about · email me · subscribe
Spurious correlation #5,021 · View random

A linear line chart with years as the X-axis and two variables on the Y-axis. The first variable is US household spending on processed fruits and the second variable is Air pollution in Akron, Ohio.  The chart goes from 2000 to 2022, and the two variables track closely in value over that time. Small Image
Download png
, svg

AI explanation

As households across the US spent less on processed fruits, there was a corresponding decrease in demand for fruit packaging. This led to a slowdown in production at packaging plants nationwide. With fewer trucks and delivery vehicles transporting these products, there was a noticeable reduction in overall emissions. Additionally, the correlation may be attributed to the fact that as households shifted their spending habits, there was a collective effort to embrace healthier, greener lifestyles, leading to fewer car trips to fast food outlets and more carpooling to local farmers' markets. This, in turn, contributed to a significant improvement in air quality in Akron, Ohio.

Model: dalle-3
Prompt: Generate a Polaroid photo of a bustling local farmers' market in downtown Akron, Ohio. Show families happily browsing the vibrant array of fresh fruits and vegetables, with the sun casting a warm, inviting glow over the scene. The image should capture the sense of community as people chat and exchange goods, while in the background, fewer trucks on the road contribute to the clear, blue skies synonymous with healthier living. 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: US household spending on processed fruits and Air pollution in Akron, Ohio. 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: Art nouveau a meme Celtic art a Polaroid photo inspired by bauhaus
ChatGPT: a Polaroid photo

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 US household spending on processed fruits and Air pollution in Akron, Ohio, in the following situation: As households across the US spent less on processed fruits, there was a corresponding decrease in demand for fruit packaging. This led to a slowdown in production at packaging plants nationwide. With fewer trucks and delivery vehicles transporting these products, there was a noticeable reduction in overall emissions. Additionally, the correlation may be attributed to the fact that as households shifted their spending habits, there was a collective effort to embrace healthier, greener lifestyles, leading to fewer car trips to fast food outlets and more carpooling to local farmers' markets. This, in turn, contributed to a significant improvement in air quality in Akron, Ohio.. Keep the description simple.
ChatGPT: In a sunny American town, families buy fewer packaged fruits at supermarkets. As a result, packaging plants across the country slow down, leading to fewer trucks on the roads. With this change, the air in Akron, Ohio becomes clearer as people shift to healthier living, choosing to visit farmers' markets and carpool with friends.

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 Polaroid photo ] and depicting this scene: In a sunny American town, families buy fewer packaged fruits at supermarkets. As a result, packaging plants across the country slow down, leading to fewer trucks on the roads. With this change, the air in Akron, Ohio becomes clearer as people shift to healthier living, choosing to visit farmers' markets and carpool with friends. Keep the visual depiction simple. Do not include any words or speech bubbles.
ChatGPT: Generate a Polaroid photo of a bustling local farmers' market in downtown Akron, Ohio. Show families happily browsing the vibrant array of fresh fruits and vegetables, with the sun casting a warm, inviting glow over the scene. The image should capture the sense of community as people chat and exchange goods, while in the background, fewer trucks on the road contribute to the clear, blue skies synonymous with healthier living.

*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 US household spending on processed fruits caused Air pollution in Akron, Ohio to decrease.\Make it sound serious until the end.

AI academic paper

(Because p < 0.01)
A Breath of Fresh Air: The Fruitful Link Between Processed Fruits Expenditure and Air Pollution in Akron, Ohio

Journal of Environmental Health and Fruit Consumption

Jan 2024

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




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

Please draft the title and abstract of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between US household spending on processed fruits and Air pollution in Akron, Ohio. Make lots of jokes, goofy observations, and puns.

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

Your research team used data from Bureau of Labor Statistics and Environmental Protection Agency to assess this nagging question. You found a correlation coefficient of 0.8174171 and p < 0.01 for 2000 to 2022.

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]]
A Breath of Fresh Air: The Fruitful Link Between Processed Fruits Expenditure and Air Pollution in Akron, Ohio

[[ABSTRACT]]
This study delves into the surprising relationship between American household expenditure on processed fruits and the state of air pollution in Akron, Ohio. Leveraging data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics and the Environmental Protection Agency, our research team set out to answer the question: Is there a correlation between consumer spending on processed fruits and air quality in this Midwestern region? Utilizing statistical analysis, we discovered a strong correlation coefficient of 0.8174171 with a remarkable p-value of less than 0.01 for the period spanning 2000 to 2022. Our findings unveil a fruitful link between processed fruits expenditure and air pollution, shedding light on the unexpected implications of grocery shopping habits on environmental factors. This study not only provides a thought-provoking insight into consumer behavior but also adds a zesty twist to the understanding of air quality dynamics.


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

Please make up the introduction section of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between US household spending on processed fruits and Air pollution in Akron, Ohio. 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]]
A Breath of Fresh Air: The Fruitful Link Between Processed Fruits Expenditure and Air Pollution in Akron, Ohio

[[ABSTRACT]]
This study delves into the surprising relationship between American household expenditure on processed fruits and the state of air pollution in Akron, Ohio. Leveraging data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics and the Environmental Protection Agency, our research team set out to answer the question: Is there a correlation between consumer spending on processed fruits and air quality in this Midwestern region? Utilizing statistical analysis, we discovered a strong correlation coefficient of 0.8174171 with a remarkable p-value of less than 0.01 for the period spanning 2000 to 2022. Our findings unveil a fruitful link between processed fruits expenditure and air pollution, shedding light on the unexpected implications of grocery shopping habits on environmental factors. This study not only provides a thought-provoking insight into consumer behavior but also adds a zesty twist to the understanding of air quality dynamics.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[INTRODUCTION]]



ChatGPT:
[[INTRODUCTION]]

Ah, the wondrous world of research! In the search for knowledge, we often find ourselves peeling back layers of complexity, seeking out the juicy bits of understanding that lie beneath the surface. Our study plunges into the seemingly uncharted territory of consumer spending and air quality, bringing together the seemingly unrelated - processed fruits and pollution in Akron, Ohio.

Picture this: an average American household, strolling through the aisles of their local grocery store, pondering their decision to invest in a bounty of processed fruits. Meanwhile, just a few miles away, the city of Akron is grappling with its own fruitless battle against air pollution. Little did they know, these seemingly disparate elements are about to collide in a statistical spectacle that would make even the most seasoned researcher's heart skip a beat.

Leveraging the power of data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics and the Environmental Protection Agency, our research endeavors to unravel the potent connection between the consumer's appetite for processed fruits and the atmospheric conditions of Akron. The correlation we uncovered is not just a mere statistical artifact, but a revelation that challenges our conventional understanding of the factors shaping air quality.

As we embark on this scientific journey, we invite you to join us in peeling back the layers of this intriguing association. Our findings promise to add a zestful flavor to the discussion of consumer behavior and the delicate dance between household spending and environmental impact. So, fasten your seatbelts and get ready for a wild ride through the delicious world of statistics and the surprising interconnectedness of seemingly unrelated variables!


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

Please make up a literature review section of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between US household spending on processed fruits and Air pollution in Akron, Ohio. 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 devolve ever further, and mention something completely ridiculous, like you conducted literature review by reading the backs of shampoo bottles.

Here is the title and abstract of the paper:
[[TITLE]]
A Breath of Fresh Air: The Fruitful Link Between Processed Fruits Expenditure and Air Pollution in Akron, Ohio

[[ABSTRACT]]
This study delves into the surprising relationship between American household expenditure on processed fruits and the state of air pollution in Akron, Ohio. Leveraging data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics and the Environmental Protection Agency, our research team set out to answer the question: Is there a correlation between consumer spending on processed fruits and air quality in this Midwestern region? Utilizing statistical analysis, we discovered a strong correlation coefficient of 0.8174171 with a remarkable p-value of less than 0.01 for the period spanning 2000 to 2022. Our findings unveil a fruitful link between processed fruits expenditure and air pollution, shedding light on the unexpected implications of grocery shopping habits on environmental factors. This study not only provides a thought-provoking insight into consumer behavior but also adds a zesty twist to the understanding of air quality dynamics.

-------

And here is the introduction section that led to this literature review:
[[INTRODUCTION]]
Ah, the wondrous world of research! In the search for knowledge, we often find ourselves peeling back layers of complexity, seeking out the juicy bits of understanding that lie beneath the surface. Our study plunges into the seemingly uncharted territory of consumer spending and air quality, bringing together the seemingly unrelated - processed fruits and pollution in Akron, Ohio.
Picture this: an average American household, strolling through the aisles of their local grocery store, pondering their decision to invest in a bounty of processed fruits. Meanwhile, just a few miles away, the city of Akron is grappling with its own fruitless battle against air pollution. Little did they know, these seemingly disparate elements are about to collide in a statistical spectacle that would make even the most seasoned researcher's heart skip a beat.
Leveraging the power of data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics and the Environmental Protection Agency, our research endeavors to unravel the potent connection between the consumer's appetite for processed fruits and the atmospheric conditions of Akron. The correlation we uncovered is not just a mere statistical artifact, but a revelation that challenges our conventional understanding of the factors shaping air quality.
As we embark on this scientific journey, we invite you to join us in peeling back the layers of this intriguing association. Our findings promise to add a zestful flavor to the discussion of consumer behavior and the delicate dance between household spending and environmental impact. So, fasten your seatbelts and get ready for a wild ride through the delicious world of statistics and the surprising interconnectedness of seemingly unrelated variables!

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[LITERATURE REVIEW]]



ChatGPT:
[[LITERATURE REVIEW]]

Smith et al. (2015) posited that the relationship between household spending on processed fruits and air pollution is a topic ripe for exploration. Their study highlighted the potential for unexpected linkages between consumer behavior and environmental outcomes. Similarly, Doe and Jones (2018) delved into the intricacies of air quality dynamics in Midwestern regions, laying the groundwork for our current investigation.

Turning to non-fiction works, "Air Pollution and Health" by Brown (2019) provides a comprehensive overview of the detrimental effects of air pollution on human health, prompting us to consider the implications of our findings on public well-being. "The Economics of Nutrition" by White (2017) offers insight into the economic aspects of food consumption patterns, infusing our exploration with a dash of fiscal flavor.

On the fiction front, "Fruit of the Poisonous Tree" by Green (2016) offers a tantalizing narrative that, while unrelated to our research, serves as a reminder to carefully consider the unexpected consequences of our choices. "Pollution Perplexity" by Black (2014) presents a fictionalized account of environmental turmoil, serving as a cautionary tale about the dangers of overlooking subtle connections.

Reflecting on more unconventional sources, the back of a shampoo bottle at a local convenience store urged us to ponder the intricate interplay of ingredients and environmental impact, leading us to consider the unforeseen ramifications of everyday consumer products on the air we breathe. While this may seem tangential, it serves as a reminder that inspiration can strike from the unlikeliest of sources, and that the quest for knowledge often leads us down unexpected and amusing paths.


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

Please make up the methodology section of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between US household spending on processed fruits and Air pollution in Akron, Ohio. 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 Bureau of Labor Statistics and Environmental Protection Agency . You used data from 2000 to 2022

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]]
A Breath of Fresh Air: The Fruitful Link Between Processed Fruits Expenditure and Air Pollution in Akron, Ohio

[[ABSTRACT]]
This study delves into the surprising relationship between American household expenditure on processed fruits and the state of air pollution in Akron, Ohio. Leveraging data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics and the Environmental Protection Agency, our research team set out to answer the question: Is there a correlation between consumer spending on processed fruits and air quality in this Midwestern region? Utilizing statistical analysis, we discovered a strong correlation coefficient of 0.8174171 with a remarkable p-value of less than 0.01 for the period spanning 2000 to 2022. Our findings unveil a fruitful link between processed fruits expenditure and air pollution, shedding light on the unexpected implications of grocery shopping habits on environmental factors. This study not only provides a thought-provoking insight into consumer behavior but also adds a zesty twist to the understanding of air quality dynamics.

[[INTRODUCTION]]
Ah, the wondrous world of research! In the search for knowledge, we often find ourselves peeling back layers of complexity, seeking out the juicy bits of understanding that lie beneath the surface. Our study plunges into the seemingly uncharted territory of consumer spending and air quality, bringing together the seemingly unrelated - processed fruits and pollution in Akron, Ohio.
Picture this: an average American household, strolling through the aisles of their local grocery store, pondering their decision to invest in a bounty of processed fruits. Meanwhile, just a few miles away, the city of Akron is grappling with its own fruitless battle against air pollution. Little did they know, these seemingly disparate elements are about to collide in a statistical spectacle that would make even the most seasoned researcher's heart skip a beat.
Leveraging the power of data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics and the Environmental Protection Agency, our research endeavors to unravel the potent connection between the consumer's appetite for processed fruits and the atmospheric conditions of Akron. The correlation we uncovered is not just a mere statistical artifact, but a revelation that challenges our conventional understanding of the factors shaping air quality.
As we embark on this scientific journey, we invite you to join us in peeling back the layers of this intriguing association. Our findings promise to add a zestful flavor to the discussion of consumer behavior and the delicate dance between household spending and environmental impact. So, fasten your seatbelts and get ready for a wild ride through the delicious world of statistics and the surprising interconnectedness of seemingly unrelated variables!

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[METHODOLOGY]]



ChatGPT:

[[METHODOLOGY]]

To dissect the tantalizing connection between processed fruits expenditure and air pollution in Akron, Ohio, our research team embarked on a scientific adventure that involved using the latest and greatest statistical techniques, mixed with a hint of zesty creativity. Our data collection escapades took us on a virtual journey across the digital landscape, where we rummaged through the treasure troves of the Bureau of Labor Statistics and the Environmental Protection Agency, sifting through mountains of numbers to unearth the juicy details needed for our analysis.

First, we employed a time-series analysis approach to tap into the rich vein of information spanning the years 2000 to 2022. We wanted to capture the essence of consumer spending on processed fruits and the ebb and flow of air pollution in Akron over these years, akin to blending the finest ingredients in a scientific smoothie.

We then gleefully crunched the numbers using various statistical models, including but not limited to linear regression and correlation analysis. Our statistical toolkit was as diverse as a fruit salad, as we sought to peel back the layers of data and extract the ripest insights from our findings. We specifically focused on exploring the relationships between household spending on processed fruits and air pollution concentration, aiming to uncover the seeds of correlation that lay buried amidst the statistical orchard.

Furthermore, we indulged in the splendor of spatial analysis, mapping the geographical distribution of processed fruits expenditure and air pollution hotspots in Akron. This allowed us to examine the regional nuances of the relationship and potentially identify areas where the impact of processed fruits consumption on air quality is particularly pronounced, akin to savoring the subtle flavors of a complex dish.

Lastly, in our quest for scientific rigor and reliability, we baked our data through sensitivity analyses and robustness checks to ensure that our findings were as stable as a well-ripened fruit. We also employed validation techniques to ensure that our results were not just a statistical fluke but a true reflection of the connections between these seemingly unrelated variables.

In sum, our methodology was a medley of statistical prowess, creative flair, and a zest for uncovering the unexpected in the realm of consumer behavior and environmental dynamics. This fusion of scientific rigor and adventurous exploration enabled us to present a mouth-watering analysis of the fruity link between processed fruits expenditure and air pollution, setting the stage for a bountiful harvest of insights into this uncharted territory of research.


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

Please make up the results section of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between US household spending on processed fruits and Air pollution in Akron, Ohio. 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 Bureau of Labor Statistics and Environmental Protection Agency .

For the time period 2000 to 2022, you found a correlation 0.8174171, r-squared of 0.6681707, 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]]
A Breath of Fresh Air: The Fruitful Link Between Processed Fruits Expenditure and Air Pollution in Akron, Ohio

[[ABSTRACT]]
This study delves into the surprising relationship between American household expenditure on processed fruits and the state of air pollution in Akron, Ohio. Leveraging data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics and the Environmental Protection Agency, our research team set out to answer the question: Is there a correlation between consumer spending on processed fruits and air quality in this Midwestern region? Utilizing statistical analysis, we discovered a strong correlation coefficient of 0.8174171 with a remarkable p-value of less than 0.01 for the period spanning 2000 to 2022. Our findings unveil a fruitful link between processed fruits expenditure and air pollution, shedding light on the unexpected implications of grocery shopping habits on environmental factors. This study not only provides a thought-provoking insight into consumer behavior but also adds a zesty twist to the understanding of air quality dynamics.

-------

And here is the methodology section that led to this result:
[[METHODOLOGY]]
Ah, the wondrous world of research! In the search for knowledge, we often find ourselves peeling back layers of complexity, seeking out the juicy bits of understanding that lie beneath the surface. Our study plunges into the seemingly uncharted territory of consumer spending and air quality, bringing together the seemingly unrelated - processed fruits and pollution in Akron, Ohio.
Picture this: an average American household, strolling through the aisles of their local grocery store, pondering their decision to invest in a bounty of processed fruits. Meanwhile, just a few miles away, the city of Akron is grappling with its own fruitless battle against air pollution. Little did they know, these seemingly disparate elements are about to collide in a statistical spectacle that would make even the most seasoned researcher's heart skip a beat.
Leveraging the power of data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics and the Environmental Protection Agency, our research endeavors to unravel the potent connection between the consumer's appetite for processed fruits and the atmospheric conditions of Akron. The correlation we uncovered is not just a mere statistical artifact, but a revelation that challenges our conventional understanding of the factors shaping air quality.
As we embark on this scientific journey, we invite you to join us in peeling back the layers of this intriguing association. Our findings promise to add a zestful flavor to the discussion of consumer behavior and the delicate dance between household spending and environmental impact. So, fasten your seatbelts and get ready for a wild ride through the delicious world of statistics and the surprising interconnectedness of seemingly unrelated variables!

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[RESULTS]]



ChatGPT:

[[RESULTS]]

Our analysis revealed a pear-fectly ripe correlation coefficient of 0.8174171 between US household spending on processed fruits and air pollution levels in Akron, Ohio, during the period from 2000 to 2022. This strong relationship implies that as spending on processed fruits increased, so did the level of air pollution in this Midwestern region. It seems that while Americans were increasing their intake of processed fruits, they were inadvertently contributing to the air pollution conundrum in Akron. This finding is truly a-peeling, as it uncovers the unforeseen consequences of our shopping habits on the environment.

The observed r-squared value of 0.6681707 suggests that approximately 66.82% of the variation in air pollution levels can be explained by the variation in processed fruit expenditure. It's remarkable to think that over two-thirds of the changes in air pollution can be linked back to how much households are spending on canned peaches and pineapple rings. This just goes to show that sometimes, the most a-peel-ing revelations spring from the most unexpected sources.

Furthermore, the p-value of less than 0.01 indicates that the observed relationship between processed fruit expenditure and air pollution is statistically significant. This means that it is highly unlikely to have occurred by chance alone. It's as if the statistical stars aligned to reveal this surprising link, leading us to the fruitful discovery of this intriguing association.

Figure 1 presents a scatterplot illustrating the striking correlation between US household spending on processed fruits and air pollution in Akron, Ohio. It's a visual spectacle that brings to life the connection between these seemingly unrelated variables, showing how they dance together like a pair of mismatched partners in a fruity tango.

In conclusion, our findings not only enrich the understanding of consumer behavior and environmental impact but also serve as a juicy reminder that even the most surprising connections can be uncovered through the power of statistical analysis. This study offers a refreshing perspective on the interactive dynamics of consumer spending and environmental factors, adding a zesty twist to the traditional understanding of air quality determinants.


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

Please make up the discussion section of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between US household spending on processed fruits and Air pollution in Akron, Ohio. 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]]
A Breath of Fresh Air: The Fruitful Link Between Processed Fruits Expenditure and Air Pollution in Akron, Ohio

[[ABSTRACT]]
This study delves into the surprising relationship between American household expenditure on processed fruits and the state of air pollution in Akron, Ohio. Leveraging data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics and the Environmental Protection Agency, our research team set out to answer the question: Is there a correlation between consumer spending on processed fruits and air quality in this Midwestern region? Utilizing statistical analysis, we discovered a strong correlation coefficient of 0.8174171 with a remarkable p-value of less than 0.01 for the period spanning 2000 to 2022. Our findings unveil a fruitful link between processed fruits expenditure and air pollution, shedding light on the unexpected implications of grocery shopping habits on environmental factors. This study not only provides a thought-provoking insight into consumer behavior but also adds a zesty twist to the understanding of air quality dynamics.

[[LITERATURE REVIEW]]
Smith et al. (2015) posited that the relationship between household spending on processed fruits and air pollution is a topic ripe for exploration. Their study highlighted the potential for unexpected linkages between consumer behavior and environmental outcomes. Similarly, Doe and Jones (2018) delved into the intricacies of air quality dynamics in Midwestern regions, laying the groundwork for our current investigation.
Turning to non-fiction works, "Air Pollution and Health" by Brown (2019) provides a comprehensive overview of the detrimental effects of air pollution on human health, prompting us to consider the implications of our findings on public well-being. "The Economics of Nutrition" by White (2017) offers insight into the economic aspects of food consumption patterns, infusing our exploration with a dash of fiscal flavor.
On the fiction front, "Fruit of the Poisonous Tree" by Green (2016) offers a tantalizing narrative that, while unrelated to our research, serves as a reminder to carefully consider the unexpected consequences of our choices. "Pollution Perplexity" by Black (2014) presents a fictionalized account of environmental turmoil, serving as a cautionary tale about the dangers of overlooking subtle connections.
Reflecting on more unconventional sources, the back of a shampoo bottle at a local convenience store urged us to ponder the intricate interplay of ingredients and environmental impact, leading us to consider the unforeseen ramifications of everyday consumer products on the air we breathe. While this may seem tangential, it serves as a reminder that inspiration can strike from the unlikeliest of sources, and that the quest for knowledge often leads us down unexpected and amusing paths.

[[RESULTS]]
Our analysis revealed a pear-fectly ripe correlation coefficient of 0.8174171 between US household spending on processed fruits and air pollution levels in Akron, Ohio, during the period from 2000 to 2022. This strong relationship implies that as spending on processed fruits increased, so did the level of air pollution in this Midwestern region. It seems that while Americans were increasing their intake of processed fruits, they were inadvertently contributing to the air pollution conundrum in Akron. This finding is truly a-peeling, as it uncovers the unforeseen consequences of our shopping habits on the environment.
The observed r-squared value of 0.6681707 suggests that approximately 66.82% of the variation in air pollution levels can be explained by the variation in processed fruit expenditure. It's remarkable to think that over two-thirds of the changes in air pollution can be linked back to how much households are spending on canned peaches and pineapple rings. This just goes to show that sometimes, the most a-peel-ing revelations spring from the most unexpected sources.
Furthermore, the p-value of less than 0.01 indicates that the observed relationship between processed fruit expenditure and air pollution is statistically significant. This means that it is highly unlikely to have occurred by chance alone. It's as if the statistical stars aligned to reveal this surprising link, leading us to the fruitful discovery of this intriguing association.
Figure 1 presents a scatterplot illustrating the striking correlation between US household spending on processed fruits and air pollution in Akron, Ohio. It's a visual spectacle that brings to life the connection between these seemingly unrelated variables, showing how they dance together like a pair of mismatched partners in a fruity tango.
In conclusion, our findings not only enrich the understanding of consumer behavior and environmental impact but also serve as a juicy reminder that even the most surprising connections can be uncovered through the power of statistical analysis. This study offers a refreshing perspective on the interactive dynamics of consumer spending and environmental factors, adding a zesty twist to the traditional understanding of air quality determinants.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[DISCUSSION]]



ChatGPT:

[[DISCUSSION]]

Our investigation into the association between US household spending on processed fruits and air pollution levels in Akron, Ohio has borne fruit, revealing an intriguing and substantial connection. The results of our study align closely with the prior research, as anticipated by Smith et al. (2015) and Doe and Jones (2018). It appears that the landscape of consumer behavior and environmental outcomes is as complex and diverse as the flavors of the processed fruits under scrutiny.

It is truly a-peeling to see how our findings parallel those of Smith et al. (2015) and Doe and Jones (2018). Just as we expected, the unexpected link between processed fruit expenditure and air pollution in Akron has been illuminated in a statistically significant manner. This revelation adds a zesty twist to the established understanding of air quality dynamics, reminding us that statistical analysis can bear the fruit of knowledge in the most unexpected of contexts.

The observed correlation coefficient of 0.8174171 between processed fruit expenditure and air pollution levels is strikingly consistent with the prior studies, affirming the validity of our investigation. It's as if our statistical analysis turned up the heat and cooked up a stew of results that perfectly complemented the existing literature. We are reminded that the pursuit of scientific inquiry often requires a willingness to explore the ripest, most succulent avenues of inquiry—no matter how tangential they may seem at first glance.

Moreover, the observed r-squared value of 0.6681707 reaffirms the magnitude of the relationship between processed fruit expenditure and air pollution, lending substantial weight to the findings. This goes to show that sometimes, the most a-peel-ing insights can be extracted from the statistical soup, as long as we're willing to dive into the pot headfirst.

The statistically significant p-value further underscores the robustness of our findings, lending credibility to the surprising connection between processed fruit expenditure and air pollution in Akron. It's as if the statistical gods conspired to present us with this extraordinary statistical harmony, highlighting the fruitful link between grocery shopping habits and environmental factors.

In closing, our investigation has not only confirmed the unexpected relationship between processed fruit expenditure and air pollution in Akron but has also reinforced the notion that statistical analysis can deliver ripe, juicy insights into the nuanced interplay of seemingly unrelated variables. Our study adds a refreshing perspective to the established understanding of consumer behavior and environmental impact, infusing the discourse with a tangy flair that is both illuminating and, dare we say, a-peel-ing. The seeds of knowledge we have planted through this research have blossomed into a garden of statistical marvels, demonstrating the deliciously intricate connections that underpin our everyday lives.


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

Please make up a short conclusion of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between US household spending on processed fruits and Air pollution in Akron, Ohio. 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]]
A Breath of Fresh Air: The Fruitful Link Between Processed Fruits Expenditure and Air Pollution in Akron, Ohio

[[ABSTRACT]]
This study delves into the surprising relationship between American household expenditure on processed fruits and the state of air pollution in Akron, Ohio. Leveraging data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics and the Environmental Protection Agency, our research team set out to answer the question: Is there a correlation between consumer spending on processed fruits and air quality in this Midwestern region? Utilizing statistical analysis, we discovered a strong correlation coefficient of 0.8174171 with a remarkable p-value of less than 0.01 for the period spanning 2000 to 2022. Our findings unveil a fruitful link between processed fruits expenditure and air pollution, shedding light on the unexpected implications of grocery shopping habits on environmental factors. This study not only provides a thought-provoking insight into consumer behavior but also adds a zesty twist to the understanding of air quality dynamics.

[[INTRDUCTION]]
Ah, the wondrous world of research! In the search for knowledge, we often find ourselves peeling back layers of complexity, seeking out the juicy bits of understanding that lie beneath the surface. Our study plunges into the seemingly uncharted territory of consumer spending and air quality, bringing together the seemingly unrelated - processed fruits and pollution in Akron, Ohio.
Picture this: an average American household, strolling through the aisles of their local grocery store, pondering their decision to invest in a bounty of processed fruits. Meanwhile, just a few miles away, the city of Akron is grappling with its own fruitless battle against air pollution. Little did they know, these seemingly disparate elements are about to collide in a statistical spectacle that would make even the most seasoned researcher's heart skip a beat.
Leveraging the power of data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics and the Environmental Protection Agency, our research endeavors to unravel the potent connection between the consumer's appetite for processed fruits and the atmospheric conditions of Akron. The correlation we uncovered is not just a mere statistical artifact, but a revelation that challenges our conventional understanding of the factors shaping air quality.
As we embark on this scientific journey, we invite you to join us in peeling back the layers of this intriguing association. Our findings promise to add a zestful flavor to the discussion of consumer behavior and the delicate dance between household spending and environmental impact. So, fasten your seatbelts and get ready for a wild ride through the delicious world of statistics and the surprising interconnectedness of seemingly unrelated variables!

[[RESULTS]]
Our analysis revealed a pear-fectly ripe correlation coefficient of 0.8174171 between US household spending on processed fruits and air pollution levels in Akron, Ohio, during the period from 2000 to 2022. This strong relationship implies that as spending on processed fruits increased, so did the level of air pollution in this Midwestern region. It seems that while Americans were increasing their intake of processed fruits, they were inadvertently contributing to the air pollution conundrum in Akron. This finding is truly a-peeling, as it uncovers the unforeseen consequences of our shopping habits on the environment.
The observed r-squared value of 0.6681707 suggests that approximately 66.82% of the variation in air pollution levels can be explained by the variation in processed fruit expenditure. It's remarkable to think that over two-thirds of the changes in air pollution can be linked back to how much households are spending on canned peaches and pineapple rings. This just goes to show that sometimes, the most a-peel-ing revelations spring from the most unexpected sources.
Furthermore, the p-value of less than 0.01 indicates that the observed relationship between processed fruit expenditure and air pollution is statistically significant. This means that it is highly unlikely to have occurred by chance alone. It's as if the statistical stars aligned to reveal this surprising link, leading us to the fruitful discovery of this intriguing association.
Figure 1 presents a scatterplot illustrating the striking correlation between US household spending on processed fruits and air pollution in Akron, Ohio. It's a visual spectacle that brings to life the connection between these seemingly unrelated variables, showing how they dance together like a pair of mismatched partners in a fruity tango.
In conclusion, our findings not only enrich the understanding of consumer behavior and environmental impact but also serve as a juicy reminder that even the most surprising connections can be uncovered through the power of statistical analysis. This study offers a refreshing perspective on the interactive dynamics of consumer spending and environmental factors, adding a zesty twist to the traditional understanding of air quality determinants.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[CONCLUSION]]



ChatGPT:

[[CONCLUSION]]

In conclusion, our research has peeled back the layers of complexity to reveal a compelling correlation between household spending on processed fruits and air pollution levels in Akron, Ohio. The pear-fectly ripe correlation coefficient of 0.8174171 demonstrates a strong association, highlighting the surprising interconnectedness of seemingly unrelated variables. It's a-maize-ing to see how the consumption of canned fruits is not just impacting our diets but also leaving its mark on the atmospheric conditions in Akron.

The r-squared value of 0.6681707 indicates that over two-thirds of the variation in air pollution levels can be attributed to variations in processed fruit expenditure. This finding is truly a fruit-tful revelation, demonstrating that our grocery carts may hold more than just snacks - they may also hold the key to understanding environmental dynamics!

The statistically significant p-value of less than 0.01 further cements the robustness of our findings. It's as if our statistical analysis has unmasked a secret love affair between processed fruits and air pollution, revealing a bond that goes beyond mere coincidence. We must acknowledge the a-peel of statistics in unraveling such unexpected relationships and bringing to light the fruitfulness of our shopping habits.

Figure 1, our scatterplot, is not just a visual feast for the eyes but also a testament to the captivating dance between processed fruit expenditure and air pollution levels. This fruity tango illustrates the harmonious yet impactful interaction between these variables, showcasing how even the most unusual pairs can create a statistical symphony.

Our study adds a zestful flavor to the discussion of consumer behavior and environmental impact, demonstrating that the influence of our shopping decisions extends beyond the confines of the grocery store. It begs the question: Are we unknowingly sowing the seeds of pollution with each processed fruit purchase?

As such, we assert that no more research is needed in this area. Our work stands as a melon-umental contribution to the understanding of the intertwining forces of consumer spending and environmental quality. It's time we let this research ripen and move onto the next big fruit—ahem, we mean, next big study!


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 A Breath of Fresh Air: The Fruitful Link Between Processed Fruits Expenditure and Air Pollution in Akron, Ohio. Respond only with the name of a fictional academic journal.

ChatGPT:

Journal of Environmental Health and Fruit Consumption


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 A Breath of Fresh Air: The Fruitful Link Between Processed Fruits Expenditure and Air Pollution in Akron, Ohio. Respond only with the name of a fictional organization.

ChatGPT:

The Society for Applied Fruitology and Environmental Health


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 A Breath of Fresh Air: The Fruitful Link Between Processed Fruits Expenditure and Air Pollution in Akron, Ohio with an abstract of This study delves into the surprising relationship between American household expenditure on processed fruits and the state of air pollution in Akron, Ohio. Leveraging data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics and the Environmental Protection Agency, our research team set out to answer the question: Is there a correlation between consumer spending on processed fruits and air quality in this Midwestern region? Utilizing statistical analysis, we discovered a strong correlation coefficient of 0.8174171 with a remarkable p-value of less than 0.01 for the period spanning 2000 to 2022. Our findings unveil a fruitful link between processed fruits expenditure and air pollution, shedding light on the unexpected implications of grocery shopping habits on environmental factors. This study not only provides a thought-provoking insight into consumer behavior but also adds a zesty twist to the understanding of air quality dynamics.

ChatGPT:

processed fruits expenditure, air pollution, Akron Ohio, consumer spending habits, Bureau of Labor Statistics data, Environmental Protection Agency data, correlation coefficient, statistical analysis, consumer behavior, air quality dynamics, grocery shopping habits, environmental factors

*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

US household spending on processed fruits
Detailed data title: Annual US household spend on processed fruits, as a percentage of total household spend
Source: Bureau of Labor Statistics
See what else correlates with US household spending on processed fruits

Air pollution in Akron, Ohio
Detailed data title: Percentage of days with moderate or worse air quality in Akron, OH
Source: Environmental Protection Agency
See what else correlates with Air pollution in Akron, Ohio

Correlation r = 0.8174171 (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 = 0.6681707 (Coefficient of determination)
This means 66.8% of the change in the one variable (i.e., Air pollution in Akron, Ohio) is predictable based on the change in the other (i.e., US household spending on processed fruits) over the 23 years from 2000 through 2022.

p < 0.01, which is statistically significant(Null hypothesis significance test)
The p-value is 1.9E-6. 0.0000019225007642045356000000
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 0.82 in 0.00019% of random cases. Said differently, if you correlated 520,156 random variables You don't actually need 520 thousand variables to find a correlation like this one. I don't have that many variables in my database. You can also correlate variables that are not independent. I do this a lot.

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

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

Just to be clear: I'm being completely transparent about the calculations. There is no math trickery. This is just how statistics shakes out when you calculate hundreds of millions of random correlations.
with the same 22 degrees of freedom, Degrees of freedom is a measure of how many free components we are testing. In this case it is 22 because we have two variables measured over a period of 23 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.

[ 0.61, 0.92 ] 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.
20002001200220032004200520062007200820092010201120122013201420152016201720182019202020212022
US household spending on processed fruits (Household spend)0.3022740.2935370.2851730.2645960.2534850.2284040.2252070.2256340.2297670.2404880.2348830.2333770.2216090.2250490.2037570.1929330.190190.186480.1862010.1776760.2038020.1987210.197349
Air pollution in Akron, Ohio (Bad air quality days)73.22472.328867.671266.027460.655743.835632.60274033.060146.301466.301438.356249.180315.890417.260351.506930.601126.575329.86323.901124.930725.842722.9282




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. Y-axis doesn't start at zero: I truncated the Y-axes of the graph above. I also used a line graph, which makes the visual connection stand out more than it deserves. Nothing against line graphs. They are great at telling a story when you have linear data! But visually it is deceptive because the only data is at the points on the graph, not the lines on the graph. In between each point, the data could have been doing anything. Like going for a random walk by itself!
    Mathematically what I showed is true, but it is intentionally misleading. Below is the same chart but with both Y-axes starting at zero.




Try it yourself

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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


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

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

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

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

    return correlation, r_squared, p_value

# These are the arrays for the variables shown on this page, but you can modify them to be any two sets of numbers
array_1 = np.array([0.302274,0.293537,0.285173,0.264596,0.253485,0.228404,0.225207,0.225634,0.229767,0.240488,0.234883,0.233377,0.221609,0.225049,0.203757,0.192933,0.19019,0.18648,0.186201,0.177676,0.203802,0.198721,0.197349,])
array_2 = np.array([73.224,72.3288,67.6712,66.0274,60.6557,43.8356,32.6027,40,33.0601,46.3014,66.3014,38.3562,49.1803,15.8904,17.2603,51.5069,30.6011,26.5753,29.863,23.9011,24.9307,25.8427,22.9282,])
array_1_name = "US household spending on processed fruits"
array_2_name = "Air pollution in Akron, Ohio"

# 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?

Your rating is stellar!


Correlation ID: 5021 · Black Variable ID: 19958 · Red Variable ID: 20235
about · subscribe · emailme@tylervigen.com · twitter

CC BY 4.0