Spurious correlation #5,780 · 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 Libertarian Senators in Nevada and the second variable is Automotive recalls issued by Porsche. The chart goes from 1976 to 2018, and the two variables track closely in value over that time.

A linear line chart with years as the X-axis and two variables on the Y-axis. The first variable is Votes for Libertarian Senators in Nevada and the second variable is Automotive recalls issued by Porsche. The chart goes from 1976 to 2018, and the two variables track closely in value over that time.

Download png, svg

AI explanation

As more Libertarian senators were elected, their push for minimal government intervention extended to the automotive industry. This led to a decrease in regulations for Porsche, ultimately resulting in more frequent quality control oversights and a spike in recalls. It just goes to show, sometimes less oversight can really drive home a point.

^{Show image generation prompt} Model: dalle-3
Prompt: Generate an image of a scene in a bustling Nevada voting booth, with people casting their ballots for Libertarian senators. Capture the excitement and energy of the voting process, with a muted color palette and a dotted halftone pattern to evoke a 1960s comic-book style. Meanwhile, depict a sleek Porsche dealership with a line of cars being recalled due to quality control oversights. Show mechanics scrambling to address the issue. Juxtapose the voting scene with the recalls to highlight the impact of minimal government intervention on the automotive industry. Ensure the visual depiction is simple and does not include any words or speech bubbles. 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 Libertarian Senators in Nevada and Automotive recalls issued by Porsche. 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: Glitch art A comic-book-style illustration with muted colors and a dotted halftone pattern from the 1960s Scalar art Parallax art An image that looks like it is a scene from A Disney Movie
ChatGPT: A comic-book-style illustration with muted colors and a dotted halftone pattern from the 1960s

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 Libertarian Senators in Nevada and Automotive recalls issued by Porsche, in the following situation: As more Libertarian senators were elected, their push for minimal government intervention extended to the automotive industry. This led to a decrease in regulations for Porsche, ultimately resulting in more frequent quality control oversights and a spike in recalls. It just goes to show, sometimes less oversight can really drive home a point.. Keep the description simple.
ChatGPT: In a bustling Nevada voting booth, people are casting their ballots for Libertarian senators. Meanwhile, at a sleek Porsche dealership, a line of cars is being recalled due to quality control oversights, with mechanics scrambling to address the issue. The juxtaposition of the voting and the recalls highlights the impact of minimal government intervention on the automotive industry.

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 comic-book-style illustration with muted colors and a dotted halftone pattern from the 1960s ] and depicting this scene: In a bustling Nevada voting booth, people are casting their ballots for Libertarian senators. Meanwhile, at a sleek Porsche dealership, a line of cars is being recalled due to quality control oversights, with mechanics scrambling to address the issue. The juxtaposition of the voting and the recalls highlights the impact of minimal government intervention on the automotive industry. Keep the visual depiction simple. Do not include any words or speech bubbles.
ChatGPT: Generate an image of a scene in a bustling Nevada voting booth, with people casting their ballots for Libertarian senators. Capture the excitement and energy of the voting process, with a muted color palette and a dotted halftone pattern to evoke a 1960s comic-book style. Meanwhile, depict a sleek Porsche dealership with a line of cars being recalled due to quality control oversights. Show mechanics scrambling to address the issue. Juxtapose the voting scene with the recalls to highlight the impact of minimal government intervention on the automotive industry. Ensure the visual depiction is simple and does not include any words or speech bubbles.

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

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

AI academic paper

(Because p < 0.01)

Driven by Politics: The Correlation between Libertarian Votes in Nevada and Automotive Recalls by Porsche

Journal of Quirky Political and Automotive Studies

Jan 2024

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

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

Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You are a 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 Libertarian votes for Senators in Nevada and Automotive recalls issued by Porsche. Make lots of jokes, goofy observations, and puns.

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

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

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

Here is the title and abstract of the paper:
[[TITLE]]
"Driven by Politics: The Correlation between Libertarian Votes in Nevada and Automotive Recalls by Porsche"

[[ABSTRACT]]
This study delves into the seemingly incongruous connection between the voting behavior of Nevada residents in support of Libertarian candidates for Senate positions and the frequency of automotive recalls issued by the prestigious manufacturer, Porsche. By harnessing data from the MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, and the US Department of Transportation, our research team uncovered a perplexing correlation coefficient of 0.8765091 and p < 0.01 for the years spanning from 1976 to 2018. The statistical analysis presented in this paper highlights unusual patterns in the dynamics between political preferences and luxury automotive safety concerns. So, buckle up as we navigate through the unexpected intersection of politics and Porsches!

-------

And here is the introduction section that led to this literature review:
[[INTRODUCTION]]
The correlation between political leanings and automotive quality is a road less traveled in the realm of research. Nonetheless, our investigation zooms in on this uncharted territory to shed light on the curious relationship between Libertarian votes for Senators in Nevada and automotive recalls issued by Porsche. One might say we are veering into unorthodox territory, but strap in, because the findings are guaranteed to rev up your interest.
The backdrop of this study involves the fierce battleground of Nevada politics, where Libertarian candidates vie for Senate positions amidst the desert dust. Meanwhile, on the other end of the spectrum, the prestigious manufacturer, Porsche, operates within the high-speed lanes of luxury automotive engineering. Here, these seemingly disparate domains converge in a statistical collision of ideologies and engineering prowess, posing a conundrum that fuels our academic curiosity.
As academics navigating through the maze of data and statistical analyses, we cannot help but appreciate the irony of “driving” statistical findings from the realm of automotive safety and political expression. Much like Porsche’s sports cars, statistical correlation coefficients and p-values serve as our trusty steeds as we navigate the twists and turns of our research journey.
In this paper, we unveil the unexpected intersection of political preferences and luxury automotive safety concerns, showcasing the peculiar dance between Libertarian voting patterns and Porsche’s recalls. Together, let's embark on this intellectual joyride through the peculiar lanes of data analysis and the highways of humorous correlations.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[LITERATURE REVIEW]]

ChatGPT:
[[LITERATURE REVIEW]]

The connection between Libertarian votes in Nevada and automotive recalls issued by Porsche has captured the attention of scholars and researchers alike, spawning a diverse array of studies that have attempted to unpack this perplexing correlation. Smith (2015) elucidates the complex political landscape of Nevada, shedding light on the historical trends of Libertarian support in Senate elections. In a similar vein, Doe (2017) delves into the intricacies of automotive recalls, highlighting the economic and safety implications for luxury car manufacturers. Jones (2019) examines the intersection of political ideology and consumer behavior, offering insights into how political leanings may influence product perceptions.

Turning the pages from this serious scholarship to more light-hearted musings, "Drive: The Surprising Truth about What Motivates Us" by Daniel H. Pink uncovers the psychological underpinnings of motivation and human behavior, offering a fresh perspective on the drivers of political choices and consumer preferences. On a fictional note, the classic "The Great Gatsby" by F. Scott Fitzgerald provides a lens into the opulent world of luxury and excess, drawing parallels to the allure of Porsche’s automotive craftsmanship.

Venturing further into unexpected sources of inspiration, a review of cartoons and children's shows reveals intriguing insights into the dynamics of power and freedom, with beloved characters like Speed Racer and Lightning McQueen embodying themes of individualism and speed – qualities that resonate with both political ideologies and automotive engineering.

It is within this eclectic fabric of literature and cultural references that our inquiry into the curious correlation between Libertarian votes in Nevada and Porsche recalls finds both depth and levity, as we navigate the uncharted terrain of academia with a playful spirit and a dash of humor.

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 Libertarian votes for Senators in Nevada and Automotive recalls issued by Porsche. 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 2018

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]]
"Driven by Politics: The Correlation between Libertarian Votes in Nevada and Automotive Recalls by Porsche"

[[ABSTRACT]]
This study delves into the seemingly incongruous connection between the voting behavior of Nevada residents in support of Libertarian candidates for Senate positions and the frequency of automotive recalls issued by the prestigious manufacturer, Porsche. By harnessing data from the MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, and the US Department of Transportation, our research team uncovered a perplexing correlation coefficient of 0.8765091 and p < 0.01 for the years spanning from 1976 to 2018. The statistical analysis presented in this paper highlights unusual patterns in the dynamics between political preferences and luxury automotive safety concerns. So, buckle up as we navigate through the unexpected intersection of politics and Porsches!

[[INTRODUCTION]]
The correlation between political leanings and automotive quality is a road less traveled in the realm of research. Nonetheless, our investigation zooms in on this uncharted territory to shed light on the curious relationship between Libertarian votes for Senators in Nevada and automotive recalls issued by Porsche. One might say we are veering into unorthodox territory, but strap in, because the findings are guaranteed to rev up your interest.
The backdrop of this study involves the fierce battleground of Nevada politics, where Libertarian candidates vie for Senate positions amidst the desert dust. Meanwhile, on the other end of the spectrum, the prestigious manufacturer, Porsche, operates within the high-speed lanes of luxury automotive engineering. Here, these seemingly disparate domains converge in a statistical collision of ideologies and engineering prowess, posing a conundrum that fuels our academic curiosity.
As academics navigating through the maze of data and statistical analyses, we cannot help but appreciate the irony of “driving” statistical findings from the realm of automotive safety and political expression. Much like Porsche’s sports cars, statistical correlation coefficients and p-values serve as our trusty steeds as we navigate the twists and turns of our research journey.
In this paper, we unveil the unexpected intersection of political preferences and luxury automotive safety concerns, showcasing the peculiar dance between Libertarian voting patterns and Porsche’s recalls. Together, let's embark on this intellectual joyride through the peculiar lanes of data analysis and the highways of humorous correlations.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[METHODOLOGY]]

ChatGPT:

[[METHODOLOGY]]

To unravel the enigmatic correlation between Libertarian votes in Nevada and the issuance of automotive recalls by Porsche, our research team embarked on a data-driven escapade that would make even the most daring statistician buckle their seatbelt. We merged data from the MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, and the US Department of Transportation, creating a roadmap of information spanning from 1976 to 2018. With this treasure trove of data in hand, we navigated through the wild terrain of statistical analysis, employing a mix of bivariate correlation and regression analyses to detangle the unexpected connections between political preferences and automotive safety concerns.

The first pit stop in our methodological adventure involved wrangling and harmonizing the diverse datasets, akin to coaxing an unruly collection of race cars onto a synchronized track. Once the datasets were aligned, we revved up our statistical engines, computing the Pearson correlation coefficient to quantify the degree of association between Libertarian votes for Senators in Nevada and the incidence of automotive recalls by Porsche. With the correlation coefficient in tow, we cruised into the realm of regression analysis, constructing a model that encapsulated the intricate interplay of political factors and automotive safety.

Not content with merely scratching the surface of this uncanny correlation, we unpacked this relationship further by conducting subgroup analyses based on election years, vehicle models, and political landscapes, painting a detailed mosaic of the interwoven variables. Our methodological journey was not without its swerves and detours, as we grappled with the complexities of endogeneity and confounding variables, navigating through the statistical traffic to isolate the essence of the Libertarian-Porsche nexus.

It is important to note that our research methodology, much like a meticulously engineered race car, adhered to rigorous standards of statistical significance and methodological transparency. We treated our data with the precision of a seasoned pit crew, ensuring that each statistical inference and observed correlation was a result of meticulous analysis rather than sheer coincidence.

As we skid through the analysis section ahead, fasten your seatbelts and brace for the intriguing revelations that lay ahead in our study of the unexpected symphony between politics and Porsches.

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 Libertarian votes for Senators in Nevada and Automotive recalls issued by Porsche. 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]]
"Driven by Politics: The Correlation between Libertarian Votes in Nevada and Automotive Recalls by Porsche"

[[ABSTRACT]]
This study delves into the seemingly incongruous connection between the voting behavior of Nevada residents in support of Libertarian candidates for Senate positions and the frequency of automotive recalls issued by the prestigious manufacturer, Porsche. By harnessing data from the MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, and the US Department of Transportation, our research team uncovered a perplexing correlation coefficient of 0.8765091 and p < 0.01 for the years spanning from 1976 to 2018. The statistical analysis presented in this paper highlights unusual patterns in the dynamics between political preferences and luxury automotive safety concerns. So, buckle up as we navigate through the unexpected intersection of politics and Porsches!

[[LITERATURE REVIEW]]
The connection between Libertarian votes in Nevada and automotive recalls issued by Porsche has captured the attention of scholars and researchers alike, spawning a diverse array of studies that have attempted to unpack this perplexing correlation. Smith (2015) elucidates the complex political landscape of Nevada, shedding light on the historical trends of Libertarian support in Senate elections. In a similar vein, Doe (2017) delves into the intricacies of automotive recalls, highlighting the economic and safety implications for luxury car manufacturers. Jones (2019) examines the intersection of political ideology and consumer behavior, offering insights into how political leanings may influence product perceptions.
Turning the pages from this serious scholarship to more light-hearted musings, "Drive: The Surprising Truth about What Motivates Us" by Daniel H. Pink uncovers the psychological underpinnings of motivation and human behavior, offering a fresh perspective on the drivers of political choices and consumer preferences. On a fictional note, the classic "The Great Gatsby" by F. Scott Fitzgerald provides a lens into the opulent world of luxury and excess, drawing parallels to the allure of Porsche’s automotive craftsmanship.
Venturing further into unexpected sources of inspiration, a review of cartoons and children's shows reveals intriguing insights into the dynamics of power and freedom, with beloved characters like Speed Racer and Lightning McQueen embodying themes of individualism and speed – qualities that resonate with both political ideologies and automotive engineering.
It is within this eclectic fabric of literature and cultural references that our inquiry into the curious correlation between Libertarian votes in Nevada and Porsche recalls finds both depth and levity, as we navigate the uncharted terrain of academia with a playful spirit and a dash of humor.

[[RESULTS]]
The statistical analysis revealed a strong positive correlation between Libertarian votes for Senators in Nevada and automotive recalls issued by Porsche for the years spanning from 1976 to 2018. The correlation coefficient of 0.8765091 indicated a robust relationship between these seemingly unrelated variables, suggesting that there may be more than meets the eye in the intersection of politics and Porsches.
Furthermore, the r-squared value of 0.7682683 indicated that approximately 76.83% of the variation in automotive recalls issued by Porsche can be explained by the variation in Libertarian votes for Senators in Nevada. This substantial proportion underscores the unexpected nature of the connection between political preferences and luxury automotive safety concerns.
The p-value of < 0.01 demonstrated that the observed correlation was highly statistically significant, further solidifying the validity of our findings. It appears that the intriguing relationship between Libertarian votes and Porsche recalls cannot be dismissed as mere coincidence.
Fig. 1 showcases the scatterplot graphically representing the pronounced correlation between Libertarian votes for Senators in Nevada and automotive recalls issued by Porsche. The tight clustering of data points in the scatterplot emphasizes the compelling nature of the relationship, inviting further inquiry into the underlying mechanisms at play.
Overall, our findings present a compelling case for the entwined fate of political choices and automotive safety in the realm of Nevada's Libertarian leanings and Porsche's engineering endeavors. These results not only shed light on the unexpected nexus of politics and Porsches but also spark contemplation on the intricate web of connections that permeate our world.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[DISCUSSION]]

ChatGPT:

[[DISCUSSION]]

The results of our study unearth a fascinating correlation between Libertarian votes for Senators in Nevada and the frequency of automotive recalls issued by Porsche. While the connection initially appears as incongruous as mixing oil and water, our findings affirm the existence of a robust relationship between these seemingly disparate variables.

From the scholarly standpoint, our results bolster the prior research that has delved into the complex landscape of political preferences and consumer behavior. Smith's (2015) illumination of historical trends in Libertarian support in Nevada's Senate elections finds resonance in our study, as we observed a substantial correlation that underscores the enduring impact of political leanings on consumption patterns. Indeed, it seems that libertarian attitudes trickle down like motor oil, lubricating the gears of automotive safety concerns.

Beyond the traditional confines of literature, our study draws inspiration from unconventional sources, such as Doe's (2017) exploration of automotive recalls. Our results bring a light-hearted twist to Doe's serious examination, underscoring the playful spirit of academic inquiry as we navigate through the labyrinthine roads of research. Additionally, our findings tease out parallels with Daniel H. Pink's "Drive" and F. Scott Fitzgerald's "The Great Gatsby," illuminating the intersection of political ideology, consumer choices, and the allure of luxury automobiles, which seems to drive the political compass in Nevada.

In the vein of unorthodox inspiration, our study resonates with the musings of cartoon characters Speed Racer and Lightning McQueen, for they embody the qualities of individualism and speed – qualities that reverberate with both political ideology and automotive craftsmanship. Thus, the unexpected convergence of political and automotive realms is not merely a product of empirical observation but a whimsical excursion into the symbiotic dance between serious scholarship and playful exploration.

Our findings not only confirm the unexpected correlation between Libertarian votes in Nevada and Porsche recalls but also invite a deeper contemplation of the interwoven fabric of political choices and automotive safety concerns. As we navigate this uncharted terrain of academia, steering through statistical twists and turns, our study stands as a testament to the whimsical nature of research – a journey that takes us from the serious rigors of analysis to the playful exuberance of unexpected discoveries.

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 Libertarian votes for Senators in Nevada and Automotive recalls issued by Porsche. 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]]
"Driven by Politics: The Correlation between Libertarian Votes in Nevada and Automotive Recalls by Porsche"

[[ABSTRACT]]
This study delves into the seemingly incongruous connection between the voting behavior of Nevada residents in support of Libertarian candidates for Senate positions and the frequency of automotive recalls issued by the prestigious manufacturer, Porsche. By harnessing data from the MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, and the US Department of Transportation, our research team uncovered a perplexing correlation coefficient of 0.8765091 and p < 0.01 for the years spanning from 1976 to 2018. The statistical analysis presented in this paper highlights unusual patterns in the dynamics between political preferences and luxury automotive safety concerns. So, buckle up as we navigate through the unexpected intersection of politics and Porsches!

[[INTRDUCTION]]
The correlation between political leanings and automotive quality is a road less traveled in the realm of research. Nonetheless, our investigation zooms in on this uncharted territory to shed light on the curious relationship between Libertarian votes for Senators in Nevada and automotive recalls issued by Porsche. One might say we are veering into unorthodox territory, but strap in, because the findings are guaranteed to rev up your interest.
The backdrop of this study involves the fierce battleground of Nevada politics, where Libertarian candidates vie for Senate positions amidst the desert dust. Meanwhile, on the other end of the spectrum, the prestigious manufacturer, Porsche, operates within the high-speed lanes of luxury automotive engineering. Here, these seemingly disparate domains converge in a statistical collision of ideologies and engineering prowess, posing a conundrum that fuels our academic curiosity.
As academics navigating through the maze of data and statistical analyses, we cannot help but appreciate the irony of “driving” statistical findings from the realm of automotive safety and political expression. Much like Porsche’s sports cars, statistical correlation coefficients and p-values serve as our trusty steeds as we navigate the twists and turns of our research journey.
In this paper, we unveil the unexpected intersection of political preferences and luxury automotive safety concerns, showcasing the peculiar dance between Libertarian voting patterns and Porsche’s recalls. Together, let's embark on this intellectual joyride through the peculiar lanes of data analysis and the highways of humorous correlations.

[[RESULTS]]
The statistical analysis revealed a strong positive correlation between Libertarian votes for Senators in Nevada and automotive recalls issued by Porsche for the years spanning from 1976 to 2018. The correlation coefficient of 0.8765091 indicated a robust relationship between these seemingly unrelated variables, suggesting that there may be more than meets the eye in the intersection of politics and Porsches.
Furthermore, the r-squared value of 0.7682683 indicated that approximately 76.83% of the variation in automotive recalls issued by Porsche can be explained by the variation in Libertarian votes for Senators in Nevada. This substantial proportion underscores the unexpected nature of the connection between political preferences and luxury automotive safety concerns.
The p-value of < 0.01 demonstrated that the observed correlation was highly statistically significant, further solidifying the validity of our findings. It appears that the intriguing relationship between Libertarian votes and Porsche recalls cannot be dismissed as mere coincidence.
Fig. 1 showcases the scatterplot graphically representing the pronounced correlation between Libertarian votes for Senators in Nevada and automotive recalls issued by Porsche. The tight clustering of data points in the scatterplot emphasizes the compelling nature of the relationship, inviting further inquiry into the underlying mechanisms at play.
Overall, our findings present a compelling case for the entwined fate of political choices and automotive safety in the realm of Nevada's Libertarian leanings and Porsche's engineering endeavors. These results not only shed light on the unexpected nexus of politics and Porsches but also spark contemplation on the intricate web of connections that permeate our world.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[CONCLUSION]]

ChatGPT:

[[CONCLUSION]]

In conclusion, our research has navigated through the intriguing intersection of political proclivities and automotive recalls, revealing a correlation that revs up the engine of statistical curiosity. The road we traveled was fraught with the unexpected twists and turns of data analysis, but we emerged victorious with a correlation coefficient that's as strong as a luxury sports car's horsepower. It's safe to say that this correlation is not just a statistical glitch – it's a full-blown "political horsepower" phenomenon!

The r-squared value of 0.7682683 demonstrates that a whopping 76.83% of the variance in Porsche recalls can be attributed to the ebbs and flows of Libertarian votes in Nevada. It's as if the libertarian spirit is fueling a turbocharged engine of automotive recalls! And let's not forget the p-value – it's smaller than the chances of finding a parking spot at a crowded shopping mall on Black Friday, underscoring the undeniable statistical significance of our findings.

Fig. 1 beautifully encapsulates the relationship between politics and Porsches, painting a picture that's as captivating as a sleek sports car on an open road. The tightly clustered data points reinforce the robustness of this correlation, leaving no room for doubt that something truly fascinating is at play here.

As we shift gears toward the finish line, it's clear that no further research is needed in this area. Our study has not only unveiled the unexpected nexus of political preferences and luxury automotive safety concerns but also sparked contemplation on the intricate web of connections that permeate our world. So, let's park this research in the annals of statistical curiosities, knowing that we've taken a joyride through a peculiar lane of scientific inquiry that will be fondly remembered in the archives of academia.

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 Driven by Politics: The Correlation between Libertarian Votes in Nevada and Automotive Recalls by Porsche. Respond only with the name of a fictional academic journal.

ChatGPT:

Journal of Quirky Political and Automotive Studies

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 Driven by Politics: The Correlation between Libertarian Votes in Nevada and Automotive Recalls by Porsche. Respond only with the name of a fictional organization.

ChatGPT:

The Society for Empirical Political Analysis and Automotive Research (SEPAA)

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 Driven by Politics: The Correlation between Libertarian Votes in Nevada and Automotive Recalls by Porsche with an abstract of This study delves into the seemingly incongruous connection between the voting behavior of Nevada residents in support of Libertarian candidates for Senate positions and the frequency of automotive recalls issued by the prestigious manufacturer, Porsche. By harnessing data from the MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, and the US Department of Transportation, our research team uncovered a perplexing correlation coefficient of 0.8765091 and p < 0.01 for the years spanning from 1976 to 2018. The statistical analysis presented in this paper highlights unusual patterns in the dynamics between political preferences and luxury automotive safety concerns. So, buckle up as we navigate through the unexpected intersection of politics and Porsches!

ChatGPT:

Nevada, Libertarian votes, automotive recalls, Porsche, correlation, Senate candidates, voting behavior, MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, US Department of Transportation, statistical analysis, political preferences, luxury automotive safety, correlation coefficient, p-value, 1976-2018, politics and Porsches

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

Automotive recalls issued by Porsche
Detailed data title: Automotive recals issued by Porsche
Source: US DOT
See what else correlates with Automotive recalls issued by Porsche

Correlation r = 0.8765091 (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 = 0.7682683 (Coefficient of determination)
This means 76.8% of the change in the one variable (i.e., Automotive recalls issued by Porsche) is predictable based on the change in the other (i.e., Votes for Libertarian Senators in Nevada) over the 9 years from 1976 through 2018.

p < 0.01, which is statistically significant(Null hypothesis significance test)
The p-value is 0.0019.^Show 0.0019272203465636678000000000
The p-value is a measure of how probable it is that we would randomly find a result this extreme.^Note More specifically the p-value is a measure of how probable it is that we would randomly find a result this extreme if we had only tested one pair of variables one time.

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

Who is going to stop me? p-value reporting doesn't require me to report how many calculations I had to go through in order to find a low p-value!
On average, you will find a correaltion as strong as 0.88 in 0.19% of random cases. Said differently, if you correlated 519 random variables^Note Which I absolutely did.
with the same 8 degrees of freedom, ^Note Degrees of freedom is a measure of how many free components we are testing. In this case it is 8 because we have two variables measured over a period of 9 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.

[ 0.51, 0.97 ] 95% correlation confidence interval (using the Fisher z-transformation)
^{Read more about the confidence interval} The confidence interval is an estimate the range of the value of the correlation coefficient, using the correlation itself as an input. The values are meant to be the low and high end of the correlation coefficient with 95% confidence.

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

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

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

	1976	1986	1992	1994	1998	2000	2004	2006	2018
Votes for Libertarian Senators in Nevada (Total votes)	2307	4899	7222	5964	8129	5395	9559	5269	9196
Automotive recalls issued by Porsche (Recalls)	1	1	4	1	4	1	8	1	8

Why this works

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

Try it yourself

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

    return correlation, r_squared, p_value

# These are the arrays for the variables shown on this page, but you can modify them to be any two sets of numbers
array_1 = np.array([2307,4899,7222,5964,8129,5395,9559,5269,9196,])
array_2 = np.array([1,1,4,1,4,1,8,1,8,])
array_1_name = "Votes for Libertarian Senators in Nevada"
array_2_name = "Automotive recalls issued by Porsche"

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

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

Reuseable content

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

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

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

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

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

Download images for these variables:

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

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

Alternatively you can use a tool like Inkscape.
High resolution line chart, optimized for mobile
Alternative high resolution line chart
Scatterplot
Portable line chart (png)
Portable line chart (png), optimized for mobile
Line chart for only Votes for Libertarian Senators in Nevada
Line chart for only Automotive recalls issued by Porsche
AI-generated correlation image
The spurious research paper: Driven by Politics: The Correlation between Libertarian Votes in Nevada and Automotive Recalls by Porsche

View another random correlation

How fun was this correlation?

I'm grateful for your review!

Correlation ID: 5780 · Black Variable ID: 26276 · Red Variable ID: 1132


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