Have We All Exceeded Dunbar's Number?

In reviewing Psychological Aspects of Cyberspace: Theory, Research, Applications, Matthew Hile of the Missouri Institute of Mental Health alludes to "Dunbar's number," the theoretical upper limit on the number of persons with whom one can maintain meaningful, stable, and coherent social connections (estimated to be approximately 150 people). This number is hypothesized to be set by relative neocortex size.

With our numerous links to Facebook, Twitter, MySpace, and other social networking sites, have many of us exceeded the cognitive limits set by Dunbar's number?

Read the Review

A Brave New World
By Matthew G. Hile
      PsycCRITIQUES, 2009 Vol 54(23)

Comments

[Greg Zerovnik, PhD]

Dunbar's number is, if anything, optimistic in my estimation. Within the field of management we talk about "span of control" and that number is generally regarded as 5 to 7. I had a good friend who at one time had waited tables at one of the tonier restaurants in New Orleans. He said the rule about waiting tables was "5 tables for excellent service without question, 7 with some difficulty, 10 would be impossible" (I'm paraphrasing).

It strikes me that research and commentary that has been done more recently on multitasking (as in, "the myth of multitasking") like Christine Rosen's piece (2008) that alludes to James's original work on attention is very much to the point here. Rosen cites research by Marois at Vanderbilt and Meyer at Michigan on the neurological constraints of adaptive executive control.

For myself, I prefer to think of networks like FaceBook and Linked-In, both of which I belong to, as specialized address books, not unlike Outlook groups, but for contacts with whom I may share a particular area of interest.