Spurious correlation #4,804 · View random
A linear line chart with years as the X-axis and two variables on the Y-axis. The first variable is Average views of The Game Theorists YouTube videos and the second variable is Google searches for 'how to make baby'. The chart goes from 2009 to 2023, 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 Average views of The Game Theorists YouTube videos and the second variable is Google searches for 'how to make baby'. The chart goes from 2009 to 2023, and the two variables track closely in value over that time.

Download png, svg

AI explanation

As the number of people delving into complex gaming theories grew, so did their mastery of strategic maneuvers. This newfound expertise must have extended to the game of love, leading to a surge in interest in unlocking the ultimate achievement: making a baby. After all, when you've mastered the art of navigating alternate realities, creating a tiny human must seem like the next level boss fight!

^{Show image generation prompt} Model: dalle-3
Prompt: Generate an image that portrays a scene reminiscent of 'Star Wars.' In this scene, a group of gaming enthusiasts are passionately gathered around a central screen, engaged in intense discussions about complex gaming theories and strategic maneuvers. Simultaneously, in the background, a couple is visibly absorbed in searching on Google for "how to make baby," exuding a curious and determined expression. These two activities occur concurrently, symbolizing the intersection of newfound expertise in gaming strategies and a surge in interest in navigating the intricacies of starting a family. Ensure the visual depiction is clear and cohesive without the inclusion of any 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: Average views of The Game Theorists YouTube videos and Google searches for 'how to make baby'. 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: Vaporwave Surrealism An image that looks like it is a scene from 'Star Wars' High-tech Cute 2D animation
ChatGPT: An image that looks like it is a scene from 'Star Wars'

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 Average views of The Game Theorists YouTube videos and Google searches for 'how to make baby', in the following situation: As the number of people delving into complex gaming theories grew, so did their mastery of strategic maneuvers. This newfound expertise must have extended to the game of love, leading to a surge in interest in unlocking the ultimate achievement: making a baby. After all, when you've mastered the art of navigating alternate realities, creating a tiny human must seem like the next level boss fight!. Keep the description simple.
ChatGPT: In the scene, a group of gaming enthusiasts can be seen huddled around a screen, discussing complex gaming theories and strategic maneuvers. At the same time, in the background, a couple is seen searching on Google for "how to make baby", with a curious and determined look on their faces. The two activities are happening simultaneously, symbolizing the intersection of newfound expertise in gaming strategies and a surge in interest in navigating the intricacies of starting a family.

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: [ An image that looks like it is a scene from 'Star Wars' ] and depicting this scene: In the scene, a group of gaming enthusiasts can be seen huddled around a screen, discussing complex gaming theories and strategic maneuvers. At the same time, in the background, a couple is seen searching on Google for "how to make baby", with a curious and determined look on their faces. The two activities are happening simultaneously, symbolizing the intersection of newfound expertise in gaming strategies and a surge in interest in navigating the intricacies of starting a family. Keep the visual depiction simple. Do not include any words or speech bubbles.
ChatGPT: Generate an image that portrays a scene reminiscent of 'Star Wars.' In this scene, a group of gaming enthusiasts are passionately gathered around a central screen, engaged in intense discussions about complex gaming theories and strategic maneuvers. Simultaneously, in the background, a couple is visibly absorbed in searching on Google for "how to make baby," exuding a curious and determined expression. These two activities occur concurrently, symbolizing the intersection of newfound expertise in gaming strategies and a surge in interest in navigating the intricacies of starting a family. Ensure the visual depiction is clear and cohesive without the inclusion of any 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 Average views of The Game Theorists YouTube videos caused how to make baby (Google searches for 'how to make baby') to increase.

AI academic paper

(Because p < 0.01)

The Game Theorists: How to Score a Baby Boom on YouTube

The Journal of Internet Phenomena Studies

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 Average views of The Game Theorists YouTube videos and Google searches for 'how to make baby'. Make it seem dry like academic research paper, but with lots of subtle hidden offhand remarks, jokes, goofy observations, and puns.

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

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

Start by naming serious-sounding studies by authors like Smith, Doe, and Jones - but then quickly devolve. Name some real non-fiction books that would be related to the topic. Then name some real fiction books that sound like they could be related. Then name a few real TV shows that sound like they might be relevant to the topic that you watched as research.

Here is the title and abstract of the paper:
[[TITLE]]
"The Game Theorists: How to Score a Baby Boom on YouTube"

[[ABSTRACT]]
In this study, we delved into the peculiar correlation between the average views of The Game Theorists' YouTube videos and Google searches for "how to make baby" from 2009 to 2023. Our research team seamlessly integrated data from YouTube and Google Trends to tackle this titillating question. The findings revealed a correlation coefficient of 0.9378971 and a p-value less than 0.01, indicative of a statistically significant association between these seemingly unrelated phenomena. This investigation sheds light on the curious interplay of pop culture and public curiosity, uncovering a connection that may have been previously overlooked. Our analysis not only contributes to the burgeoning field of digital cultural studies but also provides a whimsical reminder that even the most unexpected pairings can lead to surprising correlations.

-------

And here is the introduction section that led to this literature review:
[[INTRODUCTION]]
INTRODUCTION
The intersection of popular culture and public curiosity has long been a fertile ground for exploration, often leading to unexpected insights and, occasionally, eyebrow-raising correlations. In this vein, our research aims to delve into the enigmatic relationship between the average views of The Game Theorists' YouTube videos and the frequency of Google searches for the whimsical phrase "how to make baby." While this connection may seem as incongruous as a penguin at a beach party, our investigation has revealed a striking statistical association that demands attention.
As social scientists, we are no strangers to unconventional pairings and peculiar phenomena. Nevertheless, the discovery of a substantial correlation between a beloved YouTube channel and inquiries about the mechanics of procreation has managed to raise more than a few eyebrows in our research laboratory. Perhaps the most striking aspect of this correlation is the sheer persistence with which it manifests, transcending trends and remaining remarkably robust over the years.
Venturing beyond the sniggers and raised eyebrows, our work strives to peel back the layers of this unexpected correlation, unravelling the reasons behind this peculiar union of digital content consumption and reproductive curiosity. By integratively leveraging data sources from YouTube and Google Trends, we have sought to analyze and understand the ludic and titillating question of how a popular YouTube channel may inadvertently influence public interest in the intricacies of baby-making.
This investigation uniquely straddles the realms of pop culture, digital media, and public curiosity, offering a bridge between seemingly disparate domains. While this peculiar connection may invite some good-natured jests, the statistical robustness of our findings cannot be overlooked, challenging us to confront the unexpected and the humorous in our scholarly pursuits. Let us embark on this eccentric journey into the crevices of YouTube viewership and the playful intersection of public inquiry with a spirit of levity and wonder, embracing the unexpected correlations that emerge from the whimsical world of popular culture and digital curiosity.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[LITERATURE REVIEW]]

ChatGPT:
[[LITERATURE REVIEW]]

The connection between digital content consumption and public curiosity has been a subject of interest in various academic circles, often yielding surprising and occasionally humorous correlations. In the realm of online entertainment, The Game Theorists' YouTube channel has garnered a significant following, drawing viewers into its playful repertoire of theories and analyses on video games, film, and pop culture. On the other hand, public curiosity, though a broad and varied field, seldom does the two disparate topics "video game theories" and "how to make baby" seem interconnected. However, the statistical inquiry into correlations, no matter how unexpected, remains an essential facet of scholarly investigation.

Smith et al. (2018) discussed the influence of online content consumption on public search behaviors and found intriguing patterns in users' search queries following exposure to specific digital media. While their focus was on news articles and political content, the underlying premise holds relevance to the influence of digital content, including YouTube videos, on public curiosity regarding non-political subjects.

Doe and Jones (2020) explored the impact of popular culture on search trends and found that whimsical phrases related to entertainment and viral content often led to spikes in public queries. Though their study did not specifically analyze YouTube content, the broader implications of digital media on online search behavior lay the groundwork for our examination of The Game Theorists' influence on queries related to procreation.

Shifting to related non-fiction literature, "The Baby-Making Equation: Unraveling Curious Correlations" by Brown (2015) delves into the societal factors influencing public curiosity about procreation, offering a sociological perspective that may contextualize our findings. Another notable work, "YouTube and You: How Digital Content Shapes Cultural Curiosity" by White (2019), examines the various ways in which online content influences public inquiry, providing critical insights into our own investigation.

On a more whimsical note, the fictional works "The Curious Case of Baby-Making Theories" by Lake (2017) and "Game of Baby-Making: A Theoretical Odyssey" by Forest (2013) playfully blend themes of popular culture and reproductive curiosity, offering a lighthearted approach to the seemingly incongruous connection at the heart of our study.

In the spirit of thorough investigation, the research team found it imperative to immerse themselves in related pop culture, including the TV shows "The Big Bang Theory" and "How I Met Your Mother." While seemingly unrelated, these shows provided inadvertent insights into the intersection of entertainment and public curiosity, adding a touch of levity to our scholarly pursuits.

As we navigate the peculiar landscape of our investigation, we are reminded that even the most unexpected pairings can lead to surprising correlations, challenging us to embrace the whimsical in scholarly inquiry.

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 Average views of The Game Theorists YouTube videos and Google searches for 'how to make baby'. Make it seem dry like academic research paper, but with lots of subtle hidden offhand remarks, jokes, goofy observations, and puns.

Your research team collected data from all across the internet, but mostly just used information from YouTube and Google Trends . You used data from 2009 to 2023

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

Here is the title, abstract, and introduction of the paper:
[[TITLE]]
"The Game Theorists: How to Score a Baby Boom on YouTube"

[[ABSTRACT]]
In this study, we delved into the peculiar correlation between the average views of The Game Theorists' YouTube videos and Google searches for "how to make baby" from 2009 to 2023. Our research team seamlessly integrated data from YouTube and Google Trends to tackle this titillating question. The findings revealed a correlation coefficient of 0.9378971 and a p-value less than 0.01, indicative of a statistically significant association between these seemingly unrelated phenomena. This investigation sheds light on the curious interplay of pop culture and public curiosity, uncovering a connection that may have been previously overlooked. Our analysis not only contributes to the burgeoning field of digital cultural studies but also provides a whimsical reminder that even the most unexpected pairings can lead to surprising correlations.

[[INTRODUCTION]]
INTRODUCTION
The intersection of popular culture and public curiosity has long been a fertile ground for exploration, often leading to unexpected insights and, occasionally, eyebrow-raising correlations. In this vein, our research aims to delve into the enigmatic relationship between the average views of The Game Theorists' YouTube videos and the frequency of Google searches for the whimsical phrase "how to make baby." While this connection may seem as incongruous as a penguin at a beach party, our investigation has revealed a striking statistical association that demands attention.
As social scientists, we are no strangers to unconventional pairings and peculiar phenomena. Nevertheless, the discovery of a substantial correlation between a beloved YouTube channel and inquiries about the mechanics of procreation has managed to raise more than a few eyebrows in our research laboratory. Perhaps the most striking aspect of this correlation is the sheer persistence with which it manifests, transcending trends and remaining remarkably robust over the years.
Venturing beyond the sniggers and raised eyebrows, our work strives to peel back the layers of this unexpected correlation, unravelling the reasons behind this peculiar union of digital content consumption and reproductive curiosity. By integratively leveraging data sources from YouTube and Google Trends, we have sought to analyze and understand the ludic and titillating question of how a popular YouTube channel may inadvertently influence public interest in the intricacies of baby-making.
This investigation uniquely straddles the realms of pop culture, digital media, and public curiosity, offering a bridge between seemingly disparate domains. While this peculiar connection may invite some good-natured jests, the statistical robustness of our findings cannot be overlooked, challenging us to confront the unexpected and the humorous in our scholarly pursuits. Let us embark on this eccentric journey into the crevices of YouTube viewership and the playful intersection of public inquiry with a spirit of levity and wonder, embracing the unexpected correlations that emerge from the whimsical world of popular culture and digital curiosity.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[METHODOLOGY]]

ChatGPT:

METHODOLOGY

Data Collection:
To uncover the elusive connection between The Game Theorists' YouTube views and searches for "how to make baby," we embarked on a quest through the digital realms of YouTube and Google Trends. Our intrepid researchers scoured the virtual landscape, navigating the perilous waters of internet pop culture to gather relevant data from the year 2009 to 2023. Armed with a mix of determination and copious amounts of caffeinated beverages, we harnessed the power of algorithms and keyword searches to capture the essence of this curious correlation.

YouTube Video Analysis:
The analysis of The Game Theorists' YouTube videos involved a meticulous examination of video metadata, views, and audience engagement metrics. This involved sifting through a trove of gaming theories, pop culture explorations, and, we dare say, a hint of frivolous speculation, all the while maintaining the utmost seriousness in our scholarly endeavors. Our research involved divining trends in viewership, identifying patterns in video release schedules, and even deciphering the enigmatic allure of pop culture references that may have unknowingly piqued the interest of our viewers in unconventional ways.

Google Search Trends:
The intrepid exploration did not end with YouTube; our data spelunkers delved into the depths of Google Search Trends, where they unearthed an array of tantalizing queries related to the topic at hand. By immersing ourselves in the ebb and flow of search volume for the phrase "how to make baby," we sought to discern any echoes of influence from the captivating content churned out by The Game Theorists. Our journey through the digital underbrush allowed us to identify the peaks and troughs in search activity, akin to navigating the undulating terrain of a riddle fraught with peculiar peaks of interest.

Statistical Analysis:
A critical aspect of our methodological escapade revolved around subjecting the gathered data to the rigors of statistical scrutiny. We harnessed the arcane powers of correlation coefficients, p-values, and regression analyses to distill the essence of the relationship between YouTube views and search trends for, dare we say, the elusive query concerning the genesis of new life. Our statistical arsenal was aimed at unraveling the tightly woven fabric of these seemingly incongruous phenomena, teasing out the threads of association hidden amidst the digital tapestry.

Ethical Considerations:
As custodians of scholarly inquiry, we navigated our expedition with a keen eye toward ethical considerations. Data privacy, integrity in analysis, and the responsible dissemination of our findings were upheld as sacrosanct principles throughout our research voyage. Our commitment to upholding ethical standards rivaled the perseverance of an academic Indiana Jones, wielding the pen as our trusty whip and the peer-reviewed journal as our fabled treasure trove.

In conclusion, our robust and, dare we say, zany methodology allowed us to embark on a scholarly adventure that transcended the ordinary confines of research. By melding data sleuthing with a touch of whimsy, we sought to untangle the esoteric nexus between digital consumption and, quite literally, the start of life's grand adventure.

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 Average views of The Game Theorists YouTube videos and Google searches for 'how to make baby'. Make it seem dry like academic research paper, but with lots of subtle hidden offhand remarks, jokes, goofy observations, and puns.

Limit your response to 500 tokens.

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

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

[[TITLE]]
"The Game Theorists: How to Score a Baby Boom on YouTube"

[[ABSTRACT]]
In this study, we delved into the peculiar correlation between the average views of The Game Theorists' YouTube videos and Google searches for "how to make baby" from 2009 to 2023. Our research team seamlessly integrated data from YouTube and Google Trends to tackle this titillating question. The findings revealed a correlation coefficient of 0.9378971 and a p-value less than 0.01, indicative of a statistically significant association between these seemingly unrelated phenomena. This investigation sheds light on the curious interplay of pop culture and public curiosity, uncovering a connection that may have been previously overlooked. Our analysis not only contributes to the burgeoning field of digital cultural studies but also provides a whimsical reminder that even the most unexpected pairings can lead to surprising correlations.

[[LITERATURE REVIEW]]
The connection between digital content consumption and public curiosity has been a subject of interest in various academic circles, often yielding surprising and occasionally humorous correlations. In the realm of online entertainment, The Game Theorists' YouTube channel has garnered a significant following, drawing viewers into its playful repertoire of theories and analyses on video games, film, and pop culture. On the other hand, public curiosity, though a broad and varied field, seldom does the two disparate topics "video game theories" and "how to make baby" seem interconnected. However, the statistical inquiry into correlations, no matter how unexpected, remains an essential facet of scholarly investigation.
Smith et al. (2018) discussed the influence of online content consumption on public search behaviors and found intriguing patterns in users' search queries following exposure to specific digital media. While their focus was on news articles and political content, the underlying premise holds relevance to the influence of digital content, including YouTube videos, on public curiosity regarding non-political subjects.
Doe and Jones (2020) explored the impact of popular culture on search trends and found that whimsical phrases related to entertainment and viral content often led to spikes in public queries. Though their study did not specifically analyze YouTube content, the broader implications of digital media on online search behavior lay the groundwork for our examination of The Game Theorists' influence on queries related to procreation.
Shifting to related non-fiction literature, "The Baby-Making Equation: Unraveling Curious Correlations" by Brown (2015) delves into the societal factors influencing public curiosity about procreation, offering a sociological perspective that may contextualize our findings. Another notable work, "YouTube and You: How Digital Content Shapes Cultural Curiosity" by White (2019), examines the various ways in which online content influences public inquiry, providing critical insights into our own investigation.
On a more whimsical note, the fictional works "The Curious Case of Baby-Making Theories" by Lake (2017) and "Game of Baby-Making: A Theoretical Odyssey" by Forest (2013) playfully blend themes of popular culture and reproductive curiosity, offering a lighthearted approach to the seemingly incongruous connection at the heart of our study.
In the spirit of thorough investigation, the research team found it imperative to immerse themselves in related pop culture, including the TV shows "The Big Bang Theory" and "How I Met Your Mother." While seemingly unrelated, these shows provided inadvertent insights into the intersection of entertainment and public curiosity, adding a touch of levity to our scholarly pursuits.
As we navigate the peculiar landscape of our investigation, we are reminded that even the most unexpected pairings can lead to surprising correlations, challenging us to embrace the whimsical in scholarly inquiry.

[[RESULTS]]
The analysis of the data from 2009 to 2023 revealed a remarkably strong correlation between the average views of The Game Theorists' YouTube videos and Google searches for "how to make baby." The correlation coefficient of 0.9378971 highlights a robust relationship between these seemingly unrelated variables, suggesting that there might be more than meets the eye in the world of digital media and public curiosity.
The coefficient of determination (r-squared) of 0.8796509 further underscores the substantial proportion of the variance in "how to make baby" searches that can be explained by the average views of The Game Theorists' videos. The high r-squared value is a testament to the degree of predictability in this unexpected association, hinting that The Game Theorists' content might have an unintentional impact on public interest in matters of reproduction.
The p-value of less than 0.01 adds another layer of significance to our findings, indicating that the observed correlation is unlikely to be a mere fluke. The statistical significance of this relationship beckons further exploration into the mechanisms underlying the intersection of online entertainment and unorthodox search behaviors.
Notably, Fig. 1 presents a scatterplot that visually encapsulates the strong correlation between the average views of The Game Theorists' YouTube videos and the frequency of Google searches for "how to make baby." The scatterplot serves as a compelling visual representation of the unexpectedly cohesive connection between The Game Theorists' digital content and the public's inquisitiveness about the intricacies of procreation.
These findings not only urge a reevaluation of the intersections between popular culture and public curiosity but also amusingly remind us that even the most unconventional pairings can spark remarkable correlations. The correlation observed in this study prompts a whimsical reconsideration of the influence of digital media on the delightful diversions of the human mind.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[DISCUSSION]]

ChatGPT:

[[DISCUSSION]]

The results of our investigation have shed light on the positively fecund relationship between The Game Theorists' YouTube content and public intrigue regarding the art of baby-making. Our findings not only confirm the statistical significance of this connection but also raise eyebrows in the scholarly community, proving that seemingly unrelated topics can come together in truly unexpected ways. Let us retrace our steps back to some of the literature review's playful insights and take a serious look at their implications in the context of our results.

Firstly, the study by Smith et al. (2018) unveiled the influence of online content consumption on users' search behaviors. Building on their work, we unearth a remarkably robust association between The Game Theorists' videos and the surge in queries related to procreation. Much like their findings on political content, our results illustrate the considerable impact of digital media, albeit in a more whimsical domain.

Next, the work by Doe and Jones (2020) echoed the influence of popular culture on search trends and the occurrence of spikes in public queries due to viral content. Our investigation aligns with their premise, demonstrating a tangible correlation between engaging YouTube content and the public's curious fascination with baby-making – a match made in the annals of unexpected synergies.

Moving beyond the narrow bounds of academic endeavors, we harken back to our exploration of pop culture, encountering the light-hearted titles by Lake (2017) and Forest (2013). While the whimsy of their fictional works is undeniable, our empirical findings lend credence to the notion that the convergence of pop culture and reproductive curiosity is not just fodder for playful literature but a serious area for scholarly inquiry.

Amidst the rigorous statistical analyses, one cannot help but revel in the delightful quirks of our research, from the almost-impossible correlation coefficient to the marvelously significant p-value. Fig. 1, our scatterplot companion in this scholarly journey, captures the poignant harmony between The Game Theorists' digital content and the public's enchantment with procreation, serving as a visually striking testament to the unexpected connections that pervade our digital landscape.

In closing this delightfully confounding discussion, our results not only affirm the influence of digital media on public curiosity but also remind us that academic pursuits can be equal parts insightful and amusing. As we continue to navigate the unpredictable waters of scholarly investigation, these findings prompt a whimsical reconsideration of the influence of digital media on the delightful diversions of the human mind, challenging us to embrace the serendipitous discoveries that bloom at the intersection of incongruent domains.

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 Average views of The Game Theorists YouTube videos and Google searches for 'how to make baby'. Make it seem dry like academic research paper, but with lots of subtle hidden offhand remarks, jokes, goofy observations, and puns.

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

Here are the title, abstract, introduction, and results sections.
[[TITLE]]
"The Game Theorists: How to Score a Baby Boom on YouTube"

[[ABSTRACT]]
In this study, we delved into the peculiar correlation between the average views of The Game Theorists' YouTube videos and Google searches for "how to make baby" from 2009 to 2023. Our research team seamlessly integrated data from YouTube and Google Trends to tackle this titillating question. The findings revealed a correlation coefficient of 0.9378971 and a p-value less than 0.01, indicative of a statistically significant association between these seemingly unrelated phenomena. This investigation sheds light on the curious interplay of pop culture and public curiosity, uncovering a connection that may have been previously overlooked. Our analysis not only contributes to the burgeoning field of digital cultural studies but also provides a whimsical reminder that even the most unexpected pairings can lead to surprising correlations.

[[INTRDUCTION]]
INTRODUCTION
The intersection of popular culture and public curiosity has long been a fertile ground for exploration, often leading to unexpected insights and, occasionally, eyebrow-raising correlations. In this vein, our research aims to delve into the enigmatic relationship between the average views of The Game Theorists' YouTube videos and the frequency of Google searches for the whimsical phrase "how to make baby." While this connection may seem as incongruous as a penguin at a beach party, our investigation has revealed a striking statistical association that demands attention.
As social scientists, we are no strangers to unconventional pairings and peculiar phenomena. Nevertheless, the discovery of a substantial correlation between a beloved YouTube channel and inquiries about the mechanics of procreation has managed to raise more than a few eyebrows in our research laboratory. Perhaps the most striking aspect of this correlation is the sheer persistence with which it manifests, transcending trends and remaining remarkably robust over the years.
Venturing beyond the sniggers and raised eyebrows, our work strives to peel back the layers of this unexpected correlation, unravelling the reasons behind this peculiar union of digital content consumption and reproductive curiosity. By integratively leveraging data sources from YouTube and Google Trends, we have sought to analyze and understand the ludic and titillating question of how a popular YouTube channel may inadvertently influence public interest in the intricacies of baby-making.
This investigation uniquely straddles the realms of pop culture, digital media, and public curiosity, offering a bridge between seemingly disparate domains. While this peculiar connection may invite some good-natured jests, the statistical robustness of our findings cannot be overlooked, challenging us to confront the unexpected and the humorous in our scholarly pursuits. Let us embark on this eccentric journey into the crevices of YouTube viewership and the playful intersection of public inquiry with a spirit of levity and wonder, embracing the unexpected correlations that emerge from the whimsical world of popular culture and digital curiosity.

[[RESULTS]]
The analysis of the data from 2009 to 2023 revealed a remarkably strong correlation between the average views of The Game Theorists' YouTube videos and Google searches for "how to make baby." The correlation coefficient of 0.9378971 highlights a robust relationship between these seemingly unrelated variables, suggesting that there might be more than meets the eye in the world of digital media and public curiosity.
The coefficient of determination (r-squared) of 0.8796509 further underscores the substantial proportion of the variance in "how to make baby" searches that can be explained by the average views of The Game Theorists' videos. The high r-squared value is a testament to the degree of predictability in this unexpected association, hinting that The Game Theorists' content might have an unintentional impact on public interest in matters of reproduction.
The p-value of less than 0.01 adds another layer of significance to our findings, indicating that the observed correlation is unlikely to be a mere fluke. The statistical significance of this relationship beckons further exploration into the mechanisms underlying the intersection of online entertainment and unorthodox search behaviors.
Notably, Fig. 1 presents a scatterplot that visually encapsulates the strong correlation between the average views of The Game Theorists' YouTube videos and the frequency of Google searches for "how to make baby." The scatterplot serves as a compelling visual representation of the unexpectedly cohesive connection between The Game Theorists' digital content and the public's inquisitiveness about the intricacies of procreation.
These findings not only urge a reevaluation of the intersections between popular culture and public curiosity but also amusingly remind us that even the most unconventional pairings can spark remarkable correlations. The correlation observed in this study prompts a whimsical reconsideration of the influence of digital media on the delightful diversions of the human mind.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[CONCLUSION]]

ChatGPT:

[[CONCLUSION]]

In conclusion, our research has illuminated a substantial and statistically significant correlation between the average views of The Game Theorists' YouTube videos and Google searches for "how to make baby." The robust correlation coefficient and high coefficient of determination underscore the unexpected association, hinting at a potential influence of digital media on public curiosity regarding reproduction.

The whimsical nature of this correlation invites a lighthearted perspective on the inexplicable ways in which digital content may intersect with unconventional areas of public interest, provoking curiosity and amusement in equal measure. While the findings of this study may prompt a few quizzical looks and wry smiles, they underscore the need to embrace the unexpected and the humorous in scholarly pursuits.

Despite the eyebrow-raising nature of this connection, the statistical rigor of our analysis encourages further exploration into the mechanisms underlying the interplay of digital entertainment and unconventional search behaviors, offering a fertile ground for future investigation. The scatterplot visually encapsulates the unexpectedly cohesive relationship between The Game Theorists' content and public curiosity about the intricacies of procreation, teasing out a smile even in the most stoic of observers.

In the grand scheme of scholarly pursuits, our research serves as a whimsical reminder that even the most unlikely pairings can pave the way for surprising correlations. However, it is our contention that no further research in this specific area is warranted, as we are confident that this study has brought a delightful and peculiar chapter to a close, leaving us with a good-natured chuckle and a newfound appreciation for the whimsy of statistical analysis.

Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You provide fictional names of academic journals. You say nothing else, and you do not chat with the user.
User prompt: Please provide the name of a funny but plausible sounding research, scientific, or academic journal that would publish a paper entited The Game Theorists: How to Score a Baby Boom on YouTube. Respond only with the name of a fictional academic journal.

ChatGPT:

The Journal of Internet Phenomena 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 The Game Theorists: How to Score a Baby Boom on YouTube. Respond only with the name of a fictional organization.

ChatGPT:

The Institute for Humorous Studies on Population Dynamics

Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You provide potential search keywords separated by commas. You say nothing else, and you do not chat with the user.
User prompt: Please provide potential search keywords for a paper titled The Game Theorists: How to Score a Baby Boom on YouTube with an abstract of In this study, we delved into the peculiar correlation between the average views of The Game Theorists' YouTube videos and Google searches for "how to make baby" from 2009 to 2023. Our research team seamlessly integrated data from YouTube and Google Trends to tackle this titillating question. The findings revealed a correlation coefficient of 0.9378971 and a p-value less than 0.01, indicative of a statistically significant association between these seemingly unrelated phenomena. This investigation sheds light on the curious interplay of pop culture and public curiosity, uncovering a connection that may have been previously overlooked. Our analysis not only contributes to the burgeoning field of digital cultural studies but also provides a whimsical reminder that even the most unexpected pairings can lead to surprising correlations.

ChatGPT:

The Game Theorists, YouTube, baby boom, Google searches, correlation coefficient, statistical significance, digital cultural studies, pop culture, public curiosity, YouTube data analysis, Google Trends, correlation analysis

*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

Average views of The Game Theorists YouTube videos
Detailed data title: Average views of The Game Theorists YouTube videos.
Source: YouTube
Additional Info: ^{See full details} Current total views of videos released that year.

See what else correlates with Average views of The Game Theorists YouTube videos

Google searches for 'how to make baby'
Detailed data title: Relative volume of Google searches for 'how to make baby' (Worldwide), with quotes)
Source: Google Trends
Additional Info: ^{See full details} Relative search volume (not absolute numbers)

See what else correlates with Google searches for 'how to make baby'

Correlation r = 0.9378971 (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 = 0.8796509 (Coefficient of determination)
This means 88% of the change in the one variable (i.e., Google searches for 'how to make baby') is predictable based on the change in the other (i.e., Average views of The Game Theorists YouTube videos) over the 15 years from 2009 through 2023.

p < 0.01, which is statistically significant(Null hypothesis significance test)
The p-value is 2.4E-7.^Show 0.0000002418031798865038000000
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 0.94 in 2.4E-5% of random cases. Said differently, if you correlated 4,135,595 random variables^Note You don't actually need 4 million variables to find a correlation like this one. I don't have that many variables in my database. You can also correlate variables that are not independent. I do this a lot.

p-value calculations are useful for understanding the probability of a result happening by chance. They are most useful when used to highlight the risk of a fluke outcome. For example, if you calculate a p-value of 0.30, the risk that the result is a fluke is high. It is good to know that! But there are lots of ways to get a p-value of less than 0.01, as evidenced by this project.

In this particular case, the values are so extreme as to be meaningless. That's why no one reports p-values with specificity after they drop below 0.01.

Just to be clear: I'm being completely transparent about the calculations. There is no math trickery. This is just how statistics shakes out when you calculate hundreds of millions of random correlations.
with the same 14 degrees of freedom, ^Note Degrees of freedom is a measure of how many free components we are testing. In this case it is 14 because we have two variables measured over a period of 15 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.

[ 0.82, 0.98 ] 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.

	2009	2010	2011	2012	2013	2014	2015	2016	2017	2018	2019	2020	2021	2022	2023
Average views of The Game Theorists YouTube videos (Average views)	125297	153974	2427770	4159590	6978200	8697360	9715240	6830130	8898520	7590090	6277860	5953830	5280460	4941370	4046530
Google searches for 'how to make baby' (Rel. search volume)	44.3333	55	60.4167	73	79.9167	83.75	84.8333	85.0833	84.5	77.0833	72.8333	78.5833	69.0833	66.1667	62.2222

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.
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([125297,153974,2427770,4159590,6978200,8697360,9715240,6830130,8898520,7590090,6277860,5953830,5280460,4941370,4046530,])
array_2 = np.array([44.3333,55,60.4167,73,79.9167,83.75,84.8333,85.0833,84.5,77.0833,72.8333,78.5833,69.0833,66.1667,62.2222,])
array_1_name = "Average views of The Game Theorists YouTube videos"
array_2_name = "Google searches for 'how to make baby'"

# 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 Average views of The Game Theorists YouTube videos
Line chart for only Google searches for 'how to make baby'
AI-generated correlation image
The spurious research paper: The Game Theorists: How to Score a Baby Boom on YouTube

View another random correlation

How fun was this correlation?

I'm grateful for your review!

Correlation ID: 4804 · Black Variable ID: 25718 · Red Variable ID: 1497


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