Download png, svg
AI explanation
As Emma Watson graced the silver screen, her magical performances unknowingly charmed viewers in Michigan. Her on-screen presence sparked a wave of empathy and understanding, drawing people to embrace the values espoused by the Democratic party. Unbeknownst to her, each movie acted as a subtle campaign for democratic principles, swaying the electorate in favor of Democratic senators. As her filmography expanded, so did the support for Democratic candidates, as if her cinematic aura had a bewitching effect on the political landscape of Michigan.Model: dalle-3
Prompt: Prompt: Create an image in the style of a Discovery magazine cover featuring Emma Watson radiating on-screen charisma while her movies play on a theatre screen, with a subtle link to the surge of Democratic votes in Michigan. Capture the captivating atmosphere of her filmography subtly influencing the political tilt without the use of 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: The number of movies Emma Watson appeared in and Democrat votes for Senators in Michigan. 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 Discovery magazine cover image a Polaroid photo Cybernetic art Cute cartoon High-tech
ChatGPT: A Discovery magazine cover image
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 The number of movies Emma Watson appeared in and Democrat votes for Senators in Michigan, in the following situation: As Emma Watson graced the silver screen, her magical performances unknowingly charmed viewers in Michigan. Her on-screen presence sparked a wave of empathy and understanding, drawing people to embrace the values espoused by the Democratic party. Unbeknownst to her, each movie acted as a subtle campaign for democratic principles, swaying the electorate in favor of Democratic senators. As her filmography expanded, so did the support for Democratic candidates, as if her cinematic aura had a bewitching effect on the political landscape of Michigan.. Keep the description simple.
ChatGPT: As Emma Watson's movies lit up the screen, a wave of Democratic votes surged in Michigan. Her on-screen charm seemed to cast a spell, captivating audiences and subtly swaying them to support Democratic senators, creating a mesmerizing link between her filmography and the political tilt of Michigan.
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 Discovery magazine cover image ] and depicting this scene: As Emma Watson's movies lit up the screen, a wave of Democratic votes surged in Michigan. Her on-screen charm seemed to cast a spell, captivating audiences and subtly swaying them to support Democratic senators, creating a mesmerizing link between her filmography and the political tilt of Michigan. Keep the visual depiction simple. Do not include any words or speech bubbles.
ChatGPT: Prompt: Create an image in the style of a Discovery magazine cover featuring Emma Watson radiating on-screen charisma while her movies play on a theatre screen, with a subtle link to the surge of Democratic votes in Michigan. Capture the captivating atmosphere of her filmography subtly influencing the political tilt without the use of 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.
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 increases in The number of movies Emma Watson appeared in positively influenced Democrat votes for Senators in Michigan. Make it feel plausible.
AI academic paper
The Watson Connection: Emma's Movies and Michigan's Senators Journal of Film and Political Science Relations Jan 2024 Reminder: This paper is AI-generated. Not real! |
Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You are a researcher writing an academic paper.You write titles and abstracts of goofy academic research papers.
User prompt:
Pretend you are an academic researcher. Your writing sounds like it belongs in a medical or economics journal. However, you frequently crack jokes, make puns, and add unexpected twists in your writing.
Please draft the title and abstract of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between The number of movies Emma Watson appeared in and Democrat votes for Senators in Michigan. Make it seem dry like academic research paper, but with lots of subtle hidden offhand remarks, jokes, goofy observations, and puns.
Make the title punny if you can come up with clever pun. If not, make it sound serious.
Your research team used data from The Movie DB and MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse to assess this nagging question. You found a correlation coefficient of 0.9134410 and p < 0.05 for 2001 to 2020.
Please respond in this format (replace "Lorem ipsum dolor sit" with your title and abstract)
[[TITLE]]
Lorem ipsum dolor sit
[[ABSTRACT]]
Lorem ipsum dolor sit
ChatGPT:
[[TITLE]]
"The Watson Connection: Emma's Movies and Michigan's Senators"
[[ABSTRACT]]
This paper investigates the possible relationship between the number of movies featuring Emma Watson and the Democrat votes for Senators in Michigan from 2001 to 2020. Utilizing data from The Movie DB and MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, our research team conducted a comprehensive analysis. The findings revealed a substantial correlation coefficient of 0.9134410 with a significance level of p < 0.05, suggesting a noteworthy association. Our study sheds light on the potential influence of cultural markers in the political landscape, emphasizing the importance of considering non-traditional factors in electoral dynamics. While the observed correlation may appear perplexing, the implications of our results urge further examination and contemplation.
Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You are a researcher writing an academic paper.You draft the introduction section of an academic research paper.
User prompt:
Pretend you are an academic researcher. Your writing sounds like it belongs in a medical or economics journal. However, you frequently crack jokes, make puns, or add unexpected twists in your writing.
Please make up the introduction section of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between The number of movies Emma Watson appeared in and Democrat votes for Senators in Michigan. Make it seem dry like academic research paper, but with lots of subtle hidden offhand remarks, jokes, goofy observations, and puns. Sneak in some jokes and clever puns about science, research, statistics, and the variables.
Here is the title and abstract of the paper:
[[TITLE]]
"The Watson Connection: Emma's Movies and Michigan's Senators"
[[ABSTRACT]]
This paper investigates the possible relationship between the number of movies featuring Emma Watson and the Democrat votes for Senators in Michigan from 2001 to 2020. Utilizing data from The Movie DB and MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, our research team conducted a comprehensive analysis. The findings revealed a substantial correlation coefficient of 0.9134410 with a significance level of p < 0.05, suggesting a noteworthy association. Our study sheds light on the potential influence of cultural markers in the political landscape, emphasizing the importance of considering non-traditional factors in electoral dynamics. While the observed correlation may appear perplexing, the implications of our results urge further examination and contemplation.
-------
Your response should start like this:
[[INTRODUCTION]]
ChatGPT:
INTRODUCTION
The world of politics is often described as a carefully choreographed movie, featuring a cast of characters navigating through dramatic plot twists and unexpected turns. However, in this study, we take an unconventional approach by exploring the intersection of the cinematic world and the political realm. Our focus is on the potential link between the number of movies graced by the presence of Emma Watson, and the Democratic votes for Senators in the state of Michigan.
As Dory from "Finding Nemo" famously suggests, "Just keep swimming," and in the spirit of perseverance, our research team embarked on a journey to unravel the mysteries of cultural influences on political preferences. With the aid of datasets from The Movie DB and the meticulous MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, we delved into the realm of statistics and correlation analysis. As we navigated the intricate web of data, a surprisingly robust correlation coefficient emerged, raising eyebrows and inspiring a deeper examination of our findings.
Our odyssey through data analysis led us down some unexpected paths, much like a character in a M. Night Shyamalan film. The statistical evidence amid the glitz and glamour of Hollywood and the intricacies of political campaigns has left us pondering the entangled relationship between culture and the ballot box. While the link between Emma Watson's cinematic endeavors and voting trends may appear as improbable as a Christopher Nolan plot twist, our findings demand contemplation and consideration.
In this paper, we present our methodical analysis and the compelling results that invite the scientific community to engage in thoughtful scrutiny and perhaps a bit of whimsical curiosity. After all, as Albert Einstein once quipped, "The only source of knowledge is experience," and our experience has revealed a captivating tale of correlations that prompts further exploration.
Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You are a researcher writing an academic paper.You draft a literature review section of an academic research paper, that starts out dry for the first few sentences but then becomes hilarious and goofy.
User prompt:
Pretend you are an academic researcher. Your writing sounds like it belongs in a medical or economics journal. However, you frequently crack jokes, make puns, or add unexpected twists in your writing.
Please make up a literature review section of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between The number of movies Emma Watson appeared in and Democrat votes for Senators in Michigan. Make it seem dry like academic research paper, but with lots of subtle hidden offhand remarks, 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 cite some social media posts you read that seem to be related.
Here is the title and abstract of the paper:
[[TITLE]]
"The Watson Connection: Emma's Movies and Michigan's Senators"
[[ABSTRACT]]
This paper investigates the possible relationship between the number of movies featuring Emma Watson and the Democrat votes for Senators in Michigan from 2001 to 2020. Utilizing data from The Movie DB and MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, our research team conducted a comprehensive analysis. The findings revealed a substantial correlation coefficient of 0.9134410 with a significance level of p < 0.05, suggesting a noteworthy association. Our study sheds light on the potential influence of cultural markers in the political landscape, emphasizing the importance of considering non-traditional factors in electoral dynamics. While the observed correlation may appear perplexing, the implications of our results urge further examination and contemplation.
-------
And here is the introduction section that led to this literature review:
[[INTRODUCTION]]
INTRODUCTION
The world of politics is often described as a carefully choreographed movie, featuring a cast of characters navigating through dramatic plot twists and unexpected turns. However, in this study, we take an unconventional approach by exploring the intersection of the cinematic world and the political realm. Our focus is on the potential link between the number of movies graced by the presence of Emma Watson, and the Democratic votes for Senators in the state of Michigan.
As Dory from "Finding Nemo" famously suggests, "Just keep swimming," and in the spirit of perseverance, our research team embarked on a journey to unravel the mysteries of cultural influences on political preferences. With the aid of datasets from The Movie DB and the meticulous MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, we delved into the realm of statistics and correlation analysis. As we navigated the intricate web of data, a surprisingly robust correlation coefficient emerged, raising eyebrows and inspiring a deeper examination of our findings.
Our odyssey through data analysis led us down some unexpected paths, much like a character in a M. Night Shyamalan film. The statistical evidence amid the glitz and glamour of Hollywood and the intricacies of political campaigns has left us pondering the entangled relationship between culture and the ballot box. While the link between Emma Watson's cinematic endeavors and voting trends may appear as improbable as a Christopher Nolan plot twist, our findings demand contemplation and consideration.
In this paper, we present our methodical analysis and the compelling results that invite the scientific community to engage in thoughtful scrutiny and perhaps a bit of whimsical curiosity. After all, as Albert Einstein once quipped, "The only source of knowledge is experience," and our experience has revealed a captivating tale of correlations that prompts further exploration.
-------
Your response should start like this:
[[LITERATURE REVIEW]]
ChatGPT:
[[LITERATURE REVIEW]]
Previous research has delved into various unconventional factors that may influence political preferences, ranging from socio-economic indicators to cultural phenomena. Smith et al. (2015) examined the impact of celebrity endorsements on voter behavior, while Doe (2018) investigated the role of popular culture in shaping political attitudes. Jones (2019) explored the intersection of entertainment and political engagement, shedding light on the potential influence of media exposure on electoral dynamics.
Moving beyond the confines of traditional academic studies, our investigation delves into the uncharted territory of Emma Watson's filmography and its purported correlation with Democrat votes for Senators in Michigan. While seemingly unprecedented, our research stands on the shoulders of non-fiction works such as "The Politics of Popular Culture" by David Hesmondhalgh (2002) and "Celebrity Influence: Politics, Persuasion, and Issue-Based Advocacy" by Jennifer Smith (2017). These literary contributions have paved the way for our exploration of the intricate relationship between cinematic presence and political affiliations.
In the realm of fiction, works such as "The Power of Fiction: Society and Political Anatomy" by B.J. Smith (2016) and "Movie Magic: Hollywood and the Illusion of Influence" by A. Doe (2019) offer intriguing perspectives that resonate with the intersection of entertainment and political landscapes. While these books may not directly address the Emma Watson-Senators correlation, they provide a backdrop of theoretical understanding and creative insights that inform our study.
Additionally, our literature review draws inspiration from social media discourse, where intriguing musings and anecdotes have surfaced. A tweet from @PoliticalCinephile posited, "What if Hermione's spells extend beyond Hogwarts to sway political tides in Michigan? #MovieMagicPolitics." While such conjectures may seem light-hearted, they underscore the curiosity and speculation surrounding the interplay between cinema and electoral dynamics.
As we synthesize the scholarly and speculative domains, our investigation unveils a convergence of entertainment and politics that invites a blend of academic rigor and whimsical contemplation. The juxtaposition of serious scholarship and playful conjecture sets the stage for our innovative exploration, as we seek to uncover the enigmatic correlation between Emma Watson's cinematic endeavors and the voting patterns of Michigan Senators.
Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You are a researcher writing an academic paper.You draft the methodology section of an academic research paper.
User prompt:
Pretend you are an academic researcher. Your writing sounds like it belongs in a medical or economics journal. However, you frequently crack jokes, make puns, or add unexpected twists in your writing.
Please make up the methodology section of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between The number of movies Emma Watson appeared in and Democrat votes for Senators in Michigan. Make it seem dry like academic research paper, but with lots of subtle hidden offhand remarks, 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 The Movie DB and MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse . You used data from 2001 to 2020
Make up the research methods you don't know. Make them a bit goofy and convoluted.
Here is the title, abstract, and introduction of the paper:
[[TITLE]]
"The Watson Connection: Emma's Movies and Michigan's Senators"
[[ABSTRACT]]
This paper investigates the possible relationship between the number of movies featuring Emma Watson and the Democrat votes for Senators in Michigan from 2001 to 2020. Utilizing data from The Movie DB and MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, our research team conducted a comprehensive analysis. The findings revealed a substantial correlation coefficient of 0.9134410 with a significance level of p < 0.05, suggesting a noteworthy association. Our study sheds light on the potential influence of cultural markers in the political landscape, emphasizing the importance of considering non-traditional factors in electoral dynamics. While the observed correlation may appear perplexing, the implications of our results urge further examination and contemplation.
[[INTRODUCTION]]
INTRODUCTION
The world of politics is often described as a carefully choreographed movie, featuring a cast of characters navigating through dramatic plot twists and unexpected turns. However, in this study, we take an unconventional approach by exploring the intersection of the cinematic world and the political realm. Our focus is on the potential link between the number of movies graced by the presence of Emma Watson, and the Democratic votes for Senators in the state of Michigan.
As Dory from "Finding Nemo" famously suggests, "Just keep swimming," and in the spirit of perseverance, our research team embarked on a journey to unravel the mysteries of cultural influences on political preferences. With the aid of datasets from The Movie DB and the meticulous MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, we delved into the realm of statistics and correlation analysis. As we navigated the intricate web of data, a surprisingly robust correlation coefficient emerged, raising eyebrows and inspiring a deeper examination of our findings.
Our odyssey through data analysis led us down some unexpected paths, much like a character in a M. Night Shyamalan film. The statistical evidence amid the glitz and glamour of Hollywood and the intricacies of political campaigns has left us pondering the entangled relationship between culture and the ballot box. While the link between Emma Watson's cinematic endeavors and voting trends may appear as improbable as a Christopher Nolan plot twist, our findings demand contemplation and consideration.
In this paper, we present our methodical analysis and the compelling results that invite the scientific community to engage in thoughtful scrutiny and perhaps a bit of whimsical curiosity. After all, as Albert Einstein once quipped, "The only source of knowledge is experience," and our experience has revealed a captivating tale of correlations that prompts further exploration.
-------
Your response should start like this:
[[METHODOLOGY]]
ChatGPT:
[[METHODOLOGY]]
Before delving into the methods used to uncover the enigmatic connection between Emma Watson's cinematic endeavors and Michigan's political landscape, it is essential to acknowledge the philosophical underpinnings that guided our approach. As Socrates famously mused, "All I know is that I know nothing," highlighting the humility required in the pursuit of understanding such intricate relationships. With this philosophical backdrop, we ventured into the realm of data collection and analysis with a blend of scientific rigor and a touch of whimsy.
Data Collection:
Our research team scoured the depths of the internet, navigating through the digital labyrinth like intrepid explorers seeking the treasure troves of information. The primary sources of data were The Movie DB and the MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, serving as the treasure maps guiding our quest. As we meticulously navigated through these virtual archives, the data on Emma Watson's movie appearances and Michigan's Democratic votes for Senators from 2001 to 2020 materialized before our eyes.
Data Analysis:
Armed with our plundered data, we embarked on a statistical voyage that would make even Christopher Columbus raise an intrigued eyebrow. Utilizing the venerable tools of correlation analysis and regression modeling, we charted our course through the tempestuous sea of numbers and coefficients. Like Isaac Newton observing the fall of an apple, the discovery of a substantial correlation coefficient of 0.9134410 between Emma Watson's movies and Democrat votes for Senators in Michigan elicited astonished gasps from our team.
Statistical Validation:
In the spirit of scientific rigor, we subjected our findings to a battery of statistical tests and validation procedures. The significant p-value of less than 0.05 further bolstered our confidence in the robustness of the observed association. As we navigated through the turbulent waters of statistical significance, our compass pointed resolutely towards the undeniable link between Emma Watson's cinematic presence and Michigan's political preferences.
Limitations and Caveats:
Despite the earnest efforts of our intrepid research team, we acknowledge the presence of limitations that cast flickering shadows upon our findings. The complexity of human behavior, the volatility of electoral dynamics, and the temporal constraints of our dataset pose as formidable challenges to definitive conclusions. Nevertheless, like a protagonist facing a daunting obstacle in a captivating screenplay, we present our findings with a sense of curiosity and the recognition that this correlation, however startling, merits further investigation.
In presenting our methodology, we invite our esteemed peers to join us in this quixotic quest for knowledge, where the boundaries between cinema and politics blur into a captivating narrative worthy of contemplation and scholarly discourse. As Galileo Galilei once proclaimed, "E pur si muove" – and indeed, our findings beckon further scientific exploration with a spirited sense of wonder.
Now, let the grand adventure of analysis commence, and let the statistical stars guide our scholarly ship through the ever-enthralling seas of correlation and inference!
Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You are a researcher writing an academic paper.You draft the results section of an academic research paper. You speak in the past tense (you found...).
User prompt:
Pretend you are an academic researcher. Your writing sounds like it belongs in a medical or economics journal. However, you frequently crack jokes, make puns, or add unexpected twists in your writing.
Please make up the results section of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between The number of movies Emma Watson appeared in and Democrat votes for Senators in Michigan. Make it seem dry like academic research paper, but with lots of subtle hidden offhand remarks, 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 The Movie DB and MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse .
For the time period 2001 to 2020, you found a correlation 0.9134410, r-squared of 0.8343744, and p < 0.05.
One figure will be included. The figure (Fig. 1) is a scatterplot showing the strong correlation between the two variables. You don't need to specify where; I will add the figure.
Here is the title and abstract of the paper:
[[TITLE]]
"The Watson Connection: Emma's Movies and Michigan's Senators"
[[ABSTRACT]]
This paper investigates the possible relationship between the number of movies featuring Emma Watson and the Democrat votes for Senators in Michigan from 2001 to 2020. Utilizing data from The Movie DB and MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, our research team conducted a comprehensive analysis. The findings revealed a substantial correlation coefficient of 0.9134410 with a significance level of p < 0.05, suggesting a noteworthy association. Our study sheds light on the potential influence of cultural markers in the political landscape, emphasizing the importance of considering non-traditional factors in electoral dynamics. While the observed correlation may appear perplexing, the implications of our results urge further examination and contemplation.
-------
And here is the methodology section that led to this result:
[[METHODOLOGY]]
INTRODUCTION
The world of politics is often described as a carefully choreographed movie, featuring a cast of characters navigating through dramatic plot twists and unexpected turns. However, in this study, we take an unconventional approach by exploring the intersection of the cinematic world and the political realm. Our focus is on the potential link between the number of movies graced by the presence of Emma Watson, and the Democratic votes for Senators in the state of Michigan.
As Dory from "Finding Nemo" famously suggests, "Just keep swimming," and in the spirit of perseverance, our research team embarked on a journey to unravel the mysteries of cultural influences on political preferences. With the aid of datasets from The Movie DB and the meticulous MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, we delved into the realm of statistics and correlation analysis. As we navigated the intricate web of data, a surprisingly robust correlation coefficient emerged, raising eyebrows and inspiring a deeper examination of our findings.
Our odyssey through data analysis led us down some unexpected paths, much like a character in a M. Night Shyamalan film. The statistical evidence amid the glitz and glamour of Hollywood and the intricacies of political campaigns has left us pondering the entangled relationship between culture and the ballot box. While the link between Emma Watson's cinematic endeavors and voting trends may appear as improbable as a Christopher Nolan plot twist, our findings demand contemplation and consideration.
In this paper, we present our methodical analysis and the compelling results that invite the scientific community to engage in thoughtful scrutiny and perhaps a bit of whimsical curiosity. After all, as Albert Einstein once quipped, "The only source of knowledge is experience," and our experience has revealed a captivating tale of correlations that prompts further exploration.
-------
Your response should start like this:
[[RESULTS]]
ChatGPT:
[[RESULTS]]
The investigation into the potential relationship between the number of movies featuring Emma Watson and the Democratic votes for Senators in Michigan yielded fascinating results. Our analysis uncovered a striking correlation coefficient of 0.9134410, indicating a robust positive correlation between these seemingly disparate variables. The r-squared value of 0.8343744 further reinforced the strength of this correlation, accounting for a significant proportion of the variation in Democrat votes for Senators in Michigan. With a p-value of less than 0.05, the statistical significance of this correlation cannot be overlooked.
Fig. 1 depicts the compelling findings of our study through a scatterplot, showcasing the noteworthy association between the number of Emma Watson's cinematic appearances and the Democrat votes for Senators in Michigan. The unmistakable clustering of data points illustrates the clear trend, reminiscent of the carefully plotted drama in a blockbuster film.
In discussing these results, it is essential to acknowledge the unexpected nature of this correlation. While it may seem as improbable as a sudden plot twist in a detective novel, our findings invite further exploration and contemplation. The interplay between cultural markers and electoral dynamics presents a captivating narrative for scholarly discourse, and the implications of our results transcend conventional scientific inquiry.
This research furthers our understanding of the intricate interconnections between the realms of entertainment and politics, emphasizing the need to embrace non-traditional factors in analyzing electoral behavior. As we embark on future investigations, we are reminded of the pithy words of Sir Isaac Newton: "Truth is ever to be found in simplicity, and not in the multiplicity and confusion of things." Despite the complexity of our findings, they offer a simple yet thought-provoking insight into the potential influence of cultural phenomena on political landscapes.
Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You are a researcher writing an academic paper.You draft the discussion section of an academic research paper.
User prompt:
Pretend you are an academic researcher. Your writing sounds like it belongs in a medical or economics journal. However, you frequently crack jokes, make puns, or add unexpected twists in your writing.
Please make up the discussion section of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between The number of movies Emma Watson appeared in and Democrat votes for Senators in Michigan. Make it seem dry like academic research paper, but with lots of subtle hidden offhand remarks, jokes, goofy observations, and puns. Sneak in some jokes and clever puns about science, research, statistics, and the variables.
Limit your response to 500 tokens.
Here are the title, abstract, literature review, and results sections. Please harken back to 1-2 of the goofy items in the literature review, but pretend to take them completely seriously. Discuss how your results supported the prior research.
Do not write a conclusion. I will add a conclusion after this.
[[TITLE]]
"The Watson Connection: Emma's Movies and Michigan's Senators"
[[ABSTRACT]]
This paper investigates the possible relationship between the number of movies featuring Emma Watson and the Democrat votes for Senators in Michigan from 2001 to 2020. Utilizing data from The Movie DB and MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, our research team conducted a comprehensive analysis. The findings revealed a substantial correlation coefficient of 0.9134410 with a significance level of p < 0.05, suggesting a noteworthy association. Our study sheds light on the potential influence of cultural markers in the political landscape, emphasizing the importance of considering non-traditional factors in electoral dynamics. While the observed correlation may appear perplexing, the implications of our results urge further examination and contemplation.
[[LITERATURE REVIEW]]
Previous research has delved into various unconventional factors that may influence political preferences, ranging from socio-economic indicators to cultural phenomena. Smith et al. (2015) examined the impact of celebrity endorsements on voter behavior, while Doe (2018) investigated the role of popular culture in shaping political attitudes. Jones (2019) explored the intersection of entertainment and political engagement, shedding light on the potential influence of media exposure on electoral dynamics.
Moving beyond the confines of traditional academic studies, our investigation delves into the uncharted territory of Emma Watson's filmography and its purported correlation with Democrat votes for Senators in Michigan. While seemingly unprecedented, our research stands on the shoulders of non-fiction works such as "The Politics of Popular Culture" by David Hesmondhalgh (2002) and "Celebrity Influence: Politics, Persuasion, and Issue-Based Advocacy" by Jennifer Smith (2017). These literary contributions have paved the way for our exploration of the intricate relationship between cinematic presence and political affiliations.
In the realm of fiction, works such as "The Power of Fiction: Society and Political Anatomy" by B.J. Smith (2016) and "Movie Magic: Hollywood and the Illusion of Influence" by A. Doe (2019) offer intriguing perspectives that resonate with the intersection of entertainment and political landscapes. While these books may not directly address the Emma Watson-Senators correlation, they provide a backdrop of theoretical understanding and creative insights that inform our study.
Additionally, our literature review draws inspiration from social media discourse, where intriguing musings and anecdotes have surfaced. A tweet from @PoliticalCinephile posited, "What if Hermione's spells extend beyond Hogwarts to sway political tides in Michigan? #MovieMagicPolitics." While such conjectures may seem light-hearted, they underscore the curiosity and speculation surrounding the interplay between cinema and electoral dynamics.
As we synthesize the scholarly and speculative domains, our investigation unveils a convergence of entertainment and politics that invites a blend of academic rigor and whimsical contemplation. The juxtaposition of serious scholarship and playful conjecture sets the stage for our innovative exploration, as we seek to uncover the enigmatic correlation between Emma Watson's cinematic endeavors and the voting patterns of Michigan Senators.
[[RESULTS]]
The investigation into the potential relationship between the number of movies featuring Emma Watson and the Democratic votes for Senators in Michigan yielded fascinating results. Our analysis uncovered a striking correlation coefficient of 0.9134410, indicating a robust positive correlation between these seemingly disparate variables. The r-squared value of 0.8343744 further reinforced the strength of this correlation, accounting for a significant proportion of the variation in Democrat votes for Senators in Michigan. With a p-value of less than 0.05, the statistical significance of this correlation cannot be overlooked.
Fig. 1 depicts the compelling findings of our study through a scatterplot, showcasing the noteworthy association between the number of Emma Watson's cinematic appearances and the Democrat votes for Senators in Michigan. The unmistakable clustering of data points illustrates the clear trend, reminiscent of the carefully plotted drama in a blockbuster film.
In discussing these results, it is essential to acknowledge the unexpected nature of this correlation. While it may seem as improbable as a sudden plot twist in a detective novel, our findings invite further exploration and contemplation. The interplay between cultural markers and electoral dynamics presents a captivating narrative for scholarly discourse, and the implications of our results transcend conventional scientific inquiry.
This research furthers our understanding of the intricate interconnections between the realms of entertainment and politics, emphasizing the need to embrace non-traditional factors in analyzing electoral behavior. As we embark on future investigations, we are reminded of the pithy words of Sir Isaac Newton: "Truth is ever to be found in simplicity, and not in the multiplicity and confusion of things." Despite the complexity of our findings, they offer a simple yet thought-provoking insight into the potential influence of cultural phenomena on political landscapes.
-------
Your response should start like this:
[[DISCUSSION]]
ChatGPT:
[[DISCUSSION]]
The analysis of the relationship between the number of movies featuring Emma Watson and the Democrat votes for Senators in Michigan has opened a veritable Pandora's box of intrigue. Our findings not only substantiate the correlation but also illuminate the potential impact of cultural icons on political leanings, akin to a captivating plot twist with far-reaching implications.
Our results echo the sentiment posited by Smith et al. (2015) regarding the influence of celebrity endorsements on voter behavior. Emma Watson's cinematic presence seems to resonate deeply with the electorate, swaying political sentiments in a manner akin to the nuanced character development in a critically acclaimed coming-of-age film. Similarly, Jones (2019) shed light on the potential influence of media exposure on electoral dynamics, mirroring our observations of Emma Watson's filmography capturing the public imagination and, subsequently, potentially influencing voting patterns.
While seemingly departing from conventional academic pursuits, our investigation aligns with the theoretical underpinnings of "The Politics of Popular Culture" by David Hesmondhalgh (2002) and "Celebrity Influence: Politics, Persuasion, and Issue-Based Advocacy" by Jennifer Smith (2017). The unexpected correlation between Emma Watson's cinematic endeavors and Democrat votes for Senators in Michigan underscores the complexity of electoral dynamics, akin to the layers of subtlety in a masterful film script.
The witticisms and light-hearted conjecture permeating social media, as exemplified by the tweet from @PoliticalCinephile, underscore the imaginative speculation surrounding the interplay between cinema and political landscapes. While lighthearted, such musings underscore the intrinsic humor and unpredictable twists inherent in both entertainment and scientific inquiry, exemplified by the eyebrow-raising correlation uncovered in our study.
The scatterplot, akin to a visually arresting composition of dramatic intrigue, not only underscores the robust positive correlation between Emma Watson's cinematic appearances and Democrat votes for Senators in Michigan but also serves as a visual testament to the unexpected synchronization of these seemingly disparate variables.
In conclusion, our study presents a compelling narrative that merges rigorous scientific inquiry with the whimsical contemplation of unexpected correlations. As we navigate the unchartered waters of non-traditional factors in electoral behavior, we are reminded of the jestful wisdom encapsulated in Sir Isaac Newton's words, as it appears that truth, indeed, may dwell in the complexity and unpredictability of things, akin to the puzzling correlation unveiled in our study.
Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You are a researcher writing an academic paper.You draft the discussion section of goofy academic research papers that sounds like it belongs based on the title and abstract provided.
User prompt:
Pretend you are an academic researcher. Your writing sounds like it belongs in a medical or economics journal. However, you frequently crack jokes, make puns, or add unexpected twists in your writing.
Please make up a short conclusion of an academic research paper presenting the findings of the connection between The number of movies Emma Watson appeared in and Democrat votes for Senators in Michigan. Make it seem dry like academic research paper, but with lots of subtle hidden offhand remarks, jokes, goofy observations, and puns. Sneak in some jokes and clever puns about science, research, statistics, and the variables.
Limit your response to 300 tokens. At the very end, assert that no more research is needed in this area.
Here are the title, abstract, introduction, and results sections.
[[TITLE]]
"The Watson Connection: Emma's Movies and Michigan's Senators"
[[ABSTRACT]]
This paper investigates the possible relationship between the number of movies featuring Emma Watson and the Democrat votes for Senators in Michigan from 2001 to 2020. Utilizing data from The Movie DB and MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, our research team conducted a comprehensive analysis. The findings revealed a substantial correlation coefficient of 0.9134410 with a significance level of p < 0.05, suggesting a noteworthy association. Our study sheds light on the potential influence of cultural markers in the political landscape, emphasizing the importance of considering non-traditional factors in electoral dynamics. While the observed correlation may appear perplexing, the implications of our results urge further examination and contemplation.
[[INTRDUCTION]]
INTRODUCTION
The world of politics is often described as a carefully choreographed movie, featuring a cast of characters navigating through dramatic plot twists and unexpected turns. However, in this study, we take an unconventional approach by exploring the intersection of the cinematic world and the political realm. Our focus is on the potential link between the number of movies graced by the presence of Emma Watson, and the Democratic votes for Senators in the state of Michigan.
As Dory from "Finding Nemo" famously suggests, "Just keep swimming," and in the spirit of perseverance, our research team embarked on a journey to unravel the mysteries of cultural influences on political preferences. With the aid of datasets from The Movie DB and the meticulous MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, we delved into the realm of statistics and correlation analysis. As we navigated the intricate web of data, a surprisingly robust correlation coefficient emerged, raising eyebrows and inspiring a deeper examination of our findings.
Our odyssey through data analysis led us down some unexpected paths, much like a character in a M. Night Shyamalan film. The statistical evidence amid the glitz and glamour of Hollywood and the intricacies of political campaigns has left us pondering the entangled relationship between culture and the ballot box. While the link between Emma Watson's cinematic endeavors and voting trends may appear as improbable as a Christopher Nolan plot twist, our findings demand contemplation and consideration.
In this paper, we present our methodical analysis and the compelling results that invite the scientific community to engage in thoughtful scrutiny and perhaps a bit of whimsical curiosity. After all, as Albert Einstein once quipped, "The only source of knowledge is experience," and our experience has revealed a captivating tale of correlations that prompts further exploration.
[[RESULTS]]
The investigation into the potential relationship between the number of movies featuring Emma Watson and the Democratic votes for Senators in Michigan yielded fascinating results. Our analysis uncovered a striking correlation coefficient of 0.9134410, indicating a robust positive correlation between these seemingly disparate variables. The r-squared value of 0.8343744 further reinforced the strength of this correlation, accounting for a significant proportion of the variation in Democrat votes for Senators in Michigan. With a p-value of less than 0.05, the statistical significance of this correlation cannot be overlooked.
Fig. 1 depicts the compelling findings of our study through a scatterplot, showcasing the noteworthy association between the number of Emma Watson's cinematic appearances and the Democrat votes for Senators in Michigan. The unmistakable clustering of data points illustrates the clear trend, reminiscent of the carefully plotted drama in a blockbuster film.
In discussing these results, it is essential to acknowledge the unexpected nature of this correlation. While it may seem as improbable as a sudden plot twist in a detective novel, our findings invite further exploration and contemplation. The interplay between cultural markers and electoral dynamics presents a captivating narrative for scholarly discourse, and the implications of our results transcend conventional scientific inquiry.
This research furthers our understanding of the intricate interconnections between the realms of entertainment and politics, emphasizing the need to embrace non-traditional factors in analyzing electoral behavior. As we embark on future investigations, we are reminded of the pithy words of Sir Isaac Newton: "Truth is ever to be found in simplicity, and not in the multiplicity and confusion of things." Despite the complexity of our findings, they offer a simple yet thought-provoking insight into the potential influence of cultural phenomena on political landscapes.
-------
Your response should start like this:
[[CONCLUSION]]
ChatGPT:
[[CONCLUSION]]
In conclusion, our research has unraveled a thought-provoking correlation between the number of movies featuring Emma Watson and Democrat votes for Senators in Michigan. The noteworthy association, akin to a surprising cameo in a classic film, suggests a deeper intertwining of cultural influences and political inclinations. It is as if our statistical analysis brought forth a plot twist reminiscent of an M. Night Shyamalan masterpiece, leaving us pondering the enigmatic links between Hollywood and the ballot box.
While our findings may appear as unexpected as a plot twist in a mystery thriller, they beckon for further scrutiny and contemplation. The integration of cultural markers into the electoral landscape adds an intriguing dimension to the discourse, much like a subplot in a captivating narrative. As we reflect on the statistical evidence, we are reminded of the words of Dorothy Gale from "The Wizard of Oz": "Toto, I've a feeling we're not in Kansas anymore." Indeed, our journey through the data has transported us to uncharted territories that merit additional exploration.
Nevertheless, in the spirit of good humor, we dare say that no more research is needed in this unique area of inquiry. For as Mark Twain humorously remarked, "There are lies, damned lies, and statistics—but no statistical wizardry can conjure more revelations from this peculiar correlation.” As we bid farewell to this eccentric study, we may not be able to predict the next Hollywood blockbuster starring Emma Watson, but we can confidently assert that our findings have injected a dash of cinematic charm into the realm of political analysis.
Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You provide fictional names of academic journals. You say nothing else, and you do not chat with the user.
User prompt: Please provide the name of a funny but plausible sounding research, scientific, or academic journal that would publish a paper entited The Watson Connection: Emma's Movies and Michigan's Senators. Respond only with the name of a fictional academic journal.
ChatGPT:
Journal of Film and Political Science Relations
Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You provide fictional names of nonprofit research organizations and associations. You say nothing else, and you do not chat with the user.
User prompt: Please provide the name of a funny but plausible sounding nonprofit, academic, or scientific association or organization that would sponsor research that resulted in a paper entited The Watson Connection: Emma's Movies and Michigan's Senators. Respond only with the name of a fictional organization.
ChatGPT:
The Institute for Cinematic Studies and Political Analysis
Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You provide potential search keywords separated by commas. You say nothing else, and you do not chat with the user.
User prompt: Please provide potential search keywords for a paper titled The Watson Connection: Emma's Movies and Michigan's Senators with an abstract of This paper investigates the possible relationship between the number of movies featuring Emma Watson and the Democrat votes for Senators in Michigan from 2001 to 2020. Utilizing data from The Movie DB and MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, our research team conducted a comprehensive analysis. The findings revealed a substantial correlation coefficient of 0.9134410 with a significance level of p < 0.05, suggesting a noteworthy association. Our study sheds light on the potential influence of cultural markers in the political landscape, emphasizing the importance of considering non-traditional factors in electoral dynamics. While the observed correlation may appear perplexing, the implications of our results urge further examination and contemplation.
ChatGPT:
Emma Watson, movies featuring Emma Watson, Democrat senators Michigan, Michigan senators voting records, The Movie DB, MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse, political influence of cultural markers, electoral dynamics, correlation coefficient, significance level, non-traditional factors in electoral dynamics
*There is a bunch of Python happening behind the scenes to turn this prompt sequence into a PDF.
Discover a new correlation
View all correlations
View all research papers
Report an error
Data details
The number of movies Emma Watson appeared inSource: The Movie DB
Additional Info: Ballet Shoes (2008); Colonia (2015); Beauty and the Beast (2017); The Circle (2017); Prada Paradoxe (2022); Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows: Part 1 (2010); Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows: Part 2 (2011); The Bling Ring (2013); The Perks of Being a Wallflower (2012); Regression (2015); When Harry Left Hogwarts (2011); Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire (2005); Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix (2007); Harry Potter and the Half-Blood Prince (2009); Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban (2004); Harry Potter and the Chamber of Secrets (2002); Harry Potter and the Philosopher's Stone (2001); The Tale of Despereaux (2008); 50 Greatest Harry Potter Moments (2011); Little Women (2019); Harry Potter 20th Anniversary: Return to Hogwarts (2022); The Children's Party at the Palace (2006); Pickled (2022); The Magic Touch of Harry Potter (2004); Daniel Radcliffe: Being Harry Potter (2012); Noah (2014); An Audience with Adele (2021); This Is the End (2013); (K)nox: The Rob Knox Story (2021); David Holmes: The Boy Who Lived (2023); My Week with Marilyn (2011); Howard (2018)
See what else correlates with The number of movies Emma Watson appeared in
Votes for Democratic Senators in Michigan
Detailed data title: Total number of votes cast for Federal Democrat Senate candidates in Michigan
Source: MIT Election Data and Science Lab, Harvard Dataverse
See what else correlates with Votes for Democratic Senators in Michigan
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 = 0.8343744 (Coefficient of determination)
This means 83.4% of the change in the one variable (i.e., Votes for Democratic Senators in Michigan) is predictable based on the change in the other (i.e., The number of movies Emma Watson appeared in) over the 6 years from 2001 through 2020.
p < 0.05, which statistically significant(Null hypothesis significance test)
The p-value is 0.0109. 0.0109144225169755730000000000
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 0.91 in 1.09% of random cases. Said differently, if you correlated 92 random variables Which I absolutely did.
with the same 5 degrees of freedom, Degrees of freedom is a measure of how many free components we are testing. In this case it is 5 because we have two variables measured over a period of 6 years. It's just the number of years minus ( the number of variables minus one ), which in this case simplifies to the number of years minus one.
you would randomly expect to find a correlation as strong as this one.
[ 0.39, 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.
2002 | 2006 | 2008 | 2012 | 2014 | 2018 | |
The number of movies Emma Watson appeared in (Movie appearances) | 1 | 1 | 2 | 2 | 1 | 1 |
Votes for Democratic Senators in Michigan (Total votes) | 1896610 | 2151280 | 3038390 | 2735830 | 1704940 | 2214480 |
Why this works
- Data dredging: I have 25,153 variables in my database. I compare all these variables against each other to find ones that randomly match up. That's 632,673,409 correlation calculations! This is called “data dredging.” Instead of starting with a hypothesis and testing it, I instead abused the data to see what correlations shake out. It’s a dangerous way to go about analysis, because any sufficiently large dataset will yield strong correlations completely at random.
- 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. - 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. - 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. 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([1,1,2,2,1,1,])
array_2 = np.array([1896610,2151280,3038390,2735830,1704940,2214480,])
array_1_name = "The number of movies Emma Watson appeared in"
array_2_name = "Votes for Democratic Senators in Michigan"
# 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:
- High resolution line chart
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 The number of movies Emma Watson appeared in
- Line chart for only Votes for Democratic Senators in Michigan
- AI-generated correlation image
- The spurious research paper: The Watson Connection: Emma's Movies and Michigan's Senators
Your rating skills are top-notch!
Correlation ID: 5845 · Black Variable ID: 26660 · Red Variable ID: 26257