Additional Info: Relative search volume (not absolute numbers)
Report an error
Google searches for 'pick up lines' correlates with...
Variable | Correlation | Years | Has img? |
Associates degrees awarded in information sciences | r=0.91 | 11yrs | Yes! |
Associates degrees awarded in Visual and performing arts | r=0.91 | 11yrs | No |
The number of economists in California | r=0.9 | 19yrs | No |
Popularity of the 'first world problems' meme | r=0.89 | 18yrs | No |
Popularity of the 'success kid' meme | r=0.85 | 18yrs | Yes! |
UFO sightings in Washington | r=0.82 | 18yrs | No |
Popularity of the 'bazinga' meme | r=0.78 | 18yrs | No |
Global plane crashes | r=0.77 | 19yrs | No |
The number of microbiologists in Maine | r=0.73 | 18yrs | No |
Associates degrees awarded in Nursing | r=0.71 | 11yrs | No |
Super Bowl TV viewership | r=0.68 | 19yrs | No |
The number of movies Brad Pitt appeared in | r=0.47 | 20yrs | No |
Google searches for 'pick up lines' 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.)