New study deconstructs Dunbar's number number of friends. Retrieved November 14, from www. This discovery could help identify similar locations in the human Mini-brains are miniature human brain models, This is the finding of a new review of the dysfunctional use of smart ScienceDaily shares links with sites in the TrendMD network and earns revenue from third-party advertisers, where indicated. Print Email Share. Boy or Girl? Living Well. View all the latest top news in the environmental sciences, or browse the topics below:.
Keyword: Search. This layered structure turns up in both communities and personal social networks, with each layer being around three times the size of the layer immediately inside it. In fact, the same layers, with the same sizes, turn up in the multi-level societies of monkeys, apes, dolphins and elephants. This is why hugging and physical touch is so important in our relationships. Read more: HugaBrit: the science of hugs and why they mostly feel so good.
They use a statistical technique called regression analysis to calculate the relationship between group size and brain size. So far so good — we all do that. But regression analysis comes in different forms. This was designed for used in experiments where we can specify the values on the X-axis brain size in our case precisely. In addition, we now know that the social brain relationship actually consists of four grades.
This also causes LSR to underestimate the slope, thus compounding the problem. Better still, we should apply the equation for the right grade, or we could be off by a very long way.
Our social world is extremely small-scale. Now that research shows these group size numbers have stabilized—what does that information tell us?
Well, first about the nature of your friendships and your social world. It has become apparent in the last 10 years that the most important factor influencing your health, well-being, risk of falling ill, even your risk of dying and divorce is actually the size of your friend network.
Laughing together, jogging together, dancing together, singing together, telling emotionally wrenching stories, going to see weepy films—these activities buffer the body biochemically and immunologically against the kinds of coughs and colds of everyday life.
How would you encourage someone to make friends? One of the best ways is joining a singing club. We did a study comparing novice singing classes with novice hobby classes in terms of how much these activities produced feelings of social bonding.
Take the freaking earpieces out and talk to the guy next to you. How have singing, dancing and laughter helped humans maximize our social bonding and group sizes? The problem is that physical grooming is really inefficient.
For humans to increase group size, we somehow we had to break through that particular barrier of just using grooming to bolster community bonds. We had to find new ways of doing these things. And laughter allows you to do that with several people simultaneously. It turns out the limit of conversational laughter group size—say, at a bar—is about three people, which is slightly below the limit for conversation group size, which is four.
These numbers are very consistent in my research. The same goes with storytelling. What other areas might these stable social numbers might be informative for?
The other side has to do more with whether there are sizes of organizations that work more efficiently than others.
0コメント