AI explanation
The more cutting-edge the science experiments, the higher the demand for candidates who promise to bring the *real* rocket fuel to the nation's progress. It's basic political physics: for every action-packed video, there's an equal and opposite reaction at the polls. As the channel delves deeper into the dynamics of motion and forces, it's sparking a conservative surge that even Newton would raise an eyebrow at. So, as electoral equations go, as long as SmarterEveryDay keeps producing content that's positively electric, it's no surprise that Missouri is feeling the G-forces towards the right.Model: dalle-3
Prompt: "Generate an image inspired by a TIME magazine cover, set in a vibrant laboratory. Show a high-tech experiment with colorful liquids swirling in glass beakers. Surround the scene with a large crowd holding "Vote Republican" signs and swaying to the beats of a political rally in Missouri. Capture the fusion of cutting-edge science experiments and political momentum in a simple, visually striking composition." 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: How 'hip and with it' SmarterEveryDay YouTube video titles are and Votes for the Republican Presidential candidate in Missouri. Given these, which of the following image style descriptions seems most appropriate? Pick the one that seems to be related to one of the variables at hand. Please respond with only one of the following potential descriptions: A TIME magazine cover image Celtic art A photo-realistic image Woodblock painting Cubism
ChatGPT: A TIME magazine cover image
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 How 'hip and with it' SmarterEveryDay YouTube video titles are and Votes for the Republican Presidential candidate in Missouri, in the following situation: The more cutting-edge the science experiments, the higher the demand for candidates who promise to bring the *real* rocket fuel to the nation's progress. It's basic political physics: for every action-packed video, there's an equal and opposite reaction at the polls. As the channel delves deeper into the dynamics of motion and forces, it's sparking a conservative surge that even Newton would raise an eyebrow at. So, as electoral equations go, as long as SmarterEveryDay keeps producing content that's positively electric, it's no surprise that Missouri is feeling the G-forces towards the right.. Keep the description simple.
ChatGPT: In a vibrant laboratory setting, the camera zooms in on a high-tech experiment with colorful liquids swirling in glass beakers. As the atmosphere buzzes with excitement, a large crowd enthusiastically holds up "Vote Republican" signs and sways to the pulse-pounding beats of a political rally in Missouri. The energy of cutting-edge science experiments and the fervor of conservative support blend in an electric fusion of innovation and political momentum.
Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You write and improve image generation prompts for DALLE-3. You maintain the same subjects, but enhance the visuals.
User prompt: Please respond with an image generation prompt that would be likely to create an interesting visual using DALLE-3, using the following style: [ A TIME magazine cover image ] and depicting this scene: In a vibrant laboratory setting, the camera zooms in on a high-tech experiment with colorful liquids swirling in glass beakers. As the atmosphere buzzes with excitement, a large crowd enthusiastically holds up "Vote Republican" signs and sways to the pulse-pounding beats of a political rally in Missouri. The energy of cutting-edge science experiments and the fervor of conservative support blend in an electric fusion of innovation and political momentum. Keep the visual depiction simple. Do not include any words or speech bubbles.
ChatGPT: "Generate an image inspired by a TIME magazine cover, set in a vibrant laboratory. Show a high-tech experiment with colorful liquids swirling in glass beakers. Surround the scene with a large crowd holding "Vote Republican" signs and swaying to the beats of a political rally in Missouri. Capture the fusion of cutting-edge science experiments and political momentum in a simple, visually striking composition."
*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.
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 How 'hip and with it' SmarterEveryDay YouTube video titles are caused Votes for the Republican Presidential candidate in Missouri to increase. Make it feel plausible.
AI academic paper
SmarterEveryDay's Witty Wordplay and Voting Outcome in Missouri: A Study of the Ties That Bind Journal of Political Linguistics Jan 2024 |
Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You are a 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 How 'hip and with it' SmarterEveryDay YouTube video titles are and Votes for the Republican Presidential candidate in Missouri. Make lots of jokes, goofy observations, and puns.
Rhyme words in the title.
Your research team used data from AI analysis of YouTube video titles and MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse to assess this nagging question. You found a correlation coefficient of 0.9957617 and p < 0.01 for 2007 to 2020.
Please respond in this format (replace "Lorem ipsum dolor sit" with your title and abstract)
[[TITLE]]
Lorem ipsum dolor sit
[[ABSTRACT]]
Lorem ipsum dolor sit
ChatGPT:
[[TITLE]]
"SmarterEveryDay's Witty Wordplay and Voting Outcome in Missouri: A Study of the Ties That Bind"
[[ABSTRACT]]
This groundbreaking research delves into the unexpected connection between the intriguingly phrased video titles of the popular YouTube channel "SmarterEveryDay" and the voting patterns for the Republican Presidential candidate in the state of Missouri. By analyzing the linguistic quips and cunning catchphrases employed in the video titles using advanced AI technologies, alongside the voting data from the MIT Election Data and Science Lab, our study unearths a stunning correlation coefficient of 0.9957617, with a p-value strikingly lower than anticipated (p < 0.01). From "Gavin Free Geeks Out While Building A Microphone" to "Sacrificing Maxwell's Equations for Dummies", the linguistic flair of SmarterEveryDay's video titles holds an unexpected sway over the political preferences of Missourians. This research paves the way for future examinations of the entwined realms of online content and political inclinations, demonstrating the sheer impact of whimsically worded video titles on the voting populace.
Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You are a 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 How 'hip and with it' SmarterEveryDay YouTube video titles are and Votes for the Republican Presidential candidate in Missouri. 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]]
"SmarterEveryDay's Witty Wordplay and Voting Outcome in Missouri: A Study of the Ties That Bind"
[[ABSTRACT]]
This groundbreaking research delves into the unexpected connection between the intriguingly phrased video titles of the popular YouTube channel "SmarterEveryDay" and the voting patterns for the Republican Presidential candidate in the state of Missouri. By analyzing the linguistic quips and cunning catchphrases employed in the video titles using advanced AI technologies, alongside the voting data from the MIT Election Data and Science Lab, our study unearths a stunning correlation coefficient of 0.9957617, with a p-value strikingly lower than anticipated (p < 0.01). From "Gavin Free Geeks Out While Building A Microphone" to "Sacrificing Maxwell's Equations for Dummies", the linguistic flair of SmarterEveryDay's video titles holds an unexpected sway over the political preferences of Missourians. This research paves the way for future examinations of the entwined realms of online content and political inclinations, demonstrating the sheer impact of whimsically worded video titles on the voting populace.
-------
Your response should start like this:
[[INTRODUCTION]]
ChatGPT:
INTRODUCTION
Video titles have become the battleground of attention in the ever-expanding universe of online content, wielding the power to captivate, confuse, or compel viewers to click with the mere arrangement of words. The intricate dance between linguistic prowess and political leanings has long been a subject of fascination, but one would scarcely anticipate that the charming wordplay in SmarterEveryDay's video titles could hold such sway over the voting behavior of Missourians in the Republican Presidential primary race. It seems that in this digital age, the pen—or rather, the keyboard—is indeed mightier than the sword, as we witness the intersection of linguistic wizardry and political allegiance in a manner hitherto unexplored.
As researchers in the realms of statistical analysis, political science, and linguistic psychology, we found ourselves embarking on a curious expedition to unravel the enigma of why Missourians seem to be so attuned to the witticisms and cleverly concocted phrases that adorn the video titles of SmarterEveryDay. From “Submarine Torpedo Attack in Slow Motion” to “Disappearing Drill Bits with CoorsTek”, the titles of SmarterEveryDay's videos exude a charismatic allure that cannot be understated. However, what seemed like mere linguistic entertainment has revealed itself to be a force to be reckoned with in the sphere of political preferences.
Our study aims to shed light on this unprecedented correlation between the lexical acrobatics of a YouTube channel and the voting decisions of Missourians. With a potent cocktail of linguistic analysis, statistical rigor, and a good dose of humor, we endeavor to illuminate the unexpected ties that bind SmarterEveryDay's video titles and the Republican Presidential candidate votes in Missouri. By unearthing this unique relationship, we hope to set a new benchmark in the exploration of the unanticipated influences that permeate the interconnected realms of online content and political inclinations. So, buckle up and prepare to delve into a world where the play on words meets the pulse of politics.
Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You are a 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 How 'hip and with it' SmarterEveryDay YouTube video titles are and Votes for the Republican Presidential candidate in Missouri. 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 you might move on to cartoons and children's shows that you watched for research.
Here is the title and abstract of the paper:
[[TITLE]]
"SmarterEveryDay's Witty Wordplay and Voting Outcome in Missouri: A Study of the Ties That Bind"
[[ABSTRACT]]
This groundbreaking research delves into the unexpected connection between the intriguingly phrased video titles of the popular YouTube channel "SmarterEveryDay" and the voting patterns for the Republican Presidential candidate in the state of Missouri. By analyzing the linguistic quips and cunning catchphrases employed in the video titles using advanced AI technologies, alongside the voting data from the MIT Election Data and Science Lab, our study unearths a stunning correlation coefficient of 0.9957617, with a p-value strikingly lower than anticipated (p < 0.01). From "Gavin Free Geeks Out While Building A Microphone" to "Sacrificing Maxwell's Equations for Dummies", the linguistic flair of SmarterEveryDay's video titles holds an unexpected sway over the political preferences of Missourians. This research paves the way for future examinations of the entwined realms of online content and political inclinations, demonstrating the sheer impact of whimsically worded video titles on the voting populace.
-------
And here is the introduction section that led to this literature review:
[[INTRODUCTION]]
INTRODUCTION
Video titles have become the battleground of attention in the ever-expanding universe of online content, wielding the power to captivate, confuse, or compel viewers to click with the mere arrangement of words. The intricate dance between linguistic prowess and political leanings has long been a subject of fascination, but one would scarcely anticipate that the charming wordplay in SmarterEveryDay's video titles could hold such sway over the voting behavior of Missourians in the Republican Presidential primary race. It seems that in this digital age, the pen—or rather, the keyboard—is indeed mightier than the sword, as we witness the intersection of linguistic wizardry and political allegiance in a manner hitherto unexplored.
As researchers in the realms of statistical analysis, political science, and linguistic psychology, we found ourselves embarking on a curious expedition to unravel the enigma of why Missourians seem to be so attuned to the witticisms and cleverly concocted phrases that adorn the video titles of SmarterEveryDay. From “Submarine Torpedo Attack in Slow Motion” to “Disappearing Drill Bits with CoorsTek”, the titles of SmarterEveryDay's videos exude a charismatic allure that cannot be understated. However, what seemed like mere linguistic entertainment has revealed itself to be a force to be reckoned with in the sphere of political preferences.
Our study aims to shed light on this unprecedented correlation between the lexical acrobatics of a YouTube channel and the voting decisions of Missourians. With a potent cocktail of linguistic analysis, statistical rigor, and a good dose of humor, we endeavor to illuminate the unexpected ties that bind SmarterEveryDay's video titles and the Republican Presidential candidate votes in Missouri. By unearthing this unique relationship, we hope to set a new benchmark in the exploration of the unanticipated influences that permeate the interconnected realms of online content and political inclinations. So, buckle up and prepare to delve into a world where the play on words meets the pulse of politics.
-------
Your response should start like this:
[[LITERATURE REVIEW]]
ChatGPT:
[[LITERATURE REVIEW]]
The investigation into the correlation between the charisma of SmarterEveryDay's video titles and the Republican Presidential candidate votes in Missouri unveils a confluence of linguistic allure and political preferences. The empirical expedition into this uncharted territory beckons a survey of existing literature, entailing an exploration of the unexpected influences that permeate the interconnected realms of online content and political inclinations. Smith et al. (2017) commence this adventure with a comprehensive analysis of linguistic fascination and its impact on electoral tendencies in their seminal work "Words That Win: The Power of Linguistic Appeal in Political Campaigns." Their findings on the linguistic strategies employed in political campaigns lay a formidable foundation for understanding the significance of linguistic flair in political decision-making processes.
Doe and Jones (2015) contribute to this discourse by delving into the psychological underpinnings of wordplay and humor in their watershed publication "Language, Laughter, and Political Leanings: Unearthing the Links." Their rigorous study illuminates the ways in which linguistic wit can subtly shape political proclivities, setting the stage for an investigation into the impact of online content on voter behavior. Their work forms an essential cornerstone in the understanding of the intricate relationship between linguistic sophistication and political allegiances.
Moreover, the intersection of linguistic ingenuity and political propensities has been a subject of interest outside the realm of academic literature. Works such as "The Art of Seduction" by Robert Greene and "Fool" by Christopher Moore offer fascinating insights into the manipulation of language and the power of linguistic seduction, albeit in a non-political context. These literary masterpieces, while fictional, serve as a testament to the enduring fascination with the art of linguistics and its potential to sway human behavior.
In a rather unorthodox turn, the researchers in this study also found themselves immersing in an extensive marathon of classic cartoons and children's shows, under the pretext of understanding the nuances of linguistic appeal across diverse demographics. Shows such as "SpongeBob SquarePants," "Animaniacs," and "Phineas and Ferb" provided unexpected yet invaluable insights into the whimsical world of wordplay and its impact on the audience's receptivity, challenging traditional academic boundaries in pursuit of a holistic understanding of linguistic influence.
As the journey through the literature enfolds, it becomes apparent that the landscape of linguistic influence is a rich and varied tapestry, interwoven with facets of politics, psychology, and popular culture. This whimsical odyssey sets the stage for an unconventional exploration of the ties that bind linguistic savvy, online content, and the political predilections of Missourians.
Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You are a 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 How 'hip and with it' SmarterEveryDay YouTube video titles are and Votes for the Republican Presidential candidate in Missouri. 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 AI analysis of YouTube video titles and MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse . You used data from 2007 to 2020
Make up the research methods you don't know. Make them a bit goofy and convoluted.
Here is the title, abstract, and introduction of the paper:
[[TITLE]]
"SmarterEveryDay's Witty Wordplay and Voting Outcome in Missouri: A Study of the Ties That Bind"
[[ABSTRACT]]
This groundbreaking research delves into the unexpected connection between the intriguingly phrased video titles of the popular YouTube channel "SmarterEveryDay" and the voting patterns for the Republican Presidential candidate in the state of Missouri. By analyzing the linguistic quips and cunning catchphrases employed in the video titles using advanced AI technologies, alongside the voting data from the MIT Election Data and Science Lab, our study unearths a stunning correlation coefficient of 0.9957617, with a p-value strikingly lower than anticipated (p < 0.01). From "Gavin Free Geeks Out While Building A Microphone" to "Sacrificing Maxwell's Equations for Dummies", the linguistic flair of SmarterEveryDay's video titles holds an unexpected sway over the political preferences of Missourians. This research paves the way for future examinations of the entwined realms of online content and political inclinations, demonstrating the sheer impact of whimsically worded video titles on the voting populace.
[[INTRODUCTION]]
INTRODUCTION
Video titles have become the battleground of attention in the ever-expanding universe of online content, wielding the power to captivate, confuse, or compel viewers to click with the mere arrangement of words. The intricate dance between linguistic prowess and political leanings has long been a subject of fascination, but one would scarcely anticipate that the charming wordplay in SmarterEveryDay's video titles could hold such sway over the voting behavior of Missourians in the Republican Presidential primary race. It seems that in this digital age, the pen—or rather, the keyboard—is indeed mightier than the sword, as we witness the intersection of linguistic wizardry and political allegiance in a manner hitherto unexplored.
As researchers in the realms of statistical analysis, political science, and linguistic psychology, we found ourselves embarking on a curious expedition to unravel the enigma of why Missourians seem to be so attuned to the witticisms and cleverly concocted phrases that adorn the video titles of SmarterEveryDay. From “Submarine Torpedo Attack in Slow Motion” to “Disappearing Drill Bits with CoorsTek”, the titles of SmarterEveryDay's videos exude a charismatic allure that cannot be understated. However, what seemed like mere linguistic entertainment has revealed itself to be a force to be reckoned with in the sphere of political preferences.
Our study aims to shed light on this unprecedented correlation between the lexical acrobatics of a YouTube channel and the voting decisions of Missourians. With a potent cocktail of linguistic analysis, statistical rigor, and a good dose of humor, we endeavor to illuminate the unexpected ties that bind SmarterEveryDay's video titles and the Republican Presidential candidate votes in Missouri. By unearthing this unique relationship, we hope to set a new benchmark in the exploration of the unanticipated influences that permeate the interconnected realms of online content and political inclinations. So, buckle up and prepare to delve into a world where the play on words meets the pulse of politics.
-------
Your response should start like this:
[[METHODOLOGY]]
ChatGPT:
[[METHODOLOGY]]
To unravel the enigmatic relationship between the captivating video titles of SmarterEveryDay and the voting preferences of Missourians in the Republican Presidential candidate race, our research team employed a blend of advanced linguistic analysis and statistical modeling, spiced with a pinch of wit and humor. The data utilized in this study were collected from the years 2007 to 2020, encompassing a vast array of video titles from SmarterEveryDay and the corresponding Republican Presidential candidate votes in Missouri.
The first step in our convoluted and completely serious research process involved utilizing state-of-the-art AI analysis to dissect the linguistic nuances and wordplay present in the video titles of SmarterEveryDay. This involved employing a custom-built neural network affectionately named "Punny McPunface" to detect puns, wordplay, and quips in the video titles. Of course, the puns tended to generate some groans from our research team, but we pushed through the pain to uncover the subtleties of linguistic wizardry.
In parallel, we sourced the Republican Presidential candidate vote data from the MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, employing legitimate statistical techniques such as linear regression and factor analysis. We meticulously combed through the data to ensure that it was as robust as possible, wading through an ocean of numbers with the zeal of a penguin, eager to find statistical fish.
Once the data were in our grasp, we indulged in a fair amount of statistical shenanigans, employing Pearson's correlation coefficient and multiple regression analysis to unearth the underlying relationships between the wittily worded video titles and the voting outcomes in Missouri. Our statistical software, affectionately referred to as "Statman and Robbin'", heroically battled against the sea of data, wielding its arsenal of statistical tests with the precision of a samurai, and the tenacity of a honey badger.
Finally, to ensure the reliability and validity of our findings, we subjected our results to rigorous scrutiny, conducting sensitivity analyses and cross-validation procedures to validate the robustness of our models. We also implemented a highly scientific process known as "The Giggle Test", where if our findings induced chuckles or laughter, we considered them to be of utmost scientific importance. After all, a good pun is its own reword.
In conclusion, our methodology was a cocktail of AI linguistic analysis, statistical tomfoolery, and a dash of humor, resulting in the unearthing of the unexpected correlation between the inventive phrasing of SmarterEveryDay's video titles and the voting behavior of Missourians. So, with puns and statistics at the ready, we venture forth to unravel the mysteries of linguistic allure and political allegiance.
Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You are a 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 How 'hip and with it' SmarterEveryDay YouTube video titles are and Votes for the Republican Presidential candidate in Missouri. 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 AI analysis of YouTube video titles and MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse .
For the time period 2007 to 2020, you found a correlation 0.9957617, r-squared of 0.9915414, and p < 0.01.
One figure will be included. The figure (Fig. 1) is a scatterplot showing the strong correlation between the two variables. You don't need to specify where; I will add the figure.
Here is the title and abstract of the paper:
[[TITLE]]
"SmarterEveryDay's Witty Wordplay and Voting Outcome in Missouri: A Study of the Ties That Bind"
[[ABSTRACT]]
This groundbreaking research delves into the unexpected connection between the intriguingly phrased video titles of the popular YouTube channel "SmarterEveryDay" and the voting patterns for the Republican Presidential candidate in the state of Missouri. By analyzing the linguistic quips and cunning catchphrases employed in the video titles using advanced AI technologies, alongside the voting data from the MIT Election Data and Science Lab, our study unearths a stunning correlation coefficient of 0.9957617, with a p-value strikingly lower than anticipated (p < 0.01). From "Gavin Free Geeks Out While Building A Microphone" to "Sacrificing Maxwell's Equations for Dummies", the linguistic flair of SmarterEveryDay's video titles holds an unexpected sway over the political preferences of Missourians. This research paves the way for future examinations of the entwined realms of online content and political inclinations, demonstrating the sheer impact of whimsically worded video titles on the voting populace.
-------
And here is the methodology section that led to this result:
[[METHODOLOGY]]
INTRODUCTION
Video titles have become the battleground of attention in the ever-expanding universe of online content, wielding the power to captivate, confuse, or compel viewers to click with the mere arrangement of words. The intricate dance between linguistic prowess and political leanings has long been a subject of fascination, but one would scarcely anticipate that the charming wordplay in SmarterEveryDay's video titles could hold such sway over the voting behavior of Missourians in the Republican Presidential primary race. It seems that in this digital age, the pen—or rather, the keyboard—is indeed mightier than the sword, as we witness the intersection of linguistic wizardry and political allegiance in a manner hitherto unexplored.
As researchers in the realms of statistical analysis, political science, and linguistic psychology, we found ourselves embarking on a curious expedition to unravel the enigma of why Missourians seem to be so attuned to the witticisms and cleverly concocted phrases that adorn the video titles of SmarterEveryDay. From “Submarine Torpedo Attack in Slow Motion” to “Disappearing Drill Bits with CoorsTek”, the titles of SmarterEveryDay's videos exude a charismatic allure that cannot be understated. However, what seemed like mere linguistic entertainment has revealed itself to be a force to be reckoned with in the sphere of political preferences.
Our study aims to shed light on this unprecedented correlation between the lexical acrobatics of a YouTube channel and the voting decisions of Missourians. With a potent cocktail of linguistic analysis, statistical rigor, and a good dose of humor, we endeavor to illuminate the unexpected ties that bind SmarterEveryDay's video titles and the Republican Presidential candidate votes in Missouri. By unearthing this unique relationship, we hope to set a new benchmark in the exploration of the unanticipated influences that permeate the interconnected realms of online content and political inclinations. So, buckle up and prepare to delve into a world where the play on words meets the pulse of politics.
-------
Your response should start like this:
[[RESULTS]]
ChatGPT:
[[RESULTS]]
The results of our study revealed a striking correlation between the creatively coined and intellectually enticing video titles of SmarterEveryDay and the voting outcomes for the Republican Presidential candidate in Missouri. Our statistical analysis uncovered a correlation coefficient of 0.9957617, signifying an exceptionally strong relationship between these two variables. This finding surpassed our initial expectations and left us marveling at the extent of influence wielded by linguistic wizardry in the political landscape.
Moreover, the r-squared value of 0.9915414 further cements the robustness of the relationship between the linguistic allure of SmarterEveryDay's video titles and the voting decisions of Missourians. This resoundingly high r-squared value indicates that approximately 99.15% of the variability in the voting outcomes can be explained by the variation in the wording of the video titles. Such a substantial explanatory power speaks volumes about the profound impact of linguistically engaging content on political behavior.
Notably, the p-value, which registered at a level lower than 0.01, provides resounding evidence against the null hypothesis and substantiates the validity of our findings. The significance of this p-value reinforces the notion that the observed relationship between SmarterEveryDay's video titles and the voting preferences in Missouri is not a mere fluke but rather a genuine and robust connection.
Finally, to visually encapsulate the strength of the identified correlation, we present Figure 1, a scatterplot showcasing the unmistakable trend between the linguistic charm of SmarterEveryDay's video titles and the Republican Presidential candidate votes in Missouri. The strong clustering of data points further underscores the coherence and reliability of our findings, depicting a clear and considerable association between these seemingly disparate variables.
In summary, our research has unveiled a compelling linkage between the artful phrasing of online video titles and political inclinations, shedding light on the unexpected interplay between linguistic allure and voting behavior. These results prompt a reevaluation of the potential impact of creatively crafted content on the political landscape and beckon further exploration into the intriguing nexus of language and political preferences.
Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You are a 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 How 'hip and with it' SmarterEveryDay YouTube video titles are and Votes for the Republican Presidential candidate in Missouri. 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]]
"SmarterEveryDay's Witty Wordplay and Voting Outcome in Missouri: A Study of the Ties That Bind"
[[ABSTRACT]]
This groundbreaking research delves into the unexpected connection between the intriguingly phrased video titles of the popular YouTube channel "SmarterEveryDay" and the voting patterns for the Republican Presidential candidate in the state of Missouri. By analyzing the linguistic quips and cunning catchphrases employed in the video titles using advanced AI technologies, alongside the voting data from the MIT Election Data and Science Lab, our study unearths a stunning correlation coefficient of 0.9957617, with a p-value strikingly lower than anticipated (p < 0.01). From "Gavin Free Geeks Out While Building A Microphone" to "Sacrificing Maxwell's Equations for Dummies", the linguistic flair of SmarterEveryDay's video titles holds an unexpected sway over the political preferences of Missourians. This research paves the way for future examinations of the entwined realms of online content and political inclinations, demonstrating the sheer impact of whimsically worded video titles on the voting populace.
[[LITERATURE REVIEW]]
The investigation into the correlation between the charisma of SmarterEveryDay's video titles and the Republican Presidential candidate votes in Missouri unveils a confluence of linguistic allure and political preferences. The empirical expedition into this uncharted territory beckons a survey of existing literature, entailing an exploration of the unexpected influences that permeate the interconnected realms of online content and political inclinations. Smith et al. (2017) commence this adventure with a comprehensive analysis of linguistic fascination and its impact on electoral tendencies in their seminal work "Words That Win: The Power of Linguistic Appeal in Political Campaigns." Their findings on the linguistic strategies employed in political campaigns lay a formidable foundation for understanding the significance of linguistic flair in political decision-making processes.
Doe and Jones (2015) contribute to this discourse by delving into the psychological underpinnings of wordplay and humor in their watershed publication "Language, Laughter, and Political Leanings: Unearthing the Links." Their rigorous study illuminates the ways in which linguistic wit can subtly shape political proclivities, setting the stage for an investigation into the impact of online content on voter behavior. Their work forms an essential cornerstone in the understanding of the intricate relationship between linguistic sophistication and political allegiances.
Moreover, the intersection of linguistic ingenuity and political propensities has been a subject of interest outside the realm of academic literature. Works such as "The Art of Seduction" by Robert Greene and "Fool" by Christopher Moore offer fascinating insights into the manipulation of language and the power of linguistic seduction, albeit in a non-political context. These literary masterpieces, while fictional, serve as a testament to the enduring fascination with the art of linguistics and its potential to sway human behavior.
In a rather unorthodox turn, the researchers in this study also found themselves immersing in an extensive marathon of classic cartoons and children's shows, under the pretext of understanding the nuances of linguistic appeal across diverse demographics. Shows such as "SpongeBob SquarePants," "Animaniacs," and "Phineas and Ferb" provided unexpected yet invaluable insights into the whimsical world of wordplay and its impact on the audience's receptivity, challenging traditional academic boundaries in pursuit of a holistic understanding of linguistic influence.
As the journey through the literature enfolds, it becomes apparent that the landscape of linguistic influence is a rich and varied tapestry, interwoven with facets of politics, psychology, and popular culture. This whimsical odyssey sets the stage for an unconventional exploration of the ties that bind linguistic savvy, online content, and the political predilections of Missourians.
[[RESULTS]]
The results of our study revealed a striking correlation between the creatively coined and intellectually enticing video titles of SmarterEveryDay and the voting outcomes for the Republican Presidential candidate in Missouri. Our statistical analysis uncovered a correlation coefficient of 0.9957617, signifying an exceptionally strong relationship between these two variables. This finding surpassed our initial expectations and left us marveling at the extent of influence wielded by linguistic wizardry in the political landscape.
Moreover, the r-squared value of 0.9915414 further cements the robustness of the relationship between the linguistic allure of SmarterEveryDay's video titles and the voting decisions of Missourians. This resoundingly high r-squared value indicates that approximately 99.15% of the variability in the voting outcomes can be explained by the variation in the wording of the video titles. Such a substantial explanatory power speaks volumes about the profound impact of linguistically engaging content on political behavior.
Notably, the p-value, which registered at a level lower than 0.01, provides resounding evidence against the null hypothesis and substantiates the validity of our findings. The significance of this p-value reinforces the notion that the observed relationship between SmarterEveryDay's video titles and the voting preferences in Missouri is not a mere fluke but rather a genuine and robust connection.
Finally, to visually encapsulate the strength of the identified correlation, we present Figure 1, a scatterplot showcasing the unmistakable trend between the linguistic charm of SmarterEveryDay's video titles and the Republican Presidential candidate votes in Missouri. The strong clustering of data points further underscores the coherence and reliability of our findings, depicting a clear and considerable association between these seemingly disparate variables.
In summary, our research has unveiled a compelling linkage between the artful phrasing of online video titles and political inclinations, shedding light on the unexpected interplay between linguistic allure and voting behavior. These results prompt a reevaluation of the potential impact of creatively crafted content on the political landscape and beckon further exploration into the intriguing nexus of language and political preferences.
-------
Your response should start like this:
[[DISCUSSION]]
ChatGPT:
The results of our study have left us in awe of the formidable influence of linguistic charm on political predilections, demonstrating a robust correlation between the zany, thought-provoking video titles of SmarterEveryDay and the voting behavior for the Republican Presidential candidate in Missouri. Our findings not only align with prior research but also extend the understanding of the entwined realms of linguistic artistry and political inclinations.
Drawing from the well of existing literature, our investigation delved into the captivating allure of linguistic appeal, echoing the insights garnered by Smith et al. (2017) on the persuasive power of linguistic strategies and the findings of Doe and Jones (2015) regarding the subtle shaping of political proclivities through linguistic wit. The unexpected immersion in classic cartoons and children's shows, while initially a whimsical pursuit, provided invaluable insights into the nuanced world of wordplay and its impact on diverse demographics, supporting the multifaceted nature of linguistic influence.
The remarkable correlation coefficient of 0.9957617, testament to the overwhelming strength of the relationship between SmarterEveryDay's video titles and the voting outcomes, echoes the sentiment espoused by Smith et al. (2017) concerning the formidable impact of linguistic strategies on electoral tendencies. Furthermore, the substantial explanatory power of approximately 99.15% exhibited by the r-squared value closely mirrors the profound influence of linguistic charm highlighted by Doe and Jones (2015), substantiating the ability of linguistically engaging content to shape political behavior.
Our findings serve as a whimsically unexpected addition to the rich and varied tapestry of linguistic influence, propelled by the captivating allure of linguistic wizardry in the political landscape. The striking p-value, surpassing the conventional threshold and standing as a resounding testament to the genuine and robust connection between the video titles and voting preferences, further underscores the sheer impact of whimsically worded video titles on the political mentality of Missourians.
This study paves the way for further scholarly excavations into the interplay between linguistic sophistication and online content, in parallel with the intricacies of political allegiances. Harnessing the seemingly disparate realms of linguistic charm and political inclinations, our findings present a captivating testament to the profound, albeit unexpected, sway of linguistically engaging content on the political landscape.
Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You are a 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 How 'hip and with it' SmarterEveryDay YouTube video titles are and Votes for the Republican Presidential candidate in Missouri. 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]]
"SmarterEveryDay's Witty Wordplay and Voting Outcome in Missouri: A Study of the Ties That Bind"
[[ABSTRACT]]
This groundbreaking research delves into the unexpected connection between the intriguingly phrased video titles of the popular YouTube channel "SmarterEveryDay" and the voting patterns for the Republican Presidential candidate in the state of Missouri. By analyzing the linguistic quips and cunning catchphrases employed in the video titles using advanced AI technologies, alongside the voting data from the MIT Election Data and Science Lab, our study unearths a stunning correlation coefficient of 0.9957617, with a p-value strikingly lower than anticipated (p < 0.01). From "Gavin Free Geeks Out While Building A Microphone" to "Sacrificing Maxwell's Equations for Dummies", the linguistic flair of SmarterEveryDay's video titles holds an unexpected sway over the political preferences of Missourians. This research paves the way for future examinations of the entwined realms of online content and political inclinations, demonstrating the sheer impact of whimsically worded video titles on the voting populace.
[[INTRDUCTION]]
INTRODUCTION
Video titles have become the battleground of attention in the ever-expanding universe of online content, wielding the power to captivate, confuse, or compel viewers to click with the mere arrangement of words. The intricate dance between linguistic prowess and political leanings has long been a subject of fascination, but one would scarcely anticipate that the charming wordplay in SmarterEveryDay's video titles could hold such sway over the voting behavior of Missourians in the Republican Presidential primary race. It seems that in this digital age, the pen—or rather, the keyboard—is indeed mightier than the sword, as we witness the intersection of linguistic wizardry and political allegiance in a manner hitherto unexplored.
As researchers in the realms of statistical analysis, political science, and linguistic psychology, we found ourselves embarking on a curious expedition to unravel the enigma of why Missourians seem to be so attuned to the witticisms and cleverly concocted phrases that adorn the video titles of SmarterEveryDay. From “Submarine Torpedo Attack in Slow Motion” to “Disappearing Drill Bits with CoorsTek”, the titles of SmarterEveryDay's videos exude a charismatic allure that cannot be understated. However, what seemed like mere linguistic entertainment has revealed itself to be a force to be reckoned with in the sphere of political preferences.
Our study aims to shed light on this unprecedented correlation between the lexical acrobatics of a YouTube channel and the voting decisions of Missourians. With a potent cocktail of linguistic analysis, statistical rigor, and a good dose of humor, we endeavor to illuminate the unexpected ties that bind SmarterEveryDay's video titles and the Republican Presidential candidate votes in Missouri. By unearthing this unique relationship, we hope to set a new benchmark in the exploration of the unanticipated influences that permeate the interconnected realms of online content and political inclinations. So, buckle up and prepare to delve into a world where the play on words meets the pulse of politics.
[[RESULTS]]
The results of our study revealed a striking correlation between the creatively coined and intellectually enticing video titles of SmarterEveryDay and the voting outcomes for the Republican Presidential candidate in Missouri. Our statistical analysis uncovered a correlation coefficient of 0.9957617, signifying an exceptionally strong relationship between these two variables. This finding surpassed our initial expectations and left us marveling at the extent of influence wielded by linguistic wizardry in the political landscape.
Moreover, the r-squared value of 0.9915414 further cements the robustness of the relationship between the linguistic allure of SmarterEveryDay's video titles and the voting decisions of Missourians. This resoundingly high r-squared value indicates that approximately 99.15% of the variability in the voting outcomes can be explained by the variation in the wording of the video titles. Such a substantial explanatory power speaks volumes about the profound impact of linguistically engaging content on political behavior.
Notably, the p-value, which registered at a level lower than 0.01, provides resounding evidence against the null hypothesis and substantiates the validity of our findings. The significance of this p-value reinforces the notion that the observed relationship between SmarterEveryDay's video titles and the voting preferences in Missouri is not a mere fluke but rather a genuine and robust connection.
Finally, to visually encapsulate the strength of the identified correlation, we present Figure 1, a scatterplot showcasing the unmistakable trend between the linguistic charm of SmarterEveryDay's video titles and the Republican Presidential candidate votes in Missouri. The strong clustering of data points further underscores the coherence and reliability of our findings, depicting a clear and considerable association between these seemingly disparate variables.
In summary, our research has unveiled a compelling linkage between the artful phrasing of online video titles and political inclinations, shedding light on the unexpected interplay between linguistic allure and voting behavior. These results prompt a reevaluation of the potential impact of creatively crafted content on the political landscape and beckon further exploration into the intriguing nexus of language and political preferences.
-------
Your response should start like this:
[[CONCLUSION]]
ChatGPT:
CONCLUSION
In conclusion, it appears that the wittily titled videos of SmarterEveryDay possess an uncanny power over the political proclivities of Missourians, akin to a linguistic siren's song luring unsuspecting voters into a whirlpool of wordplay and wit. The correlation coefficient of 0.9957617, with a p-value lower than one would expect in a statistically fair universe, suggests a remarkable connection between the linguistic finesse of the video titles and the Republican Presidential candidate votes in Missouri. It seems that Missourians cannot resist the irresistible allure of cleverly named videos, succumbing to the siren call of scientific shenanigans and technological tomfoolery.
The robustness of the r-squared value at 0.9915414 further solidifies the notion that linguistic charm holds a staggering 99.15% explanatory power over the voting outcomes, leaving a mere 0.85% to be attributed to other factors—perhaps a statistical margin of error or a momentary lapse in love for lexical ingenuity. The scatterplot in Figure 1 serves as a visual testament to the undeniable trend, portraying the data points clustering tighter than a molecular bond in a chemical compound.
Our findings not only emphasize the whimsical impact of wordplay on political behavior but also beckon a deeper exploration of the uncharted domain where linguistic pizzazz and political predispositions intersect. As we wrap up this rambunctious romp through the world of statistical oddities and linguistic marvels, it becomes clear that no further research is needed in this area. After all, it seems we've hit the 'p-value' jackpot with this one!
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 SmarterEveryDay's Witty Wordplay and Voting Outcome in Missouri: A Study of the Ties That Bind. Respond only with the name of a fictional academic journal.
ChatGPT:
Journal of Political Linguistics
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 SmarterEveryDay's Witty Wordplay and Voting Outcome in Missouri: A Study of the Ties That Bind. Respond only with the name of a fictional organization.
ChatGPT:
The Institute for Linguistic Humor and Political 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 SmarterEveryDay's Witty Wordplay and Voting Outcome in Missouri: A Study of the Ties That Bind with an abstract of This groundbreaking research delves into the unexpected connection between the intriguingly phrased video titles of the popular YouTube channel "SmarterEveryDay" and the voting patterns for the Republican Presidential candidate in the state of Missouri. By analyzing the linguistic quips and cunning catchphrases employed in the video titles using advanced AI technologies, alongside the voting data from the MIT Election Data and Science Lab, our study unearths a stunning correlation coefficient of 0.9957617, with a p-value strikingly lower than anticipated (p < 0.01). From "Gavin Free Geeks Out While Building A Microphone" to "Sacrificing Maxwell's Equations for Dummies", the linguistic flair of SmarterEveryDay's video titles holds an unexpected sway over the political preferences of Missourians. This research paves the way for future examinations of the entwined realms of online content and political inclinations, demonstrating the sheer impact of whimsically worded video titles on the voting populace.
ChatGPT:
SmarterEveryDay, YouTube channel, video titles, linguistic quips, catchphrases, voting patterns, Republican Presidential candidate, Missouri, voting data, MIT Election Data and Science Lab, correlation coefficient, p-value, linguistic flair, online content, political inclinations, whimsically worded video titles, voting populace
*There is a bunch of Python happening behind the scenes to turn this prompt sequence into a PDF.
Discover a new correlation
View all correlations
View all research papers
Report an error
Data details
How 'hip and with it' SmarterEveryDay YouTube video titles areDetailed data title: How 'hip and with it' SmarterEveryDay YouTube video titles are, as rated by an AI.
Source: AI analysis of YouTube video titles
Additional Info: I asked a large language model, 'On a scale of 1-10, how _______ do you think this YouTube video title is?' for every video.
See what else correlates with How 'hip and with it' SmarterEveryDay YouTube video titles are
Votes for the Republican Presidential candidate in Missouri
Detailed data title: Percentage of all votes cast for the Republican Presidential candidate in Missouri
Source: MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse
See what else correlates with Votes for the Republican Presidential candidate in Missouri
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 = 0.9915414 (Coefficient of determination)
This means 99.2% of the change in the one variable (i.e., Votes for the Republican Presidential candidate in Missouri) is predictable based on the change in the other (i.e., How 'hip and with it' SmarterEveryDay YouTube video titles are) over the 4 years from 2007 through 2020.
p < 0.01, which is statistically significant(Null hypothesis significance test)
The p-value is 0.0042. 0.0042382653709032160000000000
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 1 in 0.42% of random cases. Said differently, if you correlated 236 random variables Which I absolutely did.
with the same 3 degrees of freedom, Degrees of freedom is a measure of how many free components we are testing. In this case it is 3 because we have two variables measured over a period of 4 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.
[ 0.81, 1 ] 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.
2008 | 2012 | 2016 | 2020 | |
How 'hip and with it' SmarterEveryDay YouTube video titles are (Hip' score (out of 10)) | 5.6 | 6.8 | 7.3529 | 7.45 |
Votes for the Republican Presidential candidate in Missouri (Percentage of votes) | 49.4261 | 53.7637 | 56.7723 | 56.7997 |
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
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
Personally I don't find any p-value calculation to be 'simple,' but you know what I mean.
p-value calculation does not take this into account, so mathematically it appears less probable than it really is. - Very low n: There are not many data points included in this analysis. Even if the p-value is high, we should be suspicious of using so few datapoints in a correlation.
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([5.6,6.8,7.3529,7.45,])
array_2 = np.array([49.4261,53.7637,56.7723,56.7997,])
array_1_name = "How 'hip and with it' SmarterEveryDay YouTube video titles are"
array_2_name = "Votes for the Republican Presidential candidate in Missouri"
# 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:
- High resolution line chart
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 How 'hip and with it' SmarterEveryDay YouTube video titles are
- Line chart for only Votes for the Republican Presidential candidate in Missouri
- AI-generated correlation image
- The spurious research paper: SmarterEveryDay's Witty Wordplay and Voting Outcome in Missouri: A Study of the Ties That Bind
Kudos for rating!
Correlation ID: 4980 · Black Variable ID: 25495 · Red Variable ID: 26125