New work on Dunbar's number: Bayesian and GML phylogenetic methods generate Dunbar's numbers ranging from 69–109 and 16–42, however, enormous 95% confidence intervals (4–520 and 2–336, respectively) imply that specifying any one number is futile. https://t
RT @johnhawks: Anthropologists of the 1990s often did pygmy marmoset-to-gorilla regressions across primates to "predict" all kinds of thing…
RT @p_lindenfors: Magnificent photo by @etologen https://t.co/mxBQnH0u4e
Holy jesus! O número de Dunbar não se mostrou algo consistente
RT @johnhawks: Anthropologists of the 1990s often did pygmy marmoset-to-gorilla regressions across primates to "predict" all kinds of thing…
RT @johnhawks: Anthropologists of the 1990s often did pygmy marmoset-to-gorilla regressions across primates to "predict" all kinds of thing…
Dunbar number. Not Lindy.
‘Dunbar's number’ deconstructed https://t.co/10xQbW7Sdo
RT @RSocPublishing: #BiologyLetters in @CosmosMagazine | ‘Dunbar's number’ deconstructed. The study: https://t.co/bmwLg4Nvz4 https://t.co/f…
#BiologyLetters in @CosmosMagazine | ‘Dunbar's number’ deconstructed. The study: https://t.co/bmwLg4Nvz4 https://t.co/fC0imSo2TH
‘Dunbar's number’ deconstructed | Biology Letters https://t.co/ra2JGsy8Cw
Looks like I’ll have to redo some slides for my intro class…
‘Dunbar's number’ deconstructed | Biology Letters https://t.co/WPJfQxAujq
Interesting study on Dunbar's number. While Dunbar's original research is not really a bad take in itself, the popularization of the number became one through things like the famous "Monkeysphere" Cracked article.
RT @RSocPublishing: ‘Dunbar’s number’ is deconstructed in new #BiologyLetters paper from @p_lindenfors https://t.co/sz74jQReEO https://t.co…
RT @RSocPublishing: ‘Dunbar’s number’ is deconstructed in new #BiologyLetters paper from @p_lindenfors https://t.co/sz74jQReEO https://t.co…
Magnificent photo by @etologen
RT @RSocPublishing: ‘Dunbar’s number’ is deconstructed in new #BiologyLetters paper from @p_lindenfors https://t.co/sz74jQReEO https://t.co…
‘Dunbar’s number’ is deconstructed in new #BiologyLetters paper from @p_lindenfors https://t.co/sz74jQReEO https://t.co/FWu0S49cOh
Sätt på P4 dalarna! Andreas Wartel pratar om vår Dunbars tal-studie om en minut. https://t.co/eCFMiz0ikI Vår studie: https://t.co/Olvh7CqBaK
Det här peket om Dunbars siffra av @p_lindenfors var lite rolig. Dunbar påstod ju att pga vår hjärnas storlek klarar vi bara av att hantera personliga förhållanden med 150 pers eller något. Harari populariserade det i ytterligare i Sapiens. https://t.co/qO
RT @JeanClaudeFox2: Another nail in the coffin of Dunbar's number (for earlier nails, see pp. 314-23 of @jeremyfreese's dissertation: https…
RT @JeanClaudeFox2: Another nail in the coffin of Dunbar's number (for earlier nails, see pp. 314-23 of @jeremyfreese's dissertation: https…
@tamasdb @mickeymcmanus @Numenta Hi, er, I know about Robin's theories & cognitive/temporal constraints, in fact the priority system of my PhD dissertation was inspired in part by his work. What people are talking about is a paper that is over wrapped
Another nail in the coffin of Dunbar's number (for earlier nails, see pp. 314-23 of @jeremyfreese's dissertation: https://t.co/01QTux7DXi). https://t.co/DvQBW1exOp
«Numéro de Dunbar» déconstruit | Lettres de biologie https://t.co/flXr3cJlc1 via @instapaper
A very interesting paper on Dunbar's Number. In a nutshell, we need to stop using it to justify limits on collaborative group size. I'm not saying though, that there aren't limits...
Humans are limited to track and maintain stable relationships with ~150 people https://t.co/xdgsxFeck1
RT @julxf: This: "‘Dunbar's number’ deconstructed" | Biology Letters. I hope this paper will get the attention it deserves. Unfortunately,…
RT @julxf: This: "‘Dunbar's number’ deconstructed" | Biology Letters. I hope this paper will get the attention it deserves. Unfortunately,…
RT @julxf: This: "‘Dunbar's number’ deconstructed" | Biology Letters. I hope this paper will get the attention it deserves. Unfortunately,…
RT @julxf: This: "‘Dunbar's number’ deconstructed" | Biology Letters. I hope this paper will get the attention it deserves. Unfortunately,…
Bang goes another magic number.
RT @RubinPsyc: Dunbar's number is wrong? How many social relationships can you keep track of? Dunbar (1992) suggested 150 as the upper li…
RT @julxf: This: "‘Dunbar's number’ deconstructed" | Biology Letters. I hope this paper will get the attention it deserves. Unfortunately,…
RT @philosophybites: Is there good empirical evidence for Dunbar Numbers? Not according to this research @royalsociety https://t.co/wJ6z…
RT @tastapod: I just love the language of understatement in academic abstracts, like this gem that a 95% confidence interval for Dunbar's N…
RT @philosophybites: Is there good empirical evidence for Dunbar Numbers? Not according to this research @royalsociety https://t.co/wJ6z…
Is there good empirical evidence for Dunbar Numbers? Not according to this research @royalsociety https://t.co/wJ6zhPnlIN
RT @julxf: This: "‘Dunbar's number’ deconstructed" | Biology Letters. I hope this paper will get the attention it deserves. Unfortunately,…
RT @jchyip: ‘Dunbar's number’ deconstructed | Biology Letters https://t.co/tvuIuz4Rr6
RT @julxf: This: "‘Dunbar's number’ deconstructed" | Biology Letters. I hope this paper will get the attention it deserves. Unfortunately,…
‘Dunbar's number’ deconstructed | Biology Letters https://t.co/tvuIuz4Rr6
RT @johnhawks: Anthropologists of the 1990s often did pygmy marmoset-to-gorilla regressions across primates to "predict" all kinds of thing…
Dunbar's Number and problems with allometric regressions across orders of magnitude. (Again, as with the Fermi Paradox / Drake's Equation, if the independent variables each have large variability / measurement uncertainty / small sample sizes / etc., you
RT @julxf: This: "‘Dunbar's number’ deconstructed" | Biology Letters. I hope this paper will get the attention it deserves. Unfortunately,…
RT @hbdchick: *ahem*
@dubeji18 Dunbar’s number has recently been rather thoroughly debunked: https://t.co/Z4h0VRfLn4
‘Dunbar's number’ deconstructed | Biology Letters https://t.co/PTWooan6zH
RT @johnhawks: Anthropologists of the 1990s often did pygmy marmoset-to-gorilla regressions across primates to "predict" all kinds of thing…
This is such a neat paper!
RT @johnhawks: Anthropologists of the 1990s often did pygmy marmoset-to-gorilla regressions across primates to "predict" all kinds of thing…
«In summary, extrapolating human cognitive limits from regressions on non-human primate data is of limited value for both theoretical and empirical reasons.» Bye bye, ‘Dunbar's number’! https://t.co/X4jJa3FVUv
Interesting paper & great food for discussion on Dunbarian approaches to group size dynamics 👇
‘However, enormous 95% confidence intervals (4–520 and 2–336, respectively) imply that specifying any one number is futile. A cognitive limit on human group size cannot be derived in this manner.’
RT @julxf: This: "‘Dunbar's number’ deconstructed" | Biology Letters. I hope this paper will get the attention it deserves. Unfortunately,…
RT @micahgallen: Finally. Feel like I've been waiting a decade for this paper.
RT @hbdchick: *ahem* https://t.co/trsROT3V47
RT @rapiduplift: Thread on "Dunbar's number". https://t.co/Gr3MtSzItI
Some excellent snark in this paper that is skeptical of Dunbar’s number. I had no idea that it was originally proposed by extrapolating from primates! https://t.co/dtRBN2XQpQ https://t.co/r9csFhZYPt
About Dunbar's number... How many people are in your social groups?👇 https://t.co/kKmLGYiknC Are this fact relevant?🤔
Thread on "Dunbar's number".
*ahem*
RT @micahgallen: Finally. Feel like I've been waiting a decade for this paper.
RT @johnhawks: Anthropologists of the 1990s often did pygmy marmoset-to-gorilla regressions across primates to "predict" all kinds of thing…
RT @micahgallen: Finally. Feel like I've been waiting a decade for this paper. https://t.co/cEGFyTTFjD
RT @julxf: This: "‘Dunbar's number’ deconstructed" | Biology Letters. I hope this paper will get the attention it deserves. Unfortunately,…
RT @johnhawks: Anthropologists of the 1990s often did pygmy marmoset-to-gorilla regressions across primates to "predict" all kinds of thing…
RT @julxf: This: "‘Dunbar's number’ deconstructed" | Biology Letters. I hope this paper will get the attention it deserves. Unfortunately,…
Cc @jim_rutt interesting counterpoint
RT @Tash_Reynolds: The Dunbar's number critique (short, sweet, statistical) that I've spent years waiting for. Great work. And open access.
RT @nyuprimatology: Dunbar’s number was a wonderful piece of scientific storytelling, but it was never science. Hopefully it might be possi…
RT @tastapod: I just love the language of understatement in academic abstracts, like this gem that a 95% confidence interval for Dunbar's N…
RT @leafs_s: Biology Letters ‘Dunbar's number’ deconstructed https://t.co/LMZ5XvgJhv
RT @julxf: This: "‘Dunbar's number’ deconstructed" | Biology Letters. I hope this paper will get the attention it deserves. Unfortunately,…
RT @Tash_Reynolds: The Dunbar's number critique (short, sweet, statistical) that I've spent years waiting for. Great work. And open access.
RT @tastapod: I just love the language of understatement in academic abstracts, like this gem that a 95% confidence interval for Dunbar's N…
RT @ProfSimonFisher: “Extrapolating human cognitive limits from regressions on non-human primate data is of limited value for both theoreti…
RT @julxf: This: "‘Dunbar's number’ deconstructed" | Biology Letters. I hope this paper will get the attention it deserves. Unfortunately,…
RT @nyuprimatology: Dunbar’s number was a wonderful piece of scientific storytelling, but it was never science. Hopefully it might be possi…
RT @julxf: This: "‘Dunbar's number’ deconstructed" | Biology Letters. I hope this paper will get the attention it deserves. Unfortunately,…
RT @julxf: This: "‘Dunbar's number’ deconstructed" | Biology Letters. I hope this paper will get the attention it deserves. Unfortunately,…
RT @julxf: This: "‘Dunbar's number’ deconstructed" | Biology Letters. I hope this paper will get the attention it deserves. Unfortunately,…
RT @johnhawks: Anthropologists of the 1990s often did pygmy marmoset-to-gorilla regressions across primates to "predict" all kinds of thing…
RT @johnhawks: Anthropologists of the 1990s often did pygmy marmoset-to-gorilla regressions across primates to "predict" all kinds of thing…
RT @tastapod: I just love the language of understatement in academic abstracts, like this gem that a 95% confidence interval for Dunbar's N…
RT @julxf: This: "‘Dunbar's number’ deconstructed" | Biology Letters. I hope this paper will get the attention it deserves. Unfortunately,…
Dunbar's number: "Enormous 95% confidence intervals (4–520 and 2–336, respectively) imply that specifying any one number is futile. A cognitive limit on human group size cannot be derived in this manner." https://t.co/05wzLDNmfb
Finally!
RT @johnhawks: Anthropologists of the 1990s often did pygmy marmoset-to-gorilla regressions across primates to "predict" all kinds of thing…
RT @johnhawks: Anthropologists of the 1990s often did pygmy marmoset-to-gorilla regressions across primates to "predict" all kinds of thing…
RT @johnhawks: Anthropologists of the 1990s often did pygmy marmoset-to-gorilla regressions across primates to "predict" all kinds of thing…
RT @johnhawks: Anthropologists of the 1990s often did pygmy marmoset-to-gorilla regressions across primates to "predict" all kinds of thing…
RT @ProfSimonFisher: “Extrapolating human cognitive limits from regressions on non-human primate data is of limited value for both theoreti…
RT @johnhawks: Anthropologists of the 1990s often did pygmy marmoset-to-gorilla regressions across primates to "predict" all kinds of thing…
‘Dunbar's number’ deconstructed | Biology Letters https://t.co/Xgl4wdWki4 ダンバー数、墜つ
RT @ProfSimonFisher: “Extrapolating human cognitive limits from regressions on non-human primate data is of limited value for both theoreti…
Interesting paper, especially as we are sometimes so focused on Dunbar‘s numbers when shaping organizations. Turns out this misses the scientifically evidence 😬