Spurious correlation #4,610 · 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 New Mexico and the second variable is Google searches for 'where to buy bleach'. The chart goes from 2004 to 2020, and the two variables track closely in value over that time.

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 New Mexico and the second variable is Google searches for 'where to buy bleach'. The chart goes from 2004 to 2020, and the two variables track closely in value over that time.

Download png, svg

AI explanation

As more Republican Senators were voted in, there was a correlated increase in support for clean politics. This, in turn, led to a heightened general concern for cleanliness and a strong belief in the power of bleach to 'clean up the system'. As faith in political hygiene grew, so did the demand for bleach, prompting more people to turn to Google for information on where to buy this potent political purifier. Remember, when it comes to political stains, a little bit of bleach can go a long way.

^{Show image generation prompt} Model: dalle-3
Prompt: Generate an image of a meme-style illustration portraying a group of Republican Senators celebrating their victory at a gathering in New Mexico, with supporters cheering and waving flags. In the background, people are eagerly searching online for "where to buy bleach," as the clean politics movement gains momentum. Show the growing demand for bleach as a powerful purifier and the renewed energy for clean governance, all while keeping the visual depiction simple and without words or speech bubbles. The depiction should include only scenes, people, and objects, it should not include text or speech bubbles.

This image generation prompt was also generated by AI, using the following sequence:

Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You select one of a few potential scene descriptors that seems to go along with the variables described. You respond only with the scene descriptions provided and say nothing else.
User prompt: Here are two variables: Republican votes for Senators in New Mexico and Google searches for 'where to buy bleach'. 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: a meme a Polaroid photo Oragami Woodblock painting Vaporwave
ChatGPT: a meme

Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You describe simple visual scenes that depict the two variables stated. You combine both variables into one scene.
User prompt: Please describe a visual scene that prominently depicts both Republican votes for Senators in New Mexico and Google searches for 'where to buy bleach', in the following situation: As more Republican Senators were voted in, there was a correlated increase in support for clean politics. This, in turn, led to a heightened general concern for cleanliness and a strong belief in the power of bleach to 'clean up the system'. As faith in political hygiene grew, so did the demand for bleach, prompting more people to turn to Google for information on where to buy this potent political purifier. Remember, when it comes to political stains, a little bit of bleach can go a long way. . Keep the description simple.
ChatGPT: A group of Republican Senators celebrate their victory at a gathering in New Mexico, with supporters cheering and waving flags. In the background, people are busy on their phones, eagerly searching online for "where to buy bleach," as the clean politics movement gains momentum. The growing interest in political hygiene has sparked a newfound demand for this powerful purifier, and the air is filled with a renewed energy for clean governance.

Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You write and improve image generation prompts for DALLE-3. You maintain the same subjects, but enhance the visuals.
User prompt: Please respond with an image generation prompt that would be likely to create an interesting visual using DALLE-3, using the following style: [ a meme ] and depicting this scene: A group of Republican Senators celebrate their victory at a gathering in New Mexico, with supporters cheering and waving flags. In the background, people are busy on their phones, eagerly searching online for "where to buy bleach," as the clean politics movement gains momentum. The growing interest in political hygiene has sparked a newfound demand for this powerful purifier, and the air is filled with a renewed energy for clean governance. Keep the visual depiction simple. Do not include any words or speech bubbles.
ChatGPT: Generate an image of a meme-style illustration portraying a group of Republican Senators celebrating their victory at a gathering in New Mexico, with supporters cheering and waving flags. In the background, people are eagerly searching online for "where to buy bleach," as the clean politics movement gains momentum. Show the growing demand for bleach as a powerful purifier and the renewed energy for clean governance, all while keeping the visual depiction simple and without words or speech bubbles.

*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.
^{Show prompt for explanation} 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 New Mexico caused where to buy bleach (Google searches for 'where to buy bleach') to increase.\Make it sound serious until the end.

AI academic paper

(Because p < 0.05)

Red-state Republicans and Retail Rendezvous: Correlating Senatorial Support with Searches for Swirling Suds

International Journal of Political Pintonomics

Jan 2024

Reminder: This paper is AI-generated. Not real!

^{Show prompt used to generate this paper} 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 goofy academic researcher writing an academic paper. You follow the rules, but you throw out convention regularly to make jokes and funny asides.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 New Mexico and Google searches for 'where to buy bleach'. You can't resist a good dad joke. Add a relevant dad joke related to the content every couple of sentences.

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

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

Start by naming serious-sounding studies by authors like Smith, Doe, and Jones - but then quickly devolve. Name some real non-fiction books that would be related to the topic. Then name some real fiction books that sound like they could be related. Then cite some social media posts you read that seem to be related.

Here is the title and abstract of the paper:
[[TITLE]]
"Red-state Republicans and Retail Rendezvous: Correlating Senatorial Support with Searches for Swirling Suds"

[[ABSTRACT]]
In this study, we investigate the curious correlation between Republican votes for Senators in the red desert state of New Mexico and the surge in Google searches for "where to buy bleach." Our research team delved into patterns from 2004 to 2020 using data from MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, and Google Trends. The results revealed a striking correlation coefficient of 0.8672499 with a p-value less than 0.05, indicating a statistically significant relationship between political preferences and cleaning supply inquiries.

As we unraveled the enigmatic connection, we couldn't help but ponder if New Mexicans were seeking political solace in the cleansing aspects of bleach or simply trying to eradicate tough stains. Perhaps they were in search of a political "bleach of contract"? Our findings open the door to further exploration of the quirky intersections between election dynamics and retail therapy. After all, politics may be messy, but it seems like New Mexicans are not afraid to roll up their sleeves and clean house.

-------

And here is the introduction section that led to this literature review:
[[INTRODUCTION]]
As the age-old adage goes, "When the going gets tough, the tough go shopping for cleaning supplies." This sentiment may seem outlandish, but our research seeks to shed light on the curious correlation between political preferences and the quest for pristine surfaces. Ladies and gentlemen, welcome to the quirky world of statistical analysis where discussions about political allegiances unexpectedly lead us to ponder the merits of lemon-scented disinfectants.
In the realm of political science, researchers often grapple with deciphering the labyrinth of factors that influence voter behavior. However, few have ventured into the realm of retail rendezvous and its potential influence on political ideology. Of course, when considering the connection between Republican votes for Senators in New Mexico and the surge in Google searches for "where to buy bleach," one cannot help but wonder whether the electorate was seeking a sparkly clean political landscape or simply battling a stubborn stain of partisan politics.
Our journey into this uncharted territory was driven by an insatiable curiosity - much like a cat who just can't resist knocking over test tubes in a science lab. Our intrepid team of researchers delved into the world of data, armed with statistical models, graphs, and a healthy dose of skepticism. After all, in the realm of academia, skepticism is the compass that guides us through the forest of statistical noise and ne'er-do-well variables.
With a database encompassing the years 2004 to 2020, we commenced our expedition armed with data from the esteemed MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, and the digital oracle known as Google Trends. We sought patterns, not unlike archaeologists unearthing ancient relics, except our artifacts were scatter plots and regression coefficients rather than golden idols and cryptic inscriptions.
As we navigated this unconventional landscape, our first encounter was with a perplexing correlation coefficient of 0.8672499, with a p-value that gleamed like a freshly bleached countertop - less than 0.05, signifying a statistically significant relationship. The weight of these findings prompted us to delve deeper, unearthing a correlation as undeniable as the tendency of a well-placed pun to elicit an eye-roll from colleagues.
Our investigation led us to question whether the citizens of New Mexico were invoking the spirit of cleanliness as a metaphor for political purification, or simply had an affinity for a spotless domicile. Maybe they were in search of a bipartisan bleaching agent to sanitize the tarnished halls of political discourse. One can't help but wonder if they were pondering the existential question of "to bleach or not to bleach" as they navigated the tumultuous waters of electoral decision-making.
As we embark on this scholarly endeavor, let us remember the wise words of Sir Francis Bacon: "If a little knowledge is dangerous, where is the man who has so much as to be out of danger?" So, join us in this expedition of empirical exploration, where we navigate the treacherous seas of political inquiry armed with our trusty scientific toolkit and the occasional cringe-worthy dad joke.
The results are in, and they are not chloro-bleaching around. Our foray into the uncharted territory of political preferences and retail rendezvous has revealed a correlation that is as vivid as a neon "Sale on Bleach" sign at a supermarket. Let us boldly venture forth into this scientific odyssey, as we seek to unveil the glistening, multifaceted truth behind the enigmatic connection between red-state Republicans and their quest for swirling suds.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[LITERATURE REVIEW]]

ChatGPT:
**[[LITERATURE REVIEW]]**

In "The Political Landscape of New Mexico: A Statistical Analysis," Smith et al. explore the intricate web of political allegiances in the red desert state. The authors meticulously dissect voting patterns and demographic characteristics, providing a comprehensive overview of political dynamics. However, the study notably overlooks the intriguing correlation between Senatorial support and the intriguing surge in searches for cleaning agents.

Doe and Jones, in "Election Dynamics: A Comprehensive Examination," provide a detailed analysis of electoral trends from 2004 to 2020, offering valuable insights into the factors influencing voter behavior. While their research delves into the complexities of political decision-making, it fails to capture the compelling connection between Republican votes and the sudden interest in household cleaning products.

Now, let's take a humorous detour and consider the book "Bleach and Punishment: The Art of Stain Eradication" by Cleanman Scrubs. While not a serious academic work, this fictional account remarks on the enduring quest for immaculate surfaces and adds a whimsical touch to our exploration of cleaning-related literature.

In a more serious vein, "The Clean Slate: A Political Analysis of Household Hygiene" by Tidy McSqueaky explores the intersection of domestic cleanliness and political symbolism, providing a thought-provoking perspective on the topic. Although not directly related to political voting patterns, it offers a compelling examination of societal attitudes toward cleanliness and order.

In a surprising twist, the fictional novel "Bleach Wars: The Battle for Sparkling Countertops" by Scentia Scrubsworth captivates readers with its whimsical portrayal of a bleached battleground. Though seemingly unrelated to our scholarly pursuit, one can't help but chuckle at the imaginative scenarios proposed in this lighthearted work.

In a lighter citation, a social media post by @SqueakyClean2020 humorously quips, "After watching those political debates, I'm considering googling 'where to buy bleach' just to clean my eyes!" While certainly comical, this anecdotal remark hints at the potential intersection of political events and household cleaning products in the digital sphere.

Taking an offbeat turn, another tweet from @PolishedPolitics muses, "Is there a correlation between voting preferences and the choice of cleaning supplies? Interesting to ponder…" while this may appear to be a lighthearted tweet, it underscores the curiosity surrounding our research topic and hints at a broader societal fascination with this unexpected correlation.

Now, back to the serious literature, "The Bleaching Point: A Psychological Examination of Cleanliness and Decision-Making" by Scrubworthy and Wipestein delves into the psychological underpinnings of cleanliness, shedding light on potential connections with decision-making processes. While not explicitly focused on political contexts, this work offers intriguing insights that may inform our understanding of the correlation under investigation.

Just as a well-timed dad joke can lighten the mood of an otherwise serious academic discussion, it's important to inject a bit of levity into our exploration of this unconventional research topic. After all, who knew that political allegiances and household hygiene could be intertwined in such a perplexingly relatable manner?

Continuing our foray into the academic landscape, "Suds and Senators: A Comparative Study of Cleaning Product Utilization Across Political Parties" by Soapworthy and Tidystein presents an unconventional analysis of cleaning habits in relation to political ideologies. The authors scrutinize the purchasing patterns of household cleaners among different political affiliations, offering a uniquely introspective angle on the subject.

In a striking deviation, the fictional work "The Bleach Conundrum: An Election Mystery" by Sudsy McBubbles artfully weaves a tantalizing narrative around the enigmatic connection between political votes and the quest for cleaning supplies. Although an imaginative creation, this speculative tale adds an element of intrigue to our scholarly discourse, prompting reflection on the unexpected correlations we seek to unravel.

While it may seem unconventional to blend the traditionally separate realms of political voting behavior and retail inquiries for household cleaning products, our research has unearthed a surprisingly robust correlation in this uncharted territory. As we traverse the peculiar intersection of political ideology and preferences for sparkling surfaces, it's essential to maintain a lighthearted perspective and embrace the unexpected twists and turns of our academic adventure.

Our next stop on this quirky academic journey involves consulting the tome "Pure Politics: The Intersection of Hygiene and Decision-Making" by Scrubson and Wipebury. This scholarly work scrutinizes the interplay of cleanliness and cognitive processes, shedding light on the potential implications for political choices. While not specifically addressing our unique correlation, it aptly illustrates the broader scholarly interest in the relationship between cleanliness and decision-making.

Dad Joke Alert! Why did the cleaning supply store close early? Because they wanted to go home and bleach! Thank you, thank you - I'll be here all night, folks.

In summary, our literature review has navigated diverse realms, from serious academic studies to whimsical fiction and social media musings, in a quest to understand the unexpectedly entwined realms of political votes and searches for household cleaning agents. As we progress further into our investigation, let us embrace the unexpected and peculiar as we continue unraveling the mystery behind Republican votes and the swirling suds that beckon New Mexican households.

Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You are a goofy academic researcher writing an academic paper. You follow the rules, but you throw out convention regularly to make jokes and funny asides.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 New Mexico and Google searches for 'where to buy bleach'. You can't resist a good dad joke. Add a relevant dad joke related to the content every couple of sentences. 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 2004 to 2020

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

Here is the title, abstract, and introduction of the paper:
[[TITLE]]
"Red-state Republicans and Retail Rendezvous: Correlating Senatorial Support with Searches for Swirling Suds"

[[ABSTRACT]]
In this study, we investigate the curious correlation between Republican votes for Senators in the red desert state of New Mexico and the surge in Google searches for "where to buy bleach." Our research team delved into patterns from 2004 to 2020 using data from MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, and Google Trends. The results revealed a striking correlation coefficient of 0.8672499 with a p-value less than 0.05, indicating a statistically significant relationship between political preferences and cleaning supply inquiries.

As we unraveled the enigmatic connection, we couldn't help but ponder if New Mexicans were seeking political solace in the cleansing aspects of bleach or simply trying to eradicate tough stains. Perhaps they were in search of a political "bleach of contract"? Our findings open the door to further exploration of the quirky intersections between election dynamics and retail therapy. After all, politics may be messy, but it seems like New Mexicans are not afraid to roll up their sleeves and clean house.

[[INTRODUCTION]]
As the age-old adage goes, "When the going gets tough, the tough go shopping for cleaning supplies." This sentiment may seem outlandish, but our research seeks to shed light on the curious correlation between political preferences and the quest for pristine surfaces. Ladies and gentlemen, welcome to the quirky world of statistical analysis where discussions about political allegiances unexpectedly lead us to ponder the merits of lemon-scented disinfectants.
In the realm of political science, researchers often grapple with deciphering the labyrinth of factors that influence voter behavior. However, few have ventured into the realm of retail rendezvous and its potential influence on political ideology. Of course, when considering the connection between Republican votes for Senators in New Mexico and the surge in Google searches for "where to buy bleach," one cannot help but wonder whether the electorate was seeking a sparkly clean political landscape or simply battling a stubborn stain of partisan politics.
Our journey into this uncharted territory was driven by an insatiable curiosity - much like a cat who just can't resist knocking over test tubes in a science lab. Our intrepid team of researchers delved into the world of data, armed with statistical models, graphs, and a healthy dose of skepticism. After all, in the realm of academia, skepticism is the compass that guides us through the forest of statistical noise and ne'er-do-well variables.
With a database encompassing the years 2004 to 2020, we commenced our expedition armed with data from the esteemed MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, and the digital oracle known as Google Trends. We sought patterns, not unlike archaeologists unearthing ancient relics, except our artifacts were scatter plots and regression coefficients rather than golden idols and cryptic inscriptions.
As we navigated this unconventional landscape, our first encounter was with a perplexing correlation coefficient of 0.8672499, with a p-value that gleamed like a freshly bleached countertop - less than 0.05, signifying a statistically significant relationship. The weight of these findings prompted us to delve deeper, unearthing a correlation as undeniable as the tendency of a well-placed pun to elicit an eye-roll from colleagues.
Our investigation led us to question whether the citizens of New Mexico were invoking the spirit of cleanliness as a metaphor for political purification, or simply had an affinity for a spotless domicile. Maybe they were in search of a bipartisan bleaching agent to sanitize the tarnished halls of political discourse. One can't help but wonder if they were pondering the existential question of "to bleach or not to bleach" as they navigated the tumultuous waters of electoral decision-making.
As we embark on this scholarly endeavor, let us remember the wise words of Sir Francis Bacon: "If a little knowledge is dangerous, where is the man who has so much as to be out of danger?" So, join us in this expedition of empirical exploration, where we navigate the treacherous seas of political inquiry armed with our trusty scientific toolkit and the occasional cringe-worthy dad joke.
The results are in, and they are not chloro-bleaching around. Our foray into the uncharted territory of political preferences and retail rendezvous has revealed a correlation that is as vivid as a neon "Sale on Bleach" sign at a supermarket. Let us boldly venture forth into this scientific odyssey, as we seek to unveil the glistening, multifaceted truth behind the enigmatic connection between red-state Republicans and their quest for swirling suds.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[METHODOLOGY]]

ChatGPT:

[[METHODOLOGY]]

In our pursuit of unraveling the correlation between Republican votes for Senators in New Mexico and the surge in Google searches for "where to buy bleach," we embarked on a methodical odyssey that would have made Odysseus proud – well, maybe not as adventurous, but certainly as meticulously planned. Our team of intrepid researchers navigated through the choppy waters of data collection and statistical analysis armed with the navigation skills of a seasoned sailor and the occasional dad joke to keep morale afloat.

First and foremost, we gathered our data from the esteemed MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, and the oracle of cyber-information, Google Trends. Our data haystack was vast, spanning the years from 2004 to 2020, resembling the proverbial needle-in-a-haystack scenario, except our needle was a relationship between political inclinations and the quest for bleach – a scenario more quirky than practical.

Armed with our data trove, we ventured into the heart of statistical analysis, relying on a combination of correlation and regression analysis techniques. Our trusty statistical compass led us through the labyrinth of variables, guiding us like the Sherpa helping mountaineers navigate the treacherous Everest slopes, only in our case, the Sherpa was a tangle of numbers and equations.

For each year of data, we calculated the percentage of Republican votes for Senators in New Mexico and the volume of Google searches for "where to buy bleach." Applying our statistical models, we wrangled with the data points, transforming them into intricate scatter plots and regression line equations, hoping to discover the elusive jewel of correlation within the rough terrain of statistical noise.

Like mad scientists cobbling together a monstrous creation, we carefully clinked and clanked our way through the laboratory of statistical analysis, infusing our research with as much rigor as a strict schoolteacher enforcing a no-nonsense class rule. We assessed not just the correlation coefficient, but also its trusty sidekick, the p-value, in our quest to discern whether the relationship between political allegiance and the allure of bleach was a mere coincidental blip or a sturdy bond akin to a quality adhesive.

In the midst of our analysis, we encountered moments that were as thrilling as a suspense movie's plot twist, albeit in a statistical context. We scrutinized assumptions, diagnostic tests, and model specifications with the fervor of a detective unraveling a complex whodunit, except our "crime scene" was a spreadsheet, and our "culprit" was an unexpected relationship between political leanings and household cleaning products.

As our statistical machinations came to a fruitful conclusion, we emerged from the labyrinth of data analysis with a correlation coefficient of 0.8672499 glinting like a prize catch in the sea of statistical significance, accompanied by a p-value less than 0.05, beckoning to us like a beacon in the night, signaling a relationship worthy of scholarly inquiry.

Now, just as a baker kneads dough to perfection, shaping it into a delightful loaf, we molded our data with care and precision to unravel the mysterious thread connecting political preferences and the pursuit of pristine surfaces. And much like a loaf of freshly baked bread, our findings are ripe for examination - both as sustenance for scholarly discourse and potential admiration for their freshly baked rigor.

Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You are a goofy academic researcher writing an academic paper. You follow the rules, but you throw out convention regularly to make jokes and funny asides.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 New Mexico and Google searches for 'where to buy bleach'. You can't resist a good dad joke. Add a relevant dad joke related to the content every couple of sentences. 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]]
"Red-state Republicans and Retail Rendezvous: Correlating Senatorial Support with Searches for Swirling Suds"

[[ABSTRACT]]
In this study, we investigate the curious correlation between Republican votes for Senators in the red desert state of New Mexico and the surge in Google searches for "where to buy bleach." Our research team delved into patterns from 2004 to 2020 using data from MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, and Google Trends. The results revealed a striking correlation coefficient of 0.8672499 with a p-value less than 0.05, indicating a statistically significant relationship between political preferences and cleaning supply inquiries.

As we unraveled the enigmatic connection, we couldn't help but ponder if New Mexicans were seeking political solace in the cleansing aspects of bleach or simply trying to eradicate tough stains. Perhaps they were in search of a political "bleach of contract"? Our findings open the door to further exploration of the quirky intersections between election dynamics and retail therapy. After all, politics may be messy, but it seems like New Mexicans are not afraid to roll up their sleeves and clean house.

[[LITERATURE REVIEW]]
In "The Political Landscape of New Mexico: A Statistical Analysis," Smith et al. explore the intricate web of political allegiances in the red desert state. The authors meticulously dissect voting patterns and demographic characteristics, providing a comprehensive overview of political dynamics. However, the study notably overlooks the intriguing correlation between Senatorial support and the intriguing surge in searches for cleaning agents.
Doe and Jones, in "Election Dynamics: A Comprehensive Examination," provide a detailed analysis of electoral trends from 2004 to 2020, offering valuable insights into the factors influencing voter behavior. While their research delves into the complexities of political decision-making, it fails to capture the compelling connection between Republican votes and the sudden interest in household cleaning products.
Now, let's take a humorous detour and consider the book "Bleach and Punishment: The Art of Stain Eradication" by Cleanman Scrubs. While not a serious academic work, this fictional account remarks on the enduring quest for immaculate surfaces and adds a whimsical touch to our exploration of cleaning-related literature.
In a more serious vein, "The Clean Slate: A Political Analysis of Household Hygiene" by Tidy McSqueaky explores the intersection of domestic cleanliness and political symbolism, providing a thought-provoking perspective on the topic. Although not directly related to political voting patterns, it offers a compelling examination of societal attitudes toward cleanliness and order.
In a surprising twist, the fictional novel "Bleach Wars: The Battle for Sparkling Countertops" by Scentia Scrubsworth captivates readers with its whimsical portrayal of a bleached battleground. Though seemingly unrelated to our scholarly pursuit, one can't help but chuckle at the imaginative scenarios proposed in this lighthearted work.
In a lighter citation, a social media post by @SqueakyClean2020 humorously quips, "After watching those political debates, I'm considering googling 'where to buy bleach' just to clean my eyes!" While certainly comical, this anecdotal remark hints at the potential intersection of political events and household cleaning products in the digital sphere.
Taking an offbeat turn, another tweet from @PolishedPolitics muses, "Is there a correlation between voting preferences and the choice of cleaning supplies? Interesting to ponder…" while this may appear to be a lighthearted tweet, it underscores the curiosity surrounding our research topic and hints at a broader societal fascination with this unexpected correlation.
Now, back to the serious literature, "The Bleaching Point: A Psychological Examination of Cleanliness and Decision-Making" by Scrubworthy and Wipestein delves into the psychological underpinnings of cleanliness, shedding light on potential connections with decision-making processes. While not explicitly focused on political contexts, this work offers intriguing insights that may inform our understanding of the correlation under investigation.
Just as a well-timed dad joke can lighten the mood of an otherwise serious academic discussion, it's important to inject a bit of levity into our exploration of this unconventional research topic. After all, who knew that political allegiances and household hygiene could be intertwined in such a perplexingly relatable manner?
Continuing our foray into the academic landscape, "Suds and Senators: A Comparative Study of Cleaning Product Utilization Across Political Parties" by Soapworthy and Tidystein presents an unconventional analysis of cleaning habits in relation to political ideologies. The authors scrutinize the purchasing patterns of household cleaners among different political affiliations, offering a uniquely introspective angle on the subject.
In a striking deviation, the fictional work "The Bleach Conundrum: An Election Mystery" by Sudsy McBubbles artfully weaves a tantalizing narrative around the enigmatic connection between political votes and the quest for cleaning supplies. Although an imaginative creation, this speculative tale adds an element of intrigue to our scholarly discourse, prompting reflection on the unexpected correlations we seek to unravel.
While it may seem unconventional to blend the traditionally separate realms of political voting behavior and retail inquiries for household cleaning products, our research has unearthed a surprisingly robust correlation in this uncharted territory. As we traverse the peculiar intersection of political ideology and preferences for sparkling surfaces, it's essential to maintain a lighthearted perspective and embrace the unexpected twists and turns of our academic adventure.
Our next stop on this quirky academic journey involves consulting the tome "Pure Politics: The Intersection of Hygiene and Decision-Making" by Scrubson and Wipebury. This scholarly work scrutinizes the interplay of cleanliness and cognitive processes, shedding light on the potential implications for political choices. While not specifically addressing our unique correlation, it aptly illustrates the broader scholarly interest in the relationship between cleanliness and decision-making.
Dad Joke Alert! Why did the cleaning supply store close early? Because they wanted to go home and bleach! Thank you, thank you - I'll be here all night, folks.
In summary, our literature review has navigated diverse realms, from serious academic studies to whimsical fiction and social media musings, in a quest to understand the unexpectedly entwined realms of political votes and searches for household cleaning agents. As we progress further into our investigation, let us embrace the unexpected and peculiar as we continue unraveling the mystery behind Republican votes and the swirling suds that beckon New Mexican households.

[[RESULTS]]
Our investigation into the correlation between Republican votes for Senators in the Land of Enchantment and Google searches for "where to buy bleach" yielded a correlation coefficient of 0.8672499, indicating a strong positive relationship between the two variables. This means that as Republican support increased, so did the interest in obtaining this household cleaning essential. One might even say that bleach and political preferences were a bipartisan match made in statistical heaven, or perhaps in this case, a statistical "bleach" heaven - pardon the pun.
The coefficient of determination (r-squared) of 0.7521225 further bolstered this finding, suggesting that approximately 75.21% of the variability in bleach-related searches could be explained by the variability in Republican votes for Senators. It's as if we found the missing piece of a jigsaw puzzle, or in this case, the missing bleach bottle under the kitchen sink.
The p-value of less than 0.05 confirmed the statistical significance of the relationship, meaning that the likelihood of observing such a strong association by mere chance is less than 5%. It’s like finding a needle in a haystack, or should I say, a bottle of bleach in a storage room filled with political memorabilia.
Upon visualizing the data in a scatterplot (Fig. 1), the striking relationship between the two variables became even more apparent. The points on the plot formed a clear pattern reminiscent of a well-organized cleaning supply aisle in a grocery store, where the Republican votes served as the sturdy shelves, and the bleach-related searches were the shining bottles neatly lined up.
In conclusion, our findings provide compelling evidence of a noteworthy correlation between Republican votes for Senators in New Mexico and the surge in Google searches for "where to buy bleach." This unexpected connection raises many questions and certainly gives a whole new meaning to the phrase "clean sweep" in politics. While our study sheds light on this peculiar phenomenon, it also opens the floodgates to a multitude of follow-up inquiries and, just maybe, a few more bleach-related puns.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[DISCUSSION]]

ChatGPT:

[[DISCUSSION]]

Our results substantiate the remarkable correlation we observed between Republican votes for Senators in New Mexico and the spike in Google searches for "where to buy bleach." It's as if political fervor and domestic sanitation have become intertwined in a statistical waltz, reveling in their unexpected partnership. Our findings align with prior research by Smith et al. and Doe and Jones, who delved into political voting patterns but missed the sparkling potential of this unique relationship. It's safe to say we've effectively cleaned up shop in terms of uncovering this unconventional correlation.

The high correlation coefficient, robust r-squared value, and statistically significant p-value underscore the strength and reliability of our findings. To put it simply, our results have all the shine and polish of a well-maintained laboratory equipment, and we've certainly scrubbed away any doubt about the legitimacy of this correlation. We've hit the statistical jackpot, or in this case, the "bleachpot," if you'll pardon the pun.

Our visual representation of the data in the scatterplot didn't just illustrate the correlation; it practically laid out a tidy roadmap for future researchers to follow. Much like a clean slate, our findings invite further exploration and hypothesis testing, offering a banquet of research opportunities that might just clean up in the academic world. After all, who knew that statistical analyses could be so "bleachy keen"?

Admittedly, our study has a few limitations, not the least of which is the comical irony of the correlation itself. We must acknowledge that correlation does not imply causation, and our findings do not elucidate the underlying reasons for this unusual relationship. Whether it's a political statement or a quest for spotless countertops remains to be understood. We've merely opened the door for further inquiries, just as one might gingerly open a storage room door, anxiously hoping the bleach didn't spill over the political memorabilia.

In the broader context, our research adds a whimsical yet thought-provoking dimension to the study of political voting behavior and retail inquiries. It serves as a gentle reminder to the academic community that even the most unexpected correlations merit exploration, and that statistical analyses can be as surprising as stumbling upon a kitchen sponge in the bathroom cabinet. As we venture into uncharted territories of statistical inquiry, let us remember that even the most unconventional subjects can yield insightful and entertaining findings.

Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You are a goofy academic researcher writing an academic paper. You follow the rules, but you throw out convention regularly to make jokes and funny asides.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 New Mexico and Google searches for 'where to buy bleach'. You can't resist a good dad joke. Add a relevant dad joke related to the content every couple of sentences. 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]]
"Red-state Republicans and Retail Rendezvous: Correlating Senatorial Support with Searches for Swirling Suds"

[[ABSTRACT]]
In this study, we investigate the curious correlation between Republican votes for Senators in the red desert state of New Mexico and the surge in Google searches for "where to buy bleach." Our research team delved into patterns from 2004 to 2020 using data from MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, and Google Trends. The results revealed a striking correlation coefficient of 0.8672499 with a p-value less than 0.05, indicating a statistically significant relationship between political preferences and cleaning supply inquiries.

As we unraveled the enigmatic connection, we couldn't help but ponder if New Mexicans were seeking political solace in the cleansing aspects of bleach or simply trying to eradicate tough stains. Perhaps they were in search of a political "bleach of contract"? Our findings open the door to further exploration of the quirky intersections between election dynamics and retail therapy. After all, politics may be messy, but it seems like New Mexicans are not afraid to roll up their sleeves and clean house.

[[INTRDUCTION]]
As the age-old adage goes, "When the going gets tough, the tough go shopping for cleaning supplies." This sentiment may seem outlandish, but our research seeks to shed light on the curious correlation between political preferences and the quest for pristine surfaces. Ladies and gentlemen, welcome to the quirky world of statistical analysis where discussions about political allegiances unexpectedly lead us to ponder the merits of lemon-scented disinfectants.
In the realm of political science, researchers often grapple with deciphering the labyrinth of factors that influence voter behavior. However, few have ventured into the realm of retail rendezvous and its potential influence on political ideology. Of course, when considering the connection between Republican votes for Senators in New Mexico and the surge in Google searches for "where to buy bleach," one cannot help but wonder whether the electorate was seeking a sparkly clean political landscape or simply battling a stubborn stain of partisan politics.
Our journey into this uncharted territory was driven by an insatiable curiosity - much like a cat who just can't resist knocking over test tubes in a science lab. Our intrepid team of researchers delved into the world of data, armed with statistical models, graphs, and a healthy dose of skepticism. After all, in the realm of academia, skepticism is the compass that guides us through the forest of statistical noise and ne'er-do-well variables.
With a database encompassing the years 2004 to 2020, we commenced our expedition armed with data from the esteemed MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, and the digital oracle known as Google Trends. We sought patterns, not unlike archaeologists unearthing ancient relics, except our artifacts were scatter plots and regression coefficients rather than golden idols and cryptic inscriptions.
As we navigated this unconventional landscape, our first encounter was with a perplexing correlation coefficient of 0.8672499, with a p-value that gleamed like a freshly bleached countertop - less than 0.05, signifying a statistically significant relationship. The weight of these findings prompted us to delve deeper, unearthing a correlation as undeniable as the tendency of a well-placed pun to elicit an eye-roll from colleagues.
Our investigation led us to question whether the citizens of New Mexico were invoking the spirit of cleanliness as a metaphor for political purification, or simply had an affinity for a spotless domicile. Maybe they were in search of a bipartisan bleaching agent to sanitize the tarnished halls of political discourse. One can't help but wonder if they were pondering the existential question of "to bleach or not to bleach" as they navigated the tumultuous waters of electoral decision-making.
As we embark on this scholarly endeavor, let us remember the wise words of Sir Francis Bacon: "If a little knowledge is dangerous, where is the man who has so much as to be out of danger?" So, join us in this expedition of empirical exploration, where we navigate the treacherous seas of political inquiry armed with our trusty scientific toolkit and the occasional cringe-worthy dad joke.
The results are in, and they are not chloro-bleaching around. Our foray into the uncharted territory of political preferences and retail rendezvous has revealed a correlation that is as vivid as a neon "Sale on Bleach" sign at a supermarket. Let us boldly venture forth into this scientific odyssey, as we seek to unveil the glistening, multifaceted truth behind the enigmatic connection between red-state Republicans and their quest for swirling suds.

[[RESULTS]]
Our investigation into the correlation between Republican votes for Senators in the Land of Enchantment and Google searches for "where to buy bleach" yielded a correlation coefficient of 0.8672499, indicating a strong positive relationship between the two variables. This means that as Republican support increased, so did the interest in obtaining this household cleaning essential. One might even say that bleach and political preferences were a bipartisan match made in statistical heaven, or perhaps in this case, a statistical "bleach" heaven - pardon the pun.
The coefficient of determination (r-squared) of 0.7521225 further bolstered this finding, suggesting that approximately 75.21% of the variability in bleach-related searches could be explained by the variability in Republican votes for Senators. It's as if we found the missing piece of a jigsaw puzzle, or in this case, the missing bleach bottle under the kitchen sink.
The p-value of less than 0.05 confirmed the statistical significance of the relationship, meaning that the likelihood of observing such a strong association by mere chance is less than 5%. It’s like finding a needle in a haystack, or should I say, a bottle of bleach in a storage room filled with political memorabilia.
Upon visualizing the data in a scatterplot (Fig. 1), the striking relationship between the two variables became even more apparent. The points on the plot formed a clear pattern reminiscent of a well-organized cleaning supply aisle in a grocery store, where the Republican votes served as the sturdy shelves, and the bleach-related searches were the shining bottles neatly lined up.
In conclusion, our findings provide compelling evidence of a noteworthy correlation between Republican votes for Senators in New Mexico and the surge in Google searches for "where to buy bleach." This unexpected connection raises many questions and certainly gives a whole new meaning to the phrase "clean sweep" in politics. While our study sheds light on this peculiar phenomenon, it also opens the floodgates to a multitude of follow-up inquiries and, just maybe, a few more bleach-related puns.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[CONCLUSION]]

ChatGPT:

[[CONCLUSION]]

In this study, we have meticulously unraveled the intriguing correlation between Republican votes for Senators in the Land of Enchantment and the uptick in Google searches for "where to buy bleach." Our findings present a compelling case for a connection that is as undeniable as a stubborn coffee stain on a white shirt. It appears that when it comes to political inclinations and household cleaning endeavors, the two are intertwined in a manner reminiscent of a classic dad joke – surprising and unabashedly punny.

The statistical measures, like trusty sidekicks, have supported our expedition wholeheartedly. The correlation coefficient and the coefficient of determination stood by us like the loyal lab assistants in a mad scientist's lair, echoing the clear relationship and the predictable variability. Meanwhile, the p-value waved at us from a distance, much like a hidden treasure waiting to be discovered amidst the clutter of statistical fluctuations - a treasure that could have scholars exclaiming, "Eureka! I've found the bleach!"

As we wrap up our study, it is clear that further exploration in this peculiar intersection of political allegiance and retail rendezvous may yield additional insights and, dare I say, a few more groan-inducing puns. However, with our findings in hand, it's safe to say that we have illuminated this quirky confluence between political preferences and the quest for squeaky-clean surfaces.

Ultimately, this study demonstrates that when it comes to political affiliations and household cleaning products, the connection might be bleach-er than we thought. Nonetheless, it is through such unexpected discoveries and offbeat inquiries that the world of research continues to thrive - much like a hearty laugh at a particularly bad pun.

And so, with a nod to the inimitable Sherlock Holmes, we conclude that when you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable, must be the correlation between Republican votes for Senators and searches for "where to buy bleach" in the state of New Mexico. At this juncture, it is safe to say that we have scrubbed the surface clean of this peculiar relationship, leaving scholars with a shiny, sterilized conclusion.

In the immortal words of Homer Simpson, "The conclusion of a scientific paper is the mwah button on the steel cage match of research." With our findings firmly secured, it's safe to say that no more research is needed in this area. After all, it looks like we've bleached this topic dry!

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 Red-state Republicans and Retail Rendezvous: Correlating Senatorial Support with Searches for Swirling Suds. Respond only with the name of a fictional academic journal.

ChatGPT:

International Journal of Political Pintonomics

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 Red-state Republicans and Retail Rendezvous: Correlating Senatorial Support with Searches for Swirling Suds. Respond only with the name of a fictional organization.

ChatGPT:

Society for Empirical Studies on Political Silliness

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 Red-state Republicans and Retail Rendezvous: Correlating Senatorial Support with Searches for Swirling Suds with an abstract of In this study, we investigate the curious correlation between Republican votes for Senators in the red desert state of New Mexico and the surge in Google searches for "where to buy bleach." Our research team delved into patterns from 2004 to 2020 using data from MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, and Google Trends. The results revealed a striking correlation coefficient of 0.8672499 with a p-value less than 0.05, indicating a statistically significant relationship between political preferences and cleaning supply inquiries.
As we unraveled the enigmatic connection, we couldn't help but ponder if New Mexicans were seeking political solace in the cleansing aspects of bleach or simply trying to eradicate tough stains. Perhaps they were in search of a political "bleach of contract"? Our findings open the door to further exploration of the quirky intersections between election dynamics and retail therapy. After all, politics may be messy, but it seems like New Mexicans are not afraid to roll up their sleeves and clean house.

ChatGPT:

Red-state Republicans, New Mexico, Republican votes, Senatorial support, Google searches, retail, bleach, cleaning supplies, election dynamics, correlation coefficient, political preferences, retail therapy, MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, Google Trends, political solace, cleaning aspects, tough stains, retail rendezvous, election dynamics, cleansing, red desert state

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

Random correlation

Discover a new correlation

View all correlations

View all research papers

Report an error

Data details

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

Google searches for 'where to buy bleach'
Detailed data title: Relative volume of Google searches for 'where to buy bleach' (Worldwide, without quotes)
Source: Google Trends
Additional Info: ^{See full details} Relative search volume (not absolute numbers)

See what else correlates with Google searches for 'where to buy bleach'

Correlation r = 0.8672499 (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 = 0.7521225 (Coefficient of determination)
This means 75.2% of the change in the one variable (i.e., Google searches for 'where to buy bleach') is predictable based on the change in the other (i.e., Votes for Republican Senators in New Mexico) over the 6 years from 2004 through 2020.

p < 0.05, which statistically significant(Null hypothesis significance test)
The p-value is 0.025.^Show 0.0252641688585175450000000000
The p-value is a measure of how probable it is that we would randomly find a result this extreme.^Note 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 0.87 in 2.5% of random cases. Said differently, if you correlated 40 random variables^Note Which I absolutely did.
with the same 5 degrees of freedom, ^Note 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.

[ 0.19, 0.99 ] 95% correlation confidence interval (using the Fisher z-transformation)
^{Read more about the confidence interval} 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: ^Note 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.

	2006	2008	2012	2014	2018	2020
Votes for Republican Senators in New Mexico (Percentage of votes)	29.3306	38.672	45.2775	44.4412	30.5322	45.6243
Google searches for 'where to buy bleach' (Rel. search volume)	9.33333	18.4167	36.6667	30.25	22.75	35.75

Why this works

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.
Lack of causal connection: There is probably^Note 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.
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^Note 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.
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.
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. ^Note 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. ^{Show the steps to do this.} 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([29.3306,38.672,45.2775,44.4412,30.5322,45.6243,])
array_2 = np.array([9.33333,18.4167,36.6667,30.25,22.75,35.75,])
array_1_name = "Votes for Republican Senators in New Mexico"
array_2_name = "Google searches for 'where to buy bleach'"

# 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. ^Note 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:

High resolution line chart ^Note The image linked here is a Scalable Vector Graphic (SVG). It is the highest resolution that is possible to achieve. It scales up beyond the size of the observable universe without pixelating. You do not need to email me asking if I have a higher resolution image. I do not. The physical limitations of our universe prevent me from providing you with an image that is any higher resolution than this one.

If you insert it into a PowerPoint presentation (a tool well-known for managing things that are the scale of the universe), you can right-click > "Ungroup" or "Create Shape" and then edit the lines and text directly. You can also change the colors this way.

Alternatively you can use a tool like Inkscape.
High resolution line chart, optimized for mobile
Alternative high resolution line chart
Scatterplot
Portable line chart (png)
Portable line chart (png), optimized for mobile
Line chart for only Votes for Republican Senators in New Mexico
Line chart for only Google searches for 'where to buy bleach'
AI-generated correlation image
The spurious research paper: Red-state Republicans and Retail Rendezvous: Correlating Senatorial Support with Searches for Swirling Suds

View another random correlation

How fun was this correlation?

Your correlation inspection deserves a standing ovation!

Correlation ID: 4610 · Black Variable ID: 26433 · Red Variable ID: 1366


Problem variable:
Issue:
Additional details: Optional
Confirm you are a human: