An private human can keep steady social relationships with about 150 individuals. This is the proposal called ‘Dunbar’s number’ – that the architecture of the human brain sets a ceiling on our social lives. A brand-new research study from Stockholm University suggests that a cognitive limitation on human group sizes cannot be obtained in this way.
Dunbar’s number is called after the British anthropologist Robin Dunbar, who proposed the theory in the 1990s. The number 150 is based upon a projection of the connection in between the relative size of the neocortex and group sizes in non-human primates. Some empirical research studies have actually discovered assistance for this number, while other have actually reported other group sizes.
“The theoretical foundation of Dunbar’s number is shaky. Other primates’ brains do not handle information exactly as human brains do, and primate sociality is primarily explained by other factors than the brain, such as what they eat and who their predators are. Furthermore, humans have a large variation in the size of their social networks,” states Patrik Lindenfors, Associate Professor of Zoological Ecology at Stockholm University and the Institute for Futures Studies, and among the authors of the research study.
Does the brain limitation our social capability, in monkeys along with human beings? Credit: Johan Lind/N
When the Swedish scientists duplicated Dunbar’s analyses utilizing modern-day analytical techniques and upgraded information on primate brains, the outcomes were all at once much bigger and far lower than 150.
The typical optimal group size typically ended up being lower than 150 individuals. But the primary issue was that the 95% self-confidence periods for these quotes were in between 2 and 520 individuals.
“It is not possible to make an estimate for humans with any precision using available methods and data,” states Andreas Wartel, co-author of the research study.
Dunbar’s number’ is typically mentioned and has actually had an excellent effect in pop culture, not the least after including plainly in Malcolm Gladwell’s book “The Tipping Point”. In 2007, Swedish media reported that the Swedish Tax Authority restructured their workplaces to remain within the 150-individual limitation.
“This reorganization would then be based on the implicit but hopefully unintended assumption that their employees have neither family nor friends outside of work,” states Patrik Lindenfors and includes, “I think Dunbar’s number is widely spread, also among researchers, since it’s so easy to understand. Our claim that it is not possible to calculate a number is not quite as entertaining”
Ideas such as Dunbar’s number emphasize concerns about the long reach of the gene.
“Are human social interactions genetically limited via the genes’ influence on the brain’s architecture? New research on cultural evolution has revealed the importance of cultural inheritance for what humans do and how we think. Culture affects everything from size of social networks to whether we can play chess or if we like hiking. Just like someone can learn to remember an enormous number of decimals in the number pi, our brain can be trained in having more social contacts” states Johan Lind, deputy director of the Centre for Cultural Evolution at Stockholm University and co-author of the research study.
Reference: “‘Dunbar’s number’ deconstructed” 4 May 2021, Biology Letters.
DOI: 10.
