about · email me · subscribe
Spurious correlation #5,443 · 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 the Libertarian Presidential candidate in Iowa and the second variable is Automotive recalls for issues with the Parking Brake.  The chart goes from 1976 to 2020, and the two variables track closely in value over that time. Small Image
Download png
, svg

AI explanation

As more people leaned towards libertarian ideals of freedom and minimal government intervention, the parking brakes decided to exercise their own free will, leading to a sudden surge in automotive recalls for parking brake issues. It was a true case of "brake-lash" in response to the political shifting of gears.

Model: dalle-3
Prompt: Generate an image in the style of a popular internet meme, showing a chaotic scene in a bustling Iowa parking lot. The focus should be on a line of cars with "Libertarian 2020" bumper stickers parked in the distance, while a group of people huddled around a bulletin board tallying votes for the Libertarian Presidential candidate are visibly startled by the sudden movement of cars. Some of the cars are rolling backward due to parking brake issues, creating a sense of unexpected chaos. 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 the Libertarian Presidential candidate in Iowa and Automotive recalls for issues with the Parking Brake. Given these, which of the following image style descriptions seems most appropriate? Pick the one that seems to be related to one of the variables at hand. Please respond with only one of the following potential descriptions: a funny image you would see on reddit Brutalism Parallax art Symbolism Futuristic
ChatGPT: a funny image you would see on reddit

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 the Libertarian Presidential candidate in Iowa and Automotive recalls for issues with the Parking Brake, in the following situation: As more people leaned towards libertarian ideals of freedom and minimal government intervention, the parking brakes decided to exercise their own free will, leading to a sudden surge in automotive recalls for parking brake issues. It was a true case of "brake-lash" in response to the political shifting of gears.. Keep the description simple.
ChatGPT: In a bustling Iowa parking lot, a line of cars with "Libertarian 2020" bumper stickers are parked, while nearby, a group of people are huddled around a bulletin board tallying votes for the Libertarian Presidential candidate. Suddenly, the parking brakes of several cars simultaneously release, causing them to roll backwards and prompting a flurry of automotive recalls for parking brake issues.

Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You write and improve image generation prompts for DALLE-3. You maintain the same subjects, but enhance the visuals.
User prompt: Please respond with an image generation prompt that would be likely to create an interesting visual using DALLE-3, using the following style: [ a funny image you would see on reddit ] and depicting this scene: In a bustling Iowa parking lot, a line of cars with "Libertarian 2020" bumper stickers are parked, while nearby, a group of people are huddled around a bulletin board tallying votes for the Libertarian Presidential candidate. Suddenly, the parking brakes of several cars simultaneously release, causing them to roll backwards and prompting a flurry of automotive recalls for parking brake issues. Keep the visual depiction simple. Do not include any words or speech bubbles.
ChatGPT: Generate an image in the style of a popular internet meme, showing a chaotic scene in a bustling Iowa parking lot. The focus should be on a line of cars with "Libertarian 2020" bumper stickers parked in the distance, while a group of people huddled around a bulletin board tallying votes for the Libertarian Presidential candidate are visibly startled by the sudden movement of cars. Some of the cars are rolling backward due to parking brake issues, creating a sense of unexpected chaos.

*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 Votes for the Libertarian Presidential candidate in Iowa caused Automotive recalls for issues with the Parking Brake to increase.

AI academic paper

(Because p < 0.01)
Brake for Freedom: Investigating the Correlation between Libertarian Votes and Automotive Recalls in Iowa

The Journal of Unconventional Political-Societal Dynamics

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

Please draft the title and abstract of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between Votes for the Libertarian Presidential candidate in Iowa and Automotive recalls for issues with the Parking Brake. Make lots of jokes, goofy observations, and puns.

Make the title seem clever.

Your research team used data from MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse and US DOT to assess this nagging question. You found a correlation coefficient of 0.9559892 and p < 0.01 for 1976 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]]
"Brake for Freedom: Investigating the Correlation between Libertarian Votes and Automotive Recalls in Iowa"

[[ABSTRACT]]
This paper presents a correlation analysis of the voting patterns for Libertarian presidential candidates in Iowa and the frequency of automotive recalls related to parking brake issues from 1976 to 2020. Leveraging data from the MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, and the US DOT, our research team sought to shed light on the peculiar connection between political preferences and automotive safety concerns. Surprisingly, we uncovered a remarkably strong correlation coefficient of 0.9559892 (p < 0.01), prompting us to contemplate whether Iowan voters have inadvertently been applying their libertarian ideals to their parking brake usage. Our findings provoke a lighthearted yet thought-provoking discussion on the interplay between civic engagement and automotive integrity. It seems that when it comes to freedom and brakes, the choices made in the ballot box may have unintended consequences on the pavement.


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

Please make up the introduction section of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between Votes for the Libertarian Presidential candidate in Iowa and Automotive recalls for issues with the Parking Brake. 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]]
"Brake for Freedom: Investigating the Correlation between Libertarian Votes and Automotive Recalls in Iowa"

[[ABSTRACT]]
This paper presents a correlation analysis of the voting patterns for Libertarian presidential candidates in Iowa and the frequency of automotive recalls related to parking brake issues from 1976 to 2020. Leveraging data from the MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, and the US DOT, our research team sought to shed light on the peculiar connection between political preferences and automotive safety concerns. Surprisingly, we uncovered a remarkably strong correlation coefficient of 0.9559892 (p < 0.01), prompting us to contemplate whether Iowan voters have inadvertently been applying their libertarian ideals to their parking brake usage. Our findings provoke a lighthearted yet thought-provoking discussion on the interplay between civic engagement and automotive integrity. It seems that when it comes to freedom and brakes, the choices made in the ballot box may have unintended consequences on the pavement.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[INTRODUCTION]]



ChatGPT:
[[INTRODUCTION]]

The intersection of politics and automotive safety is a realm where one might expect little to no overlap. However, in the realm of research, one must always be prepared for the unexpected correlations and the statistical curiosities that emerge. In this study, we dive into the realm of mixing politics and brake systems, hoping to add a dash of excitement to the otherwise mundane world of correlation analysis.

As researchers, we are often cautioned against jumping to conclusions or making hasty generalizations. Yet, every now and then, a finding emerges that is so unexpectedly amusing that one cannot help but indulge in a bit of statistical merriment. Our exploration of the correlation between votes for the Libertarian presidential candidate in Iowa and automotive recalls due to parking brake issues is one such instance. The seemingly disparate worlds of political ideology and vehicular safety converge in this quirky analysis, inviting us to ponder the potential influence of political beliefs on parking brake functionality.

With the precision of a mathematician and the optimism of a political enthusiast, we embarked on this endeavor, armed with a dataset spanning over four decades of electoral history and automotive malfunction reports. Our aim? To uncover any underlying association between the voting proclivities of Iowan citizens and the reliability of their parking brakes, all while maintaining our sense of scientific decorum, of course.

Through meticulous data analysis and a touch of academic whimsy, we set out to discern whether a trend might be lurking within the seemingly unrelated variables of libertarian leanings and parking brake perils. After all, who would have thought that political inclinations could potentially influence the practical functionality of an automotive safety feature? The interplay of variables in this investigation adds a twist of amusement to the often stolid domain of empirical inquiry.

As we venture into the realm of statistical analysis and political musings, we invite our readers to join us in this journey of discovery – where the line between civic engagement and mechanical reliability becomes delightfully blurred. For in the world of research, as in life, it is often the unanticipated correlations that spark the most joyous intellectual conversations.


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

Please make up a literature review section of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between Votes for the Libertarian Presidential candidate in Iowa and Automotive recalls for issues with the Parking Brake. Make lots of jokes, goofy observations, and puns.

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

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

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

Here is the title and abstract of the paper:
[[TITLE]]
"Brake for Freedom: Investigating the Correlation between Libertarian Votes and Automotive Recalls in Iowa"

[[ABSTRACT]]
This paper presents a correlation analysis of the voting patterns for Libertarian presidential candidates in Iowa and the frequency of automotive recalls related to parking brake issues from 1976 to 2020. Leveraging data from the MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, and the US DOT, our research team sought to shed light on the peculiar connection between political preferences and automotive safety concerns. Surprisingly, we uncovered a remarkably strong correlation coefficient of 0.9559892 (p < 0.01), prompting us to contemplate whether Iowan voters have inadvertently been applying their libertarian ideals to their parking brake usage. Our findings provoke a lighthearted yet thought-provoking discussion on the interplay between civic engagement and automotive integrity. It seems that when it comes to freedom and brakes, the choices made in the ballot box may have unintended consequences on the pavement.

-------

And here is the introduction section that led to this literature review:
[[INTRODUCTION]]
The intersection of politics and automotive safety is a realm where one might expect little to no overlap. However, in the realm of research, one must always be prepared for the unexpected correlations and the statistical curiosities that emerge. In this study, we dive into the realm of mixing politics and brake systems, hoping to add a dash of excitement to the otherwise mundane world of correlation analysis.
As researchers, we are often cautioned against jumping to conclusions or making hasty generalizations. Yet, every now and then, a finding emerges that is so unexpectedly amusing that one cannot help but indulge in a bit of statistical merriment. Our exploration of the correlation between votes for the Libertarian presidential candidate in Iowa and automotive recalls due to parking brake issues is one such instance. The seemingly disparate worlds of political ideology and vehicular safety converge in this quirky analysis, inviting us to ponder the potential influence of political beliefs on parking brake functionality.
With the precision of a mathematician and the optimism of a political enthusiast, we embarked on this endeavor, armed with a dataset spanning over four decades of electoral history and automotive malfunction reports. Our aim? To uncover any underlying association between the voting proclivities of Iowan citizens and the reliability of their parking brakes, all while maintaining our sense of scientific decorum, of course.
Through meticulous data analysis and a touch of academic whimsy, we set out to discern whether a trend might be lurking within the seemingly unrelated variables of libertarian leanings and parking brake perils. After all, who would have thought that political inclinations could potentially influence the practical functionality of an automotive safety feature? The interplay of variables in this investigation adds a twist of amusement to the often stolid domain of empirical inquiry.
As we venture into the realm of statistical analysis and political musings, we invite our readers to join us in this journey of discovery – where the line between civic engagement and mechanical reliability becomes delightfully blurred. For in the world of research, as in life, it is often the unanticipated correlations that spark the most joyous intellectual conversations.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[LITERATURE REVIEW]]



ChatGPT:
[[LITERATURE REVIEW]]

In "Smith et al.," the authors find an unexpected association between political preferences and automotive safety, sparking our interest in the peculiar correlation between votes for the Libertarian presidential candidate in Iowa and the frequency of automotive recalls pertaining to the parking brake.

Doe's comprehensive analysis delves into the impact of political ideologies on consumer behavior and product choices, offering a tantalizing glimpse into the potential influence of libertarian leanings on the automotive industry.

Jones' study explores the intricate relationship between civic engagement and societal norms, prompting us to consider the unexplored territory where political ideals intersect with the practicalities of vehicular functionality.

However, as we traverse the realm of academic literature, we find ourselves drawn to the less orthodox sources of insight. In "Drive to Freedom: A Contemporary Analysis of Political Motives in Parking Brake Activations," the authors eloquently muse on the possibility of drivers subconsciously expressing their libertarian inclinations through parking brake incidents.

Venturing into the realm of fiction, "The Brakes of Liberty" by Lorem Ipsum presents a whimsical tale of political intrigue and automotive mishaps, hinting at the enigmatic interplay between democracy and vehicular maintenance.

Moving beyond the conventional sources, we find unexpected inspiration in children's programming such as "The Carefree Car" and "Libby's Libertarian Adventures," where anthropomorphic vehicles navigate the complexities of political landscapes while grappling with parking brake predicaments.

In this light-hearted juxtaposition of academic rigor and unorthodox musings, our exploration of the correlation between libertarian votes and automotive recalls in Iowa takes on a delightfully animated dimension, inviting us to consider the incalculable ways in which civic beliefs may manifest in the realm of vehicular safety.


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

Please make up the methodology section of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between Votes for the Libertarian Presidential candidate in Iowa and Automotive recalls for issues with the Parking Brake. Make lots of jokes, goofy observations, and puns. Sneak in some jokes and clever puns about science, research, statistics, and the variables.

Your research team collected data from all across the internet, but mostly just used information from MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse and US DOT . You used data from 1976 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]]
"Brake for Freedom: Investigating the Correlation between Libertarian Votes and Automotive Recalls in Iowa"

[[ABSTRACT]]
This paper presents a correlation analysis of the voting patterns for Libertarian presidential candidates in Iowa and the frequency of automotive recalls related to parking brake issues from 1976 to 2020. Leveraging data from the MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, and the US DOT, our research team sought to shed light on the peculiar connection between political preferences and automotive safety concerns. Surprisingly, we uncovered a remarkably strong correlation coefficient of 0.9559892 (p < 0.01), prompting us to contemplate whether Iowan voters have inadvertently been applying their libertarian ideals to their parking brake usage. Our findings provoke a lighthearted yet thought-provoking discussion on the interplay between civic engagement and automotive integrity. It seems that when it comes to freedom and brakes, the choices made in the ballot box may have unintended consequences on the pavement.

[[INTRODUCTION]]
The intersection of politics and automotive safety is a realm where one might expect little to no overlap. However, in the realm of research, one must always be prepared for the unexpected correlations and the statistical curiosities that emerge. In this study, we dive into the realm of mixing politics and brake systems, hoping to add a dash of excitement to the otherwise mundane world of correlation analysis.
As researchers, we are often cautioned against jumping to conclusions or making hasty generalizations. Yet, every now and then, a finding emerges that is so unexpectedly amusing that one cannot help but indulge in a bit of statistical merriment. Our exploration of the correlation between votes for the Libertarian presidential candidate in Iowa and automotive recalls due to parking brake issues is one such instance. The seemingly disparate worlds of political ideology and vehicular safety converge in this quirky analysis, inviting us to ponder the potential influence of political beliefs on parking brake functionality.
With the precision of a mathematician and the optimism of a political enthusiast, we embarked on this endeavor, armed with a dataset spanning over four decades of electoral history and automotive malfunction reports. Our aim? To uncover any underlying association between the voting proclivities of Iowan citizens and the reliability of their parking brakes, all while maintaining our sense of scientific decorum, of course.
Through meticulous data analysis and a touch of academic whimsy, we set out to discern whether a trend might be lurking within the seemingly unrelated variables of libertarian leanings and parking brake perils. After all, who would have thought that political inclinations could potentially influence the practical functionality of an automotive safety feature? The interplay of variables in this investigation adds a twist of amusement to the often stolid domain of empirical inquiry.
As we venture into the realm of statistical analysis and political musings, we invite our readers to join us in this journey of discovery – where the line between civic engagement and mechanical reliability becomes delightfully blurred. For in the world of research, as in life, it is often the unanticipated correlations that spark the most joyous intellectual conversations.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[METHODOLOGY]]



ChatGPT:

[[METHODOLOGY]]

Sample Selection:

The population of interest in this study consisted of all presidential elections in Iowa from 1976 to 2020. As there is a paucity of literature on the connection between political leanings and automotive safety, independence and the absence of potential confounding variables were established as primary criteria for the inclusion of a presidential election. The selection of data was based on the MIT Election Data and Science Lab and the Harvard Dataverse, which provided comprehensive records of voting outcomes. Additionally, automotive recall data pertaining specifically to parking brake issues in Iowa during the same time frame was sourced from the US Department of Transportation.

Data Analysis:

To investigate the association between Libertarian votes and automotive recalls, a correlation analysis was performed. Specifically, the correlation coefficient was calculated to assess the strength and direction of the relationship between these seemingly incongruous variables. Additionally, visual representations such as scatterplots and trend lines were utilized to illustrate the potential patterns in the data and to add a dash of flair to the otherwise staid realm of statistical analysis. The correlation analysis allowed for an appraisal of the degree to which libertarian voting preferences were coincident with automotive recalls related to parking brake malfunctions.

Regression Analysis:

To delve deeper into the potential causal relationship between libertarian votes and automotive recalls, a regression analysis was conducted. The aim was to ascertain whether the direction and magnitude of the relationship between the two variables could be discerned. Ordinary least squares regression models were employed to estimate the impact of libertarian voting on the occurrence of automotive recalls, while controlling for potential confounding factors such as political climate, demographic shifts, and vehicular trends. The use of regression analysis added a touch of complexity to the inquiry, reminiscent of the intricate dance between political ideologies and mechanical quirks.

Statistical Packages:

All analyses were conducted using the R statistical software, laced with the wit and charm of virtually crafted codes and scripts. The R platform provided the necessary tools to carry out the statistical computations with eloquent precision, allowing for a seamless fusion of data manipulation and scientific whimsy.

Limitations:

It is crucial to acknowledge the limitations of this correlational study. Despite the meticulous data collection and analyses, causality cannot be inferred from the observed associations, much to the chagrin of those eager for definitive answers about the interplay between political ideologies and automotive mechanics. Moreover, the potential influence of unmeasured variables, such as societal attitudes towards vehicle maintenance and the idiosyncrasies of political discourse, cannot be discounted. Nevertheless, the findings offer a delightful glimpse into the unforeseen intersections of civic behavior and vehicular intricacies, sparking a lively discourse on the unexpected twists of statistical inquiry.


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

Please make up the results section of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between Votes for the Libertarian Presidential candidate in Iowa and Automotive recalls for issues with the Parking Brake. Make lots of jokes, goofy observations, and puns. Sneak in some jokes and clever puns about science, research, statistics, and the variables.

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

For the time period 1976 to 2020, you found a correlation 0.9559892, r-squared of 0.9139154, 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]]
"Brake for Freedom: Investigating the Correlation between Libertarian Votes and Automotive Recalls in Iowa"

[[ABSTRACT]]
This paper presents a correlation analysis of the voting patterns for Libertarian presidential candidates in Iowa and the frequency of automotive recalls related to parking brake issues from 1976 to 2020. Leveraging data from the MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, and the US DOT, our research team sought to shed light on the peculiar connection between political preferences and automotive safety concerns. Surprisingly, we uncovered a remarkably strong correlation coefficient of 0.9559892 (p < 0.01), prompting us to contemplate whether Iowan voters have inadvertently been applying their libertarian ideals to their parking brake usage. Our findings provoke a lighthearted yet thought-provoking discussion on the interplay between civic engagement and automotive integrity. It seems that when it comes to freedom and brakes, the choices made in the ballot box may have unintended consequences on the pavement.

-------

And here is the methodology section that led to this result:
[[METHODOLOGY]]
The intersection of politics and automotive safety is a realm where one might expect little to no overlap. However, in the realm of research, one must always be prepared for the unexpected correlations and the statistical curiosities that emerge. In this study, we dive into the realm of mixing politics and brake systems, hoping to add a dash of excitement to the otherwise mundane world of correlation analysis.
As researchers, we are often cautioned against jumping to conclusions or making hasty generalizations. Yet, every now and then, a finding emerges that is so unexpectedly amusing that one cannot help but indulge in a bit of statistical merriment. Our exploration of the correlation between votes for the Libertarian presidential candidate in Iowa and automotive recalls due to parking brake issues is one such instance. The seemingly disparate worlds of political ideology and vehicular safety converge in this quirky analysis, inviting us to ponder the potential influence of political beliefs on parking brake functionality.
With the precision of a mathematician and the optimism of a political enthusiast, we embarked on this endeavor, armed with a dataset spanning over four decades of electoral history and automotive malfunction reports. Our aim? To uncover any underlying association between the voting proclivities of Iowan citizens and the reliability of their parking brakes, all while maintaining our sense of scientific decorum, of course.
Through meticulous data analysis and a touch of academic whimsy, we set out to discern whether a trend might be lurking within the seemingly unrelated variables of libertarian leanings and parking brake perils. After all, who would have thought that political inclinations could potentially influence the practical functionality of an automotive safety feature? The interplay of variables in this investigation adds a twist of amusement to the often stolid domain of empirical inquiry.
As we venture into the realm of statistical analysis and political musings, we invite our readers to join us in this journey of discovery – where the line between civic engagement and mechanical reliability becomes delightfully blurred. For in the world of research, as in life, it is often the unanticipated correlations that spark the most joyous intellectual conversations.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[RESULTS]]



ChatGPT:

[[RESULTS]]

The results of our correlation analysis between libertarian votes for the presidential candidate in Iowa and automotive recalls pertaining to parking brake issues elicited amusement, surprise, and a few raised eyebrows. With a calculated correlation coefficient of 0.9559892 and an r-squared of 0.9139154, we found a remarkably strong statistical relationship, prompting an involuntary chuckle from our team. The p-value of less than 0.01 added a dash of confidence to our mirthful analysis, leaving us with the delightful quandary of whether to apply handbrakes or handshakes to our fellow researchers.

The figure (Fig. 1) showcases the scatterplot graph, undeniably demonstrating a compelling linear relationship between the two variables. It's not every day that one gets to witness the unexpected affinity between political leanings and automotive safety features in such a visually appealing manner. It seems statistical analysis can be as enthralling as a well-timed punchline.

Our findings prompt us to ponder whether the fervor for libertarian ideals has inadvertently spilled over into the parking brake application habits of Iowan citizens. Could it be possible that an eagerness for political freedom has translated into an equally fervent zest for liberating one's vehicle from the clutches of gravity? The mind boggles at the whimsical possibilities that arise from this correlation – a real testament to the captivating nature of empirical inquiry.

As we toe the line between scholarly sobriety and exuberant speculation, our results call for a moment of whimsy amidst the gravitas of academic discourse. It appears that when it comes to statistical correlations, one must always be prepared for the unexpected – and perhaps even the delightfully ludicrous.


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

Please make up the discussion section of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between Votes for the Libertarian Presidential candidate in Iowa and Automotive recalls for issues with the Parking Brake. 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]]
"Brake for Freedom: Investigating the Correlation between Libertarian Votes and Automotive Recalls in Iowa"

[[ABSTRACT]]
This paper presents a correlation analysis of the voting patterns for Libertarian presidential candidates in Iowa and the frequency of automotive recalls related to parking brake issues from 1976 to 2020. Leveraging data from the MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, and the US DOT, our research team sought to shed light on the peculiar connection between political preferences and automotive safety concerns. Surprisingly, we uncovered a remarkably strong correlation coefficient of 0.9559892 (p < 0.01), prompting us to contemplate whether Iowan voters have inadvertently been applying their libertarian ideals to their parking brake usage. Our findings provoke a lighthearted yet thought-provoking discussion on the interplay between civic engagement and automotive integrity. It seems that when it comes to freedom and brakes, the choices made in the ballot box may have unintended consequences on the pavement.

[[LITERATURE REVIEW]]
In "Smith et al.," the authors find an unexpected association between political preferences and automotive safety, sparking our interest in the peculiar correlation between votes for the Libertarian presidential candidate in Iowa and the frequency of automotive recalls pertaining to the parking brake.
Doe's comprehensive analysis delves into the impact of political ideologies on consumer behavior and product choices, offering a tantalizing glimpse into the potential influence of libertarian leanings on the automotive industry.
Jones' study explores the intricate relationship between civic engagement and societal norms, prompting us to consider the unexplored territory where political ideals intersect with the practicalities of vehicular functionality.
However, as we traverse the realm of academic literature, we find ourselves drawn to the less orthodox sources of insight. In "Drive to Freedom: A Contemporary Analysis of Political Motives in Parking Brake Activations," the authors eloquently muse on the possibility of drivers subconsciously expressing their libertarian inclinations through parking brake incidents.
Venturing into the realm of fiction, "The Brakes of Liberty" by Lorem Ipsum presents a whimsical tale of political intrigue and automotive mishaps, hinting at the enigmatic interplay between democracy and vehicular maintenance.
Moving beyond the conventional sources, we find unexpected inspiration in children's programming such as "The Carefree Car" and "Libby's Libertarian Adventures," where anthropomorphic vehicles navigate the complexities of political landscapes while grappling with parking brake predicaments.
In this light-hearted juxtaposition of academic rigor and unorthodox musings, our exploration of the correlation between libertarian votes and automotive recalls in Iowa takes on a delightfully animated dimension, inviting us to consider the incalculable ways in which civic beliefs may manifest in the realm of vehicular safety.

[[RESULTS]]
The results of our correlation analysis between libertarian votes for the presidential candidate in Iowa and automotive recalls pertaining to parking brake issues elicited amusement, surprise, and a few raised eyebrows. With a calculated correlation coefficient of 0.9559892 and an r-squared of 0.9139154, we found a remarkably strong statistical relationship, prompting an involuntary chuckle from our team. The p-value of less than 0.01 added a dash of confidence to our mirthful analysis, leaving us with the delightful quandary of whether to apply handbrakes or handshakes to our fellow researchers.
The figure (Fig. 1) showcases the scatterplot graph, undeniably demonstrating a compelling linear relationship between the two variables. It's not every day that one gets to witness the unexpected affinity between political leanings and automotive safety features in such a visually appealing manner. It seems statistical analysis can be as enthralling as a well-timed punchline.
Our findings prompt us to ponder whether the fervor for libertarian ideals has inadvertently spilled over into the parking brake application habits of Iowan citizens. Could it be possible that an eagerness for political freedom has translated into an equally fervent zest for liberating one's vehicle from the clutches of gravity? The mind boggles at the whimsical possibilities that arise from this correlation – a real testament to the captivating nature of empirical inquiry.
As we toe the line between scholarly sobriety and exuberant speculation, our results call for a moment of whimsy amidst the gravitas of academic discourse. It appears that when it comes to statistical correlations, one must always be prepared for the unexpected – and perhaps even the delightfully ludicrous.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[DISCUSSION]]



ChatGPT:

[[DISCUSSION]]

The results of our correlation analysis have led us down a delightfully unexpected rabbit hole of pondering the correlation between libertarian votes for the presidential candidate in Iowa and automotive recalls related to parking brake issues. As we reflect on the supporting evidence from the literature, particularly the whimsical musings of "Drive to Freedom: A Contemporary Analysis of Political Motives in Parking Brake Activations," and the enigmatic interplay between democracy and vehicular maintenance presented in "The Brakes of Liberty," it becomes evident that our findings add a dash of statistical rigor to the lighthearted yet thought-provoking discussions prevalent in these unconventional sources.

The remarkably strong correlation coefficient of 0.9559892, supported by the previous research highlighting the impact of political ideologies on consumer behavior, implies a connection between civic beliefs and vehicular safety that cannot be brushed aside as mere statistical noise. The validation of the well-documented libertarian inclinations and their potential manifestation in the realm of vehicular safety has invoked a few chuckles in the corridors of our research institution, prompting us to ponder whether the ballot box choices have indeed initiated unintended consequences on the pavement.

As we attempt to reconcile the statistical rigor of our findings with the waggish implications, we find ourselves grappling with the possibility that the fervor for political freedom may have unintended ripple effects, potentially translating into an eagerness for liberating vehicles from the clutches of gravity. The mind boggles at the whimsical possibilities that arise from this correlation, unveiling a testament to the captivating nature of empirical inquiry.

While the unexpected affinity between political leanings and automotive safety features may appear comical on the surface, it is important for the academic community to approach these findings with a mix of scholarly sobriety and exuberant speculation. This correlation, far from being a mere statistical oddity, delves into the unexplored territory where political ideals intersect with the practicalities of vehicular functionality.

In conclusion, it seems our analysis of the correlation between votes for the Libertarian presidential candidate in Iowa and automotive recalls for issues with the parking brake has certainly given us more than just statistical insights. It has led us to contemplate the unexpected, to chuckle at the whimsy of statistical correlations, and to contemplate the incalculable ways in which civic beliefs may manifest in the realm of vehicular safety. Truly, the realm of research has a way of transmuting the mundane into the mirthful.


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

Please make up a short conclusion of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between Votes for the Libertarian Presidential candidate in Iowa and Automotive recalls for issues with the Parking Brake. 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]]
"Brake for Freedom: Investigating the Correlation between Libertarian Votes and Automotive Recalls in Iowa"

[[ABSTRACT]]
This paper presents a correlation analysis of the voting patterns for Libertarian presidential candidates in Iowa and the frequency of automotive recalls related to parking brake issues from 1976 to 2020. Leveraging data from the MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, and the US DOT, our research team sought to shed light on the peculiar connection between political preferences and automotive safety concerns. Surprisingly, we uncovered a remarkably strong correlation coefficient of 0.9559892 (p < 0.01), prompting us to contemplate whether Iowan voters have inadvertently been applying their libertarian ideals to their parking brake usage. Our findings provoke a lighthearted yet thought-provoking discussion on the interplay between civic engagement and automotive integrity. It seems that when it comes to freedom and brakes, the choices made in the ballot box may have unintended consequences on the pavement.

[[INTRDUCTION]]
The intersection of politics and automotive safety is a realm where one might expect little to no overlap. However, in the realm of research, one must always be prepared for the unexpected correlations and the statistical curiosities that emerge. In this study, we dive into the realm of mixing politics and brake systems, hoping to add a dash of excitement to the otherwise mundane world of correlation analysis.
As researchers, we are often cautioned against jumping to conclusions or making hasty generalizations. Yet, every now and then, a finding emerges that is so unexpectedly amusing that one cannot help but indulge in a bit of statistical merriment. Our exploration of the correlation between votes for the Libertarian presidential candidate in Iowa and automotive recalls due to parking brake issues is one such instance. The seemingly disparate worlds of political ideology and vehicular safety converge in this quirky analysis, inviting us to ponder the potential influence of political beliefs on parking brake functionality.
With the precision of a mathematician and the optimism of a political enthusiast, we embarked on this endeavor, armed with a dataset spanning over four decades of electoral history and automotive malfunction reports. Our aim? To uncover any underlying association between the voting proclivities of Iowan citizens and the reliability of their parking brakes, all while maintaining our sense of scientific decorum, of course.
Through meticulous data analysis and a touch of academic whimsy, we set out to discern whether a trend might be lurking within the seemingly unrelated variables of libertarian leanings and parking brake perils. After all, who would have thought that political inclinations could potentially influence the practical functionality of an automotive safety feature? The interplay of variables in this investigation adds a twist of amusement to the often stolid domain of empirical inquiry.
As we venture into the realm of statistical analysis and political musings, we invite our readers to join us in this journey of discovery – where the line between civic engagement and mechanical reliability becomes delightfully blurred. For in the world of research, as in life, it is often the unanticipated correlations that spark the most joyous intellectual conversations.

[[RESULTS]]
The results of our correlation analysis between libertarian votes for the presidential candidate in Iowa and automotive recalls pertaining to parking brake issues elicited amusement, surprise, and a few raised eyebrows. With a calculated correlation coefficient of 0.9559892 and an r-squared of 0.9139154, we found a remarkably strong statistical relationship, prompting an involuntary chuckle from our team. The p-value of less than 0.01 added a dash of confidence to our mirthful analysis, leaving us with the delightful quandary of whether to apply handbrakes or handshakes to our fellow researchers.
The figure (Fig. 1) showcases the scatterplot graph, undeniably demonstrating a compelling linear relationship between the two variables. It's not every day that one gets to witness the unexpected affinity between political leanings and automotive safety features in such a visually appealing manner. It seems statistical analysis can be as enthralling as a well-timed punchline.
Our findings prompt us to ponder whether the fervor for libertarian ideals has inadvertently spilled over into the parking brake application habits of Iowan citizens. Could it be possible that an eagerness for political freedom has translated into an equally fervent zest for liberating one's vehicle from the clutches of gravity? The mind boggles at the whimsical possibilities that arise from this correlation – a real testament to the captivating nature of empirical inquiry.
As we toe the line between scholarly sobriety and exuberant speculation, our results call for a moment of whimsy amidst the gravitas of academic discourse. It appears that when it comes to statistical correlations, one must always be prepared for the unexpected – and perhaps even the delightfully ludicrous.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[CONCLUSION]]



ChatGPT:

[[CONCLUSION]]

In conclusion, our investigation into the relationship between votes for the Libertarian presidential candidate in Iowa and automotive recalls related to parking brake issues has brought to light a correlation so strong it's practically doing donuts in the parking lot of statistical significance. With a correlation coefficient of 0.9559892, we find ourselves pondering whether Iowan voters are inadvertently engaging in a vehicular demonstration of their libertarian propensities.

Our findings raise the question: are libertarians more likely to engage in laissez-faire parking brake practices, or is there a political revolt manifesting itself in the brake control mechanisms of Iowa's automobiles? It seems that while some strive for individual freedom, others may inadvertently be granting it to their vehicles as well.

As we put the brakes on this research, we humorously posit that further inquiries into this peculiar correlation may ultimately leave us spinning our wheels, rather than moving forward. Therefore, we assert that no further research is needed in this area, as the statistical merriment derived from this lighthearted exploration is simply too good to brake.


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 Brake for Freedom: Investigating the Correlation between Libertarian Votes and Automotive Recalls in Iowa. Respond only with the name of a fictional academic journal.

ChatGPT:

The Journal of Unconventional Political-Societal Dynamics


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 Brake for Freedom: Investigating the Correlation between Libertarian Votes and Automotive Recalls in Iowa. Respond only with the name of a fictional organization.

ChatGPT:

The Society for Ethical Studies of Political Transportation


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 Brake for Freedom: Investigating the Correlation between Libertarian Votes and Automotive Recalls in Iowa with an abstract of This paper presents a correlation analysis of the voting patterns for Libertarian presidential candidates in Iowa and the frequency of automotive recalls related to parking brake issues from 1976 to 2020. Leveraging data from the MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, and the US DOT, our research team sought to shed light on the peculiar connection between political preferences and automotive safety concerns. Surprisingly, we uncovered a remarkably strong correlation coefficient of 0.9559892 (p < 0.01), prompting us to contemplate whether Iowan voters have inadvertently been applying their libertarian ideals to their parking brake usage. Our findings provoke a lighthearted yet thought-provoking discussion on the interplay between civic engagement and automotive integrity. It seems that when it comes to freedom and brakes, the choices made in the ballot box may have unintended consequences on the pavement.

ChatGPT:

libertarian votes, libertarian presidential candidates, Iowa voting patterns, automotive recalls, parking brake issues, correlation analysis, MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, US DOT, political preferences, automotive safety concerns

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

Automotive recalls for issues with the Parking Brake
Source: US DOT
See what else correlates with Automotive recalls for issues with the Parking Brake

Correlation r = 0.9559892 (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 = 0.9139154 (Coefficient of determination)
This means 91.4% of the change in the one variable (i.e., Automotive recalls for issues with the Parking Brake) is predictable based on the change in the other (i.e., Votes for the Libertarian Presidential candidate in Iowa) over the 11 years from 1976 through 2020.

p < 0.01, which is statistically significant(Null hypothesis significance test)
The p-value is 4.3E-6. 0.0000043234896358806180000000
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 0.96 in 0.00043% of random cases. Said differently, if you correlated 231,295 random variables You don't actually need 231 thousand variables to find a correlation like this one. I don't have that many variables in my database. You can also correlate variables that are not independent. I do this a lot.

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

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

Just to be clear: I'm being completely transparent about the calculations. There is no math trickery. This is just how statistics shakes out when you calculate hundreds of millions of random correlations.
with the same 10 degrees of freedom, Degrees of freedom is a measure of how many free components we are testing. In this case it is 10 because we have two variables measured over a period of 11 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.

[ 0.83, 0.99 ] 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.
19761980198819921996200020042008201220162020
Votes for the Libertarian Presidential candidate in Iowa (Total votes)145413123249410762315320929924590129265918619637
Automotive recalls for issues with the Parking Brake (Recalls)2521666872810




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([1454,13123,2494,1076,2315,3209,2992,4590,12926,59186,19637,])
array_2 = np.array([2,5,2,1,6,6,6,8,7,28,10,])
array_1_name = "Votes for the Libertarian Presidential candidate in Iowa"
array_2_name = "Automotive recalls for issues with the Parking Brake"

# 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?

Bravo! Your evaluation rocks!


Correlation ID: 5443 · Black Variable ID: 25978 · Red Variable ID: 1113
about · subscribe · emailme@tylervigen.com · twitter

CC BY 4.0