Rachel Friedmann

“Along with other ‘noisy’ aspects of modern life, such excessive background social stimulation is very likely part of the reason why we see increasing levels of mental illness in most societies…the WHO expects that by 2020 mental illness will be the second most important cause of disability and morality worldwide…with the most common being anxiety disorder.” (See pages 120-121 in Pandora’s Seed)

The evolutionary psychologist Robin Dunbar showed that the average group size is closely related to brain size in various animal species. The larger the brain, the larger the group size because the brain can then keep track of more social connections or relationships. The human-sized brain is predicted at 150 for group sizes. This group size is found everywhere from military to hunter-gather bands. According to Dunbar, it isn’t that we cant remember more than this number; it’s a matter of what relationships are considered meaningful. We can remember up to 2,000 people, but 150 is the cap for meaningful relationships – hmm…did you just go and check your Facebook friend count?

Above the number of 150 it is hard to treat everyone the same way you would in a smaller group. In the past, communities have been known to spilt after they arrive at 150 members for this reason. We begin dehumanizing one another with passing comments – example: Facebook birthday posts. These passing acknowledgments are relatively meaningless. Our minds can’t handle that many social interactions and therefore we begin by dehumazing each other even in close quarters – think planes, hallways, sidewalks, and subways. People look at their blackberries or the floor to avoid having even more interactions than we already do. According to Wells’ in his book Pandora’s Seed, these are the reasons for the steepening increase in mental illness- we can’t handle the social interaction overload. Think about the number of email, social networking, and calendars we have to keep track of – its enough for even the calmest person to get anxious.

The only suggestion is to cut out the excess in our lives or create our own split – um, is that possible? I guess that’s why so many people are hiring others to handle their social media.

I first learned about Dunbar’s Rule or the Rule of 150 in Malcolm Gladwell’s book The Tipping Point. He states that the optimal number of individuals in a society that someone can have real social relationships with is 150, therefore companies and communities are most effective when they are less than 150 in number. I challenge anyone to sit down and write down the name of everyone you are in regular contact with – friends and family. This should not include all 1000 of your Facebook fans.

I am an avid reader and have to get in my fix of easy reading. I was surprised when I read in Cosmo magazine that we only really keep in touch and have relationships with 150 of our friends on Facebook. In Spencer Well’s Pandora’s Seed, he makes a connection between our hunter-gather ancestors and Facebook. In his book, he states that the average number of friends people have on Facebook is 130, just under the 150 cut off. Therefore, for the majority of Facebook users that want to stay in touch and share with those they have the closest relationships with just like bands of hunter-gathers that didn’t go behind that count in their groups.

The next time you think about adding another Facebook friend, consider whether or not they fall within your 150? I know I probably won’t….

I worry about today’s younger generation and the generations to come. I can’t imagine being in middle school or high school and having a Facebook profile. Not only do kids these days have to worry about what they’re wearing, and the popular kids, but also promoting themselves online. I’ve heard that trying to put your emotions into words for a status update is not a healthy psychological activity. Trying to identify so concisely and then feel the need to share with the world is not how we naturally operate. The younger generation no longer gets a break from social pressure when they get home from school because they immediately go online and have a second environment in which to compete with each other.

As for adults, when we have a problem or issue, or even great news we no longer call our friends immediately, we post it on Facebook and wait for a response. I have heard arguments for and against posting sonogram pictures and post-birth images of the baby before they have been cleaned off. It’s great that we share but sometimes we go overboard. We are also in the same trap as the younger generations, always being on and feeling the need to share. I understand that it is great relief for some to share their news instantaneously online with everyone, but what happened to the good old fashioned phone call?

I know that I can’t be the only one who checks an RSVP list on Evite or Facebook before determining whether or not to attend a party or event. We all do it once in a while and we can blame biology a little bit because of social proof. Social proof is a psychological phenomenon that occurs in ambiguous social situations when people are unable to determine the appropriate mode of behavior; making the assumption that surrounding people possess more knowledge about a situation and therefore deem the behavior of others as appropriate or better informed (according to Wikipedia). This is deeply ingrained in us biologically, for survival purposes. For instance, if one deer sees other deer running without much thought they will start running too. The reason is that they assume that the larger majority knows something and are better informed than they are, in this case that danger is present.

I wonder, if in instances such as a social event RSVP list, biology might still be at play. Although, not for for survival, but to help us determine from a biological standpoint the likelihood that, for example, a more desired “mate” could be present at a particular function. I’m sure others would say, to save resources or not social suicide. This may certainly be the case in the professional world. For professional events, I have seen increasingly the use of RSVP lists to promote events. For example, Bisnow, when selling certain events will publish in their e-mails, as a form of promotion,  the names and companies of those who’ve already RSVP and plan to attend.

I am curious to hear other’s point of view on how RSVP lists, in general, and how this affects social behavior.