about · email me · subscribe
Spurious correlation #6,524 · View random

A linear line chart with years as the X-axis and two variables on the Y-axis. The first variable is The number of movies Scarlett Johansson appeared in and the second variable is Rain in Paris.  The chart goes from 1994 to 2022, and the two variables track closely in value over that time. Small Image

AI explanation

The presence of Scarlett Johansson on screen leads to an increase in atmospheric humidity as a result of her fans' collective sweating during intense scenes, causing more rainfall in Paris. This phenomenon, known as the "Scarlett Showers Effect," has been a surprise discovery in the field of celebrity meteorology.

Model: dalle-3
Prompt: Image Generation Prompt: Create an illustration inspired by a classic TIME magazine cover. Depict a group of people in an outdoor movie screening in Paris, watching intently as Scarlett Johansson's image illuminates the screen. The fans are shown sweating in excitement as the movie reaches its climax, and the atmospheric humidity begins to rise. As the tension escalates, illustrate the surprising moment when rain starts to fall in Paris, capturing the astonishment on the faces of the fans. This visual should convey the "Scarlett Showers Effect," showcasing the strong connection between Scarlett Johansson's movies and unexpected rainfall in Paris. 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 Scarlett Johansson appeared in and Rain in Paris. 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 TIME magazine cover image Cybernetic art Photorealism Futuristic Cute cartoon
ChatGPT: A TIME 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 Scarlett Johansson appeared in and Rain in Paris, in the following situation: The presence of Scarlett Johansson on screen leads to an increase in atmospheric humidity as a result of her fans' collective sweating during intense scenes, causing more rainfall in Paris. This phenomenon, known as the "Scarlett Showers Effect," has been a surprise discovery in the field of celebrity meteorology.. Keep the description simple.
ChatGPT: A group of Scarlett Johansson's fans are gathered at an outdoor movie screening in Paris, eagerly watching their favorite actress on the screen. As the movie reaches its climax, intense scenes cause the fans to sweat in excitement, leading to an increase in atmospheric humidity. Suddenly, rain begins to fall in Paris, much to the surprise of everyone. The "Scarlett Showers Effect" has once again been demonstrated, as the connection between Scarlett Johansson's movies and rainfall in Paris becomes increasingly evident.

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 TIME magazine cover image ] and depicting this scene: A group of Scarlett Johansson's fans are gathered at an outdoor movie screening in Paris, eagerly watching their favorite actress on the screen. As the movie reaches its climax, intense scenes cause the fans to sweat in excitement, leading to an increase in atmospheric humidity. Suddenly, rain begins to fall in Paris, much to the surprise of everyone. The "Scarlett Showers Effect" has once again been demonstrated, as the connection between Scarlett Johansson's movies and rainfall in Paris becomes increasingly evident. Keep the visual depiction simple. Do not include any words or speech bubbles.
ChatGPT: Image Generation Prompt: Create an illustration inspired by a classic TIME magazine cover. Depict a group of people in an outdoor movie screening in Paris, watching intently as Scarlett Johansson's image illuminates the screen. The fans are shown sweating in excitement as the movie reaches its climax, and the atmospheric humidity begins to rise. As the tension escalates, illustrate the surprising moment when rain starts to fall in Paris, capturing the astonishment on the faces of the fans. This visual should convey the "Scarlett Showers Effect," showcasing the strong connection between Scarlett Johansson's movies and unexpected rainfall in Paris.

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

I sequence the requests into multiple prompts because I find GPT 3.5 to perform much better with short, well-managed contexts. Thus, I track the context directly in Python and only ask ChatGPT targeted questions.

Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106 (fine-tuned)
System prompt: You provide humorous responses in the form of plausible sounding explanations for correlations. You assume the correlation is causative for the purpose of the explanation even if it is ridiculous. You do not chat with the user, you only reply with the causal connection explanation and nothing else.
User prompt: Please make up a funny explanation for how increases in The number of movies Scarlett Johansson appeared in positively influenced Rain in Paris. Make it feel plausible.

AI academic paper

(Because p < 0.01)
ScarJo Shows and Parisian Woes: An Analysis of the Link Between Scarlett Johansson's Films and Rainfall in Paris

The Journal of Cinema and Climate Studies

Jan 2024
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 silly 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 Scarlett Johansson appeared in and Rain in Paris. Make lots of jokes, goofy observations, and puns.

Rhyme words in the title.

Your research team used data from The Movie DB and NOAA National Climate Data Center to assess this nagging question. You found a correlation coefficient of 0.7057588 and p < 0.01 for 1994 to 2022.

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]]
ScarJo Shows and Parisian Woes: An Analysis of the Link Between Scarlett Johansson's Films and Rainfall in Paris

[[ABSTRACT]]
The connection between Scarlett Johansson's cinematic endeavors and precipitation in the City of Light has long been a topic of speculation, often dismissed as mere fluff. However, our research endeavors to shed light on this curious correlation through a quantitative lens. Utilizing data from The Movie DB and NOAA National Climate Data Center for the years 1994 to 2022, we uncovered a surprising correlation coefficient of 0.7057588 and p < 0.01, indicating a statistically significant relationship between the number of movies featuring Scarlett Johansson and the amount of rainfall in Paris. Our findings not only provide fodder for whimsical banter, but also emphasize the depth of influence that cinematic pursuits and meteorological phenomena can have on one another. This study not only reflects the absurdity of human curiosity but also illuminates unexpected connections in the most improbable places.




Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You are a silly 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 Scarlett Johansson appeared in and Rain in Paris. Make lots of jokes, goofy observations, and puns. Sneak in some jokes and clever puns about science, research, statistics, and the variables.

Here is the title and abstract of the paper:
[[TITLE]]
ScarJo Shows and Parisian Woes: An Analysis of the Link Between Scarlett Johansson's Films and Rainfall in Paris

[[ABSTRACT]]
The connection between Scarlett Johansson's cinematic endeavors and precipitation in the City of Light has long been a topic of speculation, often dismissed as mere fluff. However, our research endeavors to shed light on this curious correlation through a quantitative lens. Utilizing data from The Movie DB and NOAA National Climate Data Center for the years 1994 to 2022, we uncovered a surprising correlation coefficient of 0.7057588 and p < 0.01, indicating a statistically significant relationship between the number of movies featuring Scarlett Johansson and the amount of rainfall in Paris. Our findings not only provide fodder for whimsical banter, but also emphasize the depth of influence that cinematic pursuits and meteorological phenomena can have on one another. This study not only reflects the absurdity of human curiosity but also illuminates unexpected connections in the most improbable places.



-------

Your response should start like this:

[[INTRODUCTION]]



ChatGPT:

[[INTRODUCTION]]

Lights, camera, raincoats! In the world of academia, where we often find ourselves knee-deep in data and equations, it's a refreshing change of pace to delve into a topic that's as quirky as a Wes Anderson film. The enigmatic correlation between Scarlett Johansson's movie appearances and rain in Paris has been a source of amusement, skepticism, and undeniable intrigue for years. After all, what could an A-lister's filmography possibly have in common with the moody weather of the City of Love?

As researchers donned in our metaphorical Sherlock Holmes hats, armed with spreadsheets and a healthy dose of skepticism, we embarked on a voyage to untangle this peculiar web of cinematic charm and meteorological mystery. With statistical tools as our trusty sidekicks, we sought to unravel the narrative hidden within the numbers that danced across our screens like a choreographed ensemble cast.

The journey was not without its fair share of amusing detours and unexpected plot twists. Imagine our delight when we discovered that the number of films featuring Scarlett Johansson displayed a positive correlation with the rain-soaked streets of Paris. It was as if the data itself had whispered, "I see you, standing under my umbrella-ella-ella."

In the grand tradition of research, we were reminded that even the most unlikely pairings can form a meaningful bond under the scrutiny of statistical analysis. From Hollywood blockbuster to meteorological plot twist, our findings speak to the capricious nature of correlations and the uncanny ability of numbers to surprise and entertain.

So, dear reader, grab your popcorn and your weather app, for our journey through the intersection of Scarlet Johansson's films and Parisian rainfall promises to whisk you away into a whimsical world where data and entertainment collide in unexpected harmony.


Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You are a silly 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 Scarlett Johansson appeared in and Rain in Paris. Make lots of jokes, goofy observations, and puns.

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

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

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

Here is the title and abstract of the paper:
[[TITLE]]
ScarJo Shows and Parisian Woes: An Analysis of the Link Between Scarlett Johansson's Films and Rainfall in Paris

[[ABSTRACT]]
The connection between Scarlett Johansson's cinematic endeavors and precipitation in the City of Light has long been a topic of speculation, often dismissed as mere fluff. However, our research endeavors to shed light on this curious correlation through a quantitative lens. Utilizing data from The Movie DB and NOAA National Climate Data Center for the years 1994 to 2022, we uncovered a surprising correlation coefficient of 0.7057588 and p < 0.01, indicating a statistically significant relationship between the number of movies featuring Scarlett Johansson and the amount of rainfall in Paris. Our findings not only provide fodder for whimsical banter, but also emphasize the depth of influence that cinematic pursuits and meteorological phenomena can have on one another. This study not only reflects the absurdity of human curiosity but also illuminates unexpected connections in the most improbable places.



-------

And here is the introduction section that led to this literature review:
[[INTRODUCTION]]
Lights, camera, raincoats! In the world of academia, where we often find ourselves knee-deep in data and equations, it's a refreshing change of pace to delve into a topic that's as quirky as a Wes Anderson film. The enigmatic correlation between Scarlett Johansson's movie appearances and rain in Paris has been a source of amusement, skepticism, and undeniable intrigue for years. After all, what could an A-lister's filmography possibly have in common with the moody weather of the City of Love?
As researchers donned in our metaphorical Sherlock Holmes hats, armed with spreadsheets and a healthy dose of skepticism, we embarked on a voyage to untangle this peculiar web of cinematic charm and meteorological mystery. With statistical tools as our trusty sidekicks, we sought to unravel the narrative hidden within the numbers that danced across our screens like a choreographed ensemble cast.
The journey was not without its fair share of amusing detours and unexpected plot twists. Imagine our delight when we discovered that the number of films featuring Scarlett Johansson displayed a positive correlation with the rain-soaked streets of Paris. It was as if the data itself had whispered, "I see you, standing under my umbrella-ella-ella."
In the grand tradition of research, we were reminded that even the most unlikely pairings can form a meaningful bond under the scrutiny of statistical analysis. From Hollywood blockbuster to meteorological plot twist, our findings speak to the capricious nature of correlations and the uncanny ability of numbers to surprise and entertain.
So, dear reader, grab your popcorn and your weather app, for our journey through the intersection of Scarlet Johansson's films and Parisian rainfall promises to whisk you away into a whimsical world where data and entertainment collide in unexpected harmony.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[LITERATURE REVIEW]]



ChatGPT:
[[LITERATURE REVIEW]]

In "Smith et al." the authors find that the number of movies Scarlett Johansson appeared in is positively correlated with the likelihood of rain in major European cities. This study was one of the first to raise eyebrows in the academic community, prompting a flurry of umbrella-related puns and head-scratching inquiries.

Doe's research, "Rainy Days, Starry Nights: An Examination of Parisian Precipitation Patterns," similarly illuminated the curious connection between cinematic star power and atmospheric conditions. The study revealed that the frequency of rainfall in Paris exhibited a notable uptick during periods of heightened Scarlett Johansson film releases. This correlation, the authors note, cannot be brushed off as mere coincidence, but rather demands further investigation into the enigmatic forces at play.

Jones' comprehensive analysis in "Cinema and Climate: Unraveling Celestial Threads" further cemented the notion that there exists a tangible link between Scarlett Johansson's on-screen presence and the precipitation patterns of Paris. Jones argue that this connection transcends mere statistical happenstance, hinting at a deeper, almost ethereal union of cultural influence and meteorological caprice.

But let's not stop at the serious stuff – let's dive into the realm of non-fiction books like "Paris, My Sweet: A Year in the City of Light (and Dark Chocolate)" and "Scarlett Johansson: The Illustrated Biography." Perhaps these works, though not directly related to our topic, may offer some unexpected insights.

And how can we ignore the delightful influence of fiction on our understanding of these perplexing matters? Consider "The Da Vinci Code" by Dan Brown – while it may not overtly discuss Scarlett Johansson's filmography or Parisian precipitation, its enigmatic intrigue could serve as a metaphor for the enigma we're trying to solve. Or perhaps "The Little Prince" by Antoine de Saint-Exupéry, with its whimsical exploration of relationships between people and their surroundings, might gently nudge us toward a newfound understanding.

In the realm of children's entertainment, let's not underestimate the profound impact of "SpongeBob SquarePants" and "Peppa Pig." After all, who's to say these playful cartoons don't hold the key to unlocking the secrets of Scarlett Johansson's movie magic and Parisian rain dance?


Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You are a silly 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 Scarlett Johansson appeared in and Rain in Paris. 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 The Movie DB and NOAA National Climate Data Center . You used data from 1994 to 2022

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]]
ScarJo Shows and Parisian Woes: An Analysis of the Link Between Scarlett Johansson's Films and Rainfall in Paris

[[ABSTRACT]]
The connection between Scarlett Johansson's cinematic endeavors and precipitation in the City of Light has long been a topic of speculation, often dismissed as mere fluff. However, our research endeavors to shed light on this curious correlation through a quantitative lens. Utilizing data from The Movie DB and NOAA National Climate Data Center for the years 1994 to 2022, we uncovered a surprising correlation coefficient of 0.7057588 and p < 0.01, indicating a statistically significant relationship between the number of movies featuring Scarlett Johansson and the amount of rainfall in Paris. Our findings not only provide fodder for whimsical banter, but also emphasize the depth of influence that cinematic pursuits and meteorological phenomena can have on one another. This study not only reflects the absurdity of human curiosity but also illuminates unexpected connections in the most improbable places.



[[INTRODUCTION]]
Lights, camera, raincoats! In the world of academia, where we often find ourselves knee-deep in data and equations, it's a refreshing change of pace to delve into a topic that's as quirky as a Wes Anderson film. The enigmatic correlation between Scarlett Johansson's movie appearances and rain in Paris has been a source of amusement, skepticism, and undeniable intrigue for years. After all, what could an A-lister's filmography possibly have in common with the moody weather of the City of Love?
As researchers donned in our metaphorical Sherlock Holmes hats, armed with spreadsheets and a healthy dose of skepticism, we embarked on a voyage to untangle this peculiar web of cinematic charm and meteorological mystery. With statistical tools as our trusty sidekicks, we sought to unravel the narrative hidden within the numbers that danced across our screens like a choreographed ensemble cast.
The journey was not without its fair share of amusing detours and unexpected plot twists. Imagine our delight when we discovered that the number of films featuring Scarlett Johansson displayed a positive correlation with the rain-soaked streets of Paris. It was as if the data itself had whispered, "I see you, standing under my umbrella-ella-ella."
In the grand tradition of research, we were reminded that even the most unlikely pairings can form a meaningful bond under the scrutiny of statistical analysis. From Hollywood blockbuster to meteorological plot twist, our findings speak to the capricious nature of correlations and the uncanny ability of numbers to surprise and entertain.
So, dear reader, grab your popcorn and your weather app, for our journey through the intersection of Scarlet Johansson's films and Parisian rainfall promises to whisk you away into a whimsical world where data and entertainment collide in unexpected harmony.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[METHODOLOGY]]



ChatGPT:

[[METHODOLOGY]]

To delve into the enthralling correlation between Scarlett Johansson's silver screen appearances and Parisian downpours, our research team concocted a methodological brew spiced with equal parts scientific rigor and whimsical flair.

First, we scoured The Movie DB to procure a comprehensive catalog of all the films graced by the presence of Scarlett Johansson from 1994 to 2022. Our dedicated data sleuths meticulously tallied the annual count of ScarJo showcases, ensuring that not a single film was overlooked in our quest for cinematic data delight.

Meanwhile, as we immersed ourselves in the mesmerizing world of filmographies, our trusty counterparts at NOAA National Climate Data Center wielded their meteorological instruments in pursuit of rainy revelations from the cobblestone streets of Paris. Rainfall data for the same timeframe became the threads of our weather-bound narrative, infusing our analysis with the aqueous essence of Parisian precipitation.

With our dataset in hand – a fusion of Scarlett Johansson's cinematic feats and raindrops cascading upon Paris – we summoned the wizards of statistical sorcery to conjure the elusive coefficient of correlation. Uniting our variables through the mystical incantations of regression analysis, we traversed the realm of p-values and null hypotheses, steadfast in our pursuit of scientific enlightenment tinged with a pinch of playfulness.

The journey was rife with methodological mirth, as we channeled the spirit of our inner data whisperers to summon meaningful insights from the web of digits and decimal points.

As with any research expedition, our methodology resonated with the jovial spirit of a comedy duo – navigating through the labyrinth of variables with earnest curiosity, coupled with the occasional quip and pun that added a sprinkle of levity to our scientific voyage. Our methodology was not just a map of investigative maneuvers but an ode to the quirky charm of scientific exploration.


Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You are a silly 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 Scarlett Johansson appeared in and Rain in Paris. 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 The Movie DB and NOAA National Climate Data Center .

For the time period 1994 to 2022, you found a correlation 0.7057588, r-squared of 0.4980955, and p < 0.01.

One figure will be included. The figure (Fig. 1) is a scatterplot showing the strong correlation between the two variables. You don't need to specify where; I will add the figure.

Here is the title and abstract of the paper:
[[TITLE]]
ScarJo Shows and Parisian Woes: An Analysis of the Link Between Scarlett Johansson's Films and Rainfall in Paris

[[ABSTRACT]]
The connection between Scarlett Johansson's cinematic endeavors and precipitation in the City of Light has long been a topic of speculation, often dismissed as mere fluff. However, our research endeavors to shed light on this curious correlation through a quantitative lens. Utilizing data from The Movie DB and NOAA National Climate Data Center for the years 1994 to 2022, we uncovered a surprising correlation coefficient of 0.7057588 and p < 0.01, indicating a statistically significant relationship between the number of movies featuring Scarlett Johansson and the amount of rainfall in Paris. Our findings not only provide fodder for whimsical banter, but also emphasize the depth of influence that cinematic pursuits and meteorological phenomena can have on one another. This study not only reflects the absurdity of human curiosity but also illuminates unexpected connections in the most improbable places.



-------

And here is the methodology section that led to this result:
[[METHODOLOGY]]
Lights, camera, raincoats! In the world of academia, where we often find ourselves knee-deep in data and equations, it's a refreshing change of pace to delve into a topic that's as quirky as a Wes Anderson film. The enigmatic correlation between Scarlett Johansson's movie appearances and rain in Paris has been a source of amusement, skepticism, and undeniable intrigue for years. After all, what could an A-lister's filmography possibly have in common with the moody weather of the City of Love?
As researchers donned in our metaphorical Sherlock Holmes hats, armed with spreadsheets and a healthy dose of skepticism, we embarked on a voyage to untangle this peculiar web of cinematic charm and meteorological mystery. With statistical tools as our trusty sidekicks, we sought to unravel the narrative hidden within the numbers that danced across our screens like a choreographed ensemble cast.
The journey was not without its fair share of amusing detours and unexpected plot twists. Imagine our delight when we discovered that the number of films featuring Scarlett Johansson displayed a positive correlation with the rain-soaked streets of Paris. It was as if the data itself had whispered, "I see you, standing under my umbrella-ella-ella."
In the grand tradition of research, we were reminded that even the most unlikely pairings can form a meaningful bond under the scrutiny of statistical analysis. From Hollywood blockbuster to meteorological plot twist, our findings speak to the capricious nature of correlations and the uncanny ability of numbers to surprise and entertain.
So, dear reader, grab your popcorn and your weather app, for our journey through the intersection of Scarlet Johansson's films and Parisian rainfall promises to whisk you away into a whimsical world where data and entertainment collide in unexpected harmony.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[RESULTS]]



ChatGPT:

[[RESULTS]]

The results of our analysis revealed a surprising and, dare we say, show-stopping correlation between the number of movies featuring Scarlett Johansson and rainfall in Paris. The correlation coefficient of 0.7057588 and an r-squared of 0.4980955 indicated a statistically significant relationship between these seemingly unrelated variables, with p < 0.01. In other words, it appears that as Scarlett Johansson's filmography blossomed, so did the precipitation in the City of Light.

Our findings, illustrated in Fig. 1, depict a scatterplot that visually captures the strength of this unexpected connection. Picture this: a cascade of data points, each representing a year in the time span of 1994 to 2022, forming a near-perfect alignment akin to matching puzzle pieces. It's almost as if Mother Nature herself decided to do a cameo in Scarlett Johansson's cinematic universe.

To put it simply, our research confirms that there is indeed a notable association between the dazzling performances of Scarlet Johansson on screen and the rainy spells that befall Paris. It seems that as Scarlett's on-screen presence shines, so does the precipitation in the French capital. Perhaps we should rename the "Rain City" as "ScarJohansson," or maybe not.


Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You are a silly 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 Scarlett Johansson appeared in and Rain in Paris. 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]]
ScarJo Shows and Parisian Woes: An Analysis of the Link Between Scarlett Johansson's Films and Rainfall in Paris

[[ABSTRACT]]
The connection between Scarlett Johansson's cinematic endeavors and precipitation in the City of Light has long been a topic of speculation, often dismissed as mere fluff. However, our research endeavors to shed light on this curious correlation through a quantitative lens. Utilizing data from The Movie DB and NOAA National Climate Data Center for the years 1994 to 2022, we uncovered a surprising correlation coefficient of 0.7057588 and p < 0.01, indicating a statistically significant relationship between the number of movies featuring Scarlett Johansson and the amount of rainfall in Paris. Our findings not only provide fodder for whimsical banter, but also emphasize the depth of influence that cinematic pursuits and meteorological phenomena can have on one another. This study not only reflects the absurdity of human curiosity but also illuminates unexpected connections in the most improbable places.



[[LITERATURE REVIEW]]
In "Smith et al." the authors find that the number of movies Scarlett Johansson appeared in is positively correlated with the likelihood of rain in major European cities. This study was one of the first to raise eyebrows in the academic community, prompting a flurry of umbrella-related puns and head-scratching inquiries.
Doe's research, "Rainy Days, Starry Nights: An Examination of Parisian Precipitation Patterns," similarly illuminated the curious connection between cinematic star power and atmospheric conditions. The study revealed that the frequency of rainfall in Paris exhibited a notable uptick during periods of heightened Scarlett Johansson film releases. This correlation, the authors note, cannot be brushed off as mere coincidence, but rather demands further investigation into the enigmatic forces at play.
Jones' comprehensive analysis in "Cinema and Climate: Unraveling Celestial Threads" further cemented the notion that there exists a tangible link between Scarlett Johansson's on-screen presence and the precipitation patterns of Paris. Jones argue that this connection transcends mere statistical happenstance, hinting at a deeper, almost ethereal union of cultural influence and meteorological caprice.
But let's not stop at the serious stuff – let's dive into the realm of non-fiction books like "Paris, My Sweet: A Year in the City of Light (and Dark Chocolate)" and "Scarlett Johansson: The Illustrated Biography." Perhaps these works, though not directly related to our topic, may offer some unexpected insights.
And how can we ignore the delightful influence of fiction on our understanding of these perplexing matters? Consider "The Da Vinci Code" by Dan Brown – while it may not overtly discuss Scarlett Johansson's filmography or Parisian precipitation, its enigmatic intrigue could serve as a metaphor for the enigma we're trying to solve. Or perhaps "The Little Prince" by Antoine de Saint-Exupéry, with its whimsical exploration of relationships between people and their surroundings, might gently nudge us toward a newfound understanding.
In the realm of children's entertainment, let's not underestimate the profound impact of "SpongeBob SquarePants" and "Peppa Pig." After all, who's to say these playful cartoons don't hold the key to unlocking the secrets of Scarlett Johansson's movie magic and Parisian rain dance?

[[RESULTS]]
The results of our analysis revealed a surprising and, dare we say, show-stopping correlation between the number of movies featuring Scarlett Johansson and rainfall in Paris. The correlation coefficient of 0.7057588 and an r-squared of 0.4980955 indicated a statistically significant relationship between these seemingly unrelated variables, with p < 0.01. In other words, it appears that as Scarlett Johansson's filmography blossomed, so did the precipitation in the City of Light.
Our findings, illustrated in Fig. 1, depict a scatterplot that visually captures the strength of this unexpected connection. Picture this: a cascade of data points, each representing a year in the time span of 1994 to 2022, forming a near-perfect alignment akin to matching puzzle pieces. It's almost as if Mother Nature herself decided to do a cameo in Scarlett Johansson's cinematic universe.
To put it simply, our research confirms that there is indeed a notable association between the dazzling performances of Scarlet Johansson on screen and the rainy spells that befall Paris. It seems that as Scarlett's on-screen presence shines, so does the precipitation in the French capital. Perhaps we should rename the "Rain City" as "ScarJohansson," or maybe not.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[DISCUSSION]]



ChatGPT:

[[DISCUSSION]]

Our research has not only confirmed, but also taken a deep dive into the whimsical and seemingly improbable connection between Scarlett Johansson’s cinematic endeavors and rain in Paris. The statistically significant correlation between these two variables not only raises eyebrows but also prompts a myriad of umbrella-related puns and shower-themed quips.

Our findings not only support previous research by "Smith et al." and Doe's "Rainy Days, Starry Nights," but they also take it a step further by uncovering a statistically significant relationship between ScarJo's films and Parisian rainfall. To say that this correlation is merely coincidental would be an insult to the vivid dance of data points in our scatterplot.

It is clear that our research has reignited interest in the ongoing debate over the influence of cinematic star power on atmospheric conditions. Perhaps this connection is a testament to the ethereal union of cultural influence and meteorological caprice. Maybe, just maybe, the aura of Scarlett Johansson's performances has the power to call forth raindrops in the City of Light.

As we move forward, it is imperative to consider the implications of our findings. For instance, could the influence of certain actors create microclimates in specific geographic locations? Could the release of a blockbuster film trigger a sudden downpour, not just of ticket sales, but of actual rain? Our research not only opens the door to these questions but also insists, with a hint of humor, that these phenomena should not be dismissed as mere fluff.

And speaking of fluff, the impact of this research extends beyond the confines of academic discussion. It challenges us to reevaluate the boundaries of cause and effect, unleashing a wave of creativity and playfulness in our statistical analyses. Can we say that Scarlett Johansson literally brings the rain wherever she goes? If only statistics could unravel the enigma of this connection.

In conclusion, our research not only adds another layer of whimsy to the fascinating interplay between celebrity culture and natural phenomena but also emphasizes the enigmatic confluence of seemingly disparate forces. As we continue to unravel the intrigue of these unexpected connections, let's remember to always keep an umbrella handy, just in case Scarlett Johansson decides to grace the silver screen once again.


Model: gpt-3.5-turbo-1106
System prompt: You are a silly 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 Scarlett Johansson appeared in and Rain in Paris. 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]]
ScarJo Shows and Parisian Woes: An Analysis of the Link Between Scarlett Johansson's Films and Rainfall in Paris

[[ABSTRACT]]
The connection between Scarlett Johansson's cinematic endeavors and precipitation in the City of Light has long been a topic of speculation, often dismissed as mere fluff. However, our research endeavors to shed light on this curious correlation through a quantitative lens. Utilizing data from The Movie DB and NOAA National Climate Data Center for the years 1994 to 2022, we uncovered a surprising correlation coefficient of 0.7057588 and p < 0.01, indicating a statistically significant relationship between the number of movies featuring Scarlett Johansson and the amount of rainfall in Paris. Our findings not only provide fodder for whimsical banter, but also emphasize the depth of influence that cinematic pursuits and meteorological phenomena can have on one another. This study not only reflects the absurdity of human curiosity but also illuminates unexpected connections in the most improbable places.



[[INTRDUCTION]]
Lights, camera, raincoats! In the world of academia, where we often find ourselves knee-deep in data and equations, it's a refreshing change of pace to delve into a topic that's as quirky as a Wes Anderson film. The enigmatic correlation between Scarlett Johansson's movie appearances and rain in Paris has been a source of amusement, skepticism, and undeniable intrigue for years. After all, what could an A-lister's filmography possibly have in common with the moody weather of the City of Love?
As researchers donned in our metaphorical Sherlock Holmes hats, armed with spreadsheets and a healthy dose of skepticism, we embarked on a voyage to untangle this peculiar web of cinematic charm and meteorological mystery. With statistical tools as our trusty sidekicks, we sought to unravel the narrative hidden within the numbers that danced across our screens like a choreographed ensemble cast.
The journey was not without its fair share of amusing detours and unexpected plot twists. Imagine our delight when we discovered that the number of films featuring Scarlett Johansson displayed a positive correlation with the rain-soaked streets of Paris. It was as if the data itself had whispered, "I see you, standing under my umbrella-ella-ella."
In the grand tradition of research, we were reminded that even the most unlikely pairings can form a meaningful bond under the scrutiny of statistical analysis. From Hollywood blockbuster to meteorological plot twist, our findings speak to the capricious nature of correlations and the uncanny ability of numbers to surprise and entertain.
So, dear reader, grab your popcorn and your weather app, for our journey through the intersection of Scarlet Johansson's films and Parisian rainfall promises to whisk you away into a whimsical world where data and entertainment collide in unexpected harmony.

[[RESULTS]]
The results of our analysis revealed a surprising and, dare we say, show-stopping correlation between the number of movies featuring Scarlett Johansson and rainfall in Paris. The correlation coefficient of 0.7057588 and an r-squared of 0.4980955 indicated a statistically significant relationship between these seemingly unrelated variables, with p < 0.01. In other words, it appears that as Scarlett Johansson's filmography blossomed, so did the precipitation in the City of Light.
Our findings, illustrated in Fig. 1, depict a scatterplot that visually captures the strength of this unexpected connection. Picture this: a cascade of data points, each representing a year in the time span of 1994 to 2022, forming a near-perfect alignment akin to matching puzzle pieces. It's almost as if Mother Nature herself decided to do a cameo in Scarlett Johansson's cinematic universe.
To put it simply, our research confirms that there is indeed a notable association between the dazzling performances of Scarlet Johansson on screen and the rainy spells that befall Paris. It seems that as Scarlett's on-screen presence shines, so does the precipitation in the French capital. Perhaps we should rename the "Rain City" as "ScarJohansson," or maybe not.

-------

Your response should start like this:

[[CONCLUSION]]



ChatGPT:

[[CONCLUSION]]

In conclusion, our research has brought to light a correlation that is as unexpected as finding a pineapple on a pizza – the connection between Scarlett Johansson's cinematic endeavors and the rainfall in Paris. It's safe to say that this unexpected duo has truly made waves (or should we say, raindrops) in the world of statistical oddities.

As we close this chapter on Scarlett Johansson's silver screen talents and the atmospheric antics of Paris, we can't help but marvel at the quirky bond we've unraveled. It's like witnessing a rom-com unfold between two variables - one dazzling with its star-studded performances, and the other providing the perfect backdrop with its dramatic downpours.

Our findings not only tickle the funny bone of statistical analysts but also remind us that even in the world of research, there is room for the whimsical and the wacky. As the great physicist Albert Einstein once said, "The most beautiful thing we can experience is the mysterious. It is the source of all true art and science." Who knew that the enigmatic allure of Scarlett Johansson's filmography and the unpredictable rainfall in Paris would blend into an unexpected masterpiece of correlation?

Now that we've uncovered this delightful connection, one might ponder if there are further secrets to be revealed in the world of celebrity cinema and climatic capers. However, we are confident in asserting that no further research is required in this area, as our findings have not only brought joy to the world of statistics but have also proven that in the realm of research, as in life, sometimes the most peculiar pairings can hold genuine significance.

So, with a tip of the hat to coincidental discoveries and a round of applause for Scarlett Johansson and Parisian rain, we bid adieu to this remarkable rendezvous of data and drama. Until next time, may your research adventures be as delightfully unexpected as this one.


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 ScarJo Shows and Parisian Woes: An Analysis of the Link Between Scarlett Johansson's Films and Rainfall in Paris. Respond only with the name of a fictional academic journal.

ChatGPT:

The Journal of Cinema and Climate 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 ScarJo Shows and Parisian Woes: An Analysis of the Link Between Scarlett Johansson's Films and Rainfall in Paris. Respond only with the name of a fictional organization.

ChatGPT:

The Center for Celebrity-Climatology Studies


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 ScarJo Shows and Parisian Woes: An Analysis of the Link Between Scarlett Johansson's Films and Rainfall in Paris with an abstract of The connection between Scarlett Johansson's cinematic endeavors and precipitation in the City of Light has long been a topic of speculation, often dismissed as mere fluff. However, our research endeavors to shed light on this curious correlation through a quantitative lens. Utilizing data from The Movie DB and NOAA National Climate Data Center for the years 1994 to 2022, we uncovered a surprising correlation coefficient of 0.7057588 and p < 0.01, indicating a statistically significant relationship between the number of movies featuring Scarlett Johansson and the amount of rainfall in Paris. Our findings not only provide fodder for whimsical banter, but also emphasize the depth of influence that cinematic pursuits and meteorological phenomena can have on one another. This study not only reflects the absurdity of human curiosity but also illuminates unexpected connections in the most improbable places.

ChatGPT:

Scarlett Johansson films, Scarlett Johansson movies, Scarlett Johansson filmography, rainfall in Paris, Paris weather data, Paris precipitation, Scarlett Johansson box office, Scarlett Johansson filmography analysis, Scarlett Johansson acting career, Scarlett Johansson movie database, correlation between film and weather, Scarlett Johansson Paris connection, Scarlett Johansson cinema impact, Paris rainfall correlation, Scarlett Johansson meteorological influence

*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

The number of movies Scarlett Johansson appeared in
Source: The Movie DB
Additional Info: Scoop (2006); Girl with a Pearl Earring (2003); Vicky Cristina Barcelona (2008); The Nanny Diaries (2007); An American Rhapsody (2001); My Brother the Pig (1999); Under the Skin (2014); Manny & Lo (1996); Lucy (2014); Deep Down (2014); Rough Night (2017); Ghost in the Shell (2017); Black Widow (2021); Jeff Koons (2017); North Star (2023); Drive-Thru Records: Vol. 1 (2002); Penglai (2022); Noi siamo cinema (2021); Lost in Translation (2003); Ghost World (2001); The Spirit (2008); The Other Boleyn Girl (2008); The Black Dahlia (2006); A Love Song for Bobby Long (2004); A Good Woman (2004); We Bought a Zoo (2011); Captain America: The Winter Soldier (2014); Her (2013); Don Jon (2013); Match Point (2005); The Island (2005); Marriage Story (2019); Marriage Story: From the Pages to the Performances (2019); Moneymaker: Behind the Black Widow (2021); Asteroid City (2023); Come Home (2021); Escape from the World's Most Dangerous Place (2012); In Good Company (2004); The Perfect Score (2004); Woody Allen: A Documentary (2011); Hitchcock (2012); Marvel Studios: Assembling a Universe (2014); Captain America: Civil War (2016); Building the Dream: Assembling the Avengers (2012); Jojo Rabbit (2019); Art as Dialogue (2017); Sing 2 (2021); VOMO: Vote or Miss Out (2020); The Horse Whisperer (1998); The Prestige (2006); He's Just Not That Into You (2009); Eight Legged Freaks (2002); Yes We Can (2008); Translating History to Screen (2008); Marvel: 75 Years, from Pulp to Pop! (2014); Iron Man 2 (2010); Sing (2016); The Avengers: A Visual Journey (2012); Chadwick Boseman: A Tribute for a King (2020); Ultimate Iron Man: The Making of Iron Man 2 (2010); The Avengers (2012); Avengers: Age of Ultron (2015); Lost on Location: Behind the Scenes of 'Lost in Translation' (2004); Chef (2014); The Jungle Book (2016); Hail, Caesar! (2016); Avengers: Infinity War (2018); Avengers: Endgame (2019); Just Cause (1995); If Lucy Fell (1996); The Man Who Wasn't There (2001); Fall (1997); Catching Fire: The Story of Anita Pallenberg (2023); The Director's Notebook: The Cinematic Sleight of Hand of Christopher Nolan (2007); Bert Stern: Original Madman (2011); The SpongeBob SquarePants Movie (2004); Home Alone 3 (1997); Floyd Norman: An Animated Life (2016); Saturday Night Live: The Best of Amy Poehler (2009); Isle of Dogs (2018); Her: Love in the Modern Age (2014); Marvel Studios Assembled: The Making of Hawkeye (2022); Celebrating Marvel's Stan Lee (2019); Final Cut: Ladies and Gentlemen (2012); Captain Marvel (2019); Thor: Ragnarok (2017); North (1994)

See what else correlates with The number of movies Scarlett Johansson appeared in

Rain in Paris
Detailed data title: Number of days with >= 0.01 inch/0.254 millimeter precipitation in the year at PARIS MONTSOURIS, FR
Source: NOAA National Climate Data Center
See what else correlates with Rain in Paris

Correlation r = 0.7057588 (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 = 0.4980955 (Coefficient of determination)
This means 49.8% of the change in the one variable (i.e., Rain in Paris) is predictable based on the change in the other (i.e., The number of movies Scarlett Johansson appeared in) over the 16 years from 1994 through 2022.

p < 0.01, which is statistically significant(Null hypothesis significance test)
The p-value is 0.0023. 0.0022516851307504237000000000
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 0.71 in 0.23% of random cases. Said differently, if you correlated 444 random variables Which I absolutely did.
with the same 15 degrees of freedom, Degrees of freedom is a measure of how many free components we are testing. In this case it is 15 because we have two variables measured over a period of 16 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.

[ 0.32, 0.89 ] 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.
2005200620072008200920102011201220132014201620172019202020212022
The number of movies Scarlett Johansson appeared in (Movie appearances)2325223628556252
Rain in Paris (Precipitation days)145149156159147141126168161174168171164141185151




Why this works

  1. 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.
  2. Lack of causal connection: There is probably Because these pages are automatically generated, it's possible that the two variables you are viewing are in fact causually related. I take steps to prevent the obvious ones from showing on the site (I don't let data about the weather in one city correlate with the weather in a neighboring city, for example), but sometimes they still pop up. If they are related, cool! You found a loophole.
    no direct connection between these variables, despite what the AI says above. This is exacerbated by the fact that I used "Years" as the base variable. Lots of things happen in a year that are not related to each other! Most studies would use something like "one person" in stead of "one year" to be the "thing" studied.
  3. Observations not independent: For many variables, sequential years are not independent of each other. If a population of people is continuously doing something every day, there is no reason to think they would suddenly change how they are doing that thing on January 1. A simple Personally I don't find any p-value calculation to be 'simple,' but you know what I mean.
    p-value calculation does not take this into account, so mathematically it appears less probable than it really is.
  4. Y-axis doesn't start at zero: I truncated the Y-axes of the graph above. I also used a line graph, which makes the visual connection stand out more than it deserves. Nothing against line graphs. They are great at telling a story when you have linear data! But visually it is deceptive because the only data is at the points on the graph, not the lines on the graph. In between each point, the data could have been doing anything. Like going for a random walk by itself!
    Mathematically what I showed is true, but it is intentionally misleading. Below is the same chart but with both Y-axes starting at zero.
  5. Outlandish outliers: There are "outliers" in this data. In concept, "outlier" just means "way different than the rest of your dataset." When calculating a correlation like this, they are particularly impactful because a single outlier can substantially increase your correlation.

    For the purposes of this project, I counted a point as an outlier if it the residual was two standard deviations from the mean.

    (This bullet point only shows up in the details page on charts that do, in fact, have outliers.)
    They stand out on the scatterplot above: notice the dots that are far away from any other dots. I intentionally mishandeled outliers, which makes the correlation look extra strong.




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([2,3,2,5,2,2,3,6,2,8,5,5,6,2,5,2,])
array_2 = np.array([145,149,156,159,147,141,126,168,161,174,168,171,164,141,185,151,])
array_1_name = "The number of movies Scarlett Johansson appeared in"
array_2_name = "Rain in Paris"

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

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



Reuseable content

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

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

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

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

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

Download images for these variables:


View another random correlation

How fun was this correlation?

Your rating is pure awesomeness!


Correlation ID: 6524 · Black Variable ID: 26635 · Red Variable ID: 25363
about · subscribe · emailme@tylervigen.com · twitter

CC BY 4.0