineffable charm of baseball, infusing the sports genre with wit and wisdom. These literary tomes, while not academic in nature, provide a colorful backdrop against which we can appreciate the rich tapestry of sporting feats and political paradoxes.
Furthermore, the internet culture has not been immune to the allure of amalgamating political satire and baseball banter. Memes such as the "Libertarian Larry" and "Scoreboard Stan" have garnered online acclaim for their humorous juxtaposition of political ideologies and sporting events, further stoking the flames of curiosity about the interplay between these seemingly unrelated spheres.
In light of these multi-faceted influences, our study seeks to bridge the gap between the oft-dour realm of political analysis and the ebullient arena of sports statistics, aiming to tickle the funny bone while upholding the tenets of sound scholarly inquiry. With a firm grounding in quantitative methodologies and a penchant for puns that soar like home runs, our research endeavors to shed light on the enigmatic correlation between Libertarian Senate votes in Kansas and the total runs scored in the World Series.

[[RESULTS]]
The relationship between Libertarian Senate votes in Kansas and the total runs scored in the World Series was a delightful surprise to uncover. Our thorough analysis for the years 1984 to 2013 revealed a substantial and noteworthy correlation coefficient of 0.9139686, with an r-squared of 0.8353386, and a p-value less than 0.01. Yes, you read that right - a p-value that had us tipping our academic hats in amazement!
This revelatory correlation, almost as surprising as a knuckleball pitch, suggests a strong relationship between these seemingly unrelated variables. The scatterplot in Fig. 1 vividly illustrates this striking positive correlation, with every point on the plot practically screaming, "Hey batter batter, swing!" It's as if Senatorial votes and World Series runs were engaged in a synchrony akin to a well-executed relay play.
To put it simply, the data don't lie - there's a statistical connection that's as clear as a perfect strike across the plate. The Libertarian leaning in Kansas appears to be dancing an intricate tango with the number of runs being batted in on the World Series stage. Who would have thought that the pace of political finger-pointing might have a rhythm so in tune with the crack of the bat and the roar of the crowd?
In the world of statistics, uncovering such a robust relationship is akin to hitting a statistical home run. Our findings not only add a light-hearted twist to the otherwise serious realm of statistical analysis, but they also serve as a poignant reminder that the world of data can often surprise us with unexpected, and in this case, downright comical connections.
This unanticipated correlation naturally prompts further inquiry and speculation. Could it be that the cheers echoing through a packed ballpark hold sway over the polling stations in the wheat-laden plains of Kansas? It's enough to make a researcher turn to their colleague and exclaim, "You're batting a thousand with your hypothesis!"
In sum, our study not only expands the frontiers of statistical insight but also brings a smile to the faces of those who see linkage between politics and sports as a merry dance rather than a stern, straight-laced affair. As with a game-deciding home run, our findings bat the door wide open for future research to explore the whimsical world of improbable statistical relations.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[DISCUSSION]]



ChatGPT:

[[DISCUSSION]]

Our study presents compelling evidence of a robust correlation between Libertarian Senate votes in Kansas and the total runs scored in the World Series. The striking correlation coefficient of 0.9139686 and the p-value of less than 0.01 affirm a noteworthy statistical relationship that parallels the tenacity of a slugger aiming for a grand slam.

The lively link we have uncovered between political preferences and sports outcomes is akin to discovering a hidden base in a game of statistical hide-and-seek. As we circle the bases of this discussion, it is evident that our findings align with prior research, offering a whimsical validation of the scholarly work conducted in the intersection of politics and sports.

Drawing upon the works of Smith, Doe, and Jones (2020), which highlighted the strong relationship between Libertarian candidates and Senate votes, and the exhaustive analyses by Johnson and Brown (2015) on the nuanced dynamics of runs scored in the World Series, our results provide a harmonious chorus to the symphony of prior inquiries. The persistent thematic resonance between political choices and sporting accomplishments has been humorously underscored by our research, enhancing the rich tapestry of academic investigations in this domain.

In a delightful nod to the whimsy of literature and pop culture, our findings not only echo the nuanced explorations of statistical relationships but also tap dance with the playful spirit of fictional narratives and internet memes. This confluence of humor and academic rigor serves as a testament to the enduring appeal of uncovering unexpected connections in scholarly pursuits.

Our results echo the sentiment of Michael Lewis in "Moneyball" and Steven D. Levitt and Stephen J. Dubner in "Freakonomics," embracing the engaging interweaving of sports and quantitative analysis with an irrepressible cheer. Like a well-timed pun in a somber mathematical discourse, our research contributes a spark of levity to the often staid realm of statistical analysis, reminding scholars that statistical revelations can be as astounding as a curveball in a fastball world.

As we pause to savor the delightful absurdity of the correlation between Libertarian Senate votes in Kansas and the total runs scored in the World Series, our study beckons future researchers to explore the capricious world of improbable statistical relations. Just as a surprise play can turn the tide in a tense game, our findings prompt a chuckle and a raised eyebrow, inviting further inquiry into the whimsical interplay between seemingly disparate spheres of human interest.


Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You are a witty academic researcher. Your writing sounds like it belongs in a statistics 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 Libertarian votes for Senators in Kansas and Total runs scored in the World Series. Make lots of jokes, goofy observations, and puns. Stay serious and dry most of the time, but then occasionally let your wit shine through.

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

Here are the title, abstract, introduction, and results sections.
[[TITLE]]
LIBERTARIAN SENATE VOTES AND WORLD SERIES RUNS: A CORRELATION THAT PUNS ABOVE THE REST?

[[ABSTRACT]]
This paper applies statistical analysis to investigate the curious relationship between the number of Libertarian votes for Senators in Kansas and the total runs scored in the World Series. Leveraging data from MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, and Wikipedia, our research explores this perplexing nexus with a lighthearted twist.

Our findings yield a remarkable correlation coefficient of 0.9139686 and p < 0.01 for the years 1984 to 2013. The link between political choices and sporting events has long fascinated researchers and laypersons alike, and our study aims to add a humorous, yet academically diligent, angle to this ongoing discourse.

In our analysis, we uncovered fascinating patterns that suggest a potential association between the two seemingly unrelated domains. This unexpected discovery adds a new dimension to the debate on the intricate interplay between politics and leisure.

By infusing statistical rigor with whimsy, this research advances the understanding of societal dynamics and highlights the enduring allure of finding connections in the most unexpected places.

[[INTRDUCTION]]
The relationship between politics and sports has often been a source of both perplexity and delight. It is the stuff of countless water cooler conversations, op-ed pieces, and now, academic research. In this paper, we embark on a wacky journey to unravel the improbable intersection of Libertarian Senate votes in Kansas and the total runs scored in the World Series.
As researchers, we are accustomed to seeking meaningful correlations within datasets, but the notion of finding a connection between political choices and baseball runs scored seemed as likely as finding a diamond among a pile of cubic zirconia. However, much to our surprise, the numbers told a different story, one that was peculiarly convincing.
The association between a political preference typically categorized as alternative and a quintessentially American sport like baseball is unexpected, to say the least. No one could have predicted that the statistical relationship between the number of votes cast for Libertarian senators and the total runs scored in the World Series would be strong enough to pique the interest of even the most die-hard political pundit or baseball aficionado.
Our study sets out to delve into this quirky correlation with both scholarly rigor and a lighthearted touch. It is a combination of data crunching and tongue-in-cheek humor, aiming to infuse the often-dry world of statistical analysis with a dash of whimsy. After all, where else can you find complex statistical modeling mingling with baseball puns and political satire?
Through our investigation, we hope to add a spirited, albeit rigorous, perspective to the ongoing dialogue about the interconnectedness of seemingly disparate social phenomena. The tantalizing prospect of uncovering unexpected connections in the labyrinth of socio-political dynamics is not just intellectually stimulating but also opens the door to a plethora of quirky water cooler moments.
Join us, dear reader, on this merry jaunt through the improbable realms of data, politics, and baseball. As we walk through this statistical wonderland, we promise to keep one eye on the numbers and the other on finding puns that hit a home run.

[[RESULTS]]
The relationship between Libertarian Senate votes in Kansas and the total runs scored in the World Series was a delightful surprise to uncover. Our thorough analysis for the years 1984 to 2013 revealed a substantial and noteworthy correlation coefficient of 0.9139686, with an r-squared of 0.8353386, and a p-value less than 0.01. Yes, you read that right - a p-value that had us tipping our academic hats in amazement!
This revelatory correlation, almost as surprising as a knuckleball pitch, suggests a strong relationship between these seemingly unrelated variables. The scatterplot in Fig. 1 vividly illustrates this striking positive correlation, with every point on the plot practically screaming, "Hey batter batter, swing!" It's as if Senatorial votes and World Series runs were engaged in a synchrony akin to a well-executed relay play.
To put it simply, the data don't lie - there's a statistical connection that's as clear as a perfect strike across the plate. The Libertarian leaning in Kansas appears to be dancing an intricate tango with the number of runs being batted in on the World Series stage. Who would have thought that the pace of political finger-pointing might have a rhythm so in tune with the crack of the bat and the roar of the crowd?
In the world of statistics, uncovering such a robust relationship is akin to hitting a statistical home run. Our findings not only add a light-hearted twist to the otherwise serious realm of statistical analysis, but they also serve as a poignant reminder that the world of data can often surprise us with unexpected, and in this case, downright comical connections.
This unanticipated correlation naturally prompts further inquiry and speculation. Could it be that the cheers echoing through a packed ballpark hold sway over the polling stations in the wheat-laden plains of Kansas? It's enough to make a researcher turn to their colleague and exclaim, "You're batting a thousand with your hypothesis!"
In sum, our study not only expands the frontiers of statistical insight but also brings a smile to the faces of those who see linkage between politics and sports as a merry dance rather than a stern, straight-laced affair. As with a game-deciding home run, our findings bat the door wide open for future research to explore the whimsical world of improbable statistical relations.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[CONCLUSION]]



ChatGPT:

[[CONCLUSION]]

In conclusion, our research has uncovered a correlation between Libertarian votes for Senators in Kansas and total runs scored in the World Series that is as surprising as a knuckleball pitch. The robust correlation coefficient of 0.9139686 and p < 0.01 for the years 1984 to 2013 leaves us in awe, much like a perfectly executed curveball.

The humorous tango between political leanings and baseball runs, highlighted by our findings, sheds light on the unexpected connections that lurk within the enigmatic realm of statistical analysis. It's as if the voting booths and the baseball diamonds were engaged in an intricate dance, much like a well-coordinated double play.

Our results not only add a lighthearted twist to the world of statistical analysis but also serve as a charming reminder of the whimsical nature of societal dynamics. It's akin to finding a four-leaf clover in a sea of statistical data – improbable, yet undeniably delightful.

This unexpected correlation, akin to a game-changing grand slam, paves the way for future research to explore the colorful tapestry of interconnections between seemingly unrelated facets of human life. It's as if our study has hit a statistical home run, leaving us grinning like a Cheshire cat at the sheer unexpectedness of it all.

In closing, we assert that our findings not only contribute to the scholarly discourse but also bring a touch of humor to the often-serious world of statistical investigations. As we hang up our statistical gloves and baseball bats, we can confidently declare that no further research in this area is needed – for now, we have hit the statistical sweet spot.


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 LIBERTARIAN SENATE VOTES AND WORLD SERIES RUNS: A CORRELATION THAT PUNS ABOVE THE REST?. Respond only with the name of a fictional academic journal.

ChatGPT:

The Journal of Satirical Scientific Studies


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 LIBERTARIAN SENATE VOTES AND WORLD SERIES RUNS: A CORRELATION THAT PUNS ABOVE THE REST?. Respond only with the name of a fictional organization.

ChatGPT:

Society for Statistical Shenanigans


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 LIBERTARIAN SENATE VOTES AND WORLD SERIES RUNS: A CORRELATION THAT PUNS ABOVE THE REST? with an abstract of This paper applies statistical analysis to investigate the curious relationship between the number of Libertarian votes for Senators in Kansas and the total runs scored in the World Series. Leveraging data from MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, and Wikipedia, our research explores this perplexing nexus with a lighthearted twist.
Our findings yield a remarkable correlation coefficient of 0.9139686 and p < 0.01 for the years 1984 to 2013. The link between political choices and sporting events has long fascinated researchers and laypersons alike, and our study aims to add a humorous, yet academically diligent, angle to this ongoing discourse.
In our analysis, we uncovered fascinating patterns that suggest a potential association between the two seemingly unrelated domains. This unexpected discovery adds a new dimension to the debate on the intricate interplay between politics and leisure.
By infusing statistical rigor with whimsy, this research advances the understanding of societal dynamics and highlights the enduring allure of finding connections in the most unexpected places.

ChatGPT:

LIBERTARIAN Senate votes Kansas, World Series runs correlation, statistical analysis political choices sporting events, MIT Election Data Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, Wikipedia data, correlation coefficient political choices sporting events, political choices leisure dynamics, societal dynamics, connections unexpected places, statistical rigor societal dynamics

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

Total runs scored in the World Series
Source: Wikipedia
See what else correlates with Total runs scored in the World Series

Correlation r = 0.9139686 (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 = 0.8353386 (Coefficient of determination)
This means 83.5% of the change in the one variable (i.e., Total runs scored in the World Series) is predictable based on the change in the other (i.e., Votes for Libertarian Senators in Kansas) over the 8 years from 1984 through 2013.

p < 0.01, which is statistically significant(Null hypothesis significance test)
The p-value is 0.0015. 0.0014909345154788247000000000
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 0.91 in 0.15% of random cases. Said differently, if you correlated 671 random variables Which I absolutely did.
with the same 7 degrees of freedom, Degrees of freedom is a measure of how many free components we are testing. In this case it is 7 because we have two variables measured over a period of 8 years. It's just the number of years minus ( the number of variables minus one ), which in this case simplifies to the number of years minus one.
you would randomly expect to find a correlation as strong as this one.

[ 0.59, 0.98 ] 95% correlation confidence interval (using the Fisher z-transformation)
The confidence interval is an estimate the range of the value of the correlation coefficient, using the correlation itself as an input. The values are meant to be the low and high end of the correlation coefficient with 95% confidence.

This one is a bit more complciated than the other calculations, but I include it because many people have been pushing for confidence intervals instead of p-value calculations (for example: NEJM. However, if you are dredging data, you can reliably find yourself in the 5%. That's my goal!


All values for the years included above: If I were being very sneaky, I could trim years from the beginning or end of the datasets to increase the correlation on some pairs of variables. I don't do that because there are already plenty of correlations in my database without monkeying with the years.

Still, sometimes one of the variables has more years of data available than the other. This page only shows the overlapping years. To see all the years, click on "See what else correlates with..." link above.
19841992199619982002200420082010
Votes for Libertarian Senators in Kansas (Total votes)675525253130981154570725218422572717922
Total runs scored in the World Series (Runs scored)3837443985363941




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([6755,25253,13098,11545,70725,21842,25727,17922,])
array_2 = np.array([38,37,44,39,85,36,39,41,])
array_1_name = "Votes for Libertarian Senators in Kansas"
array_2_name = "Total runs scored in the World Series"

# 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 shining a light on this correlation!


Correlation ID: 4472 · Black Variable ID: 26241 · Red Variable ID: 536
about · subscribe · emailme@tylervigen.com · twitter

CC BY 4.0