INSTITUTE DOCUMENT · 01
The Global Institute of Goonability Research
The Institute exists to quantify one of humanity's least understood cultural phenomena.
Our Mission
Through independent anonymous assessments conducted across the Internet, the Institute continuously measures the perceived goonability of food, technology, entertainment, cultural artifacts, public entertainers, fictional entities, consumer products, Internet phenomena, and other subjects requiring investigation.
Our mission is simple: Measure everything. Explain nothing.
Goonability is treated as an objective property of everything in the universe. The Institute makes no attempt to justify this position. It measures.
The State of the Field
Search interest in the term across the United States reached 4.3 times its October 2021 level in January 2026, the highest month on record. In September 2026 it stood at 3.5 times.
The Institute did not cause this. It intends to measure it.
Source: Google Trends. Web search interest in “goon”, United States, monthly; 100 is the highest month in the period.
VIEW THE DATA
| MONTH | INTEREST |
|---|---|
| OCT 2021 | 23 |
| NOV 2021 | 23 |
| DEC 2021 | 23 |
| JAN 2022 | 28 |
| FEB 2022 | 31 |
| MAR 2022 | 28 |
| APR 2022 | 31 |
| MAY 2022 | 27 |
| JUN 2022 | 25 |
| JUL 2022 | 26 |
| AUG 2022 | 25 |
| SEP 2022 | 24 |
| OCT 2022 | 25 |
| NOV 2022 | 24 |
| DEC 2022 | 30 |
| JAN 2023 | 31 |
| FEB 2023 | 30 |
| MAR 2023 | 30 |
| APR 2023 | 33 |
| MAY 2023 | 33 |
| JUN 2023 | 38 |
| JUL 2023 | 31 |
| AUG 2023 | 49 |
| SEP 2023 | 42 |
| OCT 2023 | 45 |
| NOV 2023 | 43 |
| DEC 2023 | 43 |
| JAN 2024 | 50 |
| FEB 2024 | 49 |
| MAR 2024 | 69 |
| APR 2024 | 57 |
| MAY 2024 | 57 |
| JUN 2024 | 52 |
| JUL 2024 | 53 |
| AUG 2024 | 50 |
| SEP 2024 | 51 |
| OCT 2024 | 50 |
| NOV 2024 | 50 |
| DEC 2024 | 57 |
| JAN 2025 | 60 |
| FEB 2025 | 77 |
| MAR 2025 | 76 |
| APR 2025 | 81 |
| MAY 2025 | 76 |
| JUN 2025 | 72 |
| JUL 2025 | 75 |
| AUG 2025 | 74 |
| SEP 2025 | 72 |
| OCT 2025 | 81 |
| NOV 2025 | 89 |
| DEC 2025 | 87 |
| JAN 2026 | 100 |
| FEB 2026 | 95 |
| MAR 2026 | 98 |
| APR 2026 | 91 |
| MAY 2026 | 87 |
| JUN 2026 | 78 |
| JUL 2026 | 77 |
| AUG 2026 | 76 |
| SEP 2026 | 80 |
Methodology
Every subject is assessed on a single integer scale from 0 to 10. Aggregate results retain decimal precision, because rounding destroys the comparisons that make the dataset worth keeping. The full statistical procedure is documented separately.
Research Standards
One assessment per anonymous session per subject. Assessments may be revised; a revision replaces the previous figure rather than adding to it. Skipped subjects are recorded as activity but are never counted as assessments, and no subject is publicly ranked by how often it was skipped.
Automated submissions are rejected where detected. The Institute would rather publish a smaller honest dataset than a larger contaminated one.
Global Goonability Index
The Index is the Institute's central instrument: the arithmetic mean of all valid current assessments for a subject. It is displayed and ranked from the first assessment onward, with the state of its sample stated beside it. A number drawn from four responses is a real number about four responses, and the Institute reports it as exactly that rather than concealing it until the sample flatters us.
Controversy Research
An average conceals disagreement. A subject rated 7 by everyone and a subject rated 0 by half the population and 10 by the other half can report identical means while describing entirely different cultural situations.
The Institute therefore measures dispersion independently of the average, and publishes it as the Controversy Index.
Longitudinal Cultural Analysis
Assessments are timestamped and preserved. This allows the Institute to answer questions that a single snapshot cannot: whether a seasonal product recovers each autumn, whether a dormant meme has re-entered circulation, whether an item's standing moved after an external cultural event.
Historical research is an active program. Its published outputs remain in preparation.
Research Ethics
Person-based subjects are restricted to verified adult public entertainers and public figures. No minor is ever a subject of assessment. The Institute does not host explicit sexual imagery, and does not publish cruel, degrading or defamatory claims about any real person. Ratings are opinions held by anonymous members of the public. They are not findings of fact about the subject.
Rights holders and subjects may raise concerns through the rights and content requests channel.
Terminology
Goonability (n.) — the capacity of a subject to provoke, in an observer, enthusiasm out of all proportion to its merits.
The Institute measures the magnitude of that response. It declines to characterize its nature, on the grounds that respondents have never required assistance in doing so themselves.
For the purposes of assessment, a score of 10 indicates the highest attainable degree of enthusiasm for the subject, and a score of 0 its complete absence. What the intervening figures represent is a matter for the individual researcher.
This is not evasion. The Index measures the intensity of an opinion that the Institute did not supply, and a definition issued from here would constrain the response it is trying to record. The ambiguity is the instrument.
Frequently Questioned Research
Is this serious? The methodology is. The subject matter is a matter for the reader.
What does the word actually mean? See terminology, above, where the Institute defines it once and declines to elaborate.
Who funds the Institute? Nobody. This has not affected our output.
Can a subject's score be corrected? Not by request. The Index reports what the public assessed. Errors of metadata, attribution or rights are corrected; errors of public opinion are not.
Why does an item show a score but no rank? Only because nobody has assessed it yet, or — in the divisive table specifically — because a single assessment has no disagreement to measure. Every other subject is ranked from its first vote. There is no minimum.
Disclaimer
Would You Goon? is an independent satirical opinion and entertainment project. Ratings represent anonymous user opinions and are not factual claims. No person, company, artist, performer, franchise, product, or other subject featured on this site sponsors, endorses, or is affiliated with Would You Goon? unless expressly stated.
Would You Goon? does not host explicit sexual imagery and does not permit minors as subjects of person-based ratings.