about · email me · subscribe
Spurious correlation #4,932 · 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 Democratic Senators in Hawaii and the second variable is Google searches for 'President phone number'.  The chart goes from 2004 to 2018, and the two variables track closely in value over that time. Small Image
Download png
, svg

AI explanation

The decrease in Democrat votes for Senators in Hawaii caused President phone number (Google searches for 'President phone number') to decrease because as the Democrat votes decreased, so did their ability to use their magical conch shell to directly contact the President in times of need. With fewer Senators to chant the secret presidential summoning chant, the general public realized they would have to find alternative ways to reach the President, leading to a decrease in searches for the elusive digits. It seems even political communication is not free from the waves of aloha and electoral shenanigans!

Model: dalle-3
Prompt: Prompt: Generate an image that captures the essence of a vaporwave-style scene set in Hawaii, where a group of Democrat Senators gathers on a palm-fringed shoreline, solemnly casting their votes around an intricate conch shell. The conch shell emanates a radiant glow, symbolizing the Senators' magical power to reach the President with its sound. In the distance, a group of onlookers stands on the beach, their eyes fixed on the Senators, while holding smartphones. The searches for 'President phone number' have dwindled as they witness the Senators' numbers decreasing, the once bustling search for the President's contact details waning amidst whispers of political change carried by the ocean breeze. 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: Democrat votes for Senators in Hawaii and Google searches for 'President phone number'. 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: Cutsy graphics Woodblock painting Vaporwave Concept art Vaporwave
ChatGPT: Vaporwave

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 Democrat votes for Senators in Hawaii and Google searches for 'President phone number', in the following situation: The decrease in Democrat votes for Senators in Hawaii caused President phone number (Google searches for 'President phone number') to decrease because as the Democrat votes decreased, so did their ability to use their magical conch shell to directly contact the President in times of need. With fewer Senators to chant the secret presidential summoning chant, the general public realized they would have to find alternative ways to reach the President, leading to a decrease in searches for the elusive digits. It seems even political communication is not free from the waves of aloha and electoral shenanigans!. Keep the description simple.
ChatGPT: Amidst the palm-fringed shores of Hawaii, a group of Democrat Senators gathers in a huddle, their intricate conch shell resting beside them. As they solemnly cast their votes, a glow of energy surrounds the shell, representing their power to reach the President with its magical sound. In the distance, a group of people stands on the beach, their eyes fixed on the Senators. They hold their smartphones, but the searches for 'President phone number' have dwindled as they watch the Senators' numbers decrease. The once bustling search for the President's contact details has waned, as the ocean breeze carries whispers of political change.

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: [ Vaporwave ] and depicting this scene: Amidst the palm-fringed shores of Hawaii, a group of Democrat Senators gathers in a huddle, their intricate conch shell resting beside them. As they solemnly cast their votes, a glow of energy surrounds the shell, representing their power to reach the President with its magical sound. In the distance, a group of people stands on the beach, their eyes fixed on the Senators. They hold their smartphones, but the searches for 'President phone number' have dwindled as they watch the Senators' numbers decrease. The once bustling search for the President's contact details has waned, as the ocean breeze carries whispers of political change. Keep the visual depiction simple. Do not include any words or speech bubbles.
ChatGPT: Prompt: Generate an image that captures the essence of a vaporwave-style scene set in Hawaii, where a group of Democrat Senators gathers on a palm-fringed shoreline, solemnly casting their votes around an intricate conch shell. The conch shell emanates a radiant glow, symbolizing the Senators' magical power to reach the President with its sound. In the distance, a group of onlookers stands on the beach, their eyes fixed on the Senators, while holding smartphones. The searches for 'President phone number' have dwindled as they witness the Senators' numbers decreasing, the once bustling search for the President's contact details waning amidst whispers of political change carried by the ocean breeze.

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

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

Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106 (fine-tuned)
System prompt: You provide humorous responses in the form of plausible sounding explanations for correlations. You assume the correlation is causative for the purpose of the explanation even if it is ridiculous. You do not chat with the user, you only reply with the causal connection explanation and nothing else.
User prompt: Please make up a funny explanation for how a decrease in Democrat votes for Senators in Hawaii caused President phone number (Google searches for 'President phone number') to decrease.

AI academic paper

(Because p < 0.05)
Dialing for Democrats: The Connection Between Senatorial Preferences in Hawaii and Google Searches for the President's Phone Number

Journal of Political Googling

Jan 2024

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




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

Please draft the title and abstract of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between Democrat votes for Senators in Hawaii and Google searches for 'President phone number'. Make lots of jokes, goofy observations, and puns.

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

Your research team used data from MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse and Google Trends to assess this nagging question. You found a correlation coefficient of 0.8283887 and p < 0.05 for 2004 to 2018.

Please respond in this format (replace "Lorem ipsum dolor sit" with your title and abstract)

[[TITLE]]
Lorem ipsum dolor sit

[[ABSTRACT]]
Lorem ipsum dolor sit



ChatGPT:
[[TITLE]]
Dialing for Democrats: The Connection Between Senatorial Preferences in Hawaii and Google Searches for the President's Phone Number

[[ABSTRACT]]
In this paper, we present the unexpected and outright quirky findings of our research on the association between the Hawaiian electorate's political tendencies and their curious online searches. Utilizing data from MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, and Google Trends, we delved into the correlation between the number of votes cast for Democratic senators in Hawaii and the frequency of Google searches for 'President phone number'. Uncovering a correlation coefficient of 0.8283887 and a statistically significant p-value of less than 0.05 for the time period spanning from 2004 to 2018, this study will have readers scratching their heads and chuckling at the puzzling relationship between civic participation and smartphone curiosity. Our jocular analysis sheds light on this peculiar tie between political leanings and digital inquiries, highlighting the whimsical side of electoral behavior.


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

Please make up the introduction section of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between Democrat votes for Senators in Hawaii and Google searches for 'President phone number'. Make lots of jokes, goofy observations, and puns. Sneak in some jokes and clever puns about science, research, statistics, and the variables.

Here is the title and abstract of the paper:
[[TITLE]]
Dialing for Democrats: The Connection Between Senatorial Preferences in Hawaii and Google Searches for the President's Phone Number

[[ABSTRACT]]
In this paper, we present the unexpected and outright quirky findings of our research on the association between the Hawaiian electorate's political tendencies and their curious online searches. Utilizing data from MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, and Google Trends, we delved into the correlation between the number of votes cast for Democratic senators in Hawaii and the frequency of Google searches for 'President phone number'. Uncovering a correlation coefficient of 0.8283887 and a statistically significant p-value of less than 0.05 for the time period spanning from 2004 to 2018, this study will have readers scratching their heads and chuckling at the puzzling relationship between civic participation and smartphone curiosity. Our jocular analysis sheds light on this peculiar tie between political leanings and digital inquiries, highlighting the whimsical side of electoral behavior.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[INTRODUCTION]]



ChatGPT:
[[INTRODUCTION]]

Ah, the world of academic research. A place where serious scientists and scholars delve into the depths of knowledge, armed with data, statistical tools, and an unbridled enthusiasm for uncovering the unexpected. In this vein, we present our delightful foray into the intersection of Hawaiian political preferences and, of all things, Google searches for the President's phone number.

As seasoned researchers, we often find ourselves embroiled in the serious business of analyzing voting behavior, predicting electoral outcomes, and unraveling the complex tapestry of political decision-making. However, in the midst of all this scholarly solemnity, we occasionally stumble upon correlations so amusing, so perplexing, that they tickle our statistical sensibilities and tug at the corners of our lips. And so, dear reader, we invite you to join us on this whimsical journey where we uncover the truly unexpected relationship between Democrat votes for Senators in Hawaii and internet searches for the President's direct line.

This study has all the hallmarks of an academic escapade likely to draw a few raised eyebrows and perhaps even a chuckle or two. Armed with data from reputable sources such as the MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, and the ever-quirky Google Trends, we set out to explore the connection that no one saw coming. The correlation coefficient of 0.8283887 beckons us like a siren's song, leading us down the path of statistical curiosity and improbable relationships.

So, let us set aside our sober academese for a moment and embrace the absurdity of this endeavor. Our analysis promises to shine a light on the peculiar bond between civic engagement and the urge to search for a certain high-profile contact details. Come, dear reader, and let us navigate this comical conundrum with the seriousness of scientists and the mirth of merry jesters.


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

Please make up a literature review section of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between Democrat votes for Senators in Hawaii and Google searches for 'President phone number'. Make lots of jokes, goofy observations, and puns.

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

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

Start by naming serious-sounding studies by authors like Smith, Doe, and Jones - but then quickly devolve. Name some real non-fiction books that would be related to the topic. Then name some real fiction books that sound like they could be related. Then name some movies that you watched that are tangentially related to the topic.

Here is the title and abstract of the paper:
[[TITLE]]
Dialing for Democrats: The Connection Between Senatorial Preferences in Hawaii and Google Searches for the President's Phone Number

[[ABSTRACT]]
In this paper, we present the unexpected and outright quirky findings of our research on the association between the Hawaiian electorate's political tendencies and their curious online searches. Utilizing data from MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, and Google Trends, we delved into the correlation between the number of votes cast for Democratic senators in Hawaii and the frequency of Google searches for 'President phone number'. Uncovering a correlation coefficient of 0.8283887 and a statistically significant p-value of less than 0.05 for the time period spanning from 2004 to 2018, this study will have readers scratching their heads and chuckling at the puzzling relationship between civic participation and smartphone curiosity. Our jocular analysis sheds light on this peculiar tie between political leanings and digital inquiries, highlighting the whimsical side of electoral behavior.

-------

And here is the introduction section that led to this literature review:
[[INTRODUCTION]]
Ah, the world of academic research. A place where serious scientists and scholars delve into the depths of knowledge, armed with data, statistical tools, and an unbridled enthusiasm for uncovering the unexpected. In this vein, we present our delightful foray into the intersection of Hawaiian political preferences and, of all things, Google searches for the President's phone number.
As seasoned researchers, we often find ourselves embroiled in the serious business of analyzing voting behavior, predicting electoral outcomes, and unraveling the complex tapestry of political decision-making. However, in the midst of all this scholarly solemnity, we occasionally stumble upon correlations so amusing, so perplexing, that they tickle our statistical sensibilities and tug at the corners of our lips. And so, dear reader, we invite you to join us on this whimsical journey where we uncover the truly unexpected relationship between Democrat votes for Senators in Hawaii and internet searches for the President's direct line.
This study has all the hallmarks of an academic escapade likely to draw a few raised eyebrows and perhaps even a chuckle or two. Armed with data from reputable sources such as the MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, and the ever-quirky Google Trends, we set out to explore the connection that no one saw coming. The correlation coefficient of 0.8283887 beckons us like a siren's song, leading us down the path of statistical curiosity and improbable relationships.
So, let us set aside our sober academese for a moment and embrace the absurdity of this endeavor. Our analysis promises to shine a light on the peculiar bond between civic engagement and the urge to search for a certain high-profile contact details. Come, dear reader, and let us navigate this comical conundrum with the seriousness of scientists and the mirth of merry jesters.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[LITERATURE REVIEW]]



ChatGPT:
[[LITERATURE REVIEW]]

A number of scholarly works have grappled with the nuances of voting behavior, digital trends, and the quirky interactions between the two. In "The Effects of Political Affiliation on Online Search Behavior," Smith et al. (2015) explored the intriguing relationships between partisan inclinations and internet queries. Similarly, Doe and Jones (2017) investigated the impact of digital curiosity on civic engagement in their seminal work "Searches and Politics: An Unlikely Tango."

Moving from the serious realm of academic research to the delightful world of non-fiction literature, books such as "The Power of Data: Uncovering Surprising Trends" by Data Analyst and "The Google Conundrum: Unraveling Online Enigmas" by Tech Guru offer valuable insights into the peculiar ties between online searches and societal phenomena. On a more whimsical note, fiction books such as "The Search for Electoral Enlightenment" by Novel Author and "Democracy's Digital Dilemmas" by Satirical Writer delve into the absurd and unexpected interactions between politics and technology, albeit in a lighthearted manner.

As we stray further from the conventional realms of academic literature, let us not forget the silver screen's take on the eclectic relationship between political preferences and technological musings. While not directly related to our research topic, films such as "Election" and "The Matrix" (where, let's face it, Keanu Reeves could use a direct line to the president) provide quirky perspectives on the unexpected twists and turns of civic life and digital escapades.

Stay tuned for more unexpected correlations and scholarly silliness as we embark on this comical crusade to decode the Hawaiian electorate's penchant for Democratic senators and their inquisitive yearning for the President's phone number.


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

Please make up the methodology section of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between Democrat votes for Senators in Hawaii and Google searches for 'President phone number'. Make lots of jokes, goofy observations, and puns. Sneak in some jokes and clever puns about science, research, statistics, and the variables.

Your research team collected data from all across the internet, but mostly just used information from MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse and Google Trends . You used data from 2004 to 2018

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]]
Dialing for Democrats: The Connection Between Senatorial Preferences in Hawaii and Google Searches for the President's Phone Number

[[ABSTRACT]]
In this paper, we present the unexpected and outright quirky findings of our research on the association between the Hawaiian electorate's political tendencies and their curious online searches. Utilizing data from MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, and Google Trends, we delved into the correlation between the number of votes cast for Democratic senators in Hawaii and the frequency of Google searches for 'President phone number'. Uncovering a correlation coefficient of 0.8283887 and a statistically significant p-value of less than 0.05 for the time period spanning from 2004 to 2018, this study will have readers scratching their heads and chuckling at the puzzling relationship between civic participation and smartphone curiosity. Our jocular analysis sheds light on this peculiar tie between political leanings and digital inquiries, highlighting the whimsical side of electoral behavior.

[[INTRODUCTION]]
Ah, the world of academic research. A place where serious scientists and scholars delve into the depths of knowledge, armed with data, statistical tools, and an unbridled enthusiasm for uncovering the unexpected. In this vein, we present our delightful foray into the intersection of Hawaiian political preferences and, of all things, Google searches for the President's phone number.
As seasoned researchers, we often find ourselves embroiled in the serious business of analyzing voting behavior, predicting electoral outcomes, and unraveling the complex tapestry of political decision-making. However, in the midst of all this scholarly solemnity, we occasionally stumble upon correlations so amusing, so perplexing, that they tickle our statistical sensibilities and tug at the corners of our lips. And so, dear reader, we invite you to join us on this whimsical journey where we uncover the truly unexpected relationship between Democrat votes for Senators in Hawaii and internet searches for the President's direct line.
This study has all the hallmarks of an academic escapade likely to draw a few raised eyebrows and perhaps even a chuckle or two. Armed with data from reputable sources such as the MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, and the ever-quirky Google Trends, we set out to explore the connection that no one saw coming. The correlation coefficient of 0.8283887 beckons us like a siren's song, leading us down the path of statistical curiosity and improbable relationships.
So, let us set aside our sober academese for a moment and embrace the absurdity of this endeavor. Our analysis promises to shine a light on the peculiar bond between civic engagement and the urge to search for a certain high-profile contact details. Come, dear reader, and let us navigate this comical conundrum with the seriousness of scientists and the mirth of merry jesters.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[METHODOLOGY]]



ChatGPT:

[[METHODOLOGY]]

To embark on this mirthful quest to unravel the mysterious connection between Democrat votes for Senators in Hawaii and the sly internet searches for the President's direct line, we concocted a methodology as quirky and unconventional as the phenomenon itself. Our data wranglers scoured the bowels of the internet, fearing neither the dark recesses of MIT Election Data and Science Lab nor the labyrinthine corridors of the Harvard Dataverse. With intrepid determination, we seized the seemingly unrelated data from the clutches of obscurity and harnessed them for our gleeful analysis.

Our analysis covered the years 2004 to 2018, a period defined by its quirkiness in both electoral politics and online behaviors. We acquired the voting statistics for Democratic senators from the tropical paradise of Hawaii, where the political breeze is balmy and the data, delightfully plentiful. Concurrently, we peered into the inquisitive habits of cyber citizens, extracting the Google Trends data for searches related to the enigmatic phrase 'President phone number'. Through these disparate sources, we spliced together a whimsical dataset, where political passion was entwined with digital inquisitiveness in an endearing and amusing tableau.

Utilizing the wizardry of statistical analysis, we conjured the correlation coefficient between the number of Democrat votes for senators in Hawaii and the frequency of online searches for the President's phone number. Our analytical wand fluttered in the statistical ether, summoning the covariances and variances, all while warding off the lurking demons of omitted variable bias and spurious correlations. Our statistical toolkit, filled with potions of regression analysis and hypothesis testing, danced to the rhythm of our mischievous inquiry, yielding results that would prompt a wry smile from even the most jaded of data wizards.

With the unmistakable correlation coefficient of 0.8283887 glinting like a mischievous twinkle in the eye of our analysis, we ventured further into the realms of statistical hilarity. Armed with a p-value of less than 0.05, akin to a secret handshake among the denizens of significance, our findings stood as a testament to the unexpected and the wonderfully absurd in the realm of research. The data, like a riddle wrapped in an enigma and shrouded in statistical significance, beckoned us into the heart of this oddity, where the unusual bedfellows of political proclivities and digital curiosities frolicked in statistical harmony.

In summary, dear reader, our methodology encapsulates the spirit of this whimsical endeavor, embracing the unconventional, the peculiar, and the downright amusing. With the unison of data from venerable sources and the gaiety of statistical analysis, we embarked on this thoroughly entertaining expedition, casting light on the confounding connection between Hawaiian political preferences and the elusive pursuit of presidential contact details.


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

Please make up the results section of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between Democrat votes for Senators in Hawaii and Google searches for 'President phone number'. Make lots of jokes, goofy observations, and puns. Sneak in some jokes and clever puns about science, research, statistics, and the variables.

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

For the time period 2004 to 2018, you found a correlation 0.8283887, r-squared of 0.6862279, and p < 0.05.

One figure will be included. The figure (Fig. 1) is a scatterplot showing the strong correlation between the two variables. You don't need to specify where; I will add the figure.

Here is the title and abstract of the paper:
[[TITLE]]
Dialing for Democrats: The Connection Between Senatorial Preferences in Hawaii and Google Searches for the President's Phone Number

[[ABSTRACT]]
In this paper, we present the unexpected and outright quirky findings of our research on the association between the Hawaiian electorate's political tendencies and their curious online searches. Utilizing data from MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, and Google Trends, we delved into the correlation between the number of votes cast for Democratic senators in Hawaii and the frequency of Google searches for 'President phone number'. Uncovering a correlation coefficient of 0.8283887 and a statistically significant p-value of less than 0.05 for the time period spanning from 2004 to 2018, this study will have readers scratching their heads and chuckling at the puzzling relationship between civic participation and smartphone curiosity. Our jocular analysis sheds light on this peculiar tie between political leanings and digital inquiries, highlighting the whimsical side of electoral behavior.

-------

And here is the methodology section that led to this result:
[[METHODOLOGY]]
Ah, the world of academic research. A place where serious scientists and scholars delve into the depths of knowledge, armed with data, statistical tools, and an unbridled enthusiasm for uncovering the unexpected. In this vein, we present our delightful foray into the intersection of Hawaiian political preferences and, of all things, Google searches for the President's phone number.
As seasoned researchers, we often find ourselves embroiled in the serious business of analyzing voting behavior, predicting electoral outcomes, and unraveling the complex tapestry of political decision-making. However, in the midst of all this scholarly solemnity, we occasionally stumble upon correlations so amusing, so perplexing, that they tickle our statistical sensibilities and tug at the corners of our lips. And so, dear reader, we invite you to join us on this whimsical journey where we uncover the truly unexpected relationship between Democrat votes for Senators in Hawaii and internet searches for the President's direct line.
This study has all the hallmarks of an academic escapade likely to draw a few raised eyebrows and perhaps even a chuckle or two. Armed with data from reputable sources such as the MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, and the ever-quirky Google Trends, we set out to explore the connection that no one saw coming. The correlation coefficient of 0.8283887 beckons us like a siren's song, leading us down the path of statistical curiosity and improbable relationships.
So, let us set aside our sober academese for a moment and embrace the absurdity of this endeavor. Our analysis promises to shine a light on the peculiar bond between civic engagement and the urge to search for a certain high-profile contact details. Come, dear reader, and let us navigate this comical conundrum with the seriousness of scientists and the mirth of merry jesters.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[RESULTS]]



ChatGPT:

[[RESULTS]]

In this section, the lighthearted yet astounding results of our investigation into the connection between Democrat votes for Senators in Hawaii and Google searches for 'President phone number' are unveiled. After a thorough analysis of the data spanning from 2004 to 2018, we uncovered a surprisingly strong correlation coefficient of 0.8283887 between these two seemingly disparate variables. Our statistical analysis further revealed an r-squared value of 0.6862279 and a p-value of less than 0.05, affirming the robustness of this relationship.

Figure 1 illustrates the undeniable correlation between the number of votes cast for Democratic senators in Hawaii and the frequency of Google searches for 'President phone number.' The plot presents a clear upward trend, showcasing the intriguing link between political preferences and the peculiar curiosity regarding the President's telephone contact. One cannot help but marvel at the quirkiness of this association, as it prompts contemplation about the whimsical nature of digital inquiries in the context of electoral behavior.

The magnitude of this correlation leaves us grinning from ear to ear, as it exemplifies the delightful unpredictability of statistical analyses. This unforeseen connection invites a playful speculation about the intertwining of civic engagement and the digital age's penchant for peculiar queries. It serves as a whimsical reminder that within the realm of research, there are boundless opportunities for uncovering correlations that spark both amusement and insight.

The robustness of our findings, paired with the unexpected nature of this relationship, contributes a touch of levity to the otherwise serious landscape of political analysis. These results do not just capture the attention of the academically inclined but also beckon a sly smile from those with a fondness for the unpredictable quirks of statistics.


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

Please make up the discussion section of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between Democrat votes for Senators in Hawaii and Google searches for 'President phone number'. Make lots of jokes, goofy observations, and puns. Sneak in some jokes and clever puns about science, research, statistics, and the variables.

Limit your response to 500 tokens.

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

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

[[TITLE]]
Dialing for Democrats: The Connection Between Senatorial Preferences in Hawaii and Google Searches for the President's Phone Number

[[ABSTRACT]]
In this paper, we present the unexpected and outright quirky findings of our research on the association between the Hawaiian electorate's political tendencies and their curious online searches. Utilizing data from MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, and Google Trends, we delved into the correlation between the number of votes cast for Democratic senators in Hawaii and the frequency of Google searches for 'President phone number'. Uncovering a correlation coefficient of 0.8283887 and a statistically significant p-value of less than 0.05 for the time period spanning from 2004 to 2018, this study will have readers scratching their heads and chuckling at the puzzling relationship between civic participation and smartphone curiosity. Our jocular analysis sheds light on this peculiar tie between political leanings and digital inquiries, highlighting the whimsical side of electoral behavior.

[[LITERATURE REVIEW]]
A number of scholarly works have grappled with the nuances of voting behavior, digital trends, and the quirky interactions between the two. In "The Effects of Political Affiliation on Online Search Behavior," Smith et al. (2015) explored the intriguing relationships between partisan inclinations and internet queries. Similarly, Doe and Jones (2017) investigated the impact of digital curiosity on civic engagement in their seminal work "Searches and Politics: An Unlikely Tango."
Moving from the serious realm of academic research to the delightful world of non-fiction literature, books such as "The Power of Data: Uncovering Surprising Trends" by Data Analyst and "The Google Conundrum: Unraveling Online Enigmas" by Tech Guru offer valuable insights into the peculiar ties between online searches and societal phenomena. On a more whimsical note, fiction books such as "The Search for Electoral Enlightenment" by Novel Author and "Democracy's Digital Dilemmas" by Satirical Writer delve into the absurd and unexpected interactions between politics and technology, albeit in a lighthearted manner.
As we stray further from the conventional realms of academic literature, let us not forget the silver screen's take on the eclectic relationship between political preferences and technological musings. While not directly related to our research topic, films such as "Election" and "The Matrix" (where, let's face it, Keanu Reeves could use a direct line to the president) provide quirky perspectives on the unexpected twists and turns of civic life and digital escapades.
Stay tuned for more unexpected correlations and scholarly silliness as we embark on this comical crusade to decode the Hawaiian electorate's penchant for Democratic senators and their inquisitive yearning for the President's phone number.

[[RESULTS]]
In this section, the lighthearted yet astounding results of our investigation into the connection between Democrat votes for Senators in Hawaii and Google searches for 'President phone number' are unveiled. After a thorough analysis of the data spanning from 2004 to 2018, we uncovered a surprisingly strong correlation coefficient of 0.8283887 between these two seemingly disparate variables. Our statistical analysis further revealed an r-squared value of 0.6862279 and a p-value of less than 0.05, affirming the robustness of this relationship.
Figure 1 illustrates the undeniable correlation between the number of votes cast for Democratic senators in Hawaii and the frequency of Google searches for 'President phone number.' The plot presents a clear upward trend, showcasing the intriguing link between political preferences and the peculiar curiosity regarding the President's telephone contact. One cannot help but marvel at the quirkiness of this association, as it prompts contemplation about the whimsical nature of digital inquiries in the context of electoral behavior.
The magnitude of this correlation leaves us grinning from ear to ear, as it exemplifies the delightful unpredictability of statistical analyses. This unforeseen connection invites a playful speculation about the intertwining of civic engagement and the digital age's penchant for peculiar queries. It serves as a whimsical reminder that within the realm of research, there are boundless opportunities for uncovering correlations that spark both amusement and insight.
The robustness of our findings, paired with the unexpected nature of this relationship, contributes a touch of levity to the otherwise serious landscape of political analysis. These results do not just capture the attention of the academically inclined but also beckon a sly smile from those with a fondness for the unpredictable quirks of statistics.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[DISCUSSION]]



ChatGPT:

[[DISCUSSION]]

These results have surely raised some eyebrows and elicited a few chuckles amongst the research community. While it may seem that the connection between Hawaiian Senatorial preferences and googling the President's phone number is as peculiar as a statistical outlier at a game of political bingo, our findings support and build upon the existing literature with a whimsical twist.

Who would have thought that the digital quest for the President's phone number and the voting habits of the Hawaiian electorate would be as snug as a bug in a rug? Nevertheless, our results mirror the efforts of Smith et al. (2015) and Doe and Jones (2017) who previously explored the impact of political leanings on online search behavior. This correlation, as unexpected as a frog at a tea party, adds a distinct hue of amusement to the scholarly canvas, reinforcing the idea that the quirkiness of human behavior holds treasures waiting to be unearthed by the discerning gaze of statistics.

Just as "The Google Conundrum: Unraveling Online Enigmas" by Tech Guru has teased the inquisitive minds, our findings tickle the brain cells and provoke contemplation about the whimsical side of statistical significance. It is evident that these results have provided a playful perspective, making the serious matter of political preferences and digital curiosity as entertaining as a stand-up comedy act at a statistics conference.

In line with the offbeat charm of "The Power of Data: Uncovering Surprising Trends", our research has added another whimsical note to the cacophony of political and technological interactions. Films such as "Election" illustrate that reality can be as outlandish as fiction, and in the spirit of unraveling societal enigmas, our findings offer a means to ponder the lighthearted aspects of political behavior.

With a correlation coefficient as strong as a cup of coffee at a late-night study session and a p-value as striking as a disco ball at a statistics party, our results add a lighthearted dimension to the otherwise serious discourse about politics and digital trends. These findings remind us that within the staid world of academia lies a smorgasbord of surprises just waiting to be discovered, much like a nerdy treasure hunt in the garden of research.

So, let the dance between politics and digital absurdity continue, because, as it turns out, there might just be more unexpected correlations waiting to marinate in the whimsical statistical sauce.


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

Please make up a short conclusion of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between Democrat votes for Senators in Hawaii and Google searches for 'President phone number'. Make lots of jokes, goofy observations, and puns. Sneak in some jokes and clever puns about science, research, statistics, and the variables.

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

Here are the title, abstract, introduction, and results sections.
[[TITLE]]
Dialing for Democrats: The Connection Between Senatorial Preferences in Hawaii and Google Searches for the President's Phone Number

[[ABSTRACT]]
In this paper, we present the unexpected and outright quirky findings of our research on the association between the Hawaiian electorate's political tendencies and their curious online searches. Utilizing data from MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, and Google Trends, we delved into the correlation between the number of votes cast for Democratic senators in Hawaii and the frequency of Google searches for 'President phone number'. Uncovering a correlation coefficient of 0.8283887 and a statistically significant p-value of less than 0.05 for the time period spanning from 2004 to 2018, this study will have readers scratching their heads and chuckling at the puzzling relationship between civic participation and smartphone curiosity. Our jocular analysis sheds light on this peculiar tie between political leanings and digital inquiries, highlighting the whimsical side of electoral behavior.

[[INTRDUCTION]]
Ah, the world of academic research. A place where serious scientists and scholars delve into the depths of knowledge, armed with data, statistical tools, and an unbridled enthusiasm for uncovering the unexpected. In this vein, we present our delightful foray into the intersection of Hawaiian political preferences and, of all things, Google searches for the President's phone number.
As seasoned researchers, we often find ourselves embroiled in the serious business of analyzing voting behavior, predicting electoral outcomes, and unraveling the complex tapestry of political decision-making. However, in the midst of all this scholarly solemnity, we occasionally stumble upon correlations so amusing, so perplexing, that they tickle our statistical sensibilities and tug at the corners of our lips. And so, dear reader, we invite you to join us on this whimsical journey where we uncover the truly unexpected relationship between Democrat votes for Senators in Hawaii and internet searches for the President's direct line.
This study has all the hallmarks of an academic escapade likely to draw a few raised eyebrows and perhaps even a chuckle or two. Armed with data from reputable sources such as the MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, and the ever-quirky Google Trends, we set out to explore the connection that no one saw coming. The correlation coefficient of 0.8283887 beckons us like a siren's song, leading us down the path of statistical curiosity and improbable relationships.
So, let us set aside our sober academese for a moment and embrace the absurdity of this endeavor. Our analysis promises to shine a light on the peculiar bond between civic engagement and the urge to search for a certain high-profile contact details. Come, dear reader, and let us navigate this comical conundrum with the seriousness of scientists and the mirth of merry jesters.

[[RESULTS]]
In this section, the lighthearted yet astounding results of our investigation into the connection between Democrat votes for Senators in Hawaii and Google searches for 'President phone number' are unveiled. After a thorough analysis of the data spanning from 2004 to 2018, we uncovered a surprisingly strong correlation coefficient of 0.8283887 between these two seemingly disparate variables. Our statistical analysis further revealed an r-squared value of 0.6862279 and a p-value of less than 0.05, affirming the robustness of this relationship.
Figure 1 illustrates the undeniable correlation between the number of votes cast for Democratic senators in Hawaii and the frequency of Google searches for 'President phone number.' The plot presents a clear upward trend, showcasing the intriguing link between political preferences and the peculiar curiosity regarding the President's telephone contact. One cannot help but marvel at the quirkiness of this association, as it prompts contemplation about the whimsical nature of digital inquiries in the context of electoral behavior.
The magnitude of this correlation leaves us grinning from ear to ear, as it exemplifies the delightful unpredictability of statistical analyses. This unforeseen connection invites a playful speculation about the intertwining of civic engagement and the digital age's penchant for peculiar queries. It serves as a whimsical reminder that within the realm of research, there are boundless opportunities for uncovering correlations that spark both amusement and insight.
The robustness of our findings, paired with the unexpected nature of this relationship, contributes a touch of levity to the otherwise serious landscape of political analysis. These results do not just capture the attention of the academically inclined but also beckon a sly smile from those with a fondness for the unpredictable quirks of statistics.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[CONCLUSION]]



ChatGPT:

[[CONCLUSION]]

In concluding this jovial jaunt through the enigmatic world of correlations, we find ourselves at the whimsical intersection of political preferences and the search for a VIP's phone digits. As we bid adieu to this laugh-inducing liaison between Democrat votes in Hawaii and the fervent hunt for the President's hotline, we are reminded of the zany capers that statistical analysis can unveil.

This fanciful foray has not only tickled our statistical fancies but also reinforced the notion that within the realm of research, there resides a menagerie of mystifying connections waiting to be unearthed. Our robust correlation coefficient of 0.8283887 stands as a quirky testament to the boundless potential for surprising statistics to elicit both bemusement and scholarly consideration.

However, as we wrap up this delightfully droll digression, we assert with confidence that no further research is needed in this area. The absurdity and unexpectedness of this connection have saturated our hearts with statistical glee, providing a rib-tickling reminder that even in the most serious of academic pursuits, there is always room for a good laugh and a quirky correlation.

So, dear reader, in the words of the great Isaac Newton, "I can calculate the motion of heavenly bodies, but not the madness of people" – an apt sentiment for the chuckle-worthy conundrum we've stumbled upon in the realm of political and digital curiosities.


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 Dialing for Democrats: The Connection Between Senatorial Preferences in Hawaii and Google Searches for the President's Phone Number. Respond only with the name of a fictional academic journal.

ChatGPT:

Journal of Political Googling


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 Dialing for Democrats: The Connection Between Senatorial Preferences in Hawaii and Google Searches for the President's Phone Number. Respond only with the name of a fictional organization.

ChatGPT:

The Institute for Sociopolitical Inquiry and Quirky Data Analysis


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 Dialing for Democrats: The Connection Between Senatorial Preferences in Hawaii and Google Searches for the President's Phone Number with an abstract of In this paper, we present the unexpected and outright quirky findings of our research on the association between the Hawaiian electorate's political tendencies and their curious online searches. Utilizing data from MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, and Google Trends, we delved into the correlation between the number of votes cast for Democratic senators in Hawaii and the frequency of Google searches for 'President phone number'. Uncovering a correlation coefficient of 0.8283887 and a statistically significant p-value of less than 0.05 for the time period spanning from 2004 to 2018, this study will have readers scratching their heads and chuckling at the puzzling relationship between civic participation and smartphone curiosity. Our jocular analysis sheds light on this peculiar tie between political leanings and digital inquiries, highlighting the whimsical side of electoral behavior.

ChatGPT:

Democratic senators, Hawaii voters, Google searches, President phone number, electoral behavior, political tendencies, online searches, Hawaii electorate, civic participation, smartphone curiosity, MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, Google Trends, correlation coefficient, statistically significant p-value, political leanings, digital inquiries, electoral behavior, Hawaii, senators, Google, President's phone number

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

Google searches for 'President phone number'
Detailed data title: Relative volume of Google searches for 'President phone number' (Worldwide, without quotes)
Source: Google Trends
Additional Info: Relative search volume (not absolute numbers)

See what else correlates with Google searches for 'President phone number'

Correlation r = 0.8283887 (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 = 0.6862279 (Coefficient of determination)
This means 68.6% of the change in the one variable (i.e., Google searches for 'President phone number') is predictable based on the change in the other (i.e., Votes for Democratic Senators in Hawaii) over the 7 years from 2004 through 2018.

p < 0.05, which statistically significant(Null hypothesis significance test)
The p-value is 0.021. 0.0213146100906828930000000000
The p-value is a measure of how probable it is that we would randomly find a result this extreme. More specifically the p-value is a measure of how probable it is that we would randomly find a result this extreme if we had only tested one pair of variables one time.

But I am a p-villain. I absolutely did not test only one pair of variables one time. I correlated hundreds of millions of pairs of variables. I threw boatloads of data into an industrial-sized blender to find this correlation.

Who is going to stop me? p-value reporting doesn't require me to report how many calculations I had to go through in order to find a low p-value!
On average, you will find a correaltion as strong as 0.83 in 2.1% of random cases. Said differently, if you correlated 47 random variables Which I absolutely did.
with the same 6 degrees of freedom, Degrees of freedom is a measure of how many free components we are testing. In this case it is 6 because we have two variables measured over a period of 7 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.

[ 0.2, 0.97 ] 95% correlation confidence interval (using the Fisher z-transformation)
The confidence interval is an estimate the range of the value of the correlation coefficient, using the correlation itself as an input. The values are meant to be the low and high end of the correlation coefficient with 95% confidence.

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


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

Still, sometimes one of the variables has more years of data available than the other. This page only shows the overlapping years. To see all the years, click on "See what else correlates with..." link above.
2004200620102012201420162018
Votes for Democratic Senators in Hawaii (Total votes)313629210330277228269489246827306604276316
Google searches for 'President phone number' (Rel. search volume)47.416735.416741.166746.543.554.416748.0833




Why this works

  1. Data dredging: I have 25,153 variables in my database. I compare all these variables against each other to find ones that randomly match up. That's 632,673,409 correlation calculations! This is called “data dredging.” Instead of starting with a hypothesis and testing it, I instead abused the data to see what correlations shake out. It’s a dangerous way to go about analysis, because any sufficiently large dataset will yield strong correlations completely at random.
  2. Lack of causal connection: There is probably Because these pages are automatically generated, it's possible that the two variables you are viewing are in fact causually related. I take steps to prevent the obvious ones from showing on the site (I don't let data about the weather in one city correlate with the weather in a neighboring city, for example), but sometimes they still pop up. If they are related, cool! You found a loophole.
    no direct connection between these variables, despite what the AI says above. This is exacerbated by the fact that I used "Years" as the base variable. Lots of things happen in a year that are not related to each other! Most studies would use something like "one person" in stead of "one year" to be the "thing" studied.
  3. Observations not independent: For many variables, sequential years are not independent of each other. If a population of people is continuously doing something every day, there is no reason to think they would suddenly change how they are doing that thing on January 1. A simple Personally I don't find any p-value calculation to be 'simple,' but you know what I mean.
    p-value calculation does not take this into account, so mathematically it appears less probable than it really is.
  4. Very low n: There are not many data points included in this analysis. Even if the p-value is high, we should be suspicious of using so few datapoints in a correlation.




Try it yourself

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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


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

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

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

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

    return correlation, r_squared, p_value

# These are the arrays for the variables shown on this page, but you can modify them to be any two sets of numbers
array_1 = np.array([313629,210330,277228,269489,246827,306604,276316,])
array_2 = np.array([47.4167,35.4167,41.1667,46.5,43.5,54.4167,48.0833,])
array_1_name = "Votes for Democratic Senators in Hawaii"
array_2_name = "Google searches for 'President phone number'"

# Perform the calculation
print(f"Calculating the correlation between {array_1_name} and {array_2_name}...")
correlation, r_squared, p_value = calculate_correlation(array_1, array_2)

# Print the results
print("Correlation Coefficient:", correlation)
print("R-squared:", r_squared)
print("P-value:", p_value)



Reuseable content

You may re-use the images on this page for any purpose, even commercial purposes, without asking for permission. The only requirement is that you attribute Tyler Vigen. Attribution can take many different forms. If you leave the "tylervigen.com" link in the image, that satisfies it just fine. If you remove it and move it to a footnote, that's fine too. You can also just write "Charts courtesy of Tyler Vigen" at the bottom of an article.

You do not need to attribute "the spurious correlations website," and you don't even need to link here if you don't want to. I don't gain anything from pageviews. There are no ads on this site, there is nothing for sale, and I am not for hire.

For the record, I am just one person. Tyler Vigen, he/him/his. I do have degrees, but they should not go after my name unless you want to annoy my wife. If that is your goal, then go ahead and cite me as "Tyler Vigen, A.A. A.A.S. B.A. J.D." Otherwise it is just "Tyler Vigen."

When spoken, my last name is pronounced "vegan," like I don't eat meat.

Full license details.
For more on re-use permissions, or to get a signed release form, see tylervigen.com/permission.

Download images for these variables:


View another random correlation

How fun was this correlation?

Thanks for shining a light on this correlation!


Correlation ID: 4932 · Black Variable ID: 26225 · Red Variable ID: 1396
about · subscribe · emailme@tylervigen.com · twitter

CC BY 4.0