Report an error
Associates degrees awarded in social services correlates with...
| Variable | Correlation | Years | Has img? |
| The number of elementary school teachers in Delaware | r=0.96 | 11yrs | No |
| The number of special education teachers in Alabama | r=0.95 | 10yrs | No |
| The number of CEOs in Minnesota | r=0.94 | 11yrs | No |
| Popularity of the first name Madeleine | r=0.94 | 11yrs | No |
| Wins for the Baltimore Orioles | r=0.92 | 11yrs | Yes! |
| Google searches for 'how to delete browsing history' | r=0.92 | 11yrs | Yes! |
| The marriage rate in Delaware | r=0.91 | 11yrs | No |
| Number of pirate attacks in Indonesia | r=0.9 | 11yrs | No |
| Google searches for 'how to make charts' | r=0.89 | 11yrs | No |
| Google searches for 'how much wood can a woodchuck chuck' | r=0.82 | 11yrs | No |
Associates degrees awarded in social services also correlates with...
<< Back to discover a correlation
You caught me! While it would be intuitive to sort only by "correlation," I have a big, weird database. If I sort only by correlation, often all the top results are from some one or two very large datasets (like the weather or labor statistics), and it overwhelms the page.
I can't show you *all* the correlations, because my database would get too large and this page would take a very long time to load. Instead I opt to show you a subset, and I sort them by a magic system score. It starts with the correlation, but penalizes variables that repeat from the same dataset. (It also gives a bonus to variables I happen to find interesting.)