Humans use compression heuristics to improve the recall of social networks

Scientific Reports

Volumn 3, Issue , 2013, Pages

  Brashears, Matthew E ^a  

^a Department of Obstetrics Gynecology   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ADAPTIVE BEHAVIOR; ADULT; ARTICLE; CULTURAL ANTHROPOLOGY; FAMILY; FEMALE; HUMAN; HUMAN RELATION; MALE; NEOCORTEX; PHYSIOLOGY; PROBLEM SOLVING; PSYCHOLOGICAL MODEL; RANDOMIZATION; RECALL; SOCIAL SUPPORT;

ADAPTATION, PSYCHOLOGICAL; ADULT; CULTURE; FAMILY; FEMALE; HUMANS; INTERPERSONAL RELATIONS; MALE; MENTAL RECALL; MODELS, PSYCHOLOGICAL; NEOCORTEX; PROBLEM SOLVING; RANDOM ALLOCATION; SOCIAL SUPPORT; YOUNG ADULT;

EID: 84875797313     PISSN: None     EISSN: 20452322     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1038/srep01513     Document Type: Article

References (36)

1. Bickart, K. C., Wright, C. I., Dauthoff, R. J., Dickerson, B. C. & Barrett, L. F. Amygdala volume and social network size in humans. Nat. Neurosci. 14, 163-164 (2010)
2. Meyer, M. L., Spunt, R. P., Berkman, E. T., Taylor, S. E. & Lieberman, M. D. Evidence for social working memory from a parametric functional MRI study. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 109, 1883-1888 (2012).
3. Sallet, K. et al. Social network size affects neural circuits in macaques. Science 334, 697-700 (2011).
4. Zahn, R. et al. Social concepts are represented in the superior anterior temporal cortex. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 104, 6430-6435 (2007). (Pubitemid 47186111)
5. Humphrey, N. K. The social function of intellect. Growing Points in Ethology, ed. P. P. G. Bateson & R. A. Hinde, pgs. 303-317. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press (1976).
6. Silk, J. B. Social Components of Fitness in Primate Groups. Science 317, 1347-1351 (2007). (Pubitemid 47417447)
7. Dunbar, R. I. M. Neocortex size as a constraint on group size in primates. Journal of Human Evolution 20, 469-493 (1992). (Pubitemid 23401825)
8. Dunbar, R. I. M. Coevolution of neocortical size, group size and language in humans. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 16, 681-735 (1993).
9. Dunbar, R. I. M. Neocortex size and group size in primates: a test of the hypothesis. Journal of Human Evolution 28, 287-296 (1995).
10. Goncalves, B., Perra, N. & Vespignani, A. Modeling Users' Activity on Twitter Networks: Validation of Dunbar's Number. PLOSone 6, doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0022656 (2011).
11. Stiller, J. & Dunbar, R. I. M. Perspective-taking and memory capacity predict network size. Social Networks 29, 93-104 (2007).
12. Dunbar, R. I. M. Bridging the bonding gap: the transition from primates to humans. Phil. Trans. Roy. Soc. B, 367, 1837-1846 (2012).
13. Bartlett, F. C. Remembering: A Study in Experimental and Social Psychology. Cambridge, MA: Cambridge University Press (1932).
14. Neisser, U. Cognitive Psychology. New York: Appleton-Crofts (1967).
15. Martin, C. L. New directions for investigating children's gender knowledge. Developmental Review 13, 184-204 (1993).
16. Brewer,W. F. & Treyens, J. C. Role of Schemata in Memory for Places. Cognitive Psychology 13, 207-230 (1981).
17. Janicik, G. A. & Larrick, R. P. Social Network Schemas and the Learning of Incomplete Networks. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 88, 348-364 (2005). (Pubitemid 40217038)
18. Simpson, B., Markovsky, B. & Steketee, M. Power and the perception of social networks. Social Networks 33, 166-171 (2011).
19. De Soto, C. B. Learning a Social Structure. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology 60, 417-421 (1960).
20. Picek, J. S., Sherman, S. J. & Shiffrin, R.M. Cognitive Organization and Coding of Social Structures. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 31, 758-768 (1975).
21. Bernard, H. R., Shelley, G. A. & Killworth, P. How Much of a Network does the GSS and RSW Dredge Up? Social Networks 9, 49-63 (1987).
22. McCarty, C., Killworth, P. D., Bernard, H. R., Johnsen, E.&Shelley, G. Comparing Two Methods for Estimating Network Size. Human Organization 60, 28-39 (2001). (Pubitemid 32454044)
23. DiPrete, T. A., Gelman, A.,McCormick, T., Teitler, J. & Zheng, T. Segregation and Social Networks Based on Acquaintanceship and Trust. American Journal of Sociology 116, 1234-1283 (2011).
24. Killworth, P. D., Johnsen, E. G., Bernard, H. R., Shelley, G. A. & McCarty, C. Estimating the size of personal networks. Social Networks 12, 289-312 (1990).
25. Apicella, C. L., Marlowe, F. W., Fowler, J. H. & Christakis, N. A. Social networks and cooperation in hunter-gatherers. Nature. 481, 497-501 (2012).
26. Marsden, P. V. Core Discussion Networks of Americans. American Sociological Review 52, 122-131 (1987).
27. Wasserman, S. & Faust, K. Social Network Analysis: Methods and Applications. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Pgs. 101-103 (1999).
28. DeScioli, P. & Kurzban, R. The Alliance Hypothesis for Human Friendship. PLoS ONE 4, doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0005802 (2009).
29. Newman, M. E. J. & Park, J. Why social networks are different from other types of networks. Phys. Rev. E 68, Doi: 10.1103/PhysRevE.68.036122 (2003).
30. Heider, F. The Psychology of Interpersonal Relations. New York: Wiley (1958).
31. Burt, R. S. Structural Holes: The Social Structure of Competition. Cambridge: Harvard University Press (1992).
32. Mann, J., Stanton, M. A., Patterson, E. M., Bienenstock, E. J. & Singh, L. O. Social networks reveal cultural behaviour in tool-using dolphins. Nat. Comms. 3, doi:10.1039/ncomms1983 (2012).
33. Myowa-Yamakoshi, M., Scola, C. & Hirata, S. Humans and chimpanzees attend differently to goal-directed actions. Nat. Comms. 3, doi:10.1038/ ncomms1695 (2012).
34. Paz-y-Mino, C, G., Bond, A. B., Kamil, A. C. & Balda, R. P. Pinyon jays use transitive inference to predict social dominance. Nature 430, 778-781 (2004). (Pubitemid 39071347)
35. Reisberg, D. Cognition: Exploring the Science of the Mind. New York: W. W. Norton & Company (1997).
36. Daneman,M. & Carpenter, P. A. Individual Differences in WorkingMemory and Reading. Journal of Verbal Learning and Verbal Behavior 19, 450-466 (1980).