about · email me · subscribe
Spurious correlation #5,315 · View random

A linear line chart with years as the X-axis and two variables on the Y-axis. The first variable is Popularity of the first name Pearl and the second variable is Votes for the Libertarian Presidential candidate in Texas.  The chart goes from 1980 to 2020, and the two variables track closely in value over that time. Small Image
Download png
, svg

AI explanation

As the name Pearl gained popularity, more people were drawn to individualism, just like the unique, independent character of a pearl in an oyster. These individuals were more likely to support the Libertarian candidate, creating a 'liber-tide' of votes in Texas.

Model: dalle-3
Prompt: An image that looks like a scene from a Disney Movie, depicting a vibrant Texas sunset with a baby nursery in the foreground where each newborn is represented by unique, glowing pearls, mirroring the individuality and independent thinking sweeping through the state. 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: Popularity of the first name Pearl and Votes for the Libertarian Presidential candidate in Texas. 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: Brutalism Photorealism An image that looks like it is a scene from A Disney Movie Realistic An image that looks like it is a scene from a Pixar movie
ChatGPT: An image that looks like it is a scene from A Disney Movie

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 Popularity of the first name Pearl and Votes for the Libertarian Presidential candidate in Texas, in the following situation: As the name Pearl gained popularity, more people were drawn to individualism, just like the unique, independent character of a pearl in an oyster. These individuals were more likely to support the Libertarian candidate, creating a 'liber-tide' of votes in Texas.. Keep the description simple.
ChatGPT: A growing number of newborns named Pearl in Texas led to a wave of individuality. As the sun dipped below the horizon, the liber-tide of votes for the Libertarian Presidential candidate surged, symbolizing the rise of independent thinking and a desire for unique expression.

Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You write and improve image generation prompts for DALLE-3. You maintain the same subjects, but enhance the visuals.
User prompt: Please respond with an image generation prompt that would be likely to create an interesting visual using DALLE-3, using the following style: [ An image that looks like it is a scene from A Disney Movie ] and depicting this scene: A growing number of newborns named Pearl in Texas led to a wave of individuality. As the sun dipped below the horizon, the liber-tide of votes for the Libertarian Presidential candidate surged, symbolizing the rise of independent thinking and a desire for unique expression. Keep the visual depiction simple. Do not include any words or speech bubbles.
ChatGPT: An image that looks like a scene from a Disney Movie, depicting a vibrant Texas sunset with a baby nursery in the foreground where each newborn is represented by unique, glowing pearls, mirroring the individuality and independent thinking sweeping through the state.

*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 an increase in Popularity of the first name Pearl caused Votes for the Libertarian Presidential candidate in Texas to increase. Include one good pun.

AI academic paper

(Because p < 0.01)
The Libertarian Lean of the Pearl: A Shellebration of Name Popularity and Political Preference in the Lone Star State

The Texas Tribune of Tidal Trends

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

Please draft the title and abstract of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between Popularity of the first name Pearl and Votes for the Libertarian Presidential candidate in Texas. Make lots of jokes, goofy observations, and puns.

Make the title a clever pun.

Your research team used data from US Social Security Administration and MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse to assess this nagging question. You found a correlation coefficient of 0.9223933 and p < 0.01 for 1980 to 2020.

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

[[TITLE]]
Lorem ipsum dolor sit

[[ABSTRACT]]
Lorem ipsum dolor sit



ChatGPT:
[[TITLE]]
"The Libertarian Lean of the Pearl: A Shellebration of Name Popularity and Political Preference in the Lone Star State"

[[ABSTRACT]]
This study provides a whimsical examination of the connection between the popularity of the first name Pearl and the alignment of voters with the Libertarian Presidential candidate in the state of Texas. Harnessing data from the US Social Security Administration and MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, our research team embarks on a journey to unearth the correlation between these seemingly disparate entities. Our findings reveal a striking correlation coefficient of 0.9223933 and a p-value of less than 0.01, encompassing the years from 1980 to 2020. Through this research, we seek to add a touch of levity to the discourse on political affiliations and emphasize the unbounded potential for unexpected correlations in the realm of social sciences.


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

Please make up the introduction section of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between Popularity of the first name Pearl and Votes for the Libertarian Presidential candidate in Texas. 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]]
"The Libertarian Lean of the Pearl: A Shellebration of Name Popularity and Political Preference in the Lone Star State"

[[ABSTRACT]]
This study provides a whimsical examination of the connection between the popularity of the first name Pearl and the alignment of voters with the Libertarian Presidential candidate in the state of Texas. Harnessing data from the US Social Security Administration and MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, our research team embarks on a journey to unearth the correlation between these seemingly disparate entities. Our findings reveal a striking correlation coefficient of 0.9223933 and a p-value of less than 0.01, encompassing the years from 1980 to 2020. Through this research, we seek to add a touch of levity to the discourse on political affiliations and emphasize the unbounded potential for unexpected correlations in the realm of social sciences.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[INTRODUCTION]]



ChatGPT:
[[INTRODUCTION]]

Picture this: a Texan named Pearl walks into a polling station, proudly sporting a cowboy hat and a belt buckle that reads "Y'all ready to vote?" But what's even more fascinating than Pearl's southern charm is the surprising connection between her name and her political leanings. It's like uncovering a treasure trove of data as we delve into the correlation between the popularity of the first name Pearl and the votes cast for the Libertarian Presidential candidate in the Lone Star State.

In the world of research, we often seek to explore the uncharted waters of statistical analysis, navigating through datasets with the precision of a scalpel-wielding surgeon. But who knew that in the labyrinth of social science, we might stumble upon an unexpected gem like the correlation between a name and political preferences? It's like finding a pearl in an oyster - a rare and delightful discovery that leaves us in awe of the complexities of human behavior.

As we embark on this whimsical journey, we are reminded of the quirky nature of scientific inquiry. From the laws of physics to the mysteries of human psychology, the world of research is a veritable playground of surprises. And what could be more surprising than the idea that the name Pearl could hold sway over political inclinations in Texas? It's like a statistical anomaly that's as precious as a rare pearl, tucked away in the depths of a convoluted dataset.

With the aid of data from the US Social Security Administration, MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, and taking a cue from Sherlock Holmes, our research team set out to unravel this enigma. We crunched the numbers, scrutinized the trends, and braved the tumultuous seas of statistical analysis, all in pursuit of the truth behind the Pearl-Libertarian connection. And lo and behold, the findings yielded a striking correlation coefficient of 0.9223933 and a p-value of less than 0.01, spanning across the years from 1980 to 2020.

So, as we present our findings, let us also bask in the amusement that comes with unearthing such an unexpected correlation. With a nod to the eccentricities of social science, let's celebrate the whimsy of our discoveries and the boundless potential for surprise that lies within the confines of research. After all, in the world of statistical correlations, sometimes the most unlikely pairings can turn out to be the most intriguing.


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

Please make up a literature review section of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between Popularity of the first name Pearl and Votes for the Libertarian Presidential candidate in Texas. 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]]
"The Libertarian Lean of the Pearl: A Shellebration of Name Popularity and Political Preference in the Lone Star State"

[[ABSTRACT]]
This study provides a whimsical examination of the connection between the popularity of the first name Pearl and the alignment of voters with the Libertarian Presidential candidate in the state of Texas. Harnessing data from the US Social Security Administration and MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, our research team embarks on a journey to unearth the correlation between these seemingly disparate entities. Our findings reveal a striking correlation coefficient of 0.9223933 and a p-value of less than 0.01, encompassing the years from 1980 to 2020. Through this research, we seek to add a touch of levity to the discourse on political affiliations and emphasize the unbounded potential for unexpected correlations in the realm of social sciences.

-------

And here is the introduction section that led to this literature review:
[[INTRODUCTION]]
Picture this: a Texan named Pearl walks into a polling station, proudly sporting a cowboy hat and a belt buckle that reads "Y'all ready to vote?" But what's even more fascinating than Pearl's southern charm is the surprising connection between her name and her political leanings. It's like uncovering a treasure trove of data as we delve into the correlation between the popularity of the first name Pearl and the votes cast for the Libertarian Presidential candidate in the Lone Star State.
In the world of research, we often seek to explore the uncharted waters of statistical analysis, navigating through datasets with the precision of a scalpel-wielding surgeon. But who knew that in the labyrinth of social science, we might stumble upon an unexpected gem like the correlation between a name and political preferences? It's like finding a pearl in an oyster - a rare and delightful discovery that leaves us in awe of the complexities of human behavior.
As we embark on this whimsical journey, we are reminded of the quirky nature of scientific inquiry. From the laws of physics to the mysteries of human psychology, the world of research is a veritable playground of surprises. And what could be more surprising than the idea that the name Pearl could hold sway over political inclinations in Texas? It's like a statistical anomaly that's as precious as a rare pearl, tucked away in the depths of a convoluted dataset.
With the aid of data from the US Social Security Administration, MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, and taking a cue from Sherlock Holmes, our research team set out to unravel this enigma. We crunched the numbers, scrutinized the trends, and braved the tumultuous seas of statistical analysis, all in pursuit of the truth behind the Pearl-Libertarian connection. And lo and behold, the findings yielded a striking correlation coefficient of 0.9223933 and a p-value of less than 0.01, spanning across the years from 1980 to 2020.
So, as we present our findings, let us also bask in the amusement that comes with unearthing such an unexpected correlation. With a nod to the eccentricities of social science, let's celebrate the whimsy of our discoveries and the boundless potential for surprise that lies within the confines of research. After all, in the world of statistical correlations, sometimes the most unlikely pairings can turn out to be the most intriguing.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[LITERATURE REVIEW]]



ChatGPT:
[[LITERATURE REVIEW]]

In "Smith, et al.," the authors find a striking correlation between the popularity of the first name Pearl and the political preferences of Texans, particularly their inclination towards the Libertarian Presidential candidate. The study delves into the historical significance of names and their potential influence on individual behavior, introducing the idea of "onomastics" as a key factor in understanding human decision-making processes. Likewise, "Doe, et al." examine the cultural resonance of names and their impact on societal trends, providing a thought-provoking analysis of how a name like Pearl could embody a spirit of independence and non-conformity that resonates with Libertarian ideology.

Moving into the realm of non-fiction literature, "The Power of Names" by John Smithson presents an in-depth exploration of how names can shape our identities and influence our choices, shedding light on the nuanced interplay between nomenclature and socio-political attitudes. Additionally, "Nom de Plume: A (Secret) History of Pseudonyms" by Carmela Smith delves into the complexities of names and their symbolic connotations, offering a compelling perspective on the potential impact of a name like Pearl in the context of political affiliation.

Transitioning to the world of fiction, "The Pearl" by John Steinbeck stands as a classic tale of human greed and the pursuit of wealth, albeit not directly related to the topic at hand, but serving as a reminder that pearls are not only objects of beauty but can also represent unexpected fortune - much like the correlation uncovered in our study. On a lighter note, the children's book "Pearl the Party Girl" by Amanda Doe serves as a delightful departure into the realm of imagination, reminding us of the joyous association that names can carry.

As we traverse farther into the absurd, our research team found itself exploring unorthodox sources of inspiration, including the backs of shampoo bottles where we discovered surprising correlations between the lather thickness and the likelihood of voting for a third-party candidate. While this may not pass traditional academic muster, it underscored the unpredictable and oftentimes whimsical nature of our investigative process. After all, in the world of research, sometimes the most unexpected sources yield the most entertaining insights.

With a nod to the quirks of scholarly exploration, let us consider the possibility that even the most serious of topics can be approached with a touch of levity. In our pursuit of knowledge, well-timed humor can sparkle like a rare pearl, enriching the discourse and reminding us that amidst the sea of data, there's always room for a bit of whimsy.


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

Please make up the methodology section of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between Popularity of the first name Pearl and Votes for the Libertarian Presidential candidate in Texas. 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 US Social Security Administration and MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse . You used data from 1980 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]]
"The Libertarian Lean of the Pearl: A Shellebration of Name Popularity and Political Preference in the Lone Star State"

[[ABSTRACT]]
This study provides a whimsical examination of the connection between the popularity of the first name Pearl and the alignment of voters with the Libertarian Presidential candidate in the state of Texas. Harnessing data from the US Social Security Administration and MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, our research team embarks on a journey to unearth the correlation between these seemingly disparate entities. Our findings reveal a striking correlation coefficient of 0.9223933 and a p-value of less than 0.01, encompassing the years from 1980 to 2020. Through this research, we seek to add a touch of levity to the discourse on political affiliations and emphasize the unbounded potential for unexpected correlations in the realm of social sciences.

[[INTRODUCTION]]
Picture this: a Texan named Pearl walks into a polling station, proudly sporting a cowboy hat and a belt buckle that reads "Y'all ready to vote?" But what's even more fascinating than Pearl's southern charm is the surprising connection between her name and her political leanings. It's like uncovering a treasure trove of data as we delve into the correlation between the popularity of the first name Pearl and the votes cast for the Libertarian Presidential candidate in the Lone Star State.
In the world of research, we often seek to explore the uncharted waters of statistical analysis, navigating through datasets with the precision of a scalpel-wielding surgeon. But who knew that in the labyrinth of social science, we might stumble upon an unexpected gem like the correlation between a name and political preferences? It's like finding a pearl in an oyster - a rare and delightful discovery that leaves us in awe of the complexities of human behavior.
As we embark on this whimsical journey, we are reminded of the quirky nature of scientific inquiry. From the laws of physics to the mysteries of human psychology, the world of research is a veritable playground of surprises. And what could be more surprising than the idea that the name Pearl could hold sway over political inclinations in Texas? It's like a statistical anomaly that's as precious as a rare pearl, tucked away in the depths of a convoluted dataset.
With the aid of data from the US Social Security Administration, MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, and taking a cue from Sherlock Holmes, our research team set out to unravel this enigma. We crunched the numbers, scrutinized the trends, and braved the tumultuous seas of statistical analysis, all in pursuit of the truth behind the Pearl-Libertarian connection. And lo and behold, the findings yielded a striking correlation coefficient of 0.9223933 and a p-value of less than 0.01, spanning across the years from 1980 to 2020.
So, as we present our findings, let us also bask in the amusement that comes with unearthing such an unexpected correlation. With a nod to the eccentricities of social science, let's celebrate the whimsy of our discoveries and the boundless potential for surprise that lies within the confines of research. After all, in the world of statistical correlations, sometimes the most unlikely pairings can turn out to be the most intriguing.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[METHODOLOGY]]



ChatGPT:

[[METHODOLOGY]]

To investigate the captivating connection between the popularity of the first name Pearl and the votes for the Libertarian Presidential candidate in Texas, our research team embarked on a scientific odyssey that was as intriguing as it was whimsical. We utilized a mixed-methods approach, blending the art of data mining with the precision of statistical analysis, as we sought to unravel the enigmatic correlation between a name and a political predisposition.

Data Collection: Like intrepid treasure hunters scouring the digital seas for hidden riches, our team scoured the US Social Security Administration archives and the MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse to obtain a comprehensive dataset spanning the years from 1980 to 2020. We cast a wide net across the internet, reeling in datasets with the agility of seasoned anglers, and selected only the finest pearls of information to include in our analysis.

Pearl Popularity: The first variable in our analysis was the popularity of the first name Pearl, which we tracked across the decades with the meticulousness of a jeweler examining a flawless gemstone. We assessed the frequency of this beguiling name, observing its ebbs and flows in the tides of nomenclature, and marveled at the enduring allure it held for proud parents across the Lone Star State.

Libertarian Lean: On the other end of our analysis, we delved into the political allegiance of voters, with a focus on their affinity for the Libertarian Presidential candidate in Texas. Like political artisans, we unraveled the intricate tapestry of electoral data, examining the ebb and flow of libertarian sentiment with the attentiveness of a watchmaker tinkering with the gears of democracy.

Statistical Sorcery: With our dataset in hand, we embarked on a journey through the labyrinth of statistical analysis, armed with the magic wands of correlation coefficients and p-values. We summoned the spirits of regression analysis and t-tests, and cast spells of significance testing and confidence intervals, all in an effort to unveil the mystical relationship between the popularity of the name Pearl and the political pull towards Libertarianism.

In the midst of our analytical escapades, we remained ever vigilant for potential confounding variables that could have obscured the true nature of the Pearl-Libertarian connection. Like detectives in a noir mystery, we peered through the haze of data, searching for any lurking shadows that could cast doubt on our findings.

In the end, our methodology was a blend of scientific rigor and fanciful whimsy, a careful dance between the realms of statistics and the wonders of human behavior. It was a journey filled with surprise and enchantment, for in the world of research, even the most unexpected correlations can yield the most delightful discoveries.


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

Please make up the results section of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between Popularity of the first name Pearl and Votes for the Libertarian Presidential candidate in Texas. 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 US Social Security Administration and MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse .

For the time period 1980 to 2020, you found a correlation 0.9223933, r-squared of 0.8508094, 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]]
"The Libertarian Lean of the Pearl: A Shellebration of Name Popularity and Political Preference in the Lone Star State"

[[ABSTRACT]]
This study provides a whimsical examination of the connection between the popularity of the first name Pearl and the alignment of voters with the Libertarian Presidential candidate in the state of Texas. Harnessing data from the US Social Security Administration and MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, our research team embarks on a journey to unearth the correlation between these seemingly disparate entities. Our findings reveal a striking correlation coefficient of 0.9223933 and a p-value of less than 0.01, encompassing the years from 1980 to 2020. Through this research, we seek to add a touch of levity to the discourse on political affiliations and emphasize the unbounded potential for unexpected correlations in the realm of social sciences.

-------

And here is the methodology section that led to this result:
[[METHODOLOGY]]
Picture this: a Texan named Pearl walks into a polling station, proudly sporting a cowboy hat and a belt buckle that reads "Y'all ready to vote?" But what's even more fascinating than Pearl's southern charm is the surprising connection between her name and her political leanings. It's like uncovering a treasure trove of data as we delve into the correlation between the popularity of the first name Pearl and the votes cast for the Libertarian Presidential candidate in the Lone Star State.
In the world of research, we often seek to explore the uncharted waters of statistical analysis, navigating through datasets with the precision of a scalpel-wielding surgeon. But who knew that in the labyrinth of social science, we might stumble upon an unexpected gem like the correlation between a name and political preferences? It's like finding a pearl in an oyster - a rare and delightful discovery that leaves us in awe of the complexities of human behavior.
As we embark on this whimsical journey, we are reminded of the quirky nature of scientific inquiry. From the laws of physics to the mysteries of human psychology, the world of research is a veritable playground of surprises. And what could be more surprising than the idea that the name Pearl could hold sway over political inclinations in Texas? It's like a statistical anomaly that's as precious as a rare pearl, tucked away in the depths of a convoluted dataset.
With the aid of data from the US Social Security Administration, MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, and taking a cue from Sherlock Holmes, our research team set out to unravel this enigma. We crunched the numbers, scrutinized the trends, and braved the tumultuous seas of statistical analysis, all in pursuit of the truth behind the Pearl-Libertarian connection. And lo and behold, the findings yielded a striking correlation coefficient of 0.9223933 and a p-value of less than 0.01, spanning across the years from 1980 to 2020.
So, as we present our findings, let us also bask in the amusement that comes with unearthing such an unexpected correlation. With a nod to the eccentricities of social science, let's celebrate the whimsy of our discoveries and the boundless potential for surprise that lies within the confines of research. After all, in the world of statistical correlations, sometimes the most unlikely pairings can turn out to be the most intriguing.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[RESULTS]]



ChatGPT:

[[RESULTS]]

The results of our endeavor to uncover the mysterious connection between the popularity of the first name Pearl and the proclivity toward the Libertarian Presidential candidate in the state of Texas are as illuminating as a lone star in the Texas sky. Our statistical analysis uncovered a robust correlation coefficient of 0.9223933, indicating a strong relationship between these seemingly unrelated variables. This correlation coefficient is akin to finding a pearl in an unexpected place – a delightful surprise that adds a touch of whimsy to the realm of social science research.

When squaring up the data, we found an r-squared value of 0.8508094, underscoring the substantial influence of the popularity of the name Pearl on votes for the Libertarian candidate. It's as if the name Pearl casts a shimmering glow on the political landscape, guiding voters toward a libertarian stance with its iridescent allure.

Furthermore, the p-value of less than 0.01 serves as a resounding confirmation of the significance of our findings. This p-value is so small, it makes a Texas-sized belt buckle look minuscule. With such a tiny p-value, we can confidently assert that the correlation we uncovered is not just a mirage in the desert of statistical noise; it's a bona fide oasis of unexpected insight.

In Fig. 1, a scatterplot graphically depicts the strong correlation between the popularity of the name Pearl and votes for the Libertarian candidate in Texas. This figure visually encapsulates the compelling relationship that our statistical analysis has unveiled, as if the data points themselves are aligning in support of this captivating correlation.

In summary, our research has shed light on the enthralling link between the first name Pearl and political preferences in the Lone Star State, showcasing the quirky and captivating nature of unexpected correlations within the realm of social sciences. It's as if we've stumbled upon a hidden treasure trove of research findings, reaffirming the inherent charm and surprise that come with scientific inquiry.


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

Please make up the discussion section of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between Popularity of the first name Pearl and Votes for the Libertarian Presidential candidate in Texas. 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]]
"The Libertarian Lean of the Pearl: A Shellebration of Name Popularity and Political Preference in the Lone Star State"

[[ABSTRACT]]
This study provides a whimsical examination of the connection between the popularity of the first name Pearl and the alignment of voters with the Libertarian Presidential candidate in the state of Texas. Harnessing data from the US Social Security Administration and MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, our research team embarks on a journey to unearth the correlation between these seemingly disparate entities. Our findings reveal a striking correlation coefficient of 0.9223933 and a p-value of less than 0.01, encompassing the years from 1980 to 2020. Through this research, we seek to add a touch of levity to the discourse on political affiliations and emphasize the unbounded potential for unexpected correlations in the realm of social sciences.

[[LITERATURE REVIEW]]
In "Smith, et al.," the authors find a striking correlation between the popularity of the first name Pearl and the political preferences of Texans, particularly their inclination towards the Libertarian Presidential candidate. The study delves into the historical significance of names and their potential influence on individual behavior, introducing the idea of "onomastics" as a key factor in understanding human decision-making processes. Likewise, "Doe, et al." examine the cultural resonance of names and their impact on societal trends, providing a thought-provoking analysis of how a name like Pearl could embody a spirit of independence and non-conformity that resonates with Libertarian ideology.
Moving into the realm of non-fiction literature, "The Power of Names" by John Smithson presents an in-depth exploration of how names can shape our identities and influence our choices, shedding light on the nuanced interplay between nomenclature and socio-political attitudes. Additionally, "Nom de Plume: A (Secret) History of Pseudonyms" by Carmela Smith delves into the complexities of names and their symbolic connotations, offering a compelling perspective on the potential impact of a name like Pearl in the context of political affiliation.
Transitioning to the world of fiction, "The Pearl" by John Steinbeck stands as a classic tale of human greed and the pursuit of wealth, albeit not directly related to the topic at hand, but serving as a reminder that pearls are not only objects of beauty but can also represent unexpected fortune - much like the correlation uncovered in our study. On a lighter note, the children's book "Pearl the Party Girl" by Amanda Doe serves as a delightful departure into the realm of imagination, reminding us of the joyous association that names can carry.
As we traverse farther into the absurd, our research team found itself exploring unorthodox sources of inspiration, including the backs of shampoo bottles where we discovered surprising correlations between the lather thickness and the likelihood of voting for a third-party candidate. While this may not pass traditional academic muster, it underscored the unpredictable and oftentimes whimsical nature of our investigative process. After all, in the world of research, sometimes the most unexpected sources yield the most entertaining insights.
With a nod to the quirks of scholarly exploration, let us consider the possibility that even the most serious of topics can be approached with a touch of levity. In our pursuit of knowledge, well-timed humor can sparkle like a rare pearl, enriching the discourse and reminding us that amidst the sea of data, there's always room for a bit of whimsy.

[[RESULTS]]
The results of our endeavor to uncover the mysterious connection between the popularity of the first name Pearl and the proclivity toward the Libertarian Presidential candidate in the state of Texas are as illuminating as a lone star in the Texas sky. Our statistical analysis uncovered a robust correlation coefficient of 0.9223933, indicating a strong relationship between these seemingly unrelated variables. This correlation coefficient is akin to finding a pearl in an unexpected place – a delightful surprise that adds a touch of whimsy to the realm of social science research.
When squaring up the data, we found an r-squared value of 0.8508094, underscoring the substantial influence of the popularity of the name Pearl on votes for the Libertarian candidate. It's as if the name Pearl casts a shimmering glow on the political landscape, guiding voters toward a libertarian stance with its iridescent allure.
Furthermore, the p-value of less than 0.01 serves as a resounding confirmation of the significance of our findings. This p-value is so small, it makes a Texas-sized belt buckle look minuscule. With such a tiny p-value, we can confidently assert that the correlation we uncovered is not just a mirage in the desert of statistical noise; it's a bona fide oasis of unexpected insight.
In Fig. 1, a scatterplot graphically depicts the strong correlation between the popularity of the name Pearl and votes for the Libertarian candidate in Texas. This figure visually encapsulates the compelling relationship that our statistical analysis has unveiled, as if the data points themselves are aligning in support of this captivating correlation.
In summary, our research has shed light on the enthralling link between the first name Pearl and political preferences in the Lone Star State, showcasing the quirky and captivating nature of unexpected correlations within the realm of social sciences. It's as if we've stumbled upon a hidden treasure trove of research findings, reaffirming the inherent charm and surprise that come with scientific inquiry.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[DISCUSSION]]



ChatGPT:

[[DISCUSSION]]

Our exploration of the connection between the popularity of the first name Pearl and the affinity for the Libertarian Presidential candidate in Texas unfurled like a captivating saga of mariners seeking elusive political treasures. Akin to the mythical allure of the pearl itself, our findings left us navigating uncharted waters in the realm of social science research.

First, let's dive into the literature review where we encountered the colorful array of previous studies. "Smith, et al." and "Doe, et al." enticed us with their serious considerations of names' influence on political leanings. Not to be outdone, we delved into the wondrous adventures of "Pearl the Party Girl" by Amanda Doe, reminding us of the magical association that names can carry. However, one might ponder if we sailed into the whimsical realm of shampoo bottle analyses, delving into the frothy world of lather thickness and third-party voting tendencies. Despite the lightheartedness, our results ultimately upheld the findings of our scholarly predecessors, proving that even the most fanciful pursuits can yield genuine insights.

Our statistical analysis unearthed a correlation coefficient worthy of a standing ovation, suggesting that the popularity of the name Pearl and the penchant for the Libertarian candidate in Texas are as harmonious as a well-composed symphony. The robust r-squared value supports the notion that the name Pearl exerts a shimmering influence on political preferences, not unlike the gravitational pull of a celestial body.

Moreover, the p-value's diminutive stature emphasizes the undeniable significance of our findings, dwarfing conventional measures of statistical significance like a Texas-sized belt buckle. Our discoveries thus stand as a resplendent example of the unexpected delights that await within the spheres of social science research.

In essence, our study has not only illuminated a beguiling correlation; it has evoked the sense of wonder and whimsy that accompanies scientific inquiry. Much like the unexpected pleasure of discovering a hidden pearl nestled within an oyster, our findings underscore the joyous unpredictability that resides at the heart of scholarly exploration.

As we conclude this section, we invite our esteemed colleagues to embrace the art of scholarly inquiry with a lighthearted spirit and the acknowledgment that amidst the rigors of research, there is always room for a sparkle of eccentricity. After all, a touch of whimsy can make even the most serious of inquiries shine like a luminescent pearl in the grand tapestry of knowledge acquisition.


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

Please make up a short conclusion of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between Popularity of the first name Pearl and Votes for the Libertarian Presidential candidate in Texas. 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]]
"The Libertarian Lean of the Pearl: A Shellebration of Name Popularity and Political Preference in the Lone Star State"

[[ABSTRACT]]
This study provides a whimsical examination of the connection between the popularity of the first name Pearl and the alignment of voters with the Libertarian Presidential candidate in the state of Texas. Harnessing data from the US Social Security Administration and MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, our research team embarks on a journey to unearth the correlation between these seemingly disparate entities. Our findings reveal a striking correlation coefficient of 0.9223933 and a p-value of less than 0.01, encompassing the years from 1980 to 2020. Through this research, we seek to add a touch of levity to the discourse on political affiliations and emphasize the unbounded potential for unexpected correlations in the realm of social sciences.

[[INTRDUCTION]]
Picture this: a Texan named Pearl walks into a polling station, proudly sporting a cowboy hat and a belt buckle that reads "Y'all ready to vote?" But what's even more fascinating than Pearl's southern charm is the surprising connection between her name and her political leanings. It's like uncovering a treasure trove of data as we delve into the correlation between the popularity of the first name Pearl and the votes cast for the Libertarian Presidential candidate in the Lone Star State.
In the world of research, we often seek to explore the uncharted waters of statistical analysis, navigating through datasets with the precision of a scalpel-wielding surgeon. But who knew that in the labyrinth of social science, we might stumble upon an unexpected gem like the correlation between a name and political preferences? It's like finding a pearl in an oyster - a rare and delightful discovery that leaves us in awe of the complexities of human behavior.
As we embark on this whimsical journey, we are reminded of the quirky nature of scientific inquiry. From the laws of physics to the mysteries of human psychology, the world of research is a veritable playground of surprises. And what could be more surprising than the idea that the name Pearl could hold sway over political inclinations in Texas? It's like a statistical anomaly that's as precious as a rare pearl, tucked away in the depths of a convoluted dataset.
With the aid of data from the US Social Security Administration, MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, and taking a cue from Sherlock Holmes, our research team set out to unravel this enigma. We crunched the numbers, scrutinized the trends, and braved the tumultuous seas of statistical analysis, all in pursuit of the truth behind the Pearl-Libertarian connection. And lo and behold, the findings yielded a striking correlation coefficient of 0.9223933 and a p-value of less than 0.01, spanning across the years from 1980 to 2020.
So, as we present our findings, let us also bask in the amusement that comes with unearthing such an unexpected correlation. With a nod to the eccentricities of social science, let's celebrate the whimsy of our discoveries and the boundless potential for surprise that lies within the confines of research. After all, in the world of statistical correlations, sometimes the most unlikely pairings can turn out to be the most intriguing.

[[RESULTS]]
The results of our endeavor to uncover the mysterious connection between the popularity of the first name Pearl and the proclivity toward the Libertarian Presidential candidate in the state of Texas are as illuminating as a lone star in the Texas sky. Our statistical analysis uncovered a robust correlation coefficient of 0.9223933, indicating a strong relationship between these seemingly unrelated variables. This correlation coefficient is akin to finding a pearl in an unexpected place – a delightful surprise that adds a touch of whimsy to the realm of social science research.
When squaring up the data, we found an r-squared value of 0.8508094, underscoring the substantial influence of the popularity of the name Pearl on votes for the Libertarian candidate. It's as if the name Pearl casts a shimmering glow on the political landscape, guiding voters toward a libertarian stance with its iridescent allure.
Furthermore, the p-value of less than 0.01 serves as a resounding confirmation of the significance of our findings. This p-value is so small, it makes a Texas-sized belt buckle look minuscule. With such a tiny p-value, we can confidently assert that the correlation we uncovered is not just a mirage in the desert of statistical noise; it's a bona fide oasis of unexpected insight.
In Fig. 1, a scatterplot graphically depicts the strong correlation between the popularity of the name Pearl and votes for the Libertarian candidate in Texas. This figure visually encapsulates the compelling relationship that our statistical analysis has unveiled, as if the data points themselves are aligning in support of this captivating correlation.
In summary, our research has shed light on the enthralling link between the first name Pearl and political preferences in the Lone Star State, showcasing the quirky and captivating nature of unexpected correlations within the realm of social sciences. It's as if we've stumbled upon a hidden treasure trove of research findings, reaffirming the inherent charm and surprise that come with scientific inquiry.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[CONCLUSION]]



ChatGPT:

[[CONCLUSION]]

In conclusion, our research has surfaced a treasure chest of insights into the relationship between the popularity of the first name Pearl and votes for the Libertarian Presidential candidate in the state of Texas, providing a shell-shocking revelation in the realm of social science. The correlation coefficient of 0.9223933 has truly made a splash, signaling a deep-seated connection that's as impactful as a tidal wave of statistical significance.

Our findings have uncovered a hidden gem in the labyrinth of social science research, hinting at the potential influence of a name on political leanings. It's like stumbling upon a lustrous pearl in an ocean of data – a discovery as rare and captivating as finding a unicorn in a petri dish.

The r-squared value of 0.8508094 further underscores the formidable impact of the name Pearl on votes for the Libertarian candidate, as if the very essence of this name exerts a gravitational pull on political preferences that's as strong as the Lone Star State's independent spirit.

And let's not forget the p-value of less than 0.01 – a tiny, twinkling star in the vast expanse of statistical analysis, affirming the resounding significance of our findings. This p-value is so small, it could fit in the pocket of the Texas-sized belt buckle of a Pearl enthusiast.

As we reflect on these results, we are reminded of the delightful whimsy that accompanies the unpredictability of scientific inquiry. It's as if the statistical analysis itself has donned a cowboy hat and embarked on a yee-haw-worthy expedition through the wild terrain of unexpected correlations.

In the spirit of reveling in the unexpected marvels of research, we assert that no further exploration is needed in this particular avenue of investigation. Sometimes, in the colorful tapestry of statistical analysis, a unique discovery like the Pearl-Libertarian connection is a precious gem that needs no further polish.

So, let's raise a toast to the captivating treasure trove of insights that emanate from our research, embracing the curiosity and humor that infuse the world of social science. After all, in the words of Mark Twain, "The report of my research's demise has been greatly exaggerated."


Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You provide fictional names of academic journals. You say nothing else, and you do not chat with the user.
User prompt: Please provide the name of a funny but plausible sounding research, scientific, or academic journal that would publish a paper entited The Libertarian Lean of the Pearl: A Shellebration of Name Popularity and Political Preference in the Lone Star State. Respond only with the name of a fictional academic journal.

ChatGPT:

The Texas Tribune of Tidal Trends


Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You provide fictional names of nonprofit research organizations and associations. You say nothing else, and you do not chat with the user.
User prompt: Please provide the name of a funny but plausible sounding nonprofit, academic, or scientific association or organization that would sponsor research that resulted in a paper entited The Libertarian Lean of the Pearl: A Shellebration of Name Popularity and Political Preference in the Lone Star State. Respond only with the name of a fictional organization.

ChatGPT:

The Institute for Texan Nameology


Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You provide potential search keywords separated by commas. You say nothing else, and you do not chat with the user.
User prompt: Please provide potential search keywords for a paper titled The Libertarian Lean of the Pearl: A Shellebration of Name Popularity and Political Preference in the Lone Star State with an abstract of This study provides a whimsical examination of the connection between the popularity of the first name Pearl and the alignment of voters with the Libertarian Presidential candidate in the state of Texas. Harnessing data from the US Social Security Administration and MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, our research team embarks on a journey to unearth the correlation between these seemingly disparate entities. Our findings reveal a striking correlation coefficient of 0.9223933 and a p-value of less than 0.01, encompassing the years from 1980 to 2020. Through this research, we seek to add a touch of levity to the discourse on political affiliations and emphasize the unbounded potential for unexpected correlations in the realm of social sciences.

ChatGPT:

Pearl name popularity, political preference, Texas voters, Libertarian candidate, US Social Security Administration data, MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, correlation coefficient, p-value, political affiliations, social sciences, voter alignment, Lone Star State, Pearl name popularity in Texas

*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

Popularity of the first name Pearl
Detailed data title: Babies of all sexes born in the US named Pearl
Source: US Social Security Administration
See what else correlates with Popularity of the first name Pearl

Votes for the Libertarian Presidential candidate in Texas
Detailed data title: Percentage of all votes cast for the Libertarian Presidential candidate in Texas
Source: MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse
See what else correlates with Votes for the Libertarian Presidential candidate in Texas

Correlation r = 0.9223933 (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 = 0.8508094 (Coefficient of determination)
This means 85.1% of the change in the one variable (i.e., Votes for the Libertarian Presidential candidate in Texas) is predictable based on the change in the other (i.e., Popularity of the first name Pearl) over the 10 years from 1980 through 2020.

p < 0.01, which is statistically significant(Null hypothesis significance test)
The p-value is 0.00014. 0.0001443925443216787600000000
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 0.92 in 0.014% of random cases. Said differently, if you correlated 6,926 random variables Which I absolutely did.
with the same 9 degrees of freedom, Degrees of freedom is a measure of how many free components we are testing. In this case it is 9 because we have two variables measured over a period of 10 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.

[ 0.7, 0.98 ] 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.
1980198819921996200020042008201220162020
Popularity of the first name Pearl (Babies born)174148157175200196259368549351
Votes for the Libertarian Presidential candidate in Texas (Percentage of votes)0.8288420.5592910.32010.3609640.3614440.5233880.6946951.10813.160721.11571




Why this works

  1. 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.
  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.




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([174,148,157,175,200,196,259,368,549,351,])
array_2 = np.array([0.828842,0.559291,0.3201,0.360964,0.361444,0.523388,0.694695,1.1081,3.16072,1.11571,])
array_1_name = "Popularity of the first name Pearl"
array_2_name = "Votes for the Libertarian Presidential candidate in Texas"

# 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?

You're a rater extraordinaire!


Correlation ID: 5315 · Black Variable ID: 3829 · Red Variable ID: 26173
about · subscribe · emailme@tylervigen.com · twitter

CC BY 4.0