✳flâneur — a map of the web's best reading

Dunbar’s number: why my theory that humans can only maintain 150 friendships has withstood 30 years of scrutiny

theconversation.com · 1,152 words · saved by 1 readers

Robin Dunbar does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment. University of Oxford provides funding as a member of The Conversation UK. View all partners Exactly 30 years ago, I was pondering a graph of primate group sizes plotted against the size of their brains: the larger the brain, the larger the group size. I was curious to know what group size this relationship might predict for humans. The number my calculations gave was 150. Since this seemed low, I hurried off to the library to look for data on natural human group sizes. Hunter-gatherers live in multilevel societies, with groupings of individuals forming a hierarchically layered structure – families within bands, bands within communities, communities within tribes. The community level of organisation turned out to be almost exactly 150. Thus was born the “social brain

Wisiel/Shutterstock https://theconversation.com/dunbars-number-why-my-theory-that-humans-can-only-maintain-150-friendships-has-withstood-30-years-of-scrutiny-160676 https://theconversation.com/dunbars-number-why-my-theory-that-humans-can-only-maintain-150-friendships-has-withstood-30-years-of-scrutiny-160676 Link copied Share article Share article Copy link Email Bluesky Facebook WhatsApp Messenger LinkedIn X (Twitter) Print article Exactly 30 years ago, I was pondering a graph of primate group sizes plotted against the size of their brains: the larger the brain, the larger the group size. I w

Explore this link on the map →

saved by

related reading