Do online social media cut through the constraints that limit the size of offline social networks?

Royal Society Open Science

Volumn 3, Issue 1, 2016, Pages

  Dunbar, R I M ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF OXFORD   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

Egocentric networks; Network size; Social brain hypothesis; Social networking sites (SNSs)

Indexed keywords

EID: 84958078590     PISSN: None     EISSN: 20545703     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1098/rsos.150292     Document Type: Article

References (80)

1. Uslaner EM. 2000 Social capital and the Net. Commun. ACM 43, 60-65. (doi: 10. 1145/355112. 355125).
2. Zhao S. 2006 Do internet users have more social ties? A call for differentiated analyses of internet use. J. Comput. Mediat. Commun. 11, 844-862. (doi: 10. 1111/j. 1083-6101. 2006. 00038. x).
3. Parks MR, Floyd K. 1996 Making friends in cyberspace. J. Commun. 46, 80-97. (doi: 10. 1111/j. 1460-2466. 1996. tb01462. x).
4. Kraut R, Patterson M, Lundmark V, Kiesler S, Mukopadhyay T, ScherlisW. 1998 Internet paradox: a social technology that reduces social involvement and psychological well-being? Am. Psychol. 53, 1017-1031. (doi: 10. 1037/0003-066X. 53. 9. 1017).
5. Nie NH. 2001 Sociability, interpersonal relations, and the internet: reconciling conflicting findings. Am. Behav. Sci. 45, 420-435. (doi: 10. 1177/0002764012 1957277).
6. Nie NH, Hillygus DS. 2002 The impact of Internet use on sociability: time-diary findings. IT Soc. 1, 1-20.
7. Mesch GS. 2006 Family relations and the Internet: exploring a family boundaries approach. J. Family Commun. 6, 119-138. (doi: 10. 1207/s15327698 jfc0602_2).
8. Rheingold H. 1993 The virtual community: homesteading on the electronic frontier. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
9. Wellman B, Quan-Haase A, Witte J, Hampton K. 2001 Does the Internet increase, decrease or supplement social capital? Social networks, participation and community commitment. Am. Behav. Sci. 45, 436-465. (doi: 10. 1177/0002764 0121957286).
10. Bargh JA, McKenna KYA. 2004 The Internet and social life. Annu. Rev. Psychol. 55, 573-590. (doi: 10. 1146/annurev. psych. 55. 090902. 141922).
11. Valkenburg P, Peter J. 2009 Social consequences of the Internet for adolescents: a decade of research. Curr. Dir. Psychol. Sci. 18, 1-5. (doi: 10. 1111/j. 1467-8721. 2009. 01595. x).
12. Brandtzæg PB, Heim J, Kaare B. 2010 Bridging and bonding in social network sites-investigating family-based capital. Int. J. Web Based Commun. 6, 231-353. (doi: 10. 1504/IJWBC. 2010. 033750).
13. Quan-Haase A, Wellman B. 2004 How does the internet affect social capital? In Social capital and information technology (eds V Huysman, MWulf), pp. 113-132. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
14. Valkenburg PM, Schouten AP, Peter J. 2005 Adolescents' identity experiments on the Internet. New Media Soc. 7, 383-402. (doi: 10. 1177/1461444 805052282).
15. Freberg K, Adams R, McGaughey K, Freberg L. 2010 The rich get richer: online and offline social connectivity predicts subjective loneliness. Media Psychol. Rev. 3.
16. Wang H, Wellman B. 2010 Social connectivity in America: changes in adult friendship network size from 2002 to 2007. Am. Behav. Sci. 53, 1148-1169. (doi: 10. 1177/0002764209356247).
17. Howes C. 1996 The earliest friendships. In The company they keep: friendship in childhood and adolescence (eds WMBukowski, AF Newcomb, WW Hartup), pp. 66-86. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
18. Dunbar RIM. 1993 Coevolution of neocortex size, group size and language in humans. Behav. Brain Sci. 16, 681-735. (doi: 10. 1017/S0140525X00032325).
19. ZhouW-X, Sornette D, Hill RA, Dunbar RIM. 2005 Discrete hierarchical organization of social group sizes. Proc. R. Soc. B 272, 439-444. (doi: 10. 1098/rspb. 2004. 2970).
20. Hamilton MJ, Milne BT, Walker RS, Burger O, Brown JH. 2007 The complex structure of hunter-gatherer social networks. Proc. R. Soc. B 274, 2195-2202. (doi: 10. 1098/rspb. 2007. 0564).
21. Hill RA, Dunbar RIM. 2003 Social network size in humans. Hum. Nat. 14, 53-72. (doi: 10. 1007/s12110-003-1016-y).
22. Roberts SBG, Dunbar RIM, Pollet TV, Kuppens T. 2009 Exploring variations in active network size: constraints and ego characteristics. Soc. Netw. 31, 138-146. (doi: 10. 1016/j. socnet. 2008. 12. 002).
23. Dunbar RIM. 1998 The social brain hypothesis. Evol. Anthropol. 6, 178-190. (doi: 10. 1002/(SICI)1520-6505(1998)6: 5<178:: AID-EVAN5>3. 0. CO; 2-8).
24. Roberts SBG, Dunbar RIM. 2011 The costs of family and friends: an 18-month longitudinal study of relationship maintenance and decay. Evol. Hum. Behav. 32, 186-197. (doi: 10. 1016/j. evolhumbehav. 2010. 08. 005).
25. Sutcliffe AJ, Dunbar RIM, Binder J, Arrow H. 2012 Relationships and the social brain: integrating psychological and evolutionary perspectives. Br. J. Psychol. 103, 149-168. (doi: 10. 1111/j. 2044-8295. 2011. 02061. x).
26. Lewis PA, Rezaie R, Browne R, Roberts N, Dunbar RIM. 2011 Ventromedial prefrontal volume predicts understanding of others and social network size. NeuroImage 57, 1624-1629. (doi: 10. 1016/j. neuro image. 2011. 05. 030).
27. Bickart KC, Wright CI, Dautoff RJ, Dickerson BC, Barrett LF. 2011 Amygdala volume and social network size in humans. Nat. Neurosci. 14, 163-164. (doi: 10. 1038/nn. 2724).
28. Powell J, Lewis PA, Roberts N, García-Fiñana M, Dunbar RIM. 2012 Orbital prefrontal cortex volume predicts social network size: an imaging study of individual differences in humans. Proc. R. Soc. B 279, 2157-2162. (doi: 10. 1098/rspb. 2011. 2574).
29. Kanai R, Bahrami B, Roylance R, Rees G. 2011 Online social network size is reflected in human brain structure. Proc. R. Soc. B 279, 1327-1334. (doi: 10. 1098/rspb. 2011. 1959).
30. Sallet J et al. 2011 Social network size affects neural circuits in macaques. Science 334, 697-700. (doi: 10. 1126/science. 1210027).
31. Hill RA, Bentley A, Dunbar RIM. 2008 Network scaling reveals consistent fractal pattern in hierarchical mammalian societies. Biol. Lett. 4, 748-751. (doi: 10. 1098/rsbl. 2008. 0393).
32. Dunbar RIM. 2014 The social brain: psychological underpinnings and implications for the structure of organizations. Curr. Dir. Psychol. Sci. 24, 109-114. (doi: 10. 1177/0963721413517118).
33. Dunbar RIM, Arnaboldi V, Conti M, Passarella A. 2015 The structure of online social networks mirrors those in the offline world. Soc. Netw. 43, 39-47. (doi: 10. 1016/j. socnet. 2015. 04. 005).
34. Miritello G, Moro E, Lara R, Martínez-López R, Belchamber J, Roberts SBG, Dunbar RIM. 2013 Time as a limited resource: communication strategy in mobile phone networks. Soc. Netw. 35, 89-95. (doi: 10. 1016/j. socnet. 2013. 01. 003).
35. Roberts SBG, Dunbar RIM. 2011 Communication in social networks: effects of kinship, network size and emotional closeness. Pers. Relationships 18, 439-452. (doi: 10. 1111/j. 1475-6811. 2010. 01310. x).
36. Roberts SBG, Arrow H, Lehmann J, Dunbar RIM. 2014 Close social relationships: an evolutionary perspective. In Lucy to language: the benchmark papers (eds RIM Dunbar, C Gamble, JAJ Gowlett), pp. 151-180. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
37. Boase J, Horrigan JB, Wellman B, Rainie L. 2006 The strength of internet ties. Washington, DC: Pew Internet and American Life Project.
38. Hansen M. 2009 Collaboration. Cambridge, MA: Harvard Business School Press.
39. Wellman B. 2012 Is Dunbar's number up? Br. J. Psychol. 103, 174-176. (doi: 10. 1111/j. 2044-8295. 2011. 02075. x).
40. Dunbar RIM, Duncan NDC, Nettle D. 1995 Size and structure of freely forming conversational groups. Hum. Nat. 6, 67-78. (doi: 10. 1007/BF02734136).
41. Dezecache G, Dunbar RIM. 2012 Sharing the joke: the size of natural laughter groups. Evol. Hum. Behav. 33, 775-779. (doi: 10. 1016/j. evolhumbehav. 2012. 07. 002).
42. Krems J, Dunbar RIM. 2013 Clique size and network characteristics in hyperlink cinema: constraints of evolved psychology. Hum. Nat. 24, 414-429. (doi: 10. 1007/s12110-013-9177-9).
43. Dunbar RIM. 1998 Theory of mind and the evolution of language. In Approaches to the evolution of language (eds J Hurford, M Studdart-Kennedy, C Knight), pp. 92-110. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
44. Granovetter M. 1973 The strength of weak ties. Am. J. Sociol. 78, 1360-1380. (doi: 10. 1086/225469).
45. Haythornthwaite C. 2000 Online personal networks: size, composition and media use among distance learners. New Media Soc. 2, 195-226. (doi: 10. 1177/ 14614440022225779).
46. Kim K, Kim GJ, Park HW, Rice RE. 2007 Configurations of relationships in different media: FtF, email, instant messenger, mobile phone, and SMS. J. Comput. Mediat. Commun. 12, 1183-1207. (doi: 10. 1111/j. 1083-6101. 2007. 00369. x).
47. Sooryamoorthy R, Miller BP, ShrumW. 2008 Untangling the technology cluster: mobile telephony, internet use and the location of social ties. New Media Soc. 10, 729-749. (doi: 10. 1177/1461 444808094354).
48. Vergeer M, Pelzer B. 2009 Consequences of media and internet use for offline and online network capital and well-being. A causal model approach. J. Comput. Mediat. Commun. 15, 189-210. (doi: 10. 1111/j. 1083-6101. 2009. 01499. x).
49. Palackal A, Mbatia PN, Dzorgbo D-B, Duque RB, Ynalvez MA, ShrumWM. 2011 Are mobile phones changing social networks? A longitudinal study of core networks in Kerala. New Media Soc. 13, 391-410. (doi: 10. 1177/1461444810393900).
50. Stefanone MA, Kwon KH, Lackaff D. 2012 Exploring the relationship between perceptions of social capital and enacted support online. J. Comput. Mediat. Commun. 17, 451-466. (doi: 10. 1111/j. 1083-6101. 2012. 01585. x).
51. Brandtzæg PB. 2012 Social networking sites: their users and social implications: a longitudinal study. J. Comput. Mediat. Commun. 17, 467-488. (doi: 10. 1111/j. 1083-6101. 2012. 01580. x).
52. Gonçalves B, Perra N, Vespignani A. 2011 Validation of Dunbar's number in Twitter conversations. PLoS ONE 6, e22656. (doi: 10. 1371/journal. pone. 0022 656).
53. Haerter JO, Jamtveit B, Mathiesen J. 2012 Communication dynamics in finite capacity social networks. Phys. Rev. Lett. 109, 168701. (doi: 10. 1103/PhysRevLett. 109. 168701).
54. Dunbar RIM, Spoors M. 1995 Social networks, support cliques and kinship. Hum. Nat. 6, 273-290. (doi: 10. 1007/BF02734142).
55. Pollet TV, Roberts S, Dunbar R. 2011 Extraverts have larger social network layers but do not feel emotionally closer to individuals at any layer. J. Individual Differ. 32, 161-169. (doi: 10. 1027/1614-0001/a000048).
56. Stiller J, Dunbar RIM. 2007 Perspective-taking and memory capacity predict social network size. Soc. Netw. 29, 93-104. (doi: 10. 1016/j. socnet. 2006. 04. 001).
57. Rosen D, Stefanone MA, Lackaff D. 2010 Online and offline social networks: investigating culturally-specific behavior and satisfaction. In Proc. of the 43rd Hawaii Int. Conf. on SystemSciences, pp. 1-10. New Brunswick, NJ: Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers (IEEE).
58. Fischer CS. 1982What do we mean by friend? An inductive study. Soc. Netw. 3, 287-306. (doi: 10. 1016/0378-8733(82)90004-1).
59. Johnson MP, Milardo RM. 1984 Network interference in pair relationships: a social psychological recasting of Slater's theory of social regression. J. Marriage Family 46, 893-899. (doi: 10. 2307/352537).
60. Bernard HR, Johnsen EC, Killworth PD, McCarty C, Shelley GA, Robinson S. 1990 Comparing four different methods for measuring personal social networks. Soc. Netw. 12, 179-215. (doi: 10. 1016/0378-8733(90)90005-T).
61. van Sonderen E, Ormel J, Brilman E, van den Heuvell C. 1990 Personal network delineation. In Social network research (eds CPM Knipscheer, TC Antonucci), pp. 101-120. Amsterdam, The Netherlands: Swets and Zeitlinger.
62. Hartup WW, Stevens N. 1997 Friendship and adaptation in the life course. Psychol. Bull. 12, 355-370. (doi: 10. 1037/0033-2909. 121. 3. 355).
63. Lang FR. 2000 Endings and continuity of social relationships: maximizing intrinsic benefits within personal networks when feeling near to death. J. Soc. Person. Relationships 17, 155-182. (doi: 10. 1177/ 0265407500172001).
64. Marin A. 2004 Are respondents more likely to list alters with certain characteristics? Implications for name generator data. Soc. Netw. 26, 289-307. (doi: 10. 1016/j. socnet. 2004. 06. 001).
65. McPherson M, Smith-Lovin L, Brashears ME. 2006 Social isolation in America: changes in core discussion networks over two decades. Am. Sociol. Rev. 71, 353-375. (doi: 10. 1177/00031224060710 0301).
66. Buys CJ, Larson KL. 1979 Human sympathy groups. Psychol. Rep. 45, 547-553. (doi: 10. 2466/pr0. 1979. 45. 2. 547).
67. McCannell K. 1988 Social networks and the transition to motherhood. In Families and social networks (ed. RM Milardo), pp. 83-106. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
68. Rands M. 1988 Changes in social networks following marital separation and divorce. In Families and social networks (ed. RM Milardo), pp. 127-146. Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications.
69. Pollet TV, Roberts SBG, Dunbar RIM. 2011 Use of social network sites and instant messaging does not lead to increased offline social network size, or to emotionally closer relationships with offline network members. Cyberpsychol. Behav. Soc. Netw. 14, 253-258. (doi: 10. 1089/cyber. 2010. 0161).
70. Cairns RB, Leung M, Buchanan L, Cairns BD. 1995 Friendships and social networks in childhood and adolescence: fluidity, reliability, and interrelations. Child Dev. 66, 1330-1345. (doi: 10. 2307/1131650).
71. Powell J, Lewis PA, Dunbar RIM, García-Fiñana M, Roberts N. 2010 Orbital prefrontal cortex volume correlates with social cognitive competence. Neuropsychologia 48, 3554-3562. (doi: 10. 1016/j. neuropsychologia. 2010. 08. 004).
72. Tong ST, Van Der Heide B, Langwell L. 2008 Too much of a good thing? The relationship between number of friends and interpersonal impressions on Facebook. J. Comput. Mediat. Commun. 13, 531-549. (doi: 10. 1111/j. 1083-6101. 2008. 00409. x).
73. Petersen B. 2013Where are all the Facebook teens going? See http: //www. globalwebindex. net/ blog/facebook-teens (accessed 5 December 2015).
74. Brandtzæg PB, Lüders M, Skjetne JH. 2010 Too many Facebook 'friends'? Content sharing and sociability versus the need for privacy in social network sites. Int. J. Hum. Comput. Interact. 26, 1006-1030. (doi: 10. 1080/10447318. 2010. 516719).
75. Madden M, Lenhart A, Cortesi S, Gasser U, Duggan M, Smith A, Beaton M. 2013 Teens, social media, and privacy. Washington, DC: Pew Research Center.
76. Roberts SBG, Dunbar RIM. 2015 Managing relationship decay: network, gender and contextual effects. Hum. Nat. 26, 426-450. (doi: 10. 1007/s12110-015-9242-7).
77. Saramäki J, Leicht E, López E, Roberts SBG, Reed-Tsochas F, Dunbar RIM. 2014 The persistence of social signatures in human communication. Proc. Natl Acad. Sci. USA 111, 942-947. (doi: 10. 1073/pnas. 1308540110).
78. Jo H-H, Saramäki J, Dunbar R, Kaski K. 2014 Spatial patterns of close relationships across the lifespan. Sci. Rep. 4, 6988. (doi: 10. 1038/ srep06988).
79. Dunbar RIM. 2012 Social cognition on the internet: testing constraints on social network size. Phil. Trans. R. Soc. B 367, 2192-2201. (doi: 10. 1098/ rstb. 2012. 0121).
80. Vlahovic T, Roberts SBG, Dunbar RIM. 2012 Effects of duration and laughter on subjective happiness within different modes of communication. J. Comput. Mediat. Commun. 17, 436-450. (doi: 10. 1111/j. 1083-6101. 2012. 01584. x).