'Dunbar's number' deconstructed

A widespread and popular belief posits that humans possess a cognitive capacity that is limited to keeping track of and maintaining stable relationships with approximately 150 people. This influential number, 'Dunbar's number', originates from an extrapolation of a regression line des...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Biology letters (2005) 2021-05, Vol.17 (5), p.20210158-20210158, Article 20210158
Main Authors: Lindenfors, Patrik, Wartel, Andreas, Lind, Johan
Format: Article
Language:English
Subjects:
brain evolution
Evolutionary Biology
mammals
phylogenetic comparative studies
primates
socialevolution
Systematic Zoology
zoologisk systematik och evolutionsforskning
Citations: Items that this one cites
Items that cite this one
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
cited_by cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c672t-64a9c3d7d8a4111aef8471ac0076d5878ab2e0b2d34a1b6e927c6a0b51f3d303
cites cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c672t-64a9c3d7d8a4111aef8471ac0076d5878ab2e0b2d34a1b6e927c6a0b51f3d303
container_end_page 20210158
container_issue 5
container_start_page 20210158
container_title Biology letters (2005)
container_volume 17
creator Lindenfors, Patrik
Wartel, Andreas
Lind, Johan
description A widespread and popular belief posits that humans possess a cognitive capacity that is limited to keeping track of and maintaining stable relationships with approximately 150 people. This influential number, 'Dunbar's number', originates from an extrapolation of a regression line describing the relationship between relative neocortex size and group size in primates. Here, we test if there is statistical support for this idea. Our analyses on complementary datasets using different methods yield wildly different numbers. Bayesian and generalized least-squares phylogenetic methods generate approximations of average group sizes between 69-109 and 16-42, respectively. 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.
doi_str_mv 10.1098/rsbl.2021.0158
format article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_swepu</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_swepub_primary_oai_DiVA_org_su_215028</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>2522399481</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c672t-64a9c3d7d8a4111aef8471ac0076d5878ab2e0b2d34a1b6e927c6a0b51f3d303</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNqFkT1PwzAQhi0EoqWwMkK3MpBytpPYXpCqli-pEkuF2CzHdkpQPoqdgPj3JLRU7cR0J91zd6_0IHSOYYxB8Bvnk3xMgOAx4IgfoD5mYRiIiL0e7vQ9dOL9OwBlDKJj1KNUhIwQ6KPL0awpE-VGflg2RWLdaGisrkpfu0bX1pyio1Tl3p5t6gAt7u8W08dg_vzwNJ3MAx0zUgdxqISmhhmuQoyxsikPGVYagMUm4oyrhFhIiKGhwklsBWE6VpBEOKWGAh2g6_VZ_2VXTSJXLiuU-5aVyuQse5nIyi2lbyTBERDe4sH_eJ61PMQCSMvfrvkWLqzRtqydyvfW9idl9iaX1afkGCj5zXe1OeCqj8b6WhaZ1zbPVWmrxksSEUKFCDlu0fEa1a7y3tl0-waD7JzJzpnsnMnOWbtwsRtui_9Joj-w75KX</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Open Access Repository</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2522399481</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>'Dunbar's number' deconstructed</title><source>PubMed Central</source><source>Royal Society Publishing Jisc Collections Royal Society Journals Read &amp; Publish Transitional Agreement 2025 (reading list)</source><creator>Lindenfors, Patrik ; Wartel, Andreas ; Lind, Johan</creator><creatorcontrib>Lindenfors, Patrik ; Wartel, Andreas ; Lind, Johan</creatorcontrib><description>A widespread and popular belief posits that humans possess a cognitive capacity that is limited to keeping track of and maintaining stable relationships with approximately 150 people. This influential number, 'Dunbar's number', originates from an extrapolation of a regression line describing the relationship between relative neocortex size and group size in primates. Here, we test if there is statistical support for this idea. Our analyses on complementary datasets using different methods yield wildly different numbers. Bayesian and generalized least-squares phylogenetic methods generate approximations of average group sizes between 69-109 and 16-42, respectively. 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.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1744-957X</identifier><identifier>ISSN: 1744-9561</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1744-957X</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1098/rsbl.2021.0158</identifier><identifier>PMID: 33947220</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>England: The Royal Society</publisher><subject>brain evolution ; Evolutionary Biology ; mammals ; phylogenetic comparative studies ; primates ; socialevolution ; Systematic Zoology ; zoologisk systematik och evolutionsforskning</subject><ispartof>Biology letters (2005), 2021-05, Vol.17 (5), p.20210158-20210158, Article 20210158</ispartof><rights>2021 The Authors. 2021</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c672t-64a9c3d7d8a4111aef8471ac0076d5878ab2e0b2d34a1b6e927c6a0b51f3d303</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c672t-64a9c3d7d8a4111aef8471ac0076d5878ab2e0b2d34a1b6e927c6a0b51f3d303</cites><orcidid>0000-0002-4159-6926 ; 0000-0003-3245-0850 ; 0000-0003-1592-409X</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8103230/pdf/$$EPDF$$P50$$Gpubmedcentral$$Hfree_for_read</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8103230/$$EHTML$$P50$$Gpubmedcentral$$Hfree_for_read</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>230,314,725,778,782,883,27911,27912,53778,53780</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33947220$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink><backlink>$$Uhttps://urn.kb.se/resolve?urn=urn:nbn:se:liu:diva-206902$$DView record from Swedish Publication Index$$Hfree_for_read</backlink><backlink>$$Uhttps://urn.kb.se/resolve?urn=urn:nbn:se:su:diva-215028$$DView record from Swedish Publication Index$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Lindenfors, Patrik</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Wartel, Andreas</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Lind, Johan</creatorcontrib><title>'Dunbar's number' deconstructed</title><title>Biology letters (2005)</title><addtitle>Biol Lett</addtitle><description>A widespread and popular belief posits that humans possess a cognitive capacity that is limited to keeping track of and maintaining stable relationships with approximately 150 people. This influential number, 'Dunbar's number', originates from an extrapolation of a regression line describing the relationship between relative neocortex size and group size in primates. Here, we test if there is statistical support for this idea. Our analyses on complementary datasets using different methods yield wildly different numbers. Bayesian and generalized least-squares phylogenetic methods generate approximations of average group sizes between 69-109 and 16-42, respectively. 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.</description><subject>brain evolution</subject><subject>Evolutionary Biology</subject><subject>mammals</subject><subject>phylogenetic comparative studies</subject><subject>primates</subject><subject>socialevolution</subject><subject>Systematic Zoology</subject><subject>zoologisk systematik och evolutionsforskning</subject><issn>1744-957X</issn><issn>1744-9561</issn><issn>1744-957X</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2021</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><recordid>eNqFkT1PwzAQhi0EoqWwMkK3MpBytpPYXpCqli-pEkuF2CzHdkpQPoqdgPj3JLRU7cR0J91zd6_0IHSOYYxB8Bvnk3xMgOAx4IgfoD5mYRiIiL0e7vQ9dOL9OwBlDKJj1KNUhIwQ6KPL0awpE-VGflg2RWLdaGisrkpfu0bX1pyio1Tl3p5t6gAt7u8W08dg_vzwNJ3MAx0zUgdxqISmhhmuQoyxsikPGVYagMUm4oyrhFhIiKGhwklsBWE6VpBEOKWGAh2g6_VZ_2VXTSJXLiuU-5aVyuQse5nIyi2lbyTBERDe4sH_eJ61PMQCSMvfrvkWLqzRtqydyvfW9idl9iaX1afkGCj5zXe1OeCqj8b6WhaZ1zbPVWmrxksSEUKFCDlu0fEa1a7y3tl0-waD7JzJzpnsnMnOWbtwsRtui_9Joj-w75KX</recordid><startdate>20210501</startdate><enddate>20210501</enddate><creator>Lindenfors, Patrik</creator><creator>Wartel, Andreas</creator><creator>Lind, Johan</creator><general>The Royal Society</general><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7X8</scope><scope>5PM</scope><scope>ADTPV</scope><scope>AOWAS</scope><scope>DG8</scope><scope>ABAVF</scope><scope>D8T</scope><scope>DG7</scope><scope>ZZAVC</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4159-6926</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3245-0850</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1592-409X</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>20210501</creationdate><title>'Dunbar's number' deconstructed</title><author>Lindenfors, Patrik ; Wartel, Andreas ; Lind, Johan</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c672t-64a9c3d7d8a4111aef8471ac0076d5878ab2e0b2d34a1b6e927c6a0b51f3d303</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2021</creationdate><topic>brain evolution</topic><topic>Evolutionary Biology</topic><topic>mammals</topic><topic>phylogenetic comparative studies</topic><topic>primates</topic><topic>socialevolution</topic><topic>Systematic Zoology</topic><topic>zoologisk systematik och evolutionsforskning</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Lindenfors, Patrik</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Wartel, Andreas</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Lind, Johan</creatorcontrib><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><collection>PubMed Central (Full Participant titles)</collection><collection>SwePub</collection><collection>SwePub Articles</collection><collection>SWEPUB Linköpings universitet</collection><collection>SWEPUB Stockholms universitet full text</collection><collection>SWEPUB Freely available online</collection><collection>SWEPUB Stockholms universitet</collection><collection>SwePub Articles full text</collection><jtitle>Biology letters (2005)</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Lindenfors, Patrik</au><au>Wartel, Andreas</au><au>Lind, Johan</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>'Dunbar's number' deconstructed</atitle><jtitle>Biology letters (2005)</jtitle><addtitle>Biol Lett</addtitle><date>2021-05-01</date><risdate>2021</risdate><volume>17</volume><issue>5</issue><spage>20210158</spage><epage>20210158</epage><pages>20210158-20210158</pages><artnum>20210158</artnum><artnum>rsbl.2021.0158</artnum><issn>1744-957X</issn><issn>1744-9561</issn><eissn>1744-957X</eissn><abstract>A widespread and popular belief posits that humans possess a cognitive capacity that is limited to keeping track of and maintaining stable relationships with approximately 150 people. This influential number, 'Dunbar's number', originates from an extrapolation of a regression line describing the relationship between relative neocortex size and group size in primates. Here, we test if there is statistical support for this idea. Our analyses on complementary datasets using different methods yield wildly different numbers. Bayesian and generalized least-squares phylogenetic methods generate approximations of average group sizes between 69-109 and 16-42, respectively. 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.</abstract><cop>England</cop><pub>The Royal Society</pub><pmid>33947220</pmid><doi>10.1098/rsbl.2021.0158</doi><tpages>1</tpages><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-4159-6926</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3245-0850</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1592-409X</orcidid><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 1744-957X
ispartof Biology letters (2005), 2021-05, Vol.17 (5), p.20210158-20210158, Article 20210158
issn 1744-957X
1744-9561
1744-957X
language eng
recordid cdi_swepub_primary_oai_DiVA_org_su_215028
source PubMed Central; Royal Society Publishing Jisc Collections Royal Society Journals Read & Publish Transitional Agreement 2025 (reading list)
subjects brain evolution
Evolutionary Biology
mammals
phylogenetic comparative studies
primates
socialevolution
Systematic Zoology
zoologisk systematik och evolutionsforskning
title 'Dunbar's number' deconstructed
url http://sfxeu10.hosted.exlibrisgroup.com/loughborough?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-15T20%3A28%3A54IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_swepu&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle='Dunbar's%20number'%20deconstructed&rft.jtitle=Biology%20letters%20(2005)&rft.au=Lindenfors,%20Patrik&rft.date=2021-05-01&rft.volume=17&rft.issue=5&rft.spage=20210158&rft.epage=20210158&rft.pages=20210158-20210158&rft.artnum=20210158&rft.issn=1744-957X&rft.eissn=1744-957X&rft_id=info:doi/10.1098/rsbl.2021.0158&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_swepu%3E2522399481%3C/proquest_swepu%3E%3Cgrp_id%3Ecdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c672t-64a9c3d7d8a4111aef8471ac0076d5878ab2e0b2d34a1b6e927c6a0b51f3d303%3C/grp_id%3E%3Coa%3E%3C/oa%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2522399481&rft_id=info:pmid/33947220&rfr_iscdi=true