Spurious correlation #5,295 · View random
A linear line chart with years as the X-axis and two variables on the Y-axis. The first variable is Votes for Republican Senators in Minnesota and the second variable is Google searches for 'please clap'. The chart goes from 2004 to 2020, and the two variables track closely in value over that time.

A linear line chart with years as the X-axis and two variables on the Y-axis. The first variable is Votes for Republican Senators in Minnesota and the second variable is Google searches for 'please clap'. The chart goes from 2004 to 2020, and the two variables track closely in value over that time.

Download png, svg

AI explanation

The Republican Senators' campaign slogan was "Don't be coy, give us a hand, We're not just fiddlin' around."

^{Show image generation prompt} Model: dalle-3
Prompt: Generate an image of a cozy living room in Minnesota with a group of friends gathered around the TV, which shows the Republican Senators' votes steadily climbing. One friend is reaching for their phone to search "please clap". The warm glow of the TV illuminates the room, and the campaign slogan "Don't be coy, give us a hand, We're not just fiddlin' around" flashes across the screen. 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: Votes for Republican Senators in Minnesota and Google searches for 'please clap'. 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: An image that looks like it is a scene from a Pixar movie Pop art Futuristic Brutalism Art nouveau
ChatGPT: Futuristic

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 Votes for Republican Senators in Minnesota and Google searches for 'please clap', in the following situation: The Republican Senators' campaign slogan was "Don't be coy, give us a hand, We're not just fiddlin' around.". Keep the description simple.
ChatGPT: In a cozy living room in Minnesota, a group of friends gathers around the TV to watch the election results. On the screen, the votes for Republican Senators in Minnesota steadily climb higher and higher. Meanwhile, one of the friends reaches for their phone and starts typing into the search bar, "please clap". The warm glow of the TV illuminates the room as the campaign slogan "Don't be coy, give us a hand, We're not just fiddlin' around" flashes across the screen.

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: [ Futuristic ] and depicting this scene: In a cozy living room in Minnesota, a group of friends gathers around the TV to watch the election results. On the screen, the votes for Republican Senators in Minnesota steadily climb higher and higher. Meanwhile, one of the friends reaches for their phone and starts typing into the search bar, "please clap". The warm glow of the TV illuminates the room as the campaign slogan "Don't be coy, give us a hand, We're not just fiddlin' around" flashes across the screen. Keep the visual depiction simple. Do not include any words or speech bubbles.
ChatGPT: Generate an image of a cozy living room in Minnesota with a group of friends gathered around the TV, which shows the Republican Senators' votes steadily climbing. One friend is reaching for their phone to search "please clap". The warm glow of the TV illuminates the room, and the campaign slogan "Don't be coy, give us a hand, We're not just fiddlin' around" flashes across the screen.

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

I sequence the requests into multiple prompts because I find GPT 3.5 to perform much better with short, well-managed contexts. Thus, I track the context directly in Python and only ask ChatGPT targeted questions.
^{Show prompt for explanation} Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106 (fine-tuned)
System prompt: You provide humorous responses in the form of plausible sounding explanations for correlations. You assume the correlation is causative for the purpose of the explanation even if it is ridiculous. You do not chat with the user, you only reply with the causal connection explanation and nothing else.
User prompt: Please make up a funny explanation for how an increase in Republican votes for Senators in Minnesota caused please clap (Google searches for 'please clap') to increase. Include one good pun.

AI academic paper

(Because p < 0.01)

Please Clap-turing Republican Votes: A Correlational Analysis of Minnesota Senators and Google Searches

Journal of Political Humor and Social Science

Jan 2024

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

^{Show prompt used to generate this paper} Quick note: This sequence is long and repetitive. That's how the prompt engineering works for this one. I manage the output in Python to format it into this PDF.

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

Please make up a literature review section of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between Republican votes for Senators in Minnesota and Google searches for 'please clap'. You can't resist a good dad joke. Add a relevant dad joke related to the content every couple of sentences.

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

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

Start by naming serious-sounding studies by authors like Smith, Doe, and Jones - but then quickly devolve. Name some real non-fiction books that would be related to the topic. Then name some real fiction books that sound like they could be related. Then 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]]
"Please Clap-turing Republican Votes: A Correlational Analysis of Minnesota Senators and Google Searches"

[[ABSTRACT]]
The link between political voting behavior and internet search history has been a subject of recent scholarly curiosity and perplexity. In this paper, we investigate the curious case of the connection between Republican votes for Senators in Minnesota and Google searches for 'please clap', utilizing data from MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, and Google Trends. Our findings reveal a remarkably high correlation coefficient of 0.9411551 and p < 0.01, spanning the years 2004 to 2020. The statistically significant connection between these seemingly unrelated phenomena calls for elucidation, making a striking case for further investigation into the mysterious world of internet search patterns and political engagement.

Like gathering data on a hot summer day, the connection between political votes and internet searches can be quite refreshing... or sweat-inducing, depending on one's perspective. It's as if we stumbled upon a corny dad joke in the midst of a serious debate – unexpected, yet strangely amusing.

-------

And here is the introduction section that led to this literature review:
[[INTRODUCTION]]
Politics and internet culture may seem like two separate worlds, like oil and water or cats and dogs, but as researchers, it's our duty to explore the unexpected connections that exist. Much like a dad joke that catches you off guard, the relationship between Republican votes for Senators in Minnesota and Google searches for 'please clap' has piqued our academic curiosity. This curious correlation led us down a rabbit hole of data analysis and statistical scrutiny to uncover the unanticipated link that lies beneath the surface.
As the old saying goes, "Why don't scientists trust atoms? Because they make up everything." Similarly, when it comes to understanding behavior and trends, every data point is crucial. In this study, we delved into the rich tapestry of electoral results and online search trends, sifting through the vast sea of information like a determined prospector panning for gold – or in this case, 'pleas' for applause.
The merging of political voting behavior and online search patterns is akin to witnessing a fusion dance between two unlikely partners, resulting in a captivating display of correlation. It's as if politics and internet memes are engaged in a tango – one leads, the other follows, and before you know it, they're in perfect sync, much like a perfectly timed punchline in a stand-up comedy routine.
Our journey into the world of data analysis and statistical inference is an adventure akin to unlocking the punchline of a complicated joke; it requires patience, perseverance, and an occasional leap of faith. In this study, we aim to bridge the gap between the serious realm of political decision-making and the seemingly whimsical realm of online searches, shedding light on a peculiar relationship that has captured our interest – much like a clever pun that leaves you simultaneously groaning and impressed.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[LITERATURE REVIEW]]

ChatGPT:
[[LITERATURE REVIEW]]

In "Smith et al.," the authors find a strong correlation between online search behavior and political voting patterns, paving the way for further investigation into the enigmatic connection between the two seemingly disparate domains. The study by Doe investigates the role of internet memes and political engagement, shedding light on the potential influence of online culture on electoral outcomes. Jones et al. delve into the intricate web of search query data and its implications for understanding voter behavior, unveiling surprising insights into the ways in which internet trends may intersect with political decision-making.

Turning to non-fiction works, "The Big Sort" by Bill Bishop explores the polarization of American politics, offering a comprehensive analysis of the factors shaping voters' preferences and choices. "The Filter Bubble" by Eli Pariser delves into the personalized nature of online content consumption, raising thought-provoking questions about the impact of digital algorithms on individuals' exposure to diverse political viewpoints.

On the fiction side, "1984" by George Orwell presents a dystopian vision of a surveillance state, prompting reflections on the implications of digital tracking and monitoring in the realm of politics. In a lighter vein, "Good Omens" by Terry Pratchett and Neil Gaiman offers a comedic take on the machinations of heaven and hell, serving as a playful reminder of the unpredictable and often whimsical nature of human behavior and decision-making.

In addition to scholarly works, the literature review process also involved unconventional sources, including the backs of shampoo bottles, to gain a holistic understanding of the subject matter. While these sources did not yield directly relevant information, they did provide ample entertainment and a newfound appreciation for the fine print – a testament to the unexpected sources of wisdom that can be uncovered in the course of academic inquiry. After all, who knew that a bottle of shampoo could offer such lathered insights?

The intersection of politics and online search trends proves to be a captivating area of study, combining the seriousness of electoral dynamics with the unpredictable nature of internet culture. It's as if we're trying to solve a complex riddle, with each piece of data serving as a potential clue – or perhaps, it's more like navigating a maze of political intrigue and meme-induced mysteries, with each unexpected turn leading to a new discovery. In the words of a wise dad, navigating this tangled web of connections is no easy feat, but with enough perseverance and a sprinkle of humor, we're well-equipped to unravel the puzzle.

Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You are a goofy academic researcher writing an academic paper. You follow the rules, but you throw out convention regularly to make jokes and funny asides.You draft the methodology section of an academic research paper.
User prompt:
Pretend you are an academic researcher. Your writing sounds like it belongs in a medical or economics journal. However, you frequently crack jokes, make puns, or add unexpected twists in your writing.

Please make up the methodology section of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between Republican votes for Senators in Minnesota and Google searches for 'please clap'. You can't resist a good dad joke. Add a relevant dad joke related to the content every couple of sentences.

Your research team collected data from all across the internet, but mostly just used information from MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse and Google Trends . You used data from 2004 to 2020

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

Here is the title, abstract, and introduction of the paper:
[[TITLE]]
"Please Clap-turing Republican Votes: A Correlational Analysis of Minnesota Senators and Google Searches"

[[ABSTRACT]]
The link between political voting behavior and internet search history has been a subject of recent scholarly curiosity and perplexity. In this paper, we investigate the curious case of the connection between Republican votes for Senators in Minnesota and Google searches for 'please clap', utilizing data from MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, and Google Trends. Our findings reveal a remarkably high correlation coefficient of 0.9411551 and p < 0.01, spanning the years 2004 to 2020. The statistically significant connection between these seemingly unrelated phenomena calls for elucidation, making a striking case for further investigation into the mysterious world of internet search patterns and political engagement.

Like gathering data on a hot summer day, the connection between political votes and internet searches can be quite refreshing... or sweat-inducing, depending on one's perspective. It's as if we stumbled upon a corny dad joke in the midst of a serious debate – unexpected, yet strangely amusing.

[[INTRODUCTION]]
Politics and internet culture may seem like two separate worlds, like oil and water or cats and dogs, but as researchers, it's our duty to explore the unexpected connections that exist. Much like a dad joke that catches you off guard, the relationship between Republican votes for Senators in Minnesota and Google searches for 'please clap' has piqued our academic curiosity. This curious correlation led us down a rabbit hole of data analysis and statistical scrutiny to uncover the unanticipated link that lies beneath the surface.
As the old saying goes, "Why don't scientists trust atoms? Because they make up everything." Similarly, when it comes to understanding behavior and trends, every data point is crucial. In this study, we delved into the rich tapestry of electoral results and online search trends, sifting through the vast sea of information like a determined prospector panning for gold – or in this case, 'pleas' for applause.
The merging of political voting behavior and online search patterns is akin to witnessing a fusion dance between two unlikely partners, resulting in a captivating display of correlation. It's as if politics and internet memes are engaged in a tango – one leads, the other follows, and before you know it, they're in perfect sync, much like a perfectly timed punchline in a stand-up comedy routine.
Our journey into the world of data analysis and statistical inference is an adventure akin to unlocking the punchline of a complicated joke; it requires patience, perseverance, and an occasional leap of faith. In this study, we aim to bridge the gap between the serious realm of political decision-making and the seemingly whimsical realm of online searches, shedding light on a peculiar relationship that has captured our interest – much like a clever pun that leaves you simultaneously groaning and impressed.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[METHODOLOGY]]

ChatGPT:

[[METHODOLOGY]]

Sample Collection:
We obtained data on Republican votes for Senators in Minnesota from the MIT Election Data and Science Lab, which served as the theoretical cradle for our investigation. The Google search data for the term 'please clap' was retrieved from Google Trends, where we navigated through the digital wilderness like intrepid explorers seeking a rare treasure – or in this case, a correlation coefficient.

We then rolled up our sleeves, metaphorically speaking, and combined these datasets like ingredients in a meticulously crafted recipe. It was as if we were baking a statistical cake, carefully measuring out each variable and stirring them together with the precision of a seasoned baker – though, sadly, without the sweet aroma of success wafting through our virtual kitchen.

Data Analysis:
Our research team utilized a series of sophisticated statistical techniques to extract meaning from the amalgamation of electoral results and online search trends. We primed our calculators and statistical software, preparing to crunch numbers with the gusto of a mathematician on a mission – or perhaps more accurately, with the resigned determination of a parent attempting to solve their child's math homework.

We calculated the correlation coefficient between Republican votes for Senators in Minnesota and Google searches for 'please clap' with the meticulousness of a watchmaker tinkering with the gears of time itself – though our explorations were more focused on statistical relationships than temporal ones. Through this process, we sought to unveil any semblance of a significant association between these two seemingly disparate phenomena, akin to uncovering a punchline that ties two seemingly unrelated segments of a comedy routine together.

Statistical Inference:
Having collected and analyzed the data, we subjected our findings to rigorous scrutiny using inferential statistics. We conducted hypothesis testing to determine the statistical significance of the relationship between Republican votes and 'please clap' searches, operating under the assumption that the unusual correlation warranted closer examination – much like a particularly perplexing riddle that demands a satisfying solution.

Furthermore, we implemented time-series analysis to explore the temporal dynamics of the relationship, akin to dissecting the cadence and timing of a well-told joke. Understanding how the connection between political votes and internet searches unfolded over time was key to grasping the nuances of this quirky association – like unraveling the layers of humor in a lengthy, elaborate pun.

Ethical Considerations:
In the spirit of scientific integrity, we conducted our research with the utmost ethical fortitude. We ensured that the data sources were reputable and the methodologies employed adhered to sound scientific principles, likening our ethical stance to the unwavering dedication of a parent enforcing dad jokes at the dinner table – always delivered with good intention, even if met with groans.

Despite the unconventional nature of our research focus, we approached the investigation with the same level of rigor and respect as any other scholarly inquiry. Our commitment to precision and transparency mirrored the unwritten code of conduct one might encounter in the realm of humor, where even the most far-fetched punchlines are held to a standard of authenticity and goodwill.

In conclusion, the methodology implemented in this research sought to unravel the enigmatic connection between Republican votes for Senators in Minnesota and Google searches for 'please clap' with the earnestness of a detective unraveling a compelling mystery – or, in the words of our dearly beloved dads, with the determination to find the punchline at the heart of an unexpected correlation.

Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You are a goofy academic researcher writing an academic paper. You follow the rules, but you throw out convention regularly to make jokes and funny asides.You draft the 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 Republican votes for Senators in Minnesota and Google searches for 'please clap'. You can't resist a good dad joke. Add a relevant dad joke related to the content every couple of sentences.

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

For the time period 2004 to 2020, you found a correlation 0.9411551, r-squared of 0.8857730, 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]]
"Please Clap-turing Republican Votes: A Correlational Analysis of Minnesota Senators and Google Searches"

[[ABSTRACT]]
The link between political voting behavior and internet search history has been a subject of recent scholarly curiosity and perplexity. In this paper, we investigate the curious case of the connection between Republican votes for Senators in Minnesota and Google searches for 'please clap', utilizing data from MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, and Google Trends. Our findings reveal a remarkably high correlation coefficient of 0.9411551 and p < 0.01, spanning the years 2004 to 2020. The statistically significant connection between these seemingly unrelated phenomena calls for elucidation, making a striking case for further investigation into the mysterious world of internet search patterns and political engagement.

Like gathering data on a hot summer day, the connection between political votes and internet searches can be quite refreshing... or sweat-inducing, depending on one's perspective. It's as if we stumbled upon a corny dad joke in the midst of a serious debate – unexpected, yet strangely amusing.

-------

And here is the methodology section that led to this result:
[[METHODOLOGY]]
Politics and internet culture may seem like two separate worlds, like oil and water or cats and dogs, but as researchers, it's our duty to explore the unexpected connections that exist. Much like a dad joke that catches you off guard, the relationship between Republican votes for Senators in Minnesota and Google searches for 'please clap' has piqued our academic curiosity. This curious correlation led us down a rabbit hole of data analysis and statistical scrutiny to uncover the unanticipated link that lies beneath the surface.
As the old saying goes, "Why don't scientists trust atoms? Because they make up everything." Similarly, when it comes to understanding behavior and trends, every data point is crucial. In this study, we delved into the rich tapestry of electoral results and online search trends, sifting through the vast sea of information like a determined prospector panning for gold – or in this case, 'pleas' for applause.
The merging of political voting behavior and online search patterns is akin to witnessing a fusion dance between two unlikely partners, resulting in a captivating display of correlation. It's as if politics and internet memes are engaged in a tango – one leads, the other follows, and before you know it, they're in perfect sync, much like a perfectly timed punchline in a stand-up comedy routine.
Our journey into the world of data analysis and statistical inference is an adventure akin to unlocking the punchline of a complicated joke; it requires patience, perseverance, and an occasional leap of faith. In this study, we aim to bridge the gap between the serious realm of political decision-making and the seemingly whimsical realm of online searches, shedding light on a peculiar relationship that has captured our interest – much like a clever pun that leaves you simultaneously groaning and impressed.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[RESULTS]]

ChatGPT:

[[RESULTS]]

The results of our analysis unveiled a striking correlation between Republican votes for Senators in Minnesota and Google searches for 'please clap'. With a correlation coefficient of 0.9411551 and an r-squared value of 0.8857730, the connection between these seemingly disparate variables exceeded our expectations. The p-value of less than 0.01 further solidified the statistical significance of this relationship, prompting us to delve deeper into the enigmatic bond between political voting behavior and internet search patterns.

It's almost as if these two seemingly unrelated entities were just waiting for someone to connect the dots, like a classic dad joke that's been right in front of you the whole time. It's all about perspective – what may seem like a groan-worthy pun to one person could be a source of amusement to another.

The scatterplot displayed in Fig. 1 illustrates the robust correlation between Republican votes for Senators in Minnesota and Google searches for 'please clap'. The data points form a tightly clustered pattern, emphasizing the strong association between these variables. It's like finding the perfect punchline to a joke – once it clicks, everything falls into place.

The results of our study not only highlight the unexpected nature of internet search patterns but also underscore the need for further exploration into the intricate interplay between online behavior and political engagement. The correlation we uncovered serves as a reminder that even in the realm of serious academic inquiry, there's always room for a touch of whimsy – much like a well-timed dad joke that lightens the mood in a room full of serious faces.

In conclusion, our findings not only contribute to the growing body of research on the intersection of politics and internet phenomena but also serve as a testament to the multifaceted nature of human behavior and its manifestation in the digital sphere. The mysterious allure of the 'please clap' phenomenon beckons us to continue unraveling its intricacies, much like a timeless dad joke that continues to amuse and intrigue across generations.

Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You are a goofy academic researcher writing an academic paper. You follow the rules, but you throw out convention regularly to make jokes and funny asides.You draft the discussion section of an academic research paper.
User prompt:
Pretend you are an academic researcher. Your writing sounds like it belongs in a medical or economics journal. However, you frequently crack jokes, make puns, or add unexpected twists in your writing.

Please make up the discussion section of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between Republican votes for Senators in Minnesota and Google searches for 'please clap'. You can't resist a good dad joke. Add a relevant dad joke related to the content every couple of sentences.

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]]
"Please Clap-turing Republican Votes: A Correlational Analysis of Minnesota Senators and Google Searches"

[[ABSTRACT]]
The link between political voting behavior and internet search history has been a subject of recent scholarly curiosity and perplexity. In this paper, we investigate the curious case of the connection between Republican votes for Senators in Minnesota and Google searches for 'please clap', utilizing data from MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, and Google Trends. Our findings reveal a remarkably high correlation coefficient of 0.9411551 and p < 0.01, spanning the years 2004 to 2020. The statistically significant connection between these seemingly unrelated phenomena calls for elucidation, making a striking case for further investigation into the mysterious world of internet search patterns and political engagement.

Like gathering data on a hot summer day, the connection between political votes and internet searches can be quite refreshing... or sweat-inducing, depending on one's perspective. It's as if we stumbled upon a corny dad joke in the midst of a serious debate – unexpected, yet strangely amusing.

[[LITERATURE REVIEW]]
In "Smith et al.," the authors find a strong correlation between online search behavior and political voting patterns, paving the way for further investigation into the enigmatic connection between the two seemingly disparate domains. The study by Doe investigates the role of internet memes and political engagement, shedding light on the potential influence of online culture on electoral outcomes. Jones et al. delve into the intricate web of search query data and its implications for understanding voter behavior, unveiling surprising insights into the ways in which internet trends may intersect with political decision-making.
Turning to non-fiction works, "The Big Sort" by Bill Bishop explores the polarization of American politics, offering a comprehensive analysis of the factors shaping voters' preferences and choices. "The Filter Bubble" by Eli Pariser delves into the personalized nature of online content consumption, raising thought-provoking questions about the impact of digital algorithms on individuals' exposure to diverse political viewpoints.
On the fiction side, "1984" by George Orwell presents a dystopian vision of a surveillance state, prompting reflections on the implications of digital tracking and monitoring in the realm of politics. In a lighter vein, "Good Omens" by Terry Pratchett and Neil Gaiman offers a comedic take on the machinations of heaven and hell, serving as a playful reminder of the unpredictable and often whimsical nature of human behavior and decision-making.
In addition to scholarly works, the literature review process also involved unconventional sources, including the backs of shampoo bottles, to gain a holistic understanding of the subject matter. While these sources did not yield directly relevant information, they did provide ample entertainment and a newfound appreciation for the fine print – a testament to the unexpected sources of wisdom that can be uncovered in the course of academic inquiry. After all, who knew that a bottle of shampoo could offer such lathered insights?
The intersection of politics and online search trends proves to be a captivating area of study, combining the seriousness of electoral dynamics with the unpredictable nature of internet culture. It's as if we're trying to solve a complex riddle, with each piece of data serving as a potential clue – or perhaps, it's more like navigating a maze of political intrigue and meme-induced mysteries, with each unexpected turn leading to a new discovery. In the words of a wise dad, navigating this tangled web of connections is no easy feat, but with enough perseverance and a sprinkle of humor, we're well-equipped to unravel the puzzle.

[[RESULTS]]
The results of our analysis unveiled a striking correlation between Republican votes for Senators in Minnesota and Google searches for 'please clap'. With a correlation coefficient of 0.9411551 and an r-squared value of 0.8857730, the connection between these seemingly disparate variables exceeded our expectations. The p-value of less than 0.01 further solidified the statistical significance of this relationship, prompting us to delve deeper into the enigmatic bond between political voting behavior and internet search patterns.
It's almost as if these two seemingly unrelated entities were just waiting for someone to connect the dots, like a classic dad joke that's been right in front of you the whole time. It's all about perspective – what may seem like a groan-worthy pun to one person could be a source of amusement to another.
The scatterplot displayed in Fig. 1 illustrates the robust correlation between Republican votes for Senators in Minnesota and Google searches for 'please clap'. The data points form a tightly clustered pattern, emphasizing the strong association between these variables. It's like finding the perfect punchline to a joke – once it clicks, everything falls into place.
The results of our study not only highlight the unexpected nature of internet search patterns but also underscore the need for further exploration into the intricate interplay between online behavior and political engagement. The correlation we uncovered serves as a reminder that even in the realm of serious academic inquiry, there's always room for a touch of whimsy – much like a well-timed dad joke that lightens the mood in a room full of serious faces.
In conclusion, our findings not only contribute to the growing body of research on the intersection of politics and internet phenomena but also serve as a testament to the multifaceted nature of human behavior and its manifestation in the digital sphere. The mysterious allure of the 'please clap' phenomenon beckons us to continue unraveling its intricacies, much like a timeless dad joke that continues to amuse and intrigue across generations.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[DISCUSSION]]

ChatGPT:

[[DISCUSSION]]

The remarkable correlation between Republican votes for Senators in Minnesota and Google searches for 'please clap' serves as a captivating enigma, akin to a dad joke that keeps resurfacing at family gatherings. Our findings align with previous research by Smith et al., Doe, and Jones et al., which underscored the intertwined nature of online search behavior and political decision-making. It's as if we stumbled upon a well-crafted pun – the surprise is part of what makes it so amusing.

Bill Bishop's "The Big Sort" and Eli Pariser's "The Filter Bubble" provided valuable insights into the polarization of American politics and the personalized nature of online content consumption, shedding light on the complex interplay between digital trends and voter preferences. The unexpected discoveries sourced from unconventional literature review materials, including the backs of shampoo bottles, add a touch of whimsy to scholarly inquiry, much like a dad joke enlivening a serious discussion.

The robust correlation coefficient and r-squared value in our study mirrored the strength of the relationship between Republican votes for Senators in Minnesota and 'please clap' searches, akin to the satisfaction of delivering a perfectly timed pun. The lower p-value further solidified the statistical significance of this unexpected connection, emphasizing that even in the realm of rigorous academic research, there's room for a playful twist reminiscent of a classic dad joke.

Fig. 1 vividly portrayed the tightly clustered pattern of data points, akin to the precision of a well-constructed punchline that resonates with its audience. Just as a well-timed dad joke can lighten the mood in a serious setting, our results shed light on the multifaceted nature of internet phenomena and its significance in understanding political engagement.

In conclusion, the 'please clap' phenomenon beckons further exploration, reminiscent of a timeless dad joke that continues to captivate and intrigue across generations. The unexpected connection between seemingly unrelated variables underscores the intricate web of human behavior, much like a good dad joke – simple on the surface, but rich with layers of meaning and amusement.

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

Please make up a short conclusion of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between Republican votes for Senators in Minnesota and Google searches for 'please clap'. You can't resist a good dad joke. Add a relevant dad joke related to the content every couple of sentences.

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]]
"Please Clap-turing Republican Votes: A Correlational Analysis of Minnesota Senators and Google Searches"

[[ABSTRACT]]
The link between political voting behavior and internet search history has been a subject of recent scholarly curiosity and perplexity. In this paper, we investigate the curious case of the connection between Republican votes for Senators in Minnesota and Google searches for 'please clap', utilizing data from MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, and Google Trends. Our findings reveal a remarkably high correlation coefficient of 0.9411551 and p < 0.01, spanning the years 2004 to 2020. The statistically significant connection between these seemingly unrelated phenomena calls for elucidation, making a striking case for further investigation into the mysterious world of internet search patterns and political engagement.

Like gathering data on a hot summer day, the connection between political votes and internet searches can be quite refreshing... or sweat-inducing, depending on one's perspective. It's as if we stumbled upon a corny dad joke in the midst of a serious debate – unexpected, yet strangely amusing.

[[INTRDUCTION]]
Politics and internet culture may seem like two separate worlds, like oil and water or cats and dogs, but as researchers, it's our duty to explore the unexpected connections that exist. Much like a dad joke that catches you off guard, the relationship between Republican votes for Senators in Minnesota and Google searches for 'please clap' has piqued our academic curiosity. This curious correlation led us down a rabbit hole of data analysis and statistical scrutiny to uncover the unanticipated link that lies beneath the surface.
As the old saying goes, "Why don't scientists trust atoms? Because they make up everything." Similarly, when it comes to understanding behavior and trends, every data point is crucial. In this study, we delved into the rich tapestry of electoral results and online search trends, sifting through the vast sea of information like a determined prospector panning for gold – or in this case, 'pleas' for applause.
The merging of political voting behavior and online search patterns is akin to witnessing a fusion dance between two unlikely partners, resulting in a captivating display of correlation. It's as if politics and internet memes are engaged in a tango – one leads, the other follows, and before you know it, they're in perfect sync, much like a perfectly timed punchline in a stand-up comedy routine.
Our journey into the world of data analysis and statistical inference is an adventure akin to unlocking the punchline of a complicated joke; it requires patience, perseverance, and an occasional leap of faith. In this study, we aim to bridge the gap between the serious realm of political decision-making and the seemingly whimsical realm of online searches, shedding light on a peculiar relationship that has captured our interest – much like a clever pun that leaves you simultaneously groaning and impressed.

[[RESULTS]]
The results of our analysis unveiled a striking correlation between Republican votes for Senators in Minnesota and Google searches for 'please clap'. With a correlation coefficient of 0.9411551 and an r-squared value of 0.8857730, the connection between these seemingly disparate variables exceeded our expectations. The p-value of less than 0.01 further solidified the statistical significance of this relationship, prompting us to delve deeper into the enigmatic bond between political voting behavior and internet search patterns.
It's almost as if these two seemingly unrelated entities were just waiting for someone to connect the dots, like a classic dad joke that's been right in front of you the whole time. It's all about perspective – what may seem like a groan-worthy pun to one person could be a source of amusement to another.
The scatterplot displayed in Fig. 1 illustrates the robust correlation between Republican votes for Senators in Minnesota and Google searches for 'please clap'. The data points form a tightly clustered pattern, emphasizing the strong association between these variables. It's like finding the perfect punchline to a joke – once it clicks, everything falls into place.
The results of our study not only highlight the unexpected nature of internet search patterns but also underscore the need for further exploration into the intricate interplay between online behavior and political engagement. The correlation we uncovered serves as a reminder that even in the realm of serious academic inquiry, there's always room for a touch of whimsy – much like a well-timed dad joke that lightens the mood in a room full of serious faces.
In conclusion, our findings not only contribute to the growing body of research on the intersection of politics and internet phenomena but also serve as a testament to the multifaceted nature of human behavior and its manifestation in the digital sphere. The mysterious allure of the 'please clap' phenomenon beckons us to continue unraveling its intricacies, much like a timeless dad joke that continues to amuse and intrigue across generations.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[CONCLUSION]]

ChatGPT:

[[CONCLUSION]]

In conclusion, our research has shed light on the unexpected and undeniably amusing connection between Republican votes for Senators in Minnesota and Google searches for 'please clap'. The substantial correlation coefficient of 0.9411551 and p < 0.01 has left us pleasantly surprised, akin to discovering a dad joke that's actually genuinely funny.

Just like how a good dad joke can bring a smile to anyone’s face, our findings have sparked joy and curiosity in the realm of academic inquiry. The evident link between these seemingly unrelated variables is a reminder that, much like a well-crafted pun, there may be subtle connections waiting to be uncovered in the most unexpected places.

With these results, it's clear that the bond between political voting behavior and internet search patterns is no laughing matter – except when it comes to 'please clap', as it certainly got a chuckle out of us. The alignment of these domains is akin to witnessing a perfectly timed punchline in a comedy routine – it’s seamless, unexpected, and undeniably satisfying.

Therefore, we assert that no further research is necessary in this area, as we have undoubtedly reached the apex of correlation and humor in the realm of academic investigation. This correlation is as clear as day, much like the groans that follow a classic dad joke – there's just no denying it!

And with that, we bid adieu to the 'please clap' phenomenon, leaving it as a testament to the delightful mysteries uncovered in the compilation and analysis of seemingly unrelated data.

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 Please Clap-turing Republican Votes: A Correlational Analysis of Minnesota Senators and Google Searches. Respond only with the name of a fictional academic journal.

ChatGPT:

Journal of Political Humor and Social Science

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 Please Clap-turing Republican Votes: A Correlational Analysis of Minnesota Senators and Google Searches. Respond only with the name of a fictional organization.

ChatGPT:

The Institute for Political Data Analytics and Behavioral Research

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 Please Clap-turing Republican Votes: A Correlational Analysis of Minnesota Senators and Google Searches with an abstract of The link between political voting behavior and internet search history has been a subject of recent scholarly curiosity and perplexity. In this paper, we investigate the curious case of the connection between Republican votes for Senators in Minnesota and Google searches for 'please clap', utilizing data from MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, and Google Trends. Our findings reveal a remarkably high correlation coefficient of 0.9411551 and p < 0.01, spanning the years 2004 to 2020. The statistically significant connection between these seemingly unrelated phenomena calls for elucidation, making a striking case for further investigation into the mysterious world of internet search patterns and political engagement.
Like gathering data on a hot summer day, the connection between political votes and internet searches can be quite refreshing... or sweat-inducing, depending on one's perspective. It's as if we stumbled upon a corny dad joke in the midst of a serious debate – unexpected, yet strangely amusing.

ChatGPT:

Minnesota Senators, Republican votes, Google searches, 'please clap', correlation analysis, MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, Google Trends, political voting behavior, internet search history, political engagement

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

Random correlation

Discover a new correlation

View all correlations

View all research papers

Report an error

Data details

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

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

See what else correlates with Google searches for 'please clap'

Correlation r = 0.9411551 (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 = 0.8857730 (Coefficient of determination)
This means 88.6% of the change in the one variable (i.e., Google searches for 'please clap') is predictable based on the change in the other (i.e., Votes for Republican Senators in Minnesota) over the 6 years from 2004 through 2020.

p < 0.01, which is statistically significant(Null hypothesis significance test)
The p-value is 0.00509.^Show 0.0050921938708393920000000000
The p-value is a measure of how probable it is that we would randomly find a result this extreme.^Note More specifically the p-value is a measure of how probable it is that we would randomly find a result this extreme if we had only tested one pair of variables one time.

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

Who is going to stop me? p-value reporting doesn't require me to report how many calculations I had to go through in order to find a low p-value!
On average, you will find a correaltion as strong as 0.94 in 0.509% of random cases. Said differently, if you correlated 196 random variables^Note Which I absolutely did.
with the same 5 degrees of freedom, ^Note Degrees of freedom is a measure of how many free components we are testing. In this case it is 5 because we have two variables measured over a period of 6 years. It's just the number of years minus ( the number of variables minus one ), which in this case simplifies to the number of years minus one.
you would randomly expect to find a correlation as strong as this one.

[ 0.55, 0.99 ] 95% correlation confidence interval (using the Fisher z-transformation)
^{Read more about the confidence interval} The confidence interval is an estimate the range of the value of the correlation coefficient, using the correlation itself as an input. The values are meant to be the low and high end of the correlation coefficient with 95% confidence.

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

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

Still, sometimes one of the variables has more years of data available than the other. This page only shows the overlapping years. To see all the years, click on "See what else correlates with..." link above.

	2006	2008	2012	2014	2018	2020
Votes for Republican Senators in Minnesota (Total votes)	835653	1212320	867974	850227	2036210	1398140
Google searches for 'please clap' (Rel. search volume)	0.583333	1.41667	1	1.16667	3.33333	2.75

Why this works

Data dredging: I have 25,237 variables in my database. I compare all these variables against each other to find ones that randomly match up. That's 636,906,169 correlation calculations! This is called “data dredging.” Instead of starting with a hypothesis and testing it, I instead abused the data to see what correlations shake out. It’s a dangerous way to go about analysis, because any sufficiently large dataset will yield strong correlations completely at random.
Lack of causal connection: There is probably^Note Because these pages are automatically generated, it's possible that the two variables you are viewing are in fact causually related. I take steps to prevent the obvious ones from showing on the site (I don't let data about the weather in one city correlate with the weather in a neighboring city, for example), but sometimes they still pop up. If they are related, cool! You found a loophole.
no direct connection between these variables, despite what the AI says above. This is exacerbated by the fact that I used "Years" as the base variable. Lots of things happen in a year that are not related to each other! Most studies would use something like "one person" in stead of "one year" to be the "thing" studied.
Observations not independent: For many variables, sequential years are not independent of each other. If a population of people is continuously doing something every day, there is no reason to think they would suddenly change how they are doing that thing on January 1. A simple^Note Personally I don't find any p-value calculation to be 'simple,' but you know what I mean.
p-value calculation does not take this into account, so mathematically it appears less probable than it really is.
Very low n: There are not many data points included in this analysis. Even if the p-value is high, we should be suspicious of using so few datapoints in a correlation.

Try it yourself

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

    return correlation, r_squared, p_value

# These are the arrays for the variables shown on this page, but you can modify them to be any two sets of numbers
array_1 = np.array([835653,1212320,867974,850227,2036210,1398140,])
array_2 = np.array([0.583333,1.41667,1,1.16667,3.33333,2.75,])
array_1_name = "Votes for Republican Senators in Minnesota"
array_2_name = "Google searches for 'please clap'"

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

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

Reuseable content

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

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

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

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

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

Download images for these variables:

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

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

Alternatively you can use a tool like Inkscape.
High resolution line chart, optimized for mobile
Alternative high resolution line chart
Scatterplot
Portable line chart (png)
Portable line chart (png), optimized for mobile
Line chart for only Votes for Republican Senators in Minnesota
Line chart for only Google searches for 'please clap'
AI-generated correlation image
The spurious research paper: Please Clap-turing Republican Votes: A Correlational Analysis of Minnesota Senators and Google Searches

View another random correlation

How fun was this correlation?

Thanks for being the explorer we needed!

Correlation ID: 5295 · Black Variable ID: 26262 · Red Variable ID: 1376


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