2011
DOI: 10.1111/j.1548-1433.2011.01369.x
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Dunbar's Number: Group Size and Brain Physiology in Humans Reexamined

Abstract: Popular academic ideas linking physiological adaptations to social behaviors are spreading disconcertingly into wider societal contexts. In this article, we note our skepticism with one particularly popular—in our view, problematic—supposed causal correlation between neocortex size and social group size. The resulting Dunbar's Number, as it has come to be called, has been statistically tested against observed group size in different primate species. Although there may be reason to doubt the Dunbar's Number hyp… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1

Citation Types

0
22
0
1

Year Published

2012
2012
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
8
2

Relationship

0
10

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 34 publications
(23 citation statements)
references
References 50 publications
(57 reference statements)
0
22
0
1
Order By: Relevance
“…While it is true that many human groups exceed the Dunbar’s threshold [82], it is worth noting that his model does leave room for that possibility, provided that groups find a way to counteract the divisive forces that increase with increasing group size [83], as Johnson has pointed out. In this respect, Carneiro [84] (see also [5]) contrasts the case of the Yanomama villages (fissioning when size rises above 200) to that of the Kayapò (whose villages reach 600/800 inhabitants), arguing that what accounts for the difference is the organization of the second into nested social segments.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 97%
“…While it is true that many human groups exceed the Dunbar’s threshold [82], it is worth noting that his model does leave room for that possibility, provided that groups find a way to counteract the divisive forces that increase with increasing group size [83], as Johnson has pointed out. In this respect, Carneiro [84] (see also [5]) contrasts the case of the Yanomama villages (fissioning when size rises above 200) to that of the Kayapò (whose villages reach 600/800 inhabitants), arguing that what accounts for the difference is the organization of the second into nested social segments.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 97%
“…For the caller-callee interactions in mobile communication there are four fundamental possibilities, namely male to male, male to female, female to male, and female to female, which together with age, kinship, and different levels of friendships affect the strengths of social interactions, giving rise to a wide scope of human sociality. The studies of primate brain size and its relation to their average social group size suggest that humans are able to maintain of the order of 150 stable relationships (Dunbar number) [1][2][3]. In addition the Social Brain hypothesis suggests that on the basis of emotional closeness human social networks can be divided into four cumulative layers of 5, 15, 50 and 150 individuals, respectively [4].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…As a result, the approach presented here shows the best results for people with more than 150 contacts on Facebook. There is, however, a cognitive limit to the number of friends with whom someone can maintain a steady relationship [33]; this number is held to be about 150 people, but this is not exact, and proposed values vary between 100 and 230 contacts. The students in this study fell within this range.…”
Section: A Challenges Of Using Self-social Media Datamentioning
confidence: 97%