Additional Info: I asked a large language model, 'On a scale of 1-10, how _______ do you think this YouTube video title is?' for every video.
Report an error
How clickbait-y MrBeast's YouTube video titles are correlates with...
Variable | Correlation | Years | Has img? |
The number of dietitians and nutritionists in Maryland | r=0.93 | 11yrs | Yes! |
The number of agricultural equipment operators in Puerto Rico | r=0.92 | 8yrs | No |
Popularity of the first name Dina | r=0.87 | 11yrs | No |
Number of times 24 was a winning Mega Millions number | r=0.86 | 12yrs | No |
Air pollution in Albuquerque | r=0.85 | 12yrs | No |
Average temperature in Boston | r=0.81 | 12yrs | No |
Amazon.com's stock price (AMZN) | r=0.62 | 12yrs | No |
How clickbait-y MrBeast's YouTube video titles are 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.)